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

[BigSoxFan]

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.

I guess I like Clarkson more than you do. A 15ppg scorer at age 23/24 is pretty solid and he shoots well from the line. Needs to get better from 3pt land but he's signed to a reasonable deal and Teague is a FA this summer and Ellis is getting old and is a FA next summer if he opts out. Clarkson would at least give them a starting quality guard. Randle has his warts but, as you mentioned, he rebounds well, shoots a respectable % from the line, and has become a better passer. Neither player offers all-star ceiling but both should play in this league for a decade or longer.

The argument against is that both players help you stay mediocre without offering any kind of upside for more so you're basically forced to find another Paul George surprise in order to break out of that cycle.

 

[smastroyin]

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.

If there is no chance George stays in Indiana, then making a trade seems to make less sense from the perspective of the Lakers.

Indeed, what the Lakers would be trading for is the edge in signing George. If there is no chance George wants to go anywhere else, they are simply giving up assets for the right to pay him more and for longer.

Now, if there's a chance he'll go to the Clippers instead, say, then sure, it's worth it to be able to offer him more. But if there's a chance he'll go other places, then are there other suitors who can offer the Pacers more than the Lakers?

You see what I'm saying - you're making the assumption that George to LAL is a foregone conclusion...and therefore Indiana should get whatever they can from LAL. But if George to LAL is a foregone conclusion, what's the motivation from LAL side?

 

[JCizzle]

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.

I don't think it's fair to say we already have a Fultz. Dude is years younger than anyone we have, a 6'4 guard with a 6'11 wingspan that can get to the rim and shoot. Nobody on our roster is like that. You hope he turns into IT offensively of course, but he will never be the same kind of liability on the other end simply due to his size.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

I guess I like Clarkson more than you do. A 15ppg scorer at age 23/24 is pretty solid and he shoots well from the line. Needs to get better from 3pt land but he's signed to a reasonable deal and Teague is a FA this summer and Ellis is getting old and is a FA next summer if he opts out. Clarkson would at least give them a starting quality guard. Randle has his warts but, as you mentioned, he rebounds well, shoots a respectable % from the line, and has become a better passer. Neither player offers all-star ceiling but both should play in this league for a decade or longer.

The argument against is that both players help you stay mediocre without offering any kind of upside for more so you're basically forced to find another Paul George surprise in order to break out of that cycle.

Clarkson isn't really a PG though. He averaged over 32 minutes in 2015-16 and averaged 2.4 assists. Last year he was right under 30 minutes and averaged 2.6. He's not really a Teague replacement. Maybe an Ellis replacement but Ellis isn't really someone you worry about replacing. The Pacers are going to suck without Paul George regardless of who they get back. I don't see Randle and Clarkson leading the Pacers to much more than 30 wins unless Myles Turner emerges. Clarkson is a 3 and D guy who doesn't do either that well.

 

[RedOctober3829]

If a contender has the assets for Paul George, they shouldn't be deterred by the Lakers request. Hearing he can be sold on a winner

 

[Cesar Crespo]

All things equal, I'd much rather have George than Butler.

 

[BigSoxFan]

If there is no chance George stays in Indiana, then making a trade seems to make less sense from the perspective of the Lakers.

Indeed, what the Lakers would be trading for is the edge in signing George. If there is no chance George wants to go anywhere else, they are simply giving up assets for the right to pay him more and for longer.

Now, if there's a chance he'll go to the Clippers instead, say, then sure, it's worth it to be able to offer him more. But if there's a chance he'll go other places, then are there other suitors who can offer the Pacers more than the Lakers?

You see what I'm saying - you're making the assumption that George to LAL is a foregone conclusion...and therefore Indiana should get whatever they can from LAL. But if George to LAL is a foregone conclusion, what's the motivation from LAL side?

