FIRE DANNY AINGE

[ManUp]

Depending on the protections on the Sacramento pick I think I'm ok with the deal.

Bud, there is no Sacramento pick. We only get that as protection backup for the Lakers pick.

Ugh... Sometimes I wish Danny could just be a normal GM and just take the easy win.

Even if he doesn't love Fultz handing him to Philly to build a core of Fultz, Simmons, and Embiid just isn't smart.

[max215]

Depending on the protections on the Sacramento pick I think I'm ok with the deal.

Bud, there is no Sacramento pick. We only get that as protection backup for the Lakers pick.

Ugh... Sometimes I wish Danny could just be a normal GM and just take the easy win.

Even if he doesn't love Fultz handing him to Philly to build a core of Fultz, Simmons, and Embiid just isn't smart.

It's downright suicidal.

[gouki88]

So we want to fire the guy who put the Celtics in a position to get the #1 pick in the draft after building a team that had the best record in the conference?

Historically doing good things only makes it worse when you do abysmal deals like this one.

You don't let someone off the hook because of previous victories.

Why not?

I'm not sure what you're saying. He's made a bad move, there might be consequences for said bad move. Especially if Fultz is what most people think he is, DA has just constructed a monstrous division rival for the next decade.

The Brooklyn deal was a fluke to pay off this well, and he's said so himself. You can't keep saying "oh but the Brooklyn deal!", as if he knew it would net us a #1 pick.

Unless this is all some crazy move for AD or something, this could cost his career. And for good reason.

[ManUp]

We might need to keep Danny away from the draft and talent evaluating.

[jpotter33]

Depending on the protections on the Sacramento pick I think I'm ok with the deal.

Bud, there is no Sacramento pick. We only get that as protection backup for the Lakers pick.

Ugh... Sometimes I wish Danny could just be a normal GM and just take the easy win.

Even if he doesn't love Fultz handing him to Philly to build a core of Fultz, Simmons, and Embiid just isn't smart.

Yeah, this is the part I worry about the most. I think this trade would be quite a bit more lauded by our fanbase if it wasn't an up and coming divisional rival that we were trading with.

[Yoki_IsTheName]

Depending on the protections on the Sacramento pick I think I'm ok with the deal.

Bud, there is no Sacramento pick. We only get that as protection backup for the Lakers pick.

Ugh... Sometimes I wish Danny could just be a normal GM and just take the easy win.

Even if he doesn't love Fultz handing him to Philly to build a core of Fultz, Simmons, and Embiid just isn't smart.

This is what stings the most.

We should be THAT team, building the future Warriors slayers, while trying to compete at the same time. Instead we are probably trying to win now, and have little to no shot against the Titans in the Bay.

Now Philadelphia has that great young core. They could easily be 2012 Oklahoma City Thunder in 2-3 years, and will be poised to take over.

[PhoSita]

He's earned the benefit of the doubt, and if this turns into Butler and Hayward, nobody will be complaining.

Still, if five years from now the new Celtics "contending core" is past their prime with no titles to show for it and the Sixers are looking amazing with Fultz, Simmons, and Embiid all young and dominant, this will be a flashpoint for the franchise, to be sure.

[PAOBoston]

So we want to fire the guy who put the Celtics in a position to get the #1 pick in the draft after building a team that had the best record in the conference?

Historically doing good things only makes it worse when you do abysmal deals like this one.

You don't let someone off the hook because of previous victories.

Why not?

I'm not sure what you're saying. He's made a bad move, there might be consequences for said bad move. Especially if Fultz is what most people think he is, DA has just constructed a monstrous division rival for the next decade.

The Brooklyn deal was a fluke to pay off this well, and he's said so himself. You can't keep saying "oh but the Brooklyn deal!", as if he knew it would net us a #1 pick.

Unless this is all some crazy move for AD or something, this could cost his career. And for good reason.

How do you know it is a bad move already?

[max215]

He's earned the benefit of the doubt, and if this turns into Butler and Hayward, nobody will be complaining.

Still, if five years from now the new Celtics "contending core" is past their prime with no titles to show for it and the Sixers are looking amazing with Fultz, Simmons, and Embiid all young and dominant, this will be a flashpoint for the franchise, to be sure.

If we end up with Butler and Hayward, I will be complaining (depending on what we give up). That team has no chance whatsoever against the Warriors.

[PAOBoston]

Depending on the protections on the Sacramento pick I think I'm ok with the deal.

Bud, there is no Sacramento pick. We only get that as protection backup for the Lakers pick.

Ugh... Sometimes I wish Danny could just be a normal GM and just take the easy win.

Even if he doesn't love Fultz handing him to Philly to build a core of Fultz, Simmons, and Embiid just isn't smart.

