Trading back with Denver to#7, select Hield/Poeltl

[mmmmm]

The 16th and 23rd picks for the 8th seems to me like bad value for SAC.

Ainge would probably need to offer up a rookie-scale contract and/or offer some financial relief, I think.

It might be - but a lot depends on what SAC wants to do.

The 16th plus two 2nds got us a #13 from Dallas a couple of years ago - though granted Dallas was trying to cut costs at the time.   But if SAC is highly motivated to rebuild with a volume of young assets they at least may be interested in negotiating something that works.

Maybe a young player and/or the #31 would need to be included.   The point isn't the exact deal.  The point is that it's not unrealistic that SAC might be interested in such a deal.   

The larger point is that I think Danny should be motivated to try to consolidate assets into fewer, better picks, rather than trading down into multiple, lesser picks.

[Lucky17]

The 16th and 23rd picks for the 8th seems to me like bad value for SAC.

Ainge would probably need to offer up a rookie-scale contract and/or offer some financial relief, I think.

It might be - but a lot depends on what SAC wants to do.

The 16th plus two 2nds got us a #13 from Dallas a couple of years ago - though granted Dallas was trying to cut costs at the time.   But if SAC is highly motivated to rebuild with a volume of young assets they at least may be interested in negotiating something that works.

Maybe a young player and/or the #31 would need to be included.   The point isn't the exact deal.  The point is that it's not unrealistic that SAC might be interested in such a deal.  

The larger point is that I think Danny should be motivated to try to consolidate assets into fewer, better picks, rather than trading down into multiple, lesser picks.

There, I disagree with you. At #8, you're at the end of that tier below Ingram/Simmons. There could be someone there with a lot of upside. Perhaps someone slips, or some other team in the #3 to #7 reaches. I just don't think there's much of a chance to see SAC pass up on that potential crisp dollar bill for a handful of change from BOS.

I do agree Ainge should consolidate picks, not diversify them.

[footey]

Poeltl would be a disastrous pick. I hate his feet, and I saw him - in person - get dominated by smaller bigs from Wichita State

NO interest in him. At all.

second that. He would have been fine if we were playing retro 1960's NBA basketball. Not this century.

[passesofftodj]

Poeltl would be a disastrous pick. I hate his feet, and I saw him - in person - get dominated by smaller bigs from Wichita State

NO interest in him. At all.

second that. He would have been fine if we were playing retro 1960's NBA basketball. Not this century.

Third and TP.  If the Celtics top pick ends up being Poetl and there is a whiff in free agency then this summer will be a disaster.

[Moranis]

Poeltl would be a disastrous pick. I hate his feet, and I saw him - in person - get dominated by smaller bigs from Wichita State

NO interest in him. At all.

second that. He would have been fine if we were playing retro 1960's NBA basketball. Not this century.

Third and TP.  If the Celtics top pick ends up being Poetl and there is a whiff in free agency then this summer will be a disaster.

big guys often struggle in college against the small guys and then do fine in the pros playing against other big guys

[mef730]

I would trade the #3 pick this year with Denver for their first this year and next, unprotected. Since there's no way on Earth Denver agrees to that, nothing's happening.

Consensus is to trade the pick if it's #3. But to whom, and for what? It's not exactly a secret that this is a two-player draft.

Mike

[alewilliam789]

Just take him at #3. There's really no one better to take and kinda reminds me of Bradley Beal. His height/wingspan is almost exact. He clearly wasn't as good of a freshman, but has evolved a very similar game. Just have to hope he can translate, but at worst he has 3 and D game on lock.

[JBcat]

I would trade the #3 pick this year with Denver for their first this year and next, unprotected. Since there's no way on Earth Denver agrees to that, nothing's happening.

Consensus is to trade the pick if it's #3. But to whom, and for what? It's not exactly a secret that this is a two-player draft.

Mike

I've mentioned this in another thread if we don't land the top 2 or 3 picks, and can't trade for a star I wouldn't mind at all trading back to around the 10 range and pick up a lottery pick for next year.

My reasoning is next year's draft is potentially stronger, and I would love to have 2 lottery picks next year.  The 4,5, and 6 picks this year seem like they will be guard heavy with Murray, Hield, and Dunn.   If Ainge feels neither one of those guys is a clear upgrade over say Bradley and Smart he might look to make a move like this.

Of course it takes 2 teams to make a move like this, one in desperate need of a guard. 

[mmmmm]

The 16th and 23rd picks for the 8th seems to me like bad value for SAC.

Ainge would probably need to offer up a rookie-scale contract and/or offer some financial relief, I think.

It might be - but a lot depends on what SAC wants to do.

The 16th plus two 2nds got us a #13 from Dallas a couple of years ago - though granted Dallas was trying to cut costs at the time.   But if SAC is highly motivated to rebuild with a volume of young assets they at least may be interested in negotiating something that works.

Maybe a young player and/or the #31 would need to be included.   The point isn't the exact deal.  The point is that it's not unrealistic that SAC might be interested in such a deal.  

The larger point is that I think Danny should be motivated to try to consolidate assets into fewer, better picks, rather than trading down into multiple, lesser picks.

