Come one man. Lakers are expected to win 35+ games. The chances the pick is even top 5 isn't very good--top pick? Assuming they don't go completely in the tank has gotta be 5%.
The Plan For the #1, er, #3 Overall Pick?
- Thread starter pdaj
- Start date
But in Red's scenario, it wouldn't be a case wherein Fultz > Fox/Smith, it would be what is Fultz in relation to Fox/Smith, Collins and the LAL/SAC pick
Well, even if the Lakers have the worst record in the league their odds are only 25%-- and in that case the odds are 75% that the pick will be 2-4, which means the Celtics get it.
If the Lakers are better than that, their odds of getting #1 go way down. Let's say that the Lakers are 4th worst, a plausible outcome since they were 3rd worst last year. In that case their odds for #1 are 11.9% and the odds for 2 through 5 are a combined 70.6%. I'll take those odds too.
What would really suck is if the Lakers pick is either 1 or 6 and the Kings pick ends up being 21st. If the Lakers pick is 1st next year, does it really matter if the Kings pick ends up being in the top 3? Is it a bad trade if we end up with the 3rd this year and in 2019 if the Lakers end up with the 1st in 2018? Value is value.
Curious if the low-end protection (6-30) allows for discretion on the Cs part to take the Lakers pick rather than wait until 2019, if, say, it winds up #6 and the Kings appear to be on the upswing.
I edited my post to get my point across better. That scenario is pretty much worse case. I don't think the Lakers winning the lottery next year makes this a bad trade if the Kings pick ends up being top 5.
To continue this since I've got all the salaries loaded... I'm trying to figure out how plausible adding Butler + Hayward really is, given the CBS speculation etc. It seems like there's a logistical cap issue. I.e.,
(1) you can't trade for butler pre-FA, because there's probably no way to get under the cap enough for a max deal to Hayward once you've added Butler's 18m.
(2) if you sign Hayward first, that assumes you've renounced Olynyk, Zeller, Young, which gets you to 27m free. Let's assume you can do something to free up that last 2-3m without moving AB/Crowder. Now you've signed Hayward and are right at the cap. To deal for Butler, you're going to have to make salaries match since he'll put them over. Since you've already renounced Zeller & Olynyk to make room for Hayward, it become a little tricky to match. You basically HAVE to include AB + Crowder just to make the salaries match (it passes the NBA trade machine, so I'm assuming that's enough). Since this has to happen after FA, I don't think Jerebko's salary can help, but I could be wrong).
So, i believe this can work by:
- renouncing Zeller, Olynyk, Young, and something (Mickey & D. Jackson? stashing Yabu again?) to make space to sign Hayward
- dealing for Butler and including AB + Crowder
Obviously you need actual value to CHI too, so maybe that LAL/SAC pick plus the BOS 2018 pick or something other future asset. I'm not sure how much more, but it will be in the future, so doesn't really affect the calculations here. The result would be a team just modestly over cap (~104m) with:
IT/Smart
Butler/Rozier
Hayward/Brown
#3/Yabu
Horford/Zizc
Does this seem right, at least as how it would have to happen if this is the plan?
I mentioned this last night but it is almost certainly due to a deal for the 3rd pick already being in place with it most likely being for Butler. If we were making a trade for a specific player it wouldn't make sense to do a deal prior to the draft without knowing the Lakers intentions however if it is for an impact player the Bulls would want this done sooner to plan their strategy for draft night. We aren't drafting at 3 for the player to be on the Celtics I'm pretty certain about this.
According to who? They won 26 last year. Unless they trade for Paul George, I'll take the under on 35.
That includes a 5 game winning streak to close out the year against teams who mostly already mailed it in for the season.
I agree it had nothing to do with it. I was just pointing out that it would have been great (obviously) if Danny could have got them to include #1-#5 instead of #2-#5.
Philly seemed desperate for Fultz. It would have been nice to not even give Philly the chance to keep the first pick. The Celts are giving up the #1; they shouldn't have left Philly a scenario where they can get #1 in one of the picks in the deal.
The Lakers were intentionally tanking for most of the season, weren't they?
The Kings pick being decent has good odds.
