Bill Simmons suspects the Celtics don't like this bad draft. Okafor was target.

[LarBrd33]

Since when was Okafor a "star" though. Ainge said landing a star.

Ainge never said the target was a star.  Listen to the radio interview. http://www.csnne.com/boston-celtics/danny-ainge-other-team-backed-out-big-trade

Somehow it's been misreported that Ainge said they almost traded for a superstar.  That's not at all what he said.   The interview brought up the Brooklyn pick and Ainge's willingness to trade it for the right guy and asked if anything had come close to happened... Ainge admitted that yes, they had a big package (presumably involving the Brooklyn pick, because that's where the discussion started) going out and the other team pulled out last second.

Question:  "In terms of that draft pick and all-star level player, obviously you mentioned you were willing to part with that... I assume it's that level of player... how close were you getting something like that done?" 

Ainge:  "We were very close.  One story I can probably share with you... I can't tell you the team or name, but we were very close.  It was something we were deliberating on for two days.  The other team was doing that.  We were wrapping ourselves around a big package to do a deal and the at the very last minute they just said they didn't want to do it.  THey just backed out.  So it was a deal that was talked about, thought about... and that was probably the closest that we came.

  Later, it was revealed that the player we we were going after was Okafor.  The interviewer just assumed it was an all-star caliber player.  Turns out, we were willing to give up the pick for a prospect with star potential... and why not?  The pick might end up being a dud... why not grab a guy with star potential now? 

FYI, another thing misreported was that Ainge said it was a rumor that nobody had thought of yet.   That's not what he said.  He actually says nothing like that at all in the interview.  A twitter user apparently talked to him about the radio interview after and Ainge admitted that it was nothing that had yet been REPORTED.   Then Bulpett Reported it.   It's been reported now... We offered the Brooklyn pick in a package for Okafor. 

[TheFlex]

Your attempt to equate being skeptical that Okafor was the target with idiotic conspiracy theorizing is an insult and straight up trolling. I'm reporting you, and I doubt I'm the first, but I find it hard to believe that the admins here knowingly tolerate the trolling of somebody whose avatar celebrates the most famous troll of all time, so I have to try at least once. Then again, maybe they know but they like the clicks your trolling produces, eh? Or would that line of thought be idiotic conspiracy theorizing?

First of all... Yes, I absolutely am equating being skeptical that okafor is the target with an idiotic conspiracy theory.

My evidence:  One of the main reasons someone here suggested that it probably wasn't Okafor was because "3 out of 3 RealGM insiders claimed it wasn't Okafor".   There are no insiders on RealGM's forums.   That's a blatantant idiotic conspiracy theory.  That's the equivalent of my mother sharing me articles from truthseeker blogs about George Bush being a reptile.   RealGM "insiders" have less credibility than the bloggers coming up with that nonsense.   Believing a forum poster by the name of 617Murph1983 who claims Steve Bulpett is Danny's "media guy" and the real target with Jimmy Butler is literally accepting a conspiracy theory over reality.

I think taking the leap to specify Jimmy Butler as the mystery player lacks credibility, but I have no problem believing that Okafor wasn't the real target or that Danny exaggerated how close the teams were. The latter is a "conspiracy theory" (lazy, derogatory term to attack an unpopular theory) because it questions the mainstream media we are supposed to religiously follow, but it doesn't require as much fantasizing as the former Jimmy Butler theory does.

The thing is, there's no valid reason to believe Bulpett made it up.  The only reason anyone does is because it's more exciting to believe the target was someone else.   To suggest that Ainge used Bulpett to create a smokescreen and our real target was someone more desirable than Okafor is fun... but flat-out a conspiracy theory. 

A conspiracy theory is an explanatory or speculative hypothesis suggesting that two or more persons or an organization have conspired to cause or to cover up, through secret planning and deliberate action, an event or situation.

The Ainge/Bulpett Okafor smokescreening of Jimmy Butler as speculated by 3 out of 3 RealGM forum posters claiming to be "insiders" = blatant conspiracy theory.

