Poll: Sully+Bradley three firsts for the #6 pick.

[Granath]

I hate how every proposed trade is a colossal OVERPAY on this forum.

Yes let's give up 5 first round picks for only the #6 pick in the draft.
Sully and Bradley were solid 1st round picks and you want to throw in 3 more 1st round picks to obtain a pick outside the top 3 in the this year's draft??

MAKES ZERO SENSE!!  If there was still a 'taketh' a tommy point away feature, I'd press it for this post...

That's because some people on CB continually harp on every Celtics player on the roster because no one is ever good enough. So all they do is nit-pick, find flaws and thus will give away useful contributors for peanuts just to clear roster space for the "next great thing". And when that next thing isn't great, they'd like to give away those assets for nothing too. Look at the original post. Sully is "gone soon anyway"? Even though there's a year left on his contract and then he'd only be a RFA (which 90+% of the time means the player stays with the team). But somehow in the OP's mind that means he's virtually out the door.

I'm glad Danny Boy is the GM. At least he knows how to get value for his assets.

[Celtics4ever]

That's because some people on CB continually harp on every Celtics player on the roster because no one is ever good enough. So all they do is nit-pick, find flaws and thus will give away useful contributors for peanuts just to clear roster space for the "next great thing

We got swept in the playoffs.  Thompson pretty much exposed our big men for what they are.

And when that next thing isn't great, they'd like to give away those assets for nothing too. Look at the original post. Sully is "gone soon anyway"?

   Sullinger, is unathletic but he really put himself in this position with the lack of personal discipline by not pushing himself from the table.   I like his knack for rebounding, nifty post moves and I think he has great hands.   I find him an anathema on defense.  KO has some gifts but is mentally weak and a confidence player and also suffers from lack of athletic ability.

I'm glad Danny Boy is the GM. At least he knows how to get value for his assets.

  You can bet he is aware of their limitations too and doesn't let his heart get into the way of making a decision that is good for the team.   Last year our team played it's heart out.   But we were dismantled in the playoffs.   Ainge knows this and although he likes things about our players he knows we lack talent.

“I feel like we need to have a busy summer,” Ainge said Thursday. “And we will have a busy summer. Hopefully, we can get some things accomplished that we need to. I think we need to upgrade our talent level on our team, and at the same time, I’m very excited about a lot of the individuals that we have — actually, all the individuals I thought played the best basketball of their careers in a lot of cases. So, I’m excited about the players we have, but at the same time, we’re not at the same level of a team like Cleveland. We found that out.”

Read more at: http://nesn.com/2015/04/danny-ainge-celtics-need-to-have-a-busy-summer-this-offseason/

I think that he will leave no stone unturned to improve the team.   He is not going to go out and publicly nit-pik the team because that hurts the value of his assets.   But you can rest assured he is aware of them or he would not have said we are not of the same level as Cleveland and we need to improve the talent level.

I disagree with your assessment though, we got rid of Rondo and the next great thing was better.   One could argue that Crowder was better than Green.   I know watching Jerebko was easier than Sullinger as he played D for me and truly spread the floor.   

Ainge is going to keep tinkering to improve the team.   We played our hearts out and it was easy to get attached to the team this year but at the end of the day we were measured and did not come up as ready to compete in the post season.    GMs have to be aware of strengths and weaknesses of their players.   If they can't they will be poor scouts as well.   

I would rather be realistic and nit-pick than have my head in the clouds and unrealistic.  The sooner you realize that the team will be in flux for the next couple of years the easier it will be for you.   This is not my first rodeo, I seen us go 29-53 in the 70s, in the year prior to getting Larry.  I have lived through Pitino and the 90s.   Now there was a guy who would not give talent a chance.   I seen Ainge draft kids and trade them to make us a contender.

There is a difference between getting rid of talent like Pitino did and realizing that your talent won't cut it.   I think Ainge is in the latter and many on this board that your are criticizing are in the latter.  When your talent is not cutting it, you realize that they have limitations which prevent them from being top talent.   Some of these limitations can be improved and some cannot.   Ainge rolls the dice he usually finds talent where he drafts with some exceptions.    I think it is his weakest area as a GM, but that does not mean he is horrible at it, everyone misses sometimes in the draft.

