Author Topic: Lowe - Excerpt from Hornets article on Celtics' draft day offer  (Read 39531 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Lowe - Excerpt from Hornets article on Celtics' draft day offer
« Reply #75 on: July 28, 2015, 06:35:10 PM »

Offline max215

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8448
  • Tommy Points: 624
What this story shows, more than anything, is that fans greatly overvalue the first round picks as assets.  The fact that two team passed should be definitive proof.  Anything below the lottery is not very much.  And while the New Jersey pick is a wild card, you probably take the known (at #9) over the unknown anyway.  That pick could well be out of the lottery.

No choosing Kaminsky is another thing entirely.

I'd argue GMs worrying about their immediate job security undervalue 1st round picks far more than fans overvalue them.

Seriosuly, there's no way you can look at Charlotte's "we have to do this now" offseason and think it makes any sense from a basketball standpoint. They're trying to get good enough to sell some tickets, there is no path to contention there.

What this story shows, more than anything, is that fans greatly overvalue the first round picks as assets.  The fact that two team passed should be definitive proof.  Anything below the lottery is not very much.  And while the New Jersey pick is a wild card, you probably take the known (at #9) over the unknown anyway.  That pick could well be out of the lottery.

No choosing Kaminsky is another thing entirely.

I think it just shows that Charlotte under values them, probably because they have made such poor ones.
Something is worth what people will pay for it.  Or in this case, the value of something can be judged by what others are willing to give you for it. 

We know of the Charlotte scenario.  And we can logically surmise that Miami also said (or would have said) no based on how much they valued Winslow.  And how do we know that DA started with Charlotte and not earlier in the draft?  So it very likely isn't just one team that said no.

And as I was saying before, non-lottery picks are simply a crap shoot and most often turn into very little. Take a look at our own team, which is full of mid first round picks and tell me whether you would package them for the chance at a star.  How many lop-sided trade proposals am I going to read from Celtic fan that involves our collection of mediocore players for a star?  Way too many.  Our fans propose these because whether they want to admit it or not, they are lopsided in our favor.

So ultimately, we have no idea whether Winslow will become a star.  But one star (or borderline star) is worth an infinite number of JAGs (Just Another Guy).

When you start getting higher than 9 the value does change and we would possibly start looking at drafting other players. I think everyone would trade 4 middle round first round picks for Karl Towns. Perhaps everyone would also trade 4 middle first round picks for Okafor or Russel.

However, the consensus I have read seems to be that a lot of the GM's in Charlotte's position would have taken that trade. I actually think there is probably a 30% chance they still could have gotten Frank Kaminsky at 15. We can't use one notoriously stubborn (and also just flat out bad) owners refusal of our package to mean that the the rest of the owners in the league would act the same for the same situation.

I would bet a very sizeable amount of money in fact, if we were offering Brooklyn one of their picks back and they were selecting 9th they would take considerably less (same with Dallas).
Not sure what you are saying here but if you mean, NJ would give us #9 for one of their future first round picks, then I say no way in Hades.  The #9 from last year, even ignoring the fact that Winslow was there is worth more than either of the future NJ picks.  Why give away a top 10 pick now for the chance at a to 10 pick in the future?  Makes no sense.

I think he's saying a similar package (or "considerably less") that included Brooklyn's 2016 pick (or Dallas' future pick), not that they would take just the pick straight up

That is correct. We can control the Nets best/easiest way of getting in cheap talent the next couple of years on team friendly deals. That is worth a ton to them. They are in basketball purgatory. They can't tank, but have no avenues to improve barring something highly improbable (like a second round pick turning into a superstar)
Well then, this is pure unadulterated, speculation.  But judging by the fact that NJ gave us all those picks to begin with, I am going to guess that they don't value mediocre picks very much either.

When we made the trade Brooklyn thought they'd be a contender for the next 4-5 years and those picks would be in the late 20's. Obviously, they were wrong. If Brooklyn knew how valuable the picks would actually be, they wouldn't have traded them.

