So would you have rather traded for Isaiah or had a top 8-12 pick?

[jambr380]

You also have to compare Rozier's play to Winslow, Turner, and Johnson. It's not like we didn't get a decent pick just a few slots away.

In addition, if only one of the three really 'succeeds', I don't think it would be fair to assume that we would have selected that player. There is a good chance one or two of them ends up no better than Rozier.

IT4 is a proven scorer in this league - these other guys haven't done anything yet. While I would have preferred any of those three over Rozier, I am not sure any of them will be better than IT4 and Rozier.

[slamtheking]

need another option - not sure what I would call it though

I don't think that not getting IT would necessarily have stopped the team from making the playoffs but I wouldn't have wanted the team to be purposely bad to get that pick.

I'd have traded IT straight up for a pick in the 8-10 range but that would have been a pipe dream

[BDeCosta26]

can't forget the future 1st that was traded for Thomas as well

We traded a pick likely to be in the late 20's for one of the best 6th men in the league who's only 26 and on an absolutely insane team friendly (and very tradeable) contract. A pick you got in a salary dump from the Cavs which also included Tyler Zeller, and you only had to use a TPE generated from an extremely lopsided trade already in our favor from Brooklyn. The Thomas trade was such a steal you just had to do it, especially considering our lack of scoring punch at the time.

I really hope Young and the Brooklyn picks pan out (I'm betting on a top 7-10 pick from them this year) just so that can become the most lopsided trade of recent memory.

[positivitize]

Thomas + Rozier + Mickey + Hunter

over Winslow, Turner, or Stanley J

any day.

[chambers]

Kinda revisionist cherry picking. Nobody knew those guys would last to those picks or have such good summers.

IT could still easily end up a better player than every one of them and on a very good contract and seems to actually want to be here.

It is revisionist cherry picking but no one's claiming it's anything else.

Question:
If we know what we know now, would we have traded for IT or not?

[chambers]

can't forget the future 1st that was traded for Thomas as well

We traded a pick likely to be in the late 20's for one of the best 6th men in the league who's only 26 and on an absolutely insane team friendly (and very tradeable) contract. A pick you got in a salary dump from the Cavs which also included Tyler Zeller, and you only had to use a TPE generated from an extremely lopsided trade already in our favor from Brooklyn. The Thomas trade was such a steal you just had to do it, especially considering our lack of scoring punch at the time.

I really hope Young and the Brooklyn picks pan out (I'm betting on a top 7-10 pick from them this year) just so that can become the most lopsided trade of recent memory.

Yep good points, but would you still make the trade if you knew one of Myles Turner, Winslow or Johnson would have been there to pick if we slipped into the 8-12 range?

IT is great, but Danny wouldn't give up the 3 first rounders+2nd round picks  that were rumored right?

[chambers]

Thomas + Rozier + Mickey + Hunter

over Winslow, Turner, or Stanley J

any day.

Well you should make the comparison:
Thomas+Rozier+Mickey+Hunter vs
(one of)Winslow/Johnson/Turner+Hunter+Mickey

because we aren't giving up those other players, we are just swapping pick #16 for one of those players somewhere between pick#8 through #12.

[chambers]

Except that there's no guarantee we don't make the playoffs without IT.  He only played 21 games for the C's.  The team was playing well for a month before the trade, and also played well while IT was injured thanks to D-Wade. So the option could have been make the playoffs with no IT.

Yeah that was a possible option but I can't see us getting to 40 wins without him.
I think we lose at least 3 more games without him and at the very worst, we end up with Miami's 37 wins and pick#10 instead of our 40 wins and pick#16. Could we have lost another 5 or 6 games and caught Charlotte+Detroit? I'm not sure, but knowing now that only 3 wins separated us, I just wish we'd tried to acquire IT in the offseason and making the mission of acquiring a top 10 talent in this year's draft the priority.

To me, IT was a critical pivot point in our charge for the postseason. After joining the team he was our best scorer over those 21 games with 19 points per game ( no one else came close), and filled the role of late game scorer that we'd 'needed' and missed throughout most of the season.

Jackie McMullan wrote a good article about this actually....
http://espn.go.com/boston/nba/story/_/id/12676881/jackie-macmullan-isaiah-thomas-made-basketball-boston-fun-again-celtics-fans

[chambers]

You also have to compare Rozier's play to Winslow, Turner, and Johnson. It's not like we didn't get a decent pick just a few slots away.