With a strong top of draft next year doesn't it behoove the Lakers to tank again? Is Danny betting on that?
Perhaps I'm misunderstanding, but it doesn't behoove LA to tank next year, because they don't have a pick.
They tanked hard last year. They have no incentive for that this year.
And even if they have the worst record, the chances of the #1 pick are 25%.
My only point is, the chances of 2-5 are much better than #1.
This could also set them up to trade for the #1 pick next year if Danny really, really wants someone from the 2018 draft. If the Nets pick ends up being #3 and the Lakers pick is #5, that should be more than enough to trade into the 1 spot. Of course that would get the board in a huge rage although that would be exactly the return we traded Fultz for, a #3 and a #5. Granted if we knew that pick would be a top 5 pick, I think everyone likes the trade more.
We discussed a lot of this in the terrible Lakers thread. They are bad. They got worse after they traded Lou Williams, who was their best player. He's not coming back. They'll play Deng more this year if they can, but the guy just doesn't really play full seasons. I'm going to go ahead and say Corey Brewer being healthy isn't a huge difference maker.
But, they can still sign some guys in FA, etc. so there is a wide window of outcomes for them. Right now, current roster plus the #2 this year I'd put the over/under at 28 wins. Getting to 35 the quickest path is probably big growth from Russell, Zubac, and Ingram.
But, they can still sign some guys in FA, etc. so there is a wide window of outcomes for them. Right now, current roster plus the #2 this year I'd put the over/under at 28 wins. Getting to 35 the quickest path is probably big growth from Russell, Zubac, and Ingram.
Problem is that the Lakers and Pacers could very well consummate a trade of George to LA, which would make the LA pick less likely to land 2-5, which is probably exactly why DA put the Sacramento pick in there as protection.
Oh, not saying it's likely - but that would be an absolute nightmare scenario.
The Lakers aren't winning this year so why would they trade assets for Paul George when they can just sign him as FA after the season?
I'm still pretty shocked. This came out of nowhere. There was no chatter about this and then boom, it happened.
On the face of it, it feels like they could have got a better deal with fewer conditional picks for the very coveted #1 but we don't know if that's the case. Moving off of a point guard seems to point in the direction of going all in on IT unless of course they draft a PG anyway. Or move away from IT if his hip isn't better. We don't know that either. We also don't know if another move or series of moves is coming. Those moves may be in flux anyway. We may never know about those conditions either.
The only thing we do know for sure is that Danny moved off of Fultz. Who, on the face of it, seems to be the ideal player to have in the current era of three's and spacing and that many fans were all set to embrace. In short, ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.
On the face of it, it feels like they could have got a better deal with fewer conditional picks for the very coveted #1 but we don't know if that's the case. Moving off of a point guard seems to point in the direction of going all in on IT unless of course they draft a PG anyway. Or move away from IT if his hip isn't better. We don't know that either. We also don't know if another move or series of moves is coming. Those moves may be in flux anyway. We may never know about those conditions either.
The only thing we do know for sure is that Danny moved off of Fultz. Who, on the face of it, seems to be the ideal player to have in the current era of three's and spacing and that many fans were all set to embrace. In short, ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.
While I'm sympathetic to the idea of zig when others zag the problem with this is that in addition to being the best offensive team(s) in the NBA the W's (and also the Cavs when they try) are (two of) the best defensive team(s) in the NBA as well. Nobody is beating the W's by excelling on one side of the ball and being average on the other. You need to excel on both for the foreseeable future.
If the NBA were to pull the one & done rule this summer that 2018 draft would be a monster with Williamson and Marv Bagley joining Ayton, Doncic, and Porter as tier 1 one guys.
They will have difficulty signing decent veteran free agents to multi-year deals while still retaining enough cap space to pay Paul George the max.
They will sink or swim with the youngsters.
I'm guessing that Ainge knew this was coming.
But if the Lakers pick is at six then Philly will add to their core.
If that happens I can't wait to hear claims that Danny had inside info of this happening. I doubt it happens so fast though.
Adding two stars should make it less likely they max IT, not more. Butler/George + Hayward is plenty of scoring, and more matchup-immune. At that point a 3 pt shooter with credible ball-handling and defense has more value. Basically, a Smart who can shoot 35%.
