Code of ethics, If we trade with Phoenix do they promise not to take our guy

[KG Living Legend]

 Hypothetically speaking If we are trading back one spot from three to four. Let's say we want Murray and they want Bender.

 What happens if they stab us in the back and take Murray? Has that ever happened? Is that why we would have to take Bender and then trade for Murray.

 Dream scenario is we trade #3 #31 #35 #45 and Young for #4 and #13

 Leaving us with #4 #13 #16

[Endless Paradise]

What? The teams would just agree to draft for one another and then trade right after making the picks. Boston would draft Bender and Phoenix would draft Murray and then they'd be swapped.

[slamtheking]

What? The teams would just agree to draft for one another and then trade right after making the picks. Boston would draft Bender and Phoenix would draft Murray and then they'd be swapped.

this.

no (decent) GM would make that agreement on either side of that deal where one GM relies on the word of another GM not to screw him. 

[slamtheking]

 Hypothetically speaking If we are trading back one spot from three to four. Let's say we want Murray and they want Bender.

 What happens if they stab us in the back and take Murray? Has that ever happened? Is that why we would have to take Bender and then trade for Murray.

 Dream scenario is we trade #3 #31 #35 #45 and Young for #4 and #13

 Leaving us with #4 #13 #16

not sure if that's a dream.  have to think about that.  would stick with #3 for #4 and #13 or at most add in Pick #31 (or #35 with #45).

Leaves #4, #13, #16, #23, #35, #45, #52, #58.   Would also try to move everything after #16 for a good player or to move #23 further up in the draft or for future picks (preferably in next year's deeper draft).

Hate the idea of frivolous spending just because we have a number of picks.  use them to get as much as possible instead of just casting them off as throwaways in a deal.

[kozlodoev]

 Hypothetically speaking If we are trading back one spot from three to four. Let's say we want Murray and they want Bender.

 What happens if they stab us in the back and take Murray? Has that ever happened? Is that why we would have to take Bender and then trade for Murray.

 Dream scenario is we trade #3 #31 #35 #45 and Young for #4 and #13

 Leaving us with #4 #13 #16

That trade wouldn't happen before the draft. But there's a history of stuff like that, see the Brandon Roy/Randy Foye swap in 2006.

Essentially, if we're absolutely sure they want Bender, we'll draft Bender and offer them a swap for Murray + some consideration.

[saltlover]

If you think Phoenix is going to pick the player you want, don't trade with them.  You don't get to have your cake and eat it too.

[Eja117]

I think in this case it doesn't work as well. I think a more classic scenario is the NFL where a team wants to trade up from 32 to 16 because they're afraid the team at 17 will take their linebacker. So in that case they tell the team this is the guy we want, and then they compensate them with 4th and 5th round picks and a future 7.

The nba doesn't work as well and especially not in this case, because who is Phoenix trying to get in front of? Well that would be us. We are the ONLY team in front of them that we can help them with. Danny Ainge can try to sorta take a guy hostage from Phoenix, but then Phoenix can take our guy.

Maybe later in the draft a team at 22 can move up to 16 and give us a future protected pick and tell us who they want, but that is really different than this case.

The nfl has more picks, players, positions, needs, etc so it works better.

[gift]

Trades during the draft don't get finalized until well after the picks are taken, so teams draft for each other and better not try to screw around or the deal could fall apart before being finalized.

[Fafnir]

What? The teams would just agree to draft for one another and then trade right after making the picks. Boston would draft Bender and Phoenix would draft Murray and then they'd be swapped.

this.

no (decent) GM would make that agreement on either side of that deal where one GM relies on the word of another GM not to screw him.

This happens all the time. Agreements in principal are made based on whom to pick and finalized post draft.

They are not broken as it is understood that if you were to break your word and back out you'd be blackballed out of ever trading again.

Only the GMs word was in play for the Ray Allen/Jeff Green swap for example and Jeff Green was the Sonics choice but the C's made the actual selection with that pick.

[droopdog7]

What? The teams would just agree to draft for one another and then trade right after making the picks. Boston would draft Bender and Phoenix would draft Murray and then they'd be swapped.

this.

no (decent) GM would make that agreement on either side of that deal where one GM relies on the word of another GM not to screw him.

Couldn't you get screwed either way?  I mean, we can draft bender for them and they can then refuse not to trade right?

Anyway, most teams will have a gentleman's agreement either way and that is enough.

