2017 NBA Offseason

[lukethedrifter]

Wtf is LeBron doing?

My first FTFY ever, iirc.

[MrCrowesGarden]

They've been hoarding picks for years and years, finally get the first overall pick and trade it away. And traded it with such stipulations that they've guaranteed themselves they won't be getting a first overall out of it no matter what.

Again, they added a first round pick and will still get one of the top guys. How is that bad? Obv if Fultz is so much better- guaranteed -than the others, it was a blunder. Otherwise I have no idea what you all are seeing.

Two picks that have zero chance of being the #1 pick for the #1 pick this year is a bad deal in the NBA. Especially for the Celts who waited for years to get this top pick and then just redistributed it as a hypothetical asset.

[Socnorb11]

They've been hoarding picks for years and years, finally get the first overall pick and trade it away. And traded it with such stipulations that they've guaranteed themselves they won't be getting a first overall out of it no matter what.

Again, they added a first round pick and will still get one of the top guys. How is that bad? Obv if Fultz is so much better- guaranteed -than the others, it was a blunder. Otherwise I have no idea what you all are seeing.

I don't think the Celtic did badly. , but accumulating picks like this in the NBA becomes almost useless, at some point. Quality is more valuable than quantity. You only have so many roster spots, and usually not more than a couple of draft picks actually make the roster when you're as good as the Celtics are. The Celtics don't need a bunch of good players right now. They need a couple of great players. Trading out of #1 doesn't seem like the way to get there.

Maybe they didn't think there was much value in the #1 overall this year, but having the #1 overall pick is a big deal. Fultz sure looks like the top prize. Ainge supposedly wants to take Jackson, but what if the Lakers take Jackson at #2? Then the Celtics are stuck with leftovers. It's a risky move.

[lukethedrifter]

They've been hoarding picks for years and years, finally get the first overall pick and trade it away. And traded it with such stipulations that they've guaranteed themselves they won't be getting a first overall out of it no matter what.

Again, they added a first round pick and will still get one of the top guys. How is that bad? Obv if Fultz is so much better- guaranteed -than the others, it was a blunder. Otherwise I have no idea what you all are seeing.

Two picks that have zero chance of being the #1 pick for the #1 pick this year is a bad deal in the NBA. Especially for the Celts who waited for years to get this top pick and then just redistributed it as a hypothetical asset.

When you pick #1 you don't get to select from a 10 year period. So.... if the top 5 guys in the year in question all smell the same to you, why not pick up an additional #1?


http://www.nba.com/history/nba-draft-index/

Checking basketball-reference for vorp per draft illustrates better.

[MrCrowesGarden]

That's lip service. I don't know if there's any sport historically where there's a bigger difference between 1 and 3 than the NBA.

[lukethedrifter]

That's lip service. I don't know if there's any sport historically where there's a bigger difference between 1 and 3 than the NBA.

That's research. What you are posting is anecdotal. Much more lip service-y.

Does what you are saying apply to this draft?

[Transmogrified Tiger]

I thought half the idea of the Celtics trading down was they were going to use picks to get Butler or George or someone of that caliber.

[lukethedrifter]

I thought half the idea of the Celtics trading down was they were going to use picks to get Butler or George or someone of that caliber.

I saw the Butler talk as well. The Cavs GM firing story says they were working on Butler as well though.

[MrCrowesGarden]

I thought half the idea of the Celtics trading down was they were going to use picks to get Butler or George or someone of that caliber.

The number one pick seems like a good trade chip for landing either.

[MrCrowesGarden]

That's lip service. I don't know if there's any sport historically where there's a bigger difference between 1 and 3 than the NBA.

That's research. What you are posting is anecdotal. Much more lip service-y.

Does what you are saying apply to this draft?

What research? Posting a list of former number one picks?