What if my assumption that George to LA is wrong? There's LA's motivation right there - to pre-empt someone else. He may not be a lock to go to LA but he's certainly a near lock to leave Indiana given their inability to improve their team and the rumblings out there. Now we're seeing more rumblings in this thread just now that George may be open to other teams so there could be some risk to LA waiting it out. Of course, Indiana could just flatly refuse and keep him for a lame duck year.

There's so much fluidity and unknown that it's hard to know what's real. But if George is available and not 100% sold to LA, I'm sure Danny will be testing the waters.

 

[Marbleheader]

Let's not clutter this already cluttered thread with too much Lakers stuff unless it particularly pertains to this pick. It's hard enough to follow. If you want to start a Lakers thread, go ahead.

 

[lovegtm]

Let's not clutter this already cluttered thread with too much Lakers stuff unless it particularly pertains to this pick. It's hard enough to follow. If you want to start a Lakers thread, go ahead.

Probably should happen anyway, given that we'll be following their 2018 pick as closely as the Nets' (assuming it's not included in a deal before then).

 

[HomeRunBaker]

If there is no chance George stays in Indiana, then making a trade seems to make less sense from the perspective of the Lakers.

Indeed, what the Lakers would be trading for is the edge in signing George. If there is no chance George wants to go anywhere else, they are simply giving up assets for the right to pay him more and for longer.

Now, if there's a chance he'll go to the Clippers instead, say, then sure, it's worth it to be able to offer him more. But if there's a chance he'll go other places, then are there other suitors who can offer the Pacers more than the Lakers?

You see what I'm saying - you're making the assumption that George to LAL is a foregone conclusion...and therefore Indiana should get whatever they can from LAL. But if George to LAL is a foregone conclusion, what's the motivation from LAL side?

I mentioned this in another thread but George coming out and essentially forcing a trade this summer (his agent also represents D'Angelo Russell and Julius Randle) allows the Lakers to use their cap space next summer on LeBron as George can then be extended with his Bird Rights. There is a TON of incentive for the Lakers to trade for George right now.....and that is one LeBron.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

Probably should happen anyway, given that we'll be following their 2018 pick as closely as the Nets' (assuming it's not included in a deal before then).

There already is a Laker thread.

 

[smastroyin]

George won't have real Bird rights, though, he'll have the one where he can get a max of 120% of his current salary. That means he can sign for about $23 million. Is he gonna leave $7 million a year on the table just to play in LA? And his agent is going to force a trade to make that happen?

 

[DJnVa]

I think we need to change the thread title.

 

[E5 Yaz]

I think we need to change the thread title.

Well, I guess theoretically we don't know the plan yet ... since the trade is unannounced

 

[DJnVa]

Well, I guess theoretically we don't know the plan yet ... since the trade is unannounced

Details, details, details.

 

[LondonSox]

Bottom line I think it's a pretty fair trade.
What we know right now is basically it's the sac unprotected Kings 2019 pick and in addition potential to replace that with the lakers if it is 2-5

Or if the lakers pick is likely to beat the Kings pick you get it in 2018.
I would wager the sticking point was the number 1 protection.
But worst case you get the Kings pick completely unprotected. They suck and that's a great chip.
I don't agree with the move but given ainges view the price seems fair. Not a rip off either way.
Sixers fans are happy as they lock in their big 3 plus saric and Covington now and still have 40+ million of cap space and minimal NEEDS. So they can fill out in many ways.
The Celtics risk is significant. If sixers were to get 1 next year and somehow the Kings be unlucky in the lottery or lucky in development (two good players may join them and hield and wcs showed more than I expected.
But these are long shots.
The lakers suck I think it's very likely you get a pick like 3 and two 3s for a 1 is ok. But not a slam dunk.
I'm not complete sold on anyone but doncic next year at this point.
I think fultz is a great fit for the sixers and I was willing to overpay. The fact they didn't is great.
I am excited for the sixers.
Fultz, tlc, Covington, Simmons and embiid
With bayless, saric, McConnell, Holmes, stauskis and whatever off the bench is finally looking really good.
I take a run at kcp as then you have ridiculous switching ability all over 6'5" and long wingspans and even embiid can switch to the perimeter

Injuries and development as the risks short and long term. But the talent and youth is extreme I am EXCITED!!

