Anthony Davis: No Loyalty

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
29,080
I wonder if the Pels and Celtics already have the parameters of a deal--I say this because if he doesn't get dealt this week, and we get to the summer, and the Celtics/Pels don't consummate a deal, the Lakers could say "Hey---sorry you couldn't work it would with Boston, here's our revised downward deal."
I am willing to bet that Ainge and Demps do indeed have the rough parameters of a deal in place. It would be crazy for Ainge to not show the Pelicans a hypothetical package just to get a placeholder/Lakers counter in place for the summer in the event that Davis isnt moved by the deadline. It costs him nothing really and, at the very least, gives him some insight into New Orleans' thinking/expectations.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
4,569
Kiev, Ukraine
I am willing to bet that Ainge and Demps do indeed have the rough parameters of a deal in place. It would be crazy for Ainge to not show the Pelicans a hypothetical package just to get a placeholder/Lakers counter in place for the summer in the event that Davis isnt moved by the deadline. It costs him nothing really and, at the very least, gives him some insight into New Orleans' thinking/expectations.
From the article DrewDawg linked in the Kyrie thread: (https://www.si.com/nba/2019/02/05/anthony-davis-celtics-trade-rumors-kyrie-irving-free-agency?utm_campaign=sinow&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social&xid=socialflow_twitter_si)

"As the Pelicans field offers for Anthony Davis, Boston’s message to New Orleans has been direct: Wait. Wait, and we will come to you with an offer that will make it worth it. Wait, and you can raid our stash of draft picks. The Celtics have refused to directly dangle Jayson Tatum, two sources familiar with the situation told SI.com, but the Pelicans have been left with the impression that if Davis remains on the roster past Thursday, nothing is off the table."

If Mannix's sources are correct, and Ainge has implied that Tatum would be on the table without saying it and gotten the Pelicans to hold off on moving AD, that's some brilliant maneuvering. Not because he won't ultimately give up Tatum, but because if/when he does, it will feel like a huge concession, and he can probably keep Brown/Smart/some picks.

It also seems clear that regardless of what we think of Jayson Tatum, or even what the league thinks of Jayson Tatum, the New Orleans Pelicans really like Jayson Tatum. That's big.
 

queenb

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 6, 2016
162
NOLA doesn't need to posture with Celtics, I don't believe. The alternative to Celts trading for Davis in July is other trades, or simply Davis reaching free agency and signing in LA. Celts have plenty of incentive to make a deal here regardless of what NOLA says publicly about any of this.
Right, but I'm assuming the only teams that will ultimately be able to trade for AD are the ones with (a) enough assets to interest the Pelicans, (b) enough assets left to keep a contending team around AD, and (c) confidence that AD might be convinced to stay. Four teams meet those conditions: Celtics, Raptors, Lakers, Knicks (assuming they get a top-3 pick, otherwise they probably don't have the assets to send out). I don't think the Nuggets are a real threat, and I haven't seen how the Clippers would manage that.
  • NYK: If the Knicks land the top pick, that's the wild card. Might be hard to beat.

  • LAL: The Lakers' package is the worst of the bunch, partly because their young guys are flawed, and partly because they don't have any lottery picks to give. What they do have is by far the best chance of a long-term deal. But again: why does New Orleans want the entire Lakers' youth core? To reunite Randle with Ingram, Ball, etc., and win, at best, 40 games every year?

  • TOR: The Raptors' youth package is arguably better, and for all we know the Pelicans actually love Siakam and OG, but their linchpin, Kawhi, has given them no assurances. And if he's gone, they probably have the worst chance of signing AD long-term of all the teams mentioned. So they may prefer to keep building and developing.

  • And then you have the Celtics. Who are they actually bidding against that would necessitate sending out more than Rozier, TimeLord, MEM pick? If Kawhi walks, the Raptors likely realize they have no shot long-term and drop out. The Knicks, who knows. The Lakers just offered everything they have, and the Pelicans said no.

    Is the MEM pick - potentially high, obviously cost-controlled, and the Pelicans will actually get to make the selection themselves - not the best asset of anything listed (other than potential Knicks pick)? Again, I don't even think trading for AD without Tatum or Brown will be possible because sometimes you're expected to give relative to what you have, not relative to what others are offering. But I don't see much competition for the Celtics.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
4,569
Kiev, Ukraine
I just keep coming back to how fast the Pelicans could be decent again if they do a Tatum/Rozier/pick(s) deal. Holiday, Tatum, Rozier, other pieces, and good picks this year could be a good core quite quickly. Sometimes, as we've seen with Indiana and Sacramento, getting rid of a star provides some clarity for your organization, even if it is an immediate downgrade. Obviously AD is better than Boogie or PG (Indy version at least), but putting decent draft picks around your talent for a couple years goes a long way fast.
 

