Stevens: #3 Trade must be 'Impactful'

[SHAQATTACK]

Then Bender is not our man.

We need Oakfor and Noel to help now .....if not Cousins

[Chief Macho]

After reading these threads the past few weeks the only player that makes sense is Cousins.

[slightly biased bias fan]

I'm pretty sure when God created Brad Stevens he removed all his natural charisma and used it to top up his Basketball I.Q haha.

Brad's statements are very reminiscent of a poker faced politician, including this one. It could really mean anything, impactful could mean trading up for a more talented player in the draft, trade for a talented youthful player or a star/superstar.

[BDeCosta26]

The case against Okafor is strong. He could become a volume scorer, but at the expense of team spacing and defense. He has no outside game at all, and will always be a below average defender.

Everyone bemoans the lack of a star, but we are two athletic, defensive minded bigs away from having the best defense in the league, all with players just entering their prime. We can achieve that without any luck at all. I wouldn't sell that out just to get Okafor's offense.

Okafor is going to be a good player. Al Jefferson has been a really good player. Flaws exist, but that doesn't mean he won't be good, he could very well he an all-star one day.

Thing is, the #3 pick or a package built around it is the best chance we have of laying the groundwork for a contender in the future. And much like Al Jefferson, even though Okafor could be an all-star level talent, it's very unlikely you can build a champion around him as the centerpiece, which you would have to do because of his skillset.

People shouldn't confuse not wanting to trade our highest pick in over a decade (plus possibly more assets) for Okafor with saying he's not going to be a good player. He is going to be. But would you trade #3, #16 and Smart for a 20 year old Al Jefferson or Brook Lopez? I wouldn't.

[loco_91]

Gonna go out on a limb and say that this quote gives us exactly zero information about anything.

[BornReady]

The case against Okafor is strong. He could become a volume scorer, but at the expense of team spacing and defense. He has no outside game at all, and will always be a below average defender.

Everyone bemoans the lack of a star, but we are two athletic, defensive minded bigs away from having the best defense in the league, all with players just entering their prime. We can achieve that without any luck at all. I wouldn't sell that out just to get Okafor's offense.

True bu our main concern should be to improve offensively
as we didnt stand a chance with only thomas creating
one rim protector at the starting lineup should be good enough for us to be the best defense

I'd be happy with bender or Dunn at 3

[EvilEmpire]

The case against Okafor is strong. He could become a volume scorer, but at the expense of team spacing and defense. He has no outside game at all, and will always be a below average defender.

Everyone bemoans the lack of a star, but we are two athletic, defensive minded bigs away from having the best defense in the league, all with players just entering their prime. We can achieve that without any luck at all. I wouldn't sell that out just to get Okafor's offense.

Okafor is going to be a good player. Al Jefferson has been a really good player. Flaws exist, but that doesn't mean he won't be good, he could very well he an all-star one day.

Thing is, the #3 pick or a package built around it is the best chance we have of laying the groundwork for a contender in the future. And much like Al Jefferson, even though Okafor could be an all-star level talent, it's very unlikely you can build a champion around him as the centerpiece, which you would have to do because of his skillset.

People shouldn't confuse not wanting to trade our highest pick in over a decade (plus possibly more assets) for Okafor with saying he's not going to be a good player. He is going to be. But would you trade #3, #16 and Smart for a 20 year old Al Jefferson or Brook Lopez? I wouldn't.

First, whos team space would Okafor be taking? Amirs? For 12 mil Amir has underperformed. Amir only gets 23 minutes a game. smh The Celtics dont have a true low post threat, Okafor would give them one. one of the faults of the Celtics current system is it relies on the outside offensive game to much. The offense needs more balance.

Second who said anything about trading 3, 16, and Smart? Philly already has 3 first round pick I highly doubt they want 5 first round pick in the same draft.
Would be nice to work a sign and trade with Turner and the 3 for Okafor and Saric.

[LooseCannon]

People who don't understand that Amir Johnson was worth his contract are likely to overrate Okafor.

[crimson_stallion]

Fairly straightforward reasoning that makes sense.

