Propose Your Celtics Draft Pick Trades Here

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,086
With the news of Philly floating Okafor, I think it makes too much sense not to happen, unless there's a better opportunity for Danny out there. I actually think Okafor for the 3 is a pretty fair deal, straight up. Obviously need some money to exchange hands, but they can find a way.
Given the way the league has evolved, I'd rather gamble on Bender or add semi-redundancy with Dunn than deal with Okafor's plobby ass. In terms of value, it's a pretty fair deal but Okafor doesn't figure to ever add much value outside of low post scoring, a skill set that is becoming increasingly less valuable.
 

Sprowl

mikey lowell of the sandbox
Dope
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2006
34,437
Haiku
With the news of Philly floating Okafor, I think it makes too much sense not to happen, unless there's a better opportunity for Danny out there. I actually think Okafor for the 3 is a pretty fair deal, straight up. Obviously need some money to exchange hands, but they can find a way.
Okafor is closer to the Celtics' needs than Bender, to be sure. We don't really need a slightly longer, slightly more athletic Olynyk whose body is two years away. Even in 2016's long-distance game, the Celtics need a post player, and Okafor has already gone through a year of growing pains.
 

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
32,617
Okafor is closer to the Celtics' needs than Bender, to be sure. We don't really need a slightly longer, slightly more athletic Olynyk whose body is two years away. Even in 2016's long-distance game, the Celtics need a post player, and Okafor has already gone through a year of growing pains.

I'm not that high on Okafor nor do I think the Cs should be considering need when they could realistically upgrade every position.
 

Sprowl

mikey lowell of the sandbox
Dope
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2006
34,437
Haiku
I'm not that high on Okafor nor do I think the Cs should be considering need when they could realistically upgrade every position.
I dispute this. Upgrading everything never works -- you gotta build on what you got. Build on the deep guard positions, because none of Dunn, Murray, or Hield is an upgrade over Thomas, Bradley and Smart. The Celtics need good big men first and foremost, preferably two of them, so that Sullinger can waddle on to another team, Johnson can hobble off into retirement, and Steven can develop an inside-out game to complement the team's barely sufficient perimeter game.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
Given the way the league has evolved, I'd rather gamble on Bender or add semi-redundancy with Dunn than deal with Okafor's plobby ass. In terms of value, it's a pretty fair deal but Okafor doesn't figure to ever add much value outside of low post scoring, a skill set that is becoming increasingly less valuable.
Okafor has already added a face-up jumper which accounted for 56% of his overall FGA last season and had (I believe) the highest FG% in the league from January through the end of the season. Yes I'm aware his season didn't make it to March however it is irresponsible to discount those final two months of improvement from a 20-year old rookie playing in that environment once he has some semblance of a PG in Ish Smith. Advanced team stats on that clusterfvck of a team don't carry as much weight for me as that was not remotely close to an actual NBA system, culture, or team.
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
43,558
Here
Given the way the league has evolved, I'd rather gamble on Bender or add semi-redundancy with Dunn than deal with Okafor's plobby ass. In terms of value, it's a pretty fair deal but Okafor doesn't figure to ever add much value outside of low post scoring, a skill set that is becoming increasingly less valuable.
The Celtics need low-post scoring and I would dispute that is a dying role and/or easy to come by. I think Okafor is on pace to be a top 5 low post player in the league, which would provide high value to this roster. I don't think the Celtics could do better with the pick, outside of possibly Butler.
 

Scoops Bolling

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 19, 2007
5,873
Okafor is closer to the Celtics' needs than Bender, to be sure. We don't really need a slightly longer, slightly more athletic Olynyk whose body is two years away. Even in 2016's long-distance game, the Celtics need a post player, and Okafor has already gone through a year of growing pains.
Do we really need a post player who cannot defend the rim, and is thus useful on only one end of the floor (and even there is not a particularly good match for today's game)? I still have not seen a particularly good argument, here or elsewhere, about why it is the Celtics would want Okafor given his deficiencies on the defensive end and his ball stopping game on offense. I'd much rather gamble on Bender, who is a better fit for today's game and almost certainly a better defender, or Murray (who can help address the perimeter game and add another option who can create his own shot) than just throw up our hands and go "we need a post player" and get Jahlil "The Dinosaur" Okafor.

