No One (Except Philly) Wants to Trade With Danny

[sawick48]

I am surprised by the lack of talk about Cousins. Don't we really have the assets to convince the Kings to trade him? I consider him to be one step above Kevin Love and in the same level of 2 way impact of Butler. However, it seems to be easier substitute a guard in this league than a Center.

Is this a serious point?  We didn't have the assets for Justice Winslow and now we clearly have enough for Boogie?  Cmon...

Can we just accept what the facts are: that nobody wants our "treasure chest of assets."  They just don't have value.  At least not enough to pry an established superstar.  Plain and simple.  This isn't 2008 anymore.  Danny's going to have to get creative.

Comparing the #3 pick this year to the poo-poo platter of mid-round firsts that we offered for Winslow last year is fallacious and illogical.

Except for the fact that there is no clear cut answer for anyone at #3, in what's universally regarded as a deep, yet not star studded draft.  Add to that the fact that last year, when DA included this Brooklyn pick into that proposal, it was widely assumed it would turn into at worst a top 5 pick anyway, and there's not much illogical about it.

Or if you don't like that response, how about the fact that GMs have already turned down our offers of #3 for players that would be universally regarded league wide as less valuable than Boogie?  Does that have fallacy behind it as well? 

So again I'll say, we couldn't swap up to #9 last year with a package THAT INCLUDED THIS PICK.  Thus, LOGICALLY SPEAKING, no, we have no shot at Boogie.

I'd love to be wrong though. 

[Ilikesports17]

I am surprised by the lack of talk about Cousins. Don't we really have the assets to convince the Kings to trade him? I consider him to be one step above Kevin Love and in the same level of 2 way impact of Butler. However, it seems to be easier substitute a guard in this league than a Center.

Is this a serious point?  We didn't have the assets for Justice Winslow and now we clearly have enough for Boogie?  Cmon...

Can we just accept what the facts are: that nobody wants our "treasure chest of assets."  They just don't have value.  At least not enough to pry an established superstar.  Plain and simple.  This isn't 2008 anymore.  Danny's going to have to get creative.

Comparing the #3 pick this year to the poo-poo platter of mid-round firsts that we offered for Winslow last year is fallacious and illogical.

Except for the fact that there is no clear cut answer for anyone at #3, in what's universally regarded as a deep, yet not star studded draft.  Add to that the fact that last year, when DA included this Brooklyn pick into that proposal, it was widely assumed it would turn into at worst a top 5 pick anyway, and there's not much illogical about it.

Or if you don't like that response, how about the fact that GMs have already turned down our offers of #3 for players that would be universally regarded league wide as less valuable than Boogie?  Does that have fallacy behind it as well? 

So again I'll say, we couldn't swap up to #9 last year with a package THAT INCLUDED THIS PICK.  Thus, LOGICALLY SPEAKING, no, we have no shot at Boogie.

I'd love to be wrong though.

your comments appear willfully ignorant.

[jpotter33]

I am surprised by the lack of talk about Cousins. Don't we really have the assets to convince the Kings to trade him? I consider him to be one step above Kevin Love and in the same level of 2 way impact of Butler. However, it seems to be easier substitute a guard in this league than a Center.

Is this a serious point?  We didn't have the assets for Justice Winslow and now we clearly have enough for Boogie?  Cmon...

Can we just accept what the facts are: that nobody wants our "treasure chest of assets."  They just don't have value.  At least not enough to pry an established superstar.  Plain and simple.  This isn't 2008 anymore.  Danny's going to have to get creative.

Comparing the #3 pick this year to the poo-poo platter of mid-round firsts that we offered for Winslow last year is fallacious and illogical.

Except for the fact that there is no clear cut answer for anyone at #3, in what's universally regarded as a deep, yet not star studded draft.  Add to that the fact that last year, when DA included this Brooklyn pick into that proposal, it was widely assumed it would turn into at worst a top 5 pick anyway, and there's not much illogical about it.

Or if you don't like that response, how about the fact that GMs have already turned down our offers of #3 for players that would be universally regarded league wide as less valuable than Boogie?  Does that have fallacy behind it as well? 

So again I'll say, we couldn't swap up to #9 last year with a package THAT INCLUDED THIS PICK.  Thus, LOGICALLY SPEAKING, no, we have no shot at Boogie.

I'd love to be wrong though.

Except pretty much nobody could've expected the Nets were going to land the number three pick this year. Many thought they'd miss the playoffs and be mid-lottery, but not number 3. Second, there's absolutely no proof that Danny offered the Brooklyn pick anyways, because that goes way against his character of almost never overpaying for a prospect, to a fault.