[greece66]

While I agree this is a lot to give up for the uncertainty of a yet unproven college player, even a 6 pick, there are a couple of other ways to look at it:

First, would you rather have 1 star player, or 5 role players?

Second, it's misleading to talk about previous 6-picks unless you include ALL lower picks as well. You cannot guarantee that Danny will make the right choice, but you also cannot penalize Danny for the poor choices of other GMs. Include Dirk, Paul, Curry, Drummand, Klay, Kawhi, etc. in this comparison.

Would you make this trade if it were for Drummand? Curry?

In a New York minute - the key is if you think there will be a game changer available at 6 - that's the real debate.

CB

So you won't to trade four players for a 5% chance of hitting the new Curry.  Sounds reasonable 

[gpap]

While I agree this is a lot to give up for the uncertainty of a yet unproven college player, even a 6 pick, there are a couple of other ways to look at it:

First, would you rather have 1 star player, or 5 role players?

Second, it's misleading to talk about previous 6-picks unless you include ALL lower picks as well. You cannot guarantee that Danny will make the right choice, but you also cannot penalize Danny for the poor choices of other GMs. Include Dirk, Paul, Curry, Drummand, Klay, Kawhi, etc. in this comparison.

Would you make this trade if it were for Drummand? Curry?

In a New York minute - the key is if you think there will be a game changer available at 6 - that's the real debate.

CB

So you won't to trade four players for a 5% chance of hitting the new Curry.  Sounds reasonable 

Who said the number 6 pick could materialize into the new Steph Curry?

Giving up three 1st rounders for the number 6 pick in my opinion is ridiculous.

That's the type of package you give up for a Durant of AD, not the no 6 pick.

Was anyone willing to give us 2 players and 3 picks for Marcus Smart, last season?

[danglertx]

TO OP, ....no.   

[hpantazo]

While I agree this is a lot to give up for the uncertainty of a yet unproven college player, even a 6 pick, there are a couple of other ways to look at it:

First, would you rather have 1 star player, or 5 role players?

Second, it's misleading to talk about previous 6-picks unless you include ALL lower picks as well. You cannot guarantee that Danny will make the right choice, but you also cannot penalize Danny for the poor choices of other GMs. Include Dirk, Paul, Curry, Drummand, Klay, Kawhi, etc. in this comparison.

Would you make this trade if it were for Drummand? Curry?

In a New York minute - the key is if you think there will be a game changer available at 6 - that's the real debate.

CB

So you won't to trade four players for a 5% chance of hitting the new Curry.  Sounds reasonable 

Who said the number 6 pick could materialize into the new Steph Curry?

Giving up three 1st rounders for the number 6 pick in my opinion is ridiculous.

That's the type of package you give up for a Durant of AD, not the no 6 pick.

Was anyone willing to give us 2 players and 3 picks for Marcus Smart, last season?

Well, it depends on how strongly Ainge feels that he can get an all-star caliber player at 6.

Stephen Curry was picked 7th

Andre Drummond 9th

Dirk Nowitzki 9th

Paul Pierce 10th

Dwayne Wade 5th

There are plenty of examples of players drafted in that range who became not only all-star caliber, but franchise players on championship teams.

Also, it depends A LOT on what 1st rounders you are giving up. #16., 27, and the Dallas  1st are all poor picks that would never get you a player like Cousins or Gasol or Love

[hpantazo]

Even more recent , would you have given up 16, 27, and a future late 1st for Giannis knowing what we know now about the players from that draft class?

Too many people fall into the mentality of the draft projections and expert big boards. Just because experts say there is a top 2 or top 3 in a draft doesnt mean they are right. Often enough they are not. There are many, many examples of guys projected, and taken, in the top 3 that sucked, and players projected and taken in the 4-10 range that were superstars. The bottom line is , the expert projections are just guesses, and I trust Ainge's scouting and evaluation more than NBAdraft.net and Draftexpress.

[cometboy]

While I agree this is a lot to give up for the uncertainty of a yet unproven college player, even a 6 pick, there are a couple of other ways to look at it:

First, would you rather have 1 star player, or 5 role players?