Pretty much exactly what I said a second earlier :).

Great minds

think alike

we did it again!!!!!!

Haha, TP.
Isaiah, you were lightning in a bottle.

DKC Clippers

Re: Lowe - Excerpt from Hornets article on Celtics' draft day offer
« Reply #76 on: July 28, 2015, 06:36:09 PM »

Offline Casperian

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3501
  • Tommy Points: 545
Holy crap that's an offer... I wonder what kind of haul we were offering to get #15.

Just goes to show you the difference in value between #16 and #9.   

Crazy to think that with a couple weeks left in the season, we were essentially tied with Charlotte for the 9th worst record.   The last 11 games of the season made a drastic change.  We ended up making the playoffs and getting swept, but it's ok because it helped us recruit Amir Johnson for 12 mil a year.  I'm not sure we would have been able to get Amir Johnson for 12 mil per year had we not gotten swept in the playoffs after stumbling in with a below .500 record... so it all worked out.

Yeah, crazy, eh?

It's so crazy, you had to mention it what, 400 times during the last few weeks?
In the summer of 2017, I predicted this team would not win a championship for the next 10 years.

3 down, 7 to go.

Re: Lowe - Excerpt from Hornets article on Celtics' draft day offer
« Reply #77 on: July 28, 2015, 06:39:49 PM »

Offline celticsclay

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15897
  • Tommy Points: 1394
Holy crap that's an offer... I wonder what kind of haul we were offering to get #15.

Just goes to show you the difference in value between #16 and #9.   

Crazy to think that with a couple weeks left in the season, we were essentially tied with Charlotte for the 9th worst record.   The last 11 games of the season made a drastic change.  We ended up making the playoffs and getting swept, but it's ok because it helped us recruit Amir Johnson for 12 mil a year.  I'm not sure we would have been able to get Amir Johnson for 12 mil per year had we not gotten swept in the playoffs after stumbling in with a below .500 record... so it all worked out.

Yeah, crazy, eh?

It's so crazy, you had to mention it what, 400 times during the last few weeks?

To be fair he didn't talk about it for like a week after the Embiid news came out.

Re: Lowe - Excerpt from Hornets article on Celtics' draft day offer
« Reply #78 on: July 28, 2015, 06:58:23 PM »

Offline PhoSita

  • NCE
  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21835
  • Tommy Points: 2182
We ended up making the playoffs and getting swept, but it's ok because it helped us recruit Amir Johnson for 12 mil a year.  I'm not sure we would have been able to get Amir Johnson for 12 mil per year had we not gotten swept in the playoffs after stumbling in with a below .500 record... so it all worked out.

You’ll have to excuse my lengthiness—the reason I dread writing letters is because I am so apt to get to slinging wisdom & forget to let up. Thus much precious time is lost.
- Mark Twain

Re: Lowe - Excerpt from Hornets article on Celtics' draft day offer
« Reply #79 on: July 28, 2015, 07:03:57 PM »

Offline droopdog7

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6974
  • Tommy Points: 466
What this story shows, more than anything, is that fans greatly overvalue the first round picks as assets.  The fact that two team passed should be definitive proof.  Anything below the lottery is not very much.  And while the New Jersey pick is a wild card, you probably take the known (at #9) over the unknown anyway.  That pick could well be out of the lottery.

No choosing Kaminsky is another thing entirely.

I'd argue GMs worrying about their immediate job security undervalue 1st round picks far more than fans overvalue them.

Seriosuly, there's no way you can look at Charlotte's "we have to do this now" offseason and think it makes any sense from a basketball standpoint. They're trying to get good enough to sell some tickets, there is no path to contention there.

What this story shows, more than anything, is that fans greatly overvalue the first round picks as assets.  The fact that two team passed should be definitive proof.  Anything below the lottery is not very much.  And while the New Jersey pick is a wild card, you probably take the known (at #9) over the unknown anyway.  That pick could well be out of the lottery.

