Sixers #3 for Celtics #1?

[Homerclease]

Look at it this way. The Celtics wanted the laker pick + Noel for pick THREE. Now that they are picking first there is 0.0 chance they even consider any of these offers and they shouldn't because it doesn't work that way.

When was the last time someone traded the top pick for a package of lesser assets like that? It NEVER happens. It never happens because the top pick is worth significantly more than all the picks below it

[Homerclease]

Simmons. Nothing less. Which is why a trade is very unlikely to happen. Celtics ownership is on record saying they would only trade the pick for the second coming and anything less than 3+ Simmons isn't enough to even keep me on the line

But thats pretty awful the other way you have to know.

Just look at his screen name.

What does my screen name have to do with anything

[vct33]

Boston receives...
#3
Lakers unprotected 2018
Saric
Kings unprotected 2019

76ers receive...

Avery Bradley
Markelle Fultz
Boston (not NETS) 2018

I'd do this if it was Smart instead of Bradley. You could take out the Kings pick if need be.

[Laimbeer]

Saric is plenty. He's a proven player who's in contention for rookie of the year. As said above, there isn't a huge drop in quality from one to three in this draft.

[Homerclease]

Saric is plenty. He's a proven player who's in contention for rookie of the year. As said above, there isn't a huge drop in quality from one to three in this draft.

Not. Even. Close. History proves me correct and our perceived value of the prospects at the top of the draft is absolutely meaningless. 1 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3

[SmartWentCrazy]

I think the entire premise is flawed. The Celtics need quality, not quantity. Why trade a guaranteed #1 pick for a guy universally seen on a tier below Fultz? A future pick that may high lottery- or may be 10+? Seems like a ridiculous risk to take.

If the Celtics trade the pick, it'd be for an established talent. Piecing out your best asset into worse assets makes no sense for a team desperate for a consolidation trade.

I think the point is IF Ainge is going to be crazy and try to be smarter than everyone else and go with someone other than Fultz (or Ball), then there is no reason for him to stay at #1.

Fultz is going #1 now, no team would trade up to take anyone else. Ball will go #2 since the Lakers I think are locked in on him.

That means if Ainge wants to go for anyone outside of those two, then it makes sense to trade down to #3 rather than just wasting #1 on them when you know they'll still be there at #3. You pick up extra assets and still get the same guy you would have taken at #1.

So while it doesn't make sense to NOT take Fultz, it makes even less sense to NOT trade down to #3 if you are taking anyone other than him or Ball.

But that's just it-- the premise is Ainge is going to do something crazy. Given how he tried to top 1 protect the pick at the deadline for George and Butler, and how all the reports are that if they keep the pick they'll take Fultz, I think it's far more logical to conclude that he wants Fultz badly.

[sixerswillrule]

Simmons. Nothing less.

Simmons for #1 straight up is fair, I agree. The Simmons vs. Fultz poll was around 50/50 on the general board.

Yes, I know what you really said. It's always funny to compare the two extremes.

"I wouldn't trade Simmons alone for both the #1 and Porzingis" - a few Sixers fans in a pre-lottery hypothetical. Insane statement.

"Both Simmons and the #3 would be needed in return for #1" - you. Also an insane statement.

[Homerclease]

Simmons. Nothing less.

Simmons for #1 straight up is fair, I agree. The Simmons vs. Fultz poll was around 50/50 on the general board.

Yes, I know what you really said. It's always funny to compare the two extremes.

"I wouldn't trade Simmons alone for both the #1 and Porzingis" - a few Sixers fans in a pre-lottery hypothetical. Insane statement.

"Both Simmons and the #3 would be needed in return for #1" - you. Also an insane statement.

It's not an insane statement. It's a testiment to how valuable the top pick is. I'm not dealing that pick if I'm the Celtics unless it's an offer I can't refuse. From the sixers that starts with Simmons and your pick. Don't blame philly at all for not wanting to do that and the Celtics will be perfectly happy making Markelle Fultz the top overall pick. The entire premise of the point flew way over your head

[Texas Chuck]

Okay that's enough with the petty name calling and sly insults already. And its disappointing the extreme positions being taken by a couple of posters which drove discussion down to the point where people felt the need to make things personal.

I'm locking this because I see it getting worse before it gets better, but if someone takes issue PM a Mod and they can handle it. I probably won't be around much until late so try someone else in addition to me.

Thanks

Chuck