Putting all our eggs in one basket with the Nets Pick?

[BudweiserCeltic]

I guess I'd also throw in the fact that Brooklyn is by far the oldest of the lottery bound teams.  They aren't getting any injured players back.  They aren't getting younger and in fact are probably due for a couple more injuries.  They aren't going to get better.  Young teams will, but that isn't the Nets.  I'd expect the second half to be as bad or probably worse for the Nets.  The Lakers, Phoenix, Bucks, Nuggets, Wolves, and even 76ers have a good chance to have better second halves than first.

I agree. Even the sixers are playing better with Ish Smith and a couple more vets on the team. If the Nets get another injury or 2 I would expect them to have the worst record....depending on the time of the injuries

Also this is NOT A 1 PERSON DRAFT. The number 2 pick would be fine with me because Ingram is the hybrid of player that would wreck havoc on the NBA. He may need 1 year to develop and get more strength because he is literally turning 19 right before next season and he already has to gain some "girth" lol. But it would be natural and fun to watch just how much higher can this kid jump? How much faster and stronger can he get?

I don't watch college ball at all, but I'm more intrigued by Ingram than Simmons in all honesty. Gut feeling.

[GC003332]

Havent posted since the start of the season and now that we are half way into the season. The Nets are bad we are a mid level team that has lots of options that we could go. Trade deadline in a month and we are sitting in the 3rd spot with the Nets pick. As we all know the draft in the past hasn't been to nice for the Celtics. Ping pong balls can go anyway. If the right guy became free for a trade Danny has to look at it real hard and say is this the best for this team right now. Everybody is hoping for Simmons will be the next big superstar and we land him? My question to everybody is this would you be willing to trade that for a guy you know is an allstar that you can have for a 5-7 window or take the chance that one of these kids pan out. Remember these kids coming out at 19 years old it will take 3 years to develop. Would you rather have more youth or try to win now.

Depends if that all star pushes the Celtics to the level of the Cavs in the East or not, forget about the Western conference for the time being, If the Celtics were able to land Simmons or Ingram and have them develop in the next 2-3 seasons along with another couple of young studs via the Nets picks fingers crossed, I would prefer that option as opposed to having a shorter window against Lebron and the Warriors/Spurs over the next couple of seasons.
So the 5-7 year window from my point of view isn't open until Lebron declines and the Spurs/Duncan era is over or the Warriors get bored with winning.i don't think one particular all star would push the Celtics past the Clippers or OKC even, better for Ainge to continue playing the long game for the next season or two.

[slamtheking]

With hindsight, the trade with the Nets was a steal.

Those 2 picks (and the option to switch in 2017) are pure gold.

Now, having said this, it is ludicrous to think that the Nets pick has a good chance of landing us Ben Simmons.

It will be good but not that good.

They are third from bottom, but several teams from the West are almost certainly out of the playoff picture and might start the real tanking in the last twenty or so games of the season (Minny, Phoenix, NOP, Denver to name the most obvious candidates). The same might be true for Milwaukee if they continue to suck so bad (that MCW for Brandon Knight trade was ...'pure genius').

The crucial detail is this: unlike the Nets, the aforementioned teams still have their picks, ie they have an incentive to tank. The only other relevant team that has given away its first rounder is the Knicks (to Toronto).

tl;dr we'll be really lucky if the Nets finish 5th from bottom- and this would only give us 10.3% shot at the first pick. A more realistic prediction is that the Nets end 6th to 9th from bottom (6.3% to 1.4% of the first pick and 21.5% to 5% of the first three picks). Still, really good stuff that could turn out to be a future All-Star, but please, do not jinx it with super-optimistic expectations.

the key thing you're overlooking is that these those team in the West all have to play each other several times --> someone is going to win those games.  even if it's just winning their home games against each other, those are wins that the Nets can't anticipate since they're several games behind everyone in the East except Philly. 

I predicted the Nets would finish in the bottom 5 this year before the season started and if anything, I'm thinking they're pretty likely to be bottom 3 --> as close as the Lakers may get to them record-wise, I think they'll end up rolling over to ensure they keep the second-worst record to give them a cushion in case someone jumps up to the top 2 spots in the lottery draw.

in any case, the worst team rarely wins the lottery.  The Nets will be bad enough to give us a decent shot at a top 3 pick which in this draft should net us a really good prospect.

