The Plan For the #1, er, #3 Overall Pick?

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
50,892
Yeah if all three were draft eligible this summer Fultz would go no better than 4th. I don't feel there is much doubt to this.

Assuming this is a prelude to a Butler trade which seems to be the case or this trade would NEVER be consummated until after the Lakers made their selection we are really going to be upgrading our 3 position, taking it from a liability many nights to a strength most nights, while simply rolling back our #1 to next years lottery. Ainge is genius.
Yeah, to me this seems all about getting Butler. Before this deal, we "only" had next year's BRK pick to convey. Now we have an extra pick and it seems Ainge doesn't think Fultz is worlds ahead of Tatum/Jackson anyway.

Not sure how Butler plays into the "our window is in 3+ years" though.
 

cumicon

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2007
86
Once he made decision to trade out of #1, I think Danny wanted a few days to shop the #3 pick (and other assets) before the draft. If he truly is intent on keeping the future picks (for now), and values a few players in the 4-8 range of this draft board, why not put a bidding war at #3? Are there teams out there that would give up multiple picks/assets for Jackson/Fox/Tatum/Ball (if the LAL pass)? If Sacramento felt another team was moving in on Fox would they cough up picks 5 and 10 for 3?
Ainge doesn't need the 3rd pick in is hands to ask around and see what he could get for it. The whole league knows he might end up with the 3rd pick on draft night.
 

MillarTime

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
1,332
A number of reporters are saying the protection is 2-5 this morning. So Celtics get Lakers pick if it's 1 or 6+.

If it's 2-5 the Celtics get Sac 2019 1st.
Opposite. Pick conveys to Celts if it's 2-5. If not it becomes the 2019 Sac pick (w/ no protections I believe).
 

finnVT

superspreadsheeter
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2002
2,131
A number of reporters are saying the protection is 2-5 this morning. So Celtics get Lakers pick if it's 1 or 6+.

If it's 2-5 the Celtics get Sac 2019 1st.
Pretty sure that's backwards. It's protected unless it's 2-5, so either they get 2-5 or SAC 2019.
 

Steve Dillard

wishes drew noticed him instead of sweet & sour
SoSH Member
Oct 7, 2003
5,720
So we know Danny likes five players for 2018.
from the 2018 thread

Who is your 4th? At this stage I have a significant dropoff after 3. Have you seen Doncic in extended action yet? He's just special.
Mohamed Bamba would be the 4th for me.

Doncic looks like the real deal but there's no chance in hell I take him over an athletic and skilled 7 footer in Ayton, particularly with Fultz and maybe Hayward in the fold. My super early top 4 is:

Ayton
Doncic
Porter
Bamba

No idea on 5-10.
PF Robert Williams(Texas A&M), F Miles Bridges(Michigan State), PF/C Wendell Carter(Duke), and G Collin Sexton(Alabama) are all at the bottom half of the top 10 in the 2018 mock draft on DX.
edit: I would add, from a larger perspective of immediate need, rebounding and defending was a major issue for the team. Adding a "medium big" is a bigger fit. I had thought Danny would leave that for 2018, but perhaps with Tatum, he sees a bigger need being filled. You generally take the best available, but if Fultz vs. Tatum is closer, then you fit need.
 
Last edited:

southshoresoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
5,249
Canton MA
Ten years ago, I couldn't understand trading the #5 pick for Ray Allen. In my mind, he was a player on the wrong side of 30 with balky ankles, a poor fit on a rebuilding team. I was wrong, as I was not privy to the longer view that would subsequently add Garnett and thereby transform an organization.

Ten years later, I don't understand trading the #1 pick for the #3 pick, and I say that as someone who thought pre-lottery that Jackson is the most Celtic player in the draft. In my mind, this team needs better assets, not more assets, so turning a better #1 into more #2-6 picks seems a poor fit on a contending team. But I may well be wrong, as I am not privy to the longer view that Ainge has, and thus I am going to watch expectantly for the next move that follows as he attempts once again to transform the organization.
But if you think your guy is there at 3 and you think he is better than the consensus one you get paid a premium lotto pick for the right to slide back? I mean, idk. Lots of scouts and experts think Jackson is the future superstar in this draft. OConnor loves Tatums fit for the Cs (i do too, he can walk in and take all of Amir Johnsons minutes right away).

