Would you cash in the pick now?

[BballTim]

This is a silly question.

If we assume, for a moment, that NBA GMs are at least as smart as we are (crazy, I know), then we can assume that they also see that the value of the Celtics' pick is fairly precarious right now.  It could be top 5, or it could be #16 or #17. 

So why would another team be willing to trade a major asset for that pick, especially considering that acquiring that kind of player would pretty much guarantee that the pick ends up on the lower end of that spectrum?

... If you traded Rondo to the Bobcats, Kings or Pistons right now... you'd probably insist that the 2014 1st rounder they included was unprotected. 

It's not a silly question.

  I don't think that's what he's asking. If Rondo was healthy and we traded him to the Pistons we might insist on it being unprotected, we'd have to expect it to end up a low enough pick that it wouldn't be a good return for Rondo.

[MVP]

None of those players are worthy of even considering other then Anthony for whom I would trade the pick if he agreed to an extension. Asik, Smith, Monroe haven't made an all star team in their careers (don't think). Gasol is to old at this point. If he was 5 years younger then I'd trade for him too.

The goal is for us to get an all star player or if we're lucky a top 10 player. You either do this by accumulating assets and trading them to an established player - like Anthony. This is the preferred option since you never know what you get in the draft and draft picks take a long time to develop which doesn't really align with Rondo's prime. But if there's no such player available in a trade then you try to get one in the draft or accumulate young players/assets until someone becomes available. But players like Asik, Smith, Monroe, and Gasol is just a waste of our assets/cap space and landing us in mediocrity.

[Boris Badenov]

This is a silly question.

If we assume, for a moment, that NBA GMs are at least as smart as we are (crazy, I know), then we can assume that they also see that the value of the Celtics' pick is fairly precarious right now.  It could be top 5, or it could be #16 or #17. 

So why would another team be willing to trade a major asset for that pick, especially considering that acquiring that kind of player would pretty much guarantee that the pick ends up on the lower end of that spectrum?

... If you traded Rondo to the Bobcats, Kings or Pistons right now... you'd probably insist that the 2014 1st rounder they included was unprotected. 

It's not a silly question.

I don't understand your point; I'm saying that it's a silly question because the premise is flawed.  We can't "cash in" on the pick right now in the way that you suggest because other teams are just as aware as we are that the team, though terrible, is still just a few games out of the playoffs.

Yeah. The Catch-22 is that the pick is only valuable to someone else if we have a crappy team...but if we trade the pick for someone good, our roster is now improved so the pick is devalued - maybe devalued too much for anyone to give up that good player in the first place.

The problem is compounded by Rondo's return, which should also improve our roster.

Can anyone think of an in-season trade like this - of a star player to a lottery-bound team, for an unprotected pick in that same year?

[Nerf DPOY]

This is a silly question.

If we assume, for a moment, that NBA GMs are at least as smart as we are (crazy, I know), then we can assume that they also see that the value of the Celtics' pick is fairly precarious right now.  It could be top 5, or it could be #16 or #17. 

So why would another team be willing to trade a major asset for that pick, especially considering that acquiring that kind of player would pretty much guarantee that the pick ends up on the lower end of that spectrum?

... If you traded Rondo to the Bobcats, Kings or Pistons right now... you'd probably insist that the 2014 1st rounder they included was unprotected. 

It's not a silly question.

I don't understand your point; I'm saying that it's a silly question because the premise is flawed.  We can't "cash in" on the pick right now in the way that you suggest because other teams are just as aware as we are that the team, though terrible, is still just a few games out of the playoffs.

Yeah. The Catch-22 is that the pick is only valuable to someone else if we have a crappy team...but if we trade the pick for someone good, our roster is now improved so the pick is devalued - maybe devalued too much for anyone to give up that good player in the first place.

The problem is compounded by Rondo's return, which should also improve our roster.

Can anyone think of an in-season trade like this - of a star player to a lottery-bound team, for an unprotected pick in that same year?

Portland traded Wallace to the Nets for a top 3 protected pick which turned out to be Lillard, but I think it was understood at the time of the trade that NJ wasn't making the playoffs that year.

Edit: Okay, so Wallace is far from a star I guess.

[LarBrd33]

This is a silly question.

If we assume, for a moment, that NBA GMs are at least as smart as we are (crazy, I know), then we can assume that they also see that the value of the Celtics' pick is fairly precarious right now.  It could be top 5, or it could be #16 or #17. 

So why would another team be willing to trade a major asset for that pick, especially considering that acquiring that kind of player would pretty much guarantee that the pick ends up on the lower end of that spectrum?

... If you traded Rondo to the Bobcats, Kings or Pistons right now... you'd probably insist that the 2014 1st rounder they included was unprotected. 