It's a ridiculous idea.  Many leaps and assumptions need to be made... that Ainge ran his mouth on a radio station and immediately realized, "oh no!... I messed up by running my mouth... now the Bulls are going to be mad at me and not want to trade Jimmy Butler to me this summer!... better use Steve Bulpett to come up with an elaborate smoke screen to draw attention away from Butler... but make sure we inform 3 out of 3 RealGM forum posters with "insider" information so the real info still gets to our devoted fans"...  That's worse writing than the crappy X-Files reboot.

You hardly addressed the central point of my post, and when you did, you used very arbitrary thinking.

There's no reason to believe Bulpett made it up, but there's enough reason to think Ainge made it up and told it to an unknowing Bulpett. "Enough" qualifies as justification for bringing it up as a point of discussion in a non-scientific/academic forum.

There's really no need to continue lecturing about how the target definitely wasn't Jimmy Butler. I agree, any theory that a) claims Butler to have been the target as fact and b) cites RealGM as proof depends heavily on faith... which is exactly what I said.

FWIW, if there even was a nearly completed blockbuster at the deadine (I'm skeptical), and that deal was for Butler (skeptical, but not a whole lot more so than I am about the Okafor rumor), the Bulls would be very upset if Danny let it leak that the Bulls almost dealt their best player, who is locked up to a great deal and under 30 years old.

[Boris Badenov]

I am not taking a stand on the various rumors, but one thing seems odd about this story.

If Ainge is selling the BKN pick for Okafor, to get out of this draft b

Simmons and House talk about that in their podcast.  Adding the Brooklyn pick with their own increases their ping pong ball combos and heightens their chance of adding Ben Simmons.  Right now they would have 250 out of 1001 combos.  Adding the Brooklyn pick (if it stays at 4th) gives them an additional 156 lotto combos.  So they'd own 406 out of 1001 lotto combos.  They'd have huge odds of landing a top 2 pick with all those lotto combos. 

That makes sense.

For what it's worth, they effectively own more than 250 combos right now (261) when it comes to one of the top picks, because of the swap rights on the SAC pick.

[Kuberski33]

Since when was Okafor a "star" though. Ainge said landing a star.

Ainge never said the target was a star.  Listen to the radio interview. http://www.csnne.com/boston-celtics/danny-ainge-other-team-backed-out-big-trade

Somehow it's been misreported that Ainge said they almost traded for a superstar.  That's not at all what he said.   The interview brought up the Brooklyn pick and Ainge's willingness to trade it for the right guy and asked if anything had come close to happened... Ainge admitted that yes, they had a big package (presumably involving the Brooklyn pick, because that's where the discussion started) going out and the other team pulled out last second.   Later, it was revealed that the player we we were going after was Okafor.

As far as the term 'star' is concerned.  Take a look at the recent All Star game rosters and tell me which ones are getting traded anytime soon?

Stars don't get traded in this league unless there's a problem and they want out. 

What you can trade for is guys who hopefully will develop into 'stars'.  Like IT.  Okafor to me is worth the gamble because he's got serious offensive skills.  But there are question marks as there will be with anyone else in the 'projected' star category. 

The more I think about out, Wyc's 'fireworks' comment showed that ownership misread the market in terms of how easy it would be to trade for an impact player.  It's looking like any deal they make is going to either involve them overpaying (maybe significantly overpaying) or dealing picks for someone with more question marks then many here may be comfortable with.

[LarBrd33]

I am not taking a stand on the various rumors, but one thing seems odd about this story.

If Ainge is selling the BKN pick for Okafor, to get out of this draft b

Simmons and House talk about that in their podcast.  Adding the Brooklyn pick with their own increases their ping pong ball combos and heightens their chance of adding Ben Simmons.  Right now they would have 250 out of 1001 combos.  Adding the Brooklyn pick (if it stays at 4th) gives them an additional 156 lotto combos.  So they'd own 406 out of 1001 lotto combos.  They'd have huge odds of landing a top 2 pick with all those lotto combos. 

That makes sense.

For what it's worth, they effectively own more than 250 combos right now (261) when it comes to one of the top picks, because of the swap rights on the SAC pick.

Good call.  So combine that with the Brooklyn lotto combos and you can sort of see the motivation.  Obviously it wasn't enough, though.   

