Let's say the Nets pick ends up #5. What package is better, Butler or Irving

[KG Living Legend]

Let's say the Nets pick ends up #5. What package is better. Thomas who is going to walk, Crowder, Zizic and #5. Or Lavine, Dunn, #7

 Some people think Butler was traded for nothing I disagree. Lavine was injured but 19 ppg at 21 he's got major scoring upside. Dunn is the unknown but could be a good two way player, and #7 is a nice pick, probably not far off from the Nets pick.

[action781]

Let's say the Nets pick ends up #5. What package is better. Thomas who is going to walk, Crowder, Zizic and #5. Or Lavine, Dunn, #7

 Some people think Butler was traded for nothing I disagree. Lavine was injured but 19 ppg at 21 he's got major scoring upside. Dunn is the unknown but could be a good two way player, and #7 is a nice pick, probably not far off from the Nets pick.

Didn't Chicago also trade away a pick too though?

But yeah I think for Chicago building for the future, the TWolves offer probably made more sense.

[Bucketgetter]

Cavs got way more. In you’re scenario, the #5 pick would still yield one of Bamba/Doncic/Ayton. That’s a way better piece than Lauri Markkanen. If everyone wants to discount IT because of his hip, you have to discount Lavine because of his ACL. He won’t even be ready for the start of the year, and a guy who’s best asset is his athleticism just tore his ACL. And that leaves Dunn, who was horrendous his rookie year but still has some upside, compared to Crowder and Zizic, and elite role player on a great contract and a decent prospect who disappointed in summer league, but not his entire first year. Not to mention Bulls had to give back #16 pick to the wolves, who selected Justin Patton, a guy who a lot of posters liked around here.

[Erik]

I'll take it one step further (if the nets pick ends up #5)

Cousins and Omri Casspi to the Pelicans for Buddy Hield (2016 #6), Tyreke Evans, Langston Galloway and its 2017 first-round (2017 #10) and second-round pick to Sacramento.

Basically Cousins for 2016 #6, 2017 #10 and Tyreke Evans
Our trade was Kyrie for 2018 #5, IT, and Jae Crowder

I will start off by saying that Kyrie ~= Cousins, so what Pelicans and Celtics got is fairly equal in value. NBARank had them #15 and #13 respectively.

1) Next, if the BRK18 pick is #5, it's debatable that it is fairly equal in value to 2016 #6. (imitating whiny voice: "Yeah but but but Bamba is going to be so much better") -- you don't know that. Hield played a great rookie season and bigs are hit or miss.

2) Jae Crowder > Tyreke Evans -- no question there. Not even going to attempt to compare these two. This was the part that hurt the most, TBH.

3) Is Isaiah Thomas on an expiring deal worth the #10 pick? Probably. But there isn't a single team in the NBA that would have given up their 10th pick for him. And with Kyrie, we don't even need him anymore. Kyrie is flat out an upgrade over the next 5 years.

4) Not even going to talk about Zizic. It's a filler, plain and simple, and anyone that says otherwise is a monumental homer.


If you break out the pieces, it seems like the Kings/Pelicans deal isn't that far off from our deal. What is the biggest difference?

"KILL Divac"
"Celtics got fleeced"

[greece66]

Erik no.

What the Celtics gave for Kyrie far exceeds what NOP gave for DMC, esp. if the Brooklyn pick ends up at #5.

[Erik]

Erik no.

What the Celtics gave for Kyrie far exceeds what NOP gave for DMC, esp. if the Brooklyn pick ends up at #5.

Care to elaborate? What is your definition of "far exceeds?" Generally you'll want to provide some information before getting to the conclusion, especially if you are directly disagreeing with someone else.

Specifically, which bullet did I mess up?

[SHAQATTACK]

i did see a professional analyst on you tube discussing who is better for Celtics ...Irving, George or Butler .

He had Bulter very close to Irving .....But has Irving still as the better 4 quarter one on one go to guy.

George ...he looked up stats had failed to win a last second game in his last 15 attempts .  I was shocked .   He was not convinced George is the finisher Celtics needed to replace IT .

He guy like the trade for Boston as Irving as an upgrade and thinks he will flourish in the Stevens system . But admits tue overall price hag was high with the Nets pick.   

[greece66]

Erik no.

What the Celtics gave for Kyrie far exceeds what NOP gave for DMC, esp. if the Brooklyn pick ends up at #5.

Care to elaborate? What is your definition of "far exceeds?" Generally you'll want to provide some information before getting to the conclusion, especially if you are directly disagreeing with someone else.

Specifically, which bullet did I mess up?

The only player of value Sac got was Buddy Hield and I'm not sure he is better than Crowder, let alone IT.

[Fafnir]

Let's say the Nets pick ends up #5. What package is better. Thomas who is going to walk, Crowder, Zizic and #5. Or Lavine, Dunn, #7

 Some people think Butler was traded for nothing I disagree. Lavine was injured but 19 ppg at 21 he's got major scoring upside. Dunn is the unknown but could be a good two way player, and #7 is a nice pick, probably not far off from the Nets pick.

They gave up the 16th pick to move up to 7th.

That's a pretty marginal move historically, especially when the draft has maybe 5 top tier prospects. A pick outright is a much more valuable piece.

Dunn and Lavine were high lottery picks, but Dunn is an older prospect who was terrible as a rookie and Lavine was a one dimensional player who just tore an ACL.

