All things Draft Pick. #3

[CelticsPride18]

The only thing I know is the 3rd/2018 BKN/2019 Kings pick shouldn't be included in any package for PG.

[fallguy]

Indiana’s ability to find a trade for George elsewhere has become increasingly limited, if not crippled, because NBA teams believe that it’s George’s intention to eventually sign with the Lakers as a free agent in 2018.

Report goes on to say he thinks he has a better shot at a title with the Lakers, so if we can score him for a lowball fee (Indy isn't going to get squat for him) and put together a strong playoff run and the Lakers suck again, there's a very strong chance we can retain his services.

The trading price will be so low now, it's worth the risk. Thank you PG-13 and you're agent!! You guys rock!

Nah, this doesn't feel like the rumors that Westbrook and Love liked LA. This sounds different. I'd be very cautious about trading for George. And if Butler is really off the market, we're either going to overpay for him, cue Ainge, "It's hard to get stars in this league", or we're going to do something else. If we max Hayward or Griffin and add Jackson or Tatum, and Zizic, to the mix, it's not a home run given what the potential scenarios are, but it's a bases-clearing double.

There's also a possibility we trade down again, or trade in with different assets to get another pick. But we're still going to be trending upward.

I'm with you on George. I'd give up serious value for him only if he signed an extension as part of the deal.

[Jakeopp]

Yeah, unless the Lakers get LBJ, there's no way they have a better title shot than the Pacers since their core will take a long time to develop.

Danny getting him now for 30 cents on the dollar would be good IMO

Yeah, his value just disappeared. Worth a gamble for the C's imo as long as we aren't giving up one of our major picks. Really hoping he doesn't end up with the Cavs here...ugh

[peachbucket]

The point of it all is that it's not a fair return, protection or no protection. And save the political crap, not the place.

You have the #1 draft pick and the prospect any team in the lottery would kill to have.

Yet you can only come away with a two spot drop and a future pick that may end up being just another Marcus Smart?

That's an unacceptable return, plain and simple.

I thought the trade was for a future pick that may end up being just another Michael Jordan? Now I see where the disagreement is...

Stop using hyperbole. They traded Markelle Fultz for pick three and another likely high lottery pick.

You keep implying that every other team must have been falling over themselves to get Fultz, but who?

- the Lakers don't have an asset, outside of perhaps Ingram, that is worth more than the LAL/SAC pick.
- the Suns haven't shown any indication that they are interested in Fultz. Plus Bender, Chriss, Warren etc are all worth less than the pick.
- 3 and LAL/SAC is worth more than 5/10. No reason to believe they would offer more than that.

So what are these magical trades that everyone MUST have been willing to do that Ainge missed the boat on?

Brother, the problem is the return. You have the #1 pick, you have all the leverage. To accept one extra pick that may be a total flame out and a move down two slots to select a player that's worth less in the eyes of the other lottery teams isn't fair value.

Again, do you think the Sixers would accept the Suns 4th pick and their 2018 pick for Fultz? Yeah, probably not.

This is getting ridiculous. Morey called Ainge the best negotiator he has ever seen (and these are not used car salesman). The assets in the deal that you are debating is the direct result of a deal that Ainge architected which is now being recognized as the most lopsided in NBA HISTORY and has yet to bear all of it's delicious fruits. There is a very good chance that Ainge will be selecting the same player at 3 that he would have at 1 this week with an additional high lottery pick with transcendent players up top. 75% of GM's wouldnt have even had the foresight to hide their hand to put themselves in a position to extract this extremely valuable asset. If you want to waste your time debating if drafting Fultz would is better than some other completely unknown outcome then by my guest... but claiming that Ainge didn't get 'fair value' and you personally could have extracted more out of Colangelo is borderline

[chrisab123]

Throw the kitchen sink at Indiana. If you aren't getting Fultz might as well try and win now. If the Celtics get him and sign Griffin or Hayward I doubt he goes anywhere.