For one, they would have been buried by the media.  All the goodwill they built by hiring Colangelo and creating the perception that their days of "tanking" are over (when they clearly are still finishing out the season with the intention of losing as much as possible) would have been tarnished if they traded away their best player/most tangible star prospect for draft considerations.   

I'm actually confused why more CeltcBloggers aren't embracing that angle.  There's a whole sect of fans here who love to hate on Sam Hinkie and latch onto the idea that his power has been usurped.  This is right in that wheelhouse.  Why not speculate that Ainge was talking to Hinkie... Hinkie was willing to move Okafor for the pick... and Colangeo killed it?   That's a heck of a theory I just gifted the Hinkie haters.   This would have been reminiscent of the MCW for Laker 1st trade.  It also would have been reminiscent of the Elfrid Payton for Dario Saric and a future 1st trade... basically rolling over their assets for future considerations.   That's a Sam Hinkie special.  Trading Okafor for a Brooklyn 1st would have resulted in tons of bad press.

[tomrod]

I think it's a long shot that the target was Okafor.

[Celtics18]

I worry about Jahlil Okafor being the next Eddy Curry.  I hope Danny stays away.

Love me some Nerlens Noel, though. 

[LarBrd33]

Your attempt to equate being skeptical that Okafor was the target with idiotic conspiracy theorizing is an insult and straight up trolling. I'm reporting you, and I doubt I'm the first, but I find it hard to believe that the admins here knowingly tolerate the trolling of somebody whose avatar celebrates the most famous troll of all time, so I have to try at least once. Then again, maybe they know but they like the clicks your trolling produces, eh? Or would that line of thought be idiotic conspiracy theorizing?

First of all... Yes, I absolutely am equating being skeptical that okafor is the target with an idiotic conspiracy theory.

My evidence:  One of the main reasons someone here suggested that it probably wasn't Okafor was because "3 out of 3 RealGM insiders claimed it wasn't Okafor".   There are no insiders on RealGM's forums.   That's a blatantant idiotic conspiracy theory.  That's the equivalent of my mother sharing me articles from truthseeker blogs about George Bush being a reptile.   RealGM "insiders" have less credibility than the bloggers coming up with that nonsense.   Believing a forum poster by the name of 617Murph1983 who claims Steve Bulpett is Danny's "media guy" and the real target with Jimmy Butler is literally accepting a conspiracy theory over reality.

I think taking the leap to specify Jimmy Butler as the mystery player lacks credibility, but I have no problem believing that Okafor wasn't the real target or that Danny exaggerated how close the teams were. The latter is a "conspiracy theory" (lazy, derogatory term to attack an unpopular theory) because it questions the mainstream media we are supposed to religiously follow, but it doesn't require as much fantasizing as the former Jimmy Butler theory does.

The thing is, there's no valid reason to believe Bulpett made it up.  The only reason anyone does is because it's more exciting to believe the target was someone else.   To suggest that Ainge used Bulpett to create a smokescreen and our real target was someone more desirable than Okafor is fun... but flat-out a conspiracy theory. 

A conspiracy theory is an explanatory or speculative hypothesis suggesting that two or more persons or an organization have conspired to cause or to cover up, through secret planning and deliberate action, an event or situation.

The Ainge/Bulpett Okafor smokescreening of Jimmy Butler as speculated by 3 out of 3 RealGM forum posters claiming to be "insiders" = blatant conspiracy theory.

It's a ridiculous idea.  Many leaps and assumptions need to be made... that Ainge ran his mouth on a radio station and immediately realized, "oh no!... I messed up by running my mouth... now the Bulls are going to be mad at me and not want to trade Jimmy Butler to me this summer!... better use Steve Bulpett to come up with an elaborate smoke screen to draw attention away from Butler... but make sure we inform 3 out of 3 RealGM forum posters with "insider" information so the real info still gets to our devoted fans"...  That's worse writing than the crappy X-Files reboot.

You hardly addressed the central point of my post, and when you did, you used very arbitrary thinking.

There's no reason to believe Bulpett made it up, but there's enough reason to think Ainge made it up and told it to an unknowing Bulpett. "Enough" qualifies as justification for bringing it up as a point of discussion in a non-scientific/academic forum.

