Sixers officially acquire #1 pick per Woj and Aldridge. Will get Fultz

LongLiveHinkie · Post #301 » by **LongLiveHinkie** » Sat Jun 17, 2017 6:02 am

sweeper12 · Post #302 » by **sweeper12** » Sat Jun 17, 2017 6:03 am

sixers4real wrote:I think its a done deal.
#3 + LAL 2018 + Sixers 2019/2020. I guess unprotected.

We still have our 2018 and Sac 2019 to get our SG. We desperately need a SG.

I'm not sure why people are saying this. Just assuming the worst case? All of the media reports have suggested it's this year's pick plus ONE more pick in the future.

Simmons25 · Post #303 » by **Simmons25** » Sat Jun 17, 2017 6:07 am

GoCeltics123 wrote:http://insider.espn.com/video/clip?id=19658224

This is probably typical Stephen A Smith BS, but he says the Sixers want Jackson if they trade up

Given Stephen A Smith has picked the loser of the last 6 finals when it was a 50/50 coin toss... this makes me feel good.

It doesn't make any sense to me that the 76ers would trade up for Jackson... a guy that isn't a perfect fit for the team and doesn't give us what we badly need which is shooting, with questionable character and on top of that is in all likelihood going to be available at #3 anyway. To then suggest you would give up future top 5 draft picks for that on top of it.. is ridiculous.

Fultz is exactly what we need and is unlikely to be there at 3... hence trying to trade up. Jackson probably will be there at 3... and if he is not we get Fultz anyway.

Jojothewhale · Post #304 » by **Jojothewhale** » Sat Jun 17, 2017 6:17 am

Stephen A changed his story anyway, not that it was ever Jackson.

Embiid P · Post #305 » by **Embiid P** » Sat Jun 17, 2017 6:39 am

All I can say is that I hope Fultz is the next Steph Curry, Ray Allen, James Harden, etc. otherwise he's not worth giving up what BC is likely to give up. Can he at least competently defend the guard positions?

mos_def · Post #306 » by **mos_def** » Sat Jun 17, 2017 6:46 am

Simbiid wrote:All I can say is that I hope Fultz is the next Steph Curry, Ray Allen, James Harden, etc. otherwise he's not worth giving up what BC is likely to give up. Can he at least competently defend the PG position?

He was the leading scorer in the Pac-12: which produced Westbrook (UCLA) and Harden (Arizona St). He isn't the shooters that you mentioned but he can score. His long arms and height make him a good matchup vs PGs. He is young so he has to work on some things. I like his offense more than Jackson.

Ericb5 · Post #307 » by **Ericb5** » Sat Jun 17, 2017 6:49 am

eyeatoma wrote:
Ericb5 wrote:The important point here is that Ball and Jackson are both better than Fultz, and we shouldn't give up anything to get Fultz.

Fultz may be terrific in the end, but that doesn't mean that we should give up assets to get him.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You're really being a broken record...

I am I suppose, but we worked too hard to gather these assets to be snookered by Ainge into trading up for a player that Ainge doesn't want in the first place.

If we are really giving up an unprotected 2018 pick to move up that is.

Fultz is terrific and I would be happy to have him, but you don't trade assets like that unless it is for a superstar, or at least a player that is on the next tier, and he is on the same tier. Ainge is going to get a player on the same level for a premium asset, and that makes us Billy King.

It's the fact that this is a losing trade value wise that bothers me, not that I don't like Fultz. If he turns into Curry then it would be great, but it is a gamble that goes against the percentages.

If we are going to consolidate assets I would rather do it for a proven player.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wilfried · Post #308 » by **Wilfried** » Sat Jun 17, 2017 6:49 am

Big believer in Murphy's law.

So if this trade goes down (with Lakers' pick involved) you can bet Embiid goes down again this season and Lakers pick is top 3 and we screw our chance to get his replacement (Ayton or Mamba). Not to mention we gave away Noel too.

Okafor will be our main center piece than

An impatient GM is a bad GM. I'm afraid BC fails to see the long term benefits.

I don't believe the gap between Fultz or Ball is that big, to give up the Lakers' pick. It will haunt us.

Winejk · Post #309 » by **Winejk** » Sat Jun 17, 2017 7:00 am

The more I think about it, the more I hate this deal if either the Laker 2018 pick or the Sacramento 19 pick is involved.

Ainge doesn't want another guard. He's loaded with guards just like the Sixers were loaded with big men. Secondly, Ainge wants as much cap space as possible to land FAs.

By trading down 2 spots Ainge likely gets Jackson or Tatum. He can't risk trading down to #5 or later so the #3 pick is the sweet spot. He avoids taking another guard.

By trading down he also saves a little on his cap space so he can go for Blake Griffin or Hayward.

Philly should only include Philly's own first rounder.