[aim2please]

I mean as much as I despised the idea of butler i suppose I can live with the idea of getting butler with this year's pick 3 and replacing this year's brooklyn pick with Sac pick in 19.

It's not terrible logic

Still don't buy this Butler situation. We are making the pick imo..we are taking the guy we always wanted to take once we saw Fultz wasn't what we thought he was, we just got an extra future asset to do so..a really damn good one that. I bet the same guys kicking and screaming over Fultz here today will be flat out denying a trade of that same asset for Fultz when it's conveyed.

If the pick is top 5 next year along with our BKN 18, everyone on this board will be pretending that they loved this trade all along. If it's top 3 in 2019, everyone will forget who Markelle Fultz even is.

Can't we have it both ways?

In vacuum, I think Danny got a good value for #1 pick. On the other hand, I think Fultz is the only can't miss prospect in this draft. That's why I'm not really sure how to feel about this trade.

A lot of GMs would just decide to play it safe and take Fultz. This is a gamble, and kudos to Ainge for having cojones. I'm not a draft expert so I'm gonna give Danny a benefit of a doubt, but if Fultz turns out to be a stud, I'm gonna hate it. If Tatum is better than Fultz and C's have an extra lotto pick coming in, I'm gonna call him a genius. I don't think that's being a hypocrite.

[Afam]

Read on Twitter

[Sven]

I'd trust Danny to judge whether he can keep George or not. And I agree, none of these awesome picks we have for a one year rental unless he is already signing, even then it'd be too much because he's already leaving Indiana.

[Slartibartfast]

Kinda sucks if LAL trades for him this year. I like Sac's odds better but a big part of the appeal is the 50/50 odds LAL ends up a bottom 5 team next year.

Makes sense on multiple levels then to make a trade for PG - to keep him from trashing the LAL pick as well as to maximize win-now (as much as I'm pessimistic on winning now).

[Double Helix]

We'd care, because that's 2 Nets picks for the price of 1 by just drafting Fultz. So if Fultz does become a Harden, this trade is awful. I just think that's a pretty nutty/unrealistic goal for Fultz. He can't even drive and create contact against NCAA caliber athletes at the level Harden is able to against NBA athletes. Harden's driving game is at a level that Fultz is unlikely to ever come to close reaching, if you ask me. Harden is like 20+ pounds heavier and probably even still quicker too. Some have argued they are concerned about his shot due to his low FT%, but it's fact that he wasn't just destroying NCAA defenders off the dribble that concerned me. Guys like Kris Dunn laughably get compared to John Wall based on facing weaker NCAA athletes and then can't drive anywhere near the same once they move up to next level. Marcus Smart another guy who was an elite driver in college but can't do it in pros. Now the difference there is that i do believe Fultz can/will be a high level shooter so I'd be real surprised if he were ever an offensive bust like those guys are currently, but I also can't see the James Harden comparisons for a guy who doesn't get to the rim at will against even NCAA caliber athletes. Not to mention his FT rate is far worse because he favors acrobatic finishes that shy away from contact (think Kyrie, D-Rose) rather than Harden's full speed/try and go through the defender and create contact approach. That's just a less efficient style because FT's are the most efficient shot in basketball.

Now hey, crazy development can happen for any prospect so never say never. Who thought Curry and Kawhi would be this level of players? But I don't see much reasonable evidence suggesting that Fultz ever becomes a Harden like talent. It'd take an outlier developmental curve to reach that kind of level.

