The History of Traded Draft Picks

[scott]

With lots of vibrant discussion around the ATL picks, their perspective value and what their realistic ceiling could be, it got me curious about just how high a draft pick acquired via trade has historically been able to reach.

I went back to look at the last 10 drafts, and here are the results. The first number is the highest pick acquired via trade (and only looking at trades that happened well before the draft, not draft day trades) for that season. The second number is the number of picks acquired via trade that landed in the lottery, and the third number is the number of FRPs acquired via trade overall. The last number is just the ratio between the second and third number, the % of acquired picks that ended up in the lotto.

2023: 11; 1; 10; 10%
2022: 8; 2, 9; 22%
2021: 7; 2; 7; 29%
2020: 14; 1; 10; 10%
2019: 10; 2; 6; 33%
2018: 8; 3; 9; 33%
2017: 1, 3; 10; 30% (More on this below)
2016: 3; 4; 10; 40% (Also more on this below)
2015: 15, 0, 5; 0%
2014: 9; 3; 10; 30%

The 2016 and 2017 results were from the 2013 trade that sent KG, Paul Pierce, and a 2017 FRP(#27) amongst some other scraps to BKY for 3 FRPs (#17 in 2014, #3 in 2016, #8 in 2018) and a Swap (#1 in 2017). This is the only draft pick trades that have hit the ultimate jackpot of a Top 5 pick.

One thing we can draw from this is just how rare it is for this Toronto pick to potentially thread the needle so perfectly, and the FO certainly deserves a lot of credit for that move. The data is also a makes the case that a Top-6 protection has been just as good as an unprotected pick from a practical perspective, since outside of the BKY-BOS trade, no traded FRP has made it that high into the lottery (with one potential caveat, below).

However, I think this should put some perspective on the ATL picks. The data above is a good illustration of what is common sense: teams will not hard tank when they don't have their picks. Boston capitalized on BKY going all in on some aging stars. KG was 37 at the time of the trade, and was traded by BKY during the following season (for or old friend, Thad Young). Paul Peirce was 36 and had a good season for BKY but bolted to WAS after one season. BKY with the ultimate fail of a trade here, and also a great example of Danny Ainge will ruin you if you trade with him .

Anything can happen (like injuries), but it's probably a fair bet to assume that the ATL picks have a realistic cap around #8-10, and that they'll certainly be trying to improve their team along the way so long as they don't have their picks. IMO, the Hawks likely will not entertain packages for Trae Young that are primarily based on far out picks. The Hawks would likely entertain trades for Trae (or Dejounte) to immediately improve their team and only entertain a rebuild-move if it is with the Spurs for their own picks back.

The caveat I mentioned above: in the 2017 draft where Boston had the #1 pick from BKY, they then traded that pick to Philly, there was another swap that went into play. The Kings (#3) had previously traded a swap to Philly (#5), so that was exercised. So we actually have 3 instances where a pick or swap ended up "in the money" of a top 5 pick.

[mo7888]

With lots of vibrant discussion around the ATL picks, their perspective value and what their realistic ceiling could be, it got me curious about just how high a draft pick acquired via trade has historically been able to reach.

I went back to look at the last 10 drafts, and here are the results. The first number is the highest pick acquired via trade (and only looking at trades that happened well before the draft, not draft day trades) for that reason. The second number is the number of picks acquired via trade that landed in the lottery, and the third number is the number of FRPs acquired via trade overall. The last number is just the ratio between the second and third number, the % of acquired picks that ended up in the lotto.

2023: 11; 1; 10; 10%
2022: 8; 2, 9; 22%
2021: 7; 2; 7; 29%
2020: 14; 1; 10; 10%
2019: 10; 2; 6; 33%
2018: 8; 3; 9; 33%
2017: 1, 3; 10; 30% (More on this below)
2016: 3; 4; 10; 40% (Also more on this below)
2015: 15, 0, 5; 0%
2014: 9; 3; 10; 30%

The 2016 and 2017 results were from the 2013 trade that sent KG, Paul Pierce, and a 2017 FRP(#27) amongst some other scraps to BKY for 3 FRPs (#17 in 2014, #3 in 2016, #8 in 2018) and a Swap (#1 in 2017). This is the only draft pick trades that have hit the ultimate jackpot of a Top 5 pick.

