Misconceptions and Myths About Philly Trades

[LarBrd33]

Well, thanks for the "proof," Lar.

heh... reminds me when people doubted Ainge was shopping Rondo.   "Where's the proof???"... despite the fact there were numerous reports Ainge was shopping Rondo.  We later learned Ainge had shopped Rondo. 

All signs point to us having offered the Brooklyn pick in a package for OKafor.  Bellyache all you want about it.  It is what it is.

[Celtics4ever]

Celticsblog, it's time to get over the obsession with semi-failed Philly big man draft picks. Almost every proposed trade on this forum involves the #3 pick for some Philadelphia big man that they've drafted over the last 3 seasons. Almost every proposed trade is an absolutely boneheaded idea. Here's why.

Were you a big Sully supporter?   What makes you think that folks will support your ability to scout of bigs given that fact?

My guess is we trade #3 + a couple additional assets (#16 + #23?) for Okafor, but first want to make sure Simmons or Ingram don't slip to us.  So if we see a deal, it will be on draft night. 

I concur.  It does not make sense otherwise.

[Celtics18]

Well, thanks for the "proof," Lar.

heh... reminds me when people doubted Ainge was shopping Rondo.   "Where's the proof???"... despite the fact there were numerous reports Ainge was shopping Rondo.  We later learned Ainge had shopped Rondo. 

All signs point to us having offered the Brooklyn pick in a package for OKafor.  Bellyache all you want about it.  It is what it is.

I'm not bellyaching about anything.  I'm just pointing out that I'm not buying what you are presenting as definitive proof.

[Roy H.]

It seems a little counter-intuitive to argue that the 3rd pick has great value due to historical trends, while concurrently arguing that the last two #3 picks (Embiid, Okafor) don't have value worth the #3 pick.  Why does an unnamed rookie have potential, but two young drafted guys don't?

[CoachBo]

Nice to seem a well written thread stopping the 76er thread. The embiid idea in particular does not make much sense. One year of Noel's rookie deal is a factor many also have overlooked

one year of Noel's rookie deal might be one of the key factors that gets them to sell low on him by trading for a guy like Marcus smart.

LB, you offer more for Okafor than die hard Sixer fans expect to get. Chad Ford said Sixers should grab offer of just the 3 pick, indicating that alone is an overpay. I think you are too focused on his 17 point average as a reason to justify the high price. I think the market has in fact moved a bit away from him. You are trying to price him like a new car rather than one that has already been driven a year whose short comings are more evident.

Neither I or sixer fans are sure of what the price for Okafor will be.  We do know that ainge built a package around the Brooklyn pick and offered it for Okafor at the deadline, but philly backed out.  So I guess the question is - has the Brooklyn pick increased or decreased in value now that we know it's 3rd?  On one hand, at the deadline there was still a reasonable chance the pick could end up 1st.  On the other hand, at the deadline there was still a reasonable chance it could have fallen out of the top 5.   So it's hard to say if Phillys interest was based on the potential to land top 2 or not.

We *know* this?

Link?  One that isn't a rumor based on anonymous sources, please.  For once I'd like absolute proof that that is real, since you stated it as an assertion of fact.  Thanks.

its been covered a bunch.  Ainge was asked if he came close to trading the Brooklyn pick at the deadline.  He said that yes, he had offered a large package including the Brooklyn pick for a player he liked... That it would have had some risk for both teams. And the other team backed out.   It was later reported that he was referring to Okafor.  Multiple sources have since reported that it was Okafor.  Nobody has denied it. 

Bostons interest in Okafor is pretty out in the open at this point.

It was also reported numerous times that we inquired about every single high profile player that was thought to be any where remotely close to the trading block.

It goes without saying that Ainge would inquire about dozens of players.  This is a no-brainer.  It's the job of the GM.  As such, it's been reported that they inquired about Horford, inquired about Kevin Love, and inquired about Jimmy Butler.  We can speculate he also inquired about Paul George, DeMarcus Cousins, Dwight Howard and probably several others.  That's literally what a GM is supposed to do.  You make offers hoping for an upgrade.  That doesn't mean any of those offers come close to being accepted.

Don't confuse this obvious aspect of being a GM with what we know.  We know that Ainge was literally asked in an interview if he came close to acquiring anyone with the Brooklyn pick.  Ainge confirmed that he did indeed come close to acquiring a player for a large package involving the Brooklyn pick.   Ainge himself said that the other team backed out last second.  That player was later reported to be Jahlil Okafor.  Some fans don't want to believe it, so they are trying to associate it with guys like Jimmy Butler.  Nobody has reported Boston came close to acquiring Jimmy Butler.

