OT - Celtics to trade #1 overall pick?

[borg]

Being greedy and unrealistic, my binky draft:
Swap #3 for #5 and #10 plus some bonus swag from Sacramento
With the 2 picks, grab Dennis Smith (PG... NC State) and Jonathan Isaac (big man....FSU)
If.......Ball drops pas LAL, rumor is Sacramento wants him, though Sacramento has too many needs to realistically swap 2 for 1
The question: who would Trader Danny pick at #5.........I'd target Isaac hoping the run on PGs has subsided by #10 freeing up Smith.
IMO...this would be a coup.....two elite athletes with big upside potential.

If this dream scenario never materializes, I could see Ainge going against the current and taking Isaac at #3. Size, need, upside.....freak.

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

....if Fultz in 2 or 3 years is tearing up the league.. what a horrible decision...

Last year, anyway, Fultz was incapable of tearing up those incomparable athletes from YALE.

 

[borg]

I smell what you're cooking regarding Duke players; I feel similarly about NFLers from Alabama. I still prefer Tatum to Josh Jackson, however, but the one player on whom I hope Danny takes a chance at #3 is Jonathan Isaac. His ceiling is higher than either Tatum's or Jackson's (though his floor is lower), and by the end of his rookie contract, he could become our version of - dare I say it - Kevin Durant.

Captain...I see great minds are thinking alike once again....Isaac is worthy. I disagree with your Tatum choice though....Ainge loves tenacity and Jackson owns that category ....and after watching players like Thomas and Smart live for the challenge, I give tenaciousness bonus points.

 

[Urgent]

>>>>>Trading away the #1 overall, with a player perceived to be a potential star, is extremely risky. The LA Laker pick cannot be the #1 overall, per ESPN. So they are trading the #1 overall for #3 and another high, but not top, pick.

In NFL comparison, would you rather have one Peyton Manning (#1 overall) or two Ryan Leaf's?

Don't agree with this at all. Red traded the number 1 pick for number 3 and Parish. Also, having tons of draft picks puts you in a great position to make your move for something big if and when the opportunity presents itself. Ainge is in a better spot than anyone in that scenario. Also, it is clear we are kicking the can down the road some. We can't beat the CAVs yet, and Golden State would have beat us in a 2 game sweep.

Robert Parish isn't walking through that door. Kevin McHale isn't walking through that door. And if they do they'll be old and gray. The negativity in this town sucks. To say nothing about these hookers I've hired for you freshmen.

 

[deroc5050]

Last year, anyway, Fultz was incapable of tearing up those incomparable athletes from YALE.

Well why did he get so much hype? Why is he touted as the best player in the 2017 draft. Especially considering I heard his team was awful and did not even make the tournament.

 

[deroc5050]

Robert Parish isn't walking through that door. Kevin McHale isn't walking through that door. And if they do they'll be old and gray. The negativity in this town sucks. To say nothing about these hookers I've hired for you freshmen.

Not in the slightest bit relevant but I heard Parish who.. for what ever reason was my idle growing up. I loved the chief but I heard he was bad person. I don't think from what I heard he did would be swept under the rug in today's world.

I wanna be careful I don't even remember the source where I heard it from.

 

[varjao]

You guys are gonna be disappointed on Butler and Hayward if the Celtics invest big money on them. Butler wouldn't even be the #2 in one of those super teams and Hayward is just a spot up shooter.

 

[ausbacker]

You guys are gonna be disappointed on Butler and Hayward if the Celtics invest big money on them. Butler wouldn't even be the #2 in one of those super teams and Hayward is just a spot up shooter.

There's not too many players in the league who could supplant either Curry or Durant as the Warriors' #2 so your comment, with the greatest of respect, is pointless. Also, even if what you say about Hayward is true, which from my observation, isn't, then great. That's one more shooter the Celtics can put out on the court to compliment Thomas than what they currently have.

 

[YOUGOTMOSSED]

Can anyone confirm that if we trade for Paul George we get "Bird Rights" when his contract comes up?

 

[RobertWeathers]

Not in the slightest bit relevant but I heard Parish who.. for what ever reason was my idle growing up. I loved the chief but I heard he was bad person. I don't think from what I heard he did would be swept under the rug in today's world.

I wanna be careful I don't even remember the source where I heard it from.

Robert Parish was an all-time great Celtic player.

He also liked his mail-order pot.

The only documented case of assault vs Robert was when she caught him with a woman on the road and she hit him first and he pushed her against a door in the hallway of a hotel. Those were his words.

None of the other stuff about him beating the crap out of her for years is substantiated and did not come out in their divorce which he initiated. His wife was crazy.

I'm not going to crap on the Chief until I hear more and since it's been 30 years I doubt I will.

 

[XLIX]

This trade will be evaluated based on whom the Celtics take. Suppose Ainge think Jackson is the best in the draft. Is sure makes sense to trade from #1 to #3 and you still get the guy you want PLUS another first rounder.

