Jackie Mac Rumor: Ainge offered IT for lottery pick in last years draft

[ThaPreacher]

Absolutely love this rumor!! Advocating for months now we should move on from IT. No matter what we do, the Cavs and the Warriors are on another level. We have to take a small step back and build through the draft. Fultz is the perfect replacement for IT.

Unfortunately, it seems like the market value for IT isn't particularly high. The way I see it, IT for Myles Turner is as good of a return as we can expect. Another idea would be IT + Boston 2018 for Saric and the Sacramento 2019 unprotected first. Or we could always move him for a lottery pick on draft night, the way Jackie Mac reported we tried to do last year.

Myles Turner is not going to be  traded,  by all accounts the Pacers are  going to build around him. You and other Celticsbloggers need to move on from him. He's miles away, literally and figuratively, from playing in TD Bank.

[Jvalin]

1) I don't think we can get fair market value for IT, but I would accept a bad trade because the alternative is he walks July , 2018.
2) I accept that IT is the best player on the team, today.
3) I get that the offense runs through IT and he is our only consistent scorer.
4) I believe that we will sign Hayward, who is a legit 20+ scorer so he provides reliable offense.
5) I believe that after two full nba seasons Brown will be ready to be relied on as a consistent scoring threat.
6) I believe  that after a full nba season Fultz will be ready to be relied on as a consistent scoring threat.
7) Today we get the bulk of our offense from IT, Bradley and Crowder. I only want to move IT so we would keep Bradley and Crowder, only they would move to the bench giving us a strong bench.
So we replace IT's offense with Hayward, Fultz, and Brown.  And keep Bradley and Crowder so we keep their offense.
9) we suffer no drop in offense letting IT walk and we get a defensive boost because we don't have to compensate for IT's horrid D.
10) if we can get a solid rotational player for him I'll take it because I do not believe IT will be a celtic after his contact is up.
11) of course if we can get a fair trade and a good player, preferably a big man (IT to the Kincks for Porzingis) that would be ideal.

When you say rotational player you mean you would be willing to trade him for a solid bench guy or something? Can you give an example of what exactly you have in mind?

[snively]

I could see it if they were trying to trade for a top 5 selection (i.e. Simmons, Ingram, Murray, etc).


Remember, though, that at this time last year the Celts were coming off a 1st round exit, and Isaiah was a fringe All-Star selection.


Given the team signing Horford to a long term deal, Isaiah making himself an MVP candidate, and the team going on a run to the ECF, one would have to assume the asking price for Isaiah is a lot higher than a lottery pick, even one in the top 5.

Isaiah is an MVP candidate like DeRozan is a third team All-NBAer - technically true but not really all that significant. This is the same guy that got low-balled into an MLE deal after averaging 20ppg and then got almost immediately dumped for a late first after playing well. He's always been praised and talked up and then when it's time to pay-up he doesn't get as much as you'd think.

His value has grown as a player, certainly since his last trade and also over last year, but his value as a contract has also decreased, so I expect his trade value to be significantly less than his accolades.

I think the best and most likely trade partner for him would be Dallas at #9. Dallas has always been a Danny go to for star-for-pick trades, from Toine to Rondo. Dallas has probably the biggest appetites for flawed stars in the league (Toine, JET, old Kidd, Chandler, Ellis, Rondo)  and very little qualms about moving picks or dealing with upcoming contracts. Carlisle also loves scoring PNR guards.

I'd be keen on moving IT to Dallas for #9 and future considerations (with Barea as filler) for a chance at Zach Collins. Collins is going to a great big man.

Ugh.  I can't even speak to that idea beyond that.  Trading a star pick and roll scorer for a potential role player at the easiest to fill position in the league?

Ugh.

Collins is a 7 footer with legit standing reach (9'3, ie 3+ inches on all of our current bigs). He has burgeoning range out to 3. He's a legit shot blocker. He can rebound. He can score in the post and should be able to score in the mid-post a la Horford with a little more polish. He can move his feet very well defensively.

That's not so easy a position to fill. Embiid, Davis, Jokic, Towns, Turner, M. Gasol (even old and declining) and Porzingis are prized commodities for a reason and DMC would be too if he wasn't the most toxic personality in the league.

Meanwhile we'll have 2 scoring PGs as soon as we draft Fultz. Plus combo guards in Smart and Rozier and a psuedo-PG in AB. And what are our big man options? An aging undersized Horford who has been in consecutive years by Cleveland and may be on his way to a third. A short-armed unathletic KO? Collapsing undersized Amir? Declining bench combo-forward Jerebko?

How about FA? Declining older than his listed age Ibaka? Mr. Injury and non-impact defender Blake Griffin? 6'8 and aging Paul Millsap?