[Evantime34]

 Hypothetically speaking If we are trading back one spot from three to four. Let's say we want Murray and they want Bender.

 What happens if they stab us in the back and take Murray? Has that ever happened? Is that why we would have to take Bender and then trade for Murray.

 Dream scenario is we trade #3 #31 #35 #45 and Young for #4 and #13

 Leaving us with #4 #13 #16

Why are we giving up so much for 4 and 13. I know not being able to trade up last year has left us Celtics fans pessimistic about our ability to trade up and get what want but I don't think that's good value.

Moving up from 4 to 3 should be enough to net us the 13th pick without us giving up 3 2nds and young. If Boston had 4 and 13 people would be pessimistic about us being able to trade up to 3, but since the situation is reversed rumors have us overpaying. If Bender is who Phoenix wants then us not taking him has to be worth at least the 13th pick.

[nickagneta]

This board went nuts following the Nets regular season, praying for losses and hoping beyond hope we would win the lottery. So many were resigned to the fact that the Celtics would end with pick 5 or 6. So we end up with the third pick and what happens? Half the board and many who were clammering for a pick higher than 5 or 6 now want to trade down in the draft.

I am dumbfounded.

This team does not need to trade down. This team does not need another draft pick in a draft where they have 8 and not enough roster spots to put all those players. It was shown last year that packaging tons of picks to move up doesnt always work and is difficult to do since teams fall in love with certain players. So trading down to acquire another pick in hopes of packaging picks to move back up seems pretty dumb given what happened just last year.

Just pick the guy you like at 3 and move on.

[mef730]

This board went nuts following the Nets regular season, praying for losses and hoping beyond hope we would win the lottery. So many were resigned to the fact that the Celtics would end with pick 5 or 6. So we end up with the third pick and what happens? Half the board and many who were clammering for a pick higher than 5 or 6 now want to trade down in the draft.

I am dumbfounded.

This team does not need to trade down. This team does not need another draft pick in a draft where they have 8 and not enough roster spots to put all those players. It was shown last year that packaging tons of picks to move up doesnt always work and is difficult to do since teams fall in love with certain players. So trading down to acquire another pick in hopes of packaging picks to move back up seems pretty dumb given what happened just last year.

Just pick the guy you like at 3 and move on.

Because getting the 3rd pick equals getting the 4th/5th/6th and, very likely, something good. The total may be of more value to us than the #3 itself.

Whereas getting the 4th/5th/6th pick itself would get us the 4th/5th/6th pick and nothing else.

Mike

[mef730]

What? The teams would just agree to draft for one another and then trade right after making the picks. Boston would draft Bender and Phoenix would draft Murray and then they'd be swapped.

this.

no (decent) GM would make that agreement on either side of that deal where one GM relies on the word of another GM not to screw him.

This happens all the time. Agreements in principal are made based on whom to pick and finalized post draft.

They are not broken as it is understood that if you were to break your word and back out you'd be blackballed out of ever trading again.

Only the GMs word was in play for the Ray Allen/Jeff Green swap for example and Jeff Green was the Sonics choice but the C's made the actual selection with that pick.

So how does this work? Is it like two 12-year olds at their first middle school dance, where they approach each other but neither wants to be the one to ask the other to dance? Does Danny say to PHX, "Well, we're taking Bender, so if you want him, let's talk"? Does PHX approach Danny first, with the understanding that, if they want Bender and the Celtics don't, they just gave the Cs a major bargaining trip (Danny: "Funny, that's who we wanted. You'd better pay up.")?

Seems like somebody is surrendering a lot of information in the deal.

Mike

[86MaxwellSmart]

This board went nuts following the Nets regular season, praying for losses and hoping beyond hope we would win the lottery. So many were resigned to the fact that the Celtics would end with pick 5 or 6. So we end up with the third pick and what happens? Half the board and many who were clammering for a pick higher than 5 or 6 now want to trade down in the draft.

I am dumbfounded.

This team does not need to trade down. This team does not need another draft pick in a draft where they have 8 and not enough roster spots to put all those players. It was shown last year that packaging tons of picks to move up doesnt always work and is difficult to do since teams fall in love with certain players. So trading down to acquire another pick in hopes of packaging picks to move back up seems pretty dumb given what happened just last year.

Just pick the guy you like at 3 and move on.

Pretty much---if the lottery balls had given us Pick #6---We'd be clogged with posts on how it's Impossible to move up for Pick #3