Assuming the draft order stays as is...

[sdceltsfan]

We end up with the #3 pick, or what seems to be the #1 Bridesmaid pick off the board. I am not too big a fan of Bender....plus I don't like the idea that he is not really NBA ready, when this team seems to need someone to step in right away in the backcourt as a shooter, and the front court as a rim protector/post-scorer.

I'm not saying Hield will be a bad pick at #3. If anything, he's probably one of the most NBA ready players....I just don't see him developing in to much more than he already is. Not a bad thing again, just not worth the #3 pick IMO.

Everyone else worth the pick (Dunn/Murray) would be backups (unless a trade is made), and you don't draft a backup #3 overall. I get that you take the BPA.

So that leaves Jaylen Brown, who honestly, reminds me a lot of another Brown we drafted a while back, of the Kedrick variety. Freak athlete, but more of an NBA Jam star and not an actual All-Star. If he had a consistent jumper, this would be a no-brainer. He comes in as a 6th/7th man to start, but could develop in to the starting SF over Crowder, and be a go-to scorer.

Too much uncertainty/speculation there, with all that said, with #3 overall. So, my question is (again, assuming the draft order stays as is), is the smart move to trade up in to the #1 or #2 spot to get Simmons or Ingram?

Personally, I would trade the entire rest of our draft to do so.

Are the Mavs pick, our early 20's pick, and our top two 2nd rounders enough to convince LA or Philly to part with the #1 or #2 pick? Is that an extreme overpay, or is it way off? Seems like it's a solid offer, not even looking at a draft-pick value chart.

Is this a stupid move, in the sense that it assumes Simmons/Ingram are locks at #1 and #2. All it takes is hearing the words, "Dragan Bender" called out when we are sitting at #3 to not have to worry about a thing.

[PhoSita]

If we get #3, I'd shop it hard to Philly / Chicago / Sacramento, and then when that failed, I'd cross my fingers and draft Bender.

[alldaboston]

I think it'd be hard to do that. Those teams won't want to drop down for the same reasons you stated we wouldn't have a good player to pick

[sdceltsfan]

For the most part, I just kinda think this draft class sucks past Simmons/Ingram, at least for where the Celtics are at and the needs we need to fill.

You could put us at #5 or 6, which is the worst we could draft at, and even if someone "slides", I still don't see the value of the pick for anyone.

I guess if we did end up with the worst luck (again), and fell to #6, I wouldn't be upset with Jaylen Brown or Hield.

I guess the point I'm really trying to make, is that we should be looking to consolidate any pick we end up with that isn't #1 or #2, and get the hell out of this draft. I'd rather trade our entire 2016 draft for one quality starter (i.e. Jimmy Butler), then load our already saturated roster with more "developmental/potential"type players.

[PhoSita]

I think it'd be hard to do that. Those teams won't want to drop down for the same reasons you stated we wouldn't have a good player to pick

I'm not talking about trading up.  I'm suggesting we would shop the pick for Butler / Okafor / Cousins.

[Evantime34]

If we get #3, I'd shop it hard to Philly / Chicago / Sacramento, and then when that failed, I'd cross my fingers and draft Bender.

We are agreeing a lot more recently than I can ever remember.

I think if you can't move the pick Bender has to be who we select.

[Moranis]

If we get #3, I'd shop it hard to Philly / Chicago / Sacramento, and then when that failed, I'd cross my fingers and draft Bender.

I'd almost rather just move back in the draft than pick at 3 (and I don't really think any of those teams are going to want 3 at least at the value Boston would want it to be).

So there are some trades I came up with (assuming no changes in draft order)

Denver - 3, Bradley, Jerekbo for 7, Gallinari
Milwaukee - 3, Bradley for 8, Parker
Toronto - 3, 31, Bradley, Olynyk for 10, 27, DeRozan
Orlando - 3, Jerekbo for 11, Gordon or Hezonja

No idea if any of those teams would be interested, but in a vacuum I think those are reasonable trades for both teams. 

[celticsfan8591]

If we get the #3 pick and can't trade it for a star or top 2 pick, I think we should trade it along with whatever other picks from this year are necessary to a team in the 6-10 range for their pick and their unprotected pick next year.  We then grab poeltl to be our rim protector and gamble on getting another lottery pick in a better draft next year.

[sdceltsfan]

If we get the #3 pick and can't trade it for a star or top 2 pick, I think we should trade it along with whatever other picks from this year are necessary to a team in the 6-10 range for their pick and their unprotected pick next year.  We then grab poeltl to be our rim protector and gamble on getting another lottery pick in a better draft next year.

Definitely not the worst idea.....although I would think if we traded down to the 10 spot even, just the BPA (not stoked on Poetl in particular, but I get why you suggested him), and then like you said, the hopes that an unprotected 1st in 2017 works out.

[alldaboston]

I think it'd be hard to do that. Those teams won't want to drop down for the same reasons you stated we wouldn't have a good player to pick

I'm not talking about trading up.  I'm suggesting we would shop the pick for Butler / Okafor / Cousins.

Lol. Sorry but I was responding to OP, not you. (I don't mean to sound rude or anything!) I was responding to this:

Too much uncertainty/speculation there, with all that said, with #3 overall. So, my question is (again, assuming the draft order stays as is), is the smart move to trade up in to the #1 or #2 spot to get Simmons or Ingram?