There's really no need to continue lecturing about how the target definitely wasn't Jimmy Butler. I agree, any theory that a) claims Butler to have been the target as fact and b) cites RealGM as proof depends heavily on faith... which is exactly what I said.

FWIW, if there even was a nearly completed blockbuster at the deadine (I'm skeptical), and that deal was for Butler (skeptical, but not a whole lot more so than I am about the Okafor rumor), the Bulls would be very upset if Danny let it leak that the Bulls almost dealt their best player, who is locked up to a great deal and under 30 years old.

If we're just speculating for the sake of speculation... if Bulpett was just Ainge's media guy it's FAR more likely that we actually tried shopping the Brooklyn pick and nobody wanted it.  Or that we were targeting someone far less exciting like Gordon Hayward or even a Horford/Howard rental... and Ainge floated the Okafor rumor, because Okafor is a legit 20 year old star prospect and it helped the value of the Brooklyn pick to believe we were actually close to landing a star prospect for a draft pick that could end up being a dud.

Or perhaps the WHOLE THING is made up by Ainge... even the story in the radio interview about being "close" to moving the pick... because Ainge was trying to create the illusion that we had options when perhaps nobody at all was interested in our assets.  "You hear that Cleveland!?  We Totes had options!... Srsly!  We might even continue those discussions in the offseason, so you better man up or lose out on our super valuable brooklyn pick... For realz!" 

That makes a lot more sense.  But nah... we offered the Brooklyn 1st in a package for Okafor and Philly backed out.

[LarBrd33]

I worry about Jahlil Okafor being the next Eddy Curry.  I hope Danny stays away.

Love me some Nerlens Noel, though.

Eddie Curry averaged 6.7 points, 3.8 rebounds, 0.7 blocks with 50% shooting as a rookie. 

Okafor is averaging like 18 and 8 as a 20 year old rookie on a wildly dysfunctional team that isn't committed to him at all.    Getting him would have been amazing.   We would have given up 5+ 1st rounders to get him around the draft... the idea that we were close to getting him for a Brooklyn 1st is kind of crazy.   I'd still like to know who else we were including in the package, but the idea excites me.  Usually those kind of players make a leap after their rookie season.  Anthony Davis averaged like 13 and 8 as a rookie, for instance.   Okafor's defense is definitely a concern, but he looks like a lock to be a 20/10 player long-term wherever he ends up.

[chambers]

I'm in the pro Okafur camp. I'd love him here. I agree he's arguably going to be better than any of the guys in the top 5 in this draft. Simmons and Ingram are still longshots with this Nets pick, and getting Okafur would be an amazing addition for our young core.

The problem I have is:

*There is no evidence other than a Steve Bulpett rumor that suggests Okafur was the target.
*Bill Simmons is a great commentator, a good comedian- but he's basically clueless when it comes to basketball knowledge about the game and about potential trades. He has no idea how the cap works, he overvalues and undervalues the wrong assets just as much as any slightly above-casual fan.
He's a dreamer with a microphone and a pen.

I'm also not sure what LarBrd33 means in the OP when he said that 'Bill admits the target was Okafur'. How would Bill have any idea? Maybe it's an innocent mis-type, but the implication is that Bill is some kind of insider and I find that pretty hilarious because he is not.

Again, there is literally one rumor that sparred this Okafur rhetoric.
Ainge could have released this to Bulpett. Bulpett may have just made it up.

If this did come from the Celtics office, I really have to question if it's true.
A guy with some Celtics contacts is Woj, and if Okafur really was the target, I think Woj would have had a say of some kind.

I also think a 3 team trade for Okafur works better for our immediate title hopes/building a contender. As I've said, I think something like a Butler to Boston, Okafur to Chicago, BRK 16+18' picks to Philly is something that was more likely than a straight up swap between our two teams.

A few guys claiming to be insiders on RealGM has nothing to do with a potential Butler trade.
I don't believe anything those 'insider' idiots on RealGM say in their mom's basement.

For me, the Jimmy Butler connection comes from two things:

*Ainge saying the trade was not centered around any of the mentioned names in the media. Butler was one of those guys.