The Boston Celtics came "very close" to including the Brooklyn Nets pick in a blockbuster trade before the other team backed out at the "very last minute," team president of basketball operations Danny Ainge revealed Friday morning.

"One story I probably can share with you is -- I can't tell you the team or the name -- but it was very close," Ainge said in a interview with 98.5 The Sports Hub, according to Mass Live's Jay King. "It's something that we had been deliberating on for two days straight. The other team was doing that, and we were wrapping ourselves around a big package to do a deal. And at the very last minute they just said they did not want to do it. They just backed out. So it was a deal that was talked about, thought about, and that was probably the closest that we came."

Later was confirmed by the Boston Herald that he was referring to Okafor:  http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/celtics/2016/02/bulpett_celtics_made_the_smart_choice_at_trade_deadline

The trade could have been massive. The 2016 unprotected first-round draft pick the Brooklyn Nets owe the Celtics -- one of the league's best assets because the Nets are one of the worst teams in the league -- was involved in the package that was discussed, according to WBZ Newsradio 1030' Adam Kaufman. Ainge said the other front office, which we now know is Philadelphia, decided to keep the player, even if the offer increased.

Nobody has denied it was Okafor.  The only person (Bulpett) to even report that Boston inquired about Jimmy BUtler is the same person who confirmed Ainge was referring to Okafor.  It was Okafor.  And there's a reason why we continued to be linked to Philly in a potential trade for Okafor - it's widely known we almost traded for him at the deadline and Ainge himself said the talks might be revisited. 

This seed was planted even before the trade deadline.  Prior to the 2015 draft it was reported that Ainge was prepared to make a godfather offer for Okafor if he fell to #3:  http://nesn.com/2015/06/report-celtics-could-make-godfather-offer-to-get-jahlil-okafor-at-no-3/ 

He's been our target.  Ainge wouldn't let a single underwhelming season in Philly dissuade him from getting his target.  This is the same guy who traded the #7 pick in 2006 for Sebastian Telfair, because he believed in Telfair's potential more than what was available at #7.

TP for interjecting some common sense into this inexplicable thread.

It's just fascinating to see people treat Okafor's rookie year as the absolute maximum he can ever produce while at the same time professing undying loyalty to a Euromistake who has done absolutely nothing overseas except attract the attention of some self-appointed "scouts" because he's tall and he "might" get better than his current woeful level of play. Maybe in five years. Maybe not.

Fascinating.

SMH.

[CoachBo]

It seems a little counter-intuitive to argue that the 3rd pick has great value due to historical trends, while concurrently arguing that the last two #3 picks (Embiid, Okafor) don't have value worth the #3 pick.  Why does an unnamed rookie have potential, but two young drafted guys don't?

It's called "pushing a personal agenda."

Counter-intuitive, indeed.

[CoachBo]

Well, thanks for the "proof," Lar.

heh... reminds me when people doubted Ainge was shopping Rondo.   "Where's the proof???"... despite the fact there were numerous reports Ainge was shopping Rondo.  We later learned Ainge had shopped Rondo. 

All signs point to us having offered the Brooklyn pick in a package for OKafor.  Bellyache all you want about it.  It is what it is.

I do indeed remember legions on this board who simply couldn't accept that Ainge would be offering their favorite player, Rondo, around. Because they loved Rondo, Ainge loved Rondo. It had to be.

It's that classic confusion I have cited before. "My favorite player" does not equal "superstar."

Denial. It's more than a river in Egypt.

[chambers]

Well, thanks for the "proof," Lar.

heh... reminds me when people doubted Ainge was shopping Rondo.   "Where's the proof???"... despite the fact there were numerous reports Ainge was shopping Rondo.  We later learned Ainge had shopped Rondo. 

All signs point to us having offered the Brooklyn pick in a package for OKafor.  Bellyache all you want about it.  It is what it is.

I do indeed remember legions on this board who simply couldn't accept that Ainge would be offering their favorite player, Rondo, around. Because they loved Rondo, Ainge loved Rondo. It had to be.

It's that classic confusion I have cited before. "My favorite player" does not equal "superstar."

Denial. It's more than a river in Egypt.

As one of those at the time who loved Rondo but thought Ainge would move him if the right deal came along, it would be fair to add that after the Rondo trade, Ainge revealed that he offered Rondo a large contract of something like $14 million x 4 years which Rondo refused

Regarding Okafor Larbrd has repeated the version of events that he thinks occurred multiple times. It still doesn't make it true. He's also tends to ignore when people post legitimate counterpoints or arguments when they disprove or discount his opinion/ideals for the C's-which I did at the time and he simply ignored. I remember Bill Simkons was a 'source' at the time apparently.

