Would you trade #11 for Bostons 21 & 22 picks?

[bigbailes]

We can all pretty much agree that the draft is a crapshoot and especially once you get to the later lottery picks. So with that thinking, would you trade that pick for both of Bostons in the 2nd third of the first round. With this draft being as deep as everyone is predicting there should still be decent value and you'd get two cracks at it instead of one.

It would be difficult to move down but if they are looking to add as many pieces as possible this might not be a bad move. I don't know if Boston would go for it but adding a Royce White and Moe Harkless with our pick at #6 wouldn't be the worst thing in the world.

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

No.

The dropoff from the prospects likely to be there at #11 to #21/22 is huge.

QUALITY >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> QUANTITY

 

[THE HCP]

NOONONONONONONONONONO! Quality players!

 

[Mediocre Man]

I voted yes, but it really depends on what we do at #6.

 

[Mediocre Man]

No.

The dropoff from the prospects likely to be there at #11 to #21/22 is huge.

QUALITY >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> QUANTITY

I will take two of NIcholson, White, Taylor, Teague, Fournier, Jones over 1 of Leonard, Zeller, Soup Juggler, Rivers. This draft is deep, not top heavy

 

[Natebishop3]

We could still get a special player at 11. There's really no guarantees in the 20s. What if we end up getting Drummond at 6 and Waiters at 11. That's a really good draft and could potentially be the best draft down the road when it's all said and done.

 

[Sinobas]

It's not a crapshoot. Look at the history of the draft and you'll see a strong correlation between talent and the picking order.

 

[Mediocre Man]

It's not a crapshoot. Look at the history of the draft and you'll see a strong correlation between talent and the picking order.

If you look at recent draft history, 21/22 would have paid out more for the team than 11

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

I will take two of NIcholson, White, Taylor, Teague, Fournier, Jones over 1 of Leonard, Zeller, Soup Juggler, Rivers. This draft is deep, not top heavy

Would any GM take any of those players at #11? Nope. Not even close. There is a reason why these guys are slated from #18-ish to the end of the first round. Btw, Jones as in Terrence Jones? He'll be long gone before Boston picks.

This team needs a talent upgrade not more bench fodder.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

I might very well do so.

We take Lilliard at #6, then pick the top shooter and rebounder at #21 & 22.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Would any GM take any of those players at #11? Nope. Not even close. There is a reason why these guys are slated from #18-ish to the end of the first round. Btw, Jones as in Terrence Jones? He'll be long gone before Boston picks.

This team needs a talent upgrade not more bench fodder.

Leonard, Zeller, Soup Juggler and Rivers are all slated to be picked right around that spot

 

[Rhal]

Really depends who is there at 21/22 and 11. If I thought we ended up with Royce/Wroten at 21/22 then i'd do it.

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

Leonard, Zeller, Soup Juggler and Rivers are all slated to be picked right around that spot

I'm talking about the your group of prospects.

 

[RR7]

I voted yes, but depends on what we do with 6, and who is there at 11, 21 and 22.

 

[RayDavies]

Nope. There are likely to be some high potential players at 11- waiters, maybe marshall... I am not too enamored of moving down when we desparately need an infusion of talent. Now, if we could somehow grab a late first pick using other assets- you have my attention.

 

[MickZagger]

I think Nicholson will be better than that batch of players mentioned. I'm just not convinced he'll fall to 21 or 22.

 

[Natebishop3]

I don't think I'd trade because we really don't know what's going to happen on draft day. We have no idea who is going to slip and who could end up a reach. What if someone really good drops to 11? Paul Pierce dropped to 10th in 1998.

 

[Mediocre Man]

I'm talking about the your group of prospects.

But how can you say my group of prospects, when those all of those guys are slotted in or around that slot in several mocks?

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

But how can you say my group of prospects, when those all of those guys are slotted in or around that slot in several mocks?

This team lacks talent from top-to-bottom outside LaMarcus and Batum.

Would you take either Nicholson or Teague or White at #11? Yeah, I wouldn't either.

Trading down for lesser prospects, and they are, makes no sense at all. There are no Faried's this late in the draft this year.

Factor in the roster, talent in that 20's area....

I rest my case.

