Tradeable Asset Hierarchy (Player A > Pick A > Pick B > Player B > Pick C > etc)

[Ilikesports17]

BRK '17 > Brown > BRK '18 > Smart > Thomas > Crowder > Bradley > MEM 1st > Olynyk > Rozier > Mickey > Yabusele > LAC 1st* > Johnson > Jerebko > Zizic > Jackson > Bentil > Hunter > Nader > Young

I agree with this list almost completely. I bumped up Crowder and Yab. I boldly put Brown over Bkn '17 because of his strong SL performance and multiple sources of uncertainty around the Nets pick. I also divided into three tiers--core assets, expendable assets, borderline assets.

Brown, Bkn '17, Crowder, Bkn '18, Smart, Thomas, [gap] Bradley, Yabusele, Memphis '19, Rozier, Olynyk, [gap] LAC 1st, Johnson, Zizic, Bos '18, Hunter, Nader, Jerebko, Bentil, Jackson, Young.

I might swap Bradley and Smart. Id also swap Brown and '17.

[Dino Pitino]

Clarification: The vast majority of teams in the league might prefer the '17 Nets 1st in a trade. It's more fungible (that's the right word?) and a team would have to value Brown the same way we do, which most don't. But to us, he's exactly what having a #3 pick is supposed to produce. The hierarchy as I see it should be based on a 50/50 or so split between market value and the value that our own front office puts. I get the sense that the Celtics would be very pleased with the '17 Nets pick if they came away with a Jaylen Brown again. So, therefore, why should they themselves value it more than Brown, right?

[oldtype]

Why is the clippers pick so much more important to LA. Isn't it protected?

Stepian rule. Frees them up to trade it and adjacent years' picks. Unhamstrings them.

Having thought about this a bit: what if Ainge picked up the Clippers pick for specifically this purpose because he was planning on going after Griffin?

[Dino Pitino]

Why is the clippers pick so much more important to LA. Isn't it protected?

Stepian rule. Frees them up to trade it and adjacent years' picks. Unhamstrings them.

Having thought about this a bit: what if Ainge picked up the Clippers pick for specifically this purpose because he was planning on going after Griffin?

Somebody sharp here theorized that in the last week. If it's true, my word...how clever, what foresight. And to think how everyone was underwhelmed/disappointed when those two 2nds were traded for it. It might be the tipping point in a package for Blake Griffin, lol.

[Csfan1984]

I think it's all about goals. Building or going for a title. If it's a team going for it "all" clearly IT, AB and even Crowder would have more value to that team than the Nets 2017 OR Brown. It's all a matter of perspective.

[sawick48]

Saw somebody do a truncated version of this on another board, thought it was an interesting exercise. Just rank the Celtics' assets in order of trade value. However you define that, whether it's market value according to the rest of the league or team importance according to us.

Here's mine.

Horford excluded because he's not tradeable. Our own picks excluded because, depending on which other picks are traded, our own picks' tradeability is limited per Stepian. 2nds excluded, too. I don't know where to rank Amir, his value is some kind of blend of the value of a big TPE and the value of an underpaid starting big in his prime, which means...?

BRK '17 > Brown > BRK '18 > Smart > Thomas > Crowder > Bradley > MEM 1st > Olynyk > Rozier > Mickey > Yabusele > LAC 1st* > Johnson > Jerebko > Zizic > Jackson > Bentil > Hunter > Nader > Young

* Unless traded back to LAC, in which case move up 4 or 5 spots

Am I missing anything, besides what I already excluded?

p.s. I am aware that I'll be in the minority re: Smart's value. Let's not turn this into a Smart thread, though, eh? Post your own asset hierarchy.

EDIT: In list form if that's easier to read...

BRK '17
Brown
BRK '18
Smart
Thomas
Crowder
Bradley
MEM 1st
Olynyk
Rozier
Mickey
Yabusele
LAC 1st*
Johnson
Jerebko
Zizic
Jackson
Bentil
Hunter
Nader
Young

I think DA thinks the list starts with AB.  Guy gushes over him on Twitter, always seems to pump him up when talking to the media, and obviously the contract makes him even more valuable. 

[Dino Pitino]

Well, if I'm in a minority re: Smart being high on the list, then you are a minority of one. I'd bet 10 bucks you're the only person on this board who thinks Bradley is our #1 asset. Ainge pumps everybody up to the media. It's his job.

[greece66]

BRK '17 > Brown > BRK '18 > Smart > Thomas > Crowder > Bradley > MEM 1st > Olynyk > Rozier > Mickey > Yabusele > LAC 1st* > Johnson > Jerebko > Zizic > Jackson > Bentil > Hunter > Nader > Young

There is an obvious difficulty with this and this is that different teams want different things: a contender wants finished players, a rebuilding team picks and young talents etc; and different players might be better fits for different teams. Just to give an example, although IT is a great player, I cannot see the Clips want to make a trade for him.

Having said this, I like the list, and it allows us to keep things organized in our minds.
Re: picks, the order looks right, namely Br 17, Br 18, Mem 19, Clips 19. The key difference in the Mem and Clips pick is the protection (Mem is only 1-8 protected).

When it comes to talent it also feels right, though for some teams Zizic would be an interesting prospect more so than Rozier or Yab. I'm also not sure of the value of Mickey given he has played so little.
To my mind it would be: 1. Brown (large gap) 2. Zizic and Rozier 3. Yab and Mickey.The difference between players in 2 and 3 should be small in terms of trade value. As for Jackson, Bentil, Young, Hunter etc their trading value is minimal as of now IMO.

Regarding non-rookie players I'd put Crowder and Bradley on top followed by IT. Players of proven value on bargain contracts. Then comes Olynyk and Smart. I would put Johnson  after them because he would be a one year rental. Unless a team becomes desperate for a big during the season, I do not see any offers coming. Jerebko's trade value is similarly small, given his one year contract and lack of athleticism.

[ThePaintedArea]

BRK '17 > Brown > BRK '18 > Smart > Thomas > Crowder > Bradley > MEM 1st > Olynyk > Rozier > Mickey > Yabusele > LAC 1st* > Johnson > Jerebko > Zizic > Jackson > Bentil > Hunter > Nader > Young

Regarding non-rookie players I'd put Crowder and Bradley on top followed by IT. Players of proven value on bargain contracts. Then comes Olynyk and Smart. I would put Johnson  after them because he would be a one year rental. Unless a team becomes desperate for a big during the season, I do not see any offers coming. Jerebko's trade value is similarly small, given his one year contract and lack of athleticism.

I think that if you add Brown and Horford to these seven you have Boston's core group (however you rank them).  No one's untouchable, as Ainge would be the first to say... but building a perennial contender means making roster continuity a priority.

[libermaniac]

Minor detail at the bottom of the list but Hunter and Nader are above Jackson and Bentil, who showed nothing in summer league.

[ThePaintedArea]

Minor detail at the bottom of the list but Hunter and Nader are above Jackson and Bentil, who showed nothing in summer league.

I think that Jackson showed he's an NBA player.  With the departure of Turner, there's even a place for a shot-creator off the bench on the Celtics - but he's got a long ways to go before he can merit floor time, and there's definitely a numbers crunch.  Boston is better off giving those developmental minutes to Rozier.