The ‘18-‘19 Kings/Grizzlies/Clippers: Tracking the Picks

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
8,953
Toscana via Kyiv
So the Wizards have a game against the Celts end of the year. Maybe we rest a bunch of guys for the playoffs....

Who wins a Washington/Memphis Tie breaker?
I think they give them even lottery odds, and then do a coinflip for draft position if neither end up in the lottery. IIRC, this was how the Celtics ended up taking Smart at #6 in 2014, when Utah won the flip and took Exum at #5.
 

amfox1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 6, 2003
5,622
The back of your computer
NO beats SAC
MIA beats DAL
LAC loses

Race for #8:
6. DAL 29-46 (lost 2)
7. MEM 30-45 (lost 1)
8. WAS 31-45 (won 1)
9. NO 32-45 (won 1)

Race for #13:
13. ORL 37-39 (lost 1) - MIA is the #8 seed after its win and ORL's loss
14. SAC 37-38 (lost 1)
 
Last edited:

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
14,711
Santa Monica
I cannot believe that the Kings lost to New Orleans down the stretch.
With the realization that the playoffs are not happening, I wonder if the Kings players will mentally check out the next 2 weeks after an intense, grueling season? or will they fight for .500?

While we care about their draft slot, the players don't.

5 of their 7 games vs WC playoff teams battling for home court/seed.
@Hou, @SA, Hou, @Utah, @Port
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
8,953
Toscana via Kyiv
With the realization that the playoffs are not happening, I wonder if the Kings players will mentally check out the next 2 weeks after an intense, grueling season? or will they fight for .500?

While we care about their draft slot, the players don't.

5 of their 7 games vs WC playoff teams battling for home court/seed.
@Hou, @SA, Hou, @Utah, @Port
Hopefully they’re worn to nubs by this point.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
20,029
With the realization that the playoffs are not happening, I wonder if the Kings players will mentally check out the next 2 weeks after an intense, grueling season? or will they fight for .500?

While we care about their draft slot, the players don't.

5 of their 7 games vs WC playoff teams battling for home court/seed.
@Hou, @SA, Hou, @Utah, @Port
Even if they lose out, the best the pick will be is like 12th. Here's to ping pong luck.
 

TripleOT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2007
5,437
Even if the Kings give playoff level intensity the rest of their way, I don't see them winning more than three remaining games. If they slide to 12, I like Ainge's luck at hitting a 1 of 20 shot at pick 2-4.

I do think the MEM pick will convey this year. They probably can get a decent piece at 9, but not getting to track the picks after a half decade of doing so will be kind of a bummer.
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
15,098
Pittsburgh, PA
Locking in a pick at #9 would not be the worst thing in the world, but if that happens I bet Danny trades it for a future unprotected, just to kick the can down the road a bit and not end up with a roster crunch of incoming picks.

Couple of pick-interesting but not pick-crucial games tonight:

WSH @ UTAH - After the victory at the Suns, can the Bullets again fail to lose, and give Memphis some breathing room at #7?

POR @ ATL - The Hawks are 3 back of Memphis (2 back of Dallas) with 7 to play, but Dallas has a YUUUGE motivation to get underneath them, as the Hawks own their pick if it's outside the top 5. Odds of Dallas keeping their pick are 44.5% at #5, 37.2% at #6, 32.0% at #7. The Hawks' management, of course, would not mind losing, but Trae Young might. And Portland is far less than 100% what with Nurkic and all.

CHA @ LAL
- Charlotte is 2 back of Sacramento, with 8 of theirs to play (7 for SAC), holding the #12 spot. Although the Lakers are now down to the #10 pick, they're not fully tanking, and this should be considered a toss-up.
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
7,252
New York, NY
The Hawks should be tanking to protect the Dallas pick (they have the exact same incentive to tank as Dallas does, essentially). It hasn’t been a point of concern until very recently, but I wouldn’t be shocked if they shift their roster management approach to make sure Dallas doesn’t catch them.
 

