Poll: Would you trade #1 for #3 and #5?

[nickagneta]

Just draft the guy you want at #1. The Celtics don't need more rookies. They could have upwards of 4 next year with the Nets pick, Zizic, Yabusele and Nader. We also want to keep our cap space in order and don't need another rookie cap hold costing us not being able to offer a max contract.

The Celtics are past the collecting assets part of their rebuild. Its time to cash those assets in for wins.

[Yoki_IsTheName]

I think I would.

That could put us in position to draft two of the following...

Lonzo Ball
Josh Jackson
Jayson Tatum
De'Aaron Fox
Malik Monk
Dennis Smith

I know we don't need more rookies on this team but, man, the idea of being able to get Josh Jackson and Dennis Smith is making me really, really excited for some reason.

I need to be alone for a while...

[Future Celtics Owner]

I think I would.

That could put us in position to draft two of the following...

Lonzo Ball
Josh Jackson
Jayson Tatum
De'Aaron Fox
Malik Monk
Dennis Smith

I know we don't need more rookies on this team but, man, the idea of being able to get Josh Jackson and Dennis Smith is making me really, really excited for some reason.

I need to be alone for a while...

IMO, Dennis Smith Jr could be the steal of the draft and is GREAT value pick.

Best case scenario:
JJ and Lonzo go 1 and 2

Celtics draft:
#3 Fultz
#5 Dennis Smith Jr

BPA is still the name of the game and top young prospects net huge returns.

[No Nickname]

Just draft the guy you want at #1. The Celtics don't need more rookies. They could have upwards of 4 next year with the Nets pick, Zizic, Yabusele and Nader. We also want to keep our cap space in order and don't need another rookie cap hold costing us not being able to offer a max contract.

The Celtics are past the collecting assets part of their rebuild. Its time to cash those assets in for wins.

This is so shortsighted.  You could potentially get two future all stars for the price of one.  Hell trade the #4 pick and just keep #2 if you feel that strongly.

[Phantom255x]

What if Philadelphia land #2 and #4 (via Lakers Pick), and they are interested in Ball/Jackson or someone OTHER than Fultz.

I think Ainge would be FOOLISH not to do that deal (#1 + filler FOR #2 and #4) if it meant adding Fultz AND someone else with #4.

Doubtful but just a possibility.

[Yoki_IsTheName]

I think I would.

That could put us in position to draft two of the following...

Lonzo Ball
Josh Jackson
Jayson Tatum
De'Aaron Fox
Malik Monk
Dennis Smith

I know we don't need more rookies on this team but, man, the idea of being able to get Josh Jackson and Dennis Smith is making me really, really excited for some reason.

I need to be alone for a while...

IMO, Dennis Smith Jr could be the steal of the draft and is GREAT value pick.

Best case scenario:
JJ and Lonzo go 1 and 2

Celtics draft:
#3 Fultz
#5 Dennis Smith Jr

BPA is still the name of the game and top young prospects net huge returns.

If we are not trading our pick, and we miss out on Markelle Fultz and Josh Jackson, I'd really want for us to take Dennis Smith.

He just reminds me of Eric Bledsoe, but probably quicker and more explosive.

Dude can just get to the rim and finish, and he could carve a career where he lives in the FT line. Good feel for the game. He does need some more work (as with most rookies), especially shooting. That's a borderline all-star talent (if he pans out of course) that if I know is reachable at #5, I wouldn't mind trading the #1 pick for (with of course the #3 pick).

[nickagneta]

Just draft the guy you want at #1. The Celtics don't need more rookies. They could have upwards of 4 next year with the Nets pick, Zizic, Yabusele and Nader. We also want to keep our cap space in order and don't need another rookie cap hold costing us not being able to offer a max contract.

The Celtics are past the collecting assets part of their rebuild. Its time to cash those assets in for wins.

This is so shortsighted.  You could potentially get two future all stars for the price of one.  Hell trade the #4 pick and just keep #2 if you feel that strongly.

Or you could be passing up on the only All-Star in this class for two players that become nothing. Or you could be passing up on landing a max free agent for a rookie that becomes nothing.

Also, I don't know where you are getting #2 and #4 from. The question was #1 for #3 and #5.

[Yoki_IsTheName]

Just draft the guy you want at #1. The Celtics don't need more rookies. They could have upwards of 4 next year with the Nets pick, Zizic, Yabusele and Nader. We also want to keep our cap space in order and don't need another rookie cap hold costing us not being able to offer a max contract.

The Celtics are past the collecting assets part of their rebuild. Its time to cash those assets in for wins.

