Paul George to OKC

[Grin&MartyBarret]

Honestly, I'm not sure why everybody here views those two picks and players as so outlandish. Of course you'd prefer a lower asking price, but the Celtics are looking to acquire a top 15 player on a discounted extension. That changes the price; early reports on the price assumed free agency. An extension eliminates risk and saves money relative to the cost of acquiring George as an UFA.

The starting caliber players have to be included to make the money work, and there are multiple starter caliber players that have limited value to Boston. Given this Haywood/George thing the C's are trying to pull off, Avery Bradley and Marcus Smart are unlikely to be part of the Celtics future. Those are "starters," and one or both may well be on the table for Indiana.

As for the picks, there's still a lot of uncertainty around that Lakers/SAC pick. Ingram, Randle, etc. will all improve. Ball will help. They could easily play themselves out of that pick conveying, and becoming the Sacramento pick.

Sacramento then offers uncertainty of their own. They've been linked to both LMA and Millsap, will beg Griffin for a meeting (and may well be the only team dumb enough to go to the full max in terms of years and money) and have made it clear their intention is to spend money to improve. They have some interesting young guys, just brought over a 23 year old widely believed to be the best player in Europe, and have max money to spend. Even if they strike out on their big targets, and instead overpaid for some combo of Gallinari/Teague/Holiday/Ibaka/Hill, etc. it could easily push that SAC pick into the latter half of the lottery and pretty greatly reduce it's value.

Brooklyn projects to be bad, but guys like Zach Lowe are pretty confident that they won't be nearly as bad. It's a big risk to bank on that being a top 3 pick.

 

[DJnVa]

Honestly, I'm not sure why everybody here views those two picks and players as so outlandish. Of course you'd prefer a lower asking price, but the Celtics are looking to acquire a top 15 player on a discounted extension. That changes the price; early reports on the price assumed free agency. An extension eliminates risk and saves money relative to the cost of acquiring George as an UFA.

Because no one else can offer anything close, and Indiana pretty much has to deal him. It's not "Boston will give us this or someone else will give us something close".

And the "discounted extension"? Isn't that more a wish? I've seen nothing except a few tweets about it. Everything public from player is "LA Lakers".

 

[Big John]

All of this begs the central question: are the Celtics trading for one year of George or three years of George? In the latter case Ainge might dip fairly deeply into his trove of picks.

Perhaps Pritchard should grant the Celtics permission to negotiate an extension with George instead of trying to control the process himself. He'd accomplish more by doing that than by making unrealistic demands.

 

[DJnVa]

Perhaps Pritchard should grant the Celtics permission to negotiate an extension with George instead of trying to control the process himself. He'd accomplish more by doing that than by making unrealistic demands.

I think that PG may be amenable to an extension, but I doubt (and I hope I'm wrong) that he's not going to sign that without playing out the season first.

 

[Grin&MartyBarret]

Because no one else can offer anything close, and Indiana pretty much has to deal him. It's not "Boston will give us this or someone else will give us something close".

This is only true if you assume those picks are hugely valuable. There's plenty of uncertainty around whether or not they will be. For what it's worth, I don't think the C's end up including both picks. But the notion that Indiana asking is absurd seems off to me.

That offer's not that far off from what Minnesota just paid for Butler for fewer years of control. They sent LaVine, Dunn and swapped #7 for #16.

That's a starter, a recent lottery pick, and an actual lotto pick that's not too far off from what that SAC/LAL pick will likely become.

As for other offers out there, it's hard to tell what the market actually is. The Nuggets have expressed interest in Love, and have young, promising players that Indiana would prefer to the picks folks here are suggesting the C's send. Houston could include Capella in a three team deal. The Lakers could include Ingram. George's willingness to commit longterm will inevitably increase the price.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

Yes it matters. Evaluation of the package is subjective and may be affected by a sense of "If Danny is willing to part with player X, there must be something I'm not seeing that make him available."

That's basically saying the GM is scared/worried that Danny Ainge is a better GM than he is. That guy will be fired very quickly. Most GMs think they know something the other GM doesn't.