EDIT: Multiple replies were posted while I was writing this. I'd ask HRB and Ed both to address how Okafor fits the team on defense, and if he can move the ball enough to fit the offense. If the answer is "he's young so he can improve" or "he played on a dysfunctional team last year, so we don't know", my retort would simply that we can make the same kind of hypotheticals for every player in the draft. If there's concrete evidence, actual data, that suggests Okafor can fit our needs, my eyes are wide open. If we're just wishcasting and hand waving, then that's not good enough.
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
43,558
Here
If you are comparing the same "wishcasting" to everyone in the draft, why should I accept anyone you'd like to draft as "good enough?" How many elite 2-way low post players come around? Not many, and I'm not going to hold the Celtics to the standard of finding a guy like that with the third pick in a 2-player draft.

Personally, I am happy taking a guy who can score to play the 4 and then looking to address the rim defense separately, because top of the line low post scorers aren't easy to find in their own right. I think Bender is a fine pick, but he's a few years away and there's significantly more risk taking him over trading for Okafor. If Ainge can whirl the pick and another reasonable asset into Blake Griffin, great, I'm just not convinced they'll do better than Okafor. Still not bad for a few combined years of late 30's PP and KG.
 

bowiac

Caveat: I know nothing about what I speak
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
12,945
New York, NY
My guess is Bender is more ready to contribute to an NBA team than Okafor is. But that's just like, my opinion man.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,459
I'd take Bender over Okafor in a heartbeat, both longterm and next year.
Bender needs work physically, but his skillset is much closer to what you want from a big in the modern game than Okafor.

He's probably a better rim protector from day 1, he's almost certainly the better pick and role defender. His passing is a strength, and I doubt he's any worse as a rebounder. I'd guess he's a better jump shooter than Okafor as well, but that is harder for me to predict. Basically the only thing I'd expect Okafor to be better at is traditional post-up play, also known as the most ineffective offense in the NBA.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,086
Okafor's low post scoring is undeniable but I do not like heavy players in today's game. It's very difficult for guys with his body type to slim down. We've seen this firsthand from Sullinger. His defense is not likely to ever be a plus and will most likely be a negative. It will be very difficult to find a good complement to Okafor. You would need a gazelle of a 5 to cover for his defensive shortcomings.
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
51,289
Let's see, doesn't improve their outside shooting, interior defense, rebounding, or passing. Where do I sign up?!
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
19,465
Somewhere
What is Noel worth to the Celtics? He has a year left under contract. I don't see a deal that the Sixers would bite on.
 

Fishy1

Head Mason
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
5,867
Okafor has the potential to be elite in the post, but he's a post player who can't shoot 3s and can't play defense. He'd kill the C's spacing.

It'd be like adding Kevin Love, except you can't even ruin his scoring average by putting him on the elbow for catch and shoot jumpers.

Benders got the potential to be a impactful two way player. Take him unless the offer is way better than Okafor.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
Do we really need a post player who cannot defend the rim, and is thus useful on only one end of the floor (and even there is not a particularly good match for today's game)? I still have not seen a particularly good argument, here or elsewhere, about why it is the Celtics would want Okafor given his deficiencies on the defensive end and his ball stopping game on offense. I'd much rather gamble on Bender, who is a better fit for today's game and almost certainly a better defender, or Murray (who can help address the perimeter game and add another option who can create his own shot) than just throw up our hands and go "we need a post player" and get Jahlil "The Dinosaur" Okafor.

EDIT: Multiple replies were posted while I was writing this. I'd ask HRB and Ed both to address how Okafor fits the team on defense, and if he can move the ball enough to fit the offense. If the answer is "he's young so he can improve" or "he played on a dysfunctional team last year, so we don't know", my retort would simply that we can make the same kind of hypotheticals for every player in the draft. If there's concrete evidence, actual data, that suggests Okafor can fit our needs, my eyes are wide open. If we're just wishcasting and hand waving, then that's not good enough.
You want concrete evidence that Okafor isn't just wishcasting and hand waving.......yet you are an advocate of Bender? Hmmmm
 

Sprowl

mikey lowell of the sandbox
Dope
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2006
34,437
Haiku
I haven't seen a lot of Okafor in action, but is it really beyond the realm of belief that 20-year-old big man might improve his defensive game in his second year in the league? He would be moving from a basket case of a team without veteran leadership to an up-and-coming team which stresses team defense, and which already has strong personalities in their athletic primes for leadership. It is not unknown for rookie big men to struggle with the speed of the NBA game, and then to improve when the game slows down a little.


