Author Topic: So are the BK picks not the bargaining chips we thought they would be?  (Read 5531 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: So are the BK picks not the bargaining chips we thought they would be?
« Reply #30 on: February 25, 2017, 12:31:45 AM »

Offline tazzmaniac

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8111
  • Tommy Points: 549
The issue with trading the picks is that they are too much of a wildcard for people a proper value on them.  If we knew it would end up #1 or #4, we could assess it's worth and trade or not.  But we just don't know.

Other teams probably place worse case scenario value on them.

Correct.  Which is why the real value will come if it falls #1.  At that point a Kevin Love-like trade is on the table, where you give up just the pick (and a project young guy) for a bonafide All-Star.

Why wouldn't you?

Best case scenario only has a 25% chance of happening.   The worst has has something like a 35% chance.

Why would you expect what the odds are strongly against?  There's a 75% chance Boston won't get the #1 pick,  and any pick after  #1 drops significantly in value
In last year's draft with Simmons being the clear #1 choice, I'd agree with you.  In this draft with Fultz, Ball and Jackson being reasonable close and Isaac and Tatum not too far behind, I don't think the value drops nearly as much. 

Re: So are the BK picks not the bargaining chips we thought they would be?
« Reply #31 on: February 25, 2017, 12:57:03 AM »

Offline droopdog7

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6969
  • Tommy Points: 466
The reality is Ainge is an idiot.

Thats really all they're is to it.   

Today's game would have been a Boston win if we got ibaka,  instead we let Toronto get him for next to nothing.  Now we don't need to worry about beating Cleveland,  because we won't get past the raptors.

I'm right there with you on this. I literally see no downside to getting him. Rozier and some late first round pick that we're just going to stash or not use anyways is worth the cost of Ibaka. This is an example of Ainge overvaluing his assets and the mythical "flexibility" once again.

And the free agency argument doesn't work either, because we can always renounce Ibaka's rights if we didn't plan on resigning him if it didn't work out and didn't want him clogging our cap.

Literally, this would've been a way for us to legitimately win now and in the future. Rather, we're just going to waltz into the playoffs with significant holes and weaknesses to be exploited, just so that we can keep Rozier and a late first round pick that will probably never help us anyways.
You want the downside?  Ainge didn't want to resign ibaka.  So he would have been given up assets for a guy that doesn't come close to putting us over the top this year.  And then he's gone.

Re: So are the BK picks not the bargaining chips we thought they would be?
« Reply #32 on: February 25, 2017, 01:06:20 AM »

Offline jpotter33

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 47760
  • Tommy Points: 2904
The reality is Ainge is an idiot.

Thats really all they're is to it.   

Today's game would have been a Boston win if we got ibaka,  instead we let Toronto get him for next to nothing.  Now we don't need to worry about beating Cleveland,  because we won't get past the raptors.

I'm right there with you on this. I literally see no downside to getting him. Rozier and some late first round pick that we're just going to stash or not use anyways is worth the cost of Ibaka. This is an example of Ainge overvaluing his assets and the mythical "flexibility" once again.

And the free agency argument doesn't work either, because we can always renounce Ibaka's rights if we didn't plan on resigning him if it didn't work out and didn't want him clogging our cap.

Literally, this would've been a way for us to legitimately win now and in the future. Rather, we're just going to waltz into the playoffs with significant holes and weaknesses to be exploited, just so that we can keep Rozier and a late first round pick that will probably never help us anyways.
You want the downside?  Ainge didn't want to resign ibaka.  So he would have been given up assets for a guy that doesn't come close to putting us over the top this year.  And then he's gone.

That's all fine and dandy until Griffin stays in LA, Hayward stays in Utah, and Milsap stays in Atlanta, which is more than likely what happens with all of them. Then we're stuck with running back this same basic group with just rookies going forward. At least having Ibaka would give you that fall back option. Now he's almost certain to resign with Toronto.

And you considerably underestimate how much adding Ibaka and Bradley to this group would help us. We'd have a legitimate chance of knocking off Cleveland with that group.

