Lottery picks

[jay]

Could you get 2014 draft picks from likely sub .500 teams for the following packages:

1. Rondo, Sullinger, Clippers '15 pick

2. Green, Bradley, '14 pick from Nets


If so, what could you do with three potential lottery picks plus Olynyk and Vitor?  Not a bad do-over if pulled off. 

[Section301]

So...the plan is to trade off the 4 best players on the team and two first round picks for two lottery picks?  Unless you can guarantee that you're going to get two perennial all stars with those two picks, you're not really changing anything, since you're trading away an all star to get the picks. 

[BballTim]

Could you get 2014 draft picks from likely sub .500 teams for the following packages:

1. Rondo, Sullinger, Clippers '15 pick

2. Green, Bradley, '14 pick from Nets


If so, what could you do with three potential lottery picks plus Olynyk and Vitor?  Not a bad do-over if pulled off.

  The odds are good you'd end up with one good player, one average player and one bust. We'd more likely than not be much better off not making the trades.

[kozlodoev]

So...the plan is to trade off the 4 best players on the team and two first round picks for two lottery picks?  Unless you can guarantee that you're going to get two perennial all stars with those two picks, you're not really changing anything, since you're trading away an all star to get the picks.

Pretty much. I don't know why people assume that two lottery picks in this (or any) draft would automatically yield two players that are better than Green and Rondo.

[jay]

increase the odds of getting that top 4 pick by making the Celtics awful this year.  (Get bad like Utah)

get two players that can come in with that top 4 player and help him.  Parker, Harris, McAdoo?  Thats not worth it?

[saltlover]

Could you get 2014 draft picks from likely sub .500 teams for the following packages:

1. Rondo, Sullinger, Clippers '15 pick

2. Green, Bradley, '14 pick from Nets


If so, what could you do with three potential lottery picks plus Olynyk and Vitor?  Not a bad do-over if pulled off.

Yes, I'm fairly certain you could get a lottery pick for either of those packages.  I think teams would be climbing over each other to do the first deal in particular.

I'd also think Danny Ainge should be fired.

Now, if you were to make one of those deals after the ping pong balls had fallen, and knew beyond a shadow of a doubt you were going to get the #1 overall, then maybe you could justify the first package.  Maybe.  Otherwise, even if you're trading with Utah, you're talking about trading Rondo, Sully, and a future 1st for a 25% chance at Wiggins, or only a 64% chance at getting one of Wiggins, Parker, and Randle.  Even if we finish with the 8th-worst record, we'd instead have a 10% chance at one of those three.  I'd rather have a 10% chance and Rondo, Sully, and the pick than a 64% chance and nothing else.

[PhoSita]

As nice as this draft is, I wouldn't trade Rondo or Sullinger to get a pick in the draft unless it were in the top 5-8 picks.

As for Green and Bradley, I'd be happy to ship them out if it netted us a lottery pick.  I don't think that's a likely trade, though.

[aingeforthree]

Could you get 2014 draft picks from likely sub .500 teams for the following packages:

1. Rondo, Sullinger, Clippers '15 pick

2. Green, Bradley, '14 pick from Nets


If so, what could you do with three potential lottery picks plus Olynyk and Vitor?  Not a bad do-over if pulled off.

The answer to your question is yes.

But with 20000 first round picks in the upcoming years, don't you want to keep your core and build from there ?

You're already setup pretty nicely to build this thing the correct way.  You're already 'doing it over' after the Brooklyn trade went down.  Now you just have to find out whose along for the bus ride going forward.

I wouldn't be surprised if you got a star while using that Clipper pick...

i.e. 15' Clippers pick, expirings of Hump and Bogans for so called 'star'

You're better off making trades for proven players than trying to get more picks.  You have enough picks to do damage.

[BballTim]

As nice as this draft is, I wouldn't trade Rondo or Sullinger to get a pick in the draft unless it were in the top 5-8 picks.

As for Green and Bradley, I'd be happy to ship them out if it netted us a lottery pick.  I don't think that's a likely trade, though.

  The odds of a 5-8 pick turning out better than Rondo or a lower lottery pick (say 11-13 or so) being better value than Green and Bradley aren't very high.