There is no more evidence suggesting that it was Okafor than there is evidence suggesting it was Butler. At the time the idea was thought to be a 3 team trade between the Bulls/76ers/C's, with Okafor going to thr Bulls and Jimmy coming here.

Personally i would love Okafor here, but we still have no idea which player it was for.
All we know is that it wasn't a player who was in media trade headlines at the time because Danny said so.
There's a good chance it was one of Okafor or Butler - LarBrd really wants it to be Okafor if you can't tell.

[Granath]

It seems a little counter-intuitive to argue that the 3rd pick has great value due to historical trends, while concurrently arguing that the last two #3 picks (Embiid, Okafor) don't have value worth the #3 pick.  Why does an unnamed rookie have potential, but two young drafted guys don't?

It's not counter-intuitive at all. It's simply a matter of long-term trending versus exceptions to the rule. Two recent picks by a really poor GM whose entire plan was to take high-risk prospects in order to build a team does not greatly impact the overall trend. That's like trying to argue that because Adam Morrison was a bust the third pick that should outweigh 35 years of historical trends. Was he worth the #3 pick after his first year? Would you argue that because Bargnani and Oden were busts in consecutive years that the 1st pick now has no value?

It's quite simple. Have Embiid or Okafor demonstrated anything on an NBA court that makes them worth this years' #3 pick, given the general historical success found with that pick? Embiid clearly can't have demonstrated anything. Okafor's first year was quite poor by every single advanced metric. That doesn't mean that Embiid won't be a beast or that Okafor won't improve but you have to judge the odds of that versus the odds of the pick.

[Roy H.]

It seems a little counter-intuitive to argue that the 3rd pick has great value due to historical trends, while concurrently arguing that the last two #3 picks (Embiid, Okafor) don't have value worth the #3 pick.  Why does an unnamed rookie have potential, but two young drafted guys don't?

It's not counter-intuitive at all. It's simply a matter of long-term trending versus exceptions to the rule. Two recent picks by a really poor GM whose entire plan was to take high-risk prospects in order to build a team does not greatly impact the overall trend. That's like trying to argue that because Adam Morrison was a bust the third pick that should outweigh 35 years of historical trends. Was he worth the #3 pick after his first year? Would you argue that because Bargnani and Oden were busts in consecutive years that the 1st pick now has no value?

It's quite simple. Have Embiid or Okafor demonstrated anything on an NBA court that makes them worth this years' #3 pick, given the general historical success found with that pick? Embiid clearly can't have demonstrated anything. Okafor's first year was quite poor by every single advanced metric. That doesn't mean that Embiid won't be a beast or that Okafor won't improve but you have to judge the odds of that versus the odds of the pick.

And you have to judge the individual prospects versus historical trends. Just because a past #3 pick was great doesn't mean Dragan Bender or whomever will be. That's a fact that you seemingly acknowledge with your disinterest in the last two #3 picks. The pick itself has no intrinsic value; it's all about the prospects available.

I mean, was the #1 pick in the Bargnani draft extremely valuable because the #1 pick has often been a superduberstar? It doesn't work that way.

[mahcus smaht]

Nice to seem a well written thread stopping the 76er thread. The embiid idea in particular does not make much sense. One year of Noel's rookie deal is a factor many also have overlooked

one year of Noel's rookie deal might be one of the key factors that gets them to sell low on him by trading for a guy like Marcus smart.

LB, you offer more for Okafor than die hard Sixer fans expect to get. Chad Ford said Sixers should grab offer of just the 3 pick, indicating that alone is an overpay. I think you are too focused on his 17 point average as a reason to justify the high price. I think the market has in fact moved a bit away from him. You are trying to price him like a new car rather than one that has already been driven a year whose short comings are more evident.

Neither I or sixer fans are sure of what the price for Okafor will be.  We do know that ainge built a package around the Brooklyn pick and offered it for Okafor at the deadline, but philly backed out.  So I guess the question is - has the Brooklyn pick increased or decreased in value now that we know it's 3rd?  On one hand, at the deadline there was still a reasonable chance the pick could end up 1st.  On the other hand, at the deadline there was still a reasonable chance it could have fallen out of the top 5.   So it's hard to say if Phillys interest was based on the potential to land top 2 or not.

We *know* this?