No choosing Kaminsky is another thing entirely.

I think it just shows that Charlotte under values them, probably because they have made such poor ones.
Something is worth what people will pay for it.  Or in this case, the value of something can be judged by what others are willing to give you for it. 

We know of the Charlotte scenario.  And we can logically surmise that Miami also said (or would have said) no based on how much they valued Winslow.  And how do we know that DA started with Charlotte and not earlier in the draft?  So it very likely isn't just one team that said no.

And as I was saying before, non-lottery picks are simply a crap shoot and most often turn into very little. Take a look at our own team, which is full of mid first round picks and tell me whether you would package them for the chance at a star.  How many lop-sided trade proposals am I going to read from Celtic fan that involves our collection of mediocore players for a star?  Way too many.  Our fans propose these because whether they want to admit it or not, they are lopsided in our favor.

So ultimately, we have no idea whether Winslow will become a star.  But one star (or borderline star) is worth an infinite number of JAGs (Just Another Guy).

When you start getting higher than 9 the value does change and we would possibly start looking at drafting other players. I think everyone would trade 4 middle round first round picks for Karl Towns. Perhaps everyone would also trade 4 middle first round picks for Okafor or Russel.

However, the consensus I have read seems to be that a lot of the GM's in Charlotte's position would have taken that trade. I actually think there is probably a 30% chance they still could have gotten Frank Kaminsky at 15. We can't use one notoriously stubborn (and also just flat out bad) owners refusal of our package to mean that the the rest of the owners in the league would act the same for the same situation.

I would bet a very sizeable amount of money in fact, if we were offering Brooklyn one of their picks back and they were selecting 9th they would take considerably less (same with Dallas).
Not sure what you are saying here but if you mean, NJ would give us #9 for one of their future first round picks, then I say no way in Hades.  The #9 from last year, even ignoring the fact that Winslow was there is worth more than either of the future NJ picks.  Why give away a top 10 pick now for the chance at a to 10 pick in the future?  Makes no sense.

I think he's saying a similar package (or "considerably less") that included Brooklyn's 2016 pick (or Dallas' future pick), not that they would take just the pick straight up

That is correct. We can control the Nets best/easiest way of getting in cheap talent the next couple of years on team friendly deals. That is worth a ton to them. They are in basketball purgatory. They can't tank, but have no avenues to improve barring something highly improbable (like a second round pick turning into a superstar)
Well then, this is pure unadulterated, speculation.  But judging by the fact that NJ gave us all those picks to begin with, I am going to guess that they don't value mediocre picks very much either.

When we made the trade Brooklyn thought they'd be a contender for the next 4-5 years and those picks would be in the late 20's. Obviously, they were wrong. If Brooklyn knew how valuable the picks would actually be, they wouldn't have traded them.
Well let's not downplay the fact that NJ are complete idiots for thinking that KG and PP would make them contenders for the next 4-5 years.  KG was already a shell of himself when the trade was made.

Do they regret the trade?  I would say probably, since they ended up with nothing to show for it.  But that doesn't change my view of how they view draft picks.  They essentially gave up four picks, assuming the risk, because that is not how they do business.  They likely feel that they can sustain with or without picks.

And as for how much we won the trade by, that is still to be determined.  So far we got one outside of the lottery that turned into James Young (not exactly a splashing win).  The pick in 2016 is not guaranteed to be in the lottery either.  So we'll see I suppose.

I agree that King & Co. are idiots, but if you think they're idiots as well, then why would you suggest that their valuation of future picks are at all accurate?
I think they are idiots for thinking that KG and PP would make them contenders for years to come.  I don't necessarily think they are idiots for the way they value picks and at least for now, it is yet to be determined by how much, or even whether, they lost that trade.

