If needed, should Ainge actually put Tatum in package for AD? Nope, walk away.

[Who]

I frankly don’t get the Zion hype.

I think there is a bust risk with him. Not a strong handle. Not a good 3 point shot.

Agreed -- High ceiling but low floor.

RJ Barrett is definitely the #1 pick in my book ahead of Zion.

But even guys like Morant and Garland who have All-Star talent too have much higher floors than Zion does.

[A Future of Stevens]

I frankly don’t get the Zion hype.

I think there is a bust risk with him. Not a strong handle. Not a good 3 point shot.

Agreed -- High ceiling but low floor.

RJ Barrett is definitely the #1 pick in my book ahead of Zion.

But even guys like Morant and Garland who have All-Star talent too have much higher floors than Zion does.

I've been laughing at myself for the last few weeks about Morant. I had heard about him during the first few weeks of the season from The Game Theory podcast and talked myself into him a nice safety net for the Kings pick.

He is easily going to be one of the best players in this draft.

[mef730]

Looks like the Lakers offer is Ball, Kuzma, Ingram, Zubac and a first, though maybe not this year's first.

I think that means that besides picks we will absolutely need to trade Tatum and one of Smart or Brown, unless that Sacramento pick turns into a top 4 pick in which case maybe we are able to keep both Smart and Brown.

Lets grade those assets against some likely assets that Boston will offer:

Jayson Tatum 5
Memphis pick 4
Sacramento pick 3
Terry Rozier 2
Robert Williams 2
LA Clippers pick 2
Boston pick 1
Package worth = 19 points

Kyle Kuzma 4
Brandon Ingram 4
Lonzo Ball 3
Ivica Zubac 3
LA Lakers pick 2
Package worth = 16 points

So that package is certainly not unbeatable.

I'm going to look at this from a different angle, although the conclusion is the same.

It's not about the total points. Otherwise, teams would trade one 5* player for three 3*. Rather, it's about the top of the chart. Who is giving up the best assets?

To me, it's inarguable that Tatum is a better asset than anything LA is offering. It's also arguable that the Memphis pick is more valuable, as well as Jaylen Brown. But the bottom line is that, with the Celtics offer, you're getting two or three of the top assets. You'd much rather have quality than quantity.

How are the Knicks a threat when they just gave up Porzingis and friends for Dennis Smith Jr. and add ons?

I don't see the Knicks being able to offer anything near the Celtics or Lakers given that Porzingis is now gone to Dallas.

It's a more unknown package, based upon draft picks and potential rather than on guys who have proven themselves.

But, this is a solid offer if the pick lands top three: 

2019 lottery pick
2021 NYK pick
2021 Dallas pick
2023 Dallas pick

Kevin Knox
Frank Ntilikina
Donald Smith Jr.

Ours is better, but it's a pipe dream to think we wouldn't need to include Tatum.

Here's where it gets a bit trickier. Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that the Knicks end up with the #1 pick. We're going to have to figure out how much the Pelicans value Zion, which is not an easy thing to do. Are they looking at him solely as a prospect or as a guy who could electrify the city with with his style of play and sell a fortune in t-shirts? I'm not saying that he's a better player than Tatum, but I'd bet that he sells a lot more merchandise.

If the Pels place a lot of value on him and, in the 14% chance that the Knicks end up at #1, that offer may start to look attractive to them. Heck, if the Knicks get the #2 pick, it could look attractive. That's two unprotected picks, one protected one and a bunch of young guys with some serious potential. And yes, Dallas is probably going to be pretty good. But we said the same thing about the Nets.

I've seen a lot of crazy things regarding Zion. I'm not ruling it out that they value him as much as they value Tatum.

I'm rooting hard for the 72% chance that the balls place NYK at #3 or worse.

Mike

[Bobshot]

I haven't been through the many posts here, so I'm sure it has been covered. But the trade checker says they need about $21M worth of salaries going to the Pels for Davis. That could include Tatum, Brown and several others, including Baynes, Morris, Yabu, etc. I understand Rozier can't be dealt as a FA, and Smart doesn't not need to be dealt. I assume none of top salary guys are a consideration. There would have to be some salary back from the Pels for that.

Chances are any deal would have to include Tatum and Brown plus Morris or Baynes. Not sure how the draft picks fit into this picture.

[Phantom255x]

You can give up Brown, Picks and $$$ to get a guy who claims to be a rental.

You DO NOT however trade Tatum without some sort of agreement/commitment, period.

If they want to then just take that LAL Package (Zubac, Ingram, Ball, Kuzma, KCP/Lance, Picks) they can go ahead.