Ericb5 · Post #310 » by **Ericb5** » Sat Jun 17, 2017 7:03 am

Chris76 wrote:
OleSchool wrote:Maybe BC can get Bradley. It would help the Celtics to free up cap space and we need AB

AB would be perfect. A great defensive SG that's a knockdown shooter. However, I would be surprised if Boston lets him go. He played a big part in their success.

If we are getting Smart or Bradley back in this deal then I will be much happier about it.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Post #311 » by **CoreyGallagher** » Sat Jun 17, 2017 7:22 am

We all knew Colangelo was going to burn through the assets, our only hope is that Hinkie gave us enough to build a Championship team out of.

76ciology · Post #312 » by **76ciology** » Sat Jun 17, 2017 7:23 am

Read on Twitter

I still believe he is still behind all this. Atleast as a consultant.

kriss73 · Post #313 » by **kriss73** » Sat Jun 17, 2017 7:27 am

76ciology wrote:

Read on Twitter

I still believe he is still behind all this. Atleast as a consultant.

....or he's Ainge's consultant now.

Post #314 » by **HartfordWhalers** » Sat Jun 17, 2017 7:29 am

Simmons25 wrote:Given Stephen A Smith has picked the loser of the last 6 finals when it was a 50/50 coin toss... this makes me feel good.

It wasn;t a 50-50 coin toss. There have been clear favorites years like this year, which makes it even worse.

76ciology · Post #315 » by **76ciology** » Sat Jun 17, 2017 7:31 am

CoreyGallagher wrote:We all knew Colangelo was going to burn through the assets, our only hope is that Hinkie gave us enough to build a Championship team out of.

Eventually someone's got to burn through the assets. At some point were going to give up value for impact. At some point the bigs are going to be traded for lesser talent but better impact players via cap structure&on court considerations.

I was looking around. There's not much "superstar" we can steal in this league and most of them (Butler or George) Fultz falls into that category. Atleast with Fultz, we don't have to overpay THAT much via assets or cap structure.

I think when everything is considered this is not an overpay of assets. Although I must admit that there's quite a risk for both teams in this deal. Just as the two popular point of views of Fultz and a gap between Ball/Jackson and the one where Ball, Fultz and Jackson are all in the same tier.

And if we do this deal, then THE OWNERSHIP falls into that group of guys that believes in Fultz over Ball/Jackson.

timLH · Post #316 » by **timLH** » Sat Jun 17, 2017 7:31 am

Why are we doing Ainge a favor and gifting extra picks to him?
I agree that on pick-wise, the value of #1 may be equal to #3 plus another top-5 pick next year.
BUT on player-wise, Fultz is not worth Jackson/Ball plus another top-5 pick next year.

76ciology · Post #317 » by **76ciology** » Sat Jun 17, 2017 7:33 am

timLH wrote:Why are we doing Ainge a favor and gifting extra picks to him?
I agree that on pick-wise, the value of #1 may be equal to #3 plus another top-5 pick next year.
BUT on player-wise, Fultz is not worth Jackson/Ball plus another top-5 pick next year.

I guess its a point of view thing, where some guys think Fultz is clearly much better than Ball/Jackson. Or atleast had the chance to be a superstar over jackson/Ball

Att · Post #318 » by **Att** » Sat Jun 17, 2017 7:50 am

This is absolutely crazy. Colangelo is clearly the worse GM in basketball and he's dealing with Ainge. If he's giving him three picks, two of them unprotected, he's even more of an idiot that I thought.

Wilfried · Post #319 » by **Wilfried** » Sat Jun 17, 2017 7:54 am

The Lakers pick should at least be top 4 protected or something

Ericb5 · Post #320 » by **Ericb5** » Sat Jun 17, 2017 7:57 am

76ciology wrote:
CoreyGallagher wrote:We all knew Colangelo was going to burn through the assets, our only hope is that Hinkie gave us enough to build a Championship team out of.

Eventually someone's got to burn through the assets. At some point were going to give up value for impact. At some point the bigs are going to be traded for lesser talent but better impact players via cap structure&on court considerations.

I was looking around. There's not much "superstar" we can steal in this league and most of them (Butler or George) Fultz falls into that category. Atleast with Fultz, we don't have to overpay THAT much via assets or cap structure.

I think when everything is considered this is not an overpay of assets. Although I must admit that there's quite a risk for both teams in this deal. Just as the two popular point of views of Fultz and a gap between Ball/Jackson and the one where Ball, Fultz and Jackson are all in the same tier.

And if we do this deal, then THE OWNERSHIP falls into that group of guys that believes in Fultz over Ball/Jackson.

I don't think that the ownership is a factor here.

If we trade 3 plus an unprotected 2018 pick then that is more than twice the value that Cousins returned, and he is a pure superstar in his prime.

It is more than Butler or George is likely to fetch.

Fultz fits like a glove, but he is an unproven commodity. Couldn't we get Butler for the same package?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Grade the trade