[ssspence]

Love, maybe.

No way.

[ssspence]

With hindsight, the trade with the Nets was a steal.

Nope. It was an absolute steal the moment it was made -- and it was easy to see (if difficult to swallow due to the loss of Cs Legends). 

First deal in NBA history with 3 unprotected first round picks.

[PhoSita]

Maybe not all of our eggs, but most of them at least, are in that Nets pick basket.  We've also got the picks coming in 2017 and 2018, but I'm most optimistic about the 2016 pick.

It is what it is, though.  Ainge has tried to leverage our assets to add some bigger pieces, but so far the biggest fish he's gotten is Isaiah.  IT and Crowder are not a bad yield to the rebuild after a couple of years, but it'll take a lot more to get us where we want to be.  That Nets pick is by far the best chance.

[Chris22]

Keep the pick.

[Boris Badenov]

Can anyone think of an instance in which a top-3 lottery pick was traded mid-year?

I can't.

[PhoSita]

Can anyone think of an instance in which a top-3 lottery pick was traded mid-year?

I can't.

And it makes sense.  It's a bad idea to trade assets whose value is very hard to determine.

If that pick ends up #1, it's far more valuable than if it ends up at #5.  And both of those outcomes are fairly probable at this point in time.

[Greyman]

Maybe not all of our eggs, but most of them at least, are in that Nets pick basket.  We've also got the picks coming in 2017 and 2018, but I'm most optimistic about the 2016 pick.

It is what it is, though.  Ainge has tried to leverage our assets to add some bigger pieces, but so far the biggest fish he's gotten is Isaiah.  IT and Crowder are not a bad yield to the rebuild after a couple of years, but it'll take a lot more to get us where we want to be.  That Nets pick is by far the best chance.

Landing the big fish is a complex operation where lots of work can trumped by good or bad luck. We know DA is a master but there are lots of GMs playing the same game. It takes time and you want to land the right big fish. That said, the Celtics have a lot invested in using assets to get the proven player they need. In terms of eggs in baskets, I hope a big fish comes before the egg.

[BDeCosta26]

There's maybe 5-10 players in the entire league Ainge would consider trading the 2016 Brooklyn pick for at this point, and I highly doubt any of them are gonna be available to us. We'll likely wait until that pick conveys to entertain it's trade potential.

At this point even though Brooklyn is in the 3rd slot, there's still a chance it ends up as high as 8-10. As the end of the season comes and that pick is cemented in a certain group of possible slots, the deadline will have passed. Even if it lands in the top 5, it will likely have ore value than it does now. People over-value draft picks around draft time, especially if they're in the lottery.

If we make a deadline deal it likely involves players and non-Brooklyn 1sts. Guys in the Gallo tier.

[__ramonezy__]

This is a year of decisions and that's what I love about both picks cuz I'm excited about ours as well.

If the pick is top 3 we keep it and go for the Simmons, ingram or Dunn. I think we're drastically overlooking our need for a floor general that can shoot and facilitate.

If it is higher than 4, i say we package it with either AB or Sully to get talent from a later lottery team and go after Poeltl...  A floor running, rim protecting big.

KO has proven to be the keeper over our other bigs and we should begin to move the others and try to get Poeltl with our pick.

Players that we can get with our pick are intriguing as well. I like LaVert, Valentine, Skal.

Follow up moves is to end the James Young project, get rid of TZ, Lee, Sully. Bring back up PJ3.

[crimson_stallion]

To me, the decision would come down to a few key factors:

1: What does the player bring to the team, and does he fill an important need?
I wouldn't trade such a valuable asset for any All-Star just for the sake of getting an All-Star.  It would have to be a guy who either fills a critical need, or who is a MAJOR upgrade at any position.   Basically somebody who is going to make the team better from day one.

2: Age and upside
A high (top 5) lottery pick presents the opportunity to acquire a player who could be a key part of your franchise for at least the next 4 years, and hopefully even longer.  If I am going to give up that chance for an established player, then it'll have to be somebody whom I am confident can produce at a high level for at least another 4 or 5 more years - preferably somebody who is still improving and still has his best years ahead of him.  That means I probably wouldn't go for anybody who is more than about 27-28 years old.  I might make an exception only in rare cases where the the player is an all-out superstar and legit superstar (e.g. Carmelo, Lebon, LMA, Dwight Howard). 