 

[Cellar-Door]

This is only true if you assume those picks are hugely valuable. There's plenty of uncertainty around whether or not they will be. For what it's worth, I don't think the C's end up including both picks. But the notion that Indiana asking is absurd seems off to me.

That offer's not that far off from what Minnesota just paid for Butler for fewer years of control. They sent LaVine, Dunn and swapped #7 for #16.

That's a starter, a recent lottery pick, and an actual lotto pick that's not too far off from what that SAC/LAL pick will likely become.

As for other offers out there, it's hard to tell what the market actually is. The Nuggets have expressed interest in Love, and have young, promising players that Indiana would prefer to the picks folks here are suggesting the C's send. Houston could include Capella in a three team deal. The Lakers could include Ingram. George's willingness to commit longterm will inevitably increase the price.

Huh? Butler got less back and Butler has more years of cheap control. The BKN pick is a better asset than anything in the MIN package, and most teams would probably think similarly about the LAL/SAC pick.
Also for salary match Bradley and Crowder are likely going out, those are both more valuable players than LaVine.
To think that package was close you'd have to project Dunn as the next Chris Paul.

 

[finnVT]

This is only true if you assume those picks are hugely valuable. There's plenty of uncertainty around whether or not they will be. For what it's worth, I don't think the C's end up including both picks. But the notion that Indiana asking is absurd seems off to me.

That offer's not that far off from what Minnesota just paid for Butler for fewer years of control. They sent LaVine, Dunn and swapped #7 for #16.

That's a starter, a recent lottery pick, and an actual lotto pick that's not too far off from what that SAC/LAL pick will likely become.

As for other offers out there, it's hard to tell what the market actually is. The Nuggets have expressed interest in Love, and have young, promising players that Indiana would prefer to the picks folks here are suggesting the C's send. Houston could include Capella in a three team deal. The Lakers could include Ingram. George's willingness to commit longterm will inevitably increase the price.

Fewer years of control? I think most people are way more ok with the draft picks being included if there's a PG extension in place. Without that, it's a steep price precisely because it's one year of PG, with lots of smoke that he really wants to go to LA.

 

[ElcaballitoMVP]

IF George is willing to do an extension, I'm fine with meeting the 2 picks and a starter like AB asking price.

Personally, I think the Pacers are holding out for more of a sure thing. They probably know what they can get from Boston and because it's based around those uncertain picks want to see what else they can get. If they can wind up with an Irving or someone like that, they should probably take that deal. If CLE can't make a deal like that work, they can go back to Ainge and take the picks.

 

[jasail]

Because no one else can offer anything close, and Indiana pretty much has to deal him. It's not "Boston will give us this or someone else will give us something close".

Indy's reported wants are consistent with what DA has been saying about the impacts of having so many assets. Teams are asking the C's for far more than fair value because they have so many assets. Look at the Butler trade. MN moved down 9 spots in the draft and gave up a starting caliber player coming off injury and a prior lottery pick coming off an underwhelming season. This has been widely considered a fleecing by MN. Butler is also under control for two more seasons than George.

So let's acknowledge these factors, but use it as a baseline because it is the only trade involving a top 20 player in recent memory. It seems like the LAL/SAC pick, plus the Memphis pick, plus one of AB/Jae should be more than enough to get it done. Two potential high lottery picks and two starters is way too much of an overpay for Paul George. No other team can offer anything close to my proposed deal, let alone what Indy wants, so the Celtics shouldn't bid against themselves.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

I think Indiana is only holding out for FA. Where guys sign will impact where George is traded.

 

[Big John]

This is only true if you assume those picks are hugely valuable.

Oh, I think 2018 Brooklyn is extremely valuable. I'll be shocked if it isn't top 5 in a very strong draft.

 

[southshoresoxfan]

It's also extremely likely the BKN pick is a top 5. Bulls might be worse. Kings possibly. But they are going to be dismal this season. I'd be open to the Lakers pick Crowder and Bradley. That's a good return for IND considering the leverage.

 

[Grin&MartyBarret]

Huh? Butler got less back and Butler has more years of cheap control. The BKN pick is a better asset than anything in the MIN package, and most teams would probably think similarly about the LAL/SAC pick.
Also for salary match Bradley and Crowder are likely going out, those are both more valuable players than LaVine.
To think that package was close you'd have to project Dunn as the next Chris Paul.