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?

No I don't think so.

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.

It's a real rumour but how legit it very unclear.

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.

You are nuts.
The sixers have a near full roster and needed a point guard to fit with the core. This is perfect.

There are reasonable people that think Lonzo is the best player in the draft, and there are also people that think the Lakers want Pacey over Lonzo at two. I get that people don't like the Ball family, but he has elite vision and can shoot. What if that's DA's ultimate goal?

There are reasonable people who rank Lonzo in the later lottery. More than who rate him above fultz.
I'll admit my research on fultz is less as I didn't think there was a chance. So maybe I'd discover warts
But I dislike Johnson. As I have said before. Ball I like but I think he is miscast as a primary initiator and if he isn't I don't see how he is a top pick. Tatum is good but a good at everyone no elite skills and a 4 for max value.
Smith is number 2 in this draft for my big board.

How exactly did the Lakers tank, in a way that won't be be case this year?

How did they tank? They benched healthy players and traded away useful pieces and late on benched even Ingram and Russell when they played well

The talk about fultz not being a true 1 is bullshit.
This is a solid draft and he's a clear number 1. More clear in fact that Simmons last year in a shit draft.
Multiple people have had discussions on where fultz sits vs recent number 1s and everything I have read says he is in the non Davis division.
I think porter and ayton have major questions. Doncic is excellent though

 

[DJnVa]

Tatum draft profile: https://sports.yahoo.com/2017-nba-draft-prospect-profiles-115541116.html

Tatum’s offensive repertoire is as polished as any one-and-done you’ll see. His bread-and-butter is his jab series — his footwork, whether facing up or playing with his back to the basket, is impeccable — but he has the entire package offensively: crossovers, step-backs, turnaround jumpers, fadeaways, jump hooks, in-and-outs, rip-throughs and he even pulls out the Dirk Nowitzki one-foot fallaway jumpers from time-to-time.

Tatum has a reputation for having a tremendous work ethic, and this is precisely the kind of issue that gets fixed with reps. I’m not concerned about his ability to make shots in the NBA, including from the NBA three-point line. He’ll get there in time.

Article gives NBA comparisons as Carmelo and Paul Pierce.

 

[BannedbyNYYFans.com]

Fuck it. In Danny I trust. I'm getting excited about this.

I've gone back and forth but in the end, that's where I'm coming down.

 

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

Himmelsbach confirms that Cs brass simply did not see that big of a gap between Fultz and Jackson, Ball, and Tatum. https://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/celtics/2017/06/18/celtics-did-their-homework-before-agreeing-deal-top-pick/8Srn9AJOOxML8NvKDgcDYK/story.html

I hope they are correct about this.

Edit: Jeff Goodman concurs here: http://www.weei.com/blogs/ty-anderson/espns-jeff-goodman-jayson-tatum-fit-celtics. Quote: "I’ve seen these kids play more than anybody and i can’t say with any conviction that Fultz is gonna be a better NBA player than whether it’s Josh Jackson, Jayson Tatum, or Lonzo Ball," Goodman continued of the 2017 draft class. "To me, you can throw almost these four in a hat. I would take Markelle Fultz at No. 1. I think he will be the best pro of the four, but I’m not sure of it any means, and neither was Danny Ainge and neither are a ton of NBA guys."

 

[djbayko]

I think he was referring to the Paul George show.

I've gone back and forth but in the end, that's where I'm coming down.

Some posters here are more like

 

[ColonelMustard]

I agree with LondonSox that Fultz is a clear number one and I am concerned that this he is generational talent we will regret passing on.

HOWEVER Ainge & other Celtic evaluators did not think so or at least thought the talent gap between the top 4 is smaller than our analysis. That's it. We can wring our hands together but that's it.