I think this is logical. The only counter would be that Harden, Curry, Dunn, Lillard weren't as good as Fultz at age 19. All of those guys had to go back to school at least one more year to reach the next level of development that made them clear cut high lotto picks. Fultz entered college as a very high recruit and performed even better than expected, besting another teen who just so happens to be 6'6 and often compared to Jason Kidd. So, it's probably less about looking at how Fultz compared to those guys when they were drafted or rookies and more about how they looked at age 18/19 as well.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

The problem is being better earlier doesn't neccessarily mean being better long-term. The concerns about Fultz for me come athletically, which is much, much more difficult to improve than your skills are. Fultz is extremely advanced, but that doesn't neccessarily mean theres a superstar ceiling there. I mean D'Angelo Russell and Jamal Murray were absurdly productive for freshmen (not that I think he's quite as unathletic as either of those 2), but the lack of top end athleticism was a concern there too. I think that gets exposed somewhat at the NBA level against significantly better athletes and that his chances of being an elite driver in the NBA like Harden is are very limited. I think he'll still be an all-star caliber player because I expect him to keep developing his shot and I'm not a believer that his FT% is a sign he won't be a real high caliber shooter like some of the advanced stats suggest. He's good enough on good volume of 3's and shot incredibly well from mid-range, plus every scout you hear from believes he can shoot that it makes me believe the FT% is the fluke, not the rest of his shooting. So I expect him to be really good, I just don't expect him to combine real good shooting with an elite NBA driving game and FT rate like Harden has which would turn him from an all-star to a superstar. If you can't get by NCAA athletes at will, it's going to be very hard for you to do it in the NBA when the athleticism level goes up massively. 18, 19 or whatever age...that's a concern.

That's why I added the caveat at the end though. Reality is none of us know how these guys are going to develop and Curry/Kawhi are a great example. So if he has an outlier development curve like them, then sure, can't rule out superstardom. But can't you say the same thing about a guy like Josh Jackson having an outlier developmental curve as a shooter the way Kawhi did? Either could happen, but I don't think it's something we should count on at all. Those guys are far more the exception than the rule.

I agree with all of this.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

[Slartibartfast]

Still don't buy this Butler situation. We are making the pick imo..we are taking the guy we always wanted to take once we saw Fultz wasn't what we thought he was, we just got an extra future asset to do so..a really damn good one that. I bet the same guys kicking and screaming over Fultz here today will be flat out denying a trade of that same asset for Fultz when it's conveyed.

If the pick is top 5 next year along with our BKN 18, everyone on this board will be pretending that they loved this trade all along. If it's top 3 in 2019, everyone will forget who Markelle Fultz even is.

Can't we have it both ways?

In vacuum, I think Danny got a good value for #1 pick. On the other hand, I think Fultz is the only can't miss prospect in this draft. That's why I'm not really sure how to feel about this trade.

A lot of GMs would just decide to play it safe and take Fultz. This is a gamble, and kudos to Ainge for having cojones. I'm not a draft expert so I'm gonna give Danny a benefit of a doubt, but if Fultz turns out to be a stud, I'm gonna hate it. If Tatum is better than Fultz and C's have an extra lotto pick coming in, I'm gonna call him a genius. I don't think that's being a hypocrite.

Exactly - we all want to be Nostradamus and that's plenty of fun to compete over, but you've got to give people space to react to risk without holding it over their head.

[Sven]

If he doesn't sign immediately, we have to win the ECF or George will bolt. No matter how good the Warriors are, I think he's mentally scarred from how many times LeBron has beat his ass in the playoffs. We lose the ECF, he says "F*ck this, I'm out."

[CelticsPride18]

Kinda sucks if LAL trades for him this year. I like Sac's odds better but a big part of the appeal is the 50/50 odds LAL ends up a bottom 5 team next year.

Makes sense on multiple levels then to make a trade for PG - to keep him from trashing the LAL pick as well as to maximize win-now (as much as I'm pessimistic on winning now).

This screw up a Sixers asset and raises the value of a Celtic asset. 2 top 5 pick in 2018 sounds good but I take my chances with Sac pick in 2019.

[Green89]

Report goes on to say he thinks he has a better shot at a title with the Lakers, so if we can score him for a lowball fee (Indy isn't going to get squat for him) and put together a strong playoff run and the Lakers suck again, there's a very strong chance we can retain his services.

The trading price will be so low now, it's worth the risk. Thank you PG-13 and you're agent!! You guys rock!

