I don't know what this means. They have so many "top" assets, and most certainly can afford to give up one of the top firsts. Not the Nets pick, but the Lakers pick would seem to be reasonable.
This makes no sense to me because a main incentive for trading George to the Celtics is they have young assets--including draft picks, as well as good inexpensive players like Crowder and Bradley.
I see George as a win-win situation. I don't think they can beat the Cavs next year without him. They can't sign two FAs. They have to make one trade for a star.