Tatum draft profile: https://sports.yahoo.com/2017-nba-draft-prospect-profiles-115541116.html

Article gives NBA comparisons as Carmelo and Paul Pierce.

It's interesting to think about who the Celtics are thinking about at 3. With my amateur eyes, Tatum looks incredibly fluid, fast and strong. However the report DrewDawg posted does not seem to agree about his athleticism and lists his weight as a concern. If he puts on 15 to 20 pounds does he still have he same fluidity and athleticism? I will say that his moves to basket are pretty and that's normally with 4 defenders on him. I'm excited and talking myself into Tatum.

An interesting question arises if the Lakers pass on Ball (as reported they most likely will not). Ball has a pretty stroke from very deep. He profiles as a PG but has the height and weight to be a SG.

Jackson is putrid to watch and simply uses his athleticism.

 

[Jeff Van GULLY]

What if this move makes the 6ers players in free agency this year?

Could be an unintended consequence: Hayward picks Philly over Boston. They have an attractive core and he would fit in very well with the pieces they have.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

I know form counts but Fultz was 52-126, .413 from 3 and 109/168 .649 from the FT line. Jackson was 34-90 .378 and 98-173 .566. It's amazing how confident people are that Fultz will be able to shoot the 3 but not Jackson. Neither have a sample size and both were bad from the line. Granted Jackson was significantly worse. I'm not sure how I feel about the trade yet but I don't get why people just brush off Fultz FT shooting.

 

[Ed Hillel]

I'm coming around more to the thought Tatum's the pick if it's not getting traded. If Jackson was really his guy, I don't believe Danny would have risked the Lakers taking him. Unless Magic's playing it close to the vest, there hasn't been much thought of the Lakers pulling that trigger. Tatum does remind me a lot of Pierce, but obviously we'd all be thrilled if he ever got near that (if we draft him).

 

[RedOctober3829]

What if this move makes the 6ers players in free agency this year?

Could be an unintended consequence: Hayward picks Philly over Boston. They have an attractive core and he would fit in very well with the pieces they have.

I think JJ Redick makes more sense for Philly.

 

[BigSoxFan]

What if this move makes the 6ers players in free agency this year?

Could be an unintended consequence: Hayward picks Philly over Boston. They have an attractive core and he would fit in very well with the pieces they have.

I'm not really concerned about this. They have a great young core but it's still incredibly young. Celtics are built to win now, have a better coach, a better organization, and more assets to build with.

I do think Philly is going to land 1 or 2 second tier FAs.

 

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

I agree with LondonSox that Fultz is a clear number one and I am concerned that this he is generational talent we will regret passing on.

HOWEVER Ainge & other Celtic evaluators did not think so or at least thought the talent gap between the top 4 is smaller than our analysis. That's it. We can wring our hands together but that's it.
.

I would be curious what makes you think a guy Fultz's size and with his skill set makes him a generational talent. I don't necessarily disagree but has been posted up thread multiple times, the true generational talents in the NBA tend to be wings like LeBron, Durant and Leonard. Note some people would include Harden but I think he is, while an amazing player, not a true generational talent.

 

[sonofgodcf]

I'm wondering if Danny goes really big/ballsy for someone completely off the radar. Could he facilitate George to CLE and end up with Irving? Maybe something like Bradley and #3 go out, and we add Irving and Hayward? We'd improve this year and have a core/picks young enough to compete post CLE/GS runs.

Of course, I'm an idiot and don't know if this is even possible (or a good idea). But George and Butler don't make sense to me if it means we need to move the majority of our future picks.

 

[Green Monster]

So how many "Generational Players" have there been this generation?

 

[ColonelMustard]

I would be curious what makes you think a guy Fultz's size and with his skill set makes him a generational talent. I don't necessarily disagree but has been posted up thread multiple times, the true generational talents in the NBA tend to be wings like LeBron, Durant and Leonard. Note some people would include Harden but I think he is, while an amazing player, not a true generational talent.