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
3,449
Saint Paul, MN
Locking in a pick at #9 would not be the worst thing in the world, but if that happens I bet Danny trades it for a future unprotected, just to kick the can down the road a bit and not end up with a roster crunch of incoming picks.
I doubt he gets an unprotected 1st. Nobody seems to do that anymore.
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
15,098
Pittsburgh, PA
Well getting #9 today vs "maybe higher, maybe lower" a year or two down the line might be the move that saves some GM's season. All it takes is one.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
41,348
Well getting #9 today vs "maybe higher, maybe lower" a year or two down the line might be the move that saves some GM's season. All it takes is one.
There are only a small number of teams I’d even want to trade a #9 in the current year for a future unprotected pick. That seems like an incredibly risky move. I’d rather keep and make the selection. I would also bet that it’s getting moved in an AD deal anyways,
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
47,406
Race for #56/3-seed:
50-52T/5-seed. IND 45-31 (lost 2)
50-52T/4-seed. BOS 45-31 (won 2)
55-56T/3-seed. PHI 48-27 (won 1)
It's not mathematically over, but it's over. The 4 is what we want, and then Philly/Toronto play in round 2.
 

Red Averages

owes you $50
SoSH Member
Apr 20, 2003
7,392
It's not mathematically over, but it's over. The 4 is what we want, and then Philly/Toronto play in round 2.
This is what I’ve been saying for a while, before making a poll on it. I think #4 at home vs Ind made
more sense over #3. Ultimately they need to figure out the best lineups as well clearly, but that that also seems to be progressing.
 

TripleOT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2007
5,437
I think we beat Indy in five or six games, regardless of home court, so I'd rather have a worse record and a draft pick one slot higher.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
11,229
Well, you promised me KD anyways so this is all just an exercise.
Until you guarantee us that it won't ever happen we're all just sitting on the edge of our seats...

Seriously, if Durant and Irving really are teammates next year (and not here), Boston needs to stay away from Davis. Because he ain't firing his agent for getting him a promise of a starring role in the Space Jam reboot franchise.
 

amfox1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 6, 2003
5,622
The back of your computer
Update on picks as of 3/31am:

SAC has clinched a lottery spot. Unless SAC wins the lottery (in which case the pick goes to PHI and BOS gets PHI's pick, currently #26), BOS will get the pick. Currently the pick is #13.

BOS also has its own 1st round pick, currently #21.

LAC's 1st round pick, which was top 14 protected, will convey to BOS, as LAC has clinched a playoff spot. Currently the pick is #22.

MEM 1st round pick - currently #8, top 8 protected, 0.5 game ahead of with NO w/6 games left (won't convey to BOS, excluding any impact of the lottery)

BOS 2nd round pick - currently #50, 31-55 protected, 4.5 games behind PHI w/5 games left (won't convey to MEM)

Race for #8:
6. DAL 29-46 (lost 2)
7. WAS 31-46 (lost 1)
8. MEM 31-45 (won 1)
9. NO 32-45 (won 1)

Race for #13:
13. SAC 37-39 (lost 2)
14. ORL 38-39 (won 1)

Race for #56/3-seed:
51/5-seed. IND 45-32 (lost 3)
50/4-seed. BOS 45-32 (lost 1) - BOS wins a tiebreaker with IND for seed
56/3-seed. PHI 49-27 (won 2)
 
Last edited:

TripleOT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2007
5,437
If MEM ends up in the 8 spot, the Cs will have a (roughly) 50/50 chance of getting the pick this draft at 9.

MEM has six games remaining, @Clippers, @Blazers, @ Mavs, Mavs, @Pistons, Warriors
NO has one more win, and has five games remaining, Lakers, Hornets, @ Suns, @ Kings, Warriors.

It will be interesting if MEM, trying to win, can win more than the two Mavs games, especially if GS needs that last game for the best record in the West, and if NO, which should be trying to lose, can actually drop games to the Lakers and Suns. Same deal with the Warriors game.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
6,216
Well, I really don't want Memphis' pick at #9. I don't think it has a lot of trade value, and I think the Celtics would have a hard time trying to work in three rookies onto their current team. I think Memphis' top 6 protected (and potentially unprotected pick) next year or the year after will have more value.

