Can the Celts build a package better than the Lakers for DMC?

[BDUB2112]

Seems like Karl wants DMC gone. Lakers could put a package together like #2 pick, Randle and Jordan Hill (assuming they pick up his option).

Racking my brain here, can we offer anything better? Word is the Kings want NBA players, so how about:

Smart, Bradley, Sully #16 this year, next year's Nets pick.  Is that better? Worse?

[beantownboy171]

Well I think we can. But it's bad news for the Celtic's chances that Cousins may be traded this offseason. Our best bet for acquiring Cousins is if Lopez walks from the Brooklyn this offseason and we end up in the middle of the lottery next year.

[DefenseWinsChamps]

We can offer more picks, including 2-3 next year. The Lakers cannot offer picks next year.

Other than that, if I'm the Kings, I like a roster with Russell-McLemore-Gay-Randle-Cauley-Stein.

The other thing that I think the Kings might want to do is include Gay's contract in any trade, but they will want another piece back for him.

[BDUB2112]

We can offer more picks, including 2-3 next year. The Lakers cannot offer picks next year.

Other than that, if I'm the Kings, I like a roster with Russell-McLemore-Gay-Randle-Cauley-Stein.

The other thing that I think the Kings might want to do is include Gay's contract in any trade, but they will want another piece back for him.

I'd happily take Gay's contract if it meant DMC. Send back Turner. Only one year left on his deal at low money.

And yes, we can offer more picks, but not the #2 pick. Seems the Lakers may not love their options there though.

[DefenseWinsChamps]

We can offer more picks, including 2-3 next year. The Lakers cannot offer picks next year.

Other than that, if I'm the Kings, I like a roster with Russell-McLemore-Gay-Randle-Cauley-Stein.

The other thing that I think the Kings might want to do is include Gay's contract in any trade, but they will want another piece back for him.

I'd happily take Gay's contract if it meant DMC. Send back Turner. Only one year left on his deal at low money.

And yes, we can offer more picks, but not the #2 pick. Seems the Lakers may not love their options there though.

Agreed. I was answering the OPs question. I don't necessarily think that those picks next year are better than the 2nd overall pick this year, but that is one thing that we have that the Lakers don't: we can offer multiple picks next year.

[SHAQATTACK]

Only if we throw in Smart 

[BDUB2112]

We can offer more picks, including 2-3 next year. The Lakers cannot offer picks next year.

Other than that, if I'm the Kings, I like a roster with Russell-McLemore-Gay-Randle-Cauley-Stein.

The other thing that I think the Kings might want to do is include Gay's contract in any trade, but they will want another piece back for him.

I'd happily take Gay's contract if it meant DMC. Send back Turner. Only one year left on his deal at low money.

And yes, we can offer more picks, but not the #2 pick. Seems the Lakers may not love their options there though.

Agreed. I was answering the OPs question. I don't necessarily think that those picks next year are better than the 2nd overall pick this year, but that is one thing that we have that the Lakers don't: we can offer multiple picks next year.

I am the OP.

[Who]

Nope -- When teams say they want established talent for their star player, they mean established star talent vs emerging star talent (like #2 pick and Okafor). Not role players.

[BDUB2112]

Nope -- When teams say they want established talent for their star player, they mean established star talent vs emerging star talent (like #2 pick and Okafor). Not role players.

Don't think there's anything established about Okafor....yet.

Also, #2 pick and Okafor are the same so did you mean someone else?

[saltlover]

When teams say they want established talent for their star player, they mean established star talent vs emerging star talent (like #2 pick and Okafor). Not role players.

Offering them better role players is not better than emerging star talent. That is worse. A much much worse trade package. 

Offering them someone who is an All-Star (like L.Aldridge) is an upgrade on emerging star talent (Okafor). That is what they want.

That's what they want, but how often in the NBA do you get a star for your star?  It's tough enough to get one star in this league, much less two.

Teams always state that they want an established star to begin with.  It's part of the ritual of trading your star.  But it pretty much never happens.

[fairweatherfan]

For either the Lakers or the Celtics to get Cousins will probably take a 3-team (or more) deal.  So the question is, can we put together a better package to get the kind of assets the Kings want for DMC?

...unfortunately, the answer is probably still no, and worse, any team with the assets Sacramento might covet would probably prefer to trade for him directly.

[PhoSita]

No, they really can't, not if the Lakers are willing to give up the #2.

[BDUB2112]

Side note:

"The Lakers, furthermore, could not legally trade the No. 2 pick until after making the selection and introducing that player as a Laker, because teams are precluded from trading first-round picks in consecutive drafts and the Lakers' 2016 first-rounder is already owed to Philadelphia."

[fairweatherfan]

Side note:

"The Lakers, furthermore, could not legally trade the No. 2 pick until after making the selection and introducing that player as a Laker, because teams are precluded from trading first-round picks in consecutive drafts and the Lakers' 2016 first-rounder is already owed to Philadelphia."

That just means the trade would be announced now but not become official until Thursday night or late.  Doesn't really change anything.  Remember our Pierce/KG deal was announced on draft night but didn't technically happen til mid-July due to contract/trade restrictions.

[DefenseWinsChamps]

Side note:

"The Lakers, furthermore, could not legally trade the No. 2 pick until after making the selection and introducing that player as a Laker, because teams are precluded from trading first-round picks in consecutive drafts and the Lakers' 2016 first-rounder is already owed to Philadelphia."

That just means the trade would be announced now but not become official until Thursday night or late.  Doesn't really change anything.  Remember our Pierce/KG deal was announced on draft night but didn't technically happen til mid-July due to contract/trade restrictions.

Are you sure this doesn't mean that they would have to wait 60 days, like the Cavs did with Wiggins last year?