3: Health record
I would be very weary of making a trade for a player who has a significant history if health issues.  I'm talking about guys like Kevin Love, Marc Gasol, etc.  The biggest incentive for trading a pick like this for an established star is that draft picks have a high risk of busting, and an established player is more of a safe bet.  If said player is a high injury risk then you may as well just gamble on the pick and see how it goes.

If somebody presented an All-Star caliber player who meets at least two of the above criteria, then I would have to very seriously consider it.

[mctyson]

It depends on the star.


Cousins, sure.


Love, maybe.


Derozan, no.

I don't necessarily agree with this, but in part I agree that because we don't know yet what number that pick will be, I don't see Danny trading it this year for any of those players above.

Having said that, if we get the #4 pick in the draft, I think trading it for Kevin Love is a no-brainer.

[crimson_stallion]

Another thing to consider is that the lottery doesn't only happen for the #1 pick - it happens for the top three picks.

Even if the Nets rise to the 6th or 7th worst record in the league, we still have a reasonable shot at the #1 pick and a very decent shot at a top 3 pick.  If you look at past drafts, it's not all that uncommon for teams in the 5-9 range to land anywhere in the top 3.

Teams like San Antonio (Duncan), Chicago (Rose) and Cleveland (Wiggins) have all come out with top tier prospects despite being positioned quite late in the lottery. 

As long as the Nets remain in the bottom 6 our pick has significant value, and if they remain in the bottom three that pick is as good as gold.

I don't necessarily agree with this, but in part I agree that because we don't know yet what number that pick will be, I don't see Danny trading it this year for any of those players above.

Having said that, if we get the #4 pick in the draft, I think trading it for Kevin Love is a no-brainer.

If we got a #4 pick I would trade it for Cousins or Derozan, but not Love.

We need a guy who can carry us on offense, and preferably on who can also make a contribution on defense.  DMC and Derozan meet both criteria, but in all honesty I'm not convinced that Love meets either.

I think that (much like Bosh) the days of Love being a top 10 scorer are long gone - I don't think he will ever be that guy again.  Also defensively he is barely capable of holding down his own positions, let alone actually making a positive contribution.

I think that now days Kevin Love is a nice player, but not a cornerstone.  I think you can be a potential contender with Love as your #3 guy, maybe even as your #2 guy.  But if he is your #1 guy, I don't think you're going anywhere. 

To be honest, I don't think Love right now is any better a player than Isaiah Thomas is.  He's no better on the offensive end, and I don't think he's all that much better on defense either.

With hindsight, the trade with the Nets was a steal.

Nope. It was an absolute steal the moment it was made -- and it was easy to see (if difficult to swallow due to the loss of Cs Legends). 

First deal in NBA history with 3 unprotected first round picks.

Yep, I'm actually really surprised that more people didn't see how huge a steal it was.

The instant the Nets got Pierce and KG, it was blatantly obvious what their position was - they were all in (championship or nothing) on the next year or two, and didn't think (or care) about what was to come after that.

Between Joe Johnson (~$20M), Deron Williams (~$20M), Brook Lopez ($15M), Paul Pierce ($10M), Kevin Garnett ($12M) and Jason Terry (~$5M) that team was financially crippled in the worst way.  To make matters worse, a number of the players either ageing or showing obvious decline (Johnson, Deron, Pierce, KG, Terry), and a number of the deals were long-term.

The day that trade was made it seemed very obvious to me that by the time that first 2016 draft pick came along, the Nets were going to be a BAD team.  Their best players were all declining, they were set to be over the salary cap for years on end, and they had thrown away all their draft picks.  They were going to become a really bad team, with opportunity to actually improve.  I was expecting that we would probably get at least two top 12 picks out the deal of it, but I must admit I never thought they would fall THIS low THIS fast.

It was a genius move by Ainge.  The Nets owner wanted had great visions of grandeur - he wanted his new Brooklyn team to bring home a title right at the start, to establish his legacy early on, and he was willing to sacrifice anything (including money and the future) to do it.  Ainge new this and jumped at the opportunity to make a deal that was (to him, at the time) an obvious case of future highway robbery.