[Jvalin]

Absolutely love this rumor!! Advocating for months now we should move on from IT. No matter what we do, the Cavs and the Warriors are on another level. We have to take a small step back and build through the draft. Fultz is the perfect replacement for IT.

Unfortunately, it seems like the market value for IT isn't particularly high. The way I see it, IT for Myles Turner is as good of a return as we can expect. Another idea would be IT + Boston 2018 for Saric and the Sacramento 2019 unprotected first. Or we could always move him for a lottery pick on draft night, the way Jackie Mac reported we tried to do last year.

Myles Turner is not going to be  traded,  by all accounts the Pacers are  going to build around him. You and other Celticsbloggers need to move on from him. He's miles away, literally and figuratively, from playing in TD Bank.

Fair enough. Just trying to put ideas out there for discussion. If you have a better idea in mind I'm all ears. Having said that, I do believe that if the Pacers try to go into win-now mode in order to keep Paul George, there is a chance they might have some sort of interest in this. I guess we could throw in a sweetener as well.

Let's say IT + non Brooklyn first for Myles Turner. It may have to be a 3-way with the pick going to the third team and the Pacers getting back a win-now veteran.

[saltlover]

I could see it if they were trying to trade for a top 5 selection (i.e. Simmons, Ingram, Murray, etc).


Remember, though, that at this time last year the Celts were coming off a 1st round exit, and Isaiah was a fringe All-Star selection.


Given the team signing Horford to a long term deal, Isaiah making himself an MVP candidate, and the team going on a run to the ECF, one would have to assume the asking price for Isaiah is a lot higher than a lottery pick, even one in the top 5.

Isaiah is an MVP candidate like DeRozan is a third team All-NBAer - technically true but not really all that significant. This is the same guy that got low-balled into an MLE deal after averaging 20ppg and then got almost immediately dumped for a late first after playing well. He's always been praised and talked up and then when it's time to pay-up he doesn't get as much as you'd think.

His value has grown as a player, certainly since his last trade and also over last year, but his value as a contract has also decreased, so I expect his trade value to be significantly less than his accolades.

I think the best and most likely trade partner for him would be Dallas at #9. Dallas has always been a Danny go to for star-for-pick trades, from Toine to Rondo. Dallas has probably the biggest appetites for flawed stars in the league (Toine, JET, old Kidd, Chandler, Ellis, Rondo)  and very little qualms about moving picks or dealing with upcoming contracts. Carlisle also loves scoring PNR guards.

I'd be keen on moving IT to Dallas for #9 and future considerations (with Barea as filler) for a chance at Zach Collins. Collins is going to a great big man.

Ugh.  I can't even speak to that idea beyond that.  Trading a star pick and roll scorer for a potential role player at the easiest to fill position in the league?

Ugh.

Collins is a 7 footer with legit standing reach (9'3, ie 3+ inches on all of our current bigs). He has burgeoning range out to 3. He's a legit shot blocker. He can rebound. He can score in the post and should be able to score in the mid-post a la Horford with a little more polish. He can move his feet very well defensively.

That's not so easy a position to fill. Embiid, Davis, Jokic, Towns, Turner, M. Gasol (even old and declining) and Porzingis are prized commodities for a reason and DMC would be too if he wasn't the most toxic personality in the league.

Meanwhile we'll have 2 scoring PGs as soon as we draft Fultz. Plus combo guards in Smart and Rozier and a psuedo-PG in AB. And what are our big man options? An aging undersized Horford who has been in consecutive years by Cleveland and may be on his way to a third. A short-armed unathletic KO? Collapsing undersized Amir? Declining bench combo-forward Jerebko?

How about FA? Declining older than his listed age Ibaka? Mr. Injury and non-impact defender Blake Griffin? 6'8 and aging Paul Millsap?

If Collins were that highly thought of, he would not be available at #9, and would be a viable option at #1.

[PhoSita]

Yeah, if Collins were a Towns or Embiid level prospect, which is how he sounds based on Snively's description, that would be one thing.

But from what I've seen and read Collins is borderline starter / decent role player type prospect, and he doesn't necessarily project to have a great jumper at the next level, which means he'll be relegated to a role as an energy big unless he's physically dominant as a defender or rim roller.

[nickagneta]

Gotta think this was to Philly to get Simmons. Philly would need Smart and IT considering they had Embiid, Noel, Okafor, and Saric and crap guards. Philly said no and Danny moved on. If Simmons is going to be as good as we think, it would have been a good move.

Seriously doubt it was any other pick he was going after.

[snively]

My response to people who want to trade IT, as always, is what do you feel the opportunity cost is for retaining him?

Or in other words, what is to be gained by letting him go?

