What's the lowest pick you ​would accept for IT

[Roy H.]

#1.

Since we already have it, I see no need to trade IT. Looking into my crystal ball (which I have named "Common Sense"), I can pretty much guarantee nobody in this draft outside of Fultz ever reaches 2nd team All-NBA.

Because the goal of team building is to put guys on the All-NBA teams.

I don't care what the All-NBA team voters decided - these are the same people that put DeRozan on the third team and David Lee on the third team a few years back.

IT is not a top 10 guy. He's barely a top 10 PG. He plays the same position of our incoming franchise player.

We should move him.

Stark reality, guys. ^^^^

If "reality" means opinion that's no based in fact.

[Dino Pitino]

Facts:

He is not a top 10 player.
He is barely a top 10 PG in a league rich with them.
Our incoming franchise player plays his position.

Those are stark facts that lead to an obvious conclusion.

[Jvalin]

Sure, all valid points.

On the other hand, IT is one of the worst (if not the worst) defenders in the league. It's not that he is hiding on D. No matter how hard he tries, he can do pretty much nothing simply because he is 5'9.

Lillard is a below average defender as well, but at least he is 6'3 with a 6'7 ¾" wingspan. When the game is on the line he has the tools to get the job done on D. You can't say the same thing about IT. In fact, CBS subs him in and out of games in the clutch (possession by possession) whenever possible. That's how bad IT is on D.

So Lillard is better because he's taller, even though he's worse on offense and hasn't shown to be Amy better on defense?

Of course he has shown that he is better on defense. Pretty much every single player in the NBA has shown that he is better than IT on defense. Anyway, what I'm saying is that both offense and defense are equally important. So yeah, IT is better on offense but Lillard is the better 2-way player.

That's the difference between Kyrie and Lillard.

Both are just as bad on d in the regular season as Isaiah. Both have the length to rise to the occasion when it matters. Kyrie has done this. Lillard has not.

You can argue that Lillard is better (is strongly disagree, but you could do it) but you can not say he is "definitely" better because it sure as hell isn't obvious

All I said was ''the way I see it, Lillard is definitely better''. It's just my opinion. Obviously, I may as well be wrong.

[Roy H.]

Facts:

He is not a top 10 player.
He is barely a top 10 PG in a league rich with them.
Our incoming franchise player plays his position.

Those are stark facts that lead to an obvious conclusion.

He just combined scoring + effiency in a way that only six players in the history of the NBA have. All are current of future HOFers. The only guard to ever score as many points with as high a TS% is Steph Curry.

[Roy H.]

Sure, all valid points.

On the other hand, IT is one of the worst (if not the worst) defenders in the league. It's not that he is hiding on D. No matter how hard he tries, he can do pretty much nothing simply because he is 5'9.

Lillard is a below average defender as well, but at least he is 6'3 with a 6'7 ¾" wingspan. When the game is on the line he has the tools to get the job done on D. You can't say the same thing about IT. In fact, CBS subs him in and out of games in the clutch (possession by possession) whenever possible. That's how bad IT is on D.

So Lillard is better because he's taller, even though he's worse on offense and hasn't shown to be Amy better on defense?

Of course he has shown that he is better on defense. Pretty much every single player in the NBA has shown that he is better than IT on defense. Anyway, what I'm saying is that both offense and defense are equally important. So yeah, IT is better on offense but Lillard is the better 2-way player

Show me your proof, because I already posted mine.

[Dino Pitino]

Facts:

He is not a top 10 player.
He is barely a top 10 PG in a league rich with them.
Our incoming franchise player plays his position.

Those are stark facts that lead to an obvious conclusion.

He just combined scoring + effiency in a way that only six players in the history of the NBA have. All are current of future HOFers. The only guard to ever score as many points with as high a TS% is Steph Curry.

Nice stat.

He is still in the bottom half of the top 10 PG in the league.

[Jvalin]

Sure, all valid points.

On the other hand, IT is one of the worst (if not the worst) defenders in the league. It's not that he is hiding on D. No matter how hard he tries, he can do pretty much nothing simply because he is 5'9.

Lillard is a below average defender as well, but at least he is 6'3 with a 6'7 ¾" wingspan. When the game is on the line he has the tools to get the job done on D. You can't say the same thing about IT. In fact, CBS subs him in and out of games in the clutch (possession by possession) whenever possible. That's how bad IT is on D.

So Lillard is better because he's taller, even though he's worse on offense and hasn't shown to be Amy better on defense?

Of course he has shown that he is better on defense. Pretty much every single player in the NBA has shown that he is better than IT on defense. Anyway, what I'm saying is that both offense and defense are equally important. So yeah, IT is better on offense but Lillard is the better 2-way player

Show me your proof, because I already posted mine.

What's your proof? The fact that he was selected for the all-NBA teams? These things are announced just for the fans to have something to talk about. I mean, we all know LeBron is hands down the best player in the world and he didn't even make it in the top 3 for the MVP vote. So what? Does this mean he is not a top 3 player anymore? Of course he is. Likewise, IT being voted in the 2nd team doesn't necessarily mean he is the 2nd best PG in the league. Imo, there are at least 8 other guys better than him.

[tazzmaniac]

Facts:

He is not a top 10 player.
He is barely a top 10 PG in a league rich with them.
Our incoming franchise player plays his position.

Those are stark facts that lead to an obvious conclusion.

He just combined scoring + effiency in a way that only six players in the history of the NBA have. All are current of future HOFers. The only guard to ever score as many points with as high a TS% is Steph Curry.