Link?  One that isn't a rumor based on anonymous sources, please.  For once I'd like absolute proof that that is real, since you stated it as an assertion of fact.  Thanks.

its been covered a bunch.  Ainge was asked if he came close to trading the Brooklyn pick at the deadline.  He said that yes, he had offered a large package including the Brooklyn pick for a player he liked... That it would have had some risk for both teams. And the other team backed out.   It was later reported that he was referring to Okafor.  Multiple sources have since reported that it was Okafor.  Nobody has denied it. 

Bostons interest in Okafor is pretty out in the open at this point.

It was also reported numerous times that we inquired about every single high profile player that was thought to be any where remotely close to the trading block.

It goes without saying that Ainge would inquire about dozens of players.  This is a no-brainer.  It's the job of the GM.  As such, it's been reported that they inquired about Horford, inquired about Kevin Love, and inquired about Jimmy Butler.  We can speculate he also inquired about Paul George, DeMarcus Cousins, Dwight Howard and probably several others.  That's literally what a GM is supposed to do.  You make offers hoping for an upgrade.  That doesn't mean any of those offers come close to being accepted.

Don't confuse this obvious aspect of being a GM with what we know.  We know that Ainge was literally asked in an interview if he came close to acquiring anyone with the Brooklyn pick.  Ainge confirmed that he did indeed come close to acquiring a player for a large package involving the Brooklyn pick.   Ainge himself said that the other team backed out last second.  That player was later reported to be Jahlil Okafor.  Some fans don't want to believe it, so they are trying to associate it with guys like Jimmy Butler.  Nobody has reported Boston came close to acquiring Jimmy Butler.

The Boston Celtics came "very close" to including the Brooklyn Nets pick in a blockbuster trade before the other team backed out at the "very last minute," team president of basketball operations Danny Ainge revealed Friday morning.

"One story I probably can share with you is -- I can't tell you the team or the name -- but it was very close," Ainge said in a interview with 98.5 The Sports Hub, according to Mass Live's Jay King. "It's something that we had been deliberating on for two days straight. The other team was doing that, and we were wrapping ourselves around a big package to do a deal. And at the very last minute they just said they did not want to do it. They just backed out. So it was a deal that was talked about, thought about, and that was probably the closest that we came."

Later was confirmed by the Boston Herald that he was referring to Okafor:  http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/celtics/2016/02/bulpett_celtics_made_the_smart_choice_at_trade_deadline

The trade could have been massive. The 2016 unprotected first-round draft pick the Brooklyn Nets owe the Celtics -- one of the league's best assets because the Nets are one of the worst teams in the league -- was involved in the package that was discussed, according to WBZ Newsradio 1030' Adam Kaufman. Ainge said the other front office, which we now know is Philadelphia, decided to keep the player, even if the offer increased.

Nobody has denied it was Okafor.  The only person (Bulpett) to even report that Boston inquired about Jimmy BUtler is the same person who confirmed Ainge was referring to Okafor.  It was Okafor.  And there's a reason why we continued to be linked to Philly in a potential trade for Okafor - it's widely known we almost traded for him at the deadline and Ainge himself said the talks might be revisited. 

This seed was planted even before the trade deadline.  Prior to the 2015 draft it was reported that Ainge was prepared to make a godfather offer for Okafor if he fell to #3:  http://nesn.com/2015/06/report-celtics-could-make-godfather-offer-to-get-jahlil-okafor-at-no-3/ 

He's been our target.  Ainge wouldn't let a single underwhelming season in Philly dissuade him from getting his target.  This is the same guy who traded the #7 pick in 2006 for Sebastian Telfair, because he believed in Telfair's potential more than what was available at #7.

Lets break this down.

First, right before the draft its reported Boston will make a big offer for Okafor. At this time i dont  think the Brooklyn pick had half the value it has today, and Id say Smarts value was probably a bit higher, but not that much (I think the playoffs really helped Smart recoup a lot of his lost value over the course of what was a dissapointing season. When a 21 year old kid takes over an absolute must win playoff game on both sides of the ball it helps your value a lot).

At this point in time its also worth noting that Okafors value was higher.
When drafted, there were concerns about how hed fit in the NBA along with his defense, rebounding, and ability to really do anything other than score in the post. Since then he has alleviated exactly 0 concerns, revealed himself as a potential character problem, and actually didnt even help the offense of the worst team in the league, then hurt his knee. He still has potential etc etc, but you simply cannot argue with a straight face his value has not dropped since then.