I laid out my argument about the LAL/SAC pick and the lesser concerns about the Brooklyn pick. You're welcome to disagree, but I think people here are being pretty rosy about those picks given the uncertainty around them. The dust may well settle in a month and those picks may look great. But there are plenty of very plausible scenarios where those picks look much less valuable in two weeks than they do now.

Fewer years of control? I think most people are way more ok with the draft picks being included if there's a PG extension in place. Without that, it's a steep price precisely because it's one year of PG, with lots of smoke that he really wants to go to LA.

It's been widely reported that George would be willing to sign a three year extension in Boston.

 

[Big John]

Wizards are reportedly offering Otto Porter for George in a sign-and-trade. As an RFA, Porter would have to agree to the deal. Obviously Washington is one of several teams that would prefer to keep George away from the Celtics.

LOL, I wonder if Pritchard will ask for Bradley Beal and two unprotected first rounders instead.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

There would have to be more going to the Pacers but Porter is a good start.

 

[Devizier]

Porter is the first serious (publicly reported) competing offer.

I mean, there are other teams that could get in the game. What if the Timberwolves decided to put Wiggins and Dieng in play? Not sure that's the right package, but things could get interesting.

 

[DJnVa]

This is only true if you assume those picks are hugely valuable. There's plenty of uncertainty around whether or not they will be.

You can't create a scenario where that Nets pick isn't good. And the other one is LA/SAC versus a pick that Houston or Cleveland can offer? It's never 100%, but I'd take that bet.

No one else rumored to be in the hunt for PG has MULTIPLE picks that are a decent bet to be in the lottery. Frankly, do they have any?

 

[DJnVa]

It's been widely reported that George would be willing to sign a three year extension in Boston.

Source from someone besides a producer at a Boston sports radio station?

 

[Cesar Crespo]

Porter is the first serious (publicly reported) competing offer.

I mean, there are other teams that could get in the game. What if the Timberwolves decided to put Wiggins and Dieng in play? Not sure that's the right package, but things could get interesting.

Denver too if they include Murray.

 

[Grin&MartyBarret]

You can't create a scenario where that Nets pick isn't good. And the other one is LA/SAC versus a pick that Houston or Cleveland can offer? It's never 100%, but I'd take that bet.

No one else rumored to be in the hunt for PG has MULTIPLE picks that are a decent bet to be in the lottery. Frankly, do they have any?

You can create a scenario where the Nets picks isn't good pretty easily, actually. The Nets sign Blake Griffin. Done.

But more plausible is that they just see an incremental improvement by making some shrewd signings. They add Redick and Olynyk, say. Russel takes a step up. And they become garden variety bad instead of top pick bad, and end up at #6 instead of #1.

And while #6 still has plenty of value to Indiana, if the C's get stuck holding that pick at #6 when they could have turned it into PG, that's a big error on Ainge's part. That's the leverage Indy has to push.

 

[Cellar-Door]

I laid out my argument about the LAL/SAC pick and the lesser concerns about the Brooklyn pick. You're welcome to disagree, but I think people here are being pretty rosy about those picks given the uncertainty around them. The dust may well settle in a month and those picks may look great. But there are plenty of very plausible scenarios where those picks look much less valuable in two weeks than they do now.



It's been widely reported that George would be willing to sign a three year extension in Boston.

The cap permutations to make an extension work are impressively difficult, Zach Lowe's piece today mentioned that he thinks it's nearly impossible, and that a trade for George is for 1 year and the bird rights.

As to the picks, sure they Could end up not as good, but few picks in the league are better bets to be good(maybe none). They are excellent assets, and about as good as future picks get, and picks tend to be more valuable than anything but a budding star player.

 

[DJnVa]

You can create a scenario where the Nets picks isn't good pretty easily, actually. The Nets sign Blake Griffin. Done.

But more plausible is that they just see an incremental import cement by making some shrewd signings. They add Redick and Olynyk, say. Russel takes a step up. And they become garden variety bad instead of top pick bad, and end up at #6 instead of #1.

#6 is still better than what other teams can offer. No other team rumored in the hunt is a lottery team except the Lakers who don't have a pick to convey.

