Chad Ford tweets about CHA as a possible Celtics trade partner with CBlog's KO

[colincb]

[Late Edit: Should have noted that the tweet-chain starts at the bottom.]

Chad Ford ?@chadfordinsider Yeah. The Celtics are the most logical trade partner for a Hornets deal.   

     Kevin O'Connor @KevinOConnorNBA Hello Celtics at #16.

Chad Ford ?@chadfordinsider Hornets also like RJ Hunter a lot, but won't take him at 9.  It's possible they trade down a few spots for Hunter & pick up another asset

Chad Ford ?@chadfordinsider With Lance Stephenson gone & Spencer Hawes on board, chances Hornets take a 2-guard like Devin Booker or Kelly Oubre at No. 9 just went up

https://twitter.com/chadfordinsider

[tarheelsxxiii]

Why do you think they're both thinking Cs are the obvious trade partner? Just given our assets and desire to move up?

[LGC88]

Interesting.
#16 #28 and #45 for #9.
Hopefully we can get Johnson.

[colincb]

Why do you think they're both thinking Cs are the obvious trade partner? Just given our assets and desire to move up?

...and the difference between Booker and Hunter not being as big as it looks based on the mocks which take in positional needs of teams. CHA needs 3 point shooting and Hunter's ranked 2nd to Booker, but is showing up 10-15 rungs lower in the mocks. Other teams in-between are focused on getting bigs, PGs etc.

[colincb]

Interesting.
#16 #28 and #45 for #9.
Hopefully we can get Johnson.

I was thinking the same picks, but not for Johnson who is one guy I'd avoid although it's not like my reaction to Aaron Gordon last year who I thought most likely to bust of top 10 prospects in the mocks. I just think Johnson has limited upside offensively and should be late lottery. Just my opinion and don't want to argue about it.

I'd prefer the best big available from WCS, Turner, or Kaminsky. I'd also look closely at any sliders like Mudiay or the Euros.

[LGC88]

Of course, if WCS or Mario is available you grab him, but I doubt any of them will be there at #9.
I'm also fine with trading down to around #20 and pick Anderson 

[Quetzalcoatl]

I really hope we move up.  The main reason is I think that the draft order is going to get silly.  There is a real chance that people start picking wonky early (Rusell @ 2, Porzingis @ 3, Trey Lyles @ 7, Cameron Payne top 10, etc) and it will mess up the other teams.  Someone could really fall.  I am seeing Mudiay going 5th in some places, Stanley Johnson going outside the top 9, WCS going 9th, etc.  If we can move up we should absolutely do so. 

If Stanley Johnson, Mario Hezonja or WCS fall to 9 and we could move up with Kelly and 16, then come on we have to do it. We'd essentially have made the playoffs and gotten a lotto pick last year.  Best of both worlds.

[krumeto]

Interesting.
#16 #28 and #45 for #9.
Hopefully we can get Johnson.

Johnson, Turner, slipping WCS, slipping Winslow (projected at 8 in the latest DE draft)... somebody of need and talent will be there.

I've proposed it before, but I'd do
Young+28+45 for 9 if the Hornets look for a 2 guard as Ford suggests.

There are 5-6 guys at 16 I like better than Young (Portis, Lyles, Anderson, RJ Hunter to name a few).

A draft of for example, Johnson, Portis and name-a-favorite 2nd rounder would be a big win.

[colincb]

I really hope we move up.  The main reason is I think that the draft order is going to get silly.  There is a real chance that people start picking wonky early (Rusell @ 2, Porzingis @ 3, Trey Lyles @ 7, Cameron Payne top 10, etc) and it will mess up the other teams.  Someone could really fall.  I am seeing Mudiay going 5th in some places, Stanley Johnson going outside the top 9, WCS going 9th, etc.  If we can move up we should absolutely do so. 

If Stanley Johnson, Mario Hezonja or WCS fall to 9 and we could move up with Kelly and 16, then come on we have to do it. We'd essentially have made the playoffs and gotten a lotto pick last year.  Best of both worlds.

I think when CBloggers start throwing players into the conversation in trades to move up, they're often reflecting their personal biases.  I also think people under-estimate the value of players who have shown they can play in the NBA, never mind KO in particular. We also have enough in pick value to make this trade and too may picks over this year and next to use them all.

Put another way, if I can do a deal for #9 using #16, #28 and #45, isn't that better than #16 and KO?  To me that's a no-brainer. It's also a reasonable trade if you look at the relative values of picks in Table 2 of the analysis done by 82games in the link below. You also have 5 second rounders next year and the Euro crop next season is looking very bad according to Chad Ford based on what GMs/scouts are telling him. You can't use all those picks to stash euros.

http://www.82games.com/barzilai1.htm

[LGC88]

I really hope we move up.  The main reason is I think that the draft order is going to get silly.  There is a real chance that people start picking wonky early (Rusell @ 2, Porzingis @ 3, Trey Lyles @ 7, Cameron Payne top 10, etc) and it will mess up the other teams.  Someone could really fall.  I am seeing Mudiay going 5th in some places, Stanley Johnson going outside the top 9, WCS going 9th, etc.  If we can move up we should absolutely do so. 

If Stanley Johnson, Mario Hezonja or WCS fall to 9 and we could move up with Kelly and 16, then come on we have to do it. We'd essentially have made the playoffs and gotten a lotto pick last year.  Best of both worlds.