SOrry for the non sequitor, I hope I didnt lose anyone. Point is, Philly was reportedly looking to trade out, we were willing to make a big offer. It was reported Orlando and New York were also looking to move their picks, but none of them did. In fact, after the draft we heard about Ainges attempts to move up to 4 and then famously 9, but there were no reports of actually trying to get to 3. If I recall correctly Ainge even said they tried to get every pick from 4 to 10 when Winslow was selected.

That is all largely irrelavant.

Now, there is one piece of evidence that we actually know, that points away from Okafor.

At the day of the draft Philly supposedly was looking to move Okafor. Just the other day it was reported that Philly was going to move Okafor, but then at the deadline, the other team in this mystery deal backed out saying they wanted to keep their guy regardless of price. This sounds a lot more like Jimmy Butler or Blake Griffin or Kevin Love, than it does Jahlil Okafor.

These 3 players also fall much more in line with the significant risk for both sides line as well.

So basically, the Herald reported it, Ainge didnt deny it, but Ainge doesnt deny many things, and he has in the past denied a lot of things that have ended up being more or less true, often he denied we were shopping rondo, so I wouldnt use his denials as much of a factor.

In conclusion, we definitely made offers for a ton of high profile guys, Ainge said we came close to getting one guy, the Herald reported it, it made sense, everyone ran with it.

This doesnt make it true. Only likely.

Stop using the word "know" because you dont know, simple as that.

[LGC88]

Finally some sense.
Thanks man.

[celticsclay]

Well, thanks for the "proof," Lar.

Indeed

[tazzmaniac]

It seems a little counter-intuitive to argue that the 3rd pick has great value due to historical trends, while concurrently arguing that the last two #3 picks (Embiid, Okafor) don't have value worth the #3 pick.  Why does an unnamed rookie have potential, but two young drafted guys don't?

It's not counter-intuitive at all. It's simply a matter of long-term trending versus exceptions to the rule. Two recent picks by a really poor GM whose entire plan was to take high-risk prospects in order to build a team does not greatly impact the overall trend. That's like trying to argue that because Adam Morrison was a bust the third pick that should outweigh 35 years of historical trends. Was he worth the #3 pick after his first year? Would you argue that because Bargnani and Oden were busts in consecutive years that the 1st pick now has no value?

It's quite simple. Have Embiid or Okafor demonstrated anything on an NBA court that makes them worth this years' #3 pick, given the general historical success found with that pick? Embiid clearly can't have demonstrated anything. Okafor's first year was quite poor by every single advanced metric. That doesn't mean that Embiid won't be a beast or that Okafor won't improve but you have to judge the odds of that versus the odds of the pick.

If the medical staff give a good report on Embiid's surgery and overall health, he's definitely worth the #3 pick in this draft.  As for Okafor, why would you expect a 19/20 year old rookie big on a 10 win team to have anything other than poor advanced metrics?  Okafor's floor was projected as Al Jefferson and his 1st season play justified that assessment. 

[Granath]

If the medical staff give a good report on Embiid's surgery and overall health, he's definitely worth the #3 pick in this draft.

Why? What makes him just as valuable as he was 2 years ago? What factors overcome his increase in age, his more recent injury history, the inevitable court rust and the fact that 1/2 of his valuable rookie contract have now gone by? If everything the last two years have been negatives, what new positives offset this?

As for Okafor, why would you expect a 19/20 year old rookie big on a 10 win team to have anything other than poor advanced metrics?  Okafor's floor was projected as Al Jefferson and his 1st season play justified that assessment.

Why shouldn't we expect at least somewhat acceptable advanced metrics? Why should his team be significantly better with him off the court on both ends of the floor? Aren't most of them also youngsters on a 10 win team too?

Did anyone project Okafor's floor as Al Jefferson? He was often compared to Jefferson pre-draft but I have yet to find anyone who said his floor was Big Al. Considering Al Jefferson has never made an All Star game, do people think that Jefferson would be worth the #3 pick in the draft? I don't think that's an unreasonable question to ask and I'm a Big Al fan.

Look, if Danny decides to trade the #3 pick for Okafor, I'll don my new Celtics sweatshirt and cheer for the guy without hesitation. I'll hope for the best. But I have serious doubts as to whether that's a good trade. I have even more doubts that it would be advisable to throw in another valuable asset (as many here have advocated) to acquire a guy who may be an albatross given the style of play in the modern NBA.

Personally, I'd like to see Danny swing a trade for Noel which won't need to involve the #3 pick. He fills a much more defined and needed role for this team and would still allow the Cs to pick the BPA with the #3.