Re: So are the BK picks not the bargaining chips we thought they would be?
« Reply #33 on: February 25, 2017, 01:26:21 AM »

Offline droopdog7

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6969
  • Tommy Points: 466
The reality is Ainge is an idiot.

Thats really all they're is to it.   

Today's game would have been a Boston win if we got ibaka,  instead we let Toronto get him for next to nothing.  Now we don't need to worry about beating Cleveland,  because we won't get past the raptors.

I'm right there with you on this. I literally see no downside to getting him. Rozier and some late first round pick that we're just going to stash or not use anyways is worth the cost of Ibaka. This is an example of Ainge overvaluing his assets and the mythical "flexibility" once again.

And the free agency argument doesn't work either, because we can always renounce Ibaka's rights if we didn't plan on resigning him if it didn't work out and didn't want him clogging our cap.

Literally, this would've been a way for us to legitimately win now and in the future. Rather, we're just going to waltz into the playoffs with significant holes and weaknesses to be exploited, just so that we can keep Rozier and a late first round pick that will probably never help us anyways.
You want the downside?  Ainge didn't want to resign ibaka.  So he would have been given up assets for a guy that doesn't come close to putting us over the top this year.  And then he's gone.

That's all fine and dandy until Griffin stays in LA, Hayward stays in Utah, and Milsap stays in Atlanta, which is more than likely what happens with all of them. Then we're stuck with running back this same basic group with just rookies going forward. At least having Ibaka would give you that fall back option. Now he's almost certain to resign with Toronto.

And you considerably underestimate how much adding Ibaka and Bradley to this group would help us. We'd have a legitimate chance of knocking off Cleveland with that group.
Patience.  Ibaka isn't the key to anything.  I'm not going to given up assets because I'm impatient.  I'm going to give up assets because it's the right move now and into the future.  And no, I'm not underestimating the impact of having ibaka on the team for a couple of months.  He's not getting us anywhere near Cleveland, and then after this season he's gone gone gone gone.

And I'm not worried about free agency either.  If we don't sign anyone this summer its not the end of the world either.  I think the next big move will be a trade anyway.  But it has to be the right one, at the right time, for the right player.

Re: So are the BK picks not the bargaining chips we thought they would be?
« Reply #34 on: February 25, 2017, 01:31:44 AM »

Offline SparzWizard

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15995
  • Tommy Points: 987
The reality is Ainge is an idiot.

Thats really all they're is to it.   

Today's game would have been a Boston win if we got ibaka,  instead we let Toronto get him for next to nothing.  Now we don't need to worry about beating Cleveland,  because we won't get past the raptors.

I'm right there with you on this. I literally see no downside to getting him. Rozier and some late first round pick that we're just going to stash or not use anyways is worth the cost of Ibaka. This is an example of Ainge overvaluing his assets and the mythical "flexibility" once again.

And the free agency argument doesn't work either, because we can always renounce Ibaka's rights if we didn't plan on resigning him if it didn't work out and didn't want him clogging our cap.

Literally, this would've been a way for us to legitimately win now and in the future. Rather, we're just going to waltz into the playoffs with significant holes and weaknesses to be exploited, just so that we can keep Rozier and a late first round pick that will probably never help us anyways.
You want the downside?  Ainge didn't want to resign ibaka.  So he would have been given up assets for a guy that doesn't come close to putting us over the top this year.  And then he's gone.

That's all fine and dandy until Griffin stays in LA, Hayward stays in Utah, and Milsap stays in Atlanta, which is more than likely what happens with all of them. Then we're stuck with running back this same basic group with just rookies going forward. At least having Ibaka would give you that fall back option. Now he's almost certain to resign with Toronto.

And you considerably underestimate how much adding Ibaka and Bradley to this group would help us. We'd have a legitimate chance of knocking off Cleveland with that group.
Patience.  Ibaka isn't the key to anything.  I'm not going to given up assets because I'm impatient.  I'm going to give up assets because it's the right move now and into the future.  And no, I'm not underestimating the impact of having ibaka on the team for a couple of months.  He's not getting us anywhere near Cleveland, and then after this season he's gone gone gone gone.