This is so shortsighted.  You could potentially get two future all stars for the price of one.  Hell trade the #4 pick and just keep #2 if you feel that strongly.

Or you could be passing up on the only All-Star in this class for two players that become nothing. Or you could be passing up on landing a max free agent for a rookie that becomes nothing.

Also, I don't know where you are getting #2 and #4 from. The question was #1 for #3 and #5.

But this makes it's intriguing.

Josh Jackson would be within that #3 range, and he could be a potential All-Star. Dennis Smith looks REALLY good, and could also be an All-Star. Jayson Tatum might also sniff that with his versatility.

This is probably the draft class where we could really consider doing a trade like this. Markelle Fultz may end up being a sure thing, but the kids in this class may not be that far behind, and we could get two of them.

[No Nickname]

Just draft the guy you want at #1. The Celtics don't need more rookies. They could have upwards of 4 next year with the Nets pick, Zizic, Yabusele and Nader. We also want to keep our cap space in order and don't need another rookie cap hold costing us not being able to offer a max contract.

The Celtics are past the collecting assets part of their rebuild. Its time to cash those assets in for wins.

This is so shortsighted.  You could potentially get two future all stars for the price of one.  Hell trade the #4 pick and just keep #2 if you feel that strongly.

Or you could be passing up on the only All-Star in this class for two players that become nothing. Or you could be passing up on landing a max free agent for a rookie that becomes nothing.

Also, I don't know where you are getting #2 and #4 from. The question was #1 for #3 and #5.

Sure, you say potato I say po-TA-to.  The theory is that 2-4 are equivalent and not a big step down from #1 (if you say that's Fultz).  So getting a two-for-one is an amazing offer.

You're the one who said the only reason not to do it was because the C's have too many young players or would need to shave more salary to offer a max contract.  In my opinion that's unbelievably short-sighted.  To get the #4 for just moving down from #1 to #2 is an incredible offer that IN THIS DRAFT you just can't pass up.  This isn't the Durant/Oden draft where you have such a cliff after the top two.

[Boris Badenov]

Just for fun, here's what the deal would have looked like, if you made it in each of the last 15 drafts:

Year      #1                    #3 and #5
2001      Kwame Brown           Paul Gasol and Jason Richardson
2002      Yao Ming              Mike Dunleavy and Nikoloz Tskitishvili
2003      Lebron James          Carmelo Anthony and Dwyane Wade
2004      Dwight Howard         Ben Gordon and Devin Harris
2005      Andrew Bogut          Deron Williams and Ray Felton
2006      Andrea Bargnani       Adam Morrison and Shelden Williams
2007      Greg Oden             Al Horford and Jeff Green
2008      Derrick Rose          OJ Mayo and Kevin Love
2009      Blake Griffin         James Harden and Ricky Rubio
2010      John Wall             Derrick Favors and DeMarcus Cousins
2011      Kyrie Irving          Enes Kanter and Jonas Valanciunas
2012      Anthony Davis         Bradley Beal and Thomas Robinson
2013      Anthony Bennett       Otto Porter and Alex Len
2014      Andrew Wiggins        Joel Embiid and Dante Exum
2015      Karl Anthony-Towns    Jahlil Okafor and Mario Hezonja

Looking back, how many times would you trade #1 for #3/#5?

[Yoki_IsTheName]

Just for fun, here's what the deal would have looked like, if you made it in each of the last 15 drafts:

Year      #1                    #3 and #5
2001      Kwame Brown           Paul Gasol and Jason Richardson
2002      Yao Ming              Mike Dunleavy and Nikoloz Tskitishvili
2003      Lebron James          Carmelo Anthony and Dwyane Wade
2004      Dwight Howard         Ben Gordon and Devin Harris
2005      Andrew Bogut          Deron Williams and Ray Felton
2006      Andrea Bargnani       Adam Morrison and Shelden Williams
2007      Greg Oden             Al Horford and Jeff Green
2008      Derrick Rose          OJ Mayo and Kevin Love
2009      Blake Griffin         James Harden and Ricky Rubio
2010      John Wall             Derrick Favors and DeMarcus Cousins
2011      Kyrie Irving          Enes Kanter and Jonas Valanciunas
2012      Anthony Davis         Bradley Beal and Thomas Robinson
2013      Anthony Bennett       Otto Porter and Alex Len
2014      Andrew Wiggins        Joel Embiid and Dante Exum
2015      Karl Anthony-Towns    Jahlil Okafor and Mario Hezonja

Looking back, how many times would you trade #1 for #3/#5?

Since we are dealing with hindsight...