Re: Lowe - Excerpt from Hornets article on Celtics' draft day offer
« Reply #80 on: July 28, 2015, 07:16:14 PM »

Offline Rondo9

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5379
  • Tommy Points: 277
Holy crap that's an offer... I wonder what kind of haul we were offering to get #15.

Just goes to show you the difference in value between #16 and #9.   

Crazy to think that with a couple weeks left in the season, we were essentially tied with Charlotte for the 9th worst record.   The last 11 games of the season made a drastic change.  We ended up making the playoffs and getting swept, but it's ok because it helped us recruit Amir Johnson for 12 mil a year.  I'm not sure we would have been able to get Amir Johnson for 12 mil per year had we not gotten swept in the playoffs after stumbling in with a below .500 record... so it all worked out.

Yeah, crazy, eh?

It's so crazy, you had to mention it what, 400 times during the last few weeks?

To be fair he didn't talk about it for like a week after the Embiid news came out.

Back to his old self eh?  ;)

Re: Lowe - Excerpt from Hornets article on Celtics' draft day offer
« Reply #81 on: July 28, 2015, 07:19:03 PM »

Offline D.o.s.

  • NCE
  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14061
  • Tommy Points: 1239
What this story shows, more than anything, is that fans greatly overvalue the first round picks as assets.  The fact that two team passed should be definitive proof.  Anything below the lottery is not very much.  And while the New Jersey pick is a wild card, you probably take the known (at #9) over the unknown anyway.  That pick could well be out of the lottery.

No choosing Kaminsky is another thing entirely.

I'd argue GMs worrying about their immediate job security undervalue 1st round picks far more than fans overvalue them.

Seriosuly, there's no way you can look at Charlotte's "we have to do this now" offseason and think it makes any sense from a basketball standpoint. They're trying to get good enough to sell some tickets, there is no path to contention there.

What this story shows, more than anything, is that fans greatly overvalue the first round picks as assets.  The fact that two team passed should be definitive proof.  Anything below the lottery is not very much.  And while the New Jersey pick is a wild card, you probably take the known (at #9) over the unknown anyway.  That pick could well be out of the lottery.

No choosing Kaminsky is another thing entirely.

I think it just shows that Charlotte under values them, probably because they have made such poor ones.
Something is worth what people will pay for it.  Or in this case, the value of something can be judged by what others are willing to give you for it. 

We know of the Charlotte scenario.  And we can logically surmise that Miami also said (or would have said) no based on how much they valued Winslow.  And how do we know that DA started with Charlotte and not earlier in the draft?  So it very likely isn't just one team that said no.

And as I was saying before, non-lottery picks are simply a crap shoot and most often turn into very little. Take a look at our own team, which is full of mid first round picks and tell me whether you would package them for the chance at a star.  How many lop-sided trade proposals am I going to read from Celtic fan that involves our collection of mediocore players for a star?  Way too many.  Our fans propose these because whether they want to admit it or not, they are lopsided in our favor.

So ultimately, we have no idea whether Winslow will become a star.  But one star (or borderline star) is worth an infinite number of JAGs (Just Another Guy).

When you start getting higher than 9 the value does change and we would possibly start looking at drafting other players. I think everyone would trade 4 middle round first round picks for Karl Towns. Perhaps everyone would also trade 4 middle first round picks for Okafor or Russel.

However, the consensus I have read seems to be that a lot of the GM's in Charlotte's position would have taken that trade. I actually think there is probably a 30% chance they still could have gotten Frank Kaminsky at 15. We can't use one notoriously stubborn (and also just flat out bad) owners refusal of our package to mean that the the rest of the owners in the league would act the same for the same situation.

I would bet a very sizeable amount of money in fact, if we were offering Brooklyn one of their picks back and they were selecting 9th they would take considerably less (same with Dallas).
Not sure what you are saying here but if you mean, NJ would give us #9 for one of their future first round picks, then I say no way in Hades.  The #9 from last year, even ignoring the fact that Winslow was there is worth more than either of the future NJ picks.  Why give away a top 10 pick now for the chance at a to 10 pick in the future?  Makes no sense.