*The Bulls are certainly at the point where rebuilding around draft picks and young players may be their best option if they are serious about building a championship contender.
Rose is done. Pau is done. Noah is gone.
Their attempts to trade Pau to the Kings, to remove protections on the Kings pick that they already own, is another indicator that have given up on this season and next season.
*Trading Pau for the Kings lottery pick, then trading Butler for our Brooklyn pick, would guarantee them two picks in the top 10 and their own pick which would also be a lottery pick. That's a very solid restarting point to help build around Doug McDermott, Portis and Terry Rozier (who they would demand in a Butler trade with the BRK pick because they love him).

There's no conspiracies, just differing opinions and reasoning on who it was.

I would love Okafur here and if that opportunity came up again I really hope we can get him but it was one rumor.

One thing is for sure. LarBrd33 REALLY wants it to be Okafur, and the self satisfaction he'd retain from having the Celtics trade for one of Philly's 'amazing' assets that he constantly raves/argues/burns down houses about with other Celticsblog members on this forum would give him a feeling of gratification and Celticsblog justice that only he can dream of.

This doesn't change the fact that we really have no idea who it was and that Bill Simmons is a slight 'hack' when it comes to current world basketball knowledge.

[Celtics18]

I worry about Jahlil Okafor being the next Eddy Curry.  I hope Danny stays away.

Love me some Nerlens Noel, though.

Eddie Curry averaged 6.7 points, 3.8 rebounds, 0.7 blocks with 50% shooting as a rookie. 

Okafor is averaging like 18 and 8 as a 20 year old rookie on a wildly dysfunctional team that isn't committed to him at all.    Getting him would have been amazing.   We would have given up 5+ 1st rounders to get him around the draft... the idea that we were close to getting him for a Brooklyn 1st is kind of crazy.   I'd still like to know who else we were including in the package, but the idea excites me.  Usually those kind of players make a leap after their rookie season.  Anthony Davis averaged like 13 and 8 as a rookie, for instance.   Okafor's defense is definitely a concern, but he looks like a lock to be a 20/10 player long-term wherever he ends up.

The comparison was based on the fact that they are/were both super talented offensive big men with issues of mobility, fitness, and motivation that hamper them on the defensive end.

Also, for someone who loves to operate on the low block as much as he does, I wish he was more of a passer out of the post.

Obviously Jah Okafor has a ton of talent and potential.  For me, though, if Danny is indeed looking to make a big move this off-season using our Brooklyn draft pick along with other assets, there are other targets I hope he would pursue instead.

I don't doubt Okafor will put up good numbers, his game just makes me uncomfortable.  I've got to admit that his drunken antics that were all over the internet don't help endear him to me either.

[TheFlex]

If we're just speculating for the sake of speculation... if Bulpett was just Ainge's media guy it's FAR more likely that we actually tried shopping the Brooklyn pick and nobody wanted it.  Or that we were targeting someone far less exciting like Gordon Hayward or even a Horford/Howard rental... and Ainge floated the Okafor rumor, because Okafor is a legit 20 year old star prospect and it helped the value of the Brooklyn pick to believe we were actually close to landing a star prospect for a draft pick that could end up being a dud.

Or perhaps the WHOLE THING is made up by Ainge... even the story in the radio interview about being "close" to moving the pick... because Ainge was trying to create the illusion that we had options when perhaps nobody at all was interested in our assets.  "You hear that Cleveland!?  We Totes had options!... Srsly!  We might even continue those discussions in the offseason, so you better man up or lose out on our super valuable brooklyn pick... For realz!"

This is partly true, and partly nonsense. Yes, we quite obviously shopped the BKN 1. "No one wanted it"... in the trades we were proposing. It's ridiculous to think Ainge offered the BKN 1 for Horford/Hayward and ATL/HOU turned it down. It's a little less ridiculous but still unlikely that Ainge offered the BKN 1 for Hayward and Utah turned it down. Since there was no deal between the two for Hayward, my guess is Ainge never offered a package around the BKN 1 for Hayward or for anyone in his talent/production tier.

Ainge probably offered the BKN 1 to the Kings for Cousins, the Clippers for Blake, the Bulls for J. Butler, etc. He said multiple times, and I don't think he was being facetious, that he would absolutely part with the BKN 1 for a young All-Star.