Nah, this doesn't feel like the rumors that Westbrook and Love liked LA. This sounds different. I'd be very cautious about trading for George. And if Butler is really off the market, we're either going to overpay for him, cue Ainge, "It's hard to get stars in this league", or we're going to do something else. If we max Hayward or Griffin and add Jackson or Tatum, and Zizic, to the mix, it's not a home run given what the potential scenarios are, but it's a bases-clearing double.

There's also a possibility we trade down again, or trade in with different assets to get another pick. But we're still going to be trending upward.

I'm with you on George. I'd give up serious value for him only if he signed an extension as part of the deal.

My point is that you won't have to give up serious value for him. No team is going to offer much based on his decision to want to go to LA. Then it becomes what is the best offer out of the lowball offers for Indy. They will have to take something or risk getting zero in return. If we can lowball it enough to the point we don't lose much if it does become a 1 year rental, you have to chance it. I'd offer Crowder, a non BKN 1st rounder and a filler player.

[London2Boston]

Lakers can still suck this coming year regardless of their moves in 2018. Especially as they won't want to destroy any flexibility to sign George. I still don't know if I want their 2018 pick or Sac in 2019 though. Will depend on how their season pans out. If they are at around 5 then I will probably root for them to win enough to break out of the protection.

[BRUNiNHO91]

Just listened to Jonathan Givony on the radio. He didn't understand why Boston would do the deal this early and generally felt Philly "won the deal". He also think Lonzo to LA is all but done and thinks the Celtics will decide between Tatum and Jackson but is currently leaning Tatum.

That's the thing with Ainge deals..unless you fully trust the guy, you won't really get it until it suddenly hits and..

[fallguy]

Nah, this doesn't feel like the rumors that Westbrook and Love liked LA. This sounds different. I'd be very cautious about trading for George. And if Butler is really off the market, we're either going to overpay for him, cue Ainge, "It's hard to get stars in this league", or we're going to do something else. If we max Hayward or Griffin and add Jackson or Tatum, and Zizic, to the mix, it's not a home run given what the potential scenarios are, but it's a bases-clearing double.

There's also a possibility we trade down again, or trade in with different assets to get another pick. But we're still going to be trending upward.

I'm with you on George. I'd give up serious value for him only if he signed an extension as part of the deal.

My point is that you won't have to give up serious value for him. No team is going to offer much based on his decision to want to go to LA. Then it becomes what is the best offer out of the lowball offers for Indy. They will have to take something or risk getting zero in return. If we can lowball it enough to the point we don't lose much if it does become a 1 year rental, you have to chance it. I'd offer Crowder, a non BKN 1st rounder and a filler player.

Yup. That works too.

Moderate-to-minimal value for no guarantee of staying next summer.

OR

Higher value if he signs an extension.

[fallguy]

Lakers can still suck this coming year regardless of their moves in 2018. Especially as they won't want to destroy any flexibility to sign George. I still don't know if I want their 2018 pick or Sac in 2019 though. Will depend on how their season pans out. If they are at around 5 then I will probably root for them to win enough to break out of the protection.

I'm happy either way. I certainly wouldn't be upset if we ended up with a top-5 pick next year, even if it was #5.

[CelticsPride18]

Memphis pick /Rozier/Crowder and AB for PG

[soxfan2003]

Will be interesting to see if you guys try and trade some of these assets for one of the superstars Fultz was compared to because then you get the rich man's Fultz in their prime to play with IT and Horford in their primes and didn't have to wait on Fultz to develop. It's not easy developing ball dominant lotto talent while you also have somebody like IT.

If you could move the Nets pick, Josh Jackson and the Kings pick in 2018 for a legit superstar then even if Fultz did become Harden-lite you guys won't care because you'll have a new superstar playing alongside IT and Horford.

