The 76ers are fools for not knowing were taking Tatum #1

[Dino Pitino]

Funny how Fultz was the consensus #1 on all the "expert" mocks but if no trades had been made and each team picked who they valued the highest then the draft would've gone Tatum first, Ball second, and Fultz third.

[jambr380]

Funny how Fultz was the consensus #1 on all the "expert" mocks but if no trades had been made and each team picked who they valued the highest then the draft would've gone Tatum first, Ball second, and Fultz third.

I think it's easy for media and websites to get persuaded by what the majority is saying - once a head of steam gets going behind a prospect, it is tough to slow it down. Regardless of whether or not Fultz ends up being the top player from this draft, it was in everybody's best interest to keep pushing the player that everybody was saying was #1. Nobody wants to be the one that had Darko over Lebron.

[moiso]

I don't buy that the Celtics wouldn't have taken Fultz with their #1 pick.

I don't really buy it either.  And if Fultz were available there is a very good chance that the Lakers would have grabbed him too.

[Eja117]

I don't buy that the Celtics wouldn't have taken Fultz with their #1 pick.

Me neither

[tazzmaniac]

The Lakers had already messed up the Sixers plans in a previous draft by taking Russell over Okafor.  There is no guarantee they wouldn't have taken Fultz over Ball.  There is also the possibility that the Suns or Kings might have tried to trade up if Fultz were available at #2.  The Lakers might have been able to trade down and still get Ball.  There is a good chance the Sixers would have taken Jackson or Smith over Ball. 

[Celtics4ever]

At the top of the draft secrets are not kept well. The last time I remember not being certain of the #1 pick was When the Cavs took Bennett #1.

Right up there with Darko and Greg Oden.

I don't buy that the Celtics wouldn't have taken Fultz with their #1 pick.

They had the number one pick and traded down, and added a pick.  I don't see how you could not buy it.  Ainge was in the driver seat and there were rumors of Fultz not shooting well at our workout.  If he wanted him he could have taken him, he didn't and traded down and added an asset and got his guy.

ESPN’s Jeff Goodman went on WEEI’s “Dale and Holley with Keefe” on Monday and shed some light on the Washington guard’s audition. “From what I’m told, Fultz didn’t shoot the ball exceptionally well in his workout in Boston,” Goodman said. “But they know he can shoot the ball. So, it’s one workout. … I still think it’s gonna be Fultz at (No. 1), Lonzo Ball at (No. 2).”

Read more at: http://nesn.com/2017/06/markelle-fultz-reportedly-had-bad-shooting-day-in-celtics-workout/

[BudweiserCeltic]

At the top of the draft secrets are not kept well. The last time I remember not being certain of the #1 pick was When the Cavs took Bennett #1.

Right up there with Darko and Greg Oden.

I don't buy that the Celtics wouldn't have taken Fultz with their #1 pick.

They had the number one pick and traded down, and added a pick.  I don't see how you could not buy it.  Ainge was in the driver seat and there were rumors of Fultz not shooting well at our workout.  If he wanted him he could have taken him, he didn't and traded down and added an asset and got his guy.

ESPN’s Jeff Goodman went on WEEI’s “Dale and Holley with Keefe” on Monday and shed some light on the Washington guard’s audition. “From what I’m told, Fultz didn’t shoot the ball exceptionally well in his workout in Boston,” Goodman said. “But they know he can shoot the ball. So, it’s one workout. … I still think it’s gonna be Fultz at (No. 1), Lonzo Ball at (No. 2).”

Read more at: http://nesn.com/2017/06/markelle-fultz-reportedly-had-bad-shooting-day-in-celtics-workout/

That they traded down for me is not indicative of anything, and I'm not selling the idea that they wanted Tatum all along. I'm just not buying that they would've used the 1st pick of the draft on him.

[chilidawg]

Fultz had a really good workout with the Lakers.  A lot of stories like the one below popped up indicating they were trying to swap spots with the Celtics to take him.

https://www.sbnation.com/platform/amp/nba/2017/6/18/15826386/lakers-markelle-fultz-lonzo-ball-2017-nba-draft

If the Lakers were sniffing around, it makes sense for the Sixers to secure the first pick by adding an asset like the 2018 pick to the trade.  I've viewed this trade from the start as one of those that both sides (Sixers and Celtics) can feel good about.  We'll see how the players work out, but that's just 20/20 hindsight.

This is how I see it as well.