In addition, if only one of the three really 'succeeds', I don't think it would be fair to assume that we would have selected that player. There is a good chance one or two of them ends up no better than Rozier.

IT4 is a proven scorer in this league - these other guys haven't done anything yet. While I would have preferred any of those three over Rozier, I am not sure any of them will be better than IT4 and Rozier.

Yep, and some people are happy with IT+Rozier instead of no IT and Winslow.

I love Rozier and defended him immediately after the pick when CB went into meltdown mode and grabbed the pitchforks for Danny's soul.

But I would have preferred Winslow, Turner or Stanley Johnson plus Hunter and Mickey to build around long term with Smart/Sully/Olynyk/Crowder/Young.
I also think Danny would have preferred that outcome because of what he was willing to give up to get Justise Winslow.

[Boris Badenov]

Except that there's no guarantee we don't make the playoffs without IT.  He only played 21 games for the C's.  The team was playing well for a month before the trade, and also played well while IT was injured thanks to D-Wade. So the option could have been make the playoffs with no IT.

This is an interesting way to think about it. Either IT was good enough to push us into the playoffs by himself, which makes a strong case for acquiring him at the expense of a higher pick - or, he wasn't good enough to do that, in which case acquiring him didn't cost us a higher pick.

This makes the trade look like a winner, pretty much, either way.

[guava_wrench]

Isaiah was good value. He was a smart pickup.

[PhoSita]

Winslow / Stanley Johnson / Miles Turner


IT is just another Ricky Davis / Dino Radja / Dana Barros / Sherman Douglas.   Entertaining scoring piece while we wait for the franchise to find a cornerstone again.

I maintain, though, that the major deciding point in making the playoffs was keeping Bass and exchanging Prince for Jerebko and Datome,  instead of just waiving both.

[Hemingway]

You guys are assuming we would lose a lot more games without IT. Sure he played very well, but we had turned things around before he got here. Some of you are missing the option that we don't trade for IT and we still end up drafting the same guys. And I'm not trying to take away from IT.

But I don't watch college ball so I don't know about the rookies until they play in the NBA. Given Ainge's track record I'll just assume the moves he makes are smart.

Also after offering MJ 3 picks Ainge did say something like he was glad it got turned down or that in the heat of the moment he offered up more than he wanted. I think that trade offer was an outlier and not the norm when factoring value for trades.

[crimson_stallion]

Not in a million years...

I can't think of a single player in that range who is likely to become as good as Thomas.  A guy as good as Thomas I wouldn't trade for any draft pick outside the top 5...and even then it would depend on the draft.  This draft was (IMO) nothing special, so I probably wouldn't consider anything outside of top 2.

[crimson_stallion]

Winslow / Stanley Johnson / Miles Turner


IT is just another Ricky Davis / Dino Radja / Dana Barros / Sherman Douglas.   Entertaining scoring piece while we wait for the franchise to find a cornerstone again.

I maintain, though, that the major deciding point in making the playoffs was keeping Bass and exchanging Prince for Jerebko and Datome,  instead of just waiving both.

I don't see how the guys you mentioned above are any different.  Winslow has mediocre written all over him.  Stanley Johnson should be a good player, but not a star - Ron Artest is about his ceiling.  i doubt Miles Turner will ever be a big star - though he likely has the best chance out of those three.

I really wasn't that impressed by this draft...I don;'t think there are many guys in there who will turn out better than Thomas, or who will offer more impact than Thomas.

One thing you need to consider is what the player brings, relative to our needs.  Isaiah Thomas offers us a go-to scorer who can get to the line, stretch the floor, and close out games with his clutch shooting.  He also offers us a true spark plug to carry our second unit.  These are all things that we desperately needed on this team.

Neither Winslow, Turner or Johnson are likely to offer the same.   They might contribute in other ways and fill other holes, but what's the point in giving up a player at a role of need, in order to pick up another player at another role of need?  One step forward, one step back.  You're going nowhere.

Thomas isn't a superstar of course, that's why we got him, and why we got him on such a great contract.  But he gives us something we need desperately, and if we traded him out and didn't get another go-to scorer in return then we would suffer for it in the Win column.