They keep drawing with all the balls in play even after the 1st pick comes up. So Boston's combos stay in there and they just keep going until they hit a non-Boston combo for #2.Explain this--why is drawing done 3 times?
They keep drawing with all the balls in play even after the 1st pick comes up. So Boston's combos stay in there and they just keep going until they hit a non-Boston combo for #2.Explain this--why is drawing done 3 times?
They only draw for top 3. Celtics had 250 combinations. They got the #1 pick on the first draw. 2nd draw was another one of the 249 left... 3rd was another one of the 248 leftExplain this--why is drawing done 3 times?
That's the point. You don't trade for more picks, grab Fultz and don't look back.Christ. Markelle Fultz is walking through that door folks. The Fellowship of the Miserable will just have to deal with it.
I think Crowder might go and brown gets his spot.Draft Fultz. Sign Hayward.
Starters: IT, Bradley, Crowder, Hayward, Horford
Bench: Fultz (but getting big minutes), Smart, Rozier, Brown, Olynyk
That's a very sweet 10-man group right there. Still not that beefy up front, but man there's talent there by the bushel.
Seriously... this is why the pick was NOT traded at deadline... or hasn't been given up to date. Ainge (smartly) held onto it, and it paid off tonight.Bill SimmonsVerified account @BillSimmons 1m1 minute ago
That lottery was a best case scenario for Indy/Chi if they want to trade George/Butler - could they just play LA and Celts off each other?
Uh no.
I'm the aftermath of drafting Brown, the way I came to terms with it (after assuming they would grab Dunn) was that this was known to be the guard draft from day one.So so so glad they used last year's pick on Brown and didn't panic and trade for Hayward or whatever. Can have our cake and eat it too
US getting #1 this year may harm next year's. The Nets might not want the embarrassment of giving up 2 in a row, so they keep a couple assets instead of trading them.And let's not forget that, as of now at least, C's are odds-on favorite to win next year's #1 pick too.
And let's not forget that, as of now at least, C's are odds-on favorite to win next year's #1 pick too.
What assets do you speak of?US getting #1 this year may harm next year's. The Nets might not want the embarrassment of giving up 2 in a row, so they keep a couple assets instead of trading them.
My bad, totally misread that.That's the point. You don't trade for more picks, grab Fultz and don't look back.
not figuring out the exact odds, but there is about a 1.5% chance of that happening.They only draw for top 3. Celtics had 250 combinations. They got the #1 pick on the first draw. 2nd draw was another one of the 249 left... 3rd was another one of the 248 left
better than picking 8th. They can't undo that.The Kings are picking 5th instead of 3rd because they just had to sign Marco Belinelli and Kosta Koufos.
That would be an excellent way to run a franchise.US getting #1 this year may harm next year's. The Nets might not want the embarrassment of giving up 2 in a row, so they keep a couple assets instead of trading them.
An expiring Lopez would get something. Lin has value.What assets do you speak of?
Don't think so. Pretty sure Olynyk needs to be renounced to fit Hayward.Is this roster possible next year financially?
Thomas
Bradley
Hayward
Crowder
Horford
Smart
Fultz
Brown
Rozier
Olynyk
Zizic
Yeah, but they're still gonna be in the lottery. They're not escaping that.US getting #1 this year may harm next year's. The Nets might not want the embarrassment of giving up 2 in a row, so they keep a couple assets instead of trading them.
It isn't Marks' business to care and he's said as much. He's been building with youth and assets and I expect he'll look into moving Lopez given that he won't really have another chance to do so. They're already going to be incorporating at least two more rookie first rounders. If Lopez goes, all bets are off.US getting #1 this year may harm next year's. The Nets might not want the embarrassment of giving up 2 in a row, so they keep a couple assets instead of trading them.
How would trading their best player make them better? I would love for them to trade Lopez.An expiring Lopez would get something. Lin has value.
Mhmmmm this sounds good. Very good.Even if Hayward is unavailable, go after Millsap or something. The prospect of having a couple bad contracts in 3-4 years (IT will be on the downside by then) isn't as daunting as it otherwise might b.
Doesn't that logic apply almost equally to this season? If they had any "assets" to keep they had just as much incentive to keep them this year as they do next year.US getting #1 this year may harm next year's. The Nets might not want the embarrassment of giving up 2 in a row, so they keep a couple assets instead of trading them.
Pessimist is never disappointed. Glad you were wrong. This is not David Stern's NBA.I'm going in with the mentality it's fixed and there's 0 chance LA loses their pick and 0 chance the Celtics pick top 3.
He can in 2018.Hey Durant, Want to re-think that decision?
I'm saying that they may want to avoid giving up 2 number 1's in a row and therefore not trade him.How would trading their best player make them better? I would love for them to trade Lopez.
It wouldn't. That's what he's saying. That because they won't want to give up #1 again they WON'T trade him.How would trading their best player make them better? I would love for them to trade Lopez.
Yeah I had bad info, sorry guys!This does not appear to be correct. It is at 8:30 PM. NBA Countdown is on now.
I certainly hope they don't even consider it now.And thank God (Danny) we didn't trade this pick for Butler, or even George
1.38%, or 1/72.46.not figuring out the exact odds, but there is about a 1.5% chance of that happening.
He has a player option, he can (and almost definitely will) opt out after this yearHe can in 2018.
Fultz is a much surer bet, provided the medicals check out on his knee. There's real questions about Jackson's shooting and his position (he played a lot of stretch 4 in college and won't have the size for it in the NBA). Fultz has the total package of size/athleticism for a point guard and can score from anywhere on the floor.Just curious for those smarter than me, why Fultz over Jackson?
Assuming it goes Fultz/Ball, it'll be interesting to see what Colangelo does with Jackson as the BPA but not a great fit with the concerns about his shooting.Looking from another angle, this was nearly a worst case scenario for the 76ers. They'll of course still add a very good player, but they miss out on the chance to get 2 picks, and between not landing in the top 2 (with either their pick or SAC), and with the C's/Lakers getting those picks (nearly ensuring that both top guards are gone), they miss out on adding Fultz/Ball, who would have fit in really nicely with Simmons/Saric/Embiid.