who really won the Celtic Brooklyn trade

[SHAQATTACK]

Did you not watch any TV 

They sucked with KG and Paul

So they traded like three years of drafts picks away for two guys that were of little help on a already bad team of losers.

Welcome to earth .

[Denis998]

There's no way that you can argue that Brooklyn actually won the trade.

However, I will say that I'm not so sure the haul the Cs got will turn out to be as good as we thought.  I think once we saw all the 1st round picks coming our way, and given the current state of the Nets, that Ainge timed it perfectly and these would be really high picks...that's what I thought anyway

I'm not so sure of that anymore.  Given that GM Billy King did that trade in the first place, one can only imagine the kinds of trades he'll attempt just to keep the team competitive.  Plus, after next season, Brook Lopez, Joe Johnson, and Thaddeus Young all come off the books so they'll have plenty of money to spend.  Can't discount Lionel Hollins either, he's a pretty solid coach.

So while there's no debate at all that the Cs won that trade, it's how much they actually got in return that's up for debate.  And we won't be able to settle that debate for another 3 years.

Odds are its more like 6 years until we see what our picks end up being. That is unless the Nets pick next year winds up being Ben Simmons...

In terms of the actual talent, absolutely.  But I was just talking specifically about draft position.

Oh ok, then yes it'll be 3 years. However, I'd still argue that if any of the picks wind up being top 5, we'll know immediately that the trade was downright criminal.

Oh totally.  That's absolute best case scenario and if it does happen, that trade could go down as one of the biggest train robbery trades in Celtics history, maybe even sports history depending on what the Celtics actually do with the picks.  And that's not an exaggeration.

But like I said, I'm not as confident as I initially was that it was going in that direction.  Realistically, I'm guessing they'll be closer to 9-15.

If I am not mistaken, Celtics traded 1st pick (Joe Barry Carroll) and 13th pick (Rickey Brown) in 1980 to the Golden State Warriors for the 3rd pick (Kevin McHale) and Robert Parish. That should be considered one of the best trades in Celtics history, if not all time.

[MJohnnyboy]

I think you're confusing the question, "Who really won the Celtics-Brooklyn trade" with "How much did the Celtics really take away from the Nets?" Because there is no FEASIBLE way to convince me that the Nets won this deal or even CAME CLOSE. If they had the choice to do this again they would balk knowing what has happened to them. They got a one year rental of Pierce, who has gone on record saying that he hated playing in Brooklyn, an aging KG who never played at the same level in Brooklyn that he did in Boston, and an aging JET who they got rid of mid-season for Marcus Thornton, who they gave to us in order to get Jarrett Jack. Not to mention they got rid KG to get a possible 1-year rental of Thad Young. That's just about the worst haul for a team that was trying to win a championship.

Meanwhile, the Celtics got 3 unprotected picks and 2 pick swaps out of the deal (One of them has been James Young, who is going to better next season), a nice fat trade exception for Pierce, who we used to get Tyler Zeller and Isaiah Thomas, Gerald Wallace's albatross turned expiring contract this summer which can be very valuable, Humphries expiring, and overall, a nice future down the line.

Now, if you think that those picks may not be as good as we think they are going to be, then that's your opinion because there is a chance that they won't. The east is weak and the Nets are going to do everything they can to stay relevant despite how bleak their outlook is. If Lopez and Young both leave, then the Nets are in worse trouble than they already are. And for those of you who think they'll be fine when they have cap space, just think, what player is going to sign there after seeing how incompetent their management is?

The Celtics won this deal in a landslide, but how much they robbed the Nets will be determined from now until 2018.

[BDeCosta26]

There's no way that you can argue that Brooklyn actually won the trade.

However, I will say that I'm not so sure the haul the Cs got will turn out to be as good as we thought.  I think once we saw all the 1st round picks coming our way, and given the current state of the Nets, that Ainge timed it perfectly and these would be really high picks...that's what I thought anyway

I'm not so sure of that anymore.  Given that GM Billy King did that trade in the first place, one can only imagine the kinds of trades he'll attempt just to keep the team competitive.  Plus, after next season, Brook Lopez, Joe Johnson, and Thaddeus Young all come off the books so they'll have plenty of money to spend.  Can't discount Lionel Hollins either, he's a pretty solid coach.

So while there's no debate at all that the Cs won that trade, it's how much they actually got in return that's up for debate.  And we won't be able to settle that debate for another 3 years.

Odds are its more like 6 years until we see what our picks end up being. That is unless the Nets pick next year winds up being Ben Simmons...

In terms of the actual talent, absolutely.  But I was just talking specifically about draft position.

Oh ok, then yes it'll be 3 years. However, I'd still argue that if any of the picks wind up being top 5, we'll know immediately that the trade was downright criminal.

Oh totally.  That's absolute best case scenario and if it does happen, that trade could go down as one of the biggest train robbery trades in Celtics history, maybe even sports history depending on what the Celtics actually do with the picks.  And that's not an exaggeration.

But like I said, I'm not as confident as I initially was that it was going in that direction.  Realistically, I'm guessing they'll be closer to 9-15.

