RE: Draft thoughts

["Thomas Murphy" <tfmiii@worldnet.att.net>]

Nice post Alex, I concur with your points, particularly regarding the
perceived 'redundancy' - it is not going to be a problem and if it is, then
it will be a pleasant 'problem'.

It looks as if the Cs are going to take the best of what was available (I
wonder if they would have taken Diop over Johnson and Kedrick if he'd been
available? one would guess so but . . .) and try and play to their strengths
(unlike Pitino). This means constructing a Milwaukee (or dare we even
compare them to late 80s Pistons?) that is very athletic, can score in
bunches and gets by on the boards with virtually non-existent shotblocking.
Unlike the Pistons or the Bucks however they seem to be moving in the
direction of not having an orthodox point but rather several players who can
handle the ball well for their position, more like teams that play the
triangle. It will be unorthodox for sure but Wallace actually seems to have
a plan and O'B seems to be a little less set in stone with his coaching than
you know who. I am actually excited about the prospect of a number of
athletic players who have more than one skill and who can actually shoot
(even free throws) manning most positions with more off the bench (what a
concept - a bench that actually contributes!). At the worst it should
provide us with ample fodder for future wheeling and dealing.

cheers - Tom Murphy

PS: as fun as it would have been to be able to buy a Celtics jersey with
MURPHY on the back, I am very glad they passed on the guy - whew!

> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 02:34:21 -0400
> From: Alexander Wang <awang@MIT.EDU>
> Subject: Draft thoughts
>
> We drafted three swingmen, Joe Johnson at 10 and Kedrick Brown at 11
> projecting as 2/3 types, and Forte as a shooting guard. Perhaps they
> envision him as a 1/2 hybrid, with ballhandlers like Walker and Johnson on
> the floor?
>
> I know that some people question the redundancy. Chris Wallace made it
very
> clear that this was a best player available draft when he said that he
> would have drafted Forte even if we had six other shooting guards under
> contract. The problem is that most people overrate draft picks. We all
like
> to think that every first round draft pick is going to turn into a solid
> starter in this league. I'm even reading complaints about our lack of a
> second round pick. Realistically, what are the chances of a second round
> pick making this roster with 14 guaranteed contracts, as the fourth
rookie?
>
> I didn't expect much from the pick at 21. If you can get a solid backup at
> that spot, you're doing pretty well. Looking more closely at 10/11: a team
> can support substantial minutes for three players at the 2/3 spot. Down
the
> road, if both Johnson and Brown develop into starter-quality players, we
> could have a similar "problem" as New York with Sprewell, Houston, and
> Rice. Of course, a starter-quality swingman on a rookie contract will have
> a lot of trade value. I don't lose any sleep over this scenario, even
> though the New York media loves to gnash their teeth about their problem.
>
> Otherwise, one of the picks is going to perform better than the other and
> end up as the eventual starter. The other one will get major backup
minutes
> if he's not a bust. No problems there. And the truth is, drafting at the
> lower lottery nowadays is an inexact science, with the players all so
> young. Having two shots to find a quality starter at the 2/3 spot is nice.
>
> As for the type of players they are, they seem to complement Walker and
> Pierce well. Pierce posting up smaller players is a major part of this
> offense. That means that everyone else but the center has to be able to
> shoot from outside, which means Walker at power forward. I'm in the
> minority here but I don't think Walker at small forward works for this
> team. If we had a certain type of power forward that could shoot, like
> Gasol projected to be, yes, or a truly superior interior defender and
> rebounder. Battie, or Potapenko, or Blount are not any of these. In any
> case, you have Walker and Pierce capable of scoring 50 points, mostly in
> the halfcourt. How do you complement that offensively? Well, you don't
want
> someone who is just a black hole and takes away touches. You want someone
> who can generate extra touches with athleticism, by getting offensive
> rebounds and fast break buckets. In addition, he needs to be able to shoot
> from outside to prevent double teams, and to allow Pierce to post up. It
> sounds like both Johnson and Brown have the potential to serve these
roles,
> with the possibility of greater things.
>
> On defense, they'll hopefully be able to tighten up the perimeter defense
> and rotate quickly when we need to trap superior inside players. I think
> it'll be hard to be a good defensive team without inside help but that's
> hard to come by. Wallace mentioned that he saw the Celtics being modelled
> after a team like Milwaukee which puts pressure on its opponents through a
> high-powered offense rather than a stifling defense. Milwaukee certainly
> isn't a dominant defensive team on the interior, and came within a game of
> the Finals.
>
> Right now, under contract:
> 5. Battie, Potapenko, Blount.
> 4. Walker, Moiso, McCarty.
> 3. Williams, K. Brown.
> 2. Pierce, Johnson, Forte.
> 1. Anderson, Palacio, R. Brown.
>
> I don't see us bringing back Stith, Griffin, Carr, or Herren. I don't see
> us signing any undrafted free agents or CBA types, seeing as we have six
> players who are either rookies or sophomores, at every position. I'd like
> to see us use our free agent exception to fill a need at center or point
> guard, but that may depend on budgetary considerations. The idea of
picking
> up Mohammed is pretty far-fetched. Atlanta has his Bird rights, and
there's
> no way they'd trade for Kenny Anderson.
>
> Alex
>