Hypothetical trade question

If the Magic had traded Nick Anderson, Scott Skiles and their 1992 1st rd pick for Reggie Lewis before the 1991-92 season, and that pick still ended up being Shaq 11 months later and Reggie still tragically passed away 2 years later, would the Magic have said they won that trade because Reggie was the best player in the deal at the time?

If Kyrie leaves a capped out Celtics team with no compensation in return summer of 2019 after winning 0 titles here, and the Nets pick ends up being the best possible scenario for them, Bagley or Porter turning into a Giannis or Kawhi type superstar. Will the Celtics still have won this trade because Kyrie was the best player in it summer of 2017?

Adrian Wojnarowski ✔ @wojespn
Irving thrilled w/ joining Celtics and they'll have great chance to eventually re-sign him. Boston made deal with strong belief he'll stay.
8:04 AM - Aug 23, 2017
225 225 Replies   5,665 5,665 Retweets   11,031 11,031 likes

Ainge didn't pull the trigger on Paul George because George was not willing to commit to stay in Boston long term.

None of what you are posting matters until he signs. There is still a chance a scenario happens where he does not, the Nets pick is a superstar and the C's lose the trade.

You could not admit such a scenario existed when it was pointed out to you it did, couldn't just say, "yup I didn't think of that, they'd lose the trade if that happens but it is unlikely." Which is the fact of the matter. You then tried to call that fact my opinion even tr to say the C's would have still won the trade if that catastrophe did happen in 2019 b/c Kyrie was still the best player in the trade way back in 2017.

Here's a shovel. Keep digging.

BleedGreen wrote:None of what you are posting matters until he signs. There is still a chance a scenario happens where he does not, the Nets pick is a superstar and the C's lose the trade.

You could not admit such a scenario existed when it was pointed out to you it did, couldn't just say, "yup I didn't think of that, they'd lose the trade if that happens but it is unlikely." Which is the fact of the matter. You then tried to call that fact my opinion even tr to say the C's would have still won the trade if that catastrophe did happen in 2019 b/c Kyrie was still the best player in the trade way back in 2017.

Here's a shovel. Keep digging.

True.

That's why I said that it's only my opinion that the Celts won in this trade because according to law of averages, the Nets pick will not be in the top 3 or top 5.

And there's very little chance of Kyrie leaving.


I'm more of a glass half full kind of guy.

I just refuse to believe your scenario of doom and gloom.

Kyrie has yet to play a single game for the Celtics and you're already talking about Kyrie leaving.

fierce wrote:I just refuse to believe your scenario of doom and gloom.

Kyrie has yet to play a single game for the Celtics and you're already talking about Kyrie leaving.

Fair enough.

I said numerous times in the past 24 hours I find that scenario unlikely and actually feel this trade was a good one Danny had to gamble on despite the risks and emotions involved.

When it comes to this deal I am on the side that is positive about it while half this board is not.

One tends to come off negative when forced to make a dozen posts explaining how something you did not even consider a possibility contradicted a statement of yours and then you strangely tried to first dismiss it as being an opinion or untrue before finally conceding you just didn't list it b/c the law of averages say it probably doesn't happen. Which I said from the start. What a pointless endeavor by you.