Would you trade #3 for Jusuf Nurkic?

[hwangjini_1]

LB, This proposal is so dumb, and I know you are not dumb, so I can only think you did this to provoke anxiety for all other Celtic fans who have a more reasoned view than you and Pelton on the value of the 3rd pick in this draft.  Nice job.

And absolutely none of that should surprise any of us. It's a time honored Celtics blog tradition by now.

Ive heard some smart people say that Brooklyn will win 50 games this year. Thats all Im saying, and the #3 pick this year is approximately as valuable as pick 45 in a typical draft. Again, this is just what Im hearing from experts. Would be pretty dissapointed if it turns out that way.

LOL that's pretty good

Nailed it

Just to clarify, in case people have trouble reading around here, I had nothing to do with this idea.  Kevin Pelton said Boston should offer #3 for Nurkic, because it's reasonable value.   Direct your diaper-pants letters to ESPN.

And FYI, I never said Brooklyn would win 50 games.  That's nonsense.  I was 100% right in my evaluation of the Nets.  So that point is invalid.  NOt to mention, even if I had been wrong about Brooklyn, which I wasn't, it has jack squat to do with Kevin Pelton saying we should trade #3 for Jusuf Nurkic.  It's like me relaying that Muhammad Ali died and you saying, "I'm not surprised this is coming from LarBrd33... he likes Bismack Biyombo"

this is very much the reason why so many people here have trouble taking you seriously. you refuse to owe up to mistakes (and god knows we all make them), move the goal posts, and deny that which does not match your hoped for outcomes.

you predicted a number of wins for the nets. your prediction missed by a country mile. even before any injuries the nets win rate was almost identical to their final win rate. injuries did not derail the nets season. it was going south from the start.

lb, if you actually would be more honest on all this everyone here would respect your posts even  more. no one would look down on you for being wrong and owning up to it. they are more likely to think less of you for NOT owning up to being wrong.

i hope you rethink how you handle all this. it would help you and everyone here.

[Phantom255x]

I love how this poll is like 93% no and only 7% yes.

Obviously it's a bad trade idea, but that's like the first time I've seen a poll so one-sided lol.

[LarBrd33]

I wouldn't mind Nurkic, but wouldn't trade 3 straight up for him.  Though I would love exploring options where we downgrade the pick and pick up a player in the process, of which Denver makes a lot of sense since they own multiple picks. 

Nurkic, Gallinari, 7

for

Johnson, Olynyk, 3

Something like that makes some sense for both teams.

Considering all factors, injury history, etc...that deal is pretty balanced.  Good one.

That trade doesn't make any sense.  Gallo is valuable by himself.  Amir and oly don't really have much trade value. Based on comments from Stevens (considering 7 guys at #3), it sounds like #3 and #7 are basically interchangeable.  So more or less this trade has us getting nurkic and gallo for free.  Based on pelton's logic we'd need to include #16 and both future Brooklyn picks for this trade to even out.

when you consider injury history and contract size, that trade is much more reasonable then you are acknowledging.

Are you assuming that Kevin Pelton is ignoring injury history and contract size?  My assumption is that he suggested we could trade #3 for Nurkic specifically because of injury history and contract size.  If those weren't a factor, such as the case with Nikola Jokic, Pelton suggests it would take "additional value" on top of the #3 pick to get him.

Or maybe Jokic is better than Nurkic.  Or maybe Pelton is just wrong on value.  Or maybe Gallinari is so injury prone and his contract is so big that Denver just wants to move on.  Or maybe Denver thinks much more highly of Bender than Boston does and thus puts way more value on that 3rd pick.  Or maybe Denver wants cap space so they will waive Johnson.  Or maybe Denver like Johnson and wants the veteran leadership he provides.  Or maybe Olynyk is a better fit with Jokic than Nurkic such that Denver values him.  Or countless other maybes that exist out there that you are ignoring.

I'm not ignoring anything that's out there.  Kevin Pelton says Nurkic, injuries and all, is reasonable value for the #3 pick and that Boston should offer #3 for Nurkic.   So would you trade #3 for Nurkic?  Personally, I'd hope for more than that.  But I don't see Gallo as a "throw-in". 

Obviously, if given a choice of just Nurkic for #3 ... or Nurkic + Gallo, I'd rather have Nurkic + Gallo... though doing such a move would kill our ability to add double-max contracts this Summer since Gallo makes a decent chunk of change.

