NBA Exec on trade - "Not highway robbery, but it's close"

[Valid]

I don't know what people expected.return, probably.

Ainge either keeping the pick or getting a better return, probably.

As I said in the part of my post that you left out, he wasn't taking Fultz, he doesn't want him, so why keep the pick? Last year when he took Brown at #3 everyone criticized him for not trading down. This year he not only traded down to get the guy he wants, he got a future likely top 5 pick for it. That is awesome. Getting a top 5 pick is a great asset. He purposely didn't take any players back in the trade because he wants to keep the cap space this summer for a max free agent. Excellent move overall.

As I said in the part of my post that you left out, he wasn't taking Fultz, he doesn't want him, so why keep the pick? Last year when he took Brown at #3 everyone criticized him for not trading down. This year he not only traded down to get the guy he wants, he got a future likely top 5 pick for it. That is awesome. Getting a top 5 pick is a great asset. He purposely didn't take any players back in the trade because he wants to keep the cap space this summer for a max free agent. Excellent move overall.

Exactly. He actually cut salary. I think it was about 1.8M, which will go directly to Hayward or Blake.

1. What makes you so sure those guys will sign here?

2. What makes you so sure that the LA or the Sacramento pick is going to be a top 5 pick? If that lands at #1, we miss out on it.

Now I'm not so sure myself that Fultz will be the next Brandon Roy, but his skills, talent and physical tools makes it much more likely. We have very little assurance that the two things you mentioned are going to materialize, and we are taking that gamble at the expense of what could be a franchise player.

It's not highway robbery, but it's close, for the darn Sixers!

Preach it Yoki!

If we draft 6'8" Marcus Smart 2.0, we'll have yet another player who can't shoot (can't have enough of those).

THEN

We'll probably end up with another 5th or 8th pick with the future first and grab Marcus Smart 3.0!

Yay!

You're telling the man to "preach it" while making ridiculous assumptions in the process.

How do you know how the players we draft are going to turn out? Seems like negative Nancying to me.

Also, we ranked a decent-enough 13th in the league in three-point percentage last season.

The "can't shoot" stuff is old news.

[Roy H.]

The entire offense went through Fultz and he went from a likely lottery pick before the season, to the #1 overall pick as large part of those individual accomplishments

Chad Ford had Fultz #1 in August 2016, before any "individual accomplishments".

https://www.reddit.com/r/NBA_Draft/comments/4z8wbj/chad_fords_mock_draft_10_2017/

If so, then it was after his performance during the summer. Because Giles was far and away the #1 pick until the injures. In fact, for a long time Giles and Jackson #1 and #2.

Regardless, you edited the rest of my post. Again, you were hellbent against the KG/Pierce trade when it happened. That's why it's best to be patient in passing judgement without knowing where future picks will land and who we draft. For example, if Bagley Jr. were eligible and I would be willing to bet anything that he would be the #1 pick and we don't make the deal.

Does it matter if I was wrong on the KG / Pierce trade? Is your track record perfect? Is Danny's?

I think trading a consensus #1 for two lesser pieces is a bad idea.

This feels like trading Kyrie for Michael Kidd Gilchrist and Enes Kanter.

But, going forward, is it fair to say that you won't be commenting on trades until 2+ years out?

[RockinRyA]

Jordan Schultz‏ Verified account
@Schultz_Report
Asked an NBA exec for his opinion on Philly-Boston trade. His answer: "That's Danny [Ainge] for you. Not a highway robbery, but it's close."

Jordan Schultz Retweeted Jordan Schultz
Genera idea is that #celtics continue to acquire more picks
-- not merely the one extra from this trade. Are there ever 2 many picks tho?

Granted I love Fultz for Philly, but C's still win this deal, at least in current iteration. Move down 2 spots and just acquire more picks.

My take: coin flip as to who is better between fultz, Jackson and ball. Boston still gets one of those three, plus maybe future top 6 pick

Pretty much as I see it. Many fans seems to love the allure of having the #1 pick more than the actual player they would be getting.