edit -- it does look like both Okafor and Noel are on the trading block. Noel might be the better fit for Stevens' team as presently organized.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,086
Defense in today's NBA just isn't easy for someone with Okafor's body type. The game is so fast is everything he does is so plodding. I'd expect any improvements he makes to be incremental. We were all waiting for Jefferson to get better on defense and it just never happened. If we did get Okafor, who would be PF target?
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,459
I haven't seen a lot of Okafor in action, but is it really beyond the realm of belief that 20-year-old big man might improve his defensive game in his second year in the league? He would be moving from a basket case of a team without veteran leadership to an up-and-coming team which stresses team defense, and which already has strong personalities in their athletic primes for leadership. It is not unknown for rookie big men to struggle with the speed of the NBA game, and then to improve when the game slows down a little.


edit -- it does look like both Okafor and Noel are on the trading block. Noel might be the better fit for Stevens' team as presently organized.
He'll almost certainly improve over last year, but Nylon Calculus had a nice bit on how big men who struggle defensively as rookies even when they improve still trail behind their peers. Also Okafor wasn't a bad defender last year he was a terrible defender. Based on the aging curve he looks likely to see small improvements up to merely bad then tail off again as he loses lateral quickness (already a concern for him)
http://nyloncalculus.com/2016/03/02/jahlil-okafor-and-defensive-improvement/

I think Okafor is a perfectly decent player in a role, I just don't see a player with that role as being worth anywhere near the #3 pick.

Edit- I wonder what Okafor's value around the league is. I know this week both Chad Ford and Kevin Pelton said they didn't think he was worth #3, and today Eric Freeman at Yahoo dropped into a longer piece on trading one of Okafor/Noel that he doesn't think PHI will be able to get a top 6 pick for either of them.
 
Last edited:

EL Jeffe

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 30, 2006
1,314
Did Okafor turn into Kevin Duckworth or something? Yeah, he's carrying a few extra pounds but he's not a tub of lard. It's also worth pointing out that Okafor has a longer wingspan than Bender with the same standing reach, so I'm not seeing Bender as some sort of superior rim protector with his non-existent hops.

If I'm Ainge and I can get Okafor for the 3rd pick I make that trade in a heartbeat. He would immediately upgrade their Bigs and give them another legit scoring option. I get that Bender is tantalizing as a seemingly skilled 7' 18 year old, but I think Okafor gets undersold around here.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,678
With big men you're not worried about hops, you're worried about quickness and timing, neither of which Okafor has. His timing might improve, but his quickness really won't. He's essentially the 6'11" Sullinger, which isn't a bad thing per se. With his post game he can likely be a very effective offensive roleplayer. But #3 is a really high price to pay for a roleplayer.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,459
Did Okafor turn into Kevin Duckworth or something? Yeah, he's carrying a few extra pounds but he's not a tub of lard. It's also worth pointing out that Okafor has a longer wingspan than Bender with the same standing reach, so I'm not seeing Bender as some sort of superior rim protector with his non-existent hops.

If I'm Ainge and I can get Okafor for the 3rd pick I make that trade in a heartbeat. He would immediately upgrade their Bigs and give them another legit scoring option. I get that Bender is tantalizing as a seemingly skilled 7' 18 year old, but I think Okafor gets undersold around here.

History says that Okafor almost certainly won't defend. His lateral agility (much more important than vertical for big defenders) is pretty poor. Bender almost certainly won't be Rudy Gobert (another low vert guy), but he has much more potential to be a good defender in the pick and roll, and probably a solid rim protector.

Okafor is pretty decent, he has 1 borderline elite NBA skill, the biggest problem to me is that his greatest weakness is what NBA offenses are built to exploit. And his weaknesses on offense are the kind of things NBA defenses are built to exploit.

The thing about Bender is that he has the potential to have a lot of very good NBA skills with less weaknesses, which makes him much more versitile in being a part of a good team. Neither is likely to be a first option on a champion, but I think Bender (while a bit higher risk) seems more easy to fit in as a top 3 player on a Championship team.
 

Grin&MartyBarret

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 2, 2007
4,932
East Village, NYC
I'm not a huge Okafor guy, and suspect his defense will always make him a frustrating player to have on your team, but the criticisms of his offensive game here aren't particularly accurate.

He's much more than just a low post scorer. He has a very good face up game for a guy his age, can finish in the pick and roll, is a solid to good passer, and a lot of scouts expect him to develop a three point jumper the same way Cousins has. Okafor's 19 years old, and is treated like a finished product. His game will evolve just like everybody else's. I'm not advocating a deal for him or anything, but I don't think he's some one-dimensional post player who kills your spacing. He can be a lot more than that, offensively.
 