What am I missing?

 

[Grin&MartyBarret]

Source from someone besides a producer at a Boston sports radio station?

Here's Amick reporting that George has made it known that he won't "close a window of opportunity" if he lands on a contender: https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nba/2017/06/28/paul-george-warned-indiana-pacers-trade/435476001/

 

[cheech13]

For what it's worth, Zach Lowe threw cold water on the idea that Paul George would renegotiate and extend with Boston. If that's the case Boston isn't going to give up that much and what Houston, Washington, Los Angeles or Cleveland bring to the table might be just as good.

 

[Grin&MartyBarret]

#6 is still better than what other teams can offer. No other team rumored in the hunt is a lottery team except the Lakers who don't have a pick to convey.

What am I missing?

Now I'm just confused. Are you saying the Celtics shouldn't include those picks even if they end up at #6?

My point is that I don't think those picks should be off limits, necessarily. There's some risk that Ainge will be left holding the bag otherwise, and plausible scenarios that leave those two picks far less valuable in two weeks than they look now. Ainge needs to very seriously weigh the possibility that those picks may never be more valuable than they are now, and be willing to turn one or both (if that's what it takes) into Paul George. The notion that Pritchard should be scoffed at for asking is off-base in my mind, for reasons I've laid out.

All that said, the fact that Lowe's reported the extension isn't on the table changes the calculus a lot, obviously.

 

[DJnVa]

Here's Amick reporting that George has made it known that he won't "close a window of opportunity" if he lands on a contender: https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nba/2017/06/28/paul-george-warned-indiana-pacers-trade/435476001/

Thanks.

To me though "willing to listen" is not the same as "trading for a discounted extension".

 

[JCizzle]

Wizards are reportedly offering Otto Porter for George in a sign-and-trade. As an RFA, Porter would have to agree to the deal. Obviously Washington is one of several teams that would prefer to keep George away from the Celtics.

LOL, I wonder if Pritchard will ask for Bradley Beal and two unprotected first rounders instead.

Is the right to pay Otto Porter max money for X # of years really that big of a draw? He's a fine player, but I'm not sure I'd want to commit that kind of money to him.

 

[DJnVa]

Now I'm just confused. Are you saying the Celtics shouldn't include those picks even if they end up at #6?

No--I'm saying that pick, even at #6 is WAY more valuable that what other teams can send so there's no way they should include it.

They should include JUST the Lakers pick, which by itself is likely to be MUCH better than any other pick offered and that the Pacers wanting "two picks in top half of draft" is ridiculous, because NO TEAM except Boston has that to offer.

If I'm trying to sell a car, and everyone and their brother is offering about $10,000 for it, and suddenly Bill Gates wants it, I don't suddenly hold out for $45,000 just because he has it, and he'd be stupid to offer it because no else is offering over $10,000.

Add to that, that I'll lose that car for nothing if I don't sell it.

 

[Jed Zeppelin]

The Brooklyn pick is the best non-player asset in the league, full stop. The Lakers pick is the would-be second best, though the Philly protections certainly throw a slight wrench into that. Nobody else reported to be in the bidding can offer picks that aren't immediately devalued the second the trade is consummated. Of the handful of teams that even have the rights to other team's picks, most of them are lotto protected, with the only ones even capable of being lotto picks are Miami's 2019 1-7 protected and 2021 unprotected pick to Phoenix (plus whichever of LA/SAC Philly ends up getting).

If some legit young talent starts getting thrown around in some of these offers, sure, other teams can put together a strong enough package but the LAL pick alone is about as significant a draft asset as a team could hope for in exchange for one year of a player.

 

[bankshot1]

It sounds like Pritchard is hoping Ainge bids aganst himself.

F that.

Danny should leverage Griffin, imakes a splashy invite for him to visit Boston, and maybe not pick-up the Indy calls on the first ring.

 

[lovegtm]

I haven't worked out exactly who gets moved to do this, but isn't signing Hayward, followed by a S&T for Griffin doable if the Clips are amenable? That could at least put some pressure on Indy.

 

[Grin&MartyBarret]

No--I'm saying that pick, even at #6 is WAY more valuable that what other teams can send so there's no way they should include it.