Personally, I would trade the entire rest of our draft to do so.

Are the Mavs pick, our early 20's pick, and our top two 2nd rounders enough to convince LA or Philly to part with the #1 or #2 pick? Is that an extreme overpay, or is it way off? Seems like it's a solid offer, not even looking at a draft-pick value chart

[PhoSita]

If we get the #3 pick and can't trade it for a star or top 2 pick, I think we should trade it along with whatever other picks from this year are necessary to a team in the 6-10 range for their pick and their unprotected pick next year.  We then grab poeltl to be our rim protector and gamble on getting another lottery pick in a better draft next year.

Trades like this very rarely happen.

The last example I can think of is the Holiday for Noel + 2014 1st trade.


Generally speaking, you don't see teams trade down / out in a draft for a future 1st.  Other teams are usually smart enough to understand that they're probably one knee injury away from that working out really badly for them.

[crimson_stallion]

If we couldn't draft up, then I also don't like Bender much.

Assuming Philly get #1, they already have Noel and Okafor so ot probably makes little sense to draft another big wothout a jumper.  Makes more sense for them to go for Ingram.

If so, them Simmons is also a questionable fit in LA, since they already have Randle at PF and neither he nor Simmons has the skill set to play center full time.  Bender on the other hand could make sense for them if they can develop him into their future center. 

So Id try to convince the Lakers to trafe down to #2 in return for maybe Bender + Olynyk + Celtics 1st.  Lakers could start Olynyk at center (he should fit well with Randle) and take their time developing Bender.

If they decline, i'd try and swing the pick for an established young star - e.g. Butler or Cousins. Actually i would probably try that as a first preference, even before trying the Lakers deal.

If neither option is available, i'd be happy to try my luck on one of the remaining guys.  I also don't like Bender...but there are a few guys in this draft who i feel could have star potentual.  Hield is one, but there are others.

Another option would be to trade down, acquire a nice piece to add to our roster (e.g. a quality big or skilled shooting wing) and then draft a lower upside player who fits a need...like Poeltyl.

Really though, there are at least 3 or 4 guys projected outside the top 3 who i really like in term off either talent, or fit, or both.  Probably wouldn't mind trading down to #5 or #6 for exactly that reason.

So many options.

I actually get the feeling bender will fall on draft day.  I just dont see star potential in him at all, and i don't see a talent impressive enough to justify a top 3 pick.  I could see Hield going at #3 without much trouble, with Bender falling to #4 or #5.



Li

[PhoSita]

I think if the pick at #3 is not Bender, it has to be Murray.

Dunn, Poeltl, Hield are the next best prospects after Bender and Murray, but those guys are probably immediate impact guys who won't improve all that much.  Sixth man / solid starter types.

Bender and Murray are the only guys after the top 2 with the kind of upside I expect from a top 3 pick.

[alldaboston]

I think if the pick at #3 is not Bender, it has to be Murray.

Dunn, Poeltl, Hield are the next best prospects after Bender and Murray, but those guys are probably immediate impact guys who won't improve all that much.  Sixth man / solid starter types.

Bender and Murray are the only guys after the top 2 with the kind of upside I expect from a top 3 pick.

For what it's worth, when I run the mock lottery simulator (http://espn.go.com/nba/lottery2016/mockdraft) the Celtics used to take bender anywhere after top 2. Now, it seems Chad ford has updated it. Now our preference seems to be Murray. We now end up with Murray first, if we land after top2. Then Hield, also before bender. Lakers, on the other hand, do take bender 3rd when they fall. So it seems to be based on team, not a general mock

[CFAN38]

If the pick stands post lottery at #3 to go along with #17, #22, #31,#35 and #46 (not counting picks in the 50s). This would be my draft day plan.

1. Offer #3,#17,#35, Smart and Amir to the Bulls for Butler. I would go as fare as to add a future Cs 1st to this deal.

2. Offer #3 + #22 to the 76ers for Okafor

Honestly at the end of the day adding additional 2nds, Hunter or Young to sweeten those deal are all minor considerations for the magnitude of the trades.

If those or any other deals for a sub 28yr old allstar level talent are not attaniable then I say fall back to the BPA plan.

Based off of DX mock

#3 Bender, people can scream bust till they are blue in the face but he is the highest potential player in this draft after Simmons and Ingram. Dunn,Murray, Poeltl and Brown are all nice prospects but they all have warts to their games that limit their potential. Bender has positional size, great mobility for his size and the skill set that is typical of a player 6 inches shorter then him. In the past these him profile euro picks have been scary but in resent years the bust potential seems to be dropping. At his age I just cant see passing a potential franchise center piece PF who fits BS system and the modern game perfectly.

#17, #22, #31,#35, #46 the Cs will not be able to use all of these picks so a consolidation trade and draft and stash will have to happen.

At the end of the Day I would like to see those 5 picks net 1 high potential athletic big (Chriss, Rabb,Davis, Labissere, Maker, Onuaku ,Diallo) in that order and one defensive wing prospect Luwawu, Prince, Hayes, Seldon.

So in theory trade #17+#31 + #35 + hunter+#46 for #14 and draft Chriss

                     then at #22 draft Prince