Red Averages

owes you $50
SoSH Member
Apr 20, 2003
5,230
From the article DrewDawg linked in the Kyrie thread: (https://www.si.com/nba/2019/02/05/anthony-davis-celtics-trade-rumors-kyrie-irving-free-agency?utm_campaign=sinow&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social&xid=socialflow_twitter_si)

"As the Pelicans field offers for Anthony Davis, Boston’s message to New Orleans has been direct: Wait. Wait, and we will come to you with an offer that will make it worth it. Wait, and you can raid our stash of draft picks. The Celtics have refused to directly dangle Jayson Tatum, two sources familiar with the situation told SI.com, but the Pelicans have been left with the impression that if Davis remains on the roster past Thursday, nothing is off the table."

If Mannix's sources are correct, and Ainge has implied that Tatum would be on the table without saying it and gotten the Pelicans to hold off on moving AD, that's some brilliant maneuvering. Not because he won't ultimately give up Tatum, but because if/when he does, it will feel like a huge concession, and he can probably keep Brown/Smart/some picks.

It also seems clear that regardless of what we think of Jayson Tatum, or even what the league thinks of Jayson Tatum, the New Orleans Pelicans really like Jayson Tatum. That's big.
Well it's also important because in the summer if Davis is still using his LA stance, we may not have to give up Tatum to be the best package. As long as this isn't a slam dunk he is extending before the trade agreement, Ainge doesn't need to use his all in stance. If the Pelicans aren't forcing the Celtics to verify they will give up Tatum, that's a great sign. The Pelicans leverage here should be that they are going to move on now unless Tatum is going to be in the offer in the Summer. IF that hasn't happened, our odds of retaining Tatum and Davis and Kyrie go up substantially.
 

cheech13

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 5, 2006
1,283
I just keep coming back to how fast the Pelicans could be decent again if they do a Tatum/Rozier/pick(s) deal. Holiday, Tatum, Rozier, other pieces, and good picks this year could be a good core quite quickly. Sometimes, as we've seen with Indiana and Sacramento, getting rid of a star provides some clarity for your organization, even if it is an immediate downgrade. Obviously AD is better than Boogie or PG (Indy version at least), but putting decent draft picks around your talent for a couple years goes a long way fast.
Not necessarily directed at you only, but for the sake of other posters reading these comments, can we clarify what is meant by "picks" when it's Tatum (or whomever) plus picks? Does that mean all three of the Sacramento, Memphis and LAC selections? Just two? Does Boston offer some of their own selections as well? NOP just asked for FOUR unprotected first rounders from LAL. Granted, the Lakers are expected to be good for a while which hurts the PV of those selections, but as we've seen from Brooklyn, trading unprotected picks can bite you in the ass really quickly.
 
Last edited:

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
29,080
Once again, there are no guarantees and lots of variables can shift between now and the offseason. However my guess is any trade for Davis will cost Tatum to start, regardless of Ainge's superior negotiation skills.

I would love to see the Cs get Davis without surrendering Tatum but it just doesn't seem realistic. You can concoct attractive packages without him but thinking the Pelicans wont demand the Cs biggest young star feels like wishcasting.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
4,569
Kiev, Ukraine
Not necessarily directed at you only, but for the sake of other posters reading these comments, can we clarify what is meant by "picks" when it's Tatum (or whomever) plus picks? Does that mean all three of the Sacramento, Memphis and LAC selections? Just two? Does Boston offer some of their own selections as well? NOP just asked for FOUR unprotected first rounders from LAL. Granted, the Lakers are expected to be good for a while which hurts the PV of those selections, but as we've seen from Brooklyn, trading unprotected picks can bite you in the ass really quickly.
Sure, happy to clarify. I'm thinking of "picks" as either SAC+BOS 2019+maybe another lightly protected BOS, or else MEM by itself if NO is really able to squeeze.

The Lakers are getting rejected with their 4 pick packages because
a) the picks have low expected value
b) they convey further out (slightly contradicts a, but relevant for Demps)
c) the Pelicans clearly like Tatum more than all the Lakers young guys put together, which isn't unreasonable

The Tatum package gives Demps (and Ferry, who should be mentioned more) the best chance to save their jobs imo.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
4,569
Kiev, Ukraine
Once again, there are no guarantees and lots of variables can shift between now and the offseason. However my guess is any trade for Davis will cost Tatum to start, regardless of Ainge's superior negotiation skills.

I would love to see the Cs get Davis without surrendering Tatum but it just doesn't seem realistic. You can concoct attractive packages without him but thinking the Pelicans wont demand the Cs biggest young star feels like wishcasting.
For sure. It's very, very likely that Jayson Tatum ends up a Pelican. The key is holding out a bit in negotiations so that you keep Brown, Smart, and maybe hopefully MEM.
 

Red Averages

owes you $50
SoSH Member
Apr 20, 2003
5,230
Once again, there are no guarantees and lots of variables can shift between now and the offseason. However my guess is any trade for Davis will cost Tatum to start, regardless of Ainge's superior negotiation skills.

I would love to see the Cs get Davis without surrendering Tatum but it just doesn't seem realistic. You can concoct attractive packages without him but thinking the Pelicans wont demand the Cs biggest young star feels like wishcasting.
As always, depends on the alternative. If it’s the Lakers package around a guy with the most distracting father in sports openly saying he doesn’t want to play there after just losing their Superstar because he wanted to leave...