How can you blame the fans loving the allure of the #1 pick when the guy lined up for it could be a James Harden caliber of a player?

This trade would have been fantastic in the Nerlens Noel class, but not in this class. We passed on what could be a franchise changing prospect to get someone who we think is close but really isn't (their flaws, compare to Fultz makes Markelle way ahead).

Just so we could get more picks? We already HAVE more picks!

I think we have to be patient and see what's gonna happen before we judge. I mean I dont like it myself, but there's no way to know right now if the deal is good or not. Remember when you crucified Ainge for not taking Upshaw? We don't want a repeat of that.

[PAOBoston]

The entire offense went through Fultz and he went from a likely lottery pick before the season, to the #1 overall pick as large part of those individual accomplishments

Chad Ford had Fultz #1 in August 2016, before any "individual accomplishments".

https://www.reddit.com/r/NBA_Draft/comments/4z8wbj/chad_fords_mock_draft_10_2017/

If so, then it was after his performance during the summer. Because Giles was far and away the #1 pick until the injures. In fact, for a long time Giles and Jackson #1 and #2.

Regardless, you edited the rest of my post. Again, you were hellbent against the KG/Pierce trade when it happened. That's why it's best to be patient in passing judgement without knowing where future picks will land and who we draft. For example, if Bagley Jr. were eligible and I would be willing to bet anything that he would be the #1 pick and we don't make the deal.

Does it matter if I was wrong on the KG / Pierce trade? Is your track record perfect? Is Danny's?

I think trading a consensus #1 for two lesser pieces is a bad idea.

This feels like trading Kyrie for Michael Kidd Gilchrist and Enes Kanter.

But, going forward, is it fair to say that you won't be commenting on trades until 2+ years out?

Not that I disagree with you is but I think its pretty subjective. Ainge views players differently than other people do.

If he's got 4 guys ranked basically in the same tier, then I see his point.

That being said I would have taken Fultz. But who knows what plan Ainge has devised.

[Smitty77]

Pretty much as I see it. Many fans seems to love the allure of having the #1 pick more than the actual player they would be getting.

Not really. Fans see a guy with elite size and length, coupled with production that's rarely been seen st the NCAA level in recent years. Fultz is a top-tier prospect who seems like he'll be on Kyrie's level, perhaps Harden's.

I am SURE that Danny has information on Fultz that NONE of us, even you Roy, have.  This trade simply CANNOT and SHOULD NOT be judged before we make OR trade those picks and THEN see how they work on in the NBA.

Smitty77

[CELTICSofBOSTON]

Say we draft Josh Jackson and he becomes a slightly better shooting Tony Allen, and Markelle Fultz becomes James Harden.... Danny get's fired right?

Say we pick 4th in 2019 and we get another Marcus Smart... lol.  Danny was trying to be too cute when he had a surefire star right in front of him.

[bellerephon]

I think what you're missing is that media consensus means nothing to professional execs. Each team has their own scouting staff and they come up with their own rankings, which could be quite different from the consensus. I also don't agree that Fultz is a sure fire star. He's no Lebron or Shaq. He might end up being an elite player, but clearly Ainge has doubts about that, and he's not alone in that opinion.

[Roy H.]

Pretty much as I see it. Many fans seems to love the allure of having the #1 pick more than the actual player they would be getting.

Not really. Fans see a guy with elite size and length, coupled with production that's rarely been seen st the NCAA level in recent years. Fultz is a top-tier prospect who seems like he'll be on Kyrie's level, perhaps Harden's.

I am SURE that Danny has information on Fultz that NONE of us, even you Roy, have.  This trade simply CANNOT and SHOULD NOT be judged before we make OR trade those picks and THEN see how they work on in the NBA.

Smitty77

Isn't the same true of every single trade and draft pick?

CelticsBlog would be a pretty odd forum if we only judged things in hindsight.