[Ilikesports17]

LB, This proposal is so dumb, and I know you are not dumb, so I can only think you did this to provoke anxiety for all other Celtic fans who have a more reasoned view than you and Pelton on the value of the 3rd pick in this draft.  Nice job.

And absolutely none of that should surprise any of us. It's a time honored Celtics blog tradition by now.

Ive heard some smart people say that Brooklyn will win 50 games this year. Thats all Im saying, and the #3 pick this year is approximately as valuable as pick 45 in a typical draft. Again, this is just what Im hearing from experts. Would be pretty dissapointed if it turns out that way.

LOL that's pretty good

Nailed it

Just to clarify, in case people have trouble reading around here, I had nothing to do with this idea.  Kevin Pelton said Boston should offer #3 for Nurkic, because it's reasonable value.   Direct your diaper-pants letters to ESPN.

And FYI, I never said Brooklyn would win 50 games.  That's nonsense.  I was 100% right in my evaluation of the Nets.  So that point is invalid.  NOt to mention, even if I had been wrong about Brooklyn, which I wasn't, it has jack squat to do with Kevin Pelton saying we should trade #3 for Jusuf Nurkic.  It's like me relaying that Muhammad Ali died and you saying, "I'm not surprised this is coming from LarBrd33... he likes Bismack Biyombo"

Twas a satire champ. Lighten up. You also were only correct in a weird twisted sense that you stipulated that Brooklyn have no injuries over the course of the season which of course is impossible.

If I predicted that the Celtics would win 60 games this year, barring injuries I also would have been correct because we lost Jae Crowder and Marcus Smart for a few games and cut David Lee.

You thought depth was irrelevant in the NBA. You thought Brooklyn would try to compete this year. You were wrong on both counts.

Also, the injury line is nice, but the Nets never had better than the 4th worst record in the year, so its not like they lost Jarret Jack and all of a sudden sucked. They sucked, lost Jarrett Jack and continued to suck, cut Joe Johnson and continued to suck.

Prior to the Nets season there were about a hundred things that could result in the Nets sucking, and you basically said, assuming none of these happen the nets will be a borderline playoff team.

So sure you were technically right, but realistically you made a fool of yourself.

[LarBrd33]

LB, This proposal is so dumb, and I know you are not dumb, so I can only think you did this to provoke anxiety for all other Celtic fans who have a more reasoned view than you and Pelton on the value of the 3rd pick in this draft.  Nice job.

And absolutely none of that should surprise any of us. It's a time honored Celtics blog tradition by now.

Ive heard some smart people say that Brooklyn will win 50 games this year. Thats all Im saying, and the #3 pick this year is approximately as valuable as pick 45 in a typical draft. Again, this is just what Im hearing from experts. Would be pretty dissapointed if it turns out that way.

LOL that's pretty good

Nailed it

Just to clarify, in case people have trouble reading around here, I had nothing to do with this idea.  Kevin Pelton said Boston should offer #3 for Nurkic, because it's reasonable value.   Direct your diaper-pants letters to ESPN.

And FYI, I never said Brooklyn would win 50 games.  That's nonsense.  I was 100% right in my evaluation of the Nets.  So that point is invalid.  NOt to mention, even if I had been wrong about Brooklyn, which I wasn't, it has jack squat to do with Kevin Pelton saying we should trade #3 for Jusuf Nurkic.  It's like me relaying that Muhammad Ali died and you saying, "I'm not surprised this is coming from LarBrd33... he likes Bismack Biyombo"

Twas a satire champ. Lighten up. You also were only correct in a weird twisted sense that you stipulated that Brooklyn have no injuries over the course of the season which of course is impossible.

If I predicted that the Celtics would win 60 games this year, barring injuries I also would have been correct because we lost Jae Crowder and Marcus Smart for a few games and cut David Lee.

You thought depth was irrelevant in the NBA. You thought Brooklyn would try to compete this year. You were wrong on both counts.

I never thought depth was irrelevant.  Hence the stipulation.  Brooklyn did try to compete this year.  They failed, in-part, because they had injuries.  I was right on both counts.

[mahcus smaht]

I wouldn't mind Nurkic, but wouldn't trade 3 straight up for him.  Though I would love exploring options where we downgrade the pick and pick up a player in the process, of which Denver makes a lot of sense since they own multiple picks. 

Nurkic, Gallinari, 7

for

Johnson, Olynyk, 3

Something like that makes some sense for both teams.

