ArlingtonDeac
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2011
- Messages
- 4,861
- Reaction score
- 413
I wouldn't make that deal, and I think every team in the top 10 passing on it makes it worth less than you're arguing -- even Lowe said turning it down is defensible if you think you have a special player in sight -- but I understand your point. Personally, I'd never trade a top 10 NBA pick unless I was getting something of equal value first -- a proven starter or a reasonably surefire later top 10 pick in return -- plus a sweetener of extra picks for my trouble. Ainge made the offer for a reason -- he knows that a coveted player in the top 10 range is worth more than 4 four middling prospect picks in the back half, where most of those selected might never even make an NBA rotation. If you get one quality starter-caliber player, it's more valuable in a five man game than four guys who more than likely will cycle through town and never leave an imprint. If Ainge had included the Brooklyn pick in 2016, instead of 2018, he has a deal, but he was never going to do that because he wasn't going to give up a likely top 10 pick.
If the Hornets had taken Winslow, no one would care about the offer because people freaking love Winslow (to an unreasonable degree in my opinion, but whatever). So I think this is just another end run to attack the Kaminsky pick over Winslow. Which is a fair opinion to have, but I'd suggest that the jury hasn't even been selected for that distinction, much less reached a verdict. But in any case, I want my team to take its shots in top 10, rather than trade back into the area where busts and total misses are more common than useful players. Like it or hate it, the Hornets valued Kaminsky over Winslow -- indeed, Winslow's value turned out to much less than everyone thought, since the entire top 9 passed on him -- so let's give it two seasons and see if they're right or wrong. But the Boston deal wasn't the right move in either case, IMO. Boston wanted to pool mediocre assets into the "pupu platter" Simmons always talks about, hoping enough mediocre pocket change would convince someone above them to give up a true dollar bill. No one bit, and Ainge had to spend the whole next morning doing damage control on the radio.
Just my two cents.
If the Hornets had taken Winslow, no one would care about the offer because people freaking love Winslow (to an unreasonable degree in my opinion, but whatever). So I think this is just another end run to attack the Kaminsky pick over Winslow. Which is a fair opinion to have, but I'd suggest that the jury hasn't even been selected for that distinction, much less reached a verdict. But in any case, I want my team to take its shots in top 10, rather than trade back into the area where busts and total misses are more common than useful players. Like it or hate it, the Hornets valued Kaminsky over Winslow -- indeed, Winslow's value turned out to much less than everyone thought, since the entire top 9 passed on him -- so let's give it two seasons and see if they're right or wrong. But the Boston deal wasn't the right move in either case, IMO. Boston wanted to pool mediocre assets into the "pupu platter" Simmons always talks about, hoping enough mediocre pocket change would convince someone above them to give up a true dollar bill. No one bit, and Ainge had to spend the whole next morning doing damage control on the radio.
Just my two cents.
Last edited:
