5 players worth trading the Celtics’ No. 1 pick for

https://www.boston.com/sports/boston-celtics/2017/06/11/5-players-worth-trading-the-celtics-no-1-pick-for



5 players worth trading the Celtics’ No. 1 pick for



Danny Ainge has reportedly been taking calls about the No. 1 overall pick.




New Orleans Pelicans forward Anthony Davis (23) in the first half of an NBA basketball game Friday, April 7, 2017, in Denver. New Orleans Pelicans forward Anthony Davis (23) in the first half of an NBA basketball game Friday, April 7, 2017, in Denver. –AP Photo/David Zalubowski



By Brian Robb  5:00 AM


The odds seem to be in favor of the Boston Celtics keeping the No. 1 overall pick in the 2017 NBA Draft, but that hasn’t stopped Danny Ainge from taking calls about the top selection.

“The only thing we know for certain is we have the No. 1 pick,” Ainge told Adam Himmelsbach of The Boston Globe in May. “What we don’t know for certain is who that person is yet and what sort of value the pick can get us if we choose to go another direction other than just drafting that pick.”


Just two years ago, the Cavaliers traded No. 1 overall pick Andrew Wiggins for All-Star forward Kevin Love in the weeks following the draft. Which players around the league would be worth moving the No. 1 pick (and potentially more) for this year? Here’s a look at five names that Ainge should be making calls on:


Anthony Davis: It would take a lot more than the No. 1 pick to get the New Orleans Pelicans to even think about parting ways with their franchise cornerstone. Still, Davis is a good place to start this list. He’s a four-time All-Star at age 23, is one of the most dominant rebounders and defenders in the NBA. He is also stuck in an ugly situation in New Orleans. In Boston, he would be exactly the kind of star who would vault the Celtics into contender status, and his youth also gives them a chance to flourish long-term with whatever young pieces of the core the front office wants to invest in.

The problem for the Celtics (and the other 28 teams that would love Davis) is that the 6-foot-11 big man is already signed through the 2020 season. Despite the Pelicans’ inability to put the proper building blocks around him anytime soon thanks to roster and cap mismanagement, they don’t have any incentive to move the face of their franchise. Boston has enough trade assets to keep Pelicans GM Dell Demps listening on the line (two Brooklyn picks, Jaylen Brown, Jae Crowder, future draft picks), but after acquiring DeMarcus Cousins last offseason, this team doesn’t appear ready to hit the reset button yet.





Karl-Anthony Towns: Much of the same logic that applies to Davis also holds true for Towns. The Timberwolves’ center is a promising young star for a franchise that hasn’t made the postseason for the last 12 seasons. The seven-footer isn’t nearly as polished defensively as Davis, but he’s putting up absurd numbers already (25 points, 12 rebounds) in just his second NBA season. The Celtics would surely offer both Brooklyn picks and close to whatever else Wolves team president Tom Thibodeau would want, which still may not be enough to get a deal done.




Nikola Jokic: The Serbian center has the potential to emerge as one of the best second-round picks in NBA history. He already averaged 16.7 points and 9.8 rebounds in just his second season at age 21 on one of the five best offenses in the NBA last season. His passing ability would make him a lethal weapon alongside Al Horford in the Celtics’ offense, and his developing 3-point shot (32 percent) would help Boston keep the floor spread against defenses. Jokic is also under contract for the next two seasons for a total of $2.9 million, making him one of the biggest bargains in the league. The center would not come without flaws (his defensive ability leaves much to be desired) and wouldn’t necessarily have the long-term upside of a Markelle Fultz, but he’s a proven commodity already. For a team that’s ready to win sooner rather than later, picking up Jokic at the cost of the No. 1 pick (and perhaps a little bit more than that) is a gamble worth taking.




Klay Thompson: Would the Oakland juggernaut be willing to trade an All-Star guard for an unproven rookie? The obvious answer would seem to be “no,” but a closer look at the Warriors’ payroll beyond 2017 makes this an offer that would be fiscally enticing to Golden State. Thompson is under contract for two more seasons before he’ll likely command a new max deal alongside Kevin Durant, Steph Curry, and Draymond Green. The Warriors won’t be able to pay that entire group max contracts without a record-setting luxury tax bill. That’s something Warriors ownership may be willing to swallow for the next year or two, but adding the cost control of a No. 1 overall pick would ease that long-term salary crunch across the roster. Boston would need to add a win-now player to the deal, but Thompson is the kind of two-way star that the Celtics would love to build with. He’s in the middle of his prime at age 27, and his 41 percent career 3-point shooting fits perfectly into Brad Stevens’ offensive scheme.




Kristaps Porzingis: The one building block the Knicks have in place for their future is already reportedly disgruntled from the drama in the Big Apple. Porzingis skipped out on exit meetings this spring with the front office amid the ongoing turmoil with Carmelo Anthony. He’s already played for three head coaches in two seasons, but that hasn’t stopped him from emerging as one of the best offensive-minded big men in the league. Despite an inferior supporting cast, the 7-foot-3 Latvian sensation has a versatile skillset from the post and perimeter, averaging over 18 points per game last year while playing within an ancient Triangle offense scheme. If the Knicks want to set the reset button and like the long-term potential of Fultz, Porzingis would be an ideal fit in Boston as a shot creator in the frontcourt.




bob
MY NOTE:  File this under "water is wet".  I don't know about Jokic.  That was a pretty assist, positively Bird-like, but I might want a bit more than that for a #1 pick.  Thompson makes sense because he is a proven big-time NBA scorer and Champion and is only 27.  Also, taking him away from GSW weakens them while making us stronger and makes the case for us beating them stronger.  KAT, Davis and Porzingis?  Of course, although we'd have to gut our team to get them you take the elite, young quality whenever you can.  I don't think any of them are available, none, but sure I'd take them.

The point I take away from this article isn't that I'd trade the #1 for these guys, that's a no-brainer (except maybe Jokic), it's that the list of players we should trade the #1 for is really, really short and quite elite.  This is for a straight up pick plus players to match salaries trade, not a hybrid trade where we get, say, the #3 from Philly with Saric or, say, Julius Randle and LA's #2 for our #1 (just an example.  I'm not saying LA would or should do that, just that we're getting a very high pick back as well as a player we like).


.

Towns and Davis are definitely worth trading the pick and building around. Jokic and Porzingis are maybes, probably would want their lottery pick in the deal. Thompson does nothing for us like Butler or George, not worth considering. Fultz's upside and most any decent FA gets us closer to a championship (or championships) than Thompson.

KyleCleric wrote:Towns and Davis are definitely worth trading the pick and building around. Jokic and Porzingis are maybes, probably would want their lottery pick in the deal. Thompson does nothing for us like Butler or George, not worth considering. Fultz's upside and most any decent FA gets us closer to a championship (or championships) than Thompson.

kdp,

I see Klay Thompson as what we would want Markelle Fultz to become.  Markelle Fultz may become Klay Thompson in 3-5 years (and maybe not).  Klay Thompson is Klay Thompson.

What does anybody see in Fultz that would make you think he would be better than Klay Thompson?  A better defender?  I don't think so, Thompson's pretty good and that's not Fultz' forte.  Shooting?  Thompson is 3" taller and has shown he can light up any team on any given night for 30+.  In fact, he scored 37 in one quarter.  Passing?  Maybe.  Rebounding?  I doubt 6'4" 195# Markelle Fultz is going to be a great career rebounder.


bob


.

bobheckler wrote:

KyleCleric wrote:Towns and Davis are definitely worth trading the pick and building around. Jokic and Porzingis are maybes, probably would want their lottery pick in the deal. Thompson does nothing for us like Butler or George, not worth considering. Fultz's upside and most any decent FA gets us closer to a championship (or championships) than Thompson.

kdp,

I see Klay Thompson as what we would want Markelle Fultz to become.  Markelle Fultz may become Klay Thompson in 3-5 years (and maybe not).  Klay Thompson is Klay Thompson.

