How many teams would you trade all of our players for all of theirs.

[KG Living Legend]

Even swap all of ours for all of theirs. We keep all our pics obviously. I wish we could trade with the Twolves right now. GS would be a neat team to swap with.
 Maybe the better question is how many would you not swap with. I don't want the Nets roster, or Philly.

[LilRip]

Hmm, I wouldn't want:
1. Nets
2. Knicks
3. Hornets
4. Nuggets
5. Mavericks

Basically, I picked the teams that aren't built to win now, or who are 1 piece away from contending (in which case, we could package our picks for that last piece), or who I feel have no interesting prospects to build around in the future.

[Moranis]

Pretty much every team.  I mean in this scenario we keep all our picks and thus pretty much every team has a prospect, a player, or both better than anything Boston has. 

[PhoSita]

Assuming we keep all of our non-player assets . . .

Well, let's make the list shorter and put down teams whose roster I wouldn't prefer to have.


Nets
Hornets
Nuggets
Mavericks
Lakers


I think that's it.

[Celtics18]

Zero.

[PhoSita]

Zero.

I wouldn't have expected any different.

[Celtics18]

Zero.

I wouldn't have expected any different.

Ditto.

[Rondo9]

Pretty much every team.  I mean in this scenario we keep all our picks and thus pretty much every team has a prospect, a player, or both better than anything Boston has.

 

[oldtype]

Assuming we keep all picks, I think 18 teams are snap calls (although I guess there's a viable argument about not wanting to trade with Memphis because we'd only have a tiny championship window during which we'd have to burn every pick we have to put another piece alongside Gasol, Zbo, and Conley).

Here are the 7 I think you obviously wouldn't trade with and the 5 I think are debatable.

<Obvious>
1. New York
2. Charlotte
3. Brooklyn
4. Phoenix
5. Denver
6. Dallas
7. LA

<Borderline>
8. Toronto
I don't think I'd make this trade but it's close. Lowry is clearly better than anyone we have but if we're relying on our picks to rebuild, he's the wrong age for our timeline. Comparing Lowry v. Smart, obviously Lowry is the superior option if we want to trade our picks for a superstar, but if that's not possible and we have to rebuild through the draft we'll end up stuck with a declining star on the wrong side of thirty while we wait for Ben Simmons or whoever to mature as a player. Smart isn't anywhere near as good as Lowry right now but he's better in terms of preserving our flexibility.

Derozan and Valenciunas are nice players, but ultimately they don't move the needle that much.

9. Detroit
Drummond has bags of potential but other than him the rest of this roster is more or less trash. If Drummond doesn't turn into a star I'm not sure the Reggie Jackson/Brandon Jennings/Stanley Johnson pu-pu platter is worth much more than our pu-pu platter. I guess I can talk myself into doing this because Drummond is such an attractive big-man prospect, but it's not as much of a snap call as you'd think.

10. Indiana
"Build around Paul George" sounds like a great idea but even moreso than Detroit, there is literally nothing here other than him and the chance that Myles Turner turns into a good player. If George is healthy and 100% then obviously you make this trade because he's a transcendent superstar, but I want to see him play at least half a season before I pull that trigger.

11. 76ers
Noel v. Smart is more or less a wash. Okafor looks decent but even if he turns into Al Jefferson, that's not necessarily a championship piece. If you swap rosters with the 76ers you're pretty much betting that the chance of Okafor becoming a star is greater than the chance of any player on our roster other than Smart becoming a star. I'd have to think long and hard before I made that determination. That said, once you factor in the chances of Saric coming over in a reasonable timeframe+being good and the tiny, tiny chance that Embiid isn't just the next Greg Oden, I guess it's just barely worth it.

12. Portland
Dame Lillard is amazing, but he's strictly a one-way player and probably won't ever be anything more than the 2nd-best player on a championship team. The rest of the roster is a few nice role players, a couple of long shots that may pay off (Vonleh, Plumlee), and a dozen or so utter and complete nothings. Is three Brooklyn pick enough to put a championship team around Lillard? I don't think so, which is why I wouldn't take this trade, but I can see why someone would decide otherwise.

[Moranis]

Pretty much every team.  I mean in this scenario we keep all our picks and thus pretty much every team has a prospect, a player, or both better than anything Boston has.

