Ted Stephens Rule

[TheBallDoLie]

I am aware you are not allowed to trade consecutive 1st round picks. My question is when does that apply? So for example:

The Chicago Bulls in 2017 drafted Justin Patton with the THEIR 16th overall pick. But they drafted Patton with the sole purpose of trading him to Minnesota. Chicago did use their pick, but traded the player immediately to Minnesota. Does the Ted Stephens rule go in affect? Is Chicago not allowed to trade their 2018 1st round pick? Or because they technically used the pick and traded it later, does that rule not apply.

[DBoys]

I am aware you are not allowed to trade consecutive 1st round picks.

That is NOT the rule (although that is how it is often misconstrued).

The rule is that a team cannot make a trade that will result (or may result) in being without a 1st round draft pick in any two consecutive, future years.
* A 1st round pick (of any sort), not their own necessarily
* Future years (already-done drafts and picks don't matter)
* Because it's about a snapshot of the future draft picks at the moment of the trade, it may matter if a draft-day trade is done before, or after, the draft
* Decided based on all the possible outcomes at the time of the trade (IOW, conditional picks cannot not have a condition that might result in violating the rule)
* Ted Stepien (past owner of the Cavs)

[TheBallDoLie]

I am aware you are not allowed to trade consecutive 1st round picks.

That is NOT the rule (although that is how it is often misconstrued).

The rule is that a team cannot make a trade that will result (or may result) in being without a 1st round draft pick in any two consecutive, future years.
* A 1st round pick (of any sort), not their own necessarily
* Future years (already-done drafts and picks don't matter)
* Because it's about a snapshot of the future draft picks at the moment of the trade, it may matter if a draft-day trade is done before, or after, the draft
* Decided based on all the possible outcomes at the time of the trade (IOW, conditional picks cannot not have a condition that might result in violating the rule)
* Ted Stepien (past owner of the Cavs)

Thanks for the education DBoys. Always appreciated.

[NPZ]

I am aware you are not allowed to trade consecutive 1st round picks.

That is NOT the rule (although that is how it is often misconstrued).

The rule is that a team cannot make a trade that will result (or may result) in being without a 1st round draft pick in any two consecutive, future years.
* A 1st round pick (of any sort), not their own necessarily
* Future years (already-done drafts and picks don't matter)
* Because it's about a snapshot of the future draft picks at the moment of the trade, it may matter if a draft-day trade is done before, or after, the draft
* Decided based on all the possible outcomes at the time of the trade (IOW, conditional picks cannot not have a condition that might result in violating the rule)
* Ted Stepien (past owner of the Cavs)

Thanks for the education DBoys. Always appreciated.

It's an antiquated rule because the Cavs and Stepien were in an era where some franchises were poor and/or on the brink of collapse. EG: Jazz and Cavs. Teams like that were in a double bind because they needed top picks, but couldn't afford em year in and year out. Whoooole different NBA than now. Lakers got both Magic and Worthy #1 picks due to deals for future unprotected 1st round picks from both N.O. Jazz and Cavs (pre-Stepien, but same behavior). The smart/stable teams like BOS/LA were preying on the losers. Both Clev and Utah eventually wound up with the league's worst record when the picks came due (79 and 82) and LA simply stepped into their position in the coin toss for 1st and 2nd picks.

The Jazz also couldn't afford to keep Dominique Wilkins. They drafted him 3rd in 82 and sold him to Atlanta for 1 million and a player. I recall an older Jazz fan once writing somewhere that they literally would've folded if they signed Nique. Yes, they lost out on Magic and Nique. They literally were hanging on by what is now considered petty cash. They had already moved to Utah cus NO was a failure and their owner at the time was trying to move em again, almost immediately, to Vegas, which was nixed by two different commissioners. That's why they played RS games at UNLV and hence, why Kareem broke Wilt's scoring record at Thomas & Mack Center instead of The Salt Palace. I think it was kinda like the situation the 90s Clippers had with The Arrowhead Pond Of Anaheim (Arrowhead bottled water corp was the orig name sponsor...). It was a much better facility than the LA Memorial Sports Arena. I attended one Clipp game at both arenas in the 90s. Sports Arena was a dump. The Pond (now Honda Center) is a nice little building in a nice little area. For 1993, it was a modern venue that would've suited any smaller NBA franchise well. They would often put the bigger games at The Pond. Bulls, Lakers, Sonics, etc.