Boston/Philly deal supposedly agreed upon; to be completed on Monday

[Beat LA]

https://twitter.com/adamhimmelsbach/status/876284322147389440

The Celtics' overflowing backcourt also factored into their decision to pass on Fultz, sources say.

Just to tick everyone off a bit more. Danny overvaluing Rozier screwed us once again!  \

But seriously, Fultz is probably better than anyone on our team now, but now Danny is drafting for fit at the number one seed?!

I can't believe that I'm going to do this, but wasn't this same logic applied to Dunn last year, as in Ainge believing that Rozier will either be as good or better than Kris, which looks fine so far.  I'd trade Rozier for Orlando's two seconds at 33 and 35, myself, but yeah...

I'm really searching at this point, lol . This is hilarious.

[Snakehead]

https://twitter.com/NateDuncanNBA/status/876284262479142912

One problem for Cs once they got #1 pick was it seemed too much to give up. Breaking that asset into smaller pieces helps w/ trades

[hpantazo]

Imagine for a second.... Cs could easily have gotten the 3rd pick on lottery night.  We are better off having won the lottery even if the return on this trade is disappointing.

That's how I'm trying to rationalize this. I would have been fine taking Jackson a month ago, and this is better.

But, the fact is we did get the #1 pick, and this seems like poor value.

It is poor value. I doesn't matter if we are moving only two spots down, we're passing on a supposedly transcendent player for an asset to be used as a trade chip or draft someone who's not Markelle Fultz.

The whole point of moving down is to get value, and what do we get, a protected LA pick or the Sacramento pick? Jesus Christ...

Supposedly is the key word. Ainge and some other GMs think its a 4 player tier 1

[gouki88]

Imagine for a second.... Cs could easily have gotten the 3rd pick on lottery night.  We are better off having won the lottery even if the return on this trade is disappointing.

That's how I'm trying to rationalize this. I would have been fine taking Jackson a month ago, and this is better.

But, the fact is we did get the #1 pick, and this seems like poor value.

It is poor value. I doesn't matter if we are moving only two spots down, we're passing on a supposedly transcendent player for an asset to be used as a trade chip or draft someone who's not Markelle Fultz.

The whole point of moving down is to get value, and what do we get, a protected LA pick or the Sacramento pick? Jesus Christ...

Keeps getting worse and worse.

[CelticsElite]

Who's ready for another defensive role player who can't shoot? Say I!


"jackson for 3!"
*clank*

[trickybilly]

I just need to remind myself that a few months ago I liked Luca Doncic more than Fultz, and now we have a greater chance of drafting him.

Find the happy thoughts, saltlover.

Also Jackson might be Kawhi leonard 2.0

[jpotter33]

https://twitter.com/NateDuncanNBA/status/876284262479142912

One problem for Cs once they got #1 pick was it seemed too much to give up. Breaking that asset into smaller pieces helps w/ trades

Yeah, I posted about this earlier in another thread.

Granted, Danny is also catching a ton of flak for this trade already, so what was the difference? Would a potential team want the 3 and that protected Lakers pick more than the 1 pick? Maybe, I don't know.

EDIT: Or he thinks that the number 3 alone with some minor assets is enough for a Butler or George. That makes quite a bit more sense.

[BitterJim]

Imagine for a second.... Cs could easily have gotten the 3rd pick on lottery night.  We are better off having won the lottery even if the return on this trade is disappointing.

That's how I'm trying to rationalize this. I would have been fine taking Jackson a month ago, and this is better.

But, the fact is we did get the #1 pick, and this seems like poor value.

I'm just going back to the day of the lottery, before I got super invested into Fultz. At that point, I would have found this deal a lot more appealing than today, which tells me that my internal Fultz hype is clouding my judgement a bit.

Before the lottery, I had questions about Fultz. Those questions never got answered, I've just been ignoring them because I've been invested in Fultz. Stepping back and looking at it, the return is actually pretty good (not to mention other deals that could be in the works)

[CelticSooner]

https://twitter.com/adamhimmelsbach/status/876284322147389440

The Celtics' overflowing backcourt also factored into their decision to pass on Fultz, sources say.

