Would you trade the #1 pick to Philly for #4 and #8?

[chambers]

If so, who would you take?
If not, why not?

I'd have to think long and hard about this. If Dennis Smith was available at #4 I'd probably consider it. One of Tatum, Smith, Ball or Fultz is going to be available at #4 still.

At #8 guys like Josh Jackson, Giles and a few others should be available.

[The One]

Awesome question!

My initial reaction is no...I would try to flip the #1 for a superstar.

[Who]

Yeah, I'd be open to that.

[Donoghus]

No. I'm about quality over quantity at this point.

Take (presumably) Fultz and call it a day.

[Tr1boy]

Yes...maybe.  it will depend if danny really likes one of tatum, jackson, giles or a darkhorse like bridges. Plus is not in love with fultz, ball and quite impressed also by Ntilikina or Fox

If the trade happened
76ers take fultz or ball

Celtics take 2 of the players listed above. 1 guard. 1 non guard (need consider also jerebko, amir, ko, young, green may not be brought back next season). So need to replace with talent from the draft or FA

[JBcat]

Yeah, I'd be open to that.

I could be as well if Ainge feels there isn't much of a drop off in talent.  Maybe it would be something where we would draft Jackson and take a chance on Giles health.

The thing about a trade like this though is we are already facing a big roster crunch this summer.  There would probably need to be some other consolidation trade.

[Tr1boy]

Yeah, I'd be open to that.

I could be as well if Ainge feels there isn't much of a drop off in talent.  Maybe it would be something where we would draft Jackson and take a chance on Giles health.

The thing about a trade like this though is we are already facing a big roster crunch this summer.  There would probably need to be some other consolidation trade.

True. A gamble on giles is also a possibility

[Geo123]

No because we need proven players (we need another All Star).  Getting another 2 young players to go with our 3 First round draft picks from last year moves us farther away from a title.   

[gift]

It's the rare year where this might be the right move. Have to see how things shake out right up to the draft, though. If trading, the #1 has more value.

[Moranis]

Nope. 

1.  4 and 8 have way less value than 1
2.  Boston doesn't need 2 lesser young players
3.  Boston doesn't need 2 for 1 period

That said if there were other components of the trade and it was clear Boston was moving on from Horford, Thomas, etc. then it might make mores sense.  If it was 2 and 8, that would be a bit different as that makes the trade fairly reasonable on the value side of things. 

[Tr1boy]

Nope. 

1.  4 and 8 have way less value than 1
2.  Boston doesn't need 2 lesser young players
3.  Boston doesn't need 2 for 1 period

That said if there were other components of the trade and it was clear Boston was moving on from Horford, Thomas, etc. then it might make mores sense.  If it was 2 and 8, that would be a bit different as that makes the trade fairly reasonable on the value side of things.

This draft has depth but its not like lebron or towns and then the rest

Fultz is good but is he absolutely better than Tatum? Or ball? Even Isaac has a very high end upside if he can add weight and keep improving on his game

[footey]

If I concluded that Tatum and Giles would be available at 4 and 8, then yes, I would make that trade.

[Donoghus]

Nope. 

1.  4 and 8 have way less value than 1
2.  Boston doesn't need 2 lesser young players
3.  Boston doesn't need 2 for 1 period

That said if there were other components of the trade and it was clear Boston was moving on from Horford, Thomas, etc. then it might make mores sense.  If it was 2 and 8, that would be a bit different as that makes the trade fairly reasonable on the value side of things.

This draft has depth but its not like lebron or towns and then the rest

Fultz is good but is he absolutely better than Tatum? Or ball? Even Isaac has a very high end upside if he can add weight and keep improving on his game

You can't just keep adding 19-20 year old kids to this roster.  It creates a handful of issues.  Once again, some people are too tied up in the allure of potential, IMO.

[Endless Paradise]

... whats the point? Are the Celtics somehow lacking in depth?

[green_bballers13]

Nope. 

1.  4 and 8 have way less value than 1
2.  Boston doesn't need 2 lesser young players
3.  Boston doesn't need 2 for 1 period

That said if there were other components of the trade and it was clear Boston was moving on from Horford, Thomas, etc. then it might make mores sense.  If it was 2 and 8, that would be a bit different as that makes the trade fairly reasonable on the value side of things.

This draft has depth but its not like lebron or towns and then the rest

Fultz is good but is he absolutely better than Tatum? Or ball? Even Isaac has a very high end upside if he can add weight and keep improving on his game

You can't just keep adding 19-20 year old kids to this roster.  It creates a handful of issues.  Once again, some people are too tied up in the allure of potential, IMO.

You can if they are good enough. If there's not a significant separation between 1-10, why wouldn't you rather have 2 vs 1. You can always make trades later....

You really want Fultz over Tatum/Jackson and Giles?