If another team comes in, I agree.
 

cheech13

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 5, 2006
1,283
If we've dodged the Lakers bullet for now, the next concern is hoping that Zion goes to a team that can't/won't package him for New Orleans.
The New York Knicks are probably the only team in the mix for Zion that would actually trade him. Zion/Knox/DSJ beats any other offer out there, short of Boston doing Tatum/Brown/Memphis pick. It's only a 14% chance they get that selection though.

Chicago would probably think of doing Zion/Markannen/Carter, but ultimately they can't blow up their team for a guy that doesn't want to be there.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
4,569
Kiev, Ukraine
The New York Knicks are probably the only team in the mix for Zion that would actually trade him. Zion/Knox/DSJ beats any other offer out there, short of Boston doing Tatum/Brown/Memphis pick. It's only a 14% chance they get that selection though.

Chicago would probably think of doing Zion/Markannen/Carter, but ultimately they can't blow up their team for a guy that doesn't want to be there.
Yeah, Chicago would keep Zion, because Zion/Markannen/Carter/Dunn/LaVine-if-he-gets-his-head-straight could be a good team in the east quickly, and, as you said, AD probably wouldn't re-sign. This always happens with young teams: if 2-3 of their guys make leaps, things get interesting fast.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
3,233
  • And then you have the Celtics. Who are they actually bidding against that would necessitate sending out more than Rozier, TimeLord, MEM pick? If Kawhi walks, the Raptors likely realize they have no shot long-term and drop out. The Knicks, who knows. The Lakers just offered everything they have, and the Pelicans said no.

    Is the MEM pick - potentially high, obviously cost-controlled, and the Pelicans will actually get to make the selection themselves - not the best asset of anything listed (other than potential Knicks pick)? Again, I don't even think trading for AD without Tatum or Brown will be possible because sometimes you're expected to give relative to what you have, not relative to what others are offering. But I don't see much competition for the Celtics.
Pretty much any team in the league could beat that offer. It's insanely low, way worse than the Lakers reported offer. If the Celtics are lucky enough to get AD, it's going to hurt. Not getting him for 15 cents on the dollar.
 

Minneapolis Millers

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,950
Twin Cities
It's all guesswork at this point, but I think Tatum and the Memphis pick will both have to go in an AD trade. Both are great but still somewhat uncertain pieces. What if the MEM pick conveys next year and it's #7 in the draft? Nice but not likely franchise-altering. What if Tatum grows into an All-Star top 20 player but not an MVP-level top 5 guy? I don't want to deal Tatum but I think he'll be necessary. The larger questions will be whether Brown and the other two non-Celtics picks have to be included as well (along with Rozier and maybe TL). That deal hurts.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
3,217
Just to play devil's advocate here, NO has to trade AD this summer (if not before) or they get nothing and their franchise player just walks away in 2021 and the front office loses their jobs. If Boston doesn't trade for AD, quite a fans will be upset, but I don't think DA is getting fired. So, BOS actually will have some leverage here. They need to beat NO's best alternative offer, but they don't need to OVERCOMPENSATE them.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,801
Well it's also important because in the summer if Davis is still using his LA stance, we may not have to give up Tatum to be the best package. As long as this isn't a slam dunk he is extending before the trade agreement, Ainge doesn't need to use his all in stance. If the Pelicans aren't forcing the Celtics to verify they will give up Tatum, that's a great sign. The Pelicans leverage here should be that they are going to move on now unless Tatum is going to be in the offer in the Summer. IF that hasn't happened, our odds of retaining Tatum and Davis and Kyrie go up substantially.
I think the only real threat to Boston is New York landing a top 2 pick. From the Pelicans’ point of view it’s going to be tough to top Williamson/Barnett (who they’d control for seven years) with two guys with six years worth of control (Knox and DSJ), one of whom is a star in the making (Knox). Because they’d be adding that to their own mid lottery pick and their 2020 picks.

The other scenario that really changes things is the Pelicans winning a top 2 pick in the lottery, because that might change their approach to a Davis trade in that they might prefer quantity of high upside guys over a single potential franchise guy like Tatum.

The real nightmare for for Boston is where New Orleans wins the Zion Sweepstakes and New York lands in the top four.

There is a quirk to the Stepien Rule that I am surprised no one has exploited yet. It applies only to "future" first round picks. Once a draft has passed, whether or not a team had a first rounder in that draft is irrelevant.
It’s “exploited” all the time. It’s why teams announce draft night trades after they happen, so that they have their first round picks in a row.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
31,505
Just to play devil's advocate here, NO has to trade AD this summer (if not before) or they get nothing and their franchise player just walks away in 2021 and the front office loses their jobs. If Boston doesn't trade for AD, quite a fans will be upset, but I don't think DA is getting fired. So, BOS actually will have some leverage here. They need to beat NO's best alternative offer, but they don't need to OVERCOMPENSATE them.
LA will put the same offer on the table of their 3 young guys plus picks. They’re not going to let a Lonzo Ball, Kyle Kuzma, or Brandon Ingram get in the way of an MVP caliber player. The Celtics need Tatum to beat that offer.