If SAC leapfrogs to 2-4 it's great, but if someone else jumps over them that's going to be really annoying. Probably even more annoying if SAC jumps to #1 :)
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
41,348
Well, I really don't want Memphis' pick at #9. I don't think it has a lot of trade value, and I think the Celtics would have a hard time trying to work in three rookies onto their current team. I think Memphis' top 6 protected (and potentially unprotected pick) next year or the year after will have more value.

If SAC leapfrogs to 2-4 it's great, but if someone else jumps over them that's going to be really annoying. Probably even more annoying if SAC jumps to #1 :)
Last year the #10 pick got the Sixers the #16 pick and an unprotected Miami pick. Only takes one team to fall in love with a prospect. There are some intriguing guys in that 8-12 range.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
41,348
For those who don’t want the Memphis pick this year, some very good results:

Mavericks win at OKC
Wizards win at Denver
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
24,323
For those who don’t want the Memphis pick this year, some very good results:

Mavericks win at OKC
Wizards win at Denver
These results are more evidence that whether teams are "trying to win" or are "tanking"...….the players on the floor are still competing which makes these fancy taglines nothing more than silliness. Charlotte was "trying to win" and last I saw they were down 43 in Oakland while these "tanking" teams you listed went on the road vs playoff teams and came away with a W. The only way an organization can truly tank is by doing what the Chicago Bulls are doing in not fielding a team with NBA players. They literally started 3 PG's, someone named Brandon Sampson, and Robin Lopez yesterday.....and two other PG's played big minutes. This my friends is how you tank without having to worry about pulling road upsets.

Speaking of the Bulls.....old friend Walt Lemon Jr was just signed and put up 19/6/4/4 in 31 min during a blowout loss to the Raptors yesterday.
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
15,098
Pittsburgh, PA
it's also nice nowadays that you don't have to look absolutely abject, even if you're sincerely committed to tanking. Bulls have a 12.5% chance of Zion at 21 wins, could have as many as 27 without it changing anything, and even there aren't at a meaningful disadvantage relative to the Knicks at 14 wins, who have a 14.0% chance of Zion. You can put a product on the court that isn't an embarrassment while still "tanking", and sell some tickets because you'll win a few games and be close in a lot more. That wasn't nearly as true under the old 25%-for-#1 regime.
 

amfox1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 6, 2003
5,622
The back of your computer
Race for #8:
6. DAL 30-46 (won 1)
7. MEM 31-46 (lost 1)
8T. WAS 32-46 (won 1)
8T. NO 32-46 (lost 1)

Race for #13:
13T. SAC 38-39 (won 1)
13T. ORL 38-39 (won 1)
 

wilked

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2005
3,151
Schedules remaining, colored green for teams that are < 0.500.

We want MEM to lose, and all others to win. MEM plays Dallas twice, the only two games it has left against a 'bad team' - need at least a split there, Grizzlies sweeping would hurt for sure.

What is good is DAL and NO have a ton of winnable games left. It would help if AD plays of course... We also want the Warriors final game of the season (@MEM) to be meaningful for the Warriors, which is fairly possible looking at things (need DEN to keep winning).

DAL: PHI, MIN, MEM, @MEM, PHO, @SAN
MEM: @POR, @DAL, DAL, @DET, GSW
WAS: CHI, SAN, @NYK, BOS,
NO: CHA, @PHO, @SAC, GSW
 

TripleOT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2007
5,437
MEM pick not conveying this year figures to be one of the most valuable trade assets this off season. I'm okay with whatever happens with the pick. There's no guarantee that the Grizz will suck next season, as we (Cleveland) saw with the unprotected Nets pick.

I'm just worried/thrilled if we hear, early in the draft lottery, "The Kings pick has moved into the top four." Philly getting that pick would be a disaster, but the Celtics adding another pick in the 3 range would be unprecedented for a non-lotto team.