One thing we can draw from this is just how rare it is for this Toronto pick to potentially thread the needle so perfectly, and the FO certainly deserves a lot of credit for that move. The data is also a makes the case that a Top-6 protection has been just as good as an unprotected pick from a practical perspective, since outside of the BKY-BOS trade, no traded FRP has made it that high into the lottery (with one potential caveat, below).

However, I think this should put some perspective on the ATL picks. The data above is a good illustration of what is common sense: teams will not hard tank when they don't have their picks. Boston capitalized on BKY going all in on some aging stars. KG was 37 at the time of the trade, and was traded by BKY during the following season (for or old friend, Thad Young). Paul Peirce was 36 and had a good season for BKY but bolted to WAS after one season. BKY with the ultimate fail of a trade here, and also a great example of Danny Ainge will ruin you if you trade with him .

Anything can happen (like injuries), but it's probably a fair bet to assume that the ATL picks have a realistic cap around #8-10, and that they'll certainly be trying to improve their team along the way so long as they don't have their picks. IMO, the Hawks likely will not entertain packages for Trae Young that are primarily based on far out picks. The Hawks would likely entertain trades for Trae (or Dejounte) to immediately improve their team and only entertain a rebuild-move if it is with the Spurs for their own picks back.

The caveat I mentioned above: in the 2017 draft where Boston had the #1 pick from BKY, they then traded that pick to Philly, there was another swap that went into play. The Kings (#3) had previously traded a swap to Philly (#5), so that was exercised. So we actually have 3 instances where a pick or swap ended up "in the money" of a top 5 pick.

Good stuff. It's mostly looking at it from the perspective of the team receiving picks and their value if used in selecting drafted players (i.e. San Antonio), and while that's supremely relevant, I think its also important to look at what unprotected picks in the top 10 have been bringing on the open market. Basically, looking at it from the perspective of the team selling star players. KD, Kyrie, AD etc.

It's not just a 'trade them for Trae or use them to select' question. It's a 'trade them for Trae.. use them to select...or use them to trade for other players in aggregate or the whole' question...

[scott]

Good stuff. It's mostly looking at it from the perspective of the team receiving picks and their value if used in selecting drafted players (i.e. San Antonio), and while that's supremely relevant, I think its also important to look at what unprotected picks in the top 10 have been bringing on the open market. Basically, looking at it from the perspective of the team selling star players. KD, Kyrie, AD etc.

It's not just a 'trade them for Trae or use them to select' question. It's a 'trade them for Trae.. use them to select...or use them to trade for other players in aggregate or the whole' question...

I completely agree. I also meant to include the caveat that past performance does not guarantee future results

I think you are totally right about the value that these picks hold to help us build our team. The unknown mystery box of a draft pick seems to always get overrated versus a known quan y. Different spot/league, but we see this all the time in the NFL, legit starting caliber player getting traded for 3-6th round draft picks (of course there are other factors at play there).

Your point also reminds me that if you want to use those unprotected picks you acquired to make another trade for a proven yet, do so while there is still mystery about those other teams picks. Let some other GM overvalue those slim odds, don't wait until the future is clearer (though that is a double edged sword... as the clarity might also show you that a team like ATL, for example, actually WILL be terrible and you DON'T want to make that trade). It's all just playing probabilities, but of course, even then you can still be wrong and you just have to accept that.

[Mr. Body]

The ATL pick in 2027 may be better than the ATL pick in 2025 as their roster atrophies without the previous picks (swapped or otherwise) and they struggle to maintain the roster. They'd be far worse without the unexpected development of Jalen Johnson.

