Would you guys do this

[BRIGGS]

Pick #4 for Pick #8 and a 2016 pick restricted to 5

[coordinator0]

Only if Russell fell out of the top three. Mudiay isn't really a good fit and giving up a pick like that to move up for someone like Winslow would be foolish. He's not worth that. Everybody that's likely to be picked between five and twelve are all pretty close in terms of value. Detroit's best bet is to either stick with what they've got or move down a bit.

[sc8581]

Pick #4 for Pick #8 and a 2016 pick restricted to 5

Only if Towns or Russell are there

[Montanabadboy]

I thought we couldn't trade our pick in consecutive drafts, maybe if we get a pick back it's ok? Can anybody clarify this?
Regardless I wouldn't do this. I'm not a fan of trading future picks, and I wouldn't give up any assets when there's a possibilty the guy we would trade up for could fall to us any way. The value just isn't there for me.

[coordinator0]

I thought we couldn't trade our pick in consecutive drafts, maybe if we get a pick back it's ok? Can anybody clarify this?
Regardless I wouldn't do this. I'm not a fan of trading future picks, and I wouldn't give up any assets when there's a possibilty the guy we would trade up for could fall to us any way. The value just isn't there for me.

http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q87

Teams are restricted from trading away future first round draft picks in consecutive years. This is known as the "Ted Stepien Rule." Stepien owned the Cavs from 1980-83, and made a series of bad trades (such as the 1982 trade mentioned above) that cost the Cavs several years' first round picks. As a result of Stepien's ineptitude, teams are now prevented from making trades which might leave them without a first round pick in consecutive future years.

The Stepien rule applies only to future first round picks. For example, if this is the 2011-12 season, then a team can trade its 2012 first round pick without regard to whether they had traded their 2011 pick, since their 2011 pick is no longer a future pick. But they can't trade away both their 2012 and 2013 picks, since both are future picks. Teams sometimes work around this rule by trading first round picks in alternate years, or by giving one team the right to swap picks with the other.

The Pistons are free to trade their pick if they want to. I'm guessing they won't get any offers tempting enough to do so but who knows.

[Montanabadboy]

I thought we couldn't trade our pick in consecutive drafts, maybe if we get a pick back it's ok? Can anybody clarify this?
Regardless I wouldn't do this. I'm not a fan of trading future picks, and I wouldn't give up any assets when there's a possibilty the guy we would trade up for could fall to us any way. The value just isn't there for me.

http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q87

Teams are restricted from trading away future first round draft picks in consecutive years. This is known as the "Ted Stepien Rule." Stepien owned the Cavs from 1980-83, and made a series of bad trades (such as the 1982 trade mentioned above) that cost the Cavs several years' first round picks. As a result of Stepien's ineptitude, teams are now prevented from making trades which might leave them without a first round pick in consecutive future years.

The Stepien rule applies only to future first round picks. For example, if this is the 2011-12 season, then a team can trade its 2012 first round pick without regard to whether they had traded their 2011 pick, since their 2011 pick is no longer a future pick. But they can't trade away both their 2012 and 2013 picks, since both are future picks. Teams sometimes work around this rule by trading first round picks in alternate years, or by giving one team the right to swap picks with the other.

The Pistons are free to trade their pick if they want to. I'm guessing they won't get any offers tempting enough to do so but who knows.

Good find. So the above proposal would not be acceptable, which was #8 this year and a top 5 protected pick in 2016 for #4. Two draft picks in consecutive years. Is that how everybody else reads this?

[BRIGGS]

You can "swap" places--unfortunately Im a kNick fan and Ive seen this hurt us but its an effective way around the rule. You are not trading the pick you are simply "swapping positions".

[sc8581]

If Russell is there I'll even throw in KCP and our 2018 pick

[tmorgan]

There is a zero percent chance Philly passes on Russell at #3, even if the Lakers go insane and draft Mudiay at #2. Unless Minny or LA falls in love with Russell and takes him earlier, he's going to be a Sixer.

[AussieAsh13]

Knowing the 76ers I can almost see them drafting Mudiay to play as more of traditional PG as opposed to Russell. But I see that as like a dark horse thing.
However I'm a betting man, and the odds say Russell!

[The Penguin]

No

4-8 looks like a pretty fluid situation with Cauley-Stein / Kristaps / Mudiay / Winslow / Hezonja / Johnson potentially going in any order, there's too much of a chance the player the Pistons are looking at with #4 might be there at #8 anyway to give up a future 1st, especially one only top 5 protected for a team that has the longest playoff drought in the East.

[Laimbeer]

self delete

[coordinator0]

Yeah, I know. It wasn't a response to the OP as much as it was clarifying that the Pistons would be able to trade their pick this year if they choose. The original deal obviously wouldn't be legal.