I'd say that's fair. The salary jump could help them. I think it depends a lot on what happens this summer to Lopez. He's the difference for them. If he opts out and they resign him, the 16 pick and probably the 17 swap will likely be late lottery, of he can stay healthy.

But I think one of the least talked about FA stories this summer will be Lopez to the Bucks. Kidd really likes Lopez, the Bucks need a starting 5 and I think that Ilysova trade was preparation for the offer they're gonna give Lopez. If he leaves Brooklyn, those picks are at least top ten and possibly top 5. If even one of those picks becomes a top 6-8 pick that was one of the greatest trades in team history. If all three of them end up in the lottery (totally possible, though not probable), that was an amazing trade.

[Rosco917]

it has become quite fashionable to write about the deal that sent KG and PP to Brooklyn as a favorable trade for the Celtics because of all the accumulated assets and the impending Brooklyn implosion that will make these assets really valuable assets. One thing that is always left unsaid about this Brooklyn deal is that terrible Wallace contract the Cs absorbed.

The truth is the Wallace contract has become an albatross on the roster and prevents us from making a move not to talk about the millions of dollars spent without any return for the money spent. Therefore when the Brooklyn deal is analyzed the analysts should put in the Boston column of what they gave up the almost 40 million dollars paid on the Wallace contract and if Cs have to spend a first to get rid of that contract that should also be added to what the Cs gave up in that deal. So we add PP, KG, Jet, 40 million dollars, and a 1st for whatever we got in return.


When this is done, the deal does not look like that steal it was for Celtics, does it?

You can't be serious? Yeah we absorbed Wallace's contract, but we sold him 3 players that we're running on fumes. For cards we haven't even played yet.

[BadNewsBarnes]

Is it April Fool's Day?  There is no way you can argue that this trade was good for the Nets.  Ask any Nets fan if they were happy with giving up all those picks.  The Nets have the potential to really suck the next few years.  Some of those picks could end up being top 5 draft picks.

[WeMadeIt17]

Its really not even close. Yes we took on Wallaces contract but i would not be the least surprised if he is gone by draft night. Danny is gonna try and package him somewhere with that 28th pick . If he is here then so be it, he was a good presence this past season for the young guys and he expires after this season. Again its not even close. The fact that we have unprotected picks from the nets is a scary thing to the rest of the league.

[get_banners]

Re: the Nets improving, this is assuming miraculous collapses in the East. They have no picks, they have no cap space, and their "assets" they can exchange for picks/talent are ones nobody would want w/o the Nets giving up plenty themselves (D-Will, Iso Joe). Lopez might leave this offseason, and even if he doesn't, he's a major injury risk. So, at best, they will be as good as they were last year, which seems unlikely given Williams and Johnson being a year older, Lopez possibly being gone, and lots of teams in the East improving. Again, miracles can happen, but I can't see them NOT being a lottery team next year (possibly quite bad, as I think its very likely that the Heat, Knicks, Hornet, Pacers, and Heat will all be better than the Nets next season), and worse following that.

[max215]

There's no way that you can argue that Brooklyn actually won the trade.

However, I will say that I'm not so sure the haul the Cs got will turn out to be as good as we thought.  I think once we saw all the 1st round picks coming our way, and given the current state of the Nets, that Ainge timed it perfectly and these would be really high picks...that's what I thought anyway

I'm not so sure of that anymore.  Given that GM Billy King did that trade in the first place, one can only imagine the kinds of trades he'll attempt just to keep the team competitive.  Plus, after next season, Brook Lopez, Joe Johnson, and Thaddeus Young all come off the books so they'll have plenty of money to spend.  Can't discount Lionel Hollins either, he's a pretty solid coach.

So while there's no debate at all that the Cs won that trade, it's how much they actually got in return that's up for debate.  And we won't be able to settle that debate for another 3 years.

Odds are its more like 6 years until we see what our picks end up being. That is unless the Nets pick next year winds up being Ben Simmons...

In terms of the actual talent, absolutely.  But I was just talking specifically about draft position.

Oh ok, then yes it'll be 3 years. However, I'd still argue that if any of the picks wind up being top 5, we'll know immediately that the trade was downright criminal.

Oh totally.  That's absolute best case scenario and if it does happen, that trade could go down as one of the biggest train robbery trades in Celtics history, maybe even sports history depending on what the Celtics actually do with the picks.  And that's not an exaggeration.

But like I said, I'm not as confident as I initially was that it was going in that direction.  Realistically, I'm guessing they'll be closer to 9-15.

Just my opinion, but I think at least one (quite possibly more) of the remaining 3 picks will be in the 6-8 range (pre-lotto). I guess we'll agree to disagree on that and wait to see what happens though. Man, I DO miss the captain and KG, but I just get so happy every time I think about that trade and what it has already given us/what it will in the future. IMO the trade should play at least some (possibly major) role in bringing us back into contention, while the Nets wallow in mediocrity.

[Denis998]

There's no way that you can argue that Brooklyn actually won the trade.