[mo7888]

I completely agree. I also meant to include the caveat that past performance does not guarantee future results

I think you are totally right about the value that these picks hold to help us build our team. The unknown mystery box of a draft pick seems to always get overrated versus a known quan y. Different spot/league, but we see this all the time in the NFL, legit starting caliber player getting traded for 3-6th round draft picks (of course there are other factors at play there).

Your point also reminds me that if you want to use those unprotected picks you acquired to make another trade for a proven yet, do so while there is still mystery about those other teams picks. Let some other GM overvalue those slim odds, don't wait until the future is clearer (though that is a double edged sword... as the clarity might also show you that a team like ATL, for example, actually WILL be terrible and you DON'T want to make that trade). It's all just playing probabilities, but of course, even then you can still be wrong and you just have to accept that.

You're spot on...that's the game.... working the odds and evaluating the players...

I like your point about 'selling the mystery'. It's why I'm pretty high on selling picks for players in the 25 and 27 drafts this summer. We can likely do better than just packaging for Trae if we work it a bit. I think any team is going to want our whole slot of atl picks, but if we can find the right deal with the first trade and hold back some, then we can probably get our main target in the second trade. I know i didn't articulate that very well, but what im getting at is our package is a huge overpay and we can get the same player (TY or otherwise) with a smaller package if we've already used some of that capital elsewhere.

[spurraider21]

the hawks picks could be that exception if theyre stupid enough to trade Trae for picks elsewhere. they'd basically be tanking solely for our benefit. and in theory, any team they trade Young to becomes better for the foreseeable future, and so the picks the hawks are getting wouldnt be great anyway. nor is it a suns situation where they are dealing away post-durant picks in exchange for durant. Trae is still 25

[scott]

You're spot on...that's the game.... working the odds and evaluating the players...

I like your point about 'selling the mystery'. It's why I'm pretty high on selling picks for players in the 25 and 27 drafts this summer. We can likely do better than just packaging for Trae if we work it a bit. I think any team is going to want our whole slot of atl picks, but if we can find the right deal with the first trade and hold back some, then we can probably get our main target in the second trade. I know i didn't articulate that very well, but what im getting at is our package is a huge overpay and we can get the same player (TY or otherwise) with a smaller package if we've already used some of that capital elsewhere.

I am following you. I'm mostly on the Trae-train, but only because there aren't any clear alternatives we are aware of. We can definitely come up with several on our own that would be preferable! Basically, I like the Trae idea... but there are other ideas (that I haven't heard yet) that I would undoubtedly like better.

[Mr. Body]

The Spurs managed to get players to good situations, good guy trades, while most of the destinations are not likely to blow up or keep the picks.

They managed to get a FRP for DeRozen, a player who was not staying. Kind of ridiculous, and the protections are such that it was enticing to Chicago but just enough it could tumble over the fence.

The Toronto pick, as you mention, may thread the needle perfectly. And, tbh, it's not a bad deal for TOR. Poeltl transforms that team.

The CHA pick was thrown in and we didn't devise it.

The BOS thing was more convoluted but gave us a shot at a young guard and a possible swap some years from now.

We used cap space to squeeze a swap out of a desperate Dallas.

And they let ATL apparently bid against themselves in a tidy package. We'll see what happens.

I know there's complaining about our drafts lately. Only Primo looks really stinky, both because Sengun was the obvious pick and because Primo torpedoed his career. Branham and Wesley, jury is still out and it's not obvious who the picks should have been otherwise.

A good bit of business. Not OKC level, but we weren't working at the positions of advantage they were, and their pouch stash can't give them high lottery picks anymore. They've run out of those.

[scott]

I'm almost ready to give up on Branham, not because I don't think he can't still develop, but because I think the team will start moving faster than his development can keep up with... but with that said... we need to keep in mind the expectations of the #20 and #25 picks. We're spoiled because we have a history of turning #29 picks into gold, but that's not the true expected outcome of those picks. Where Branham and Wesley are is probably pretty close to the median of their range of outcomes at this point, IMO.