If AD is coming, I’m 99.9% certain that Tatum is going.
 

cheech13

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 5, 2006
1,283
Just to play devil's advocate here, NO has to trade AD this summer (if not before) or they get nothing and their franchise player just walks away in 2021 and the front office loses their jobs. If Boston doesn't trade for AD, quite a fans will be upset, but I don't think DA is getting fired. So, BOS actually will have some leverage here. They need to beat NO's best alternative offer, but they don't need to OVERCOMPENSATE them.
Boston doesn't have any leverage. They have to beat LAL's existing offer, plus whatever the Knicks can put together after the draft is over and whatever pops up after free agency (say a huge offer from Toronto if they bring back Kawhi).

Tatum is the potentially the best player available in a trade, but he's just one piece. Boston will have to add more to beat the totality of the other offers out there. How much New Orleans values Tatum is the real wild card because it determines what the + is in Tatum+.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
4,569
Kiev, Ukraine
Boston doesn't have any leverage. They have to beat LAL's existing offer, plus whatever the Knicks can put together after the draft is over and whatever pops up after free agency (say a huge offer from Toronto if they bring back Kawhi).

Tatum is the potentially the best player available in a trade, but he's just one piece. Boston will have to add more to beat the totality of the other offers out there. How much New Orleans values Tatum is the real wild card because it determines what the + is in Tatum+.
Most reporting, and the fact that they didn't take LA's biggest realistic offer, suggests that they really, really like Tatum.

The media is also helping a lot by making the discussion "will Boston include Tatum????" rather than "what else will Boston have to send with Tatum?"
I think the only real threat to Boston is New York landing a top 2 pick. From the Pelicans’ point of view it’s going to be tough to top Williamson/Barnett (who they’d control for seven years) with two guys with six years worth of control (Knox and DSJ), one of whom is a star in the making (Knox). Because they’d be adding that to their own mid lottery pick and their 2020 picks.

The other scenario that really changes things is the Pelicans winning a top 2 pick in the lottery, because that might change their approach to a Davis trade in that they might prefer quantity of high upside guys over a single potential franchise guy like Tatum.

The real nightmare for for Boston is where New Orleans wins the Zion Sweepstakes and New York lands in the top four.
The flipside here is that landing Zion might make NO like a Tatum+Rozier package even more, because you can just drop them in along with Holiday, find a capable center on the market, and you've got a really good core instantly, all on a similar timeline except Holiday, and it's always nice to have a vet in his prime with these types of cores. Draft a wing with the #12 SAC pick that the Celtics send, and enjoy the next 10 years.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
16,856
Boston doesn't have any leverage. They have to beat LAL's existing offer, plus whatever the Knicks can put together after the draft is over and whatever pops up after free agency (say a huge offer from Toronto if they bring back Kawhi).

Tatum is the potentially the best player available in a trade, but he's just one piece. Boston will have to add more to beat the totality of the other offers out there. How much New Orleans values Tatum is the real wild card because it determines what the + is in Tatum+.
Of course BOS has leverage. In fact, BOS has more leverage than NO, since BOS could (if it wanted to) blow away any other offer from any other team.

Assuming NO lets TRS pass, they will spend the next five months trying to drum up their own leverage. If NYK doesn't get a top draft choice or if KL indicates he's going to sign with LAC, it will be very interesting to watch DA take advantage of the situation.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
3,233
Of course BOS has leverage. In fact, BOS has more leverage than NO, since BOS could (if it wanted to) blow away any other offer from any other team.

Assuming NO lets TRS pass, they will spend the next five months trying to drum up their own leverage. If NYK doesn't get a top draft choice or if KL indicates he's going to sign with LAC, it will be very interesting to watch DA take advantage of the situation.
This is, for sure, not true. Even the way you explain it gives NO the leverage, sure you can blow away any other offer. So go ahead and do so, you can't have our guy until you do.

NO has the player everybody wants. They always have the option to walk away from a Boston offer if they won't put everything they want in it and get a real good haul elsewhere. Boston can't just turn around and spin their offer for another similar player, because one isn't available.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
39,341
deep inside Guido territory
From Sam Amick of The Athletic

This latest Lakers-Celtics subplot would be dead by now if Ainge had been scared off, but sources say Boston — which can’t trade for Davis until this summer because of the well-chronicled ‘Rose Rule’ — is continuing its complicated pursuit of the five-time All-Star in spite of the message being sent through various channels that he doesn’t want to play there. A source with knowledge of the talks said the potential centerpiece in a Pelicans package, 20-year-old Celtics small forward Jayson Tatum, has been discussed extensively by the two teams and is expected to be a major part of the talks when June rolls around.


https://theathletic.com/802339/2019/02/05/celtics-vs-lakers-redux-the-battle-for-anthony-davis-and-why-magic-johnson-should-be-worried-right-now/
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
16,856
This is, for sure, not true. Even the way you explain it gives NO the leverage, sure you can blow away any other offer. So go ahead and do so, you can't have our guy until you do.