And I'm not worried about free agency either.  If we don't sign anyone this summer its not the end of the world either.  I think the next big move will be a trade anyway.  But it has to be the right one, at the right time, for the right player.

In like 10+ years for the "right one, at the right time, for the right player"...welcome back to that 20+ year drought!


#JTJB (Just Trade Jaylen Brown)
#JFJM (Just Fire Joe Mazzulla)

Re: So are the BK picks not the bargaining chips we thought they would be?
« Reply #35 on: February 25, 2017, 01:40:52 AM »

Offline nickagneta

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 48120
  • Tommy Points: 8794
  • President of Jaylen Brown Fan Club
At this time last year it was a given Horford would stay in Atlanta and Durant would stay in OKC. So anyone declaring Ainge a fool for keeping his options open in free agency because Blake is definitely staying in LA, Hayward is definitely staying in Utah and Millsap is definitely staying in Atlanta doesn't have a clue what they are talking about.

Re: So are the BK picks not the bargaining chips we thought they would be?
« Reply #36 on: February 25, 2017, 01:43:52 AM »

Offline droopdog7

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6969
  • Tommy Points: 466
The reality is Ainge is an idiot.

Thats really all they're is to it.   

Today's game would have been a Boston win if we got ibaka,  instead we let Toronto get him for next to nothing.  Now we don't need to worry about beating Cleveland,  because we won't get past the raptors.

I'm right there with you on this. I literally see no downside to getting him. Rozier and some late first round pick that we're just going to stash or not use anyways is worth the cost of Ibaka. This is an example of Ainge overvaluing his assets and the mythical "flexibility" once again.

And the free agency argument doesn't work either, because we can always renounce Ibaka's rights if we didn't plan on resigning him if it didn't work out and didn't want him clogging our cap.

Literally, this would've been a way for us to legitimately win now and in the future. Rather, we're just going to waltz into the playoffs with significant holes and weaknesses to be exploited, just so that we can keep Rozier and a late first round pick that will probably never help us anyways.
You want the downside?  Ainge didn't want to resign ibaka.  So he would have been given up assets for a guy that doesn't come close to putting us over the top this year.  And then he's gone.

That's all fine and dandy until Griffin stays in LA, Hayward stays in Utah, and Milsap stays in Atlanta, which is more than likely what happens with all of them. Then we're stuck with running back this same basic group with just rookies going forward. At least having Ibaka would give you that fall back option. Now he's almost certain to resign with Toronto.

And you considerably underestimate how much adding Ibaka and Bradley to this group would help us. We'd have a legitimate chance of knocking off Cleveland with that group.
Patience.  Ibaka isn't the key to anything.  I'm not going to given up assets because I'm impatient.  I'm going to give up assets because it's the right move now and into the future.  And no, I'm not underestimating the impact of having ibaka on the team for a couple of months.  He's not getting us anywhere near Cleveland, and then after this season he's gone gone gone gone.

And I'm not worried about free agency either.  If we don't sign anyone this summer its not the end of the world either.  I think the next big move will be a trade anyway.  But it has to be the right one, at the right time, for the right player.

In like 10+ years for the "right one, at the right time, for the right player"...welcome back to that 20+ year drought!
Youre probably like a lot of people that think trading for a star/established player is motivated by speeding up the process.  It's not.  Trading for an established player is about trading uncertainty for more certainty.  Nothing to do with being impatient.  Impatience will only hurt you.

Re: So are the BK picks not the bargaining chips we thought they would be?
« Reply #37 on: February 25, 2017, 01:48:35 AM »

Offline jpotter33

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 47760
  • Tommy Points: 2904
At this time last year it was a given Horford would stay in Atlanta and Durant would stay in OKC. So anyone declaring Ainge a fool for keeping his options open in free agency because Blake is definitely staying in LA, Hayward is definitely staying in Utah and Millsap is definitely staying in Atlanta doesn't have a clue what they are talking about.