However, I will say that I'm not so sure the haul the Cs got will turn out to be as good as we thought.  I think once we saw all the 1st round picks coming our way, and given the current state of the Nets, that Ainge timed it perfectly and these would be really high picks...that's what I thought anyway

I'm not so sure of that anymore.  Given that GM Billy King did that trade in the first place, one can only imagine the kinds of trades he'll attempt just to keep the team competitive.  Plus, after next season, Brook Lopez, Joe Johnson, and Thaddeus Young all come off the books so they'll have plenty of money to spend.  Can't discount Lionel Hollins either, he's a pretty solid coach.

So while there's no debate at all that the Cs won that trade, it's how much they actually got in return that's up for debate.  And we won't be able to settle that debate for another 3 years.

Odds are its more like 6 years until we see what our picks end up being. That is unless the Nets pick next year winds up being Ben Simmons...

In terms of the actual talent, absolutely.  But I was just talking specifically about draft position.

Oh ok, then yes it'll be 3 years. However, I'd still argue that if any of the picks wind up being top 5, we'll know immediately that the trade was downright criminal.

Oh totally.  That's absolute best case scenario and if it does happen, that trade could go down as one of the biggest train robbery trades in Celtics history, maybe even sports history depending on what the Celtics actually do with the picks.  And that's not an exaggeration.

But like I said, I'm not as confident as I initially was that it was going in that direction.  Realistically, I'm guessing they'll be closer to 9-15.

Just my opinion, but I think at least one (quite possibly more) of the remaining 3 picks will be in the 6-8 range (pre-lotto). I guess we'll agree to disagree on that and wait to see what happens though. Man, I DO miss the captain and KG, but I just get so happy every time I think about that trade and what it has already given us/what it will in the future. IMO the trade should play at least some (possibly major) role in bringing us back into contention, while the Nets wallow in mediocrity.

I still see PP as the captain of our team, even though he plays for a different one. I hope he returns to Boston after his career for a job in the front office.

[Ogaju]

Okay yall the heading was written in a rush so it is misleading. If you read the post it is obvious that I believe the Celtics won the deal, the question at the end though is if we count the fact that we took the 40 million contract off the books for Brooklyn was the deal that much of the steal that yall think. Wallace has barely played and Cs pay him 10 million a year.

My point is we never mention this fact when we analyze the deal. If we now spend a first round draft to dump that contract we have to subtract that first round draft from what we hauled from the Nets, no?

[loco_91]

Why is Wallace's contract such a big deal? It isn't like we would've signed a big FA if we had an extra $10m in cap space. The money is something that was obviously relevant to Wyc, but I don't think it had much impact if any on the quality of team that we have or will have.

At this point I don't know why we'd spend a 1st to dump him; if we did, it would be probably be a financial move, not a basketball move.

[jambr380]

Okay yall the heading was written in a rush so it is misleading. If you read the post it is obvious that I believe the Celtics won the deal, the question at the end though is if we count the fact that we took the 40 million contract off the books for Brooklyn was the deal that much of the steal that yall think. Wallace has barely played and Cs pay him 10 million a year.

My point is we never mention this fact when we analyze the deal. If we now spend a first round draft to dump that contract we have to subtract that first round draft from what we hauled from the Nets, no?

Yeah, people seem to be jumping down your throat. If you just take it at face value, I know what you mean...We are needing to give up at least a first to rid ourselves of Wallace's expiring contract (if Ainge 'needs' to). If you take this over three years, that is three firsts - one for each year of his deal - which is essentially what we got from BKN (plus the swap in '17).

But other parts of the deal are what really played out in Boston's favor:

- The Pierce TPE (which led to Zeller and IT)
- Terry's two remaining years
- KG's two remaining years
- the possibility that these picks could actually be lottery picks

I totally get what you are saying and have thought the same thing, but it really goes far beyond the actual years/money we took on with Wallace.

[beantownboy171]

Okay yall the heading was written in a rush so it is misleading. If you read the post it is obvious that I believe the Celtics won the deal, the question at the end though is if we count the fact that we took the 40 million contract off the books for Brooklyn was the deal that much of the steal that yall think. Wallace has barely played and Cs pay him 10 million a year.

My point is we never mention this fact when we analyze the deal. If we now spend a first round draft to dump that contract we have to subtract that first round draft from what we hauled from the Nets, no?

I think people will account for that if it happens. But it hasn't happened yet so why account for it?

It also might not be as simple a calculation as 3 1st rounders (BKN Trade) - 1 1st rounders (Wallace dump) = 2 1st rounders.  Because the pick we use to dump wallace might be less valuable than any of the 3 1st rounders we acquired from the Nets.

For instance if we managed to dump Wallace with our #28 + #45 this year.

Another thing that hasn't been accounted for is how valuable will our right to swap be in 2017? If the celtics are competing at a high level and the nets are in the tank the value there could be huge. (Like this year when the Nets swapped 15 & 28 with the Hawks).

This is a trade we will be recalculating for years to come.

[get_banners]

I get the OPs point, but Wallace's contract isn't really a liability anymore (since it expires after this season, it becomes an asset for trades, etc.), and it wasn't much of a liability before in that we weren't going to sign anybody big with that money, anyway. Its basically part of the cost we had to pay to get 3 unprotected #1s, one that I think everybody would do every day and twice on Sunday.