I think he's saying a similar package (or "considerably less") that included Brooklyn's 2016 pick (or Dallas' future pick), not that they would take just the pick straight up

That is correct. We can control the Nets best/easiest way of getting in cheap talent the next couple of years on team friendly deals. That is worth a ton to them. They are in basketball purgatory. They can't tank, but have no avenues to improve barring something highly improbable (like a second round pick turning into a superstar)
Well then, this is pure unadulterated, speculation.  But judging by the fact that NJ gave us all those picks to begin with, I am going to guess that they don't value mediocre picks very much either.

When we made the trade Brooklyn thought they'd be a contender for the next 4-5 years and those picks would be in the late 20's. Obviously, they were wrong. If Brooklyn knew how valuable the picks would actually be, they wouldn't have traded them.
Well let's not downplay the fact that NJ are complete idiots for thinking that KG and PP would make them contenders for the next 4-5 years.  KG was already a shell of himself when the trade was made.

Do they regret the trade?  I would say probably, since they ended up with nothing to show for it.  But that doesn't change my view of how they view draft picks.  They essentially gave up four picks, assuming the risk, because that is not how they do business.  They likely feel that they can sustain with or without picks.

And as for how much we won the trade by, that is still to be determined.  So far we got one outside of the lottery that turned into James Young (not exactly a splashing win).  The pick in 2016 is not guaranteed to be in the lottery either.  So we'll see I suppose.

I agree that King & Co. are idiots, but if you think they're idiots as well, then why would you suggest that their valuation of future picks are at all accurate?
I think they are idiots for thinking that KG and PP would make them contenders for years to come.  I don't necessarily think they are idiots for the way they value picks and at least for now, it is yet to be determined by how much, or even whether, they lost that trade.

I very much disagree with the bolded assessment and I don't think that your assertion that their front office believed KG and Pierce would make them contenders for years to come is accurate, either. It was almost exclusively a win-now trade from the Nets with nearly zero thought given to how they would function beyond that season.
At least a goldfish with a Lincoln Log on its back goin' across your floor to your sock drawer has a miraculous connotation to it.

Re: Lowe - Excerpt from Hornets article on Celtics' draft day offer
« Reply #82 on: July 28, 2015, 07:24:16 PM »

Offline oldtype

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1677
  • Tommy Points: 143
It's not like they only "lost the trade" if the picks end up being good for us - that would be pure hindsight. That trade was clearly just bad value for the Nets in the abstract.

If we traded Marcus Smart for a 2nd round pick tomorrow, that wouldn't be a good decision just because that 2nd rounder somehow miraculously became better than Smart 5 years down the road.


Great words from a great man

Re: Lowe - Excerpt from Hornets article on Celtics' draft day offer
« Reply #83 on: July 28, 2015, 07:26:37 PM »

Offline mctyson

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5087
  • Tommy Points: 372
Holy crap that's an offer... I wonder what kind of haul we were offering to get #15.

Just goes to show you the difference in value between #16 and #9.   

Crazy to think that with a couple weeks left in the season, we were essentially tied with Charlotte for the 9th worst record.   The last 11 games of the season made a drastic change.  We ended up making the playoffs and getting swept, but it's ok because it helped us recruit Amir Johnson for 12 mil a year.  I'm not sure we would have been able to get Amir Johnson for 12 mil per year had we not gotten swept lost to the EC Champion in the playoffs after stumbling streaking in with a below .500 record .600 winning percentage in our last 40 games... so it all worked out. I am psyched for next year

I fixed it.

Re: Lowe - Excerpt from Hornets article on Celtics' draft day offer
« Reply #84 on: July 28, 2015, 07:30:01 PM »

Offline celticsclay

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15897
  • Tommy Points: 1394
It's not like they only "lost the trade" if the picks end up being good for us - that would be pure hindsight. That trade was clearly just bad value for the Nets in the abstract.

