Poll

Which other young Laker + #2  would you want?

#2 + Ingram
12 (60%)
#2 + Randle
5 (25%)
#2 + Russell
3 (15%)

Total Members Voted: 20

Author Topic: Celtics bluff taking Ball. Which other young Laker + #2 would you want? (Poll)  (Read 2146 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Tr1boy

  • Paul Pierce
  • ***************************
  • Posts: 27260
  • Tommy Points: 867
Scenerio: Celtics bluff to take Ball at #1. Magic really wants Ball and is willing to give up one of their promising young players for Ball.

Celtics trade #1, #37 plus Crowder for one of the choices above. Which package would you take?

Offline JohnBoy65

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 916
  • Tommy Points: 132
Magic went on the record yesterday saying Ingram was untouchable. Don't think we can grab him.

Online Donoghus

  • Global Moderator
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31068
  • Tommy Points: 1616
  • What a Pub Should Be
Is there a point of having both Russell & Fultz?


2010 CB Historical Draft - Best Overall Team

Offline CelticsElite

  • NCE
  • Danny Ainge
  • **********
  • Posts: 10774
  • Tommy Points: 789
Poll flawed. They're not moving Ingram and they'll just take fultz from us. Then we would be stuck with lonzo sitting out the season until a trade

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58752
  • Tommy Points: -25628
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
If the Lakers trade up to #1, it's to take Fultz.


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Offline sdceltsfan

  • Jrue Holiday
  • Posts: 347
  • Tommy Points: 45
In poker, bluffing is always a bad idea if you think the other players at the table have any idea what your hand is.

The Lakers, and pretty much the rest of the league, know exactly what the Celtics have. And to be honest, they shouldn't do anything to try to screw it up. The Lakers only want Ball because they CANT get Fultz at #2......unless of course, some ridiculous scenario happens, like the Celtics drafting Ball, in attempts to force the Lakers hand.

The only teams we should realistically be fielding offers from is Philly and Phoenix. Trading with them gives us a selection of Josh Jackson or Jason Taytum. I just don't see either team giving us one of the players we would actually want to make the trade down.

For trading with Philly, we should be asking for #3 and Simmons, but no way Philly does that. They offer us some combo of #3, Saric, Okafor, and future picks.....in that case I'd rather keep Fultz.

With Phoenix, we would be asking for #4, Chriss, and Booker for #1. Phoenix says it's too much, and I doubt Boston takes #4 and just one of either of those guys. As talented as Booker is and Chriss could be, Fultz still far and away has the All-NBA potential that I'm not seeing in the combo of players we walk away with in the trade.

Offline KG Living Legend

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8635
  • Tommy Points: 1136
 Theoretically speaking. If there was a prearranged deal made. Is there anyway to make sure we don't get screwed.

 If we took Ball first just to trade with the Lakers and get Fultz and Randle.

 Randle is the only player that makes sense, although none of this is going to happen.
« Last Edit: May 26, 2017, 03:35:58 PM by KG Living Legend »

Offline Bobshot

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2050
  • Tommy Points: 141
Won't happen. Fultz is just too good to pass up. This isn't last year's draft.

Offline fairweatherfan

  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20738
  • Tommy Points: 2365
  • Be the posts you wish to see in the world.
I mean, you take Ingram, but the whole premise is wildly unrealistic.  Why not just ask which one people would rather trade for?

Online Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 47465
  • Tommy Points: 2404
Is there a point of having both Russell & Fultz?

I like it. Russell is more of a two guard than a PG anyway. I like them together sharing the ball-handling and playmaking duties. I think they'd be a dynamic combination.

Clarkson never worked well alongside Russell. Two ball-dominant. Bad shooter. Only useful with the ball in his hands. Doesn't play defense. Not well rounded enough. Fultz has the tools to be a well-rounded player and is capable of playing both on and off the ball. A much better fit alongside Russell.

Offline CelticsElite

  • NCE
  • Danny Ainge
  • **********
  • Posts: 10774
  • Tommy Points: 789
We have zero leverage thanks to ball willing to sit it out and not wanting to work out

Offline NHCelticsFan

  • Al Horford
  • Posts: 403
  • Tommy Points: 179
I'd want Nance most of all.  We already have Jaylen, so I don't need Ingram and we would take a guard with the #2 pick.

I think Nance is going to be a really good player.  If he wasn't behind Randle he might have already shown it.  Really like Larry.

Offline Tr1boy

  • Paul Pierce
  • ***************************
  • Posts: 27260
  • Tommy Points: 867
I'd want Nance most of all.  We already have Jaylen, so I don't need Ingram and we would take a guard with the #2 pick.

I think Nance is going to be a really good player.  If he wasn't behind Randle he might have already shown it.  Really like Larry.

Too bad he has been battling injuries do far in his career...but I agree Nance is a good looking prospect

Offline Celtics4ever

  • NCE
  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20000
  • Tommy Points: 1323
I think the odds are good Magic won't be a good GM, he was not a good coach.   Great player though.    There is no one in that young core I would really want but Philly is another thing.   I think they have more desirable assets.

Offline positivitize

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2565
  • Tommy Points: 614
  • Puns of steel
No. Don't mess around with Fultz. Take him and run all the way to the bank.
My biases, in order of fervor:
Pro:
Smart, Brown, Hayward, Tatum, Kemba, Grant Williams, Sleepy Williams, Edwards!

Anti:
Kanter, Semi, Theis, Poierier