Cetics have the 21st and 22nd picks in the draft

[nickagneta]

The Celtics will also have their own pick at No. 21, giving them back-to-back selections in what is considered a draft that is short on star power, but deep in potential contributors. The pick from the Clippers carried top-10 protection through 2016, but that became moot after they acquired Chris Paul and emerged as a playoff team in the Western Conference. The Clippers won a tiebreaker with the Hawks for the 22nd pick.

-WEEI

http://www.weei.com/sports/boston/this-just-in/21195226/celtics-have-consecutive-picks-draft

That doesn't say that the Celtics can opt to rollover the pick, though.  (I know it has protection for the Clippers benefit, but it would be very unusual for the Celtics to also have the option of refusing the pick.)

That would be a very rare and surprising detail.

Washburn describes how I've understood this pick since day 1. That the Celtics can rollover the pick ala the Denver Nuggets pick back in the day.

Celtics receive the Clippers' 2012 first-round pick, via Thunder (Eric Bledsoe trade) (top 10 protected in 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2015, unprotected in 2016. In 2012, the Celtics would receive the lesser of the Clippers first-round pick or the T'Wolves' first-round pick (Marko Jaric trade)) (Jeff Green trade 02-24-11)

http://www.nbadraft.net/nba_draft_trades/2012

What I read is the celtics get the first pick that isn't protected. So if the pick was within the protected area it would roll over to the next year and if it was still in the protected area again then it rolls over and so on.

But the pick landed outside the protected area so the Celtics have to take it.

That's the way I read these multiple protected year trades. Its not a team that gets the pick option for a rollover.

[Roy H.]

Where does it say that the Clippers choose when the pick gets sent to us? I don't know, maybe I'm confused and so isn't Washburn, but that is how I interpret the trade.

The default for any trade is that the protection flows to the team trading the pick away.  A pick can't be rolled over unless that's specifically noted. 

Otherwise, why wouldn't the Celtics just gamble on the pick until 2016?  Why settle for the 22nd pick? 

Additionally, the Clippers would essentially be hand-cuffed from trading a #1 pick away in the foreseeable future, due to the Stepian rule preventing teams from trading back-to-back future #1s.  Since the Clippers wouldn't know which #1 they were committed to giving up, they couldn't trade any pick.  Obviously, that's not the intent here.

[ManUp]

That's a pretty nice range, we lucked out a bit. The talent level seems to drop right after us, but that's without taking sliders into account. Considering we got Bradley in a weak draft at around 19 I'm optimistic.

[GreenFaith1819]

Nice range for our picks, but I'm hoping that perhaps Danny pulls an Auerbachian move and somehow moves us up a bit.

Just use the picks...don't want us to part with Avery by any stretch.

For me, I'd be happy with one top 10 talent, rather than two nice players in the spots we are looking at now.

Right now? We're looking at these two picks, plus E'twaun and JJ for next year.

Will Doc play these four? We'd be only 11 deep, depending upon who is here next year.

IMO, I'd rather go with one Heavy Hitter (Meyers Leonard..Austin Rivers...Terrance Jones...James McAdoo perhaps(?)) than the nice players that will be available at our spots.

But's that's me.

[jyyzzoel]

EVERYONE is talking about packaging these two picks to move up in the draft.

does no one else realise...
that because we traded our first round pick last year to move down to 27 or 28 and grab JJJ we can't trade the celtics pick this year??

we CAN trade the clippers pick, but you cant trade your first rounder two years in a row. look it up.

[Roy H.]

EVERYONE is talking about packaging these two picks to move up in the draft.

does no one else realise...
that because we traded our first round pick last year to move down to 27 or 28 and grab JJJ we can't trade the celtics pick this year??

we CAN trade the clippers pick, but you cant trade your first rounder two years in a row. look it up.

That's not accurate.

Teams can't leave themselves without a first round pick in consecutive *future* drafts.  For instance, we can't trade a 2015 #1 and a 2016 #1, unless we picked up another #1 in either 2015 or 2016. 

However, we can trade our pick this year because:

1.  Last year's selection doesn't count as a "future" pick; and
2.  Even if it did, we'd still have a #1 via the Clippers pick; and
3.  There's no rule against trading a #1 (or multiple #1s) for a higher pick in the same round.

Packaging the two picks to move up is absolutely allowed under the rules.  That doesn't mean it's a good idea, but it's permitted.

[jyyzzoel]

SWEET! thanks for clearing that up for me!!! ok, it's gonna be a very interesting draft this year. im still gutted danny didnt  trade up last year and grab kenneth faried.

EVERYONE is talking about packaging these two picks to move up in the draft.

does no one else realise...
that because we traded our first round pick last year to move down to 27 or 28 and grab JJJ we can't trade the celtics pick this year??

we CAN trade the clippers pick, but you cant trade your first rounder two years in a row. look it up.

That's not accurate.

Teams can't leave themselves without a first round pick in consecutive *future* drafts.  For instance, we can't trade a 2015 #1 and a 2016 #1, unless we picked up another #1 in either 2015 or 2016. 