 

If we are keeping all the draft picks, I don't see how this is a crazy statement.

For example, take LA.  I'd rather have Randle and Russell than any 2 players on Boston going forward.  Couple that with the massive cap space and all the picks, it is a better situation for a title at some point in the future.  Remember the scenario is we keep all of the picks Boston currently owns.

The only ones I think you could really argue are Dallas (though Parsons might be the best player on either team and they still have Dirk and Matthews) and Brooklyn (though Lopez is the best player on either team).  I think every other team has either top tier assets, a significantly better player, or some combination of each (like say the Knicks that have Melo and Porzingis).

[sofutomygaha]

Interesting question. If I was swapping places with a non-contending team, I would want them to have a more promising handful of rising young players than ours. Thus I would not swap with Brooklyn, Charlotte, Dallas, or Phoenix. I'm on the fence about the Knicks but I'm leaning no because I think Porzingis is going to get broken and Anthony's trade value is falling too fast. Damian Lillard is really good, but I think I would probably take a pass on swapping with Portland as well.

[sofutomygaha]

Jusuf Nurkic is going to be the biggest bully in the NBA, and Mudiaye is going to be John Wall. I'd very strongly consider the Denver trade-- those two players have ceilings that no Celtic can touch.

[PhoSita]

Zero.

I wouldn't have expected any different.

Ditto.

[Moranis]

Interesting question. If I was swapping places with a non-contending team, I would want them to have a more promising handful of rising young players than ours. Thus I would not swap with Brooklyn, Charlotte, Dallas, or Phoenix. I'm on the fence about the Knicks but I'm leaning no because I think Porzingis is going to get broken and Anthony's trade value is falling too fast. Damian Lillard is really good, but I think I would probably take a pass on swapping with Portland as well.

Charlotte has MKG, Batum, Walker, Jefferson, Lamb, Zeller, Kaminsky.  Now not all those guys are young per se, but I think that is probably a better starting point than Boston.  Phoenix has Knight, Bledsoe, Len, Tucker, Morris, Warren plus the vet Chandler.  Again I think that is a bit better starting point.  As for the Knicks, whether Anthony is fading fast, he is still by far the best player on either team and Porzingis is as at least as good a prospect as Smart.  Guys like Lopez, Afflalo, Calderon just add depth and are fairly similar to Boston's players.

Dallas and Brooklyn really are the only debateable ones in my eyes.  Neither has any high end prospects, but both do probably have the best player on either team (though not clear franchise player type players).

[sofutomygaha]

Interesting question. If I was swapping places with a non-contending team, I would want them to have a more promising handful of rising young players than ours. Thus I would not swap with Brooklyn, Charlotte, Dallas, or Phoenix. I'm on the fence about the Knicks but I'm leaning no because I think Porzingis is going to get broken and Anthony's trade value is falling too fast. Damian Lillard is really good, but I think I would probably take a pass on swapping with Portland as well.

Charlotte has MKG, Batum, Walker, Jefferson, Lamb, Zeller, Kaminsky.  Now not all those guys are young per se, but I think that is probably a better starting point than Boston.  Phoenix has Knight, Bledsoe, Len, Tucker, Morris, Warren plus the vet Chandler.  Again I think that is a bit better starting point.  As for the Knicks, whether Anthony is fading fast, he is still by far the best player on either team and Porzingis is as at least as good a prospect as Smart.  Guys like Lopez, Afflalo, Calderon just add depth and are fairly similar to Boston's players.

Dallas and Brooklyn really are the only debateable ones in my eyes.  Neither has any high end prospects, but both do probably have the best player on either team (though not clear franchise player type players). The other young assets are Len and Morris. You might trade Olynyk, Rozier, Young, Hunter, Mickey, Crowder

I disagree. In my opinion we are both better and younger than Charlotte right now. MKG is the only valuable fungible asset on that team that I'd be interested in.

Bledsoe and Knight are very good and locked up long term (combined $27M/yr), but I would not trade places with Phoenix when I have Thomas and Smart locked up a third the price (combined $10.3M/yr). Morris has a nice contract and Len has some really good moments; both could still be building blocks-- there's a case to be made there I suppose.