If the MEM pick falls to 9, Ainge needs to flip it for a future draft asset, so we can be Tankathon-engaged for another few seasons.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
41,348
MEM pick not conveying this year figures to be one of the most valuable trade assets this off season. I'm okay with whatever happens with the pick. There's no guarantee that the Grizz will suck next season, as we (Cleveland) saw with the unprotected Nets pick.

I'm just worried/thrilled if we hear, early in the draft lottery, "The Kings pick has moved into the top four." Philly getting that pick would be a disaster, but the Celtics adding another pick in the 3 range would be unprecedented for a non-lotto team.

If the MEM pick falls to 9, Ainge needs to flip it for a future draft asset, so we can be Tankathon-engaged for another few seasons.
I’m really ok either way. I prefer it going into 2020/2021 due to the one and done rule going away but if we have to settle for #9, I could live with it. There are some guys that intrigue me.

Ultimately, I don’t think it’s going to convey. Last night was a big night for the non-convey group.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
24,323
I’m really ok either way. I prefer it going into 2020/2021 due to the one and done rule going away but if we have to settle for #9, I could live with it. There are some guys that intrigue me.

Ultimately, I don’t think it’s going to convey. Last night was a big night for the non-convey group.
While I am firmly in the Non-convey group it is extremely important that the Grizzlies win total remains below 34 for my ticket to convey. Gotta feed the family ya know.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
41,348
While I am firmly in the Non-convey group it is extremely important that the Grizzlies win total remains below 34 for my ticket to convey. Gotta feed the family ya know.
Ha, I totally forgot about that one. Amazing how good Vegas is.
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
15,098
Pittsburgh, PA
I'm just worried/thrilled if we hear, early in the draft lottery, "The Kings pick has moved into the top four." Philly getting that pick would be a disaster, but the Celtics adding another pick in the 3 range would be unprecedented for a non-lotto team.
I realize you said "worried/thrilled", but if we do hear that, every single celtics fan ought to be freaking stoked. That means we hit our tiny percentage chance to move up, and have gone from "2% probability of a franchise-altering pick" to "83% probability of a franchise-altering pick, with a 17% chance of Philly getting one instead". If you've ever played poker, say, and have both an intellectual and an emotional understanding of probabilities and expected-value, you would be hugely excited for that to occur.

Also, I'm not sure what you mean by "unprecedented". The Celtics weren't a lotto team when they got Tatum at #3, nor Brown at #3. If you just mean a lottery longshot hitting on a big jump up, you've got the Kings going from #8 to #3 in 2017 and from #7 to #2 last year, the Cavs going from #9 -> #1 in 2014 (lolWiggins), Clippers from #8 -> #1 in 2011 (Irving), Bulls from #9 -> #1 in 2008 (Rose), and so on. And of course, in a result famous enough that it caused an immediate change in the weighted odds, in 1993 the Magic were the last team in the lottery (#11) and won it (and the rights to Chris Webber).
 

TripleOT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2007
5,437
I realize you said "worried/thrilled", but if we do hear that, every single celtics fan ought to be freaking stoked. That means we hit our tiny percentage chance to move up, and have gone from "2% probability of a franchise-altering pick" to "83% probability of a franchise-altering pick, with a 17% chance of Philly getting one instead". If you've ever played poker, say, and have both an intellectual and an emotional understanding of probabilities and expected-value, you would be hugely excited for that to occur.

Also, I'm not sure what you mean by "unprecedented". The Celtics weren't a lotto team when they got Tatum at #3, nor Brown at #3. If you just mean a lottery longshot hitting on a big jump up, you've got the Kings going from #8 to #3 in 2017 and from #7 to #2 last year, the Cavs going from #9 -> #1 in 2014 (lolWiggins), Clippers from #8 -> #1 in 2011 (Irving), Bulls from #9 -> #1 in 2008 (Rose), and so on. And of course, in a result famous enough that it caused an immediate change in the weighted odds, in 1993 the Magic were the last team in the lottery (#11) and won it (and the rights to Chris Webber).
I'm a poker player and certainly understand odds. I was thinking about how I was about 90% on the drive home from my last tournament, when some idiot donk shoved with 99 against my KK on a 654 rainbow flop, and got lucky on the river. I'd be perfectly content to move up and get the 4 or 3, but it would be an excruciating reveal if it were 1 or 2 -- either add a top player and another weapon in the arms race with your rival, or get nothing while they get Zion.