What does anybody see in Fultz that would make you think he would be better than Klay Thompson?  A better defender?  I don't think so, Thompson's pretty good and that's not Fultz' forte.  Shooting?  Thompson is 3" taller and has shown he can light up any team on any given night for 30+.  In fact, he scored 37 in one quarter.  Passing?  Maybe.  Rebounding?  I doubt 6'4" 195# Markelle Fultz is going to be a great career rebounder.


bob


.

Thompson is a great player but he isn't a top 10 player and won't be a transcendent player. I'd put him on the same caliber of player with Griffin, Butler, George, DeRozan, and Hayward. Fultz could become a transcendent player some day, a player like Westbrook or Harden. Also if we were to move Fultz for Thompson, we would have difficulty creating enough cap to create room to sign equivalent level players to Thompson, Blake Griffin or Gordan Hayward. .

Just in terms of day 1 comparison for Fultz relative to Thompson, Thompson provides better scoring, shooting and individual defense while Fultz will be better playmaking, passing, and rebounding. That's a pretty easy prediction to make. Those are the 3 aspects to the game that Thompson excels at an elite or near elite level and pretty much doesn't add anything to those other elements.

Davis or Towns. I agree. Porzingas will not be traded without Melo, so no thanks. Jokic will not be traded because they got rid of "my guy" Nurcic so he could play.
I agree that we hope Fultz can become Klay, and we don't need any more guards. IF we traded the pick, and I don't think we should, we need to go big

red16russ11 wrote:Davis or Towns.  I agree.  Porzingas will not be traded without Melo, so no thanks.  Jokic will not be traded because they got rid of "my guy" Nurcic so he could play.  
I agree that we hope Fultz can become Klay, and we don't need any more guards.  IF we traded the pick, and I don't think we should, we need to go big

red,

1.  We agree on Davis or Towns.

2.  I agree about Melo and Zinger being packaged.  I, for one, would take that deal to get a transcendental player like Kristaps Porzingis when he is only 21 years old.  He would be a part of our core for a long, long time, while Melo has a year or two left. Just long enough for LeBron to be fading away too.

3.  Agree about Jokic.  

4.  Agree about going big, however, there's more than one way to skin a GM.  We can trade Fultz for Thompson (let's just say it's more or less straight up to simplify things) and then we trade Bradley and/or some other established player for the big.  Getting the upgrade with Thompson would allow Danny to think like that. And Melo could be our KD, a player who can score in buckets against LBJ.

What I find somewhat amusing is these talks about big player movement on the Celtics, and CSNNE and others are doing it even more than us, yet we made the EC Finals.  That's usually the kind of talk with an underachieving team, not an overachieving one.


bob



.

KyleCleric wrote:

bobheckler wrote:

KyleCleric wrote:Towns and Davis are definitely worth trading the pick and building around. Jokic and Porzingis are maybes, probably would want their lottery pick in the deal. Thompson does nothing for us like Butler or George, not worth considering. Fultz's upside and most any decent FA gets us closer to a championship (or championships) than Thompson.

kdp,

I see Klay Thompson as what we would want Markelle Fultz to become.  Markelle Fultz may become Klay Thompson in 3-5 years (and maybe not).  Klay Thompson is Klay Thompson.

What does anybody see in Fultz that would make you think he would be better than Klay Thompson?  A better defender?  I don't think so, Thompson's pretty good and that's not Fultz' forte.  Shooting?  Thompson is 3" taller and has shown he can light up any team on any given night for 30+.  In fact, he scored 37 in one quarter.  Passing?  Maybe.  Rebounding?  I doubt 6'4" 195# Markelle Fultz is going to be a great career rebounder.


bob


.