[mo7888]

I am following you. I'm mostly on the Trae-train, but only because their aren't any clear alternatives we are aware of. We can definitely come up with several on our own that would be preferable! Basically, I like the Trae idea... but there are other ideas (that I haven't heard yet) that I would undoubtedly like better.

I'm actually good with Trae. It's just a matter of price to me.

[Guru of Nothing]

... it's probably a fair bet to assume that the ATL picks have a realistic cap around #8-10, and that they'll certainly be trying to improve their team along the way so long as they don't have their picks. IMO, the Hawks likely will not entertain packages for Trae Young that are primarily based on far out picks. The Hawks would likely entertain trades for Trae (or Dejounte) to immediately improve their team and only entertain a rebuild-move if it is with the Spurs for their own picks back.

The bolded is key. Spurs should get some fine picks if they fall in the 8-10 range, but I think I'd prefer all-star level PG play from Trae Young. ATL on the other hand would do well to get their picks back and turn those 8-10s into 1-5s. It's obvious to me that this is what is best for both franchises. Now, if ATL wants more than the three picks back and a combo of say KJ and Collins, they can "Get ready to like 35-win seasons, buddy." I'm not that opposed to holding all those picks.

So, add Trae this off-season (Trae and sop re Wemby is a playoff lock) and build from there with the two first rounders this season - I'm in camp Topic/Sheppard, today. Find a quality vet upgrade at SF (especially like the idea of a heavily weighted two-year contract for a player like Tobias Harris) and give Sochan one season (his third) to relegate the vet to the bench, or it's adios. This leaves the Spurs with a hole at PF, and for that I'd be alright continuing roster experiements into 2024 by splitting those 48-minutes between Barlow and Mamu (using Mamu mostly as an example) with hope that Barlow can take ownership. Barlow and Mamu could be good for 15/10/5 per 48, which is more than plentiful if Wemby/Young/Vassell are combining for 75-80 points/game; and, their 12 fouls per night could be worth a point or two alone in the Spurs favor.

[scott]

The bolded is key. Spurs should get some fine picks if they fall in the 8-10 range, but I think I'd prefer all-star level PG play from Trae Young. ATL on the other hand would do well to get their picks back and turn those 8-10s into 1-5s. It's obvious to me that this is what is best for both franchises. Now, if ATL wants more than the three picks back and a combo of say KJ and Collins, they can "Get ready to like 35-win seasons, buddy." I'm not that opposed to holding all those picks.

So, add Trae this off-season (Trae and sop re Wemby is a playoff lock) and build from there with the two first rounders this season - I'm in camp Topic/Sheppard, today. Find a quality vet upgrade at SF (especially like the idea of a heavily weighted two-year contract for a player like Tobias Harris) and give Sochan one season (his third) to relegate the vet to the bench, or it's adios. This leaves the Spurs with a hole at PF, and for that I'd be alright continuing roster experiements into 2024 by splitting those 48-minutes between Barlow and Mamu (using Mamu mostly as an example) with hope that Barlow can take ownership. Barlow and Mamu could be good for 15/10/5 per 48, which is more than plentiful if Wemby/Young/Vassell are combining for 75-80 points/game; and, their 12 fouls per night could be worth a point or two alone in the Spurs favor.

Good to see you, GoN.

Since you mentioned it... Mamu/Wemby and Barlow/Wemby lineups are actually some of our best. Mamu/Wemby lineups have a +39.2 NetRtg and Barlow/Wemby have a +78.5 (!!!). Unfortunately, it's only in 12 and 5 minutes, respectively

[Mr. Body]

I'm almost ready to give up on Branham, not because I don't think he can't still develop, but because I think the team will start moving faster than his development can keep up with... but with that said... we need to keep in mind the expectations of the #20 and #25 picks. We're spoiled because we have a history of turning #29 picks into gold, but that's not the true expected outcome of those picks. Where Branham and Wesley are is probably pretty close to the median of their range of outcomes at this point, IMO.

Oh, I would definitely disagree.