Just to tick everyone off a bit more. Danny overvaluing Rozier screwed us once again!  \

But seriously, Fultz is probably better than anyone on our team now, but now Danny is drafting for fit at the number one seed?!

I can't believe that I'm going to do this, but wasn't this same logic applied to Dunn last year, as in Ainge believing that Rozier will either be as good or better than Kris, which looks fine so far.  I'd trade Rozier for Orlando's two seconds at 33 and 35, myself, but yeah...

I'm really searching at this point, lol . This is hilarious.

Yes. Many people (myself included) balked at taking Brown over the BPA in Dunn. Doesn't look so bad now. Regardless I can't shake the feeling Fultz is going to a great one that Ainge just sent to a pretty good core in Philly. Time will tell.

[Yoki_IsTheName]

Imagine for a second.... Cs could easily have gotten the 3rd pick on lottery night.  We are better off having won the lottery even if the return on this trade is disappointing.

That's how I'm trying to rationalize this. I would have been fine taking Jackson a month ago, and this is better.

But, the fact is we did get the #1 pick, and this seems like poor value.

It is poor value. I doesn't matter if we are moving only two spots down, we're passing on a supposedly transcendent player for an asset to be used as a trade chip or draft someone who's not Markelle Fultz.

The whole point of moving down is to get value, and what do we get, a protected LA pick or the Sacramento pick? Jesus Christ...

Supposedly is the key word. Ainge and some other GMs think its a 4 player tier 1

Understood, but if we look at scouting reports, Fultz clearly has the least amount of glaring weakness. Jackson has personal and length issues. Lonzo Ball has physicality and personal issues. Tatum has consistency and defense issues.

Fultz's weaknesses are at the most tolerable. Why not just take that player???

[Beat LA]

Imagine for a second.... Cs could easily have gotten the 3rd pick on lottery night.  We are better off having won the lottery even if the return on this trade is disappointing.

That's how I'm trying to rationalize this. I would have been fine taking Jackson a month ago, and this is better.

But, the fact is we did get the #1 pick, and this seems like poor value.

It is poor value. I doesn't matter if we are moving only two spots down, we're passing on a supposedly transcendent player for an asset to be used as a trade chip or draft someone who's not Markelle Fultz.

The whole point of moving down is to get value, and what do we get, a protected LA pick or the Sacramento pick? Jesus Christ...

Supposedly is the key word. Ainge and some other GMs think its a 4 player tier 1

I think many tiers have already been shed on here, tonight .

[gouki88]

I just need to remind myself that a few months ago I liked Luca Doncic more than Fultz, and now we have a greater chance of drafting him.

Find the happy thoughts, saltlover.

Also Jackson might be Kawhi leonard 2.0

Effectively no chance in hell that this is the case. For every Kawhi Leonard there are hundreds of Michael Kidd-Gilchrists

[hpantazo]

https://twitter.com/NateDuncanNBA/status/876284262479142912

One problem for Cs once they got #1 pick was it seemed too much to give up. Breaking that asset into smaller pieces helps w/ trades

Yeah, I posted about this earlier in another thread.

Granted, Danny is also catching a ton of flak for this trade already, so what was the difference? Would a potential team want the 3 and that protected Lakers pick more than the 1 pick? Maybe, I don't know.

If that is their logic, then I guess that's why the deal was made today instead of draft night. It gives Ainge 5 days to make moves with the revised assets. Maybe he wanted to break it down into multiple assets to make multiple trades.

[BitterJim]

I just need to remind myself that a few months ago I liked Luca Doncic more than Fultz, and now we have a greater chance of drafting him.

Find the happy thoughts, saltlover.

Also Jackson might be Kawhi leonard 2.0

More like Andre Iguodala 2.0. And, hey, maybe he develops a **** and becomes even more. We'll see

Edit: should be "shot" but I'm just gonna leave it

[Snakehead]

EDIT: Or he thinks that the number 3 alone with some minor assets is enough for a Butler or George. That makes quite a bit more sense.

Yeah I was thinking something like 3 and Crowder plus whatever.