Thompson is a great player but he isn't a top 10 player and won't be a transcendent player. I'd put him on the same caliber of player with Griffin, Butler, George, DeRozan, and Hayward. Fultz could become a transcendent player some day, a player like Westbrook or Harden. Also if we were to move Fultz for Thompson, we would have difficulty creating enough cap to create room to sign equivalent level players to Thompson, Blake Griffin or Gordan Hayward. .

Just in terms of day 1 comparison for Fultz relative to Thompson, Thompson provides better scoring, shooting and individual defense while Fultz will be better playmaking, passing, and rebounding. That's a pretty easy prediction to make. Those are the 3 aspects to the game that Thompson excels at an elite or near elite level and pretty much doesn't add anything to those other elements.

Kyle Cleric

Your statement below.

"Fultz could become a transcendent player some day"

?
"Could some day" is much too iffy for me - I'll go with the proven - like George, Butler and Griffin (if he has a medical OK from the leagues GM'S.)

swish

Bob,

Porzingis might not be as far away as I used to think.   I also like Thompson, but the Warriors can't breakup what they have until they just cannot afford their big four (and that is not next year).  Davis and Towns would rightfully cost too much.  I agree that Jokic is a good player but probably not worth gambling on with Fultz.  Of course, getting Porzingis may mean that Ainge has to take Carmelo Anthony as well as give up the number one overall pick.

I am not sure that I would ever expect Carmelo Anthony to ever change his style of play, but for only the two years (and, maybe only one with the stretch rule - if necessary) along with Porzingis might not be all bad for a short period of time.

Porzingis would be the addition to the front court that may be around and at an all star level for ten years.  He will add to all of his present stats once escaping the "triangle" in NY as he is only going to get better in the next 5-7 years.

Anthony may come to realize that getting out of NY to play for a much better organization from top to bottom may help him get at least an opportunity to get the ring that has been unavailable throughout his career to date.   Just like the rest of us he is not getting younger so staying in his "charmed" NY to hang out at clubs and sit in parks is going to leave him as a big time loser when his career ends.  Cripes, he can still live there if he wants as long as he is at practices and games every day for all I care.  I just do not think that he can "wait out" Phil Jackson to leave (was just extended/re-signed last winter) or for the owner to pass away or all of a sudden get much smarter..

I have never been an Anthony fan, but if taking him for a short period of time could gain us Porzingis, I would give up the opportunity to draft Fultz.  Porzingis is further along already as a franchise player, he also fits what we need the most and he is still in the learning phase of his NBA career.

Anthony MIGHT even "see the light" and become more of a team player on a different team that is moving forward with a chance to at least to get to the finals. Maybe with some new surroundings, he jumps in and passes the ball some, he extends himself to take a couple of steps to get a rebound, he really digs in and plays defense (60% of the time?), hustles a little more, complains a lot less, etc, etc. ??  Even if he does not completely buy in, he will still be a very nice second scoring option to go along with Thomas. He will score as much as Haywood, and will even cost less for two years and is on a shorter contract.

swish wrote:

KyleCleric wrote:

bobheckler wrote:

KyleCleric wrote:Towns and Davis are definitely worth trading the pick and building around. Jokic and Porzingis are maybes, probably would want their lottery pick in the deal. Thompson does nothing for us like Butler or George, not worth considering. Fultz's upside and most any decent FA gets us closer to a championship (or championships) than Thompson.

kdp,

I see Klay Thompson as what we would want Markelle Fultz to become.  Markelle Fultz may become Klay Thompson in 3-5 years (and maybe not).  Klay Thompson is Klay Thompson.