Second, it's misleading to talk about previous 6-picks unless you include ALL lower picks as well. You cannot guarantee that Danny will make the right choice, but you also cannot penalize Danny for the poor choices of other GMs. Include Dirk, Paul, Curry, Drummand, Klay, Kawhi, etc. in this comparison.

Would you make this trade if it were for Drummand? Curry?

In a New York minute - the key is if you think there will be a game changer available at 6 - that's the real debate.

CB

So you won't to trade four players for a 5% chance of hitting the new Curry.  Sounds reasonable 

Who said the number 6 pick could materialize into the new Steph Curry?

Giving up three 1st rounders for the number 6 pick in my opinion is ridiculous.

That's the type of package you give up for a Durant of AD, not the no 6 pick.

Was anyone willing to give us 2 players and 3 picks for Marcus Smart, last season?

Well, it depends on how strongly Ainge feels that he can get an all-star caliber player at 6.

Stephen Curry was picked 7th

Andre Drummond 9th

Dirk Nowitzki 9th

Paul Pierce 10th

Dwayne Wade 5th

There are plenty of examples of players drafted in that range who became not only all-star caliber, but franchise players on championship teams.

Also, it depends A LOT on what 1st rounders you are giving up. #16., 27, and the Dallas  1st are all poor picks that would never get you a player like Cousins or Gasol or Love

Thanks hpantazo - you may be the only one who gets my point.

I'm not that in tune with the college game, so I don't personally know where the "probable star" line is drawn this year. From what I read, it's probably after the 3 pick. If that's the case, then I only do a trade like this for the 3 (or higher) pick. However, I would try hard to keep AB and limit it to likely non-lottery picks. You can get a very good player outside the lottery, but the odds for a game changer are very low. Players like that can be bought as FAs all the time. It's that star player we need, and it's been tough to get them as FAs.

If Danny can make a trade similar to this for a pick he considers to be a likely star, he does it all day long. He won't even think twice. We have plenty of "nice" players who would come off the bench on a good team.

CB

[FreddieJ]

The 6 this year is particularly enticing. Winslow, WCS or Mudiay most likely will be there

[cometboy]

The 6 this year is particularly enticing. Winslow, WCS or Mudiay most likely will be there

If Winslow pans out, he could solve one of our two biggest problems

CB

[Smitty77]

That's because some people on CB continually harp on every Celtics player on the roster because no one is ever good enough. So all they do is nit-pick, find flaws and thus will give away useful contributors for peanuts just to clear roster space for the "next great thing

We got swept in the playoffs.  Thompson pretty much exposed our big men for what they are.

And when that next thing isn't great, they'd like to give away those assets for nothing too. Look at the original post. Sully is "gone soon anyway"?

   Sullinger, is unathletic but he really put himself in this position with the lack of personal discipline by not pushing himself from the table.   I like his knack for rebounding, nifty post moves and I think he has great hands.   I find him an anathema on defense.  KO has some gifts but is mentally weak and a confidence player and also suffers from lack of athletic ability.

I'm glad Danny Boy is the GM. At least he knows how to get value for his assets.

  You can bet he is aware of their limitations too and doesn't let his heart get into the way of making a decision that is good for the team.   Last year our team played it's heart out.   But we were dismantled in the playoffs.   Ainge knows this and although he likes things about our players he knows we lack talent.

“I feel like we need to have a busy summer,” Ainge said Thursday. “And we will have a busy summer. Hopefully, we can get some things accomplished that we need to. I think we need to upgrade our talent level on our team, and at the same time, I’m very excited about a lot of the individuals that we have — actually, all the individuals I thought played the best basketball of their careers in a lot of cases. So, I’m excited about the players we have, but at the same time, we’re not at the same level of a team like Cleveland. We found that out.”

Read more at: http://nesn.com/2015/04/danny-ainge-celtics-need-to-have-a-busy-summer-this-offseason/

I think that he will leave no stone unturned to improve the team.   He is not going to go out and publicly nit-pik the team because that hurts the value of his assets.   But you can rest assured he is aware of them or he would not have said we are not of the same level as Cleveland and we need to improve the talent level.