Simply your feeling that he may not be worth $40 million when he is age 34-35 does not mean the team has a better option.

The most obvious opportunity cost is not getting better-fitting trade assets for him now - he will either walk for nothing in 2018 or become a likely difficult to trade max contract.

The next most obvious: playing/development time for Fultz, likely a better player in the near future.

I think they can play together.  I don't see a problem with not handing the keys to the team over to Fultz right away.  Players like that tend to need some development time.

As for better-fitting trade assets, the question is what you think you can really get for a player like IT on the last year of his deal.

It's really hard to get fair value for stars in general, but especially hard to get fair value for a guy with an obvious glaring flaw (i.e. size / defense) on the last year of his deal.

I'm also just not sure how you can be confident it would make the Celts better.

Isn't our problem that we don't have enough star talent?  How is trading IT for a couple role players and a pick (for example) going to help that?

Fultz and IT are a bad combo for the same reason Lillard and CJ are - loads of offense, terrible defense in combination. It's a recipe for high-end mediocrity.

IT's massive defensive issues make him a big problem next to other offensive oriented stars. His reliance on high PNR /4 shooters in particular makes him a high maintenance star as well - someone who needs the team built around him to function at peak offensive level (a la Harden and Westbrook and even LeBron to a degree) - and IT just doesn't have anywhere close to the completeness of games those guys do.

He's got the talent to score very efficiently in a supplementary lower volume role, but is a 20-22ppg Isaiah worth the defensive headaches? Sacramento and Phoenix would say not really.

[snively]

I could see it if they were trying to trade for a top 5 selection (i.e. Simmons, Ingram, Murray, etc).


Remember, though, that at this time last year the Celts were coming off a 1st round exit, and Isaiah was a fringe All-Star selection.


Given the team signing Horford to a long term deal, Isaiah making himself an MVP candidate, and the team going on a run to the ECF, one would have to assume the asking price for Isaiah is a lot higher than a lottery pick, even one in the top 5.

Isaiah is an MVP candidate like DeRozan is a third team All-NBAer - technically true but not really all that significant. This is the same guy that got low-balled into an MLE deal after averaging 20ppg and then got almost immediately dumped for a late first after playing well. He's always been praised and talked up and then when it's time to pay-up he doesn't get as much as you'd think.

His value has grown as a player, certainly since his last trade and also over last year, but his value as a contract has also decreased, so I expect his trade value to be significantly less than his accolades.

I think the best and most likely trade partner for him would be Dallas at #9. Dallas has always been a Danny go to for star-for-pick trades, from Toine to Rondo. Dallas has probably the biggest appetites for flawed stars in the league (Toine, JET, old Kidd, Chandler, Ellis, Rondo)  and very little qualms about moving picks or dealing with upcoming contracts. Carlisle also loves scoring PNR guards.

I'd be keen on moving IT to Dallas for #9 and future considerations (with Barea as filler) for a chance at Zach Collins. Collins is going to a great big man.

Ugh.  I can't even speak to that idea beyond that.  Trading a star pick and roll scorer for a potential role player at the easiest to fill position in the league?

Ugh.

Collins is a 7 footer with legit standing reach (9'3, ie 3+ inches on all of our current bigs). He has burgeoning range out to 3. He's a legit shot blocker. He can rebound. He can score in the post and should be able to score in the mid-post a la Horford with a little more polish. He can move his feet very well defensively.

That's not so easy a position to fill. Embiid, Davis, Jokic, Towns, Turner, M. Gasol (even old and declining) and Porzingis are prized commodities for a reason and DMC would be too if he wasn't the most toxic personality in the league.

Meanwhile we'll have 2 scoring PGs as soon as we draft Fultz. Plus combo guards in Smart and Rozier and a psuedo-PG in AB. And what are our big man options? An aging undersized Horford who has been in consecutive years by Cleveland and may be on his way to a third. A short-armed unathletic KO? Collapsing undersized Amir? Declining bench combo-forward Jerebko?

How about FA? Declining older than his listed age Ibaka? Mr. Injury and non-impact defender Blake Griffin? 6'8 and aging Paul Millsap?

If Collins were that highly thought of, he would not be available at #9, and would be a viable option at #1.

Why was Myles Turner available at #11?

[chambers]

Hield would have been the guy.
Danny loves him.

[snively]

Yeah, if Collins were a Towns or Embiid level prospect, which is how he sounds based on Snively's description, that would be one thing.

But from what I've seen and read Collins is borderline starter / decent role player type prospect, and he doesn't necessarily project to have a great jumper at the next level, which means he'll be relegated to a role as an energy big unless he's physically dominant as a defender or rim roller.