I fell for Fultz too but he was never this franchise altering slam dunk pick. He is going to be very good at the NBA level. But is a high lotto pick better than Tatum or Jackson? Ainge just said emphatically no.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
50,892
A number of reporters are saying the protection is 2-5 this morning. So Celtics get Lakers pick if it's 1 or 6+.

If it's 2-5 the Celtics get Sac 2019 1st.
Actually, isn't it the Celtics get it only if it's 2-5, if not it flips to SAC pick? It has top and bottom protection.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
29,621
A number of reporters are saying the protection is 2-5 this morning. So Celtics get Lakers pick if it's 1 or 6+.

If it's 2-5 the Celtics get Sac 2019 1st.
This would be a very odd outcome, since the delta in value between 1 and 7+ is so huge. The reported 'opposite' protection (Celts get 2-5 or Sacto) has much steadier value and thus seems much more likely. That way, both teams have a sense what the value exchange is
 

Big John

lurker
Dec 9, 2016
2,086
Actually, isn't it the Celtics get it only if it's 2-5, if not it flips to SAC pick? It has top and bottom protection.
That was my understanding as well. Some of the reporting has probably been wrong. If in fact Philly gets it if 2-5, then the deal becomes considerably worse, although I don't think Ainge and Stevens were intending to draft Fultz anyway.
 

jmm57

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,474
If it's the Kings pick that they get it could be the Zion Williamson draft, assuming he is for real. Physically he's the closest HS prospect to LeBron I have seen.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
50,892
That was my understanding as well. Some of the reporting has probably been wrong. If in fact Philly gets it if 2-5, then the deal becomes considerably worse, although I don't think Ainge and Stevens were intending to draft Fultz anyway.
We're making one of the easy parts of this difficult:

Pick:
1: Philly keeps it, Bos gets SAC's pick
2-5: Boston get it
6+: Philly keeps it, Bos gets SAC's pick
 

Kull

wannabe merloni
SoSH Member
Nov 1, 2005
1,555
El Paso, TX
Assuming the Celtics use cap space to sign Hayward, it would still be less painful to make the signing first, trade second. As is, the Celtics need to shave off one of Smart/Jae/Avery/#3 to make Hayward fit under the cap.(Assuming Yabusele won't stay overseas. If he did, just moving Rozier would get them close). If you traded for Butler first, you'd have to send out another 14-18M to stay under the cap, depending upon which Celtic you moved first. If a Butler trade came after a Hayward signing, you could get away with sending out 5M less.
This came in answer to my question about cap implications of trading #3 for Butler. So quite possibly we aren't going to see the next shoe fall until after the draft AND after signing Hayward. Could even be that a Chicago deal is contingent on the Hayward signing, and failing that, Danny just rolls with the picks.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
I would've tried to get Holmes in the deal. He'd fit in nicely given his length, defensive upside, athleticism, ability to stretch the floor, age, salary and our lack of bigs. He's also kind of redundant in Philly. Of course it looks like Danny is trying to avoid bringing back any salary for obvious reasons.

I've also seen a few people who are higher on Yabu than Zizic. They are in love with his wingspan and his range. There was one guy a few months back who took Yabu at 4 in a redraft. I've seen 2 or 3 others slot him in the lottery in a redraft for 2016 too. Where they would have him in the 2017 lottery, I have no idea.

If people think Zizic really would go mid lottery in 2017, where would those people have Jaylen Brown being drafted in the 2017 lottery if you take his rookie year into consideration? We had this discussion earlier somewhere on this board (I love this forum but we really suck at not cross posting) and the consensus was JB would go mid lottery. One poster (Wade Boggs) had him going 3rd, the rest saw him going no higher than 7th.