The list of teams you can trade with to move down while still landing an all-star player in the draft is very small. The Sixers had a lot of leverage if the Celtics really wanted to move down.
I don't have a problem with the idea of a trade down, or even of the return (even if it seems most likely that the bonus will be the 6th or 7th pick in 2019.) If their scouts truly believe that Tatum, Isaac and/or Fox will be just as good as Fultz then adding another lottery pick to move down is an OK move.
Wouldn't they be able to offer George an extra year if they acquire him this summer? They'd also be getting a star in his prime a year earlier, which has value for such a young team, and they wouldn't have to worry about clearing cap next summer. If they go Ball as rumored, Clarkson becomes expendable. And Randle is a pretty meh player.
They benched guys for the last 20% of the season. This year they have no incentive.
Either way, it doesn't matter much. No matter where they finish the odds are more likely they get 2-5 than #1
I find this hard to believe. If Ainge were to trade for Butler before free agency, it's going to be very difficult to clear the cap space needed to sign Hayward.
Pretty sure they can't. And where he didn't make an All NBA team, he isn't super max so all teams can pretty much sign him to the same deal. I'm also pretty sure their cap situation is going to be fine next summer unless they sign guys. Brewer, Young and Black will be gone, Clarkson could easily be moved. I responded in the other thread that the Lakers probably would trade Randle and Clarkson for him but how would the Pacers sell that to their fan base?
I think it's an easy sell. Do you want Randle/Clarkson or nothing? Sounds like there's a zero percent chance he re-signs. And as we've seen with these situations, the team losing the star almost never gets fair value.
Certainly not a lock that a trade happens but the pieces align if this is the route the Lakers want to go.
It could, but how would you envision that playing out? If the Kings pick isn't in the top-10, then we receive...? Isn't that the last of the Sixers high end assets since they're likely going to be quite good for a pretty long time?
If the pick is protected from the back end, what would convey if it fell below the unprotected range? Sixers picks would be useless. Based on this, their Thunder pick is 1-20.
(Edit: Better said right above this post, and two minutes earlier.)
Well, it's hard to create parameters that benefit the Celtics on that pick. What kind of reverse protections can you put in place there realistically?
I'm back to being in full on denial. I was never a "In Danny We Trust" guy, but this kind of deal seems very unlike him. This is the same guy that offered four first rounders for Justise Winslow.
I think nothing might be a better option. I guess you could flip Randle for a 1st round pick or hope he develops a 3 point shot but he's terrible beyond 16 feet as it is. He's really not that great beyond 3 feet. He doesn't turn 23 until November and he does rebound and pass the ball well so I guess it's better than nothing. Clarkson is dime a dozen.
With whats been reported, I wouldn't be surprised to find out both picks have 2-5 protection and we own both of them. If they both fall in the 2-5 range, we get both. If they don't convey, we get nothing. Who knows what to believe at this point. The parameters keep changing. At this rate, we will find out players are actually involved too. I don't see how the Kings pick can really even have protection unless you are ok with a 2021 76ers first round pick that has been thrown around in this deal. Ugh.
It might just be a future Sixers' pick, which is better than top 3 protected or something.
I just don't think Fultz is that much of a better prospect than the next 3 players. Others here seem to clearly disagree. They also already have a Fultz on the roster and I can see them possibly going with IT the next 5 years and looking to build up at other positions. It's not like Fultz is Bradley on defense.
Randle's passing alone makes him a nice piece. That's a skillset from a big which goes a long way. He's a bit older, but he's actually developed better than I expected so far.
I think if the Lakers can get George without giving up Russell or Ingram, they'd go for it. Yeah, they can get him for free, but it's nice to avoid the ignominy the Nets are going through now by losing #1 overall. If they can add George and turn into a 38 win team or something, there will be a lot less agita about that pick situation.
I think if the Lakers can get George without giving up Russell or Ingram, they'd go for it. Yeah, they can get him for free, but it's nice to avoid the ignominy the Nets are going through now by losing #1 overall. If they can add George and turn into a 38 win team or something, there will be a lot less agita about that pick situation.