EL Jeffe

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 30, 2006
1,314
With big men you're not worried about hops, you're worried about quickness and timing, neither of which Okafor has. His timing might improve, but his quickness really won't. He's essentially the 6'11" Sullinger, which isn't a bad thing per se. With his post game he can likely be a very effective offensive roleplayer. But #3 is a really high price to pay for a roleplayer.
The only thing I'd add here is that length also matters (twss). For example, Zeller's alligator arms completely limit his effectiveness on both ends of the court. Okafor has very respectable measurements so while his lateral quickness will very likely never surpass "meh" his size and length definitely give him a chance to be better defensively once he figures things out.

Perkins is a perfect example of a guy who had to greatly improve his conditioning and figure out how to defend at the NBA level. He did both of those things, and certainly playing with HOF players greatly impacted his development. Okafor's story is far from being written and I still see a guy who can be more than a role player.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,678
Perkins was slow end to end, not as slow laterally. But beyond that the game has really changed in the last five years, I'm not sure that 2008-2010 Perkins would be more than a backup these days given the modern preference for switching. That being said, having a prime Kevin Garnett (i.e. a top ten all time defensive player) to cover for Okafor would mask the issues, but Boston doesn't have that guy and I still wouldn't trade #3 for a roleplayer, no matter how good a roleplayer he is,
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
51,289
Solid improvement from Okafor probably gets him to Bropez-style defense, decent enough defending straight line attacks in the paint with his size, less so everywhere else. Not sure how much hope there is to improve his rebounding.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,459
The only thing I'd add here is that length also matters (twss). For example, Zeller's alligator arms completely limit his effectiveness on both ends of the court. Okafor has very respectable measurements so while his lateral quickness will very likely never surpass "meh" his size and length definitely give him a chance to be better defensively once he figures things out.

Perkins is a perfect example of a guy who had to greatly improve his conditioning and figure out how to defend at the NBA level. He did both of those things, and certainly playing with HOF players greatly impacted his development. Okafor's story is far from being written and I still see a guy who can be more than a role player.
Okafor isn't necessarily a role player, if I were projecting him I'd say his reasonable best case is Al Jefferson, maybe with a bit less rebounding.
His floor is probably Kanter but a significantly worse rebounder? but similarly a scorer who isn't much of a defender or passer.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,678
Solid improvement from Okafor probably gets him to Bropez-style defense, decent enough defending straight line attacks in the paint with his size, less so everywhere else. Not sure how much hope there is to improve his rebounding.
Bropez is probably a best case scenario for him. Only Bropez doesn't seem to impact w/l much, which I'd similarly expect with Okafor.
 

amfox1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 6, 2003
6,808
The back of your computer
Here's my proposed trade:

BOS trades #3, Amir Johnson ($12mm team option) and Terry Rozier (4-years rookie contract)

DEN trades #7, Danilo Gallinari ($15.1mm in 2016-17, then $16.1mm player option) and Nikola Jokic (3-years rookie contract)

Why does DEN do this trade? They get their player at #3 (Hield or Murray, most likely), clear out a big man, shore up their backcourt and clear salary to go after a free agent (if, as expected, Johnson is not retained).

Why does BOS do this trade? They get badly-needed shooting help and rim protection, Gallinari's contract fits well with a run at Durant after next season (assuming he stays at OKC for one more year) and can still pick up a draft asset at #7 (Chriss or Ellenson?)
 

DannyDarwinism

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 7, 2007
4,883
I'd think the Celtics would have to include next year's Brooklyn rights and one of their other first rounders this year for Denver to even consider.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
8,092
That seems pretty weak from Denver's perspective. Jokic alone is worth #3. I'm not sure Denver does it even if they keep the #7 pick.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
That seems pretty weak from Denver's perspective. Jokic alone is worth #3. I'm not sure Denver does it even if they keep the #7 pick.
We were discussing this in the other thread. I don't feel the #3 alone gets Jokic.....he could go first overall if he were in this draft.
 

bowiac

Caveat: I know nothing about what I speak
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
12,945
New York, NY
We were discussing this in the other thread. I don't feel the #3 alone gets Jokic.....he could go first overall if he were in this draft.
That seems unlikely to me given concerns about his defensive upside, although I do agree he's worth more than the #3 pick.
 

zenter

indian sweet
SoSH Member
Oct 11, 2005
5,641
Astoria, NY
Let's remove Jokic, because he's basically Denver's centerpiece going forward and is likely going to take a lot to extract.

What about #3 + (something) for Danillo + #7? He's a proper scorer.
 