[RockinRyA]

They probably had an idea we were taking Tatum. What they dont know was if the Lakers wouldve picked Fultz if he was available.

[hwangjini_1]

At the top of the draft secrets are not kept well. The last time I remember not being certain of the #1 pick was When the Cavs took Bennett #1.

Right up there with Darko and Greg Oden.

I don't buy that the Celtics wouldn't have taken Fultz with their #1 pick.

They had the number one pick and traded down, and added a pick.  I don't see how you could not buy it.  Ainge was in the driver seat and there were rumors of Fultz not shooting well at our workout.  If he wanted him he could have taken him, he didn't and traded down and added an asset and got his guy.

ESPN’s Jeff Goodman went on WEEI’s “Dale and Holley with Keefe” on Monday and shed some light on the Washington guard’s audition. “From what I’m told, Fultz didn’t shoot the ball exceptionally well in his workout in Boston,” Goodman said. “But they know he can shoot the ball. So, it’s one workout. … I still think it’s gonna be Fultz at (No. 1), Lonzo Ball at (No. 2).”

Read more at: http://nesn.com/2017/06/markelle-fultz-reportedly-had-bad-shooting-day-in-celtics-workout/

That they traded down for me is not indicative of anything, and I'm not selling the idea that they wanted Tatum all along. I'm just not buying that they would've used the 1st pick of the draft on him.

sorry to have to ask this bc, but aside from wishful thinking, what basis do you have for your argument above? ainge could have drafted fultz if he wanted him. he did not HAVE to trade the #1 away. but he did. ainge simply did not seem to value fultz the same way you do.

[TheSundanceKid]

I think Philly was scared that LAL would have taken Fultz at #2 if we'd picked Tatum first, which would have left them with Ball. Not sure how well Ball and Simmons would work together.

That certainly doesn't make it worth it on their end, but that was probably what they were thinking if they knew we had Tatum on the top of our board.

Well this is it right? It doesn't matter who we took at #1, Fultz wasn't getting to #3 so Philly had to make a move. Although we complained a lot about the trade it was really good value for Danny.

[Dino Pitino]

Funny how Fultz was the consensus #1 on all the "expert" mocks but if no trades had been made and each team picked who they valued the highest then the draft would've gone Tatum first, Ball second, and Fultz third.

I think it's easy for media and websites to get persuaded by what the majority is saying - once a head of steam gets going behind a prospect, it is tough to slow it down. Regardless of whether or not Fultz ends up being the top player from this draft, it was in everybody's best interest to keep pushing the player that everybody was saying was #1. Nobody wants to be the one that had Darko over Lebron.

Yep, TP. Groupthink begets itself.

[mqtcelticsfan]

The Lakers had already messed up the Sixers plans in a previous draft by taking Russell over Okafor.  There is no guarantee they wouldn't have taken Fultz over Ball.  There is also the possibility that the Suns or Kings might have tried to trade up if Fultz were available at #2.  The Lakers might have been able to trade down and still get Ball.  There is a good chance the Sixers would have taken Jackson or Smith over Ball.

Exactly. Any number of scenarios existed where Philly does not get Fultz if they stay at 3. Whether it's Boston taking Fultz, LA taking Fultz or any other team trading up with either of them to take Fultz, and obviously Philly would have a reason to be concerned that Boston would trade the pick given that they were discussing a trade themselves. Even if the rumblings were there that Boston favored Tatum, it's not like there weren't rumblings they liked Butler, George or KP.

[Granath]

At the top of the draft secrets are not kept well. The last time I remember not being certain of the #1 pick was When the Cavs took Bennett #1.

Right up there with Darko and Greg Oden.

I don't buy that the Celtics wouldn't have taken Fultz with their #1 pick.

They had the number one pick and traded down, and added a pick.  I don't see how you could not buy it.  Ainge was in the driver seat and there were rumors of Fultz not shooting well at our workout.  If he wanted him he could have taken him, he didn't and traded down and added an asset and got his guy.

ESPN’s Jeff Goodman went on WEEI’s “Dale and Holley with Keefe” on Monday and shed some light on the Washington guard’s audition. “From what I’m told, Fultz didn’t shoot the ball exceptionally well in his workout in Boston,” Goodman said. “But they know he can shoot the ball. So, it’s one workout. … I still think it’s gonna be Fultz at (No. 1), Lonzo Ball at (No. 2).”