[ferguson]

Tatum must not be included in a trade for Davis.  You are mortgaging the future if you include him.  The celtics can't afford to lose Tatum, Brown, Smart, Rozier, Morris, Williams and draft picks in one year(some in the trade and some to free agency) to get Davis.  This with no guarantee that Kyrie will stay. If it all works out with the salaries of Kyrie, Davis, Hayward, and a resigned Horford no money will be left for the rest of the team.  Not to mention you traded away your draft picks and any future picks will be late round picks.  If one or two of those guys go down with injuries we are screwed.
In year two Tatum is ahead of where most present superstars were at that time. I think we would be trading a Kobe type talent

[footey]

Anthony Davis is still 25 and an all pro. That’s quite a future too.

[ferguson]

He'll be 26 in March and as seen in New Orleans it will take more than him to win.  We already have seen that Kyrie doesn't like to share the limelight.  There are no guarantees that Kyrie stays even if the trade happens.  Then all of a sudden we become New Orleans

[mqtcelticsfan]

Tatum must not be included in a trade for Davis.  You are mortgaging the future if you include him.  The celtics can't afford to lose Tatum, Brown, Smart, Rozier, Morris, Williams and draft picks in one year(some in the trade and some to free agency) to get Davis.  This with no guarantee that Kyrie will stay. If it all works out with the salaries of Kyrie, Davis, Hayward, and a resigned Horford no money will be left for the rest of the team.  Not to mention you traded away your draft picks and any future picks will be late round picks.  If one or two of those guys go down with injuries we are screwed.
In year two Tatum is ahead of where most present superstars were at that time. I think we would be trading a Kobe type talent

As a Platinum Member of the Don’t Trade Tatum Club, there are a couple major issues with your scenario.

1) Trading Tatum ultimately reduces the amount of other assets going to NO. There’s no way we lose all those pieces of Tatum headlines the deal.

2) I’m going to go out on a limb and say the Celtics will have a complete picture of Kyrie’s plans before making a deal, given that he has to re-sign or not before we can acquire Davis.

[nickagneta]

If Davis is obtained it's pretty common knowledge that Kyrie is a certainty to re-sign.

Also, the Celtics ownership has already said they will pay the luxury tax to field a perrenial contender. So no worries, Davis, Hayward, Irving and Horford will have other good players. My guess is Brown and/or Smart will return to fill out the starting five and the bench will have Baynes, Ojeleye, maybe Yabusele, maybe Williams and if Horford opts out and signs for less, maybe Morris or Rozier. Plus we have the tax payer MLE that will bring in a quality bench player. We will be fine.

[KGBirdBias]

I'm not trading Tatum unless AD signs an extension the day of the trade. 🤷🏾‍♂️

Include Brown, Hayward, Rozier, Theis, Yabu, 4 #1s

He's untouchable in my eyes.

[keevsnick]

Tatum must not be included in a trade for Davis.  You are mortgaging the future if you include him.  The celtics can't afford to lose Tatum, Brown, Smart, Rozier, Morris, Williams and draft picks in one year(some in the trade and some to free agency) to get Davis.  This with no guarantee that Kyrie will stay. If it all works out with the salaries of Kyrie, Davis, Hayward, and a resigned Horford no money will be left for the rest of the team.  Not to mention you traded away your draft picks and any future picks will be late round picks.  If one or two of those guys go down with injuries we are screwed.
In year two Tatum is ahead of where most present superstars were at that time. I think we would be trading a Kobe type talent

If Tatum gets us Davis, I think Irving resigns. So for Davis and Irving I would carry Tatum to the airport on my back.

[ferguson]

Haywards salary doesn't fit in the trade machine in that scenario.  NO will surely demand Williams for post play and because of salary we will probably lose Rozier and Morris to free agency.

Common knowledge and certainty doesn't apply when dealing with Kyrie

[SHAQATTACK]

Kyrie , AD and Tatum are my Celtic big three.
I hope Timelord can survive and be cheap AD backup.

Hayward , Horford, Rozier , Mook , Brown are Danny s work load to get there ....what ever the means ......keep em , trade m  , smoke em ,  what ever. Thin the herd set the stage .

[Jvalin]

I'd have no problem whatsoever including Tatum in a trade with New Orleans as long as AD signs an extension with the C's (like KG did back in 2007). If not, I'm not even sure I'd like us to trade for AD.

Hate to say it, but AD wants to play for the Fakers. Wouldn't want us to trade assets for a one-year rental, only to see AD ending up with the Fakers for absolutely nothing.