NoXInNixon

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 24, 2008
5,297
Unless there's a combination of trades and signings that convince Durant to come to Boston, I don't want the Celtics to be moving down. They should be trying to package picks and players in order to move up. They don't need more decent players. They need a superstar, and higher you pick the more likely that is. If the Lakers have any interest in swapping places, I want Danny to make that happen. How high a pick can they get for #16 plus #23?
 

zenter

indian sweet
SoSH Member
Oct 11, 2005
5,641
Astoria, NY
Unless there's a combination of trades and signings that convince Durant to come to Boston, I don't want the Celtics to be moving down.
Given what ppl say about the 3-7 spots in the draft, trading down may be beneficial to extract more assets. Especially if the value a Denver (for example) sees in a player is much greater than the value the Cs see.

They should be trying to package picks and players in order to move up. They don't need more decent players. They need a superstar, and higher you pick the more likely that is. If the Lakers have any interest in swapping places, I want Danny to make that happen.
For the Sixers, short of including IT, Crowder, and the 2018 BKN pick, it ain't happening. The Lakers are motivated (due to Buss stuff) to transform pick 2 into Cousins or George. Cs don't have an equivalent player.

Realistically a bigtime non-starter.

How high a pick can they get for #16 plus #23?
15 or 14. 3 nickels equals 1 dime in this league. The most valuable (in terms of opportunity cost) pick they have after #3 is #31.

#16, #23 are best used to extract some value from a team without picks this year. That list is: CLE, MIA, NYK, OKC, POR, or WAS.
 

DavidTai

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
1,242
Herndon, VA
What sort of value are you going to be able to pull out with 16 and 23, though? I mean, I'd rather gamble on a stash and follow type foreign player than whatever sort of NBA value we could get with those picks, for the most part, because I keep thinking we'd get something like role players in trades when we need top-end talent more.

I'd rather gamble on drafting a Rajon Rondo with that sort of pick than trading it to those teams. Well, maybe OKC or Cleveland's first rounders in a few years if we could swing that.
 

zenter

indian sweet
SoSH Member
Oct 11, 2005
5,641
Astoria, NY
You got it. Future 1st of some sort. Cs have too many picks and isn't it best to stash high 2nd rounders (31, 35, 45)?
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,678
Unless there's a combination of trades and signings that convince Durant to come to Boston, I don't want the Celtics to be moving down. They should be trying to package picks and players in order to move up. They don't need more decent players. They need a superstar, and higher you pick the more likely that is. If the Lakers have any interest in swapping places, I want Danny to make that happen. How high a pick can they get for #16 plus #23?
Teams don't swap superstars for guys they see as merely good. Again, this isn't the NFL, the lottery balls didn't bounce Boston's way on draft night so they need to make due. You might trade within a tier, but trading up into a new tier is really tough.
 

smastroyin

simpering whimperer
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2002
20,684
As much as this is a two player draft, I'd still bet the rest of the field on producing the best player in retrospect. The question as always is whether the celtics identify (and keep) that player
 

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
4,700
Saint Paul, MN
Rumors flying out here in the Twin Cities about Chicago wanting #5 pick plus Wiggins for Butler. No Chace the Wolves go for that, but there is talk of a #5 plus Lavine.

Celts could easily beat that with a #3 plus Smart.
 

MillarTime

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
1,338
Rumors flying out here in the Twin Cities about Chicago wanting #5 pick plus Wiggins for Butler. No Chace the Wolves go for that, but there is talk of a #5 plus Lavine.

Celts could easily beat that with a #3 plus Smart.
I don't know. The difference between #3 and #5 is negligible in this draft (unless the Bulls want to ensure that they get a specific player like Dunn) and I think Lavine is a better prospect than Smart (at least in terms of upside).
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
19,465
Somewhere
Depends on what you think about Wiggins; from the framing of your rumor (source?) it sounds like the Wolves think that is too much.

It probably takes more than the third pick and Smart, but the Celtics can easily afford to pay.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,678
I don't know. The difference between #3 and #5 is negligible in this draft (unless the Bulls want to ensure that they get a specific player like Dunn) and I think Lavine is a better prospect than Smart (at least in terms of upside).
Lavine is one of those rare players that is so stupid that I am not sure that he ever plays an acceptable level of defense (he is absolutely horrific on that end of the floor). Add in the "empty stats" considerations and given how little extra he brings offensively and no, he isn't a better prospect than Smart.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
Rumors flying out here in the Twin Cities about Chicago wanting #5 pick plus Wiggins for Butler. No Chace the Wolves go for that, but there is talk of a #5 plus Lavine.

Celts could easily beat that with a #3 plus Smart.
You can argue the value of Smart's higher floor to Lavines higher upside and the difference between 3 and 5 is fairly negligible. When you factor the advantage Minnesota had by taking Butler out of the EC then we don't come close to topping the Wolves offer as listed above.