[Eddie20]

The entire offense went through Fultz and he went from a likely lottery pick before the season, to the #1 overall pick as large part of those individual accomplishments

Chad Ford had Fultz #1 in August 2016, before any "individual accomplishments".

https://www.reddit.com/r/NBA_Draft/comments/4z8wbj/chad_fords_mock_draft_10_2017/

If so, then it was after his performance during the summer. Because Giles was far and away the #1 pick until the injures. In fact, for a long time Giles and Jackson #1 and #2.

Regardless, you edited the rest of my post. Again, you were hellbent against the KG/Pierce trade when it happened. That's why it's best to be patient in passing judgement without knowing where future picks will land and who we draft. For example, if Bagley Jr. were eligible and I would be willing to bet anything that he would be the #1 pick and we don't make the deal.

Does it matter if I was wrong on the KG / Pierce trade? Is your track record perfect? Is Danny's?

I think trading a consensus #1 for two lesser pieces is a bad idea.

This feels like trading Kyrie for Michael Kidd Gilchrist and Enes Kanter.

But, going forward, is it fair to say that you won't be commenting on trades until 2+ years out?

You being wrong on the KG/Pierce trade has relevancy because like this trade, it involved future picks and a level of patience. When it comes to the fluidity of future picks, I think the best approach is to wait and see. This trade could be an amazing one, but it also has risk. We won't be able to judge until we know where the protected pick ends up. However, to dismiss it entirely is shortsighted. Bagley Jr would likely be the #1 pick this year and to have a chance at him is exciting, even if it begs for patience.

[Roy H.]

The entire offense went through Fultz and he went from a likely lottery pick before the season, to the #1 overall pick as large part of those individual accomplishments

Chad Ford had Fultz #1 in August 2016, before any "individual accomplishments".

https://www.reddit.com/r/NBA_Draft/comments/4z8wbj/chad_fords_mock_draft_10_2017/

If so, then it was after his performance during the summer. Because Giles was far and away the #1 pick until the injures. In fact, for a long time Giles and Jackson #1 and #2.

Regardless, you edited the rest of my post. Again, you were hellbent against the KG/Pierce trade when it happened. That's why it's best to be patient in passing judgement without knowing where future picks will land and who we draft. For example, if Bagley Jr. were eligible and I would be willing to bet anything that he would be the #1 pick and we don't make the deal.

Does it matter if I was wrong on the KG / Pierce trade? Is your track record perfect? Is Danny's?

I think trading a consensus #1 for two lesser pieces is a bad idea.

This feels like trading Kyrie for Michael Kidd Gilchrist and Enes Kanter.

But, going forward, is it fair to say that you won't be commenting on trades until 2+ years out?

You being wrong on the KG/Pierce trade has relevancy because like this trade, it involves future picks and it involves a level of patience. When it comes to the fluidity of future picks, I think the best approach is to wait and see. This trade could be an amazing one, but it also has risk. We won't be able to judge until we know where the protected pick ends up. However, to dismiss it entirely is shortsighted. Bagley Jr would likely be the #1 pick this year and to have a chance at him is exciting, even it begs for patience.

I don't judge things on whether through happenstance we end up with a best case scenario. Rather, I judge things on what can be reasonably expected. Top tier talent is extremely difficult to acquire, and we just passed on it for two lesser assets.

But again, let me know how not commenting on trades except in hindsight works out for you. In the interim, let's all hope that "John Bagley Jr." works out.

[Big333223]

I think the key issue is how one evaluates Fultz. If you think he's got elite potential then the trade looks bad. If you think he does not, or if you think Jackson or Tatum has more potential then the trade looks very good. Clearly Ainge does not agree with the consensus that Fultz is the best prospect in this draft, and BTW he's not alone in that opinion. Several sources have noted that some NBA execs don't rate Fultz as the best. Doesn't mean he's right, but if that's his analysis then the trade makes a lot of sense.