Considering all factors, injury history, etc...that deal is pretty balanced.  Good one.

That trade doesn't make any sense.  Gallo is valuable by himself.  Amir and oly don't really have much trade value. Based on comments from Stevens (considering 7 guys at #3), it sounds like #3 and #7 are basically interchangeable.  So more or less this trade has us getting nurkic and gallo for free.  Based on pelton's logic we'd need to include #16 and both future Brooklyn picks for this trade to even out.

when you consider injury history and contract size, that trade is much more reasonable then you are acknowledging.

Are you assuming that Kevin Pelton is ignoring injury history and contract size?  My assumption is that he suggested we could trade #3 for Nurkic specifically because of injury history and contract size.  If those weren't a factor, such as the case with Nikola Jokic, Pelton suggests it would take "additional value" on top of the #3 pick to get him.

Or maybe Jokic is better than Nurkic.  Or maybe Pelton is just wrong on value.  Or maybe Gallinari is so injury prone and his contract is so big that Denver just wants to move on.  Or maybe Denver thinks much more highly of Bender than Boston does and thus puts way more value on that 3rd pick.  Or maybe Denver wants cap space so they will waive Johnson.  Or maybe Denver like Johnson and wants the veteran leadership he provides.  Or maybe Olynyk is a better fit with Jokic than Nurkic such that Denver values him.  Or countless other maybes that exist out there that you are ignoring.

I'm not ignoring anything that's out there.  Kevin Pelton says Nurkic, injuries and all, is reasonable value for the #3 pick and that Boston should offer #3 for Nurkic.   So would you trade #3 for Nurkic?  Personally, I'd hope for more than that.  But I don't see Gallo as a "throw-in". 

Obviously, if given a choice of just Nurkic for #3 ... or Nurkic + Gallo, I'd rather have Nurkic + Gallo... though doing such a move would kill our ability to add double-max contracts this Summer since Gallo makes a decent chunk of change.

I think Pelton's value thing is weird and am not a huge fan. That said, Im also not a huge fan of pick #3.

I guess it all comes down to how you feel about KD. If Ainge thinks he even has a small chance at KD you gotta maintain that flexibility (Nurkic and Gallo arent bringing KD to Boston).

Id be interested in Gallo + 7 for 3 because a healthy (so pretty rare) Gallo would be nice here and then at 7 I am much more willing to take a guy who projects as more of a roleplayer like Hield or Murray Im also more willing to take a risk on a Bender or Brown. Not sure why Denver trades up at all tho.

[LarBrd33]

I wouldn't mind Nurkic, but wouldn't trade 3 straight up for him.  Though I would love exploring options where we downgrade the pick and pick up a player in the process, of which Denver makes a lot of sense since they own multiple picks. 

Nurkic, Gallinari, 7

for

Johnson, Olynyk, 3

Something like that makes some sense for both teams.

Considering all factors, injury history, etc...that deal is pretty balanced.  Good one.

That trade doesn't make any sense.  Gallo is valuable by himself.  Amir and oly don't really have much trade value. Based on comments from Stevens (considering 7 guys at #3), it sounds like #3 and #7 are basically interchangeable.  So more or less this trade has us getting nurkic and gallo for free.  Based on pelton's logic we'd need to include #16 and both future Brooklyn picks for this trade to even out.

when you consider injury history and contract size, that trade is much more reasonable then you are acknowledging.

Are you assuming that Kevin Pelton is ignoring injury history and contract size?  My assumption is that he suggested we could trade #3 for Nurkic specifically because of injury history and contract size.  If those weren't a factor, such as the case with Nikola Jokic, Pelton suggests it would take "additional value" on top of the #3 pick to get him.

Or maybe Jokic is better than Nurkic.  Or maybe Pelton is just wrong on value.  Or maybe Gallinari is so injury prone and his contract is so big that Denver just wants to move on.  Or maybe Denver thinks much more highly of Bender than Boston does and thus puts way more value on that 3rd pick.  Or maybe Denver wants cap space so they will waive Johnson.  Or maybe Denver like Johnson and wants the veteran leadership he provides.  Or maybe Olynyk is a better fit with Jokic than Nurkic such that Denver values him.  Or countless other maybes that exist out there that you are ignoring.