So what?  The regular season really doesn't matter.  In the playoffs against better teams, IT's offense becomes less effective and his defense becomes more of a liability.  The question is can we build a true contender with IT and Horford using nearly 60% of cap.  I don't think just adding Hayward, George or Butler would get us there.  I think we'd need to add one of them and Cousins (with all the risks involved) to get us there.  If Ainge can't see a path for us to be a contender with IT, he needs to trade IT or just let him walk after next season. 

[Ilikesports17]

Facts:

He is not a top 10 player.
He is barely a top 10 PG in a league rich with them.
Our incoming franchise player plays his position.

Those are stark facts that lead to an obvious conclusion.

2 out of your 3 facts are opinions and the third one lacks the context that Isaiah can play both the 1 and 2 offensively and Fultz projects to defend both the one and two and play both offensively as well.

[Ilikesports17]

Sure, all valid points.

On the other hand, IT is one of the worst (if not the worst) defenders in the league. It's not that he is hiding on D. No matter how hard he tries, he can do pretty much nothing simply because he is 5'9.

Lillard is a below average defender as well, but at least he is 6'3 with a 6'7 ¾" wingspan. When the game is on the line he has the tools to get the job done on D. You can't say the same thing about IT. In fact, CBS subs him in and out of games in the clutch (possession by possession) whenever possible. That's how bad IT is on D.

So Lillard is better because he's taller, even though he's worse on offense and hasn't shown to be Amy better on defense?

Of course he has shown that he is better on defense. Pretty much every single player in the NBA has shown that he is better than IT on defense. Anyway, what I'm saying is that both offense and defense are equally important. So yeah, IT is better on offense but Lillard is the better 2-way player

Show me your proof, because I already posted mine.

What's your proof? The fact that he was selected for the all-NBA teams? These things are announced just for the fans to have something to talk about. I mean, we all know LeBron is hands down the best player in the world and he didn't even make it in the top 3 for the MVP vote. So what? Does this mean he is not a top 3 player anymore? Of course he is. Likewise, IT being voted in the 2nd team doesn't mean he is the 2nd best PG in the league. Imo, there are at least 8 other guys better than him.

Lillard has been worse defensively by most metrics save RPM which is super flawed and says that Avery Bradley sucks at defense.

Also all-NBA votes had Lebron as the best player in the world.

[Ilikesports17]

Sure, all valid points.

On the other hand, IT is one of the worst (if not the worst) defenders in the league. It's not that he is hiding on D. No matter how hard he tries, he can do pretty much nothing simply because he is 5'9.

Lillard is a below average defender as well, but at least he is 6'3 with a 6'7 ¾" wingspan. When the game is on the line he has the tools to get the job done on D. You can't say the same thing about IT. In fact, CBS subs him in and out of games in the clutch (possession by possession) whenever possible. That's how bad IT is on D.

So Lillard is better because he's taller, even though he's worse on offense and hasn't shown to be Amy better on defense?

Of course he has shown that he is better on defense. Pretty much every single player in the NBA has shown that he is better than IT on defense. Anyway, what I'm saying is that both offense and defense are equally important. So yeah, IT is better on offense but Lillard is the better 2-way player.

That's the difference between Kyrie and Lillard.

Both are just as bad on d in the regular season as Isaiah. Both have the length to rise to the occasion when it matters. Kyrie has done this. Lillard has not.

You can argue that Lillard is better (is strongly disagree, but you could do it) but you can not say he is "definitely" better because it sure as hell isn't obvious

All I said was ''the way I see it, Lillard is definitely better''. It's just my opinion. Obviously, I may as well be wrong.

Yeah and that's a ridiculous opinion. you can make an argument that they are really close and pollard has the edge because he could feasibly bother people more on defense(despite having not shown any evidence that this is the case) but to act as if it is obvious or that there is a substantial gap between the two is not really an opinion I can take seriously

[kozlodoev]

Trading IT means no Hayward. It's that black and white.

Not sure why it means this. If Hayward is coming here because of Stevens he's still coming here because of Stevens.

I think trading Thomas for a competent big man and the chance to draft Fox makes us every bit as good in the present and more stocked in the future.

Strongly disagree. No way we win 53 games with a "competent big" instead of Thomas.

Furthermore, there's 0% chance you can get a competent big and a chance to draft Fox for An injured expiring Isaiah Thomas

I think I was pretty clear that my floor for trading him is a pick that can fetch us Fox and a starting-caliber big. Wasn't that the question here?

[mctyson]

People continue to forget how deadly IT was on offense this year with no other playmaker on the floor besides Al Horford.

Imagine this team with another player who is deadly in the pick and roll, allowing IT to spot up in the corner, where he makes like 50% on his 3 pt attempts?

[mctyson]

Facts:

He is not a top 10 player.
He is barely a top 10 PG in a league rich with them.
Our incoming franchise player plays his position.

Those are stark facts that lead to an obvious conclusion.

WTH?

He was literally voted as a top-4 GUARD (all guards) this year. 

[Dino Pitino]

Facts:

He is not a top 10 player.
He is barely a top 10 PG in a league rich with them.
Our incoming franchise player plays his position.

Those are stark facts that lead to an obvious conclusion.

2 out of your 3 facts are opinions and the third one lacks the context that Isaiah can play both the 1 and 2 offensively and Fultz projects to defend both the one and two and play both offensively as well.

Just opinions, eh?

You suggesting they aren't true?