If Fultz becomes a perennial all star, then the trade will be seen as a disaster.

 

[XLIX]

Can anyone confirm that if we trade for Paul George we get "Bird Rights" when his contract comes up?

If by "Bird Rights" you mean sit there and watch him fly away to L.A., then yes I can confirm.

 

[Deus Irae]

I don't see how it's a bad trade if:
Ainge really felt someone other than fultz or ball is best pick, and
Ainge isn't lying that this was the best offer by a lot.

I don't see fultz as the kind of guy anyone would trade a bounty for.

Whether Ainge is lying about the quality of offers is irrelevant. Whether Ainge feels someone other then Fultz or Ball is the best pick is irrelevant. It's a bad trade because the return on a trade of the #1 overall pick is insufficient. Nobody had a gun to Ainge's head, forcing him to make a trade or die. If you don't have a good enough offer, you don't have to make the trade. That's simple. If you take the bad trade, you've taken a bad trade. That's also simple.

Sometimes, taking a bad trade is a move worth making. Time will tell if this is one of those times.

 

[YOUGOTMOSSED]

If by "Bird Rights" you mean sit there and watch him fly away to L.A., then yes I can confirm.

June 22 can't get here soon enough. Let's just draft Tatum and then try to sign Hayward or Griffen and be done with it.

 

[Off The Grid]

I don't know **** about BasketBall, but that's no reason to shut my Pie Hole :

01 ~ It was amusing, ere the last couple weeks, to listen to the Radio Idiots ~ sadly, I'm talking about the Hosts ~ declare that the reason that Ainge had purportedly been insisting on protecting the #1 Possibility of the Pick in Trade Talk during the Season was specifically because he was enamored with Fultz!! Whoops!!

02 ~ Only an Idiot would miss something this obvious: Ainge was protecting that Pick for the Value of the Pick, not for any specific Prospect. Doy.

03 ~ The Roster and Salary Cap Dynamics of BasketBall are very different from FootBall, but the fundamental Wisdom of Trading Back, as Ainge just did ~ provided that you get appropriate Value ~ should be pretty obvious.

04 ~ The fact that any "Fan" who's watched what Bill The Mad (Genius) has built, in part, by repeatedly Trading Back and amassing Draft Capital, would describe Danny Ainge's doing so as stupid or idiotic...is incalculably ironic!!

 

[cmasspatsfan]

This trade will be evaluated based on whom the Celtics take. Suppose Ainge think Jackson is the best in the draft. Is sure makes sense to trade from #1 to #3 and you still get the guy you want PLUS another first rounder.

If Fultz becomes a perennial all star, then the trade will be seen as a disaster.

Let's wait and see this play out before you make definitive statements. If the guys they acquire win championships who gives a rats ass what Fultz does.

 

[DarrylS]

IMO all of this is for naught as it is rumored that Butler may be going to Cleveland.. the NBA has the inmates running the asylum..

You can add any group of players but all pale in comparison to Golden State and the Cavaliers..

When the season begins we all wait for the NBA finals with the same teams again, then another superstar will arise and create a new superteam with the same results..

 

[YOUGOTMOSSED]

I smell what you're cooking regarding Duke players; I feel similarly about NFLers from Alabama. I still prefer Tatum to Josh Jackson, however, but the one player on whom I hope Danny takes a chance at #3 is Jonathan Isaac. His ceiling is higher than either Tatum's or Jackson's (though his floor is lower), and by the end of his rookie contract, he could become our version of - dare I say it - Kevin Durant.

He looks like a stick figure.

 

[Ring 6]

Whether Ainge is lying about the quality of offers is irrelevant. Whether Ainge feels someone other then Fultz or Ball is the best pick is irrelevant. It's a bad trade because the return on a trade of the #1 overall pick is insufficient. Nobody had a gun to Ainge's head, forcing him to make a trade or die. If you don't have a good enough offer, you don't have to make the trade. That's simple. If you take the bad trade, you've taken a bad trade. That's also simple.

Sometimes, taking a bad trade is a move worth making. Time will tell if this is one of those times.

I think it is very relevant if you trade down from 1 to 3 because the player you think is the best player in the draft (even if only best for your team) is there at 3.
Of course what others are offering is relevant. You aren't trading a fictitious #1, you are trading the player who will be picked. If Shaq, Alcindor or magic were in this draft he would have gotten more. The fact that fultz is not in demand controls what you can get for the pick, not the fact that it is the first pick in a vacuum.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I think it is very relevant if you trade down from 1 to 3 because the player you think is the best player in the draft (even if only best for your team) is there at 3.
Of course what others are offering is relevant. You aren't trading a fictitious #1, you are trading the player who will be picked. If Shaq, Alcindor or magic were in this draft he would have gotten more. The fact that fultz is not in demand controls what you can get for the pick, not the fact that it is the first pick in a vacuum.

Not only that but if Shaq, Alcindor or Magic we're in this draft he would have kept the pick.