Read more at: http://nesn.com/2017/06/markelle-fultz-reportedly-had-bad-shooting-day-in-celtics-workout/

That they traded down for me is not indicative of anything, and I'm not selling the idea that they wanted Tatum all along. I'm just not buying that they would've used the 1st pick of the draft on him.

sorry to have to ask this bc, but aside from wishful thinking, what basis do you have for your argument above? ainge could have drafted fultz if he wanted him. he did not HAVE to trade the #1 away. but he did. ainge simply did not seem to value fultz the same way you do.

To be honest hwangjini_1 I'm not sure I'm buying that either.

I know that became the narrative as soon as Ainge traded the pick but that was the only narrative to sell a Celtics Nation who wanted to hang Danny by his earlobes for trading the #1. I don't know if Danny truly preferred Tatum or he thought that Tatum and Fultz were close enough in talent to make trading down a viable option. We'll never know.

I do know it took some massive balls to make that deal. If Tatum - or the LAL 18 pick - doesn't turn out to be at least close to the level of Fultz then that will always taint Ainge's legacy. The Cs could win 3 Championships over the next 10 years but if Fultz > Tatum + LAL18 then the narrative will be "how many more would we have won if Danny didn't make that deal"? It takes some major cajones to buck the consensus when you know doing so will always define you. The safer move would be to take Fultz.

Of course, if he did that then this season would be defined by a constant narrative of "can Fultz make IT expendible?". Plus we'd only have one more guaranteed lottery shot. By making the move Ainge removed that possible cloud and created even more of an opportunity next year. So I'm not saying it was the wrong move. But I'm not sure I'd have had the guts to make it.

[moiso]

At the top of the draft secrets are not kept well. The last time I remember not being certain of the #1 pick was When the Cavs took Bennett #1.

Right up there with Darko and Greg Oden.

I don't buy that the Celtics wouldn't have taken Fultz with their #1 pick.

They had the number one pick and traded down, and added a pick.  I don't see how you could not buy it.  Ainge was in the driver seat and there were rumors of Fultz not shooting well at our workout.  If he wanted him he could have taken him, he didn't and traded down and added an asset and got his guy.

ESPN’s Jeff Goodman went on WEEI’s “Dale and Holley with Keefe” on Monday and shed some light on the Washington guard’s audition. “From what I’m told, Fultz didn’t shoot the ball exceptionally well in his workout in Boston,” Goodman said. “But they know he can shoot the ball. So, it’s one workout. … I still think it’s gonna be Fultz at (No. 1), Lonzo Ball at (No. 2).”

Read more at: http://nesn.com/2017/06/markelle-fultz-reportedly-had-bad-shooting-day-in-celtics-workout/

That they traded down for me is not indicative of anything, and I'm not selling the idea that they wanted Tatum all along. I'm just not buying that they would've used the 1st pick of the draft on him.

sorry to have to ask this bc, but aside from wishful thinking, what basis do you have for your argument above? ainge could have drafted fultz if he wanted him. he did not HAVE to trade the #1 away. but he did. ainge simply did not seem to value fultz the same way you do.

To be honest hwangjini_1 I'm not sure I'm buying that either.

I know that became the narrative as soon as Ainge traded the pick but that was the only narrative to sell a Celtics Nation who wanted to hang Danny by his earlobes for trading the #1. I don't know if Danny truly preferred Tatum or he thought that Tatum and Fultz were close enough in talent to make trading down a viable option. We'll never know.

I do know it took some massive balls to make that deal. If Tatum - or the LAL 18 pick - doesn't turn out to be at least close to the level of Fultz then that will always taint Ainge's legacy. The Cs could win 3 Championships over the next 10 years but if Fultz > Tatum + LAL18 then the narrative will be "how many more would we have won if Danny didn't make that deal"? It takes some major cajones to buck the consensus when you know doing so will always define you. The safer move would be to take Fultz.

Of course, if he did that then this season would be defined by a constant narrative of "can Fultz make IT expendible?". Plus we'd only have one more guaranteed lottery shot. By making the move Ainge removed that possible cloud and created even more of an opportunity next year. So I'm not saying it was the wrong move. But I'm not sure I'd have had the guts to make it.

Me either.  Very ballsy.  Even if Fultz flops, it would be tough to criticize Ainge for taking him.  If Fultz ends up better than Tatum and the future pick isn't amazing, Ainge will be killed for making the trade.