I'm not ignoring anything that's out there.  Kevin Pelton says Nurkic, injuries and all, is reasonable value for the #3 pick and that Boston should offer #3 for Nurkic.   So would you trade #3 for Nurkic?  Personally, I'd hope for more than that.  But I don't see Gallo as a "throw-in". 

Obviously, if given a choice of just Nurkic for #3 ... or Nurkic + Gallo, I'd rather have Nurkic + Gallo... though doing such a move would kill our ability to add double-max contracts this Summer since Gallo makes a decent chunk of change.

I think Pelton's value thing is weird and am not a huge fan. That said, Im also not a huge fan of pick #3.

I guess it all comes down to how you feel about KD. If Ainge thinks he even has a small chance at KD you gotta maintain that flexibility (Nurkic and Gallo arent bringing KD to Boston).

Id be interested in Gallo + 7 for 3 because a healthy (so pretty rare) Gallo would be nice here and then at 7 I am much more willing to take a guy who projects as more of a roleplayer like Hield or Murray Im also more willing to take a risk on a Bender or Brown. Not sure why Denver trades up at all tho.

I had that idea early last month:  http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=84555.0

Who says no?

Boston trades #3, Amir's 12 mil unguaranteed contract, Jerebko's 5 mil unguaranteed contract for Gallo and #7.

Can you think of an alternative that makes more sense?  I'm not a huge fan of Gallo, honestly.  He missed the last 23 games of the season with injury.  But I know a lot of people think he can fill the scoring void.  I know a lot of people think picks 3-8 are about even.  And I know a lot of people think Durant is all but off the table.    By bringing in Gallo, you'd still have max cap space to sign someone like Horford and you'd be able to add an interesting rookie at #7 - or trade that pick too.

Would we need to also include #16?   #3 + #16 + #23 + #31 + #35 for Gallo, #7 and #15?

But this was before guys like Kevin Pelton and Chad Ford threw ice on the party and suggested the #3 pick "in a down draft" is worth Jusuf Nurkic.  This was also before Brad Stevens came out and said Boston can't decide between 7 different prospects at #3... so #3 and #7 might be more or less even.  So if #3 and #7 are basically interchangeable talent (one might be Murray, the other might be Hield), I can't see Denver just giving away Gallo for nothing.

[Ilikesports17]

LB, This proposal is so dumb, and I know you are not dumb, so I can only think you did this to provoke anxiety for all other Celtic fans who have a more reasoned view than you and Pelton on the value of the 3rd pick in this draft.  Nice job.

And absolutely none of that should surprise any of us. It's a time honored Celtics blog tradition by now.

Ive heard some smart people say that Brooklyn will win 50 games this year. Thats all Im saying, and the #3 pick this year is approximately as valuable as pick 45 in a typical draft. Again, this is just what Im hearing from experts. Would be pretty dissapointed if it turns out that way.

LOL that's pretty good

Nailed it

Just to clarify, in case people have trouble reading around here, I had nothing to do with this idea.  Kevin Pelton said Boston should offer #3 for Nurkic, because it's reasonable value.   Direct your diaper-pants letters to ESPN.

And FYI, I never said Brooklyn would win 50 games.  That's nonsense.  I was 100% right in my evaluation of the Nets.  So that point is invalid.  NOt to mention, even if I had been wrong about Brooklyn, which I wasn't, it has jack squat to do with Kevin Pelton saying we should trade #3 for Jusuf Nurkic.  It's like me relaying that Muhammad Ali died and you saying, "I'm not surprised this is coming from LarBrd33... he likes Bismack Biyombo"

Twas a satire champ. Lighten up. You also were only correct in a weird twisted sense that you stipulated that Brooklyn have no injuries over the course of the season which of course is impossible.

If I predicted that the Celtics would win 60 games this year, barring injuries I also would have been correct because we lost Jae Crowder and Marcus Smart for a few games and cut David Lee.

You thought depth was irrelevant in the NBA. You thought Brooklyn would try to compete this year. You were wrong on both counts.

I never thought depth was irrelevant.  Hence the stipulation.  Brooklyn did try to compete this year.  They failed, in-part, because they had injuries.  I was right on both counts.

Brooklyn bought out/cut Joe Johnson and Deron Williams then sat Brook Lopez for the last 10 games of the season, all this after using a first rounder on a player they knew would not play for half the season.

Point is you made the stipulation because that way you knew if the Nets sucked (like Pelton and Ford thought they would, but I understand their opinions are only relevant when they can be used to imply bad news for boston) you would probably be able to stand here like a 5 year old and proclaim that you werent wrong.