I disagree with your assessment though, we got rid of Rondo and the next great thing was better.   One could argue that Crowder was better than Green.   I know watching Jerebko was easier than Sullinger as he played D for me and truly spread the floor.   

Ainge is going to keep tinkering to improve the team.   We played our hearts out and it was easy to get attached to the team this year but at the end of the day we were measured and did not come up as ready to compete in the post season.    GMs have to be aware of strengths and weaknesses of their players.   If they can't they will be poor scouts as well.   

I would rather be realistic and nit-pick than have my head in the clouds and unrealistic.  The sooner you realize that the team will be in flux for the next couple of years the easier it will be for you.   This is not my first rodeo, I seen us go 29-53 in the 70s, in the year prior to getting Larry.  I have lived through Pitino and the 90s.   Now there was a guy who would not give talent a chance.   I seen Ainge draft kids and trade them to make us a contender.

There is a difference between getting rid of talent like Pitino did and realizing that your talent won't cut it.   I think Ainge is in the latter and many on this board that your are criticizing are in the latter.  When your talent is not cutting it, you realize that they have limitations which prevent them from being top talent.   Some of these limitations can be improved and some cannot.   Ainge rolls the dice he usually finds talent where he drafts with some exceptions.    I think it is his weakest area as a GM, but that does not mean he is horrible at it, everyone misses sometimes in the draft.

I think you are being ridiculously UNFAIR to Sully in the playoffs!!!  He was NOT expected to play and was coming off an extended injury.  He was trying to play himself back into condition.  He ONLY played 13:38 in game 1, 22:14 in game 2, 16:32 in game 3, and FINALLY 27:53 in game four where he put up 21 and 11 and 1 block!  Meanwhile, Tristan, who allegedly OWNED Sully, had a pitiful 5 points and 3 rebounds and 4 fouls in just under 22 minutes!!

I don't think we should be GIVING away Sully to try to get one of the most offensively limited players in the draft in WCS!!!!!!!!!!!!

Smitty77

[Smitty77]

BTW, Sully was #23 in Real Plus/Minus for PF's!!

http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/rpm/_/sort/RPM/position/6

Smitty77

[317]

take Bradly out, add lottery protection to the Dallas pick and i would do it if Porzingis is still on the board. i dont know if he will end up as a 4 or a 5 but he has 3 point range with some rim protection skills, which is the new key combo in todays NBA.

[greece66]

While I agree this is a lot to give up for the uncertainty of a yet unproven college player, even a 6 pick, there are a couple of other ways to look at it:

First, would you rather have 1 star player, or 5 role players?

Second, it's misleading to talk about previous 6-picks unless you include ALL lower picks as well. You cannot guarantee that Danny will make the right choice, but you also cannot penalize Danny for the poor choices of other GMs. Include Dirk, Paul, Curry, Drummand, Klay, Kawhi, etc. in this comparison.

Would you make this trade if it were for Drummand? Curry?

In a New York minute - the key is if you think there will be a game changer available at 6 - that's the real debate.

CB

So you won't to trade four players for a 5% chance of hitting the new Curry.  Sounds reasonable 

Who said the number 6 pick could materialize into the new Steph Curry?

Giving up three 1st rounders for the number 6 pick in my opinion is ridiculous.

That's the type of package you give up for a Durant of AD, not the no 6 pick.

Was anyone willing to give us 2 players and 3 picks for Marcus Smart, last season?

Well, it depends on how strongly Ainge feels that he can get an all-star caliber player at 6.

Stephen Curry was picked 7th

Andre Drummond 9th

Dirk Nowitzki 9th

Paul Pierce 10th

Dwayne Wade 5th

There are plenty of examples of players drafted in that range who became not only all-star caliber, but franchise players on championship teams.

Also, it depends A LOT on what 1st rounders you are giving up. #16., 27, and the Dallas  1st are all poor picks that would never get you a player like Cousins or Gasol or Love

This is cherry picking data.
By the same logic, lots of good players were selected in the second round.
So, let's trade our #16 for a second rounder...

[Celtics4ever]

BTW, Sully was #23 in Real Plus/Minus for PF's!!

http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/rpm/_/sort/RPM/position/6

Jerebko was 14th.

RPM is a dubious stat and it is even worse when you post something proves the opposite of your intention.