It's not a silly question.

I don't understand your point; I'm saying that it's a silly question because the premise is flawed.  We can't "cash in" on the pick right now in the way that you suggest because other teams are just as aware as we are that the team, though terrible, is still just a few games out of the playoffs.

Sure you can... if some team thinks Boston is going to suck regardless of if they add Rondo and Player X, they would be smart to trade for the unprotected pick.

It's kinda like when Boston gave up KG and Pierce for a bunch of unprotected picks from Brooklyn... Sure, it was unlikely those picks would fall in the lottery... but you never know.

No guarantee that Rondo + Player X turns this team around.  It's just as likely that Rondo comes back, has a handful of awful games (like Rose) and reinjures himself (like Rose).  Premise isn't flawed.

If you're chicago and you're offering Noah for the Celtics unprotected 1st and Humph's expiring, you probably understand that there's a chance Boston will dig out of the dumps... but there's also a chance that frequently injured Noah blows out his knee and Rondo ends up having a short-lived return.  Then you're talking about adding a potential superstar... worst case scenario you're still ended up with a mid 1st rounder out of the deal.  But that intrigue would be there.

And again... whether or not these offers are reasonable or not isn't the point. 

My hypothetical question was, if a team offered you a talent now but insisted you include your unprotected 2014 pick... would you do it?  What player would get you to do it? 

It's a tough hypothetical question.  I admire those bold enough to answer it.

[PhoSita]

This is a silly question.

If we assume, for a moment, that NBA GMs are at least as smart as we are (crazy, I know), then we can assume that they also see that the value of the Celtics' pick is fairly precarious right now.  It could be top 5, or it could be #16 or #17. 

So why would another team be willing to trade a major asset for that pick, especially considering that acquiring that kind of player would pretty much guarantee that the pick ends up on the lower end of that spectrum?

... If you traded Rondo to the Bobcats, Kings or Pistons right now... you'd probably insist that the 2014 1st rounder they included was unprotected. 

It's not a silly question.

I don't understand your point; I'm saying that it's a silly question because the premise is flawed.  We can't "cash in" on the pick right now in the way that you suggest because other teams are just as aware as we are that the team, though terrible, is still just a few games out of the playoffs.

Sure you can... if some team thinks Boston is going to suck regardless of if they add Rondo and Player X, they would be smart to trade for the unprotected pick.

It's kinda like when Boston gave up KG and Pierce for a bunch of unprotected picks from Brooklyn... Sure, it was unlikely those picks would fall in the lottery... but you never know.

No guarantee that Rondo + Player X turns this team around.  It's just as likely that Rondo comes back, has a handful of awful games (like Rose) and reinjures himself (like Rose).  Premise isn't flawed.

If you're chicago and you're offering Noah for the Celtics unprotected 1st and Humph's expiring, you probably understand that there's a chance Boston will dig out of the dumps... but there's also a chance that frequently injured Noah blows out his knee and Rondo ends up having a short-lived return.  Then you're talking about adding a potential superstar... worst case scenario you're still ended up with a mid 1st rounder out of the deal.  But that intrigue would be there.

And again... whether or not these offers are reasonable or not isn't the point. 

My hypothetical question was, if a team offered you a talent now but insisted you include your unprotected 2014 pick... would you do it?  What player would get you to do it? 

It's a tough hypothetical question.  I admire those bold enough to answer it.

I think you're making a stronger argument for some team to take a couple of our future 1sts in return for one of their good players, not our current pick.

The picks we got in the Brooklyn trade were enticing because a couple of them fall a few years in the future.

I doubt any team in the league would believe that they could trade a major piece (e.g. Monroe, Smith, Melo, Noah) to this team and still get a 2014 lottery pick out of the deal.

[LarBrd33]

This is a silly question.

If we assume, for a moment, that NBA GMs are at least as smart as we are (crazy, I know), then we can assume that they also see that the value of the Celtics' pick is fairly precarious right now.  It could be top 5, or it could be #16 or #17. 

So why would another team be willing to trade a major asset for that pick, especially considering that acquiring that kind of player would pretty much guarantee that the pick ends up on the lower end of that spectrum?

... If you traded Rondo to the Bobcats, Kings or Pistons right now... you'd probably insist that the 2014 1st rounder they included was unprotected. 

It's not a silly question.

I don't understand your point; I'm saying that it's a silly question because the premise is flawed.  We can't "cash in" on the pick right now in the way that you suggest because other teams are just as aware as we are that the team, though terrible, is still just a few games out of the playoffs.

Sure you can... if some team thinks Boston is going to suck regardless of if they add Rondo and Player X, they would be smart to trade for the unprotected pick.