 

[RR7]

I think the lack of talent overall on this roster is exactly why you might trade down, and get two Bs, instead of a B+. At 11, we're not missing out on one of those top 6 guys in the draft. You're grabbing a guy who could potentially have gone 7th, or who could go all the way down maybe at 18 or so. So with the lack of quality on our roster, needing to fill out 13 slots, drafting 2 guys a 21 and 22, IMO, gives us two prospects at who knows, maybe C+ ish or so, versus a B at 11, and a D filler end of bench guy(Chris Johnson type)

 

[Mediocre Man]

This team lacks talent from top-to-bottom outside LaMarcus and Batum.

Would you take either Nicholson or Teague or White at #11? Yeah, I wouldn't either.

Trading down for lesser prospects, and they are, makes no sense at all. There are no Faried's this late in the draft this year.

Factor in the roster, talent in that 20's area....

I rest my case.

You don't rest it with me. Who realistically at #11 is better than any two of the players I mentioned?

 

[Natebishop3]

You don't rest it with me. Who realistically at #11 is better than any two of the players I mentioned?

I honestly don't know enough about the guys that are being talked about that late in the draft, but Waiters seems like a pretty good prospect (if we don't go the route of Lillard) or maybe Ross. I would stay away from the bigs though. I'd rather use some of our cap space on a big.

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

You don't rest it with me. Who realistically at #11 is better than any two of the players I mentioned?

From the mid to late lotto is going to be unpredictable but there will be a few slippers. This is where you want to be and can totally understand why teams in the 20's are trying to trade up.

But answer my question, would you take any of those players at #11?

 

[MickZagger]

This team lacks talent from top-to-bottom outside LaMarcus and Batum.

Would you take either Nicholson or Teague or White at #11? Yeah, I wouldn't either.

Trading down for lesser prospects, and they are, makes no sense at all. There are no Faried's this late in the draft this year.

Factor in the roster, talent in that 20's area....

I rest my case.

....lol, how do you know there won't be any Faried's in this years draft? Tony Wroten is a guy that will be available late 1st or early 2nd that I think has star potential.

If GM's around the league had the consensus that Faried was going to be a solid ball player he wouldn't have slipped late in the 1st like he did.

 

[RR7]

From the mid to late lotto is going to be unpredictable but there will be a few slippers. This is where you want to be and can totally understand why teams in the 20's are trying to trade up.

But answer my question, would you take any of those players at #11?

More than likely if you make the trade, you do it draft day, after guys are drafted, not now. So you have the opportunity to make sure a top guy does not slip. You determine that, and then, say, draft Rivers for them, and trade him for the rights to...I dunno, White and Wroten.

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

....lol, how do you know there won't be any Faried's in this years draft. Tony Wroten is a guy that will be available late 1st or early 2nd that I think has star potential.

Looking at the list of players I think it's pretty obvious. Do you think Nicholson has the potential of a Faried, at least in terms of impact? His severe lack of lateral quickness tells me he wont. I could be wrong, but I rarely am.

 

[Draco]

If we aren't high on anyone available at #11 I'd definetely consider it. I would only do this on draft day depending on how picks 1-10 play out though.

 

[Mediocre Man]

From the mid to late lotto is going to be unpredictable but there will be a few slippers. This is where you want to be and can totally understand why teams in the 20's are trying to trade up.

But answer my question, would you take any of those players at #11?

No, it's why I would trade back. Players spotted at 11 don't excite me. Sounds like you feel the same, no?

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

No, it's why I would trade back. Players spotted at 11 don't excite me. Sounds like you feel the same, no?

This is why you don't do this trade.

Why wouldn't you take them at #11? Because the better player and prospect is sitting there at #11. If this team had the core of, say, the 2008 Blazers I think you could sacrifice the better prospect for depth but you can't afford to do this when you're in need of EVERYTHING outside a starting PF.

The overall talent level is right where the Blazers were back in 2002-2003.

Quality over quantity!

 

[Mediocre Man]

This is why you don't do this trade.

Why wouldn't you take them at #11? Because the better player and prospect is sitting there at #11. If this team had the core of, say, the 2008 Blazers I think you could sacrifice the better prospect for depth but you can't afford to do this when you're in need of EVERYTHING outside a starting PF.

The overall talent level is right where the Blazers were back in 2002-2003.

Quality over quantity!

But what player at 11 would you take over 2 of the guys I mentioned? Realistically