I guess it shouldn't shock me that there would be people out there that think Zizic is a better or comparable prospect to Jaylen Brown but that's essentially what they are saying. It's also possible those people think Zizic will have a floor of being a 25 minute rotation big but with a limited ceiling while Jaylen Brown has the floor of being out of the league in 2 years and a ceiling of Jimmy Butler. I have a hard time buying into the argument that Zizic has a better floor or ceiling than Jaylen Brown though.

From what I've read on Zizic, he doesn't project to be much better than average on defense and it may take him awhile to get there. He's pretty bad now. That's not really a shock for a young big though. He also has limited range and his passing needs improvement. That sounds like a player who would have done better in the 80s and 90s. Zizic is still young and he's improved his FT shooting every year. If he can extend his range beyond the arc, he obviously becomes a much better fit in today's NBA. He's developed a hook shot so that's good at least. He's supposed to be a really good rebounder but he's not a rim protector. Unless he took a step forward in athleticism last year (he did improve his strength, and that counts as something), I don't see him going mid lottery in 2017 unless there is some type of huge drop off in talent after the top 5 or 6 players. Does he go higher than Zach Collins? I'm not a draft expert but it looks like the 2017 class has a pretty great "2nd tier" too with guys like Malik Monk, Dennis Smith, the aforementioned Zach Collins, Jonathan Issac.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
28,163
This. You can read every self-appointed internet expert out there, but the consensus is the way to go. It's the same reason I'm confident Ball is the 2nd best player in the draft despite the wise guys going sour on him. It's house money that the consensus is the way to go.
No one is saying that Fultz is going to bust and in fact, there's a good bet that he's a multiple all-star. But as I mentioned upthread, if he's Kyrie Irving or even John Wall, what does that get the Cs? Yes, GSW won a title with Curry, Thompson, and Green but it's typically the LBJ's, KD's, Leonard's and guys like them that dominate the NBA landscape.

I dunno. I'm shocked that DA doesn't wait until draft night to extract maximum pain out of PHI and make sure that the Lakers don't take Jackson but I guess the thought of ending up with Fultz must be too much for DA to bear.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
29,621
It did get worse than what was reported. We were expecting both picks and got 1.

You weren't exactly level headed either.
One problem is people start judging these deals based on their favorite report (since early reports are all over the map) and then are disappointed when the actual deal might be less than that.

What matters is not whether some other rumor was more favorable--we'll never know of it is real--but whether 3 and a likely top 5 pick is worth Fultz.
 

Jeff Van GULLY

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 13, 2005
3,969
I'll also add that I don't think Josh Jackson is a good person. What happened outside the bar in Kansas is disturbing to me and goes beyond a normal drunken college transgression. Threatening to beat up a woman and then damaging her car when she wouldn't get out and fight is not OK.

He's not someone I want to root for on the Celtics.

I guess I'll be hoping the Celtics draft Tatum.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
44,767
One problem is people start judging these deals based on their favorite report (since early reports are all over the map) and then are disappointed when the actual deal might be less than that.

What matters is not whether some other rumor was more favorable--we'll never know of it is real--but whether 3 and a likely top 5 pick is worth Fultz.
Why are we assuming the pick is "likely" top 5? Odds are against LA finishing 2-5 next year and then we're left playing the guessing game on Sacramento in 2019, who will be adding the #5 and #10 picks in 2017 and probably another good lotto pick in 2018. Last year, they finished with the 8th worst record. They're always on the short list of teams that should suck out loud but that 2019 pick is just as likely to be 6-10 as it is 1-5.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
This would be a very odd outcome, since the delta in value between 1 and 7+ is so huge. The reported 'opposite' protection (Celts get 2-5 or Sacto) has much steadier value and thus seems much more likely. That way, both teams have a sense what the value exchange is
Didn't Philly do a trade like this before where they got a 1st round pick that they would only receive if it was 1-3? I think they came very close to receiving that pick or they might have even received it. Londonsox?
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
28,163
I've also seen a few people who are higher on Yabu than Zizic. They are in love with his wingspan and his range. There was one guy a few months back who took Yabu at 4 in a redraft. I've seen 2 or 3 others slot him in the lottery in a redraft for 2016 too. Where they would have him in the 2017 lottery, I have no idea.

