More draft thoughts

[Alexander Wang <awang@MIT.EDU>]

I read in Shira Springer's article that the Celtics that, "Each time Boston
took its turn at the podium in New York, the player at the top of its draft
board was available." Um, isn't the draft board the ranking of the
remaining available players? At least she had a good profile of Chris
Wallace a couple of days ago.

So we did strike a deal to get Kedrick Brown. The dangerous part would have
been if there had been multiple surprises in the lottery and two better
players had slid down to us; then we would have been forced to select Brown
or face the wrath of SFX (Falk/Tellem). Our benefit from the agreement is
that he refused to work out for other teams and skipped the Chicago camp.
It seemed to work out well for us. If earlier teams had worked him out,
perhaps they would have selected him and pushed Diop down to us, which was
evidently the worst-case scenario in the Celtics brain trust's opinion.

People tend to judge the draft by looking at the new lineup and projecting
forward several years. If I do that, I agree with Mark Berry: our team's
not going to contend as currently structured. The center position is too
weak, particularly when combined with Antoine who is not a physically
dominant power forward. But we're not locked in to this team for the next 5
years. There are going to be more drafts, trades, free agents down the road
as contracts expire. Wallace has only had true control of the direction of
this team since the end of the season.

I think that so far, Wallace has had a few opportunities. First, he could
have tried to ship Walker off to Atlanta for the #3 pick, Lorenzen Wright,
and Brevin Knight. I don't know if that would have beaten out the Shareef
offer, but say it did. Even though I don't know much about the relative
talent level, I would want Curry over Gasol for this type of deal, because
I'd rather build through the center position with our one chance at a top
pick. Our team would take a step backward and definitely miss the playoffs.

Second, he could have packed the #10 and #11 and the #21 to move up to #7
and grab Eddie Griffin. That definitely beats Houston's offer; maybe we
keep the #21 pick but whatever. I think that this is the type of player you
get that lets you move Antoine to SF. 

Third, he can do what he did: draft the best available player. I think the
decision at #21 could have gone to Parker: drafting the #2 player on your
board with a relatively low pick to fill a need wouldn't kill you. But at
#10 and #11, I don't think there's any question that drafting the best
player was the right decision. All of those center prospects look like, at
best, a marginal improvement over our three headed center rotation.

So now we are really deep at that spot. If they all pan out and we are
fixed at our lineup, then our team is structurally unsound, like the
Knicks. But quality, excess talent is the best trading material. Pheonix
had three high quality point guards in Kidd, Kevin Johnson, and Steve Nash.
They traded Nash for the pick that became Shawn Marion. Indiana traded
Antonio Davis to get high into the draft, because they still had Dale
Davis. Realistically, the only way to add quality talent at the center
position is going to be by putting together a package involving an
extremely talented wing player. You're not going to get it in the low
lottery, you're not going to get it by trading Kenny Anderson.

I'm comfortable with this outcome. It's nice to be set with the players
you'll have for the next five years, but it's more important to stock the
lineup with talent first. I'd be extremely surprised if Johnson, Kedrick
Brown, and Forte are all still on this team in three years. I would hope
that two of them have developed enough to compete as starters, and one is
packaged with Battie, say, for a top inside player.

In the meantime, I'm hoping for an upgrade over Stith at the swingman
position. Stith averaged 9.7 ppg, 3.6 rpg (.8 offensive), 2.2 apg on 40%
shooting, 38% from 3pt range, in 32 mpg. If a rookie (Johnson, probably)
steps in, he may not be as good on defense and he'll get screwed by the
refs for a while. But you'd hope that given the minutes, he'd do a bit
better on the offensive boards, shoot a little better, average a few more
points. The net effect might be very small, which would be fine for a
rookie year, in my opinion. Best (realistic) case in my mind would be 15
ppg, 5 rpg - like Mercer's rookie year, but better rebounding, 3 point
range, and better synergy with Walker and Pierce.

Alex