What does anybody see in Fultz that would make you think he would be better than Klay Thompson?  A better defender?  I don't think so, Thompson's pretty good and that's not Fultz' forte.  Shooting?  Thompson is 3" taller and has shown he can light up any team on any given night for 30+.  In fact, he scored 37 in one quarter.  Passing?  Maybe.  Rebounding?  I doubt 6'4" 195# Markelle Fultz is going to be a great career rebounder.


bob


.

Thompson is a great player but he isn't a top 10 player and won't be a transcendent player. I'd put him on the same caliber of player with Griffin, Butler, George, DeRozan, and Hayward. Fultz could become a transcendent player some day, a player like Westbrook or Harden. Also if we were to move Fultz for Thompson, we would have difficulty creating enough cap to create room to sign equivalent level players to Thompson, Blake Griffin or Gordan Hayward. .

Just in terms of day 1 comparison for Fultz relative to Thompson, Thompson provides better scoring, shooting and individual defense while Fultz will be better playmaking, passing, and rebounding. That's a pretty easy prediction to make. Those are the 3 aspects to the game that Thompson excels at an elite or near elite level and pretty much doesn't add anything to those other elements.

Kyle Cleric

  Your statement below.

   "Fultz could become a transcendent player some day"

  ?
"Could some day" is much too iffy for me - I'll go with the proven - like George, Butler and Griffin (if he has a medical OK from the leagues GM'S.)

 swish
 

If you trade Fultz for Thompson. You cannot get Griffin. If you don't trade Fultz, you can get Griffin and Fultz.

KyleCleric wrote:

swish wrote:

KyleCleric wrote:

bobheckler wrote:

KyleCleric wrote:Towns and Davis are definitely worth trading the pick and building around. Jokic and Porzingis are maybes, probably would want their lottery pick in the deal. Thompson does nothing for us like Butler or George, not worth considering. Fultz's upside and most any decent FA gets us closer to a championship (or championships) than Thompson.

kdp,

I see Klay Thompson as what we would want Markelle Fultz to become.  Markelle Fultz may become Klay Thompson in 3-5 years (and maybe not).  Klay Thompson is Klay Thompson.

What does anybody see in Fultz that would make you think he would be better than Klay Thompson?  A better defender?  I don't think so, Thompson's pretty good and that's not Fultz' forte.  Shooting?  Thompson is 3" taller and has shown he can light up any team on any given night for 30+.  In fact, he scored 37 in one quarter.  Passing?  Maybe.  Rebounding?  I doubt 6'4" 195# Markelle Fultz is going to be a great career rebounder.


bob


.

Thompson is a great player but he isn't a top 10 player and won't be a transcendent player. I'd put him on the same caliber of player with Griffin, Butler, George, DeRozan, and Hayward. Fultz could become a transcendent player some day, a player like Westbrook or Harden. Also if we were to move Fultz for Thompson, we would have difficulty creating enough cap to create room to sign equivalent level players to Thompson, Blake Griffin or Gordan Hayward. .

Just in terms of day 1 comparison for Fultz relative to Thompson, Thompson provides better scoring, shooting and individual defense while Fultz will be better playmaking, passing, and rebounding. That's a pretty easy prediction to make. Those are the 3 aspects to the game that Thompson excels at an elite or near elite level and pretty much doesn't add anything to those other elements.

Kyle Cleric

  Your statement below.

   "Fultz could become a transcendent player some day"

  ?
"Could some day" is much too iffy for me - I'll go with the proven - like George, Butler and Griffin (if he has a medical OK from the leagues GM'S.)

 swish
 

If you trade Fultz for Thompson. You cannot get Griffin. If you don't trade Fultz, you can get Griffin and Fultz.

Kyle,

Excellent point. If Thompson eats up Danny's cap space then there goes all high quality free agent signings this year.


bob


.

I cannot come up with a logical reason their respective teams would trade any of them.

Besides that the only player in that group I would really wNt is AD with KAT a close second.

The Celtics can keep their pick this year and use their Nets pick next year to get that coveted big.

Dboss