If people think Zizic really would go mid lottery in 2017, where would those people have Jaylen Brown being drafted in the 2017 lottery if you take his rookie year into consideration? We had this discussion earlier somewhere on this board (I love this forum but we really suck at not cross posting) and the consensus was JB would go mid lottery. One poster (Wade Boggs) had him going 3rd, the rest saw him going no higher than 7th.

I guess it shouldn't shock me that there would be people out there that think Zizic is a better or comparable prospect to Jaylen Brown but that's essentially what they are saying. It's also possible those people think Zizic will have a floor of being a 25 minute rotation big but with a limited ceiling while Jaylen Brown has the floor of being out of the league in 2 years and a ceiling of Jimmy Butler. I have a hard time buying into the argument that Zizic has a better floor or ceiling than Jaylen Brown though.

From what I've read on Zizic, he doesn't project to be much better than average on defense and it may take him awhile to get there. He's pretty bad now. That's not really a shock for a young big though. He also has limited range and his passing needs improvement. That sounds like a player who would have done better in the 80s and 90s. Zizic is still young and he's improved his FT shooting every year. If he can extend his range beyond the arc, he obviously becomes a much better fit in today's NBA. He's developed a hook shot so that's good at least. He's supposed to be a really good rebounder but he's not a rim protector. Unless he took a step forward in athleticism last year (he did improve his strength, and that counts as something), I don't see him going mid lottery in 2017 unless there is some type of huge drop off in talent after the top 5 or 6 players. Does he go higher than Zach Collins? I'm not a draft expert but it looks like the 2017 class has a pretty great "2nd tier" too with guys like Malik Monk, Dennis Smith, the aforementioned Zach Collins, Jonathan Issac.
I think this is the discussion to which you referred: http://sonsofsamhorn.net/index.php?threads/2017-nba-draft-thread.16589/page-16#post-2243993.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
No one is saying that Fultz is going to bust and in fact, there's a good bet that he's a multiple all-star. But as I mentioned upthread, if he's Kyrie Irving or even John Wall, what does that get the Cs? Yes, GSW won a title with Curry, Thompson, and Green but it's typically the LBJ's, KD's, Leonard's and guys like them that dominate the NBA landscape.

I dunno. I'm shocked that DA doesn't wait until draft night to extract maximum pain out of PHI and make sure that the Lakers don't take Jackson but I guess the thought of ending up with Fultz must be too much for DA to bear.
If he makes the trade before draft night it is pretty clear he knows who LA is taking, he isn't taking the pick, or he doesn't care if Josh Jackson is still there at 3 because he likes other players just as much. Maybe he really does flip 3 to Sacramento for 5 and 10.

Why are we assuming the pick is "likely" top 5? Odds are against LA finishing 2-5 next year and then we're left playing the guessing game on Sacramento in 2019, who will be adding the #5 and #10 picks in 2017 and probably another good lotto pick in 2018. Last year, they finished with the 8th worst record. They're always on the short list of teams that should suck out loud but that 2019 pick is just as likely to be 6-10 as it is 1-5.
See above. If Ainge does flip the 3rd pick for 5 and 10, that probably makes the Kings worse long term. It also means even more trades would be on the way because there is no way the Celtics would be giving 4 rookies and JB burn next year unless they are going to shock the world and blow it up. I doubt he is keeping any of the picks he acquires outside of who he picks 3rd or possibly 5th. If he picks 5th, I think he may trade the 10th pick unless Collins is there or someone else drops.
 

axx

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
7,769
I think Danny is trying to turn #1 into Butler/etc (without having to give up the 2018 Brooklyn pick), and I don't think it's going to work.

In a funny way, it's Ainge betting on the Lakers being terrible again. Almost feels like a tiny piece of shade thrown at Magic.
I was going to suggest that it's more like he wants the Kings pick, but will take the Lakers if they end up being bad.
 