[LarBrd33]

LB, This proposal is so dumb, and I know you are not dumb, so I can only think you did this to provoke anxiety for all other Celtic fans who have a more reasoned view than you and Pelton on the value of the 3rd pick in this draft.  Nice job.

And absolutely none of that should surprise any of us. It's a time honored Celtics blog tradition by now.

Ive heard some smart people say that Brooklyn will win 50 games this year. Thats all Im saying, and the #3 pick this year is approximately as valuable as pick 45 in a typical draft. Again, this is just what Im hearing from experts. Would be pretty dissapointed if it turns out that way.

LOL that's pretty good

Nailed it

Just to clarify, in case people have trouble reading around here, I had nothing to do with this idea.  Kevin Pelton said Boston should offer #3 for Nurkic, because it's reasonable value.   Direct your diaper-pants letters to ESPN.

And FYI, I never said Brooklyn would win 50 games.  That's nonsense.  I was 100% right in my evaluation of the Nets.  So that point is invalid.  NOt to mention, even if I had been wrong about Brooklyn, which I wasn't, it has jack squat to do with Kevin Pelton saying we should trade #3 for Jusuf Nurkic.  It's like me relaying that Muhammad Ali died and you saying, "I'm not surprised this is coming from LarBrd33... he likes Bismack Biyombo"

Twas a satire champ. Lighten up. You also were only correct in a weird twisted sense that you stipulated that Brooklyn have no injuries over the course of the season which of course is impossible.

If I predicted that the Celtics would win 60 games this year, barring injuries I also would have been correct because we lost Jae Crowder and Marcus Smart for a few games and cut David Lee.

You thought depth was irrelevant in the NBA. You thought Brooklyn would try to compete this year. You were wrong on both counts.

I never thought depth was irrelevant.  Hence the stipulation.  Brooklyn did try to compete this year.  They failed, in-part, because they had injuries.  I was right on both counts.

Brooklyn bought out/cut Joe Johnson and Deron Williams then sat Brook Lopez for the last 10 games of the season, all this after using a first rounder on a player they knew would not play for half the season.

Point is you made the stipulation because that way you knew if the Nets sucked (like Pelton and Ford thought they would, but I understand their opinions are only relevant when they can be used to imply bad news for boston) you would probably be able to stand here like a 5 year old and proclaim that you werent wrong.

I fully anticipated Brooklyn to be a bottom 5 team.  I'm thrilled it happened.  Now we have the #3 pick.  I hope guys like Pelton and Ford, who you say also correctly predicted Brooklyn would stink, are wrong this time when they claim this is a "down draft" and the #3 pick could either be used as a throw-in to upgrade Thomas to Butler - or be used to trade for a prospect on Jusuf Nurkic's level.

[Eddie20]

I love how this poll is like 93% no and only 7% yes.

Obviously it's a bad trade idea, but that's like the first time I've seen a poll so one-sided lol.

You must have not been around when the same guy had a poll last year wanting to trade the 16th pick (Rozier) for Stauskas.

He lives such an apparently pathetic life that he feels the constant need to irritate C's fans by speaking highly of the Sixers, but disparaging our team. I almost feel sorry for the guy.  It's pretty sad what he finds compelling to do with his spare time.

[PickNRoll]

Pelton is crazy.  I liked Nurkic coming out of the draft, but Nurk for 3 isn't even close.

It seems like there's something going on with him mentally.  Mentioned this before, but nearly every time I watched the nuggs, Nurk was coming down with some sort of oddball injury.  Like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ca_ZfpkW7Lg

Apparently he was hit in the back of the head and had to come out of the game.  But no contact is apparent on replay.  He's very animated about getting hurt... as in he gets hit on the wrist and has to shake it off for 10 minutes.  I saw him pull himself out of games 3 or 4 different times for what I would call incidental contact.  Then he's missing games for "shortness of breath", undisclosed illnesses.  Just seems weird.  He piled up a lot of DNP's.  This in addition to actual knee surgery.  Don't like his body language at all.

[LarBrd33]

I love how this poll is like 93% no and only 7% yes.

Obviously it's a bad trade idea, but that's like the first time I've seen a poll so one-sided lol.

You must have not been around when the same guy had a poll last year wanting to trade the 16th pick (Rozier) for Stauskas.