It's kinda like when Boston gave up KG and Pierce for a bunch of unprotected picks from Brooklyn... Sure, it was unlikely those picks would fall in the lottery... but you never know.

No guarantee that Rondo + Player X turns this team around.  It's just as likely that Rondo comes back, has a handful of awful games (like Rose) and reinjures himself (like Rose).  Premise isn't flawed.

If you're chicago and you're offering Noah for the Celtics unprotected 1st and Humph's expiring, you probably understand that there's a chance Boston will dig out of the dumps... but there's also a chance that frequently injured Noah blows out his knee and Rondo ends up having a short-lived return.  Then you're talking about adding a potential superstar... worst case scenario you're still ended up with a mid 1st rounder out of the deal.  But that intrigue would be there.

And again... whether or not these offers are reasonable or not isn't the point. 

My hypothetical question was, if a team offered you a talent now but insisted you include your unprotected 2014 pick... would you do it?  What player would get you to do it? 

It's a tough hypothetical question.  I admire those bold enough to answer it.

I think you're making a stronger argument for some team to take a couple of our future 1sts in return for one of their good players, not our current pick.

The picks we got in the Brooklyn trade were enticing because a couple of them fall a few years in the future.

I doubt any team in the league would believe that they could trade a major piece (e.g. Monroe, Smith, Melo, Noah) to this team and still get a 2014 lottery pick out of the deal.

I do think it depends on the circumstances surrounding the team.  If the Knicks get word Melo is fleeing, they'd be smart to trade him for Boston's unprotected 2014 + other picks + expiring contracts...  Even if the pick ends up mid-1st round it's still an opportunity they probably will not have during the offseason.

Or if the Bulls are looking to drop more salary to make a run at LeBron and Melo... perhaps the allure of Boston's unprotected 2014 pick would make such a trade possible.

[Larry for 3]

Actually it's an easy question. The answer is no all day long. You dont give that pick on the off chance that pick becomes the next Lebron James or heck even the next Paul Pierce, and for who?  Who's available, Noah, LOL, Carmelo, LOL. Sure if the trade nets us back Lebron or Kevin Durant, than make the trade now. Outside of that, nope. This team is more than 1 player away unless it's those 2. Why would Ainge or myself do that? To make the second round of the playoffs? I know alot of people on this board want that, but c'mon.

[LarBrd33]

Actually it's an easy question. The answer is no all day long. You dont give that pick on the off chance that pick becomes the next Lebron James or heck even the next Paul Pierce, and for who?  Who's available, Noah, LOL, Carmelo, LOL. Sure if the trade nets us back Lebron or Kevin Durant, than make the trade now. Outside of that, nope. This team is more than 1 player away unless it's those 2. Why would Ainge or myself do that? To make the second round of the playoffs? I know alot of people on this board want that, but c'mon.

I can appreciate that... You're an all or nothing kinda guy.  Wiggins or Bust.  You go for broke.  I imagine you're worried about Rondo's return too...

Because it seems Rondo's return had a 50/50 shot of pushing us into the playoffs.  And then when you end up drafting with the #15 pick... it probably will no longer be "LOL, Carmelo"... you could try offering the #15 to the Knicks at that point and it will probably be "LOL, Doug McDermott"

[Nerf DPOY]

Actually it's an easy question. The answer is no all day long. You dont give that pick on the off chance that pick becomes the next Lebron James or heck even the next Paul Pierce, and for who?  Who's available, Noah, LOL, Carmelo, LOL. Sure if the trade nets us back Lebron or Kevin Durant, than make the trade now. Outside of that, nope. This team is more than 1 player away unless it's those 2. Why would Ainge or myself do that? To make the second round of the playoffs? I know alot of people on this board want that, but c'mon.

I can appreciate that... You're an all or nothing kinda guy.  Wiggins or Bust.  You go for broke.  I imagine you're worried about Rondo's return too...

Because it seems Rondo's return had a 50/50 shot of pushing us into the playoffs.  And then when you end up drafting Doug McDermott with the #15 pick... it probably will no longer be "LOL, Carmelo"

If you think Rondo's return gives us a 50/50 shot at the playoffs, how do think the Knicks or Bulls feel about adding Melo or Noah on top of that to this team? You're contradicting yourself. There's too many games left for us to turn it around and make the playoffs especially with a serious addition, for a team to bank on us being a lottery team. I think you know this.

[vjcsmoke]

Agreed.  TP given.  You don't give up an unprotected pick in THIS YEAR's Draft when any of the top 6 players could be a stud on the level of Wade, Durant, Howard, etc.  Especially NOT for the names proffered by the OP.  I'll never understand his obsession with obtaining a washed up, over the hill Pau Gasol.  If this was Gasol of 10 years ago, he'd be worth something, but now?  R-eallly?  No way!

Actually it's an easy question. The answer is no all day long. You dont give that pick on the off chance that pick becomes the next Lebron James or heck even the next Paul Pierce, and for who?  Who's available, Noah, LOL, Carmelo, LOL. Sure if the trade nets us back Lebron or Kevin Durant, than make the trade now. Outside of that, nope. This team is more than 1 player away unless it's those 2. Why would Ainge or myself do that? To make the second round of the playoffs? I know alot of people on this board want that, but c'mon.

[Moranis]

Agreed.  TP given.  You don't give up an unprotected pick in THIS YEAR's Draft when any of the top 6 players could be a stud on the level of Wade, Durant, Howard, etc.  Especially NOT for the names proffered by the OP.  I'll never understand his obsession with obtaining a washed up, over the hill Pau Gasol.  If this was Gasol of 10 years ago, he'd be worth something, but now?  R-eallly?  No way!

Actually it's an easy question. The answer is no all day long. You dont give that pick on the off chance that pick becomes the next Lebron James or heck even the next Paul Pierce, and for who?  Who's available, Noah, LOL, Carmelo, LOL. Sure if the trade nets us back Lebron or Kevin Durant, than make the trade now. Outside of that, nope. This team is more than 1 player away unless it's those 2. Why would Ainge or myself do that? To make the second round of the playoffs? I know alot of people on this board want that, but c'mon.

to be fair the Pau Gasol trade was probably more about dumping Wallace than acquiring Pau.

[Monkhouse]

I would do it for Melo if he signed an extension so he can't leave.

I think Melo will score better than Pierce, but I think at times he'll also struggle to score, because there is no definite number two. It could possibly be Bradley or Hayward or whoever, but neither of them are 2nd options on contenders.

Wallace/Humphries/Green/Crawford/2014 1st unprotected, Brooklyn Nets 2015 pick, 2 2nd rounders, and Faverani with Bogans/TPE to absorb and take on Stoudemaire/Melo.

Melo is a top 10 player, and you need that in this league to succeed. I consider Rondo a top 20 player.

Rondo
Bradley
Melo
Sullinger
Asik

In my mind is a contender, that is an huge re-vamp of what we were missing. We'll lack defending, but we'll have two great rebounders, and Rondo will be able to set so many pick and rolls with Asik.

I think Asik is a top 3 defensive Center. Hes good at what he does, and he doesn't try to do anything more.

Rebound, defend, set screens, and anchor the defense.

I posted this idea on real GM, and everyone seemed to agree with it. A lot of people on the Knicks agree that Melo isn't going to stay unless he firmly believes money is worth it all.

I don't get why Melo cares so much about winning. In the long run Melo will be a HoFer regardless.

[chambers]

Okay, I've decided that Wyc's crew really won't care about a little luxury tax as long as we are a top 4 team and contending.

So..

Celtics send
2014 lottery pick +
Wallace +
Bogans +
Bass


Knicks send
Carmelo Anthony
(via sign and trade $23 million x 4 years)

Rockets send
Omer Asik

Celtics send
Jeff Green

Celtics
* Sign offer sheet to Chris Bosh $22 Million x 4 years
*Sign offer sheet $11 million to Lance Stephenson x 4 years
*Sign Kevin Garnett Veterans minimum x 2 years
*Sign Paul Pierce veterans minimum x 2 years

Starting 5

PG Rondo $14 million x 4
SG Stephenson $12 million x4
SF Carmelo $23 million x4
PF Bosh $22 million x 4
C Omer Asik $8 million x1
=$79 million
+ bench ($4-5 million)

Bench
Jared Sullinger
Paul Pierce
Kevin Garnett

Approx $84 million with a tiny tax bill 
Actually by sending Green to New York and forgetting about Asik and putting Sully as PF and Bosh at Center we'd cut this by 8 million to $76 million.

Celtics:
Win Banner 18.

[Monkhouse]

Good joke. TP.

Either way, I believe in order for us to obtain Melo, that we need to get Asik. Melo will only find more solace and belief in us if he sees we have a legitimate defensive Center to anchor the defense. There is no urgency in this, but the trade deadline ends soon. If DA is going to make some moves, then he needs to make some moves soon. Or the possibility of us being able to sign Melo in FA is impossible.

I seriously think Wallace, TPE, Bogans, Crawford, Green, Humphries and a few first round unprotected picks with some 2nd rounders is a pretty decent deal. We could throw in Faverani if it'll help for Melo/Stoudemaire.