Swedgin

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2013
656
I don't think it's his athleticism that keeps him from finishing near the rim. I think it's that he's not a particularly talented scorer.
He has a poor vertical off of one foot. He can get up for a rebound, block or oop when he jumps off two, but he can't elevate when driving
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
I think Danny is trying to turn #1 into Butler/etc (without having to give up the 2018 Brooklyn pick), and I don't think it's going to work.



I was going to suggest that it's more like he wants the Kings pick, but will take the Lakers if they end up being bad.
I don't know why. The 2019 draft could potentially be terrible if the NBA gets rid of the one and done rule. I guess that is an if, but the 2018 draft has the potential to be insanely deep.
 

JCizzle

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 11, 2006
19,286
I think someone earlier mentioned this, but if more moves are to come then I'd prefer more assets instead of a GFIN approach with Butler or PG. If the draft goes Fultz, Ball instead of Fultz, JJ, then I'd try to pull the trigger on that rumored Sac deal of #3 for #5 and 10. In this scenario, you draft Fox for Sac and still end up with one of Tatum or JJ at 5, plus a Kelly replacement at 10.

Edit: bosox said basically the same thing above
 

Fishy1

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
4,955
I don't know why. The 2019 draft could potentially be terrible if the NBA gets rid of the one and done rule. I guess that is an if, but the 2018 draft has the potential to be insanely deep.
This is a really underrated aspect of this deal. If Danny thinks 1-3 are better than Fultz AND a bunch of high schoolers who'd otherwise have been going to college are now going right into the draft - then the value of this deal has the potential to be very, very high.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
44,767
If he makes the trade before draft night it is pretty clear he knows who LA is taking, he isn't taking the pick, or he doesn't care if Josh Jackson is still there at 3 because he likes other players just as much. Maybe he really does flip 3 to Sacramento for 5 and 10.



See above. If Ainge does flip the 3rd pick for 5 and 10, that probably makes the Kings worse long term. It also means even more trades would be on the way because there is no way the Celtics would be giving 4 rookies and JB burn next year unless they are going to shock the world and blow it up. I doubt he is keeping any of the picks he acquires outside of who he picks 3rd or possibly 5th. If he picks 5th, I think he may trade the 10th pick unless Collins is there or someone else drops.
Is 3 for 5/10 a real thing or just SoSH speculation? I agree that we are not likely to make that Lakers 2018/Kings 2019 pick so I'm sure Ainge has a pretty good sense of its value on the trade market. My ultimate goal is that Ainge is able to keep #3 while still landing another top guy with the Lakers/Kings and Memphis picks along with some combination of Crowder/Bradley/Smart/Rozier. I'm sure the 2018 Nets pick is only available for a white whale trade.
 

Imbricus

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 26, 2017
4,438
If it really is Tatum or Jackson, and Danny doesn't have a huge preference, he has to try to trade down to # 5 because one of those guys will be there.
Yeah, there's a scenario where trading down to #5 makes sense. Imagine this: You like four guys, Tatum, Jackson, Fultz, Ball. Then you work out Isaacs and you think: hey, he's pretty close to #4. So he becomes your #5 guy. Meanwhile there are published rumors that Sacramento wants to trade the #5 and #10 for #3. Suppose that's true. You could directly do the #1 for #5 and #10 and parts, but suppose Sacramento doesn't have the parts you want or isn't willing to let them go. You could trade the #1 for the #3, get the picks, then flip the #3 for the #5 and #10. If you planned to do this, you'd want to pull the trigger on that deal the weekend before the draft -- that gives you time to bring in players that you might want to take at #10 -- or even #5.
 

bowiac

Caveat: I know nothing about what I speak
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
12,943
New York, NY
Most people weren't expecting that. That's a completely ridiculous haul for moving up 2 slots.
If you're trying to get an actual NBA star (i.e., a top 15 player), it's not a ridiculous haul, no.

Take a look at the drafts in the last 15 years, and ask yourself what percent of the guys taken 1st overall turned into stars, and what percent of guys taken 2nd through 5th turned into stars. I just did this last night with every draft since LeBron, and I found you were approximately 10 times more likely to get a star drafting 1st (~60% vs. 6%), but you can take a look yourself. The results are dramatic.