He lives such an apparently pathetic life that he feels the constant need to irritate C's fans

I think they are interesting discussions worth talking about.  You assume I support every idea I relay.  I don't.  I wasn't even sure if I'd move #16 for Stauskas, for instance, but it was a discussion worth having.  Also, because it seems Stauskas is on track to have a better career than Rozier.

Also, I think that's extremely insulting to suggest Kevin Pelton has a "pathetic life" just because he thinks Boston should trade #3 for Nurkic.  Some people really like Nurkic.  I'd venture to guess Kevin Pelton has a pretty nice life, actually.  Dude must make bank from all his various media jobs and advanced stat projects.  Dude invented VORP, for instance.

[LarBrd33]

I love how this poll is like 93% no and only 7% yes.

Obviously it's a bad trade idea, but that's like the first time I've seen a poll so one-sided lol.

I think we can all acknowledge that we hope Boston gets better value than Nurkic for the #3 pick... such as Jahlil Okafor or something... but let's not discount the possibility that Pelton is just super high on Nurkic.  Nurkic did put up per-36 numbers of: 17.3 points, 11.5 rebounds, 2.9 blocks, 1.6 steals this season...  He's also still a year younger than Buddy Hield and could conceivably fill our long-term need for a defensive big.

We could do much worse. 

[LarBrd33]

I wouldn't mind Nurkic, but wouldn't trade 3 straight up for him.  Though I would love exploring options where we downgrade the pick and pick up a player in the process, of which Denver makes a lot of sense since they own multiple picks. 

Nurkic, Gallinari, 7

for

Johnson, Olynyk, 3

Something like that makes some sense for both teams.

Considering all factors, injury history, etc...that deal is pretty balanced.  Good one.

That trade doesn't make any sense.  Gallo is valuable by himself.  Amir and oly don't really have much trade value. Based on comments from Stevens (considering 7 guys at #3), it sounds like #3 and #7 are basically interchangeable.  So more or less this trade has us getting nurkic and gallo for free.  Based on pelton's logic we'd need to include #16 and both future Brooklyn picks for this trade to even out.

when you consider injury history and contract size, that trade is much more reasonable then you are acknowledging.

Are you assuming that Kevin Pelton is ignoring injury history and contract size?  My assumption is that he suggested we could trade #3 for Nurkic specifically because of injury history and contract size.  If those weren't a factor, such as the case with Nikola Jokic, Pelton suggests it would take "additional value" on top of the #3 pick to get him.

Or maybe Jokic is better than Nurkic.  Or maybe Pelton is just wrong on value.  Or maybe Gallinari is so injury prone and his contract is so big that Denver just wants to move on.  Or maybe Denver thinks much more highly of Bender than Boston does and thus puts way more value on that 3rd pick.  Or maybe Denver wants cap space so they will waive Johnson.  Or maybe Denver like Johnson and wants the veteran leadership he provides.  Or maybe Olynyk is a better fit with Jokic than Nurkic such that Denver values him.  Or countless other maybes that exist out there that you are ignoring.

I'm not ignoring anything that's out there.  Kevin Pelton says Nurkic, injuries and all, is reasonable value for the #3 pick and that Boston should offer #3 for Nurkic.   So would you trade #3 for Nurkic?  Personally, I'd hope for more than that.  But I don't see Gallo as a "throw-in". 

Obviously, if given a choice of just Nurkic for #3 ... or Nurkic + Gallo, I'd rather have Nurkic + Gallo... though doing such a move would kill our ability to add double-max contracts this Summer since Gallo makes a decent chunk of change.

I think Pelton's value thing is weird and am not a huge fan. That said, Im also not a huge fan of pick #3.

I guess it all comes down to how you feel about KD. If Ainge thinks he even has a small chance at KD you gotta maintain that flexibility (Nurkic and Gallo arent bringing KD to Boston).

Id be interested in Gallo + 7 for 3 because a healthy (so pretty rare) Gallo would be nice here and then at 7 I am much more willing to take a guy who projects as more of a roleplayer like Hield or Murray Im also more willing to take a risk on a Bender or Brown. Not sure why Denver trades up at all tho.

I had that idea early last month:  http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=84555.0

Who says no?

Boston trades #3, Amir's 12 mil unguaranteed contract, Jerebko's 5 mil unguaranteed contract for Gallo and #7.