[Section301]

increase the odds of getting that top 4 pick by making the Celtics awful this year.  (Get bad like Utah)

get two players that can come in with that top 4 player and help him.  Parker, Harris, McAdoo?  Thats not worth it?

you're using circular logic.  If the players you're trading away are good enough to prevent the C's from getting the high lottery pick you covet....why trade them to the teams you're hoping to get a high pick from?

[jay]

in the case of Rondo, of course trading him to a lottery team wont help them get better, because he is on the bench.

I really dont think sending Green to Phoenix or Detroit orld beaters.  It may screw up their chemistry for a while and they will get worse.

My point is, how high do you value those 4 players, what is their ceiling?

Rondo - 9
Green - 8
Sullinger - 7.5
Bradley - 7.5

What if you got better players in the draft?  We know Rondo and Bradley arent going to turn into Isiah Thomas or anyone thats gonna lead the team to the Finals.  Sullinger is short and doesnt fit on a running team.  Green is a nice player, but he wont be a perenial all-star. 

Is Green really better than what McAdoo can be?
Is Bradley better than Gary Harris?

[BballTim]

in the case of Rondo, of course trading him to a lottery team wont help them get better, because he is on the bench.

I really dont think sending Green to Phoenix or Detroit orld beaters.  It may screw up their chemistry for a while and they will get worse.

My point is, how high do you value those 4 players, what is their ceiling?

Rondo - 9
Green - 8
Sullinger - 7.5
Bradley - 7.5

What if you got better players in the draft?  We know Rondo and Bradley arent going to turn into Isiah Thomas or anyone thats gonna lead the team to the Finals.  Sullinger is short and doesnt fit on a running team.  Green is a nice player, but he wont be a perenial all-star. 

Is Green really better than what McAdoo can be?
Is Bradley better than Gary Harris?

  Trading Rondo to a lottery team would obviously make that team better, he's on the bench now but he'll probably be playing soon. And if you start looking at past drafts you'll see that it's fairly rare for players that aren't high draft picks to turn into players better than Rondo or for players picked 10th or worse to even be better than Green.

[PhoSita]

As nice as this draft is, I wouldn't trade Rondo or Sullinger to get a pick in the draft unless it were in the top 5-8 picks.

As for Green and Bradley, I'd be happy to ship them out if it netted us a lottery pick.  I don't think that's a likely trade, though.

  The odds of a 5-8 pick turning out better than Rondo or a lower lottery pick (say 11-13 or so) being better value than Green and Bradley aren't very high.

In a typical draft, I think I'd probably agree with you.

However, in this draft, I tend to disagree.

Wiggins, Parker, Randle, Exum, Smart, Gordon, and perhaps a couple others -- any of those players could very well make a substantial immediate impact; they might even quickly become stars.

Also consider that even if a player is not "better" than Rondo, Green, or Bradley during their rookie contract, they might provide a great deal more value relative to their salary than any of those players.

[LooseCannon]

I just don't think any team that has a decent shot at a top five pick is trading that pick.

[BballTim]

As nice as this draft is, I wouldn't trade Rondo or Sullinger to get a pick in the draft unless it were in the top 5-8 picks.

As for Green and Bradley, I'd be happy to ship them out if it netted us a lottery pick.  I don't think that's a likely trade, though.

  The odds of a 5-8 pick turning out better than Rondo or a lower lottery pick (say 11-13 or so) being better value than Green and Bradley aren't very high.

In a typical draft, I think I'd probably agree with you.

However, in this draft, I tend to disagree.

Wiggins, Parker, Randle, Exum, Smart, Gordon, and perhaps a couple others -- any of those players could very well make a substantial immediate impact; they might even quickly become stars.

Also consider that even if a player is not "better" than Rondo, Green, or Bradley during their rookie contract, they might provide a great deal more value relative to their salary than any of those players.

  I get the feeling that people feel that if you look at the top 25 or so players in the league a few years from now a good 25% or so of them will be from the class of 2014. It's nonsense. So's a draft with 7-8 players that make a substantial and immediate impact on their teams.