Now, getting a star is a high bar for success, but given where the Celtics are, I think that's pretty much what they should be looking at.
 

Koufax

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
5,798
Danny said exactly that a couple of weeks ago when he said we have plenty of good players - we need great players. He's aware of all of these factors. It seems inescapable that he's just not sold on Fulz.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
31,005
Is 3 for 5/10 a real thing or just SoSH speculation? I agree that we are not likely to make that Lakers 2018/Kings 2019 pick so I'm sure Ainge has a pretty good sense of its value on the trade market. My ultimate goal is that Ainge is able to keep #3 while still landing another top guy with the Lakers/Kings and Memphis picks along with some combination of Crowder/Bradley/Smart/Rozier. I'm sure the 2018 Nets pick is only available for a white whale trade.
3 for 5 and 10 was floated a bunch when PHI had the pick on the basis of none of the guys at 3 being a great fit for PHI's roster.

I think it makes little sense for Boston unless they are then trading one or both of those picks, we don't have the roster spaces or rotation playing time to add 2 top 10 picks (plus Zizic) and it makes getting cap room for a Hayward or Griffin harder.
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
18,641
Pittsburgh, PA
Also, with all the chatter about the Lakers maybe thinking twice about Ball, I just think it's instructive that all the hype has for months insisted that Fultz and Ball are the no-doubt top two guys in the draft who you have to take if you get the chance. Meanwhile, there's a good chance that the teams with the actual original top two picks took or will take a good look and said "eh, no thanks, we'll go in a different direction." That doesn't mean they're right, necessarily, and my bet is the Lakers do end up taking Ball, but it should raise a few eyebrows.
The Lakers better take Ball, because it is absolutely tailor-made for some people who are looking for reasons to despise the Lakers now that Kobe and Phil Jackson are gone. I need some fuel for my hate. They're kinda Just Another Team right now, history aside, but that'll all change if it becomes the Ball Family Show down there. (and that alone might dissuade Lebron from signing - but for me, this is mostly about the hate)

Ainge doesn't need the 3rd pick in is hands to ask around and see what he could get for it. The whole league knows he might end up with the 3rd pick on draft night.
Why on earth would he get honest, realistic answers to that question when he doesn't yet hold the 3rd pick? Other GMs are neither stupid nor robots who will fully answer any question put to them. Until Ainge actually owns #3, the cost of giving up information (i.e., what you value and how much) is too high to justify the mere potential of a couple things happening that might result in that scenario becoming relevant.
 
Last edited:

Big John

lurker
Dec 9, 2016
2,086
If either Ainge or Stevens really thought that Fultz was going to be a superstar, they would not have traded the pick. In my view, Fultz will be challenged defensively in the NBA. If drafted, he certainly was not going to play more than 15-20 minutes in his first year, since you could never pair him with IT.

I'm guessing that 90% of the Boston media types are hoping that the Lakers take Jackson and that the Celtics draft Ball. LaVar Ball will be the gift that keeps on giving for the Boston talk show hosts.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
7,011
If you're trying to get an actual NBA star (i.e., a top 15 player), it's not a ridiculous haul, no.

Take a look at the drafts in the last 15 years, and ask yourself what percent of the guys taken 1st overall turned into stars, and what percent of guys taken 2nd through 5th turned into stars. I just did this last night with every draft since LeBron, and I found you were approximately 10 times more likely to get a star drafting 1st (~60% vs. 6%), but you can take a look yourself. The results are dramatic.

Now, getting a star is a high bar for success, but given where the Celtics are, I think that's pretty much what they should be looking at.
That info might be useful in evaluating say, the value of the 1st pick vs the 3rd pick in a draft 5 years from now, but by all accounts this particular draft is much deeper at the top than average. The only thing that matters now is the chance of Fultz being a star vs. Jackson (or Tatum), and I don't think anyone would say it's a 10-fold difference. If the difference is marginal (and that's a big if), this trade is robbery. It's a pick with better than 50% chance of top 10 for free.
 