They should include JUST the Lakers pick, which by itself is likely to be MUCH better than any other pick offered and that the Pacers wanting "two picks in top half of draft" is ridiculous, because NO TEAM except Boston has that to offer.

If I'm trying to sell a car, and everyone and their brother is offering about $10,000 for it, and suddenly Bill Gates wants it, I don't suddenly hold out for $45,000 just because he has it, and he'd be stupid to offer it because no else is offering over $10,000.

Add to that, that I'll lose that car for nothing if I don't sell it.

That's an awful lot of capitalized words for a subject on which we're all just guessing.

For instance, that #6 overall pick, currently projected to be somebody named Colin Sexton, may not be WAY more valuable to Indiana than Otto Porter and a late first.

As for your car example, money has a fixed value. Otto Porter, Kevin Love, Clint Capella, and NBA draft picks, etc. do not. Different teams will value them differently. You have no idea how the Pacers value the SAC/LAL pick relative to the Otto Porter offer, nor do you even know what the market for Paul George will end up being. The Lakers made a few underwhelming offers which Indiana turned down. This is crazy season in the NBA. There's plenty of room for things to shift drastically.

 

[Hagios]

As for your car example, money has a fixed value. Otto Porter, Kevin Love, Clint Capella, and NBA draft picks, etc. do not. Different teams will value them differently. You have no idea how the Pacers value the SAC/LAL pick relative to the Otto Porter offer, nor do you even know what the market for Paul George will end up being. The Lakers made a few underwhelming offers which Indiana turned down. This is crazy season in the NBA. There's plenty of room for things to shift drastically.

Slight tangent, but while money has a fixed value, cars do not. In my twenties I valued SUV's and sports cars. In my 40's I value commuter cars. That part of the analogy is spot-o. The salient difference is that cars have enough buys and sellers that there is (mostly) a market clearing price. By contrast, there are only a few buyers and sellers in the NBA free agent market, which creates a multilateral oligopoly (fuzzier case of a bilateral monopoly). So yes, the presence of a new bidder with deep pockets absolutely changes the prices.

 

[nighthob]

Honestly, I'm not sure why everybody here views those two picks and players as so outlandish. Of course you'd prefer a lower asking price, but the Celtics are looking to acquire a top 15 player on a discounted extension. That changes the price; early reports on the price assumed free agency. An extension eliminates risk and saves money relative to the cost of acquiring George as an UFA.

I think the thing is that there isn't going to be a discounted extension unless he signs one with Boston in a few months. We've been over this, Boston can't clear enough space to renegotiate & extend George's contract without completely gutting the roster and it's not legal for Indy to do it and then trade him. So the deal is pure risk from Boston's end. So three lottery picks is a non-starter (because they're clearly looking for Brown or Tatum as the "good young player").

 

[Big John]

What worries me is that Ainge will make a bad deal because he's under pressure from ownership and the Boston media to recreate 2007.

 

[the moops]

If anything Ainge has shown that he will wait, and wait, and wait to make a deal. I think Ainge still gets another year from everyone to make the magic happen.

 

[Kenny F'ing Powers]

For what it's worth, Zach Lowe threw cold water on the idea that Paul George would renegotiate and extend with Boston. If that's the case Boston isn't going to give up that much and what Houston, Washington, Los Angeles or Cleveland bring to the table might be just as good.

If an extension isn't in place before a trade, the BKN and LA/SAC picks should be off the table. Really, the BKN pick is off the table regardless. You don't trade those picks in a draft with 4 potential franchise players for a rental that still leaves you well behind GS.

I've got a boner for George/Hayward, bit short of a perfect deal, we keep the picks and keep playing for the future.

 

[NoXInNixon]

If an extension isn't in place before a trade, the BKN and LA/SAC picks should be off the table. Really, the BKN pick is off the table regardless. You don't trade those picks in a draft with 4 potential franchise players for a rental that still leaves you well behind GS.

And they shouldn't have to for George. Two of Bradley/Smart/Crowder plus the Memphis and Clippers picks is already a better deal than I think any other suitor can offer.

 

[BigSoxFan]

And they shouldn't have to for George. Two of Bradley/Smart/Crowder plus the Memphis and Clippers picks is already a better deal than I think any other suitor can offer.