Just poor phrasing on my part. I meant consensus number one, multiple all-star nods. There are very few generational PGs and right now only Magic or Paul come to mind. Rose if he had stayed healthy perhaps could have been on that level with his ridiculous explosiveness.

Speaking of explosiveness the more I watch Tatum the more impressed I am. He's just so smooth he could avoid some of the injury risk which comes with explosive athleticism. He has incredible moves to get to the basket that will translate well in the NBA if he packs on some size and he has the ability to score on all levels.

I know form counts but Fultz was 52-126, .413 from 3 and 109/168 .649 from the FT line. Jackson was 34-90 .378 and 98-173 .566. It's amazing how confident people are that Fultz will be able to shoot the 3 but not Jackson. Neither have a sample size and both were bad from the line. Granted Jackson was significantly worse. I'm not sure how I feel about the trade yet but I don't get why people just brush off Fultz FT shooting.

Great point. Tatum FT% is at 84.9 and indicates he will shoot well at the NBA level.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

So how many "Generational Players" have there been this generation?

That answer will be different for everyone. Some would include Cousins, Towns, Jokic, Greek Freak, Porzingis and other guys who haven't really won anything yet. It also depends on how long you think a generation is.

 

[Jed Zeppelin]

I'm not really concerned about this. They have a great young core but it's still incredibly young. Celtics are built to win now, have a better coach, a better organization, and more assets to build with.

I do think Philly is going to land 1 or 2 second tier FAs.

Would be great if they were competing with Brooklyn for some of the same guys.

They won't be in play for any top guys. Not for another season at least. Embiid needs to prove he isn't made of shattered glass being held together by a grade school glue stick before anybody would stake their professional future on playing there.

 

[bosockboy]

So how many "Generational Players" have there been this generation?

LeBron and KD since Jordan hung it up. Curry from a shooting perspective. Davis possibly. Not many.

 

[Hagios]

LeBron and KD since Jordan hung it up. Curry from a shooting perspective. Davis possibly. Not many.

If we're going from when Jordan hung it up, then Shaq too. Possibly Kobe.

I agree with the general sentiment is that the buzz on Fultz is "clear #1" but not "generational talent". How powerful are the Celtics owners? How well connected are they to Silver? If one and done is ending next year or the year after, then trading down absolutely makes sense.

 

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

Article gives NBA comparisons as Carmelo and Paul Pierce.

Rumour (internet) has it that Cs see Tatum as PP 2.0. Though it would be interesting if Cs crossed everyone ip and took Isaac.

I know form counts but Fultz was 52-126, .413 from 3 and 109/168 .649 from the FT line. Jackson was 34-90 .378 and 98-173 .566. It's amazing how confident people are that Fultz will be able to shoot the 3 but not Jackson. Neither have a sample size and both were bad from the line. Granted Jackson was significantly worse. I'm not sure how I feel about the trade yet but I don't get why people just brush off Fultz FT shooting.

Form counts. Jackson is going to have to redo his shot. Like Marcus Smart.

 

[ehaz]

Great point. Tatum FT% is at 84.9 and indicates he will shoot well at the NBA level.

FWIW (small sample size and all, so maybe not all that much) that FT% is better than what George, Pierce, Thompson, Harden, and CP3 did in their NCAA careers.

 

[bowiac]

I know form counts but Fultz was 52-126, .413 from 3 and 109/168 .649 from the FT line. Jackson was 34-90 .378 and 98-173 .566. It's amazing how confident people are that Fultz will be able to shoot the 3 but not Jackson. Neither have a sample size and both were bad from the line. Granted Jackson was significantly worse. I'm not sure how I feel about the trade yet but I don't get why people just brush off Fultz FT shooting.

Andrew Johnson publishes 3PT shooting projections which incorporate NCAA 3PT% and FT%. You can look at either Model One or Model Two - they both show Fultz projecting as a 35% guy to Jackson's 32%. That's not like a huge difference, and there's a lot of variability there, but I can see why people have more concerns with Jackson.

