Re: trading up/down

[Joe Hironaka <j.hironaka@unesco.org>]

I have a few comments on another well-thought post from Mark.

"Berry, Mark S" wrote:

> That leaves, in my opinion, three players up in the air: Alexander,
> DerMar Johnson, and Moiso. Now, Johnson or Alexander certainly may be gone
> in the top 8, but it seems that these three are the most likely targets at
> No. 11. Houston at No. 9 reportedly loves Moiso, and they need a PF, so that
> makes sense. That leaves Orlando choosing from Johnson and Alexander. I'd be
> shocked if, given this choice, they didn't go for Johnson. He may be a
> little more raw, but he seems to have a higher ceiling and lacks Alexander's
> baggage. The more I look at it, the more I think Alexander may be the guy in
> that group who slides to us.

I agree that this scenario would be the least surprising. Alexander may or may
not be the headcase he has been made out to be and he deserves the benefit of
the doubt. But on the court I do fear another Ron Mercer type "chemistry" issue
viz.a.viz. Paul Pierce. Recall that Ron Mercer took more shot attempts than any
two-guard in the NBA during his last season in Beantown. It does seem that
Alexander can do more or the court than Ron Mercer, hopefully along the lines of
a Sprewell or Derek Anderson. If the kid can potentially play outstanding
defense, then take him. But if not the Celts should opt for a talented
character/leadership guy like Quentin Richardson or MoPete, neither of whom is
exactly chopped liver. Or scout the heck out of Stevenson, Crawford and Miles.

> Now, if that happens, does Pitino make the deal with the devil? He's a
> talent, and maybe the most NBA-ready player in the draft. But he is a
> headache and a shoot-first player. Would Pitino do it? I don't know, and
> that's where all the other options come in: Ernest Brown is a reach at 11.
> Morris Peterson has been awful in his workouts and is dropping out of the
> lottery. Etan Thomas is a solid, safe pick with no upside. The other
> high-schooler, DeShawn Stevenson, might make sense in this scenario, but the
> Celts are said to want a contributor. Quentin Richardson? Maybe, but he
> scares me. A 6-4 shooting guard who made his living on the offensive
> glass-almost playing PF-is risky.

I agree Q is the biggest boom or bust "tweener" in the draft but what a
basketball player! His game is somewhere between that of Adrian Griffin and
Adrian Dantley, with a little Charles Barkley thrown in. QRichardson was
practically the only guaranteed double-double player on the college circuit in
the past two years, mixing it against much bigger guys. Add to this his long
range jumpers not only look sweet but they go in.

If Pitino has no qualms about starting Minor, then later Adrian and Cheaney at
starting forward for the Celtics, then as a fallback option Quentin Richardson
could continue his basketball career at that natural position. A safe bet would
be that the Celtics will build on their reputation as the greatest rebounding
team in the East, if he joins a lineup that already includes good offensive
rebounders at every position.

> Jamal Crawford could be the compromise
> pick. He would be the big point guard Pitino wants. OO? Who knows? I'm not
> going to speculate without ever seeing the guy play, but maybe he's an
> option.
>
> Maybe if this scenario plays out, Pitino trades out of that spot, either
> down in the draft or straight out of it for a veteran.
>
> Anyway, it seems the best thing that could happen to the Celts is to have
> Alexander go early and drop one of those other "elite 11" players into their
> laps. Or maybe someone else sneaks into the top 10-Stevenson or OO seem to
> be the most likely possibilities, or perhaps Q.
>
> I've also read theories that if Alexander were there for the Celts, they
> would take him in order to trade him, and maybe that's where Przybilla (or
> Swift/Mihm/Martini) comes in-say the Celts send Alexander and Vitaly to the
> Bulls for Przybilla, who they snatched up with the fourth pick. Or to the
> Clippers.
>
> I don't know, but it does seem that a few names are becoming more and more
> likely to be considered at 11, if we stay there. I will say this (as if I
> haven't said enough already)-none of these guys at 11 are going to make a
> significant difference next year. If that's the only change we make, we'll
> be back in the same spot next June.

If we instead had a pick between number four and number ten, I think there is
roughly and equal chance we'd end up with a bust. Similarly if the 6-6 Fizer
dropped all the way to 11, that doesn't necessarily mean we should draft him. I
don't like Fizer's chances as a small forward.

At number 11, I think we can acquire more offense, athleticism and size at the
two or three positions. In this sense we will match up better with the wing
players in Milwaukee and Toronto, while retaining a relative edge in team
rebounding. After all, IMO not only Vitaly but also Battie could probably start
and get 30 mpg if they played on either of those two up-and-coming basketball
teams.

****