He's got a 74% FT stroke. He's got good form. He's had great results in small sample sizes. Statistically he closely resembles Turner and Towns. Doesn't have Towns ball skills, but neither did Turner.

I think the gawkiness and lack of aesthetic athleticism is what is criminally underrating Collins just as it did Turner.

And I think a consensus mid-lotto big man prospect is a pretty good return for IT.

[Dino Pitino]

Yeah, if Collins were a Towns or Embiid level prospect, which is how he sounds based on Snively's description, that would be one thing.

But from what I've seen and read Collins is borderline starter / decent role player type prospect, and he doesn't necessarily project to have a great jumper at the next level, which means he'll be relegated to a role as an energy big unless he's physically dominant as a defender or rim roller.

I think the bigs in this draft are being underrated in today's guard-crazy atmosphere. What did McHale look like as a freshman? Where would a freshman McHale go in this draft?

[IDreamCeltics]

Everyone seems to think Bradley's the odd man out if we keep Fultz here; I have a sneaking suspicion it's actually IT we don't value as much. His game's not likely to age well and he's got a mega-contract coming up next offseason. As much as I like him I think we'll find a way for him to not be here for it.

I keep wondering about this too.  You just can't ignore the fact that we havent been able to hide IT on defense in the playoffs. I wonder if DA is more realistic about giving a huge contract to IT. 

Does it make more sense to use some of that money between AB and Marcus and roll with AB. Fultz, Smart, and maybe Rozier if he isn't traded as part of a deal for a big.  That all of course depends on Fultz becoming a solid starter within a year. If he does turn out to be the player we think he will be, then I am pretty happy with Fultz, AB, Smart as core guards moving forward.  Gives us way more flexibility

I want to address this narrative because I think it's the byproduct of group-think and lazy media members parroting each other.

Who is going to sign IT to a max contract?

Everyone keeps insisting that IT is going to get a max contract, but what team is indicating they want him this badly?  His last contract was for 27 million over 4 years. 


Literally EVERYONE agrees he's a gifted scorer who's a complete liability on defense...This is exactly what his reputation was the last time he signed a contract three seasons ago and, by the way, the team that signed him to that contract traded him for a late first round pick within half a season of signing him. 

Nobody wanted him for peanuts three years ago when he was essentially the same exact player... Even his staunchest fans are concerned about signing him to a max deal so what GM in the NBA is going to sign Isaiah to the max?   

The last time Isaiah was a free agent people were SHOCKED that 27 million over four years was the best deal he could get.  He was coming off a season where he scored 20 points a game, averaged 6 assists, and shot .35% from three.

I think there's a very good chance that his open market value is MUCH less than what people keep insisting it is.  If Danny's smart he'll Belichick this negotiation and wait for the market to set the terms of the deal.

[snively]

Everyone seems to think Bradley's the odd man out if we keep Fultz here; I have a sneaking suspicion it's actually IT we don't value as much. His game's not likely to age well and he's got a mega-contract coming up next offseason. As much as I like him I think we'll find a way for him to not be here for it.

I keep wondering about this too.  You just can't ignore the fact that we havent been able to hide IT on defense in the playoffs. I wonder if DA is more realistic about giving a huge contract to IT. 

Does it make more sense to use some of that money between AB and Marcus and roll with AB. Fultz, Smart, and maybe Rozier if he isn't traded as part of a deal for a big.  That all of course depends on Fultz becoming a solid starter within a year. If he does turn out to be the player we think he will be, then I am pretty happy with Fultz, AB, Smart as core guards moving forward.  Gives us way more flexibility

I want to address this narrative because I think it's the byproduct of group-think and lazy media members parroting each other.

Who is going to sign IT to a max contract?

Everyone keeps insisting that IT is going to get a max contract, but what team is indicating they want him this badly?  His last contract was for 27 million over 4 years. 


Literally EVERYONE agrees he's a gifted scorer who's a complete liability on defense...This is exactly what his reputation was the last time he signed a contract three seasons ago and, by the way, the team that signed him to that contract traded him for a late first round pick within half a season of signing him. 

Nobody wanted him for peanuts three years ago when he was essentially the same exact player... Even his staunchest fans are concerned about signing him to a max deal so what GM in the NBA is going to sign Isaiah to the max?   

The last time Isaiah was a free agent people were SHOCKED that 27 million over four years was the best deal he could get.  He was coming off a season where he scored 20 points a game, averaged 6 assists, and shot .35% from three.

I think there's a very good chance that his open market value is MUCH less than what people keep insisting it is.  If Danny's smart he'll Belichick this negotiation and wait for the market to set the terms of the deal.

Dallas seems like a sure bet to throw crazy money at IT.

[Tr1boy]

I wonder how much Ainge hates Jackie right about now