• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Official 2018 NBA Offseason Thread: the preseason cometh

Ainge's seeming allergy to offensively gifted players is just starting to annoy me. Fultz, in my opinion, is the only one in this draft with the potential to be a #1 option on offense for a contender. Josh Jackson and Jaylen Brown seem a bit redundant. The return with those protections is just hella weak to me. Lakers will finish outside the top 5 next year, and we'll be chilling with the 6th pick in what looks like a top-heavy, weak draft. Whoopty freaking doo.

The timing is also a bit strange, unless Ainge has plans to turn this pick around for an established player or additional picks. The Lakers, although not very likely, could very well pick Jackson, which would leave the Celtics with Ball or Tatum or whomever. Why not pick Fultz and make sure the Lakers pick Ball before doing this deal?

This also suggests that they're gonna give Isaiah a max deal. No. Bueno. At. All.

Hmm, you seem to me posting a lot like me as I have said Brown and Jackson are almost identical...and play the same position as Hayward.

If I'm not mistaken, the Celtics only get the Sixers pick next year if it's #2-5. If it's #1 or #6 or below, it reverts to the Sixers. The Lakers will be fighting to be the worst team in the West next year. So, getting #2-5 is fairly likely. If the Celtics get that pick, they would likely get the big they so greatly need. If the Sixers get #1 or #6, they could get the best Euro player to come to the NBA in many in 6'8 Real Madrid SG Luke Doncic.
 
And as with so many other moves in Ainge's tenure, it seems like this was defensively motivated. By all accounts, that's Jackson's biggest strength, and he looks like a gamechanger there.

SBNation took that argument a step further last month, and called Jackson the "only player who can survive in the Finals right now," due mostly to his defensive prowess.

https://www.sbnation.com/nba/2017/6...raft-2017-lakers-76ers-defense-passing-finals

It’s evident that Jackson takes pride in his defense. He plays with a rare competitive fire and doesn’t take possessions off. Even if his wingspan is a little shorter than you’d like (a shade under 6’10, per DraftExpress), he’ll make up for it by getting a loose ball, taking a charge, or intercepting a pass to quickly turn defense into offense.

Ultimately, Jackson’s best attribute as a defender is his versatility. He should be able to switch screens and guard up to four positions. You can make an argument that Jonathan Isaac has the highest defensive upside of any player in this draft, but Jackson is the safest bet to thrive on that end from the moment he enters the league.
 
You have to score to win in the current NBA. Plus, Brown was coming on late in the season. He was #3 in last year's draft.
 
On the other, I like Jackson a lot, and I think he's a more immediate fit (if not necessarily a better fit) with the current roster. I have a hunch that he's going to be a better three point shooter than Fultz....

What makes you think that? Fultz shot 41.3% on 5 attempts a game. Jackson shot 37.8% on 2.3 attempts a game. Three point shooting is one of his areas he really needs to improve.

ETA he's also shooting 56% from FT line
 
What makes you think that? Fultz shot 41.3% on 5 attempts a game. Jackson shot 37.8% on 2.3 attempts a game. Three point shooting is one of his areas he really needs to improve.
Jackson got better as the year went on from that range. (7/26 in Nov/Dec, 27/64 from January on)

I also think that the difference in position should help Jackson; he'll probably be set up for more corner looks than Fultz.

It's just a hunch, really, and god knows my track record on those.
 
Not really sure I understand the redundancy argument. You can pretty easily play any two of Brown/Jackson/Crowder/Hayward at the same time, and can probably get away with playing three of them for stretches if you wanted to go a little bigger. Jackson plays a bit bigger than Brown, and is a better shooter. He's a closer analog to Crowder than Brown, imo, but with a higher ceiling.

The thing all four of them have in common is the ability to defend multiple positions at an above average level, which is how the Warriors started their blueprint to begin with, and which teams like the Jazz and C's have been trying to emulate for the last few years.
 
Jackson got better as the year went on from that range. (7/26 in Nov/Dec, 27/64 from January on)

I also think that the difference in position should help Jackson; he'll probably be set up for more corner looks than Fultz.

It's just a hunch, really, and god knows my track record on those.

As someone who has been trying to talk himself into Jackson for about a month now, I can say I have concerns about his shot

It looks good, he's very athletic, can create pretty well, defend very well, but that three point shot doesn't go in wnough
 
You don't use the #3 pick for a rotation player who shares PT with four other people.
 
You don't use the #3 pick for a rotation player who shares PT with four other people.
Huh?

I was talking about the team this year. Fultz would have been a "rotation player" this year, too.

I think that Jackson and Brown would have every opportunity to land starting minutes, and I assume that one of them is good enough to make that leap. I don't really have a problem taking somebody with a ceiling that high (same as with Brown last year) and letting the "redundancies" work themselves out down the line depending on who does or doesn't pan out. That's sort of the luxury of having these consistent top picks with a team that is already a contender. You don't have to stake your reputation​ on every pick.

Jackson would also allow the team to be more liberal in considering offers for Crowder, who has been deemed untouchable the last few seasons out of necessity (in that so much of the defense revolved around him).
 
Then what do they do with Hayward?

That's what I was getting at above? Setting aside the fact that Hayward is still a competent 2/3 (and could play alongside Brown and Jackson in this hypothetical), you could very easily find 30+ minutes for all three players.

If both Brown and Jackson develop to be starting caliber players, then the value comes in the rotational variations. You'd have the freedom to switch and matchup Bradley/Smart/Hayward/Brown/Jackson/Yabusele almost at will across three positions. Yes, somebody in that group will see their minutes suffer, but again, that's the value of doing this as a contender; the likelihood of all of these players panning out is very small, and you're really only discussing the hypothetical scenario in which they all do. In which case: that's a pretty good problem to have, I guess?

That's what I was getting at with the "why are you focusing on next year" question. None of these guys (Jackson, Fultz, Ball, Tatum, Fox) would be an immediate starter for the Celts; we won't know for a couple of years, at minimum, who is or isn't being slighted/limited by a "rotation player" label.
 
Last edited:
Other than the Chauncy-led Pistons, no one has won the NBA championship without superstars in decades. Neither Hayward, nor anyone the Celtics have on their roster is a superstar. They need to make other moves.
 
Other than the Chauncy-led Pistons, no one has won the NBA championship without superstars in decades. Neither Hayward, nor anyone the Celtics have on their roster is a superstar. They need to make other moves.

Hayward and Horford are both top 20 players in the league. You can with with them as your two best players, and with Thomas as a third. We'll probably have to agree to disagree on that.
 
So, now the Celts could have two top 5 picks next year (Nets + Lakers), plus the Grizzlies pick in 2019.

Huh. Gimme dat BAMBA.
 
Hayward and Horford are both top 20 players in the league. You can with with them as your two best players, and with Thomas as a third. We'll probably have to agree to disagree on that.

Neither of those are Top 20 players.
 
Back
Top