What I was trying to convey with the "non-lotto" team talk is the Celtics are the first team who have acquired and are trying to integrate two number three picks into the top of the rotation of a 50+ win team. I was not talking about back of the lottery teams moving up, which as you outlined, has happened a lot. It would be unprecedented to add a third top pick to a winning team in a four year period
 
Last edited:

InstaFace

MDLzera
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
15,098
Pittsburgh, PA
Dallas surprises even @wilked and beats Philly by 20, temporarily bumping them down into a tie for 6th with Memphis.

Meanwhile, Orlando loses at Toronto, pushing SAC back to #14. With 5 to play and 3 games in between them, SAC has all but clinched no-worse-than-13th, and the real question for them is down to Orlando's performance.

Just another episode of "As The Tank Turns".
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
I realize you said "worried/thrilled", but if we do hear that, every single celtics fan ought to be freaking stoked. That means we hit our tiny percentage chance to move up, and have gone from "2% probability of a franchise-altering pick" to "83% probability of a franchise-altering pick, with a 17% chance of Philly getting one instead". If you've ever played poker, say, and have both an intellectual and an emotional understanding of probabilities and expected-value, you would be hugely excited for that to occur.

Also, I'm not sure what you mean by "unprecedented". The Celtics weren't a lotto team when they got Tatum at #3, nor Brown at #3. If you just mean a lottery longshot hitting on a big jump up, you've got the Kings going from #8 to #3 in 2017 and from #7 to #2 last year, the Cavs going from #9 -> #1 in 2014 (lolWiggins), Clippers from #8 -> #1 in 2011 (Irving), Bulls from #9 -> #1 in 2008 (Rose), and so on. And of course, in a result famous enough that it caused an immediate change in the weighted odds, in 1993 the Magic were the last team in the lottery (#11) and won it (and the rights to Chris Webber).
He meant what he typed, I just think you missed the qualifier he threw in. Unprecedented for a ‘non-lotto team’. As in a team that wasn’t in the lottery on their own, but by owning other teams’ picks, ended up with a top 3, 3 years in a row.
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
15,098
Pittsburgh, PA
Yeah, I see that he meant it, I just think that it's only true if you define the precedent so narrowly that it's not a useful statement.

The Lakers in 1979 had made the playoffs, and through a complex series of trades had come away with the rights to #1 for Magic Johnson. The defending champion 1982 Lakers then somehow had Cleveland's #1-overall pick again (James Worthy).

The Celtics pulled off the Joe Barely Cares trade, giving up the #1 pick for #3 in 1980, after a season in which they were the top seed in the east. They had that #3 pick through a series of events primarily involving the unloading of Bob McAdoo. The next year, as defending champions, they convinced Ainge to give up baseball to join them (using a second round pick, though, but it's relevant in the saga). Come 1986, the again-defending champion Celtics again had pick #2, though I'm not sure what happened to that selection... '

Point is, you've had an out-of-lottery team come up with a top selection a number of times, sometimes multiple occasions within a short window of years. Adding Brown and Tatum to what was a playoff team before either of them arrived has been great, but I'm not sure it's without precedent.
 

TripleOT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2007
5,437
Yeah, I see that he meant it, I just think that it's only true if you define the precedent so narrowly that it's not a useful statement.

The Lakers in 1979 had made the playoffs, and through a complex series of trades had come away with the rights to #1 for Magic Johnson. The defending champion 1982 Lakers then somehow had Cleveland's #1-overall pick again (James Worthy).