Yeah, this is the whole thing. A lot of people think there isn't much separation among the top 3-4 picks. Apparently Boston wasn't sold on Fultz being that much better. If that turns out to be true, then the deal is a great one.

But it'll be years before we know for sure.

[colincb]

Kevin Pelton did an ESPN "Insider" analysis of the deal and came up with what would be a fair return based on an NBA draft chart similar to what is done in the NFL. By his analysis, we did fine.

Still, making up the gap between the two picks wouldn't require Boston to get another top-five pick. The chart shows the difference between No. 1 and No. 3 as 1,330 points, about equivalent to the No. 14 pick, the final pick of the lottery (1,320 points).

and

Though the Lakers and Kings won't have any incentive to lose to improve their lottery odds, the most likely outcome for both of those picks is much better than the 14th pick, with a reasonable chance they'll end up in the lottery's top three.

If the pick that Philadelphia sends is the 2018 Lakers pick, it will be in the top five -- it conveys if it is anywhere from No. 2 to No. 5. It's not the Lakers pick, the Sixers will send along the Kings' 2019 pick (unprotected), likely a lottery pick. So on paper, the No. 3 pick and the Lakers' (or the Kings') pick would very likely exceed the No. 1 pick in value.

http://www.espn.com/nba/insider/story/_/id/19658707/how-much-more-valuable-no-1-pick-trading-2017-nba-draft

[LGC88]

There is the mental part of all those players that we are not aware of.
This is something that scouts analyse throughout the years seeing kids growing.
Maybe Fultz doesn't work hard or he's not passionate enough or anything that would give a GM a red flag. Something that cannot be express and explain to the media/fans for ethical or diplomatic reasons...

I start to think that either Danny believes Tatum is some sort of modern Pierce, or he already has many deals in place to create a superteam.

[Roy H.]

Kevin Pelton did an ESPN "Insider" analysis of the deal and came up with what would be a fair return based on an NBA draft chart similar to what is done in the NFL. By his analysis, we did fine.

Still, making up the gap between the two picks wouldn't require Boston to get another top-five pick. The chart shows the difference between No. 1 and No. 3 as 1,330 points, about equivalent to the No. 14 pick, the final pick of the lottery (1,320 points).

and

Though the Lakers and Kings won't have any incentive to lose to improve their lottery odds, the most likely outcome for both of those picks is much better than the 14th pick, with a reasonable chance they'll end up in the lottery's top three.

If the pick that Philadelphia sends is the 2018 Lakers pick, it will be in the top five -- it conveys if it is anywhere from No. 2 to No. 5. It's not the Lakers pick, the Sixers will send along the Kings' 2019 pick (unprotected), likely a lottery pick. So on paper, the No. 3 pick and the Lakers' (or the Kings') pick would very likely exceed the No. 1 pick in value.

http://www.espn.com/nba/insider/story/_/id/19658707/how-much-more-valuable-no-1-pick-trading-2017-nba-draft

I think his chart is off. In what draft is #1 only worth #3 plus #14?

[kozlodoev]

Jordan Schultz‏ Verified account
@Schultz_Report
Asked an NBA exec for his opinion on Philly-Boston trade. His answer: "That's Danny [Ainge] for you. Not a highway robbery, but it's close."

Jordan Schultz Retweeted Jordan Schultz
Genera idea is that #celtics continue to acquire more picks
-- not merely the one extra from this trade. Are there ever 2 many picks tho?

Granted I love Fultz for Philly, but C's still win this deal, at least in current iteration. Move down 2 spots and just acquire more picks.

My take: coin flip as to who is better between fultz, Jackson and ball. Boston still gets one of those three, plus maybe future top 6 pick

Pretty much as I see it. Many fans seems to love the allure of having the #1 pick more than the actual player they would be getting.

Does this writer cover a lot of football, baseball, and hockey? In the NBA, "moving down 2 spots" is the difference between drafting Jeff Green instead of Kevin Durant. This is not a league where you win with quantity over quality.

What a pile.