Danny's in his wheelhouse on this one

[mctyson]

It's so strange to me that people want to trade down and pick up more mediocre-to-decent assetts. The Celtics already have a tone of those. They need to consolodate some of those assetts (and players) into something (or someone) of higher value.

Not really...if you are of the mindset that picks #3 through, say, #6 could all yield good prospects that are of equivalent value, it makes sense to move down if you know the one you want will be there later.

I think they could grab Hield at #4 or later.  I want them to trade down to Phoenix for their other 1st rounder.

[OldSchoolDude]

We have 8 picks!  We are only allowed a 15 man roster.    The ideal move is to draft at 3 (Bender or Brown) and trade 16, 23, and one of our surplus guards to get back into the lottery to get a center (Davis or Poeltl).

[Eja117]

We have 8 picks!  We are only allowed a 15 man roster.    The ideal move is to draft at 3 (Bender or Brown) and trade 16, 23, and one of our surplus guards to get back into the lottery to get a center (Davis or Poeltl).

I am eja and I approve the general concept of this message

[Lucky17]

We have 8 picks!  We are only allowed a 15 man roster.    The ideal move is to draft at 3 (Bender or Brown) and trade 16, 23, and one of our surplus guards to get back into the lottery to get a center (Davis or Poeltl).

But that roster doesn't get cut down to 15 until October.

Ainge can use all 8 picks on players, and make any number of trades later this summer.

[ahonui06]

We have 8 picks!  We are only allowed a 15 man roster.    The ideal move is to draft at 3 (Bender or Brown) and trade 16, 23, and one of our surplus guards to get back into the lottery to get a center (Davis or Poeltl).

But that roster doesn't get cut down to 15 until October.

Ainge can use all 8 picks on players, and make any number of trades later this summer.

I'd agree with most posters and consolidation of assets is necessary. Celtics only have 3 FA (2 RFA and 1 UFA) which means 12 players are still on the roster.

Ainge will need to be flexible with the roster this offseason and packaging picks will make it simpler.

[JBcat]

I like the idea of trading down if we pick up another lottery pick in the future.  Something like trading the 3rd and 16th pick for a 6th and future lottery pick.  Less picks for this year and more chances in potential better drafts in the future.

[Lucky17]

We have 8 picks!  We are only allowed a 15 man roster.    The ideal move is to draft at 3 (Bender or Brown) and trade 16, 23, and one of our surplus guards to get back into the lottery to get a center (Davis or Poeltl).

But that roster doesn't get cut down to 15 until October.

Ainge can use all 8 picks on players, and make any number of trades later this summer.

I'd agree with most posters and consolidation of assets is necessary. Celtics only have 3 FA (2 RFA and 1 UFA) which means 12 players are still on the roster.

Ainge will need to be flexible with the roster this offseason and packaging picks will make it simpler.

Ideally, yes, Ainge will consolidate assets.

But he shouldn't do so if it yields a poor return. Trading the #16 and the #23 could be good; trading them for the #14 pick would be bad.

[ahonui06]

We have 8 picks!  We are only allowed a 15 man roster.    The ideal move is to draft at 3 (Bender or Brown) and trade 16, 23, and one of our surplus guards to get back into the lottery to get a center (Davis or Poeltl).

But that roster doesn't get cut down to 15 until October.

Ainge can use all 8 picks on players, and make any number of trades later this summer.

I'd agree with most posters and consolidation of assets is necessary. Celtics only have 3 FA (2 RFA and 1 UFA) which means 12 players are still on the roster.

Ainge will need to be flexible with the roster this offseason and packaging picks will make it simpler.

Ideally, yes, Ainge will consolidate assets.

But he shouldn't do so if it yields a poor return. Trading the #16 and the #23 could be good; trading them for the #14 pick would be bad.

Agreed. When it comes to trades I completely trust Ainge. He knows how to "win" trades as evidenced by the Brooklyn Nets deal which keeps on giving year after year.

[Boris Badenov]

We have 8 picks!  We are only allowed a 15 man roster.    The ideal move is to draft at 3 (Bender or Brown) and trade 16, 23, and one of our surplus guards to get back into the lottery to get a center (Davis or Poeltl).

But that roster doesn't get cut down to 15 until October.

Ainge can use all 8 picks on players, and make any number of trades later this summer.

I'd agree with most posters and consolidation of assets is necessary. Celtics only have 3 FA (2 RFA and 1 UFA) which means 12 players are still on the roster.

Ainge will need to be flexible with the roster this offseason and packaging picks will make it simpler.

We have team options on AJ, JJ and John Holland.

We have 9 players under guaranteed contract for next season. And I bet we'd cut James Young loose in a heartbeat and take the hit on him, if there was anyone else with a pulse we'd rather have.

Even if we stand pat completely and draft 8 guys, only three of those are guaranteed, which brings us up to 12 guys under contract. The late-2nd round picks (3 of them) are unlikely to make the roster, but even if one of those guys and the 31/35 picks do as well, we don't have to cut anyone.

In short: the concerns about having too many picks and not enough space for them are a bit overblown in my view.

[PaulP34]

Celtics are not trading the pick. They will keep the pick.

[Bobshot]

What about prying Dieng from the Wolves? For maybe a guard or one of the later no.1s?
Seems like Townes has made him expendable.

[vjcsmoke]

It's so strange to me that people want to trade down and pick up more mediocre-to-decent assetts. The Celtics already have a tone of those. They need to consolodate some of those assetts (and players) into something (or someone) of higher value.

We have bingo!  It's really a bad move to move out of the top 5 to pick amongst 2nd or even 3rd tier talent.

I could live with a trade down to #4 if we have an understanding with the Suns that they are not taking our top target.  But I don't see the benefit of dropping down to 7, 8, or 9.  There will be a bunch of mediocre talents outside the top 5 and that is true of 90% of the drafts.  If you want a starter or star level talent, you need a top 5 pick in most cases.

[PhoSita]

Boris, you're right that it's easy to envision the team having room for eight or more draft picks.

But I guess the question is, do the Celts want to make the playoffs again next year?

Might be tough to do that if more than half the roster is comprised of first and second year players.  That starts to look more like a team headed for a twenty to thirty win season.

[Surferdad]

It's so strange to me that people want to trade down and pick up more mediocre-to-decent assetts. The Celtics already have a tone of those. They need to consolodate some of those assetts (and players) into something (or someone) of higher value.

We have bingo!  It's really a bad move to move out of the top 5 to pick amongst 2nd or even 3rd tier talent.

I could live with a trade down to #4 if we have an understanding with the Suns that they are not taking our top target.  But I don't see the benefit of dropping down to 7, 8, or 9.  There will be a bunch of mediocre talents outside the top 5 and that is true of 90% of the drafts.  If you want a starter or star level talent, you need a top 5 pick in most cases.

So at least 4 posters on this thread (including myself) have made this point:  Trading down (for lesser talent) makes no sense.  The only benefit of that approach is to add more picks (assets), but the question is why do we want to add assets that are not likely to be top-tier talent?  It seems CB-nation is split on this point.

[Celtics4ever]

So as we continue to see rumors of the Celts' liking different players (Bender, Murray, Dunn, Chriss etc.), it becomes clear how well having the #3 pick plays to Danny's greatest strength which is trading.

Austin Ainge likes Bender.  Danny said that Bender has a long ways to go in terms of his body.   This indicates that he does not like him.   To say that, even hurts Bender's value in a trade, to some degree.   The only thing that makes sense is that he is trying to stir doubt so he drops.   Why else, say that, it hurts his value, doesn't make other teams want to trade for him, either.