The Celtics pulled off the Joe Barely Cares trade, giving up the #1 pick for #3 in 1980, after a season in which they were the top seed in the east. They had that #3 pick through a series of events primarily involving the unloading of Bob McAdoo. The next year, as defending champions, they convinced Ainge to give up baseball to join them (using a second round pick, though, but it's relevant in the saga). Come 1986, the again-defending champion Celtics again had pick #2, though I'm not sure what happened to that selection... '

Point is, you've had an out-of-lottery team come up with a top selection a number of times, sometimes multiple occasions within a short window of years. Adding Brown and Tatum to what was a playoff team before either of them arrived has been great, but I'm not sure it's without precedent.
Maybe I should have added the caveat "in the lottery era." Those two cases did happen four decades ago, but are much different than the situation in the current NBA, where teams are loathe to give up unprotected picks. I don't know how "useful" that statement about a top team integrating three top picks into its rotation is, and I don't know how useful discussing the Magic/Worthy/McHale picks is either.

I do know that the since the Lakers wrangled two number one picks from the Cavs, and the Celtics got the number one pick from the Pistons in the ML Carr/McAdoo transaction, and the number 2 pick in 1986 from Seattle in the Gerald Henderson trade, the only other time a top team got a top 3 pick was in the 2003 draft. The Pistons, coming off a season with the best record in the East, with the second pick, chose Darko Milicic over Chris Bosh, Carmelo Anthony, Dwayne Wade, and five other players who became all stars. Just like if Len Bias lived, if Detroit takes any of those three players, it probably wins more titles.
 

amfox1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 6, 2003
5,622
The back of your computer
Race for #8:
6T. DAL 31-46 (won 2)
6T. MEM 31-46 (lost 1)
8T. WAS 32-46 (won 1)
8T. NO 32-46 (lost 1)

Race for #13:
13. ORL 38-40 (lost 1)
14. SAC 38-39 (won 1)

Race for #56/3-seed:
50-51T/5-seed. IND 46-32 (won 1)
50-51T/4-seed. BOS 46-32 (won 1) - BOS wins a tiebreaker with IND for seed
54-56T/3-seed. PHI 49-28 (lost 1)

Only game of consequence tonight is HOU-SAC.
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
15,098
Pittsburgh, PA
Maybe I should have added the caveat "in the lottery era." Those two cases did happen four decades ago, but are much different than the situation in the current NBA, where teams are loathe to give up unprotected picks. I don't know how "useful" that statement about a top team integrating three top picks into its rotation is, and I don't know how useful discussing the Magic/Worthy/McHale picks is either.

I do know that the since the Lakers wrangled two number one picks from the Cavs, and the Celtics got the number one pick from the Pistons in the ML Carr/McAdoo transaction, and the number 2 pick in 1986 from Seattle in the Gerald Henderson trade, the only other time a top team got a top 3 pick was in the 2003 draft. The Pistons, coming off a season with the best record in the East, with the second pick, chose Darko Milicic over Chris Bosh, Carmelo Anthony, Dwayne Wade, and five other players who became all stars. Just like if Len Bias lived, if Detroit takes any of those three players, it probably wins more titles.
All true stuff and good history. I'll apologize for being excessively harsh in my phrasing.

I guess the comp I'm thinking about relative to our current run of draft pick magic is Cleveland getting 3 #1-overall picks in the space of 4 years (2011, 13, 14) and blowing 2 of the 3, and only getting out of the basement due to a Lebron-ex-machina. The first (Irving) was a 2.8%-chance whammy with holding the Clippers' pick (They made their own selection at #4 that year, for T. Thompson), then their own at #4 the next year, got mildly lucky in 2013 (3rd to 1st) and then massively lucky in 2014 (1.7% chance of 9th to 1st). So very little trade-genius happening there, and a lot of quality pingpong balls, which ultimately went to waste.

Regardless of the historical comparisons about lottery luck, I hope we can all agree that in terms of trades adding expected-value, Ainge's machinations have put him in the league of both his mentor and Jerry West. Maybe they haven't had the drafting luck or player-development skills of (say) the recent-vintage Warriors, but the franchise has done everything a fan could ever ask for in terms of taking risks and making moves to add value.