OT: 2016-2017 Boston Celtics/NBA Thread II

[Fenway]

Fred Roggin is a well know sports anchor in LA is saying the Lakers want nothing to do with the Ball entourage and most likely will take Jackson.

 

[N o o d l e s]

It has nothing to do with the players. It has everything to do with not getting enough to move down. Hell, the Lakers rumored offer was more than what he's getting from the Sixers. If they had made the move down and gotten Saric, that would have been better than some nebulous pick in the next year or two.

If Randle and the #2 was a legit offer I agree with you it's better. Was that definitely on the table? I never saw any indication beyond the rumor.

 

[Gator Mike]

Nah, I'd rather that they trade down if they got the player they still wanted later, but added another young guy. Picks in a year or two, that have protections are a joke to me.

So, you would have rather seen them trade #1 for #3 and maybe a guy like Dario Saric?

There are cap implications to such a move, though. Would make things even tougher to bring in a max salary player.

 

[Gator Mike]

Fred Roggin is a well know sports anchor in LA is saying the Lakers want nothing to do with the Ball entourage and most likely will take Jackson.

I would happily take Jayson Tatum.

 

[BMC]

Fred Roggin is a well know sports anchor in LA is saying the Lakers want nothing to do with the Ball entourage and most likely will take Jackson.

You can hardly blame them. Not with the father from hell running his son's show. If Ball was a no brainer #1 pick future hall of famer for sure then LA would grab him and take their chances. He isn't so they won't. Someone else will though.

 

[KrejciMVP]

Worst trade in Celtics history. We were so close to the nations leading scorer and we got nothing in return but excuses.

 

[LSCII]

If Randle and the #2 was a legit offer I agree with you it's better. Was that definitely on the table? I never saw any indication beyond the rumor.

No clue, but that was the rumor. So to me, this is a letdown after hearing that. Same thing with Saric or hell, even Okafor.

 

[LSCII]

So, you would have rather seen them trade #1 for #3 and maybe a guy like Dario Saric?

There are cap implications to such a move, though. Would make things even tougher to bring in a max salary player.

The cap space would have easily been mitigated by them walking away from the last year and $8 mill they owe Zeller. It's a team option, and they're absolutely going to exercise it. I'd also try to move Crowder and or Rozier.

 

[Lord Ahriman]

Worst trade in Celtics history. We were so close to the nations leading scorer and we got nothing in return but excuses.

It keeps getting worse:



LAL and SAC picks are protected: PATHETIC!!!!

 

[LSCII]

It keeps getting worse:



LAL and SAC picks are protected: PATHETIC!!!!

Woj has it that it's not both. It's one or the other. It's the Lakers pick next year if it falls between 2-5, and the Kings pick the following year if it doesn't.

 

[Jack de la Hoya]

It seems more likely that the SAC protections favor Boston than Philly--e.g., if it isn't top 10, they get an extra future PHI first or multiple seconds.

 

[EverettMike]

I like it. Good move.

 

[Lord Ahriman]

Woj has it that it's not both. It's one or the other. It's the Lakers pick next year if it falls between 2-5, and the Kings pick the following year if it doesn't.

Woj said that yesterday; today news are stating both picks are protected. Well, we don't know for sure the whole deal, but for me it's a very bad trade.

 

[Over the volcano]

IT is a cornerstone - picking up a first for moving down two spots and getting the guy you want is a good move IMO.

 

[LSCII]

Woj said that yesterday; today news are stating both picks are protected. Well, we don't know for sure the whole deal, but for me it's a very bad trade.

ESPN has it as one or the other too. Obviously it will have to be a wait and see, but this deal screams panic move, IMO. If they didn't like Fulz, that's fine, but it seems like they were in a rush to get this done for some strange reason. Why not wait it out and force another team to really overpay if they wanted him as it got closer to draft day?

 

[LSCII]

IT is a cornerstone - picking up a first for moving down two spots and getting the guy you want is a good move IMO.

Yeah, no. He's a great complimentary player, but he is not a guy you build a championship team around. If he's your 2 or 3, you're in good shape. But he's not a foundational player at all. Just look at this year's playoffs. What kind of player do you need to add to that team just to get them within spitting distance of the Cavs? You need to add a legit first team all star type of stud, which means IT is not a cornerstone by default. He'd be the 1A (and I'm being generous with that), not the 1.

 

[Lord Ahriman]

ESPN has it as one or the other too. Obviously it will have to be a wait and see, but this deal screams panic move, IMO. If they didn't like Fulz, that's fine, but it seems like they were in a rush to get this done for some strange reason. Why not wait it out and force another team to really overpay if they wanted him as it got closer to draft day?

Yeah, couldn't agree more.

 

[Fenway]

You can hardly blame them. Not with the father from hell running his son's show. If Ball was a no brainer #1 pick future hall of famer for sure then LA would grab him and take their chances. He isn't so they won't. Someone else will though.

Throw in that Ball is from SoCal.

The Lakers are not going to tip their hand especially to Boston.

 

[Absurdity]

Fred Roggin is a well know sports anchor in LA is saying the Lakers want nothing to do with the Ball entourage and most likely will take Jackson.

Very interesting especially since there are some reports out there that Jackson's work out for the Lakers went horribly:

 

[Beesfan]

This trade makes no sense unless there are two players Boston has rated higher than or equal to Faultz. One is obviously Jackson but who is the other? Making a trade based on an assumption that LA will pick Ball is stupid.

 

[Fenway]

This trade makes no sense unless there are two players Boston has rated higher than or equal to Faultz. One is obviously Jackson but who is the other? Making a trade based on an assumption that LA will pick Ball is stupid.

My only concern is why the rush?

Celtics obviously have concerns about Faultz but why?

 

[CDJ]

Never gets old seeing the overreaction of Celtics fans


i sometimes go back to this thread at the deadline and read while casually sipping coffee

 

[LSCII]

Never gets old seeing the overreaction of Celtics fans


i sometimes go back to this thread at the deadline and read while casually sipping coffee

So why do you feel this is a good deal? I'd love to hear the logic behind your thinking. I've provided mine several times, and it has nothing to do with passing on Fultz.

 

[Fenway]

Please continue here

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=2358663