No, this isn't true at all. Horford was always considered a flight risk, and that was the primary reason we didn't trade for him at the deadline - because Danny was confident we could get him in the summer. And the same was true of KD. He was always considered a potential flight risk, even if OKC was the most likely scenario for him. And this was obviously apparent after their collapse in the playoffs.

Furthermore, you obviously have missed the entire conversation and what I've been arguing, along with others. Trading for Ibaka does not preclude us from being players in free agency. If it doesn't work out, then you just renounce your rights to him and try and sign someone else. Trading for him now though gives you half a season to evaluate his fit and to decide whether or not to resign him.

His minimal trade cost allowed that possibility, especially for a team like the C's. The price was something like Zeller, Rozier, and the Clips pick, which is right in line with the actual trade they got from Toronto. But Danny wasn't willing to include Rozier, which is simply ridiculous. That's a price that we should be willing to pay for that type of upgrade, especially given his apparent excellent fit in our system, even if it was just for a half season rental that put us in better position to succeed in the playoffs. Rozier has no future with the C's. He's a terrible fit with both IT and Smart, who we are both much more committed to over Rozier. And ultimately he's been a disappointment all year, and he doesn't look to be anything more than a end of the bench player at this point with his terrible BBIQ and defense.

That's the whole point of stockpiling assets to take chances like this and be able to make these types of trades.
« Last Edit: February 25, 2017, 01:56:26 AM by jpotter33 »

Re: So are the BK picks not the bargaining chips we thought the would be?
« Reply #38 on: February 25, 2017, 01:54:26 AM »

Offline max215

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8448
  • Tommy Points: 624
No, they're not bargaining chips. They're not even assets any more.

These picks ended up being so good that they now have to be considered as Golden Opportunities.

I think some folks are having trouble coming to terms with that. The original idea was that Danny was going to amass a huge number of picks - some decent, some not - and throw a bunch of them at a trade deal. It was a pretty good plan and he pulled it off well. We had a massive number of chips. We used them to get Crowder, IT, Smart and some other key contributors.

But these picks are too good to throw them around. Danny's smart enough to know that he has an opportunity that's never come to any GM before. Never before in the history of the NBA has any 50+ win team ever had 2 consecutive top 5 lottery picks. The Cs are going to have two and have a high likelihood of actually getting 3 top 5 picks. Those are tools in which you just don't build a winning team but you have an opportunity to build a dynasty.

Now I'm not saying the Cs are a dynasty or are going to be one. It's just they have an exceptionally rare opportunity to potentially have the pieces to do it. You don't just cash those in when others at the table are holding aces (Cle and GS). Better off waiting for the table to clear a bit and then sitting down and running away with it.

This. It's maybe less true for the 2018 Pick, as it's far enough in the future that it could conceivably be less golden, but the 2017 Pick has become close to too valuable. You could argue that no pre-lotto draft asset has ever been this valuable before.
Isaiah, you were lightning in a bottle.

DKC Clippers

Re: So are the BK picks not the bargaining chips we thought they would be?
« Reply #39 on: February 25, 2017, 02:28:24 AM »

Offline crimson_stallion

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5964
  • Tommy Points: 875
The reality is Ainge is an idiot.

Thats really all they're is to it.   

Today's game would have been a Boston win if we got ibaka,  instead we let Toronto get him for next to nothing.  Now we don't need to worry about beating Cleveland,  because we won't get past the raptors.

I'm right there with you on this. I literally see no downside to getting him. Rozier and some late first round pick that we're just going to stash or not use anyways is worth the cost of Ibaka. This is an example of Ainge overvaluing his assets and the mythical "flexibility" once again.

And the free agency argument doesn't work either, because we can always renounce Ibaka's rights if we didn't plan on resigning him if it didn't work out and didn't want him clogging our cap.

Literally, this would've been a way for us to legitimately win now and in the future. Rather, we're just going to waltz into the playoffs with significant holes and weaknesses to be exploited, just so that we can keep Rozier and a late first round pick that will probably never help us anyways.
You want the downside?  Ainge didn't want to resign ibaka.  So he would have been given up assets for a guy that doesn't come close to putting us over the top this year.  And then he's gone.

