Trading Up

[alewilliam789]

I don't know what world some of you fans are living in, but in reality you would be hard pressed to get a top 12 pick for Isaiah Thomas. Probably considerably less than that because his defense is just so below average as well and he isn't exactly a traditional point guard.

Olynyk will not get a top 20 pick let alone a top 8 pick.

Sullinger will not get you a top 12 pick.

Thomas will not get you a top 12 pick.

Avery Bradley will not get you a top 9 pick.

In a package maybe a top 8, maybe ,but let's be real here all these players are role players. Why would you trade out of the lottery in a deep top 10 with each player having the potential to be star players for a group of average to below average player/players? It doesn't make sense. Fans need to realize that the only thing that the Celtics have that are appetizing to other GMs is picks. Seeing that I doubt Ainge will over pay to trade up I highly doubt we will move up from 16. Maybe from 28 up, but not from 16 to 8 or 9 or 10 unless we put together a pretty good package which isn't worth it to just move up to 10.

People always talk about the Trey Burke trade, but that draft was also considered the worst draft in common era so it only makes sense that one would trade down to give themselves a better chance to land a serviceable player. Also that Chicago trade for McDermott was with a better package of picks.

[danglertx]

Don't take this the wrong way, but you are waaaaay overvaluing draft picks.  What did the 9th pick net last year, Nik Stauskas?  And they said that draft was pretty deep.  Doug McDermott barely got off the bench and he was a lottery pick. 

[dreamgreen]

Well kind of goes without saying you need a package to move up. Where I disagree with you is that we can and should over (if we have to) pay to move up if DA is hot for a specific player and can get him. We have no idea what those future pics will be and we sure as hell don't need them all. On top of that all the players you mentioned are role players and we don't need them all. You move both KO and Sully if you have to to get a better athletic big IMO.

[Lucky17]

Why would you trade out of the lottery in a deep top 10 with each player having the potential to be star players for a group of average to below average player/players?

I'd say it's because you don't believe each player in the top ten has "star player" potential.

[oldtype]

Did you think top-ten draft picks were this ridiculously valuable last year when we actually had one?

[danglertx]

Who will have a better year next season, WCS or Hassan Whiteside?  If we are looking to get rid of a player, be it Bradley, Sully, or whoever and you want to combine that with pick 16 to move up to get a specific player, Herzonja, WCS, or whoever Ainge targets, I'd be OK with that.  But I certainly wouldn't give up future undetermined draft picks unless they get heavily protected.

[SparzWizard]

But but but...I want Jahlil Okafor, Karl Anthony Towns, or Willie-Cauley Stein! 

[BleedGreen1989]

Any package to move up is going to involve Boston also giving the #16.

I think this is what's forgotten most of the time in possible deals with teams like Charlotte or Detroit.

[GreenWarrior]

I think anyone believing we're going to get in the top 10 is fooling themselves.

any talk of Ainge trying to imo is more posturing than anything.

[Rondo9]

I think anyone believing we're going to get in the top 10 is fooling themselves.

any talk of Ainge trying to imo is more posturing than anything.

It's possible to get there they got the ammo

[byennie]

About all I can conclude from some of these threads in that "lottery" is a cherished word. Yes, typically trading up into the top tier of players, which might be top 3,5, or even just top 1 in a given year, can be very expensive. But around here, it seems to be common knowledge that #12 is twice as valuable as #16 because it's a "lottery" pick. We could never trade "role players" like KO or Sully and expect to get back a decent pick, despite the fact that teams have spent lottery picks in recent year on phenoms such as Anthony Bennett (#1), Otto Porter (#3), Nik Stauskus (#8), Trey Burke (#9). Dion Waiters went #4. Thomas Robinson #5. Austin Rivers #10 and Terrence Ross #9. I wouldn't want *any* of those guys over Bradley, Sully and KO.

And yet somehow, folks want to bundle deals like #16 and Sully for #12? Or think we'd have to sell the farm to get to #8? When Sully is better than the majority of #12 picks, and there is a marginal difference between 12 and 16?

Well I guess one thing is certain - the truth is somewhere between IT for the #4 and #16, #28, Sully, and KO for the #12 pick....!

[Future Celtics Owner]

Trade players for Myles Turner and draft Upshaw with pick 16.

Can you people get that through your head. That's the best thing we can do because of you insane green teamers.

[Celtics18]

I want to point out that since 1980 there have been exactly four all stars picked number eight in the draft.

The last one was Vin Baker back in '93. 

Over that span of time, the sixteenth pick has yielded the same amount of all stars. 

Every single year, people get all nutty and talk themselves into the idea that all the lottery picks are going to be perennial all stars.

Not likely. 

[alewilliam789]

Well kind of goes without saying you need a package to move up. Where I disagree with you is that we can and should over (if we have to) pay to move up if DA is hot for a specific player and can get him. We have no idea what those future pics will be and we sure as hell don't need them all. On top of that all the players you mentioned are role players and we don't need them all. You move both KO and Sully if you have to to get a better athletic big IMO.

I agree that Ainge should overpay for a player like Hezonja or Stanley Johnson, but not Cualey Stein I just don't think that he will overpay when the time arises.

[LilRip]

i find the term "lottery pick" too broad. The way I view it, the pick that has the highest chance of yielding an allstar is the #1 pick. Then picks #2-3 are in the next tier (not as likely to yield an allstar as #1, but still a decent chance). Then #4-5. Beyond that, #6-15 can probably fall under one category.