EagleOutsider.com

The future first-rounder sent to Boston will either be the Los Angeles Lakers' selection next year -- if it falls between Nos. 2 and 5 -- or a first-rounder in 2019, belonging either to Sacramento or Philadelphia. The teams announced the deal on Monday.

This was the comp in addition to the #3.

Getting a first round pick is better than just drafting a guy you could have had at 3 at 1. Plus you pay the #3 a lot less, so it frees some of the small amount of space you need to sign a max FA.

I'd also imagine that the contingency is related to which pick turns out to be better. Everyone has been assuming an unprotected Kings pick is going to be worse that the sixers' pick

Nevermind, just saw that the pick is only protected if they are #1. Sixers winning the lottery (or being 6 or higher) and then the Kings winning the lottery? I guess it could happen.

jhiggi02 {l Wrote}:

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:Nevermind, just saw that the pick is only protected if they are #1. Sixers winning the lottery (or being 6 or higher) and then the Kings winning the lottery? I guess it could happen.

Theoretically the C's could end up with the last pick in the first round.

And I agree with all you wrote justifying the trade, although I don't want them to sign griffin, Hayward or trade for Butler and would prefer them to develop Brown and Jackson(assuming he is picked). They would be stupid to trade the future for a competitive team now considering the dominance of the Warriors

It sounds like they weren't taking Fultz if they stayed put, so all that they really did is pick up a draft pick that is likely to be in the 2-5 range one year or the other. While the Sixers might not suck completely this season, I don't see the Kings winning the lottery in two years.

If they weren't taking Fulz and if they were targeting Tatum and Jackson... well... you make the deal and draft whichever one is left. As teddy points out... it isn't so much that you look for a bounty. You got something in return for a player you were going to take 1... knowing that he would be available at 3. Similarly, the Lakers should be bashed if they take Ball #2. No one is touching that kid in the Top 5 (unless they are desperate for a PG and Fulz and Fox are both gone)... they too should trade if they aren't taking Jackson. For the record, I don't like Tatum... he reminds me of Shane Battier (good all around player who does nothing spectacular).

There seems to be rumors out there about a Jimmy Butler deal involving #3 and future picks. If the Cs have decided to "go for it", then that is a nice move they can make. However, I don't know if Butler makes them better than the Warriors (though I think it puts them on par with the Cavs). That said, what's the alternative? Keep getting young... with the hope that when the Cavs/Warriors age-out, you have a young team to fill the power vacuum? The problem with that strategy is that if you actually hit on the draft picks, you will be dealing with signability issues right around the time you were hoping to take the crown.

Butler only puts the Cs on the level of the Cavs because he can cover LeBron effectively. If you are looking to outscore them, take Hayward. Butler's offense is about having the rock in his hands and they've already got a ball dominant player.

The one thing I've always loved about Boston is how incredibly quick they are to look the other way when it relates to their team.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/n ... /99270048/
This article will be buried forever if the Cs take Jackson. If they take Tatum, the kid will be treated like Ray Rice whenever his team visits the Garden.

HJS {l Wrote}:The one thing I've always loved about Boston is how incredibly quick they are to look the other way when it relates to their team.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/n ... /99270048/
This article will be buried forever if the Cs take Jackson.

I thought his issues were pretty widely known. I don't pay much attention to it, but every time people mention Jackson and compare him to Tatum, they hint at "issues" off the court.

Porzingis to the Celtics??? A few articles talking specifically about it.
http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baske ... -1.3262522

I think the Knicks would love to run it in Brooklyn's face by rebuilding using their #1 this year and next.

The Knicks haven't signed a draft pick to a second contract since Charlie Ward, so no, they probably won't.

I think Danny takes Tatum, who he has targeted all along. Jackson shoots 50% from the line compared to 85% for Tatum, which shows you that Jackson can't really shoot that well.

HJS {l Wrote}:Porzingis to the Celtics??? A few articles talking specifically about it.
http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baske ... -1.3262522

I think the Knicks would love to run it in Brooklyn's face by rebuilding using their #1 this year and next.

That's a good fit for Stephens' offense.

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:

HJS {l Wrote}:Porzingis to the Celtics??? A few articles talking specifically about it.
http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baske ... -1.3262522

I think the Knicks would love to run it in Brooklyn's face by rebuilding using their #1 this year and next.

That's a good fit for Stephens' offense.

Not going to happen, the Knicks want too much. They want the Cs #3 pick plus Jaylen Brown.

Jackson has told the Celtics that he will not even work out for them unless they can assure him that:

1) the Celtics keep the pick and
2) draft Jackson

Could this mean that the Lakers have assured him that they will draft him at #2? He seems to be pretty cocky for a guy looking to be a top 3 pick.

Why would he want assurances from the #3 team if he knows he's going #2.

Ball's going to the Lakers. The Knicks won't move Porzingas for only Brown and the #3, that's absurd. C's would have to throw in at least one of next year's picks or probably a different player and another player. Crowder is by far the best piece for an opponent given his contract, so assume he's gone if there is a trade.

Knicks asked PHX for Devin Booker and the #4 pick. Brown and the #3 ain't getting it done.

flyingelvii {l Wrote}:The Knicks haven't signed a draft pick to a second contract since Charlie Ward, so no, they probably won't.

My Knicks are the worst run franchise in all of professional sports.

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:Knicks asked PHX for Devin Booker and the #4 pick. Brown and the #3 ain't getting it done.

I don't know what the Knicks are trying to accomplish, but if the idea is to develop a young base on which to build, I don't think the Knicks will find a better deal than Brown, #3 and Brooklyn's 2018.

HJS {l Wrote}:

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:Knicks asked PHX for Devin Booker and the #4 pick. Brown and the #3 ain't getting it done.

I don't know what the Knicks are trying to accomplish, but if the idea is to develop a young base on which to build, I don't think the Knicks will find a better deal than Brown, #3 and Brooklyn's 2018.

I agree, but that's not what ghost said. He said Brown and the 3 and that he thought that was too much.

Celtics aren't trading the 3 and the Brooklyn pick and Brown for Porzingas. A different second pick and a different player, maybe.

I'm not a big Porzingas guy. But, he's 21 and proven he can play (and at times dominate). That's better than anything in the draft. While every year at this time folks talk about how each pick is the next Lebron or Durant, the truth is that they are more likely to be the next Anthony Bennett.

Lakers are locked into Ball with that Russell trade. Brooklyn's 2018 is now more valuable in a Porzingas trade.

HJS {l Wrote}:I'm not a big Porzingas guy. But, he's 21 and proven he can play (and at times dominate). That's better than anything in the draft. While every year at this time folks talk about how each pick is the next Lebron or Durant, the truth is that they are more likely to be the next Anthony Bennett.

Lakers are locked into Ball with that Russell trade. Brooklyn's 2018 is now more valuable in a Porzingas trade.

Brooklyn's 2018 is in a draft stocked with big men, it isn't going anywhere. This year's #3, the contingent Laker's pick and somebody like Bradley or Crowder, and the C's would deal.

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:Celtics aren't trading the 3 and the Brooklyn pick and Brown for Porzingas. A different second pick and a different player, maybe.

Wait. Are you saying you WOULDNT trade Brown, #3 and Brooklyns 2018???? Shit. I'd throw in the weird Kings/Laker pick too to get the deal done.

HJS {l Wrote}:

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:Celtics aren't trading the 3 and the Brooklyn pick and Brown for Porzingas. A different second pick and a different player, maybe.

Wait. Are you saying you WOULDNT trade Brown, #3 and Brooklyns 2018???? Shit. I'd throw in the weird Kings/Laker pick too to get the deal done.

That's as crazy in the opposite direction as bowtie's suggestion that Brown and the #3 was too much. Frankly I'd rather not trade Brown at all, but would for Porzingas and the #3, but the Knicks aren't doing that.

People grossly underestimate the value of Crowder's contract. A team as shitty as the Knicks, it doesn't matter, but for a good team, Crowder might be the most valuable asset the Celtics have other than the Nets 2018 pick.

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:

HJS {l Wrote}:

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:Celtics aren't trading the 3 and the Brooklyn pick and Brown for Porzingas. A different second pick and a different player, maybe.

Wait. Are you saying you WOULDNT trade Brown, #3 and Brooklyns 2018???? Shit. I'd throw in the weird Kings/Laker pick too to get the deal done.

That's as crazy in the opposite direction as bowtie's suggestion that Brown and the #3 was too much. Frankly I'd rather not trade Brown at all, but would for Porzingas and the #3, but the Knicks aren't doing that.

People grossly underestimate the value of Crowder's contract. A team as shitty as the Knicks, it doesn't matter, but for a good team, Crowder might be the most valuable asset the Celtics have other than the Nets 2018 pick.

I agree on Crowder (who is young and gets paid nothing). But you put WAY too much value in the Nets 2018 pick. You have no clue what pick it will be and next year's draft class is not supposed to be anywhere near as good as this one. Further, there is no HS kid that folks have been lusting after for years. Brown, #3 and Nets 2018 for Porzingas would be an absolute steal for the Celtics.

Porzingas is 21... proven... fits the Cs system... and is exactly the fit Boston would embrace.

HJS {l Wrote}:

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:

HJS {l Wrote}:

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:Celtics aren't trading the 3 and the Brooklyn pick and Brown for Porzingas. A different second pick and a different player, maybe.

Wait. Are you saying you WOULDNT trade Brown, #3 and Brooklyns 2018???? Shit. I'd throw in the weird Kings/Laker pick too to get the deal done.

That's as crazy in the opposite direction as bowtie's suggestion that Brown and the #3 was too much. Frankly I'd rather not trade Brown at all, but would for Porzingas and the #3, but the Knicks aren't doing that.

People grossly underestimate the value of Crowder's contract. A team as shitty as the Knicks, it doesn't matter, but for a good team, Crowder might be the most valuable asset the Celtics have other than the Nets 2018 pick.

I agree on Crowder (who is young and gets paid nothing). But you put WAY too much value in the Nets 2018 pick. You have no clue what pick it will be and next year's draft class is not supposed to be anywhere near as good as this one. Further, there is no HS kid that folks have been lusting after for years. Brown, #3 and Nets 2018 for Porzingas would be an absolute steal for the Celtics.

Porzingas is 21... proven... fits the Cs system... and is exactly the fit Boston would embrace.

I agree on Porzingas. But next year's draft class starts with a player much better than any in this class, and the rest of the top 10 is loaded with impact bigs. Celtics definitely want the Nets pick which is about 99.999% likely to be top 3.

I'd trade a lot of things for Porzingas, but the Brooklyn pick is not one, and Brown only reluctantly.

What do you want to be? A team that rebuilds for 2020 or a team that is going to the Finals in the next 2 years? You really can't be both.

If you are gunning for 2020, realize that teams like Philly have a huge head start. If you are looking to be a major player in the free agency, realize that the Lakers just cleared enough cap space to sign 2 max players. Further, NBA free agency is all about superstars joining other superstars. Who's the Celtics superstar in 2019?

Personally, I don't think the Cs are far off. As I mentioned earlier, put Butler on the team, and they are on par with the Cavs. I don't think Porzingas immediately brings them that far, but he brings you close, costs you zero cap space and STILL gives a centerpiece for the future. Essentially, Porzingas plus one move for a legit center, puts you right in line for a title.

I think keeping all the picks, not taking advantage of IT's prime, Crowders' contract and everything else you have built towards is a mistake. You've come so far and have valuable assets to trade for a superstar. Failing to do that is a mistake. While Marcus Smart, Terry Rozier, Jaylen Brown, Yabesele and Zizic may prove decent NBA players, no one is banging down the door to come play with them.

HJS {l Wrote}:What do you want to be? A team that rebuilds for 2020 or a team that is going to the Finals in the next 2 years? You really can't be both.

If you are gunning for 2020, realize that teams like Philly have a huge head start. If you are looking to be a major player in the free agency, realize that the Lakers just cleared enough cap space to sign 2 max players. Further, NBA free agency is all about superstars joining other superstars. Who's the Celtics superstar in 2019?

Personally, I don't think the Cs are far off. As I mentioned earlier, put Butler on the team, and they are on par with the Cavs. I don't think Porzingas immediately brings them that far, but he brings you close, costs you zero cap space and STILL gives a centerpiece for the future. Essentially, Porzingas plus one move for a legit center, puts you right in line for a title.

I think keeping all the picks, not taking advantage of IT's prime, Crowders' contract and everything else you have built towards is a mistake. You've come so far and have valuable assets to trade for a superstar. Failing to do that is a mistake. While Marcus Smart, Terry Rozier, Jaylen Brown, Yabesele and Zizic may prove decent NBA players, no one is banging down the door to come play with them.

Superstars come from draft picks, and the guys you are talking about aren't superstars. The Celtics aren't winning a title with IT, frankly, so I would have taken Fultz and signed Heyward and kept the 2018 pick and took one of the bigs. But having passed on Fultz, I'd rather they kept the younger guys. Trade a pick or two and a Crowder for Porzingas, but selling out for a superstar is not trading all your assets for him. That's called fucking stupid.

And LOL at Philly.

And no thanks on Butler, especially if IT is still around.

I think the jury is still out some of the Cs guys like Smart and Brown. Jimmy Butler was averaging 2.6 a game when he was Marcus Smart's age.

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:And LOL at Philly.

I love how everyone is annointing them as the next great thing with a big that has played like 30 games in three years, a forward with foot issues who we don't know if he can shoot, and a rookie PG, a position that tends to take a year or two to pick up the position. And a top 3 pick who is consistently a DNP-CD. But, yeah, they're gonna be great.