It just feels like there's another shoe to drop here somewhere.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

We'd care, because that's 2 Nets picks for the price of 1 by just drafting Fultz. So if Fultz does become a Harden, this trade is awful. I just think that's a pretty nutty/unrealistic goal for Fultz. He can't even drive and create contact against NCAA caliber athletes at the level Harden is able to against NBA athletes. Harden's driving game is at a level that Fultz is unlikely to ever come to close reaching, if you ask me. Harden is like 20+ pounds heavier and probably even still quicker too. Some have argued they are concerned about his shot due to his low FT%, but it's fact that he wasn't just destroying NCAA defenders off the dribble that concerned me. Guys like Kris Dunn laughably get compared to John Wall based on facing weaker NCAA athletes and then can't drive anywhere near the same once they move up to next level. Marcus Smart another guy who was an elite driver in college but can't do it in pros. Now the difference there is that i do believe Fultz can/will be a high level shooter so I'd be real surprised if he were ever an offensive bust like those guys are currently, but I also can't see the James Harden comparisons for a guy who doesn't get to the rim at will against even NCAA caliber athletes. Not to mention his FT rate is far worse because he favors acrobatic finishes that shy away from contact (think Kyrie, D-Rose) rather than Harden's full speed/try and go through the defender and create contact approach. That's just a less efficient style because FT's are the most efficient shot in basketball.

Now hey, crazy development can happen for any prospect so never say never. Who thought Curry and Kawhi would be this level of players? But I don't see much reasonable evidence suggesting that Fultz ever becomes a Harden like talent. It'd take an outlier developmental curve to reach that kind of level.

I think this is logical. The only counter would be that Harden, Curry, Dunn, Lillard weren't as good as Fultz at age 19. All of those guys had to go back to school at least one more year to reach the next level of development that made them clear cut high lotto picks. Some of them played 4 years of college ball.

Fultz entered college as a very high recruit and performed even better than expected, besting another teen PG who just so happens to be 6'6 and often compared to Jason Kidd. So, it's probably less about looking at how Fultz compared to those guys when they were drafted and more about how they looked at age 18/19 as well.

I'm not sure how good he will be though in his prime. It's a good time for PGs in this league who can shoot the 3 but there's also a lot of them out there. What makes him truly special? I'm not sure and it sounds like Ainge wasn't either.

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

One thing worth considering, so many of Fultz games were under the radar and his team losing, opponents didn't have a huge incentive to try to stop him like a KD at Texas. KD was receiving lots of hype and his team was pretty good so defenders were awfully aggressive. Fultz may have been well known to folks following the draft but wasn't receiving that much national hype because his team was bad and he isn't really a spectacular player to watch in terms of athleticism.

One way I look at it...if Fultz for his career is 90-100% as good as the average of Rose/Iverson/Kyrie/Wall/Harden, I am actually not upset Ainge gambled and traded him to get that 2nd pick and a chance at a higher upside player/major trade chip. Now I will be the first to admit, I am worried about what Ainge does next but I think this was a gamble worth taking in isolation.

If one is really playing chess and not checkers, a reason to take Jackson or some other player over Fultz is it better maintains IT trade value and Boston can perhaps ship him out at the deadline....

If Fultz is Wade in terms of impact as a 2 way player, the deal will probably haunt Ainge but I can see it being reasonable for Ainge to gamble that he is not.

I'd go further than you and say can't say Fultz bested Ball at all at the college level in anything other than convincing most pro scouts he had more potential. And sometimes those scouts get things really wrong. UCLA hammered Fultz's team and Ball outplayed Fultz in that game as far as I am concerned. It was just one game but given fairly similar stats as measured by PER, have to give the edge to Ball at the college level. One can certainly argue that Fultz better NBA prospect but its hard to argue Fultz actually had the better college season when UCLA outperformed decent expectations and Fultz's team underperformed lower expectations. People were expecting UCLA to be better but nowhere near that much better than Washington.

Curry I'd bet for winning games was better as a freshman than Fultz. Shot 85.5% from the line. His team went 29-5 and he scored nearly as many points as Fultz and I suspect gave greater effort on D.