1. This team is woefully short on talent.

2. Even if we draft over him, we still need a bench, and as he develops that's a good spot for him.

3. Unseen has been a lot of foundational work that will be seen before long. Pop said that these guys don't know to set screens, etc., extending to how to do manifold things on the court. To me Branham has been concentrating on trying to get those things right, and we're seeing that after Wembanyama has defined himself. I think people will be surprised when he starts playing naturally once those lessons are learned.

[Frenchfred]

People say that Atlanta would want more than those 3 picks but they have more value now than when they traded them to the Spurs. Back then, Atlanta thought that they would be a top team with Murray so in their mind their draft picks would probably fall in the 20s so low value. Now, if they get their picks back and they tank, those picks are going to be lottery picks. I still think that we could try to keep their 25 and send ours instead.

[mo7888]

The bolded is key. Spurs should get some fine picks if they fall in the 8-10 range, but I think I'd prefer all-star level PG play from Trae Young. ATL on the other hand would do well to get their picks back and turn those 8-10s into 1-5s. It's obvious to me that this is what is best for both franchises. Now, if ATL wants more than the three picks back and a combo of say KJ and Collins, they can "Get ready to like 35-win seasons, buddy." I'm not that opposed to holding all those picks.

So, add Trae this off-season (Trae and sop re Wemby is a playoff lock) and build from there with the two first rounders this season - I'm in camp Topic/Sheppard, today. Find a quality vet upgrade at SF (especially like the idea of a heavily weighted two-year contract for a player like Tobias Harris) and give Sochan one season (his third) to relegate the vet to the bench, or it's adios. This leaves the Spurs with a hole at PF, and for that I'd be alright continuing roster experiements into 2024 by splitting those 48-minutes between Barlow and Mamu (using Mamu mostly as an example) with hope that Barlow can take ownership. Barlow and Mamu could be good for 15/10/5 per 48, which is more than plentiful if Wemby/Young/Vassell are combining for 75-80 points/game; and, their 12 fouls per night could be worth a point or two alone in the Spurs favor.

I don't think Wemby/ Trae is a playoff 'lock', but if the second part of your post about adding Tobias (or another forward vet of similar ability) comes to fruition then i think we're there. I love Shephard and Topic, but I'd look elsewhere if i got Trae. Maybe Matas and JaKobe...

[Guru of Nothing]

Good to see you too, Scott.

Mamu caught my attention back in December when he finally got some quality minutes on the floor, and suddenly the ball seemed to be flying all over our the place as passes would leave his hands as soon as he caught it. It's not that he lit up the stat sheet in any way, but it was a jarring visual to see him single-handedly knocking off a -ton of half court stagnation. Made me realize that the stagnation, more than the mistakes, was the thing I hated most about ths team's performance.

[Guru of Nothing]

I don't think Wemby/ Trae is a playoff 'lock', but if the second part of your post about adding Tobias (or another forward vet of similar ability) comes to fruition then i think we're there. I love Shephard and Topic, but I'd look elsewhere if i got Trae. Maybe Matas and JaKobe...

Yeah, I'm probably in the minority wanting to target Topic if we get Trae. Mostly a preference for what I perceive to be the higher ceiling, but I also have slight concerns about Trae possibly opting out after two years (and not for a second do I even pretend to keep up with the subtlies of NBA player contracts beyond the simplest of arithmetic operations). If Trae is all that we hope and expect, and if Topic hits too, then the Spurs have pivot options in a couple of years to reshape the franchise for an extended stretch of deep playoff runs. Also, and my X's and O's analysis ranks as poorly as my salary cap skills, Topic's size could mitigate some size and defense issues for smaller guards, like Young and Sheppard.

[SOMA Spur]

With lots of vibrant discussion around the ATL picks, their perspective value and what their realistic ceiling could be, it got me curious about just how high a draft pick acquired via trade has historically been able to reach.

I went back to look at the last 10 drafts, and here are the results. The first number is the highest pick acquired via trade (and only looking at trades that happened well before the draft, not draft day trades) for that season. The second number is the number of picