Ideas for what to do with all these draft pick (serious or otherwise)

[NYDan]

Combine them to trade up or target specific players on draft day. Draft raw international players and stash them away for a bit. Offer future picks with young players for a disgruntled star, or use them as backups if we trade our own. Offer future picks in lesser trades that improve the team in the short term. Draft some gambles, some needs, some Best Player Availables. Sell them for cash? Lots of options on the table.

[hwangjini_1]

Consolidate picks and try to move up the draft to get a single higher value pick.

Like the Rockets did in 2001 when they traded 3 first rounders to move up into the lottery. They traded the #13, #18 and #23 picks to get the #7 overall pick.

This seems most likely.  No one is going to give up a top 3 or top 5 for multiple lower picks but 7-10 should be gettable.

Mike

history should serve to inspire, not limit, our imaginations.

yes, perhaps the 2001 combo of #1s will not net the celtics a top 5 pick. however, if the celtics are sitting, say, with a top 7 pick themselves, it is possible that 2 or 3 additional picks might get the celtics into the 4-6 range.

major jumps may be not be probable, but moving up 3-4 slots should be in play.

but the key to all this is that ainge has opened up a range of methods for the celtics to get better talent.

[Yoki_IsTheName]

Turn it into a player we can build around or a player we can have as part of moving forward.

I don't know how he would do this, but that's basically his plan. He can do what please now. As everyone said, he can go many ways with it.

All I'm hoping for is he doesn't end up picking 3 late 1st round players in 2016.

[LarBrd33]

The picks give Ainge flexibility to take the players he wants.  If you look at the history of his tenure here, it'll make more sense to you.

For instance, in 2000 we draft Jerome Moiso with the #11 pick... In 2001 we trade Moiso for Philly's 2003 1st... which we used to take Dahntay Jones at #20 and essentially trade it to Memphis on draft night for Kendrick Perkins (who they selected 27th)... who we later used to trade for Jeff Green.

In 2003, Ainge trades our "superstar" Antoine Walker in a package that nets several pieces... one of them being a kid named Jiri Welsch.  In 2005, Ainge traded Jiri Welsch for the Cavs 2007 1st rounder.  He later trade that 2007 1st rounder (that ended up being Rudy Fernandez) to the Phoenix Suns in 2006 for the player they took 21st... some scrub named Rajon Rondo.

You have to have perspective.   These picks offer tremendous flexibility.   

I had a much more long-winded post in another thread... but it's like fans see guys like James young, get all excited about his potential, and assume he just fell from the sky.  They neglect to realize that James young (taken #17) was one of SEVERAL 1st rounders we received by dumping the rotting corpses of Kevin Garnett and Paul Pierce.

When you lament the loss of Jeff Green and Rajon Rondo, you're effectively lamenting the loss of Jerome Moiso and Jiri Welsch.  Let's see what we get out of it long-term. 

[Csfan1984]

10 first and 11 seconds over 4 years is way too much roster adds clearly. 21 draftees!

I would like to see pair of 1st -2 packaged for move ups in two different drafts. One 1st given up for a high level RFA signing -1. A few seconds packaged for 2 near debut Euros(-4). A first -1 and seconds (-2) used in trades to upgrade talent. Also two first and two seconds used in trade-outs to 2019 and 2020 year picks -2 (-2).

4 first round and 3 second players actually drafted in four years. Also in that 4 years now there is a good RFA, talent upgrades and a Euro (say one Euro joins by or before 2018) added. 9 players in four years more reasonable than 21 plus add a Euro, 2 first and 2 second future picks past 2018.

[Vermont Green]

Packaging two or three firsts to "move up" to one better pick seems to be the approach that most people are advocating.  I would actually be disappointed if that is how it works out.  Drafting is so inexact that to give up on one or two hard earned (traded) firsts, just to move up from say 7 to 4 or 11 to 7 or whatever seems like a waste.  You just don't know how good either player is going to be.

I think you can trade current picks for future picks.  Teams are going to put more value on a mid range pick now than a mid range pick in a couple of years.  I think we can trade a mid range pick in the current year (say 2016) for a pick in 2019 plus maybe a second or something like that.  The other team is going to think they are getting better and that the future pick will not be that good, which may be the case but we still keep the picks to use in trades or to have multiple picks in future years.

I like having two firsts in a given year.  That way you double your chance of getting lucking and picking someone who will exceed the value of the draft slot.  With two, chances are (on average) one pick will be a bust and one will be a surprise.  Alone the way, maybe one in 5 becomes a really big surprise and that one pick may make all the trades worth it.  Drafting is not the game to put all your eggs in one basket in my opinion.

Using multiple picks for players is a safer bet in my opinion.  Actual players have a much better track record that you can assess.  There is still risk, but less than drafting so that is another part of why I don't want to see Ainge just roll up 2 or 3 picks for 1 pick.

[hwangjini_1]

Packaging two or three firsts to "move up" to one better pick seems to be the approach that most people are advocating.  I would actually be disappointed if that is how it works out.  Drafting is so inexact that to give up on one or two hard earned (traded) firsts, just to move up from say 7 to 4 or 11 to 7 or whatever seems like a waste.  You just don't know how good either player is going to be.

I think you can trade current picks for future picks.  Teams are going to put more value on a mid range pick now than a mid range pick in a couple of years.  I think we can trade a mid range pick in the current year (say 2016) for a pick in 2019 plus maybe a second or something like that.  The other team is going to think they are getting better and that the future pick will not be that good, which may be the case but we still keep the picks to use in trades or to have multiple picks in future years.

I like having two firsts in a given year.  That way you double your chance of getting lucking and picking someone who will exceed the value of the draft slot.  With two, chances are (on average) one pick will be a bust and one will be a surprise.  Alone the way, maybe one in 5 becomes a really big surprise and that one pick may make all the trades worth it.  Drafting is not the game to put all your eggs in one basket in my opinion.

Using multiple picks for players is a safer bet in my opinion.  Actual players have a much better track record that you can assess.  There is still risk, but less than drafting so that is another part of why I don't want to see Ainge just roll up 2 or 3 picks for 1 pick.

vg, good point and i agree. just to add to that, the philly 2nd rounders actually have real value, more than the tail end of the 1st round does in some cases. the reason is that the 2nd rounders are not guaranteed contracts, so they are easier to jettison if they dont work out. the first pick in the 2nd round may have more value to some GMs than the last pick in the first round.

ainge has lined up value on many levels.

next, your post made me think (which is good). having extra picks in a year gives a GM a chance to wheel and deal, make trades, facilitate other trades for others, lots of options. ainge is a guy who loves to wheel and deal and does well in these situations.

the typical draw back is that such scenarios (multiple picks) do not come along very often.

but look at the celtics. they are staring at multiple picks for years to come, and if they roll some over through trades as you suggest, then that window of opportunities will continue for more years.

i expect the next 4-6 years to be like this for the celtics. ainge will be working hard and have assets to make deals. expect a LOT of changes and tinkering even when they get good players.

[Csfan1984]

@VG, Do understand the more shots better chance of hitting idea but to move up three spots could be all the difference in the world. If you get a elite player instead of 2 good ones that is huge. Good players help you compete while elite players help you win. I wouldn't mind move ups if say it's pick in 20s and high teens for near top ten. Ex.
22 and 15 for 10th overall
25 and 14 for 9th overall
26, 19 and 7 for 2nd overall
23 and 5 for 3rd overall
20, 8 for 5th overall.
11 and 4 for 1st overall
Packages above seem like fair moving up deals

[boscel33]

Consolidate picks and try to move up the draft to get a single higher value pick.

Like the Rockets did in 2001 when they traded 3 first rounders to move up into the lottery. They traded the #13, #18 and #23 picks to get the #7 overall pick.

Philly could be the team.  They have Noel and Embid.  The desire for another center coul be a smokescreen.  I'd target them with two first and their second if they are top two/three.