 

[Kid T]

1) I see many posts devaluing the Lakers and Kings picks. How many teams are really worse than theirs for 2017-2018? It seems so many attribute the presence of a lottery pick being a dramatic difference maker, but how many rookies have that dramatic of an impact their first year?

2) For those who worry about an increased age for draft eligible players - doesn't that have to be negotiated with the Players Union? What's the likelihood that this can be evaluated, negotiated, and agreed to prior to the 2019 draft? I would think that even if there was universal agreement, there would be a moratorium before it would be phased in.

3) I don't see George being traded to the Lakers this year as they would have to both move salary AND find equitable compensation to Indiana. I imagine the Pacers wouldn't want that albatross of a contract that Mozgov brings and Deng doesn't seem like the right piece for a team looking to rebuild. I doubt Clarkson alone is enough and I don't think the Lakers would want to continue mortgaging their future by trading more draft picks.

4) As I am typing this out I see on the ESPN crawl that the Pacers have reached out to Cleveland o gauge interest in George. I bet Indiana has more interest in Irving than Love.

5) Just thinking about the draft and how things shake out. If Fultz goes #1 and Jackson goes #2, might there be a bidding war from any Ball fans for the 3rd pick? Would DA trade further down (let's say for Sacramentos #5 and #10) draft Tatum/Isaac and trade #10 for a future first? The difference in salary slots from #1/#3 to #5 might be enough that Ainge wont have to purge any of Smart/Bradley/Crowder/Rozier to clear enough space for a max contract.

 

[Big John]

Howe many times did Fultz have to make a game winning play against good competition? Stuffing the box score against bad teams, or against good teams when you are down by 20, doesn't impress me.

I feel the same way about Dennis Smith. If he plays like Westbrook, how come NC State was 15-17 and only 4-14 in the ACC? They had one great game where they beat Duke at Cameron but the rest of their season was terrible. They lost to UNC by 50 and then by 25. They barely beat BU and lost to a bad Boston College team.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

2) For those who worry about an increased age for draft eligible players - doesn't that have to be negotiated with the Players Union? What's the likelihood that this can be evaluated, negotiated, and agreed to prior to the 2019 draft? I would think that even if there was universal agreement, there would be a moratorium before it would be phased in.

We aren't worried about an increased age. If the one and done rule is removed, HS players will be able to enter the NBA draft again. It would make the 2018 draft stronger and the 19 draft weaker.

 

[ifmanis5]

So how many "Generational Players" have there been this generation?

Pretty much just Adam Morrison.

 

[Jimbodandy]

I'm depressed about this. Fultz will be a legit scorer in this game for the next dozen years. Danny is trading him for a high-upside guy and a pretty good shot at another high-upside guy. Not a windfall, just another lottery ticket. It's one thing to think that you know better than everyone else when you're deciding between guys like Jaylen, Murray, Hield, Chriss, and Bender. He's almost certainly the only GM that would do this. I'm not skeptical that he knows something that we don't. Of course he does. I'm skeptical that he knows something that 29 other GMs don't.

 

[vicirus]

I'm not enamored with the haul here, but I understand why Ainge agreed to it. Back on p.16, I thought he would at least get the #3, and the better of the Lakers/Sixers 2018. I suggested the reverse protection 5-30, and although it's actaully 2-5, that has significant value. A couple things to ponder:

1. With the Lakers pick, Ainge has almost assured himself of getting a top 4 pick in next year's draft. Not 100%, but an extremely high probability if you add in the Nets pick. With just the Nets pick, that wasn't assured. Say they finished 3rd and the ping pong balls dropped them to 6th... now the Lakers pick gives us another shot (assuming we keep it).

2. Although I could be persuaded, Fultz plus roster pieces for Butler or George is too much. As Goodman suggested, this trade makes it much more palatable to trade #3 or Lakers/Kings pick with roster pieces for one of those guys.