NO has the player everybody wants. They always have the option to walk away from a Boston offer if they won't put everything they want in it and get a real good haul elsewhere. Boston can't just turn around and spin their offer for another similar player, because one isn't available.
We can agree to disagree but NO has no leverage because they can't just walk away. Because around September 1 or so, the longer they wait, the more likely they lose AD for nothing. And if they continue sitting AD through the start of next season, it's going to be a PR nightmare and likely a financial hit in terms of reduced revenues that IMO would be non-trivial.

I mean we've been through this. Teams are lucky to extract any value when stars demand a trade. CLE got little value for KI. SAC appears to have gotten more value (while most thought at the time that they got fleeced) but certainly got dimes on the dollar. IND got quarters (or more) on the dollar but most people didn't think that was the case.

If it's true that there is a "haul elsewhere" that would support your point but I'm not seeing any "haul" right now. If NO thought the LAL offer was a "haul," they would have taken it. Maybe NYK will get a top pick or or TOR will flame out or something else will happen that means one or more other teams will put together a monster offer but from everything I've seen, there is no serious offer or even a suggestion of an offer that beats JT+.

And the only reason I'm going on about this is because if it turns out that no teams other than LAL and BOS will put in a serious offer, the Cs will really be in the driver's seat.

NOP should be making up and leaking theoretical offers to create leverage. But at this moment, thy don't have much (other than Magic's and LBJ's desperation).
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
29,080
Davis will be 26 next month and has made it clear that he wants to play for a winner or at least with a team in a major market. Anything is possible but I am not sure the Suns, even with their emerging young talent plus another veteran, are a great destination for him.

Of course, it depends on whom they would try to pair with Davis but I have a hard time seeing them trading a bunch of their assets for a guy who may put butts in seats for the season but may well bolt immediately after.

To me, the risk is still that a contending team other than Boston or someone like the Knicks puts together a strong package for the Pelicans.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
3,233
If it's true that there is a "haul elsewhere" that would support your point but I'm not seeing any "haul" right now. If NO thought the LAL offer was a "haul," they would have taken it. Maybe NYK will get a top pick or or TOR will flame out or something else will happen that means one or more other teams will put together a monster offer but from everything I've seen, there is no serious offer or even a suggestion of an offer that beats JT+.
No, they wouldn't necessarily take a "haul" they were offered right now from LA, knowing that exact "haul" will be just as available this summer when Boston can make their "haul" offer with the LA "haul" offer as a minimum baseline to beat. There is no downside to them waiting unless AD makes it untenable to keep him until the summer unless they're afraid of him slipping and falling at his house and tearing his achilles.

It sounds crazy to me to think the team that has the golden goose with multiple bidders for it somehow has less leverage than one of the bidders. Like, if I owned the Mona Lisa and lots of people were bidding for it, the bidder who has the most money doesn't have leverage over me. He'd just have to pay above the price I can get the second richest guy to bid for it. Even if there were time constraints like in the AD situation, I can always just say if you don't meet my price, I'll just sell Mona Lisa Davis to the second highest bidder right now. I'll give you five minutes to top his price. Tick...tick...tick...

"haul"
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
2,985
around the way
No, they wouldn't necessarily take a "haul" they were offered right now from LA, knowing that exact "haul" will be just as available this summer when Boston can make their "haul" offer with the LA "haul" offer as a minimum baseline to beat. There is no downside to them waiting unless AD makes it untenable to keep him until the summer unless they're afraid of him slipping and falling at his house and tearing his achilles.

It sounds crazy to me to think the team that has the golden goose with multiple bidders for it somehow has less leverage than one of the bidders. Like, if I owned the Mona Lisa and lots of people were bidding for it, the bidder who has the most money doesn't have leverage over me. He'd just have to pay above the price I can get the second richest guy to bid for it. Even if there were time constraints like in the AD situation, I can always just say if you don't meet my price, I'll just sell Mona Lisa Davis to the second highest bidder right now. I'll give you five minutes to top his price. Tick...tick...tick...

"haul"
Not if you HAVE to sell the Mona Lisa.

Magic is desperate but doesn't have fair value assets in hand that Demps wants, and he particularly wants to make it happen by Thursday. The Celtics aren't desperate, but they have the assets that Demps wants, and those assets could be retained and help the Celtics . Demps is desperate to make a great deal, although not necessarily before Thursday.

Lakers/Magic = really fucking desperate, sooner is better
Demps = really desperate
Celtics = coveting thy neighbors goods bigtime, but not desperate
Toronto, Milwaukee, et al. = already great, see "Celtics"
Whoever gets Zion = not desperate (they have Zion)

The Celtics could miss out on Davis and have Kyrie walk on 7/1 and not be within a thousand miles of the desperate that Demps is.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
3,233
Not if you HAVE to sell the Mona Lisa.
\

Yes, if I HAVE to sell the Mona Lisa I still have the leverage, because everybody wants it! What are you going to do? You're gonna put less than your best offer on the table because you have leverage over me? You'll just go to the Mona Lisa store down the street to buy another one?