We gave up a much better package for Kyrie, now clearly those other deals could end up better as the future is unknown. But as far as current value goes the packages weren't close.

[KG Living Legend]

Erik no.

What the Celtics gave for Kyrie far exceeds what NOP gave for DMC, esp. if the Brooklyn pick ends up at #5.

Care to elaborate? What is your definition of "far exceeds?" Generally you'll want to provide some information before getting to the conclusion, especially if you are directly disagreeing with someone else.

Specifically, which bullet did I mess up?

The only player of value Sac got was Buddy Hield and I'm not sure he is better than Crowder, let alone IT.

 Obviously Buddy, had got a lot more upside than Crowder.

[greece66]

Let's say the Nets pick ends up #5. What package is better. Thomas who is going to walk, Crowder, Zizic and #5. Or Lavine, Dunn, #7

 Some people think Butler was traded for nothing I disagree. Lavine was injured but 19 ppg at 21 he's got major scoring upside. Dunn is the unknown but could be a good two way player, and #7 is a nice pick, probably not far off from the Nets pick.

They gave up the 16th pick to move up to 7th.

That's a pretty marginal move historically, especially when the draft has maybe 5 top tier prospects. A pick outright is a much more valuable piece.

Dunn and Lavine were high lottery picks, but Dunn is an older prospect who was terrible as a rookie and Lavine was a one dimensional player who just tore an ACL.

We gave up a much better package for Kyrie, now clearly those other deals could end up better as the future is unknown. But as far as current value goes the packages weren't close.

Yep. AlsoAinge had said at the time that Minny overpaid for Butler.

https://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/2000208-sports-and-racing-nba/75493635

The simplest explanation is that Ainge values Kyrie higher than PG and Butler. I hope he is right.

[tazzmaniac]

Let's say the Nets pick ends up #5. What package is better. Thomas who is going to walk, Crowder, Zizic and #5. Or Lavine, Dunn, #7

 Some people think Butler was traded for nothing I disagree. Lavine was injured but 19 ppg at 21 he's got major scoring upside. Dunn is the unknown but could be a good two way player, and #7 is a nice pick, probably not far off from the Nets pick.

They gave up the 16th pick to move up to 7th.

That's a pretty marginal move historically, especially when the draft has maybe 5 top tier prospects. A pick outright is a much more valuable piece.

Dunn and Lavine were high lottery picks, but Dunn is an older prospect who was terrible as a rookie and Lavine was a one dimensional player who just tore an ACL.

We gave up a much better package for Kyrie, now clearly those other deals could end up better as the future is unknown. But as far as current value goes the packages weren't close.

Lavine was the 13th pick so not high lottery.  Butler, like Irving, has 2+1 years on his contract and he hadn't demanded a trade.  Definitely not close. 

[Erik]

Erik no.

What the Celtics gave for Kyrie far exceeds what NOP gave for DMC, esp. if the Brooklyn pick ends up at #5.

Care to elaborate? What is your definition of "far exceeds?" Generally you'll want to provide some information before getting to the conclusion, especially if you are directly disagreeing with someone else.

Specifically, which bullet did I mess up?

The only player of value Sac got was Buddy Hield and I'm not sure he is better than Crowder, let alone IT.

Ah, I see. We solved the problem. You either speak in hyperbole or you're an unabashed homer.

Since we're going to skip right over facts and head into opinion, my opinion is that if Vlade contacts me and says that he'll trade Hield OR their #10 pick 1:1 for either Crowder or IT, I would first check the calendar to make sure it's not April fools day and then agree as fast as possible.

I'm just thankful that Danny is our GM and not people like you who struggle to understand that a player's trade value has components within it that are separate than their current NBA 2K rating. I'd recommend that you leave your investments to professionals.

For what it's worth, Crowder has more trade value than IT. Try to figure that head-scratcher out.

[byennie]

Ah, I see. We solved the problem. You either speak in hyperbole or you're an unabashed homer.

Since we're going to skip right over facts and head into opinion, my opinion is that if Vlade contacts me and says that he'll trade Hield OR their #10 pick 1:1 for either Crowder or IT, I would first check the calendar to make sure it's not April fools day and then agree as fast as possible.

I'm just thankful that Danny is our GM and not people like you who struggle to understand that a player's trade value has components within it that are separate than their current NBA 2K rating. I'd recommend that you leave your investments to professionals.

For what it's worth, Crowder has more trade value than IT. Try to figure that head-scratcher out.

I understand what you're getting at, but you're about 10 steps overboard with your snarky-ness.  Hield was a not-so-great 22 year-old rookie and IT was 2nd team All-NBA. Contracts and age matter, but they aren't everything. By your logic, Crowder was the key player in the Irving deal. No. You're not an investment professional, either.

Edit: holy Edited.  Profanity and masked profanity are against forum rules and may result in discipline., you actually said #10 for IT was a slam dunk.

[Erik]

I will say that some of the snarkyness is just mental exhaustion from reading comments about the trade, which I think is a very fair trade... I didn't think the Sac trade was terrible, either.

Can you think of any team that will trade their 10th pick for IT? I can't. Who's going to give away a lotto pick for either a rental who is injured with a follow up of a max contract?

I would have paid him max money, but like I said, you go into it knowing half of that contract will be   bad. So it's a risk of a headache... giving away a lotto pick on top of that makes it a bad deal, IMO.