If we traded Marcus Smart for a 2nd round pick tomorrow, that wouldn't be a good decision just because that 2nd rounder somehow miraculously became better than Smart 5 years down the road.

Its tough not to question whether the poster really doesn't believe that it was a bad trade for the nets or are just trying to be contrarian/inflammatory.

Re: Lowe - Excerpt from Hornets article on Celtics' draft day offer
« Reply #85 on: July 28, 2015, 07:31:17 PM »

Offline max215

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8448
  • Tommy Points: 624
It's not like they only "lost the trade" if the picks end up being good for us - that would be pure hindsight. That trade was clearly just bad value for the Nets in the abstract.

If we traded Marcus Smart for a 2nd round pick tomorrow, that wouldn't be a good decision just because that 2nd rounder somehow miraculously became better than Smart 5 years down the road.

This. Even if we get 4 picks outside the lottery, the trade still advanced our rebuild and set the Nets back AT LEAST 5 years.
Isaiah, you were lightning in a bottle.

DKC Clippers

Re: Lowe - Excerpt from Hornets article on Celtics' draft day offer
« Reply #86 on: July 28, 2015, 07:33:27 PM »

Offline ahonui06

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 614
  • Tommy Points: 27
It's not like they only "lost the trade" if the picks end up being good for us - that would be pure hindsight. That trade was clearly just bad value for the Nets in the abstract.

If we traded Marcus Smart for a 2nd round pick tomorrow, that wouldn't be a good decision just because that 2nd rounder somehow miraculously became better than Smart 5 years down the road.

This. Even if we get 4 picks outside the lottery, the trade still advanced our rebuild and set the Nets back AT LEAST 5 years.

In hindsight, the trade favors Boston since Brooklyn wasn't able to get a title out of the deal. 

However, when the trade first happened I was very disappointed because I love The Truth and thought he had so much left in the tank.  I thought Ainge had made a mistake despite the slew of picks we were receiving.

Re: Lowe - Excerpt from Hornets article on Celtics' draft day offer
« Reply #87 on: July 28, 2015, 07:34:02 PM »

Offline Beat LA

  • NCE
  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8338
  • Tommy Points: 896
  • Mr. Emoji
Holy crap that's an offer... I wonder what kind of haul we were offering to get #15.

Chris Babb

Lol, TP ;D.

Re: Lowe - Excerpt from Hornets article on Celtics' draft day offer
« Reply #88 on: July 28, 2015, 07:35:24 PM »

Offline Beat LA

  • NCE
  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8338
  • Tommy Points: 896
  • Mr. Emoji
Holy crap that's an offer... I wonder what kind of haul we were offering to get #15.

Just goes to show you the difference in value between #16 and #9.   

Crazy to think that with a couple weeks left in the season, we were essentially tied with Charlotte for the 9th worst record.   The last 11 games of the season made a drastic change.  We ended up making the playoffs and getting swept, but it's ok because it helped us recruit Amir Johnson for 12 mil a year.  I'm not sure we would have been able to get Amir Johnson for 12 mil per year had we not gotten swept in the playoffs after stumbling in with a below .500 record... so it all worked out.

Lol, outstanding - TP ;D.

Re: Lowe - Excerpt from Hornets article on Celtics' draft day offer
« Reply #89 on: July 28, 2015, 07:37:56 PM »

Offline MBunge

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4661
  • Tommy Points: 471
We ended up making the playoffs and getting swept, but it's ok because it helped us recruit Amir Johnson for 12 mil a year.  I'm not sure we would have been able to get Amir Johnson for 12 mil per year had we not gotten swept in the playoffs after stumbling in with a below .500 record... so it all worked out.

That sarcasm would be a lot more biting if it wasn't coming from the guy who practically drooled over the idea of Boston trading for or signing Anthony Bennett, Nik Stauskus and Bismack Biyombo.

Glass house.  Stones.  You figure it out.

Mike