Good grief, I know this is a Celtics board but if you look at it through anything but green colored glasses, it should be obvious that the Pelicans have quite a bit of leverage here. We just did this over the summer where people thought the Spurs didn't have leverage, they'll just have to take the Lakers best offer because that's where he wants to go and no one else will bid higher for a rental.

There are only maybe 7 or 8 guys you can lock in to make the all-NBA team given health. AD is one of them. They're gold. You don't just get to say well they have to move him so we, one of the other 29 teams that want him, now have leverage over the Pelicans.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
29,080
\

Yes, if I HAVE to sell the Mona Lisa I still have the leverage, because everybody wants it! What are you going to do? You're gonna put less than your best offer on the table because you have leverage over me? You'll just go to the Mona Lisa store down the street to buy another one?

Good grief, I know this is a Celtics board but if you look at it through anything but green colored glasses, it should be obvious that the Pelicans have quite a bit of leverage here. We just did this over the summer where people thought the Spurs didn't have leverage, they'll just have to take the Lakers best offer because that's where he wants to go and no one else will bid higher for a rental.

There are only maybe 7 or 8 guys you can lock in to make the all-NBA team given health. AD is one of them. They're gold. You don't just get to say well they have to move him so we, one of the other 29 teams that want him, now have leverage over the Pelicans.
This is absolutely right assuming that Demps and the Pelicans ownership are pulling in the same direction. Davis' skillset is an extremely scarce commodity with few reasonable substitutes. As with anything that is that rare and well bid, the holder has all the power in terms of maximizing the price.
 

queenb

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 6, 2016
162
Pretty much any team in the league could beat that offer. It's insanely low, way worse than the Lakers reported offer. If the Celtics are lucky enough to get AD, it's going to hurt. Not getting him for 15 cents on the dollar.
Wait. What? This is what you wrote earlier in the thread:

The problem with these bulk trade offers is, what are the odds a team likes all four of your guys?

Maybe they like one, think one is ok, and have no interest in the other two. While the Lakers may think it's a strong offer of their four best prospects, the Pelicans might think they're getting one and a half guys back.

The Pelicans, and anyone trading a star, should just be hunting for the one best asset they love, then build a deal around it. Taking back a bulk package if they don't absolutely love at least one guy, and probably two, is a disaster.
This is very astute! I feel like current me and old you should be agreeing. If the Pelicans don't like the centerpiece(s) of the deal, it shouldn't matter how many marginal assets are included in that deal. This report said they don't want Lonzo. Maybe it's Ingram. But let's say they happen to not like Ingram's game for what they would hope to build post-AD. Which of the Lakers' young guys is definitively more valuable to NO than the MEM pick? I don't think it's crazy to say there isn't a clear answer.

If I were in charge of a rebuild in NO, I'd rank the Celtics' and Lakers' assets as such:

1. Tatum
2. MEM pick
3 (tie). SAC pick / Brown (depends what NO wants in terms of a timeline)
5. Lakers 1st round picks and pick swaps 2022-2025 (these move up to no. 2, if you think LeBron is getting injured or retiring prematurely just as these convey. But with LeBron there and it being LA, I think they replenish mid-course and add another star closer to AD's age, so these picks stay in the 20s for most of this period)
6. Ball (extra year of control compared to Ingram; you could flip him)
7. Hart (seems like a solid guy, and with Brogdon-lite potential)
8. TimeLord (could be defensive anchor and lob machine, doesn't need the ball)
9. Lakers 1st round picks and pick swaps 2019-2021
10. Celtics future 1st round picks (say 2020-2024)
11. Ingram (admittedly, I just don't get his appeal)
12. Kuzma (gets you buckets but useless for a team in purgatory)

But if the Pelicans want to recreate the 2016-17 Lakers, only with Jrue Holiday instead of LeBron, they're free to try and save the franchise that way. And your point that "any team" could beat the Celtics' low-ball offer misses the point. No team (other than the several I mentioned) that could, would. Because they'd be mortgaging their future for one year of a grumpy and possibly pretending-to-be-injured AD.

EDIT: I don't know where to rank S&T Rozier, Morris, Smart, etc., but you get the point.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
17,980
If I were in charge of a rebuild in NO, I'd rank the Celtics' and Lakers' assets as such:

1. Tatum
2. MEM pick
3 (tie). SAC pick / Brown (depends what NO wants in terms of a timeline)
5. Lakers 1st round picks and pick swaps 2022-2025 (these move up to no. 2, if you think LeBron is getting injured or retiring prematurely just as these convey. But with LeBron there and it being LA, I think they replenish mid-course and add another star closer to AD's age, so these picks stay in the 20s for most of this period)
6. Ball (extra year of control compared to Ingram; you could flip him)
7. Hart (seems like a solid guy, and with Brogdon-lite potential)
8. TimeLord (could be defensive anchor and lob machine, doesn't need the ball)
9. Lakers 1st round picks and pick swaps 2019-2021
10. Celtics future 1st round picks (say 2020-2024)
11. Ingram (admittedly, I just don't get his appeal)
12. Kuzma (gets you buckets but useless for a team in purgatory)
In case anyone wasn’t sure.....you are reading a Boston Celtics fans message board. :)
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
8,553
\

Yes, if I HAVE to sell the Mona Lisa I still have the leverage, because everybody wants it! What are you going to do? You're gonna put less than your best offer on the table because you have leverage over me? You'll just go to the Mona Lisa store down the street to buy another one?