3. If Ainge kept #1, drafted Fultz, and signed Hayward, he'd probably have to trade Bradley and renounce Olynyk. That team would probably get us to the ECF again, but likely not the finals. In 2019, you need to give IT $25-30MM, so you're losing Smart most likely as salary would be around $130MM without him (already over the luxury tax). That doesn't leave much room for I mprovements and it's maybe ECF or just 2nd round.

4. I'm absolutely convinced that a deal in principal is done for Butler (Lakers pick, Bradley and Crowder) and Hayward has indicated that he's signing here. As others stated, if you sign Hayward first, you can keep Rozier, Smart and #3. That team is finals material and they're able to extend IT, while staying right around the luxury tax level for 2019 because of Butlers great contract. In 2020, Horford opts out, and there's enough cash to resign Butler and probably give Horford a new contract. The 2018 Nets pick might also be able to step in and replace him. That's a huge amount of flexibility compared to the team detailed in (3) above.

 

[Apisith]

And the 76ers entire future depends pretty much solely on the health of Embiid. If he is healthy, they are going to be a juggernaut regardless. He's a generational talent. If he can't stay on the court for more than 30-40 games a season, they are just another team.

They have two other #1 picks on their team. If Embiid can't stay on the court, they could still be a really good team. Sixers are well positioned to make a run in 2-3 years.

 

[InstaFace]

Pretty much just Adam Morrison.

Now you've done it, you've made him cry.

 

[ColonelMustard]

Andrew Johnson publishes 3PT shooting projections which incorporate NCAA 3PT% and FT%. You can look at either Model One or Model Two - they both show Fultz projecting as a 35% guy to Jackson's 32%. That's not like a huge difference, and there's a lot of variability there, but I can see why people have more concerns with Jackson.

Curious to see how Jackson's model is weighted, projected and normalized but Tatum is projected at 36% 3PT% and 84% FT%.

 

[DJnVa]

I'm depressed about this. Fultz will be a legit scorer in this game for the next dozen years..

Well, there's not much doubt Tatum will score at the next level.

It's the other skills both bring that will make the difference

 

[ALiveH]

The most logical answer is that either Ainge loves at least two of the guys below Fultz (Jackson and Tatum seem most likely - Ball doesn't fit the profile of guys Ainge typically likes), or it doesn't matter because that pick is being shipped out for a trade target. I trust his talent evaluation more than mine. Tatum makes more sense to me in terms of roster fit (we need scoring and he's slightly bigger & longer than JJ so better suited to play more stretch 4), but in the high lottery roster fit is usually a secondary consideration to BPA. I don't know if the brain doctor is still on the payroll but he might love JJ's competitiveness (my theory is lack of competitiveness alpha-dog mentality is what scared him off of MF).

 

[nighthob]

Well, there's not much doubt Tatum will score at the next level.

It's the other skills both bring that will make the difference

For what it's worth I have Tatum #2 on my board and the one guy in tier 2 that I think has a realistic shot at being a top 10 guy. Some of my fellow freaks (those of us that watch so much basketball that we have no life) have him #1 on their board.

So if Tatum is the pick I'm fine with the deal, it's the thought of Jackson that keeps me up nights, because he worries me more than the other two tier 2 guys (Ball & Fox).

 

[nighthob]

I'm wondering if Danny goes really big/ballsy for someone completely off the radar. Could he facilitate George to CLE and end up with Irving? Maybe something like Bradley and #3 go out, and we add Irving and Hayward? We'd improve this year and have a core/picks young enough to compete post CLE/GS runs.

Of course, I'm an idiot and don't know if this is even possible (or a good idea). But George and Butler don't make sense to me if it means we need to move the majority of our future picks.

Cleveland wants to add George to James and Irving, not make a lateral move by keeping Love. So while Thomas to Indiana might facilitate PG to Cleveland, I'm not really enamoured of adding Love's defense to Boston.

However if the Bulls would do something based around Love for Butler then sure.