However, we can trade our pick this year because:

1.  Last year's selection doesn't count as a "future" pick; and
2.  Even if it did, we'd still have a #1 via the Clippers pick; and
3.  There's no rule against trading a #1 (or multiple #1s) for a higher pick in the same round.

Packaging the two picks to move up is absolutely allowed under the rules.  That doesn't mean it's a good idea, but it's permitted.

[chambers]

For the love of god what is with people wanting to move BOTH picks to try and snag Austin Rivers!? He's one inch taller than Avery Bradley.
We have our 2 guard, he's excellent and only getting better!
Get the best players available, hopefully they're bigs.
If not, we will get some decent bigs in free agency in the next 2 years.

[GreenFaith1819]

For the love of god what is with people wanting to move BOTH picks to try and snag Austin Rivers!? He's one inch taller than Avery Bradley.
We have our 2 guard, he's excellent and only getting better!
Get the best players available, hopefully they're bigs.
If not, we will get some decent bigs in free agency in the next 2 years.

Just a thought, My Man.

I mean...do you or anyone else here REALLY believe that anyone available at 21 or 22 will be an immediate impact for us?

I could be wrong....but we all know how crafty Danny can be. Don't be heartbroken if he moves these picks.

Just my thoughts.

[Roy H.]

I'd be inclined to keep both picks, because I don't see a huge difference between who will be there in the 12 to 15 range, vs. picks 21 + 22.  I'd rather get two picks rather than one, if only because the chance of hitting on an impact player is higher.

However, I'm an amateur who hasn't spent any time scouting guys.  If Danny -- who has invested hundreds of hours watching these prospects -- thinks that one guy in the late lottery stands out above all others, then I support him if he decides to trade up.

[hpantazo]

For the love of god what is with people wanting to move BOTH picks to try and snag Austin Rivers!? He's one inch taller than Avery Bradley.
We have our 2 guard, he's excellent and only getting better!
Get the best players available, hopefully they're bigs.
If not, we will get some decent bigs in free agency in the next 2 years.

I don't know if I would trade both picks for Rivers, but if there is a guy who Danny believes in that is a SG or PG, I would still trade the picks for him considering we have Rondo and AB. You always have to draft for talent, not for position. If you draft for talent things work out in the long term.

[GreenFaith1819]

I'd be inclined to keep both picks, because I don't see a huge difference between who will be there in the 12 to 15 range, vs. picks 21 + 22.  I'd rather get two picks rather than one, if only because the chance of hitting on an impact player is higher.

However, I'm an amateur who hasn't spent any time scouting guys.  If Danny -- who has invested hundreds of hours watching these prospects -- thinks that one guy in the late lottery stands out above all others, then I support him if he decides to trade up.

I'm probably more of an amateur with these college players than most on here, myself.

My thoughts initially with my proposal was that I'd like to see BOS get an impact player. Lord knows we haven't had one of those in quite a while through the draft. My thoughts were that I believed we'd stand a better chance at getting one earlier than later.

Like Roy said - I'm sure that Danny is doing the research.

Chambers - I share your thoughts entirely about Austin Rivers. Unless Danny plans on moving AB (hope not!), right now I don't see any need to draft a SG.

I shouldn't have listed Rivers earlier.

[KGs Knee]

My thoughts initially with my proposal was that I'd like to see BOS get an impact player. Lord knows we haven't had one of those in quite a while through the draft. My thoughts were that I believed we'd stand a better chance at getting one earlier than later.

Just curious, but what is your definition of "impact player"?  I mean, wouldn't Bradley be considered an impact player?

[GreenFaith1819]

My thoughts initially with my proposal was that I'd like to see BOS get an impact player. Lord knows we haven't had one of those in quite a while through the draft. My thoughts were that I believed we'd stand a better chance at getting one earlier than later.

Just curious, but what is your definition of "impact player"?  I mean, wouldn't Bradley be considered an impact player?

Someone who impresses Doc and Danny enough to either start or get significant minutes.

As great as AB has been lately, he barely sniffed the floor last year. He didn't even see a lot of time THIS year until March or so.

[Kane3387]

My thoughts initially with my proposal was that I'd like to see BOS get an impact player. Lord knows we haven't had one of those in quite a while through the draft. My thoughts were that I believed we'd stand a better chance at getting one earlier than later.

Just curious, but what is your definition of "impact player"?  I mean, wouldn't Bradley be considered an impact player?

Someone who impresses Doc and Danny enough to either start or get significant minutes.

As great as AB has been lately, he barely sniffed the floor last year. He didn't even see a lot of time THIS year until March or so.

I wouldn't dwell on his past like that. He was a rookie, hurt and missed all of camp, and was the fourth guard last year. He was never gonna get run with all that against him. With the lockout this year things didn't look good for him either but ability and talent often wins out.

This kid will be a an all star before it's said and done. Maybe not perennial, but he will be in a couple. He is just scratching the surface of what he can do and as his ball handling improves so will his production.

I'm not moving AB unless it's a no brainer.