Re: Kelly Olynyk to Boston
posted at 6/28/2013 2:36 AM EDT
In response to gman101019's comment:
In response to Fierce34's comment:
In response to hops29's comment:
No slack. Ugly game, ugly pick. We now have 4 bigs that are undersized, soft, and or unathletic. Olynyk, Bass, Sully, and now Humphries. Expect to see ALOT of Celtic shots ending up in the 4th row.
Which could also mean the Celtic shot of getting Andrew Wiggins increases by the day.
So you pass on better talent to you increase your chances of wiggins? DA always takes bpa. Tanking hardly works and never if your the celtics, (missed out on both tim duncan and Durant)
Olynyk must have been high on their board, to give up 2 2nds just to move up 3 spots. He should be a good fit. He provides size and shooting. We need both.
I think that Danny has an interesting drafting philosophy. The player must have some unique dimension. The more dimensions, the better. Sullinger was a no-brainer. IQ, rebounding, scoring. Melo has length and mobility. Rondo had a unique sense. JJJ had the size and mobility combination. AB had the defensive skills. Baby had the read/reaction combo.
Olynyk has unique scoring ability. His team was ranked #1 in the country and they had a very weak guard core.
Some of these pan out, some don't. Tommy Heinsohn had once mentioned that the most important requirement for the rookies is to believe that they belong. The ones that believe, pan out. Others fall by the way side. If Olynyk can believe and build on what he is, he can become a very special player. Or, he can get swallowed by his defensive liabilities and be a nobody.
Who would have been a better pick, a pick with better potential to be special in some manner?