There's many reasons why a GM would want to leak a general rumor that the team is active on the superstar market. I have been to many Celtics games this year and attendance is not quite the level it was when, say, KG & Pierce were fueling the Celtics to a top 3 conference finish in February. Fan interest in this team is not as it would be if we were the 3 seed with a legitimate superstar. It is rational to consider that Ainge may be continually hinting at accelerating the process ("fireworks") to keep a hungry fanbase at bay in case the Celtics continue on "the long road." Even though Okafor isn't currently a superstar, he's not an unknown. Fans can check ESPN and see he scored 20 the other night, or grabbed 10 rebounds last week. They can go on YouTube and watch highlights of him lighting up DeAndre Jordan and other premier centers in the league. Maybe a few more guys and gals start tuning into the Celtics and saying, "hey, this guy Isaiah Thomas would be sick with the player we're probably going to get, Jahlil Okafor." Fans can't do that with the 2016 BKN 1. A "probable lottery pick" is nothing more than abstract idea to casual (most) fans. Okafor is not, he's an up-and-coming player whose promise and upside is tangible to the average fan.

That makes a lot more sense.  But nah... we offered the Brooklyn 1st in a package for Okafor and Philly backed out.

Your unwavering faith in this Bulpett report/Okafor narrative seems contradictory to when you were skeptical of the many well-respected journalists that reported Philadelphia's unofficial demotion of Sam Hinkie upon hiring Colangelo. All I'm suggesting is that the truth is a fickle thing in the NBA.

And by the way... you can't have your cake and eat it too. If you believe 100% in this narrative, then Ainge offered Okafor for a package based around the BKN 1 and Philadelphia seriously considered it before turning it down and adding that they would reconsider it down the line. Or, Philadelphia flatly turned us down, and the BKN 1 doesn't have as much value as we'd like to think it does, proving you right (this is what I have an easier time believing). But if the latter is true, that calls into question the whole narrative that we came "very close" to acquiring a player with the BKN 1 at the deadline. If the whole narrative doesn't really add up, or is called into question, it's understandable why some people are pondering what "really happened," and things like that, though we agree it's nonsense to suggest that the target definitely wasn't Okafor and definitely Butler based on RealGM posters.

[Csfan1984]

I still think Okafor was not coming here but going to another team and their all star was going to C's. That team and star is what I want to know. Not buying Okafor to C's at all.

[Ilikesports17]

at this point Id say its basically fact that Okafor was the target.

Regardless of who was first to report it, essentially every publication has reported it at this point, nobody from the Celtics has disputed it and nobody has reported an alternative.  It was Okafor. 

The only reason some people don't believe it is because it's more fun to believe in some alternative conspiracy theory.   I think that's a giant waste of time.  Instead of sitting here pretending like it was Jimmy Butler, why can't we just focus on the reality of the offer and what that means in relation to our future?   Will we still be able to make a compelling offer for a Philly big this summer?  Should we be concerned about the quality of this draft?  Would Okafor have flourished here?  There's plenty to explore with this story beyond the "maybe Ainge was actually referring to LeBron and just paid Bulpett to report a smokescreen" tinhattery.

Why would somebody from the Celtics dispute it?  Why would they bother?  Why would they care who people think the target was?  Usually they only dispute reports of one of their current players being shopped, to avoid hurting the player's feelings and to keep that player's reputation in tact.

Valid point.  No point in Boston disputing it.  It would be Philly denying the rumors.  That hasn't happened either though, because everyone (including Okafor) knows at least one of those bigs is a sitting duck and it's been known Boston has had interest in Okafor or Noel since pre-draft.  It shouldn't have surprised anyone that we offered the Brooklyn 1st for one of them.

It also suits Phillys purposes too. They know they need to trade a big. Everyone knows Okafor is at least close to available. All of a sudden Boston is in the game, they have a ton of assets and an aggressive GM. If another team wants okafor they have to compete with Boston and their war chest of picks and players.

This rumor is most beneficial to Philly.

[CelticSooner]

You also forgot to mention that he said this is around the time most people start to hate the upcoming draft. They mentioned Simmons and Ingram being potential stars. If Ainge wanted to trade the pick it's soley because there's a chance Brooklyn gets out tanked by Phoenix and Minnesota. I understand the reasoning.