Good grief, I know this is a Celtics board but if you look at it through anything but green colored glasses, it should be obvious that the Pelicans have quite a bit of leverage here. We just did this over the summer where people thought the Spurs didn't have leverage, they'll just have to take the Lakers best offer because that's where he wants to go and no one else will bid higher for a rental.

There are only maybe 7 or 8 guys you can lock in to make the all-NBA team given health. AD is one of them. They're gold. You don't just get to say well they have to move him so we, one of the other 29 teams that want him, now have leverage over the Pelicans.
Sorry, I'm not seeing this side of it. You have a depreciating asset. The asset value goes to 0 in a bit more than a year, and starts declining rapidly in 6 months. The asset value could be as high as the moon, but "you can't take it with you"; it's a burning platform. The question for you is how do you maximize the return on your asset. You have to make A move, the question is just which one.

That aspect of it swamps all other considerations (including the fact that the asset is uniquely, irreplaceably valuable and has multiple motivated suitors). Other than the Lakers, none of the other suitors have any sort of time pressure. Creating time pressure (sometimes even artificially) to add leverage in negotiations is almost literally chapter 1 in negotiation tactics - and Lakers aside, it's New Orleans that's feeling it.

What the problem reduces to for New Orleans is an optimization problem around when their value is maximized and how to know it, since they also know that eventually, suitors will go make other plans, and eventually their asset starts to depreciate rapidly, too. There is a lot of game-theory research around just those sorts of problems - see e.g. the Secretary Problem.

Ainge still has to beat all other outstanding offers in order to win the auction, but at some point New Orleans has to call off the auction and sell. I'd argue that, as the deepest-pocketed bidder, Ainge has the most leverage in this affair.
 

clemcooper

lurker
Dec 7, 2016
6
Boston, MA

@wojespn: Sources: Clippers and Sixers have agreed to trade Tobias Harris, Boban Marjanovic, Mike Scott for Landry Shamet, Wilson Chandler, Mike Muscala, 2020 first-rounder, 2021 unprotected 1st via Miami and two second rounders.

Didn't see this coming. How, if at all, does this change the calculus for the Clips making a serious play for AD? Sixers 2020 pick isn't particularly valuable (lottery protected for 3 years, to boot) but the unprotected Miami 2021 1st is a nice get.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
2,985
around the way
\

Yes, if I HAVE to sell the Mona Lisa I still have the leverage, because everybody wants it! What are you going to do? You're gonna put less than your best offer on the table because you have leverage over me? You'll just go to the Mona Lisa store down the street to buy another one?

Good grief, I know this is a Celtics board but if you look at it through anything but green colored glasses, it should be obvious that the Pelicans have quite a bit of leverage here. We just did this over the summer where people thought the Spurs didn't have leverage, they'll just have to take the Lakers best offer because that's where he wants to go and no one else will bid higher for a rental.

There are only maybe 7 or 8 guys you can lock in to make the all-NBA team given health. AD is one of them. They're gold. You don't just get to say well they have to move him so we, one of the other 29 teams that want him, now have leverage over the Pelicans.
Pelicans have an unbelievable asset, and that's awesome. Ainge can walk away, keep his job, and go in another direction. Demps can't. I'm not sure why that's green-tinted glasses.

Whoever ends up trading for AD is going to feel pain, most likely. There are many teams likely to be bidding, so it won't be a pu pu platter of junk going to NOP. But the teams that don't HAVE to make a deal (Celtics are just one of them) have the ability to walk away from the table. This is leverage. Not having the option to walk away is the opposite of leverage.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
4,569
Kiev, Ukraine
For one, you've got what's likely to be about the 15th or 16th pick in this draft as more valuable than all of the Lakers' assets.
Ball should definitely be ahead of SAC pick (in #4 behind Brown), if we're doing league-wide value.

After that it gets murky. Ingram is in a similar spot perception-wise and career-wise to Russell, who was dealt for salary relief and the 28th pick. That's roughly the value of the SAC pick, a bit worse.Is there a GM out there, anywhere, who would give a top-10 pick for Ingram? The question isn't really theoretical now: if there were, Magic would have done it.

None of the Lakers other assets rise even to that level.

If anything, this shows clearly why NO hasn't been super-pumped to make a deal with LA--it's a real pupu platter.
 

OnWisc

Microcosmic
SoSH Member
Apr 16, 2006
3,700
Chicago, IL
Having the deepest pockets doesn’t equate to having leverage unless you can somehow turn it into a negotiating advantage.