Some other guys ahead of Sully.
                                                GP     MPG  ORPM      DPRM   RPM   WAR
14   Jonas Jerebko   BOS/DET   75   16.4     0.93   1.63     2.56   3.69
18   Lavoy Allen   IND                   63   17.0     0.42   1.62     2.04   2.88
19   James Johnson   TOR           70   19.6     0.33   1.66     1.99   3.66
20   Anthony Tolliver   DET/PHX   76   18.8     2.09   -0.14     1.95   3.80
21   Darrell Arthur   DEN           58   17.0    -2.08   3.92     1.84   2.64
22   Amir Johnson   TOR           75   26.4     0.50   1.32     1.82   5.08
23   Jared Sullinger   BOS           58   27.0     1.50   0.16     1.66   3.97

Note who is horrible at DPRM rating of .16.  Jerebko was a quite a few spots better than him.

I think you are being ridiculously UNFAIR to Sully in the playoffs!!!  He was NOT expected to play and was coming off an extended injury.  He was trying to play himself back into condition.  He ONLY played 13:38 in game 1, 22:14 in game 2, 16:32 in game 3, and FINALLY 27:53 in game four where he put up 21 and 11 and 1 block!  Meanwhile, Tristan, who allegedly OWNED Sully, had a pitiful 5 points and 3 rebounds and 4 fouls in just under 22 minutes!!

An injury that was largely self-inflicted by him over eating.   Perhaps he should not have came back and messed with the chemistry of the team that was winning a lot without him?

CBS said he was not going to let him compromise our defensive integrity in the paper and this was clearly directed at Sully.   Ainge has served him notice and stated he wants guys who play at both ends of the court.

The probably one of the few who thinks Sully is better than Tristan Thompson.   Thompson is going to get paid this year.   I am not so sure that Sully will  BTW Thompson's  +/- for that series was better than Sully's.  I am not a huge fan of that stat.  Check out this great play by Sully.  How UNFAIR is that.

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/eye-on-basketball/25158149/video-jared-sullinger-sets-solid-screen-on-his-own-teammate

I don't think we should be GIVING away Sully to try to get one of the most offensively limited players in the draft in WCS!!!!!!!!!!!!

I never said that at any point.  But rest assured as your RPM shows that Sully is just as limited defensively  as WCS is offensively, perhaps more.    WCS has athletic scores that are equal to DeAndre Jordan, he might do ok.   He also does not a history of conditioning issues.  Personally, I would like something athletes that can play on both ends of the court.  Sully has great hands, is a nice rebounder and nifty in the low post defensively is is horrible, number 53 in DRPM( it is sortable hint) on your list and he tries too often to be something he is not a three point marksmen.

If he gets in shape it will help some but recall that he was bottom five in his combo for vertical leap and lane agility and 3/4 court sprint.

Interestingly enough, the slowest time wasn't by a seven-footer. Technically, Georgetown center Henry Sims, who posted a time of 3.81 seconds, is only 6'11". But perhaps his relatively slow time was the reason that he went undrafted, which was to the surprise of many. Jared Sullinger, who is 6'9", shared this time with Sims.

Another rough time for Jared Sullinger, who posted a time of 12.77 seconds—the worst time by over .4 seconds!

Jared Sullinger looked just awful, but we expected that.

Finite athletic potential that will only marginally be improved by getting in shape.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1243048-nba-draft-2012-weird-draft-combine-results-you-may-not-know-about

Even with the Celtics holding on to the No. 21 pick and Sullinger still being on the board, they too had some concerns about drafting him.
Danny Ainge, Boston’s president of basketball operations, said there was ” a lot” of internal discussions about Sullinger once his medical reports were obtained.
“There were concerns by everybody,” Ainge told CSNNE.com. “But we thought that with Jared, we weighed his talent and his potential and thought that it was definitely something we should roll the dice on.”

http://redsarmy.com/2014/05/13/your-morning-dump-where-the-nba-combine-can-simultaneously-help-and-hurt/

Ainge knew this and rolled the dice.

Don't I think that price is too steep, for DA to do it.   Sully is not as worth much as you think outside of Boston.   Three first for a number 5 is not something I see Ainge doing.