Cleveland's chemistry is falling apart at the seams.  Lebron is getting older and is more worked out then he's ever been.   Love is out, so knows when he'll be back to full strength.   Cleveland is in a weakened state,  they're as vulnerable as they've ever been.

Boston's biggest weakness right now is our second frontcourt position.  Amir Johnson is solid when hes healthy,  but he never is.  He can't play more then 20 mins a game. We need a big who is starting caliber, and having that impacts this team as a unit in a huge way 

So maybe ibaka could impact our chances against Cleveland.

But let's say it doesn't.   Adding a player as good as ibaka means we are favourites the beat the  Raptors and the Wizards,  so there's a very good chance we end up playing Cleveland in the East finals...if that happens is unquestionably impacts our attractiveness at free agent time.

But we didn't get ibaka,  so now we have almost zero chance of beating Cleveland.  And when we doesn't get him the raptors did,  so now we almost certainly lose to the raptors,  and probably the wizards too.

So now we have a legit chance of a first round of second round knockout, which leaves potential free agents thinking we're still some ways away from being competitive.

And then in the draft we'll draft a guard,  pushing rozier even further down the DNP list...making the fact that Danny refuses to trade him all the more ludicrous.

And the Boston 1St which will be useless since we can't find space for any more picks.

So really wed have given up nothing of any value to us.

Re: So are the BK picks not the bargaining chips we thought they would be?
« Reply #40 on: February 25, 2017, 02:31:17 AM »

Offline Somebody

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7816
  • Tommy Points: 560
  • STAND FIRM, SAY NO TO VIBE MEN
The reality is Ainge is an idiot.

Thats really all they're is to it.   

Today's game would have been a Boston win if we got ibaka,  instead we let Toronto get him for next to nothing.  Now we don't need to worry about beating Cleveland,  because we won't get past the raptors.

I'm right there with you on this. I literally see no downside to getting him. Rozier and some late first round pick that we're just going to stash or not use anyways is worth the cost of Ibaka. This is an example of Ainge overvaluing his assets and the mythical "flexibility" once again.

And the free agency argument doesn't work either, because we can always renounce Ibaka's rights if we didn't plan on resigning him if it didn't work out and didn't want him clogging our cap.

Literally, this would've been a way for us to legitimately win now and in the future. Rather, we're just going to waltz into the playoffs with significant holes and weaknesses to be exploited, just so that we can keep Rozier and a late first round pick that will probably never help us anyways.
You want the downside?  Ainge didn't want to resign ibaka.  So he would have been given up assets for a guy that doesn't come close to putting us over the top this year.  And then he's gone.

Cleveland's chemistry is falling apart at the seams.  Lebron is getting older and is more worked out then he's ever been.   Love is out, so knows when he'll be back to full strength.   Cleveland is in a weakened state,  they're as vulnerable as they've ever been.

Boston's biggest weakness right now is our second frontcourt position.  Amir Johnson is solid when hes healthy,  but he never is.  He can't play more then 20 mins a game. We need a big who is starting caliber, and having that impacts this team as a unit in a huge way 

So maybe ibaka could impact our chances against Cleveland.

But let's say it doesn't.   Adding a player as good as ibaka means we are favourites the beat the  Raptors and the Wizards,  so there's a very good chance we end up playing Cleveland in the East finals...if that happens is unquestionably impacts our attractiveness at free agent time.

But we didn't get ibaka,  so now we have almost zero chance of beating Cleveland.  And when we doesn't get him the raptors did,  so now we almost certainly lose to the raptors,  and probably the wizards too.

So now we have a legit chance of a first round of second round knockout, which leaves potential free agents thinking we're still some ways away from being competitive.

And then in the draft we'll draft a guard,  pushing rozier even further down the DNP list...making the fact that Danny refuses to trade him all the more ludicrous.

And the Boston 1St which will be useless since we can't find space for any more picks.

So really wed have given up nothing of any value to us.
Woah hold your horses, we can still pick up a big like Terrence Jones off waivers
Jaylen Brown for All-NBA