I think the Memphis pick is pretty underrated. This is a team with two 30ish year-old stars and not much else. Gasol will be 34 in Feb 2019 and Conley will be 31.5. I could easily see them missing the playoffs that year and giving us a pick in the 9-14 range. This looks like a team on the descent while there are several teams that should be trending up.

 

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

As alluded to above, here's the biggest problem with the PG trade. (1) Pritchard is looking to make a splash on the trade (don't forget that this is the guy who brought the term "Pritch Slap" into existence), (2) DA isn't going to get fleeced, and (3) as noted in this forum on a number of previous times, the wild swings in valuation of the future draft picks make it hard to properly discuss.

I.e., DA is saying, "I have a good probability of getting two top-5 picks in next year's draft and I have no idea if PG is going to extend so why would I do that"? versus Pritchard saying, "If I end up with Jae Crowder, Avery Bradley, and a late lottery pick, I'm going to be raked over the coals."

Also, Pritchard could just keep waiting. Like MIN did with Love.

 

[nighthob]

Wizards are reportedly offering Otto Porter for George in a sign-and-trade. As an RFA, Porter would have to agree to the deal. Obviously Washington is one of several teams that would prefer to keep George away from the Celtics.

The sign & trade rules make that tough given that Porter is a BYC player and would presumably be getting the max. His salary would be around $23 million, but would only count for half that from the Wizards end, so Washington would need to bundle a couple of other salaries with him, but then the only picks they would have to give up are, definitionally, picks in the 20s.

 

[JakeRae]

If an extension isn't in place before a trade, the BKN and LA/SAC picks should be off the table. Really, the BKN pick is off the table regardless. You don't trade those picks in a draft with 4 potential franchise players for a rental that still leaves you well behind GS.

I've got a boner for George/Hayward, bit short of a perfect deal, we keep the picks and keep playing for the future.

I think this is wrong. If you can get George and Hayward for Bradley, Crowder, and the Lakers pick, you do it. If it takes an extra late 1st, you probably still do it. George is unlikely to flee a true contender for a lottery team, no matter how much he loves LA. And, he's unlikely to be able to orchestrate another star joining him in LA because the team still wouldn't be a contender. So, if we can get him to Boston, I expect we'll be able to keep him.

 

[the moops]

yea, it makes sense sometimes to look at the totality of the trades + signings. If Hayward would not sign unless there is another shoe to drop, and George wouldn't be amenable to an extension unless someone like Hayward was in the fold, then it is not outrageous to think of it as LAL18, Crowder, Bradley, BOS18 for George + Hayward.

The onyl downside is the fact that IND makes out in the deal because of the above scenarios

 

[Cesar Crespo]

Boston hasn't even offered the LAL/SAC pick, nevermind Jaylen, Tatum or Nets pick.

http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/246596/Celtics-Have-Yet-To-Offer-Brown-Tatum-Or-Either-Brooklyn-LAL-SAC-FRP-To-Pacers

 

[BigSoxFan]

Boston hasn't even offered the LAL/SAC pick, nevermind Jaylen, Tatum or Nets pick.

http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/246596/Celtics-Have-Yet-To-Offer-Brown-Tatum-Or-Either-Brooklyn-LAL-SAC-FRP-To-Pacers

Good. None of those should be available given the current competition.

 

[Cellar-Door]

That's an awful lot of capitalized words for a subject on which we're all just guessing.

For instance, that #6 overall pick, currently projected to be somebody named Colin Sexton, may not be WAY more valuable to Indiana than Otto Porter and a late first.

As for your car example, money has a fixed value. Otto Porter, Kevin Love, Clint Capella, and NBA draft picks, etc. do not. Different teams will value them differently. You have no idea how the Pacers value the SAC/LAL pick relative to the Otto Porter offer, nor do you even know what the market for Paul George will end up being. The Lakers made a few underwhelming offers which Indiana turned down. This is crazy season in the NBA. There's plenty of room for things to shift drastically.

