Celtics may trade out of #1?

More importantly, the Sixers would have much less reason to go after Holiday if they are trading up for Fultz.

Let this trade happen.

Not a bad deal for the Celtics, they don't need a PG, drop to #3 and get Jackson.

Then I still get to laugh at Ball so win win

yeah. it's a no-brainer for the Sixers. a 3 man core like that was the entire point of The Process. send out the picks.

for Celtics, you're right; it is a gamble. though i do think the Lakers+Nets picks next year are both going to be top 5.

i've seen chatter about the salary difference between 1 and 3 helping them too. if they are keeping #3, maybe they think this helps them get Hayward AND Butler or George this summer? that would be a hell of an off-season.

I think this would be a great deal. Trading down from #1 to #3 has worked out well before for the celtics, when it got them Parish and McHale In 1980.

I wouldn't necessarily be hell bent on trading the treasure trove of picks for Paul George. It's too much to gamble on a guy that could bolt in a year and if he doesn't he will hurt their financial flexibility. I think it's best if they don't trade their picks, since they could potentially add Gordon Hayward or Blake Griffin this off season and have the valuable rookie contracts.

Isiah thomas must be thrilled.

With Jackson, the current Celtics, and either heyward or butler, celtics will compete and with two more high picks in near future, they will be in finals vs lebrons lakers in 2019.

Yes, I agree with you, elite perimeter players are needed to win a title. However, the celtics aren't an elite perimeter player away from actually beating the Cavaliers, much less the Warriors. It's better in the long run for them to keep the picks and build through the draft and retain financial flexibility.

Let's say you trade for Paul George, and he's gone in a year. You most likely give up two-three potential top five picks for one year of maybe bringing the cavaliers to six games instead of losing in five or four (that's IF they make it there, they could have easily lost in any round before the conference finals).

Even if Paul George stays, the cap situation would be awful (especially if they give the max to Thomas). You would essentially invest about 80-90 million on a core who probably has a 5% chance at winning the title.

They're better off in the long run if they trade down to #3 and keep all the players they draft. I don't see Thomas as the point guard who can win a championship, his defense is mediocre and the celtics' motion offense they ran when he was out looked more efficient than Thomas running isolation play after isolation play.

obviously you dont sell the farm for an expiring George unless you're very confident he wont bolt.

a core of Butler/George, Horford, Thomas, and Hayward/Griffin is a much more serious threat to the Cavs than you are insinuating. beating LeBron is tough for everyone, but that team would have a hell of a recipe and it would be fun to watch.

Boston's problem is that they really dont have much top end talent- and the talent they do have is, as you point out with Thomas, flawed in a serious way. it's to their credit that they win so many games, but when you're getting bailed out by Kelly Olynyk in a game 7, you're a paper tiger.

plus, if they land two marquee players this summer, that makes moving on from Thomas much easier to swallow

while i get the play, if they are going to hoard picks to be contenders 4-5 years from now, there is no reason to chase FA this summer (nor do i think a guy like Hayward is signing on to wait years for a bunch of rookies to probably not become as good as he is). and if that is the plan, might as well start selling other players off more assets.

maybe that's what Ainge wants to do. and that's fine. i'd rather see them go for it b/c i think they could be very good.