Double Down on 2016?

[jaketwice]

I don't think we are really going to draft anyone who is going to make a major dent in our rotation, either at 16, or at 28. And, truth be told, I am not in love with any of the players outside of the top 10, although I think Sam Dekker will be a multi-year quality bench player/starter.

So what if we just traded away our picks in this year's draft for picks in the "Ben Simmons" 2016 draft? This year's 16 and 28 to Toronto for an unprotected first in 2016? We would then have basically five draft picks in 2016, three of which would be unprotected.

There is no reason for a free agent to come here. We do not have the players to trade for a difference maker. And we have plenty of quality role players. Why not just double down on 2016?

[acieEarl]

I hear what your saying, but Toronto? That pick would most likely be in the 14-20 range. I think we could do better than that.

[Celtics18]

I don't think we are really going to draft anyone who is going to make a major dent in our rotation, either at 16, or at 28. And, truth be told, I am not in love with any of the players outside of the top 10, although I think Sam Dekker will be a multi-year quality bench player/starter.

So what if we just traded away our picks in this year's draft for picks in the "Ben Simmons" 2016 draft? This year's 16 and 28 to Toronto for an unprotected first in 2016? We would then have basically five draft picks in 2016, three of which would be unprotected.

There is no reason for a free agent to come here. We do not have the players to trade for a difference maker. And we have plenty of quality role players. Why not just double down on 2016?

Because it's unlikely we'll get higher value next year with Toronto's pick than we will with our numbers 16 and 28 in this year's draft.

[jaketwice]

I don't think we are really going to draft anyone who is going to make a major dent in our rotation, either at 16, or at 28. And, truth be told, I am not in love with any of the players outside of the top 10, although I think Sam Dekker will be a multi-year quality bench player/starter.

So what if we just traded away our picks in this year's draft for picks in the "Ben Simmons" 2016 draft? This year's 16 and 28 to Toronto for an unprotected first in 2016? We would then have basically five draft picks in 2016, three of which would be unprotected.

There is no reason for a free agent to come here. We do not have the players to trade for a difference maker. And we have plenty of quality role players. Why not just double down on 2016?

Because it's unlikely we'll get higher value next year with Toronto's pick than we will with our numbers 16 and 28 in this year's draft.

Yes - but we will have potentially four picks in that draft to use to trade up. There is also some question about whether Toronto has reached its ceiling: http://hoopshabit.com/2015/06/22/toronto-raptors-time-tear/

...and fine - maybe it isn't Toronto. Maybe you reach out to Utah (likely to be pretty bad in 2016) or Phoenix (I don't think Bledsoe and the Morris twins are the answer there).

[Celtics18]

I don't think we are really going to draft anyone who is going to make a major dent in our rotation, either at 16, or at 28. And, truth be told, I am not in love with any of the players outside of the top 10, although I think Sam Dekker will be a multi-year quality bench player/starter.

So what if we just traded away our picks in this year's draft for picks in the "Ben Simmons" 2016 draft? This year's 16 and 28 to Toronto for an unprotected first in 2016? We would then have basically five draft picks in 2016, three of which would be unprotected.

There is no reason for a free agent to come here. We do not have the players to trade for a difference maker. And we have plenty of quality role players. Why not just double down on 2016?

Because it's unlikely we'll get higher value next year with Toronto's pick than we will with our numbers 16 and 28 in this year's draft.

Yes - but we will have potentially four picks in that draft to use to trade up. There is also some question about whether Toronto has reached its ceiling: http://hoopshabit.com/2015/06/22/toronto-raptors-time-tear/

...and fine - maybe it isn't Toronto. Maybe you reach out to Utah (likely to be pretty bad in 2016) or Phoenix (I don't think Bledsoe and the Morris twins are the answer there).

I don't know, seems like a bad idea to me any way you slice it.  Whether you are talking Toronto, Phoenix, Utah, or whoever, we are dealing with a complete unknown.  One factor to take into consideration is that any team that traded away their unprotected first rounder next year would have no motivation to not attempt to maximize their win totals this year.

Also, I think there will be plenty of players at both of our first round spots this year that have potential to be very good NBA players.  I will be very happy if the Celtics end up keeping both picks and selecting the players they like the best and taking our chances with them.

Danny's due for a big hit in the draft.  This could be the year. 