I think when CBloggers start throwing players into the conversation in trades to move up, they're often reflecting their personal biases.  I also think people under-estimate the value of players who have shown they can play in the NBA, never mind KO in particular. We also have enough in pick value to make this trade and too may picks over this year and next to use them all.

Put another way, if I can do a deal for #9 using #16, #28 and #45, isn't that better than #16 and KO?  To me that's a no-brainer. It's also a reasonable trade if you look at the relative values of picks in Table 2 of the analysis done by 82games in the link below. You also have 5 second rounders next year and the Euro crop next season is looking very bad according to chad ford based on what GMs/scouts are telling him. You can't use all those picks to stash euros.

http://www.82games.com/barzilai1.htm

I couldn't agree more. TP

[Endless Paradise]

It's also a reasonable trade if you look at the relative values of picks in Table 2 of the analysis done by 82games in the link below.

I disagree for the simple fact that the market for trading into the lottery has somewhat been set by last year's Chicago-Denver trade. Chicago traded the 16th and 19th picks, a second rounder in this year's draft, and took on a salary dump in exchange for the 11th pick. You're advocating getting an even higher pick with even worse draft picks and no kind of salary relief for the Hornets; it just doesn't seem realistic.

You can argue that this year's picks might be weighed differently due to the perceived inferior depth of the draft compared to last year, but I just don't see it happening. The 2013 draft was projected as one of the worst in years and it took the 14th and 21st picks to jump to 9th. In other words, even for a bad draft in 2013, getting the same pick you're coveting required a lottery pick and a higher non-lottery pick (21st vs. 28th). There's arguably not much difference between the 14th and 16th picks; there's considerably more difference between a mid-late pick in the 21st and an end-of-the-round pick in the 28th. For a draft that, although not as heralded as last year's, also is largely seen as better than the 2013 draft, that difference is magnified even more so.

(I'm not focusing on the second rounder you're throwing in because a] second rounders can easily be purchased, especially one as late as the 45th pick and b] the Hornets aren't exactly starved for draft picks. The second rounder is largely of no consequence.)

To jump so high in the draft using relatively mediocre assets and providing no further incentive to the team with the better pick is unprecedented; seriously, you can't find a deal like that ever happening. Basically, unless you're offering a real player to Charlotte and/or offering to take unwanted money off their hands, I wouldn't expect them to take that deal. Lottery picks are a lot more valuable than that.

[LGC88]

It's also a reasonable trade if you look at the relative values of picks in Table 2 of the analysis done by 82games in the link below.

I disagree for the simple fact that the market for trading into the lottery has somewhat been set by last year's Chicago-Denver trade. Chicago traded the 16th and 19th picks, a second rounder in this year's draft, and took on a salary dump in exchange for the 11th pick. You're advocating getting an even higher pick with even worse draft picks and no kind of salary relief for the Hornets; it just doesn't seem realistic.

You can argue that this year's picks might be weighed differently due to the perceived inferior depth of the draft compared to last year, but I just don't see it happening. The 2013 draft was projected as one of the worst in years and it took the 14th and 21st picks to jump to 9th. In other words, even for a bad draft in 2013, getting the same pick you're coveting required a lottery pick and a higher non-lottery pick (21st vs. 28th). There's arguably not much difference between the 14th and 16th picks; there's considerably more difference between a mid-late pick in the 21st and an end-of-the-round pick in the 28th. For a draft that, although not as heralded as last year's, also is largely seen as better than the 2013 draft, that difference is magnified even more so.

(I'm not focusing on the second rounder you're throwing in because a] second rounders can easily be purchased, especially one as late as the 45th pick and b] the Hornets aren't exactly starved for draft picks. The second rounder is largely of no consequence.)

To jump so high in the draft using relatively mediocre assets and providing no further incentive to the team with the better pick is unprecedented; seriously, you can't find a deal like that ever happening. Basically, unless you're offering a real player to Charlotte and/or offering to take unwanted money off their hands, I wouldn't expect them to take that deal. Lottery picks are a lot more valuable than that.

You made good points and I tend to agree that our offer was a low ball one.
But you can't set the market based on Chicago's robbery either.

[Endless Paradise]

Fair enough, but even if you want to set it using the super-low baseline of the other trade I brought up, 16th + 28th wouldn't be enough for the 9th pick.

[LGC88]

I think it depends of the demand. Here it's Hornets that want to go down and pick RJ Hunter. If they are too demanding, maybe they will end up pick up RJH at #9 and get nothing more.
If it's Danny who is trying to go up the draft, then he will have to pay a higher price.

On the flip side, let's say Danny wants Anderson and he's willing to trade down to 20. My guess is that he will get a mid second round for that. Anything more than that will really surprise me.

As for the trade with Charlotte, maybe adding our first next year will do it? Hard to say. I think all GM will react differently. I don't see any pattern on draft, it changes each year, because of depth and needs.

[GryphMinuteMan]

Interesting.
#16 #28 and #45 for #9.
Hopefully we can get Johnson.

I was thinking the same picks, but not for Johnson who is one guy I'd avoid although it's not like my reaction to Aaron Gordon last year who I thought most likely to bust of top 10 prospects in the mocks. I just think Johnson has limited upside offensively and should be late lottery. Just my opinion and don't want to argue about it.

I'd prefer the best big available from WCS, Turner, or Kaminsky. I'd also look closely at any sliders like Mudiay or the Euros.

Kaminsky over Johnson? Wow... I wouldn't think twice about Johnson over turner but kaminsky over Johnson is laughable in my opinion.