There, I disagree with you. At #8, you're at the end of that tier below Ingram/Simmons. There could be someone there with a lot of upside. Perhaps someone slips, or some other team in the #3 to #7 reaches. I just don't think there's much of a chance to see SAC pass up on that potential crisp dollar bill for a handful of change from BOS.

I do agree Ainge should consolidate picks, not diversify them.

Well, we don't know how SAC will tier the draft.  They may view #8 as in the bottom of a 3 - 8 tier or they may view it as the top of the next tier, which could go pretty far.

Again, it's not useful to get too caught up in the specifics.   How far down below the #8 one views the worth of the #16 is a secondary concern.   By 'type of deal', I mean that they may indeed want to do a deal that cashes in the #8 for multiple assets.  You start with what their larger goal is.  If it is to trade down or out for multiple pieces, then you can go about assembling the pieces to make such a package work. 

My main point is simply that they are a prime candidate team for possibly wanting to trade for multiple pieces, whether those pieces are picks or players.

[Evantime34]

The 16th and 23rd picks for the 8th seems to me like bad value for SAC.

Ainge would probably need to offer up a rookie-scale contract and/or offer some financial relief, I think.

It might be - but a lot depends on what SAC wants to do.

The 16th plus two 2nds got us a #13 from Dallas a couple of years ago - though granted Dallas was trying to cut costs at the time.   But if SAC is highly motivated to rebuild with a volume of young assets they at least may be interested in negotiating something that works.

Maybe a young player and/or the #31 would need to be included.   The point isn't the exact deal.  The point is that it's not unrealistic that SAC might be interested in such a deal.  

The larger point is that I think Danny should be motivated to try to consolidate assets into fewer, better picks, rather than trading down into multiple, lesser picks.

There, I disagree with you. At #8, you're at the end of that tier below Ingram/Simmons. There could be someone there with a lot of upside. Perhaps someone slips, or some other team in the #3 to #7 reaches. I just don't think there's much of a chance to see SAC pass up on that potential crisp dollar bill for a handful of change from BOS.

I do agree Ainge should consolidate picks, not diversify them.

With the win now way Sacramento has been operating lately, I doubt they want to add additional picks instead of a higher pick.

I do however, think you might be able to get them to overpay for an established player like Avery Bradley. Maybe something like Bradley and the 23rd for the 8th pick.

[Lucky17]

The 16th and 23rd picks for the 8th seems to me like bad value for SAC.

Ainge would probably need to offer up a rookie-scale contract and/or offer some financial relief, I think.

It might be - but a lot depends on what SAC wants to do.

The 16th plus two 2nds got us a #13 from Dallas a couple of years ago - though granted Dallas was trying to cut costs at the time.   But if SAC is highly motivated to rebuild with a volume of young assets they at least may be interested in negotiating something that works.

Maybe a young player and/or the #31 would need to be included.   The point isn't the exact deal.  The point is that it's not unrealistic that SAC might be interested in such a deal.  

The larger point is that I think Danny should be motivated to try to consolidate assets into fewer, better picks, rather than trading down into multiple, lesser picks.

There, I disagree with you. At #8, you're at the end of that tier below Ingram/Simmons. There could be someone there with a lot of upside. Perhaps someone slips, or some other team in the #3 to #7 reaches. I just don't think there's much of a chance to see SAC pass up on that potential crisp dollar bill for a handful of change from BOS.

I do agree Ainge should consolidate picks, not diversify them.

With the win now way Sacramento has been operating lately, I doubt they want to add additional picks instead of a higher pick.

I do however, think you might be able to get them to overpay for an established player like Avery Bradley. Maybe something like Bradley and the 23rd for the 8th pick.

I'm wondering if they might consider moving Koufos for prospects and picks? Open up a little more cap room for a splashy signing, get younger.

[mmmmm]

The 16th and 23rd picks for the 8th seems to me like bad value for SAC.

Ainge would probably need to offer up a rookie-scale contract and/or offer some financial relief, I think.

It might be - but a lot depends on what SAC wants to do.

The 16th plus two 2nds got us a #13 from Dallas a couple of years ago - though granted Dallas was trying to cut costs at the time.   But if SAC is highly motivated to rebuild with a volume of young assets they at least may be interested in negotiating something that works.

Maybe a young player and/or the #31 would need to be included.   The point isn't the exact deal.  The point is that it's not unrealistic that SAC might be interested in such a deal.  

The larger point is that I think Danny should be motivated to try to consolidate assets into fewer, better picks, rather than trading down into multiple, lesser picks.

There, I disagree with you. At #8, you're at the end of that tier below Ingram/Simmons. There could be someone there with a lot of upside. Perhaps someone slips, or some other team in the #3 to #7 reaches. I just don't think there's much of a chance to see SAC pass up on that potential crisp dollar bill for a handful of change from BOS.

I do agree Ainge should consolidate picks, not diversify them.

With the win now way Sacramento has been operating lately, I doubt they want to add additional picks instead of a higher pick.

I do however, think you might be able to get them to overpay for an established player like Avery Bradley. Maybe something like Bradley and the 23rd for the 8th pick.