[jaketwice]

I don't think we are really going to draft anyone who is going to make a major dent in our rotation, either at 16, or at 28. And, truth be told, I am not in love with any of the players outside of the top 10, although I think Sam Dekker will be a multi-year quality bench player/starter.

So what if we just traded away our picks in this year's draft for picks in the "Ben Simmons" 2016 draft? This year's 16 and 28 to Toronto for an unprotected first in 2016? We would then have basically five draft picks in 2016, three of which would be unprotected.

There is no reason for a free agent to come here. We do not have the players to trade for a difference maker. And we have plenty of quality role players. Why not just double down on 2016?

Because it's unlikely we'll get higher value next year with Toronto's pick than we will with our numbers 16 and 28 in this year's draft.

Yes - but we will have potentially four picks in that draft to use to trade up. There is also some question about whether Toronto has reached its ceiling: http://hoopshabit.com/2015/06/22/toronto-raptors-time-tear/

...and fine - maybe it isn't Toronto. Maybe you reach out to Utah (likely to be pretty bad in 2016) or Phoenix (I don't think Bledsoe and the Morris twins are the answer there).

I don't know, seems like a bad idea to me any way you slice it.  Whether you are talking Toronto, Phoenix, Utah, or whoever, we are dealing with a complete unknown.  One factor to take into consideration is that any team that traded away their unprotected first rounder next year would have no motivation to not attempt to maximize their win totals this year.

Also, I think there will be plenty of players at both of our first round spots this year that have potential to be very good NBA players.  I will be very happy if the Celtics end up keeping both picks and selecting the players they like the best and taking our chances with them.

Danny's due for a big hit in the draft.  This could be the year.

I suppose to think it's a good idea, you have to feel that five first rounders in 2016 would give the Celtics enough draft day leverage to make it worthwhile.

[A Future of Stevens]

I don't think we are really going to draft anyone who is going to make a major dent in our rotation, either at 16, or at 28. And, truth be told, I am not in love with any of the players outside of the top 10, although I think Sam Dekker will be a multi-year quality bench player/starter.

So what if we just traded away our picks in this year's draft for picks in the "Ben Simmons" 2016 draft? This year's 16 and 28 to Toronto for an unprotected first in 2016? We would then have basically five draft picks in 2016, three of which would be unprotected.

There is no reason for a free agent to come here. We do not have the players to trade for a difference maker. And we have plenty of quality role players. Why not just double down on 2016?

Because it's unlikely we'll get higher value next year with Toronto's pick than we will with our numbers 16 and 28 in this year's draft.

Yes - but we will have potentially four picks in that draft to use to trade up. There is also some question about whether Toronto has reached its ceiling: http://hoopshabit.com/2015/06/22/toronto-raptors-time-tear/

...and fine - maybe it isn't Toronto. Maybe you reach out to Utah (likely to be pretty bad in 2016) or Phoenix (I don't think Bledsoe and the Morris twins are the answer there).

I think in this scenario, Pheonix would be the better bet in terms of future value for a lottery pick for us. Utah seems to have a very solid core that can grow together, and already showed this year that they are on an upward swing. Pheonix on the other hand could have the floor drop out from under them. I see Minny making some strides next year (in terms of pushing Pheonix down the standings in the West, not making the playoffs), as Wiggins will have another year of development, and the addition of KAT.

Intristing Proposal, TP for the idea, but think of it this way. Lets say the Brooklyn pick is 8th in the draft, Dallas is anywhere between 12-16 (say 14 for arguments sake), the Cs don't improve by leaps and bounds, but still make the playoffs (16 seed again, while arguably we could be the same level of talent, and as the east ascends we do not make the playoffs,) and call the Suns the 10 pick (doesn't matter). If you were a team looking at taking Ben Simmons or Jaylen Brown, would 8,10, 14 and 16 (some of these are also very generous selection spots) be enough to get you to trade? This is all speculation of course as who knows where those picks wind up, but the idea is the same. I would rather have the one possible transcendent player instead of 4 mid-late lottery picks that would be hard to integrate on your current squad. Also they are all guaranteed money, so that aspect of those 4 picks will also come into play.

PS: I do not know where the 4th draft pick everyone talks about is coming from. We traded the protected Cavs pick for IT, bringing us down to 3, unless Minny takes HUGE strides next year and gets a pick higher than 12 in the draft (1-12 protection). If I am missing something in terms of the 1st rounders we have next year please let me know, as that's another asset to contemplate.

http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/celtics/post/_/id/4716912/bostons-pile-of-draft-picks