Evaluating an asset based on close to a worst case scenario is weird. Beyond that..... I'd much rather have the #6 pick next year with his high ceiling, 4 years at a cheap contract and 8-9 years of control than Otto Porter at $20M+ per season. And that's a worst case, any top 3 pick is worth a ton more than Porter at high salary.

Edit- Also remember that to salary match the Celtics have to send out Bradley and/or Crowder. Bradley's contract is short, but he's a better player than Porter, Crowder is arguably better and has a terrific contract.
There is almost certainly not a bid out there good enough that the BKN pick would be needed to beat it, probably isn't one that necessitates the LAL/SAC pick either. The Celtics salary fill is arguably better talent and assets than the main pieces in some other offers.

 

[Grin&MartyBarret]

Evaluating an asset based on close to a worst case scenario is weird. Beyond that..... I'd much rather have the #6 pick next year with his high ceiling, 4 years at a cheap contract and 8-9 years of control than Otto Porter at $20M+ per season. And that's a worst case, any top 3 pick is worth a ton more than Porter at high salary.

Edit- Also remember that to salary match the Celtics have to send out Bradley and/or Crowder. Bradley's contract is short, but he's a better player than Porter, Crowder is arguably better and has a terrific contract.
There is almost certainly not a bid out there good enough that the BKN pick would be needed to beat it, probably isn't one that necessitates the LAL/SAC pick either. The Celtics salary fill is arguably better talent and assets than the main pieces in some other offers.

What about my post is a worst case scenario? That the Nets aren't in the top 3? That Sacramento's pick doesn't end up in the top 3? Those are completely reasonable outcomes.

And my point here is not whether or not about the value the #6 (or whatever) pick holds for Indiana. It's about the risk that the Celtics end up with it instead. At a certain point, you need to cash in these assets, and there's a real risk that the most valuable asset the Celtics will see from the Brooklyn trade was Markel Fultz. If, at the end of the summer, Brooklyn's signed Redick and Olynyk -- two guys they've been linked to -- and Sacramento convinces somebody to take a max contract for them, the value of those picks will have been greatly reduced.

And that's why I think you shouldn't hesitate to include one of them in this deal if you believe George will re-sign. It's a risk arbitrage. There are a lot of unknowns surrounding those picks, and their value may well be at an all time high.

 

[bakahump]

A Cadillac pulls in and asks if you want to sell some of the firewood in your yard. Looking to make a score you say "I sure do, $350 per cord". The person behind the wheel sizes you up then says he will offer $200. You guffaw knowing that anyone in a Caddy can afford 300. You stick with the $300 price and the Caddy Driver eventually drives away.

A few days later a Rough looking pickup pulls in. They too want to buy some wood. They offer $200, and after a few mins you counter with both of you eventually settling on $225 (which happens to be the going rate).

Thats the situation that the Celts are in right now. They are suffering from the "Big Score Syndrome".

 

[Jed Zeppelin]

What about my post is a worst case scenario? That the Nets aren't in the top 3? That Sacramento's pick doesn't end up in the top 3? Those are completely reasonable outcomes.

And my point here is not whether or not about the value the #6 (or whatever) pick holds for Indiana. It's about the risk that the Celtics end up with it instead. At a certain point, you need to cash in these assets, and there's a real risk that the most valuable asset the Celtics will see from the Brooklyn trade was Markel Fultz. If, at the end of the summer, Brooklyn's signed Redick and Olynyk -- two guys they've been linked to -- and Sacramento convinces somebody to take a max contract for them, the value of those picks will have been greatly reduced.

And that's why I think you shouldn't hesitate to include one of them in this deal if you believe George will re-sign. It's a risk arbitrage. There are a lot of unknowns surrounding those picks, and their value may well be at an all time high.

Well, George not re-signing is a significant risk in its own right, and I'd definitely prefer, say, the 6 next year and the 10 the year after to one year of George. Re-signing seems to be the crucial part of the calculus right now. As always I think there's a lot of posturing going on.

If Hayward signs, George is X% more amenable to staying in Boston, Ainge is X% more amenable to including the LA pick, and so on. If Hayward is locked in, I think it becomes pretty easy to let that pick go, which is a pretty attractive piece for Indy under the assumption that LAL—without George—are biding their time until more suitable FA (including George himself) hit the market and will be bad again.