I think that is seriously open for question.  They will have a new coach.  Rondo is an unrestricted FA.    They have various veterans like Collison, Macklemore & Casspi tied up only through this next year.   The #8 pick is not going to put them over the hump and into the playoffs.   

They have to seriously consider a major restructuring.  Either go 'all in' on trying to secure more veteran talent to try to glue on top of what they have (which isn't all that great) or do a more serious rebuilding move.   Either way, I think there is a good chance they might end up moving the pick.

[Evantime34]

The 16th and 23rd picks for the 8th seems to me like bad value for SAC.

Ainge would probably need to offer up a rookie-scale contract and/or offer some financial relief, I think.

It might be - but a lot depends on what SAC wants to do.

The 16th plus two 2nds got us a #13 from Dallas a couple of years ago - though granted Dallas was trying to cut costs at the time.   But if SAC is highly motivated to rebuild with a volume of young assets they at least may be interested in negotiating something that works.

Maybe a young player and/or the #31 would need to be included.   The point isn't the exact deal.  The point is that it's not unrealistic that SAC might be interested in such a deal.  

The larger point is that I think Danny should be motivated to try to consolidate assets into fewer, better picks, rather than trading down into multiple, lesser picks.

There, I disagree with you. At #8, you're at the end of that tier below Ingram/Simmons. There could be someone there with a lot of upside. Perhaps someone slips, or some other team in the #3 to #7 reaches. I just don't think there's much of a chance to see SAC pass up on that potential crisp dollar bill for a handful of change from BOS.

I do agree Ainge should consolidate picks, not diversify them.

With the win now way Sacramento has been operating lately, I doubt they want to add additional picks instead of a higher pick.

I do however, think you might be able to get them to overpay for an established player like Avery Bradley. Maybe something like Bradley and the 23rd for the 8th pick.

I think that is seriously open for question.  They will have a new coach.  Rondo is an unrestricted FA.    They have various veterans like Collison, Macklemore & Casspi tied up only through this next year.   The #8 pick is not going to put them over the hump and into the playoffs.   

They have to seriously consider a major restructuring.  Either go 'all in' on trying to secure more veteran talent to try to glue on top of what they have (which isn't all that great) or do a more serious rebuilding move.   Either way, I think there is a good chance they might end up moving the pick.

They are moving into a new arena this season. They want to try to be good now so that they can make the playoffs when their new arena opens. If they do rebuild I don't expect it to happen until after next season.

[TheSundanceKid]

The 16th and 23rd picks for the 8th seems to me like bad value for SAC.

Ainge would probably need to offer up a rookie-scale contract and/or offer some financial relief, I think.

It might be - but a lot depends on what SAC wants to do.

The 16th plus two 2nds got us a #13 from Dallas a couple of years ago - though granted Dallas was trying to cut costs at the time.   But if SAC is highly motivated to rebuild with a volume of young assets they at least may be interested in negotiating something that works.

Maybe a young player and/or the #31 would need to be included.   The point isn't the exact deal.  The point is that it's not unrealistic that SAC might be interested in such a deal.  

The larger point is that I think Danny should be motivated to try to consolidate assets into fewer, better picks, rather than trading down into multiple, lesser picks.

There, I disagree with you. At #8, you're at the end of that tier below Ingram/Simmons. There could be someone there with a lot of upside. Perhaps someone slips, or some other team in the #3 to #7 reaches. I just don't think there's much of a chance to see SAC pass up on that potential crisp dollar bill for a handful of change from BOS.

I do agree Ainge should consolidate picks, not diversify them.

With the win now way Sacramento has been operating lately, I doubt they want to add additional picks instead of a higher pick.

I do however, think you might be able to get them to overpay for an established player like Avery Bradley. Maybe something like Bradley and the 23rd for the 8th pick.

I think that is seriously open for question.  They will have a new coach.  Rondo is an unrestricted FA.    They have various veterans like Collison, Macklemore & Casspi tied up only through this next year.   The #8 pick is not going to put them over the hump and into the playoffs.   

They have to seriously consider a major restructuring.  Either go 'all in' on trying to secure more veteran talent to try to glue on top of what they have (which isn't all that great) or do a more serious rebuilding move.   Either way, I think there is a good chance they might end up moving the pick.

They are moving into a new arena this season. They want to try to be good now so that they can make the playoffs when their new arena opens. If they do rebuild I don't expect it to happen until after next season.

Let's look at that another way. They're moving into a new arena next year, they want to build a young exciting team that can grow a new identity for the Kings.

I mean after all look how the arena move worked out for the Nets... It really would be the most sensible move to trade Cousins for at least 2 BRK picks and start over. They'd have 2 top 10 picks, Cauley-Stein and McLemore + 2 likely top 10 picks next year as well. It's one hell of a good start to a rebuild

[Moranis]

Philly has the right to pick swap with Sacto the next couple of seasons and then gets Sacto's outright 1st 2 years after Sacto conveys its pick to Cleveland.  Sacto isn't going to go into tank mode only to lose the pick they tanked to get whether it is swapped with Philly or sent to Cleveland.