Last edited:

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
44,767
3 for 5 and 10 was floated a bunch when PHI had the pick on the basis of none of the guys at 3 being a great fit for PHI's roster.

I think it makes little sense for Boston unless they are then trading one or both of those picks, we don't have the roster spaces or rotation playing time to add 2 top 10 picks (plus Zizic) and it makes getting cap room for a Hayward or Griffin harder.
Agreed on the Boston angle. My guess is Danny only makes a 3 for 5/10 trade (if it's even available) if that is what his trade partner wants. A team like Chicago may prefer 5/10 to 3 and it may make it more likely that Ainge could pocket the Lakers/Kings pick in a potential trade for a vet like Butler.

We'll have to see what LA does at #2. Ainge may be indifferent between Jackson/Tatum but other teams like Chicago may have a stronger preference for one or the other. I'm sure Ainge has these scenarios worked out but it'll be fascinating to see how this unfolds.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
28,163
Danny said exactly that a couple of weeks ago when he said we have plenty of good players - we need great players. He's aware of all of these factors. It seems inescapable that he's just not sold on Fulz.
Or, to put it another way, he has Fultz being a star but not a great player.
 

slamminsammya

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
7,591
San Francisco
I was secretly very concerned about Fultz turning into Deangelo Russell. Happy we won't be taking him first. But I am going to be pissed if we take Josh Jackson.
 

Remagellan

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I'm a Sixers fan and I'm not super happy about this deal because I think we need quantity as much as quality. But I will say from your side, if you guys are not packaging picks for Butler or George (and I much prefer Butler), I don't know what Ainge is doing. You guys aren't close to contention, you're in contention. At this point, Ainge should be thinking more about using his draft assets to land a superstar, rather than hoping to draft guys who may or may not turn into one in a few years.
 

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts way less than 18% useful shit
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2010
13,502
I'm slowly talking myself into this and walking off the ledge. I suppose, like anything else, we should let these chips falls before judgement.

I will say, however, that my concern is Ainge gets stuck in limbo. I distinctly recall Ainge complaining that he couldn't find a partner to dance at the last draft, as well as at some trade deadlines. All this action is fine, but if we aren't able to actually construct a plan because we can't make a deal after this one, it'll be very frustrating.

I guess if I had a hope, this would be an Allen/KG thing. Hiweird isn't confident about coming here, but if he sees Butler on the roster, he becomes much more willing.

To walk out of the 2017 #1 pick with Helloword, Butler, and still keep BKN'S 2018 pick (trading #3 and LA pick for Butler)...well, that still gives us something to play for now and look forward to in the future.
 

cumicon

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2007
86
Why on earth would he get honest, realistic answers to that question when he doesn't yet hold the 3rd pick? Other GMs are neither stupid nor robots who will fully answer any question put to them. Until Ainge actually owns #3, the cost of giving up information (i.e., what you value and how much) is too high to justify the mere potential of a couple things happening that might result in that scenario becoming relevant.
He would get an honest answer because those teams would actually want the #3 pick, and they know there is a good chance he will have it come draft night. I fail to see how other GMs have anything to lose telling Ainge what they would give up for the #3 pick if he were to acquire it.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
28,163
I'm a Sixers fan and I'm not super happy about this deal because I think we need quantity as much as quality. But I will say from your side, if you guys are not packaging picks for Butler or George (and I much prefer Butler), I don't know what Ainge is doing. You guys aren't close to contention, you're in contention. At this point, Ainge should be thinking more about using his draft assets to land a superstar, rather than hoping to draft guys who may or may not turn into one in a few years.
No one is talking about PHI here (understandably) but there's a big downside for PHI if they miss out on the upper tier of next year's draft and they find out (i) Fultz loses some of his value without the ball in his hands and (ii) Simmons loses a good bit of his without the ball in his hands.

Seems like Issac and Ntilikina solve more problems for PHI than Fultz does but that's more of a WAG than analysis.