This is what stings the most.

We should be THAT team, building the future Warriors slayers, while trying to compete at the same time. Instead we are probably trying to win now, and have little to no shot against the Titans in the Bay.

Now Philadelphia has that great young core. They could easily be 2012 Oklahoma City Thunder in 2-3 years, and will be poised to take over.

Because that worked out great for OKC right?

[gouki88]

So we want to fire the guy who put the Celtics in a position to get the #1 pick in the draft after building a team that had the best record in the conference?

Historically doing good things only makes it worse when you do abysmal deals like this one.

You don't let someone off the hook because of previous victories.

Why not?

I'm not sure what you're saying. He's made a bad move, there might be consequences for said bad move. Especially if Fultz is what most people think he is, DA has just constructed a monstrous division rival for the next decade.

The Brooklyn deal was a fluke to pay off this well, and he's said so himself. You can't keep saying "oh but the Brooklyn deal!", as if he knew it would net us a #1 pick.

Unless this is all some crazy move for AD or something, this could cost his career. And for good reason.

How do you know it is a bad move already?

I'm talking at face value of course. And I'm someone who highly rates Fultz, so there will likely be some bias, I have to admit. Who knows whether there is some blockbuster on the way after this. But if we trade Fultz for the #3 and a protected LAL (that turns into Sac '19) pick I will be very disappointed.

[Ilikesports17]

So we want to fire the guy who put the Celtics in a position to get the #1 pick in the draft after building a team that had the best record in the conference?

Historically doing good things only makes it worse when you do abysmal deals like this one.

You don't let someone off the hook because of previous victories.

Why not?

I'm not sure what you're saying. He's made a bad move, there might be consequences for said bad move. Especially if Fultz is what most people think he is, DA has just constructed a monstrous division rival for the next decade.

The Brooklyn deal was a fluke to pay off this well, and he's said so himself. You can't keep saying "oh but the Brooklyn deal!", as if he knew it would net us a #1 pick.

Unless this is all some crazy move for AD or something, this could cost his career. And for good reason.

I don't understand why past performance doesn't get a GM off he hook.

Danny should have more slack to Edited.  Profanity and masked profanity are against forum rules and may result in discipline. up then just about any GM  in the league. That's not to say he's not fireable but ignoring past performance would be really really stupid.

[gouki88]

Depending on the protections on the Sacramento pick I think I'm ok with the deal.

Bud, there is no Sacramento pick. We only get that as protection backup for the Lakers pick.

Ugh... Sometimes I wish Danny could just be a normal GM and just take the easy win.

Even if he doesn't love Fultz handing him to Philly to build a core of Fultz, Simmons, and Embiid just isn't smart.

This is what stings the most.

We should be THAT team, building the future Warriors slayers, while trying to compete at the same time. Instead we are probably trying to win now, and have little to no shot against the Titans in the Bay.

Now Philadelphia has that great young core. They could easily be 2012 Oklahoma City Thunder in 2-3 years, and will be poised to take over.

Because that worked out great for OKC right?

If they had been willing to pay the luxury tax it would have. All their owners fault.

[Casperian]

He's earned the benefit of the doubt, and if this turns into Butler and Hayward, nobody will be complaining.

Still, if five years from now the new Celtics "contending core" is past their prime with no titles to show for it and the Sixers are looking amazing with Fultz, Simmons, and Embiid all young and dominant, this will be a flashpoint for the franchise, to be sure.

Nobody will be complaining?

Sure as **** I will complain. Butler, Hayward, Mighty Mouse and Miss Dominican Republic aren't getting us past the Warriors.

One extra pick? ONE PICK? WITH protections? You gotta be kidding me.

[gouki88]

So we want to fire the guy who put the Celtics in a position to get the #1 pick in the draft after building a team that had the best record in the conference?

Historically doing good things only makes it worse when you do abysmal deals like this one.

You don't let someone off the hook because of previous victories.

Why not?

I'm not sure what you're saying. He's made a bad move, there might be consequences for said bad move. Especially if Fultz is what most people think he is, DA has just constructed a monstrous division rival for the next decade.

The Brooklyn deal was a fluke to pay off this well, and he's said so himself. You can't keep saying "oh but the Brooklyn deal!", as if he knew it would net us a #1 pick.

Unless this is all some crazy move for AD or something, this could cost his career. And for good reason.

I don't understand why past performance doesn't get a GM off he hook.

Danny should have more slack to **** up then just about any GM  in the league. That's not to say he's not fireable but ignoring past performance would be really really stupid.

I don't disagree, I was just trying to say that he shouldn't be cut so much slack that we ignore what could be disgustingly bad trades.