2001: ABSOLUTELY
2002: No
2003: No way
2004: No
2005: Yes (D-Will was fantastic before the injuries)
2006: I'd probably rather just trade OUT of this draft and get a pick for the future ones.
2007: Yes (knowing that Oden won't play)
2008: Yes (knowing Rose's injury concerns)
2009: ABSOLUTELY
2010: Yes (Favors and Cousins could be my bigs of the future? Yes please)
2011: No
2012: No way
2013: Yes
2014: Yes
2015: No way


I'd say about even. The one constant thing is the depth of the draft. If there is depth, I think I would not mind exploring trading the #1 pick if it means getting the #3 and #5.

And this upcoming class has depth...

[Donoghus]

Just for fun, here's what the deal would have looked like, if you made it in each of the last 15 drafts:

Year      #1                    #3 and #5
2001      Kwame Brown           Paul Gasol and Jason Richardson
2002      Yao Ming              Mike Dunleavy and Nikoloz Tskitishvili
2003      Lebron James          Carmelo Anthony and Dwyane Wade
2004      Dwight Howard         Ben Gordon and Devin Harris
2005      Andrew Bogut          Deron Williams and Ray Felton
2006      Andrea Bargnani       Adam Morrison and Shelden Williams
2007      Greg Oden             Al Horford and Jeff Green
2008      Derrick Rose          OJ Mayo and Kevin Love
2009      Blake Griffin         James Harden and Ricky Rubio
2010      John Wall             Derrick Favors and DeMarcus Cousins
2011      Kyrie Irving          Enes Kanter and Jonas Valanciunas
2012      Anthony Davis         Bradley Beal and Thomas Robinson
2013      Anthony Bennett       Otto Porter and Alex Len
2014      Andrew Wiggins        Joel Embiid and Dante Exum
2015      Karl Anthony-Towns    Jahlil Okafor and Mario Hezonja

Looking back, how many times would you trade #1 for #3/#5?

Knowing what we know now?

Yes;  '01, '05, '07, '13 

Maybe; '03, '08, '09, '10, '14

No; '02, '04, '06, '11, '12, '15, '16

[Boris Badenov]

I think the only three definite "yes" answers are '01, '07 and '13.

The definite "no" answers are '02, '03, '04, '11, '12 and '15.

Now, recognize that of the definite "yes" answers, one is because of injury, and the others were in weak drafts.

Of the definite "no" answers, there are no such injury concerns, and many of these answers are in strong drafts.

Then here's my question: without any injury concerns (I don't think there are any), and in a strong draft, why would you pick "yes" now?

[chilidawg]

Taking 1 over 3 and 5 exposes you to more injury risk.  You lose one with two picks, you still have the other.  You lose 1 with one pick and you've got nothing.  So taking 1 is probably bigger upside, but lower downside, on average.

I was about 50/50 on those trades.  This year I certainly make that trade, because I don't see Fultz as significantly better than the next 3.

Boy that 2006 draft was a stinker.

[nickagneta]

Just draft the guy you want at #1. The Celtics don't need more rookies. They could have upwards of 4 next year with the Nets pick, Zizic, Yabusele and Nader. We also want to keep our cap space in order and don't need another rookie cap hold costing us not being able to offer a max contract.

The Celtics are past the collecting assets part of their rebuild. Its time to cash those assets in for wins.

This is so shortsighted.  You could potentially get two future all stars for the price of one.  Hell trade the #4 pick and just keep #2 if you feel that strongly.

Or you could be passing up on the only All-Star in this class for two players that become nothing. Or you could be passing up on landing a max free agent for a rookie that becomes nothing.

Also, I don't know where you are getting #2 and #4 from. The question was #1 for #3 and #5.

Sure, you say potato I say po-TA-to.  The theory is that 2-4 are equivalent and not a big step down from #1 (if you say that's Fultz).  So getting a two-for-one is an amazing offer.

You're the one who said the only reason not to do it was because the C's have too many young players or would need to shave more salary to offer a max contract.  In my opinion that's unbelievably short-sighted.  To get the #4 for just moving down from #1 to #2 is an incredible offer that IN THIS DRAFT you just can't pass up.  This isn't the Durant/Oden draft where you have such a cliff after the top two.

You're still stuck on #2 and #4. That isn't the trade. Its #3 and #5.

And you think its short sighted, I think its better to take your best shot at the draft.

I also am not as enamored with this draft class as some so that is effecting my opinion here. So many, including you, are already crowning these players as future All-Stars and yet not of the top players could even lead their team into the Final Four. Color me unimpressed.