Can you think of an alternative that makes more sense?  I'm not a huge fan of Gallo, honestly.  He missed the last 23 games of the season with injury.  But I know a lot of people think he can fill the scoring void.  I know a lot of people think picks 3-8 are about even.  And I know a lot of people think Durant is all but off the table.    By bringing in Gallo, you'd still have max cap space to sign someone like Horford and you'd be able to add an interesting rookie at #7 - or trade that pick too.

Would we need to also include #16?   #3 + #16 + #23 + #31 + #35 for Gallo, #7 and #15?

But this was before guys like Kevin Pelton and Chad Ford threw ice on the party and suggested the #3 pick "in a down draft" is worth Jusuf Nurkic.  This was also before Brad Stevens came out and said Boston can't decide between 7 different prospects at #3... so #3 and #7 might be more or less even.  So if #3 and #7 are basically interchangeable talent (one might be Murray, the other might be Hield), I can't see Denver just giving away Gallo for nothing.

FYI, found this article from a couple days ago from the Denver side.  They suggested something similar:  http://milehighsports.com/sending-danilo-gallinari-to-boston-in-a-deal-to-acquire-the-no-3-pick-is-feasible-and-logical/

Their suggestion...

Nuggets send:  Gallo, Gary Harris, #7
Boston sends:  Amir, Marcus Smart, #3

With the Celtics interest in Gallinari being high for a sustained amount of time, a trade involving Gallinari and the Celtics’ third pick in the draft has to at least be discussed. With both teams having tons of different types of assets, it leaves many different ways for a deal to get completed before draft day.
Read more at http://milehighsports.com/sending-danilo-gallinari-to-boston-in-a-deal-to-acquire-the-no-3-pick-is-feasible-and-logical/#tggJUEYUe687iyzX.99

Had to laugh at the inclusion of Smart.  Here's what they had to say about Smart:

Getting Smart in exchange for Harris would be huge for the Nuggets. Denver is in need of a backup point guard with D.J. Augustin being a free agent and Jameer Nelson looking for extended minutes elsewhere. Having a defensive bulldog as your backup point guard will help the Nuggets second unit immensely.

They suggest that the addition of Gary Harris would make up for Boston's loss of Smart:

Harris is no slouch when it comes to versatility. Hailing from Michigan State, Harris brings with him a relentless defensive attitude that Brad Stevens ingrains in all of his players. Having Harris able to cover either guard off the bench or from the starting lineup would make up for the loss of Marcus Smart in the deal (and if Evan Turner leaves in free agency). Harris’s ability to hit corner threes and make great arbitrary cuts adds another guy with a high basketball IQ to an already brilliant team.

[celticsclay]

LB, This proposal is so dumb, and I know you are not dumb, so I can only think you did this to provoke anxiety for all other Celtic fans who have a more reasoned view than you and Pelton on the value of the 3rd pick in this draft.  Nice job.

And absolutely none of that should surprise any of us. It's a time honored Celtics blog tradition by now.

Ive heard some smart people say that Brooklyn will win 50 games this year. Thats all Im saying, and the #3 pick this year is approximately as valuable as pick 45 in a typical draft. Again, this is just what Im hearing from experts. Would be pretty dissapointed if it turns out that way.

LOL that's pretty good

Nailed it

Just to clarify, in case people have trouble reading around here, I had nothing to do with this idea.  Kevin Pelton said Boston should offer #3 for Nurkic, because it's reasonable value.   Direct your diaper-pants letters to ESPN.

And FYI, I never said Brooklyn would win 50 games.  That's nonsense.  I was 100% right in my evaluation of the Nets.  So that point is invalid.  NOt to mention, even if I had been wrong about Brooklyn, which I wasn't, it has jack squat to do with Kevin Pelton saying we should trade #3 for Jusuf Nurkic.  It's like me relaying that Muhammad Ali died and you saying, "I'm not surprised this is coming from LarBrd33... he likes Bismack Biyombo"

Twas a satire champ. Lighten up. You also were only correct in a weird twisted sense that you stipulated that Brooklyn have no injuries over the course of the season which of course is impossible.

If I predicted that the Celtics would win 60 games this year, barring injuries I also would have been correct because we lost Jae Crowder and Marcus Smart for a few games and cut David Lee.

You thought depth was irrelevant in the NBA. You thought Brooklyn would try to compete this year. You were wrong on both counts.

I never thought depth was irrelevant.  Hence the stipulation.  Brooklyn did try to compete this year.  They failed, in-part, because they had injuries.  I was right on both counts.