If DA realizes that NO values Tatum more than any other piece anyone else could realistically offer- which may be the case- that would be leverage. If NYK wins the lottery and makes Zion available and that’s NO’s main target, then they’ve got all the leverage. If Hayward’s recovery progress stalls out and word gets out that Kyrie ultimatumed DA to get Davis or he’s skipping town, then NO has some leverage.

There’s a lot of moving pieces here that will likely settle down before this is resolved barring the Lakers throwing every first rounder they’re allowed to trade on the table. Having a wealth of assets gives DA an advantage over other clubs in his attempt to acquire AD, but in and of itself doesn’t equate to any degree of leverage whatsoever over NO. That said, if someone can figure out how to use those assets to somehow box in NO, eliminate their other options, and extract AD for the lowest cost possible, it’s probably Danny.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
31,505
Ball should definitely be ahead of SAC pick (in #4 behind Brown), if we're doing league-wide value.

After that it gets murky. Ingram is in a similar spot perception-wise and career-wise to Russell, who was dealt for salary relief and the 28th pick. That's roughly the value of the SAC pick, a bit worse.Is there a GM out there, anywhere, who would give a top-10 pick for Ingram? The question isn't really theoretical now: if there were, Magic would have done it.

None of the Lakers other assets rise even to that level.

If anything, this shows clearly why NO hasn't been super-pumped to make a deal with LA--it's a real pupu platter.
It’s also worth noting that Ball’s trade value is likely much less than his on court value because of LaVar. He probably has very limited number of possible landing spots.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
4,569
Kiev, Ukraine
It’s also worth noting that Ball’s trade value is likely much less than his on court value because of LaVar. He probably has very limited number of possible landing spots.
Yup. Phoenix is one of the only places that makes sense for him, but it seems that the Suns also know that, so they aren't rushing. It's also possible that the Suns are one of the teams that just doesn't like Ball, although I think he'd be a great fit there.
 

queenb

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 6, 2016
162
For one, you've got what's likely to be about the 15th or 16th pick in this draft as more valuable than all of the Lakers' assets.
Right, so draft.net has the Kings pick as the 13th in the draft right now. Imagine that magically the Pelicans own that 13th pick come June. You're saying the Pelicans would trade the no. 13 pick straight up for one of the Lakers' guys if they could. But I'm guessing they wouldn't. Not for Ingram, not for Kuzma, Hart, etc. (And not for Ball, who they reportedly want no part of.) Which of the Lakers' assets is more valuable to the Pelicans than a late-lottery pick this year?

As I said, there's an argument to made that the Lakers will implode four years from now, and that any 1st rounders or swaps could be gold. But I don't think the NO front office has a long enough leash to bet on this trade's value JUST starting to materialize 4-5 years down the road.

Someone said this way back, but draft picks aren't just valuable because you can dream on them; they're valuable because YOU get to pick the player you like, and have these 7 years of cost control. If DeAndre Hunter is available at 13 (again, draft.net has him going at 17, so perhaps he would be)...how many GMs take Ingram in Year 3 over a rookie like him? I understand people think this is ridiculous, but sometimes when teams are rebuilding they want a sure-fire young stud, or a few chances to hand-pick their own young talent.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
16,856
Right, so draft.net has the Kings pick as the 13th in the draft right now. Imagine that magically the Pelicans own that 13th pick come June. You're saying the Pelicans would trade the no. 13 pick straight up for one of the Lakers' guys if they could. But I'm guessing they wouldn't. Not for Ingram, not for Kuzma, Hart, etc. (And not for Ball, who they reportedly want no part of.) Which of the Lakers' assets is more valuable to the Pelicans than a late-lottery pick this year?

As I said, there's an argument to made that the Lakers will implode four years from now, and that any 1st rounders or swaps could be gold. But I don't think the NO front office has a long enough leash to bet on this trade's value JUST starting to materialize 4-5 years down the road.

Someone said this way back, but draft picks aren't just valuable because you can dream on them; they're valuable because YOU get to pick the player you like, and have these 7 years of cost control. If DeAndre Hunter is available at 13 (again, draft.net has him going at 17, so perhaps he would be)...how many GMs take Ingram in Year 3 over a rookie like him? I understand people think this is ridiculous, but sometimes when teams are rebuilding they want a sure-fire young stud, or a few chances to hand-pick their own young talent.
Draft picks have a perception of value because they are unrealized. That is, until it comes time to actually make the pick.

That's why DA loves to stockpile draft picks. A pick's value never gets diminished but something as simple as actual on-court play.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
4,569
Kiev, Ukraine
Draft picks have a perception of value because they are unrealized. That is, until it comes time to actually make the pick.

That's why DA loves to stockpile draft picks. A pick's value never gets diminished but something as simple as actual on-court play.
This is true, but one irony of the current situation is that at the 2017 deadline, the whole league was mocking Ainge, because he was going to have to actually use his pick for the 2nd year in a row, instead of selling it to another team to dream on.

That pick turned into Jayson Tatum, who is now the trump card that beats all non-Zion picks.