The #3 is a pick that projects with a fairly high chance at a 'future all star' caliber player.   Danny isn't going to give it up for someone who either is already that level of player or has a very good chance of being that.

Right.  Roughly speaking, 60% chance of picking a future star.  Giving up that 60% for somebody who is already at that level is a no-brainer.  Trading it for an older player with a chance of becoming a star makes less sense.  A guy like Okafor, though, is a near mortal lock to be an all-star at some point.  Another no-brainer.

http://www.82games.com/nbadraftpicks.htm

A near mortal lock to become an all star?

Mmm...I think not.  It's certainly within the realm of possibility, but he is not a near lock.  Okafor is an inferior version of Al Jefferson, and Jefferson never made an all-star team.

[crimson_stallion]

People who don't understand that Amir Johnson was worth his contract are likely to overrate Okafor.

Absolutely correct.

Amir Johnson had a huge impact on this team, even if he never played huge minutes.  When he was on the court he almost always made us better.  He rebounded, he defended, protected the rim, finished at a very efficient rate inside, made high IQ plays on a consistent basis.

Our team overachieved because we had guys like Johnson - guys who didn't put up great box score stats, but impacted the game positively in all the ways that the box score doesn't tally.

Okafor was the complete polar opposite of that.  All about stats, did nothing at all to make his team better.

[LarBrd33]

People who don't understand that Amir Johnson was worth his contract are likely to overrate Okafor.

Absolutely correct.

Amir Johnson had a huge impact on this team, even if he never played huge minutes.  When he was on the court he almost always made us better.  He rebounded, he defended, protected the rim, finished at a very efficient rate inside, made high IQ plays on a consistent basis.

Our team overachieved because we had guys like Johnson - guys who didn't put up great box score stats, but impacted the game positively in all the ways that the box score doesn't tally.

Okafor was the complete polar opposite of that.  All about stats, did nothing at all to make his team better.

I went from thinking we'd win about 35 to thinking we'd win 45+ once we added Amir.  He filled a need.  But the reason he got that big money was majorly so that he'd be an option as a contract filler in a significant trade.

[Surferdad]

People who don't understand that Amir Johnson was worth his contract are likely to overrate Okafor.

Absolutely correct.

Amir Johnson had a huge impact on this team, even if he never played huge minutes.  When he was on the court he almost always made us better.  He rebounded, he defended, protected the rim, finished at a very efficient rate inside, made high IQ plays on a consistent basis.

Our team overachieved because we had guys like Johnson - guys who didn't put up great box score stats, but impacted the game positively in all the ways that the box score doesn't tally.

Okafor was the complete polar opposite of that.  All about stats, did nothing at all to make his team better.

I went from thinking we'd win about 35 to thinking we'd win 45+ once we added Amir.  He filled a need.  But the reason he got that big money was majorly so that he'd be an option as a contract filler in a significant trade.

I was actually hoping Amir would be even better, and he probably would have been if not for injury.  Well worth the contract these days, IMO.

[dannyboy35]

I'm on the Chriss bandwagon now.

[ThePaintedArea]

Fairly straightforward reasoning that makes sense.

The #3 is a pick that projects with a fairly high chance at a 'future all star' caliber player.   Danny isn't going to give it up for someone who either is already that level of player or has a very good chance of being that.

Right.  Roughly speaking, 60% chance of picking a future star.  Giving up that 60% for somebody who is already at that level is a no-brainer.  Trading it for an older player with a chance of becoming a star makes less sense.  A guy like Okafor, though, is a near mortal lock to be an all-star at some point.  Another no-brainer.

http://www.82games.com/nbadraftpicks.htm

Interesting link, though of course it's not an argument about Okafor the individual; these stats are persuasive that NBA GM's know what they're doing, however - even GM's of teams that have had disastrous seasons and wound up at the top of the draft.  So if we believe that Sam Hinkie is a typically astute GM...

[Jon]

Then Bender is not our man.

We need Oakfor and Noel to help now .....if not Cousins

I think you misread the quote. He didn't say the pick had to be impactful, he said a player we trade the pick for would have to be impactful.

But as others have said, that's not exactly a newsflash. But I also wouldn't read anything into it about who we'll draft if we keep the pick.