So, yes, I do think this is different. Even though there's a gap between two and three, this pick is much, much, much more valuable than anything we had last year. Granted, no, I don't think we can trade for Boogie, but that's because they're not making him available not because we don't have enough assets.

EDIT: We're also still two days away from the draft, and many times people's stances soften the closer they get to the draft when they crunch time comes. I still think Butler gets traded, even if it's to Minny rather than us. So the fact that GMs are rebuffing offers now is actually expected, because most deals aren't really agreed to until draft night anyways.

[mahcus smaht]

I am surprised by the lack of talk about Cousins. Don't we really have the assets to convince the Kings to trade him? I consider him to be one step above Kevin Love and in the same level of 2 way impact of Butler. However, it seems to be easier substitute a guard in this league than a Center.

Is this a serious point?  We didn't have the assets for Justice Winslow and now we clearly have enough for Boogie?  Cmon...

Can we just accept what the facts are: that nobody wants our "treasure chest of assets."  They just don't have value.  At least not enough to pry an established superstar.  Plain and simple.  This isn't 2008 anymore.  Danny's going to have to get creative.

Comparing the #3 pick this year to the poo-poo platter of mid-round firsts that we offered for Winslow last year is fallacious and illogical.

Except for the fact that there is no clear cut answer for anyone at #3, in what's universally regarded as a deep, yet not star studded draft.  Add to that the fact that last year, when DA included this Brooklyn pick into that proposal, it was widely assumed it would turn into at worst a top 5 pick anyway, and there's not much illogical about it.

Or if you don't like that response, how about the fact that GMs have already turned down our offers of #3 for players that would be universally regarded league wide as less valuable than Boogie?  Does that have fallacy behind it as well? 

So again I'll say, we couldn't swap up to #9 last year with a package THAT INCLUDED THIS PICK.  Thus, LOGICALLY SPEAKING, no, we have no shot at Boogie.

I'd love to be wrong though.

your comments appear willfully ignorant.

Nets pick never confirmed to be offered. Jae Crowder and Avery Bradley have both seen their value skyrocket and Nets '17 swap is way more valuable now based on the nets current state, the quality of the '17 draft (was less apparent a year ago) and the nearness of the pick.

[steve]

Why wouldn't danny just offer a godfather package right now and not use the next two days to drum up interest from every team, thus creating a bidding war for 3? (sarcasm)

[alldaboston]

A little off topic. I was out of the country when the Pierce deal went down, and so the only way I found out about it was when I logged onto NBA.com and ESPN and the likes, when I had a little free time a few days after the draft had happened. My question is, when did we start hearing reports about the rumored deal? Was it on draft night, or was it maybe the day before, or when?

The entire week leading up to the draft was drama with Doc and KG heading to the Clippers for picks and DeAndre.  It wasn't really until the day before the draft that there were murmurs about a potential deal with the Nets for both guys.

Yep , the tumors leading up to the draft were KG and Doc for DeAndre and Bledsoe I believe, and the Nets deal showed up out of nowhere late in the afternoon on draft day I think.

Ah I see. So there's still hope that we could see a new deal that we hadn't heard of before.

Thanks guys!

[sawick48]

the rose colored glasses around these parts never cease to amaze me. 

Ok.  we'll see. as always. 

But it's been 2 years of me fighting uphill battles around here trying to bring rationality and reality to these boards, and sadly, I've been right more often than not in the end.  The idea people didn't expect the Nets to be awful this season at this point last year though is just incorrect.  It was generally assumed they'd be one of the worst in the league.  I'll agree it wasn't a lock they'd be conveying a top 3 pick, but that's fine.

I'll just be over here being willfully, ignorantly correct about the majority of my predictions as always. 

[jpotter33]

the rose colored glasses around these parts never cease to amaze me. 

Ok.  we'll see. as always. 

But it's been 2 years of me fighting uphill battles around here trying to bring rationality and reality to these boards, and sadly, I've been right more often than not in the end.  The idea people didn't expect the Nets to be awful this season at this point last year though is just incorrect.  It was generally assumed they'd be one of the worst in the league.  I'll agree it wasn't a lock they'd be conveying a top 3 pick, but that's fine.

I'll just be over here being willfully, ignorantly correct about the majority of my predictions as always.

[loco_91]

Of course teams are going to rebuff his offers until draft night. Get him to add an extra pick to the offer. I'm sure that one of these guys will ultimately be available, it's just a question of whether Ainge thinks it's worth it or not.

Encouraged to hear that Philly is willing to trade Noel. I'd be pleased with a trade of #3 + a couple 2nds for Noel + Saric.

[Ilikesports17]

I am surprised by the lack of talk about Cousins. Don't we really have the assets to convince the Kings to trade him? I consider him to be one step above Kevin Love and in the same level of 2 way impact of Butler. However, it seems to be easier substitute a guard in this league than a Center.

Is this a serious point?  We didn't have the assets for Justice Winslow and now we clearly have enough for Boogie?  Cmon...

Can we just accept what the facts are: that nobody wants our "treasure chest of assets."  They just don't have value.  At least not enough to pry an established superstar.  Plain and simple.  This isn't 2008 anymore.  Danny's going to have to get creative.

Comparing the #3 pick this year to the poo-poo platter of mid-round firsts that we offered for Winslow last year is fallacious and illogical.

Except for the fact that there is no clear cut answer for anyone at #3, in what's universally regarded as a deep, yet not star studded draft.  Add to that the fact that last year, when DA included this Brooklyn pick into that proposal, it was widely assumed it would turn into at worst a top 5 pick anyway, and there's not much illogical about it.

Or if you don't like that response, how about the fact that GMs have already turned down our offers of #3 for players that would be universally regarded league wide as less valuable than Boogie?  Does that have fallacy behind it as well? 

So again I'll say, we couldn't swap up to #9 last year with a package THAT INCLUDED THIS PICK.  Thus, LOGICALLY SPEAKING, no, we have no shot at Boogie.

I'd love to be wrong though.

your comments appear willfully ignorant.

allow me to expand.

the rumored ainge package was a package of 6 picks including 4 first in this and future drafts. It has never been confirmed that that included either the '17 swap or the 16 first. Theres no reason it couldnt have been 16,28,Minny '16 first (protected), Dallas '16 first, and some second round pick.

Now he ignorance angle is to assume that Ainge would just pick up that package which lets just say for your sake contained the '16 Nets pick and point it at the Kings. Well the winslow package was not reported to include Olynyk. hes not very valuable, but he is probably along the lines of one of those eh firsts Danny probably offered. It wasnt reported to include Marcus Smart. Smarts no stud either, but dont tell me he doesnt have value. At the time Crowder was an FA. Now he is a 2-way solid starting SF with tremendous intangibles and one of the best contracts in the league. Last year AB was a nice player on a nice contract, but he wasnt quite the elite defender he was coming into the league. Also, the contract explosion hadnt really happened yet, so his contract wasnt quite as lauded. Now AB is first team all-defense and  contract project to explode even more. IT isnt on the table but his value has skyrocketed.

To suggest that we cannot put together a competitive package for Cousins is one thing to point at a bundle of undefined picks that could get us Justice Winslow last year as cold hard evidence that we cannot enter the boogie sweepstakes is willfullly ignorant.

Do I think we have the assets to get Cousins? yes.
Do I think Danny AInge will be willing to part with close to enough assets to get Cousins? no.

[byennie]

Let me get this straight. A 48 win team with no bad contracts and the biggest stash of draft picks in the league, cannot possibly create a package good enough to land the star of a 33 win team, who openly clashes with coaches and teammates.

Right.

It's extremely hard to get deals for superstars done for various reasons, but we do not lack the assets to acquire *just* Cousins.

How about the #3 plus 6 more 1st rounders (#16, #23, BKN17, BKN18, BOS19, MEM19), Smart and Bradley? Throw in #31 and Crowder? KO or Rozier or Hunter or Mickey if they like any of them?

Yeah, I don't think so.

[LatterDayCelticsfan]

Perhaps the concern is that when you do a deal with Danny you end up looking like a fool. Look at Phoenix, Dallas, Brooklyn and to a small extent Minnesota, and OKC/Seattle. All lost badly dealing with trader Danny.

[tenn_smoothie]

PLEASE, No Love - he has shown himself to be a finesse guy who disappears in the big games.

No Cousins, either - complete head-case who would ruin our great chemistry.

No Horford - great guy, very good player but too old.

No Russell from the Lakers - also bad for chemistry and we already have a two point guards.

Is Noel healthy enough ? Is Okafor mature enough ?

[LarBrd33]

If the rumors are true, Philly is willing to give up Okafor or Noel for #3.

I expect to see us trade #3 for Okafor.  Only hold-up is that we'd prefer to move the pick for an established star or a solid established shooter like Middleton.  That, and we need to first see if Simmons or Ingram falls. 

Otherwise, get hyped.



Legit possibility.

[tarheelsxxiii]

If the rumors are true, Philly is willing to give up Okafor or Noel for #3.

I expect to see us trade #3 for Okafor.  Only hold-up is that we'd prefer to move the pick for an established star or a solid established shooter like Middleton.  That, and we need to first see if Simmons or Ingram falls. 

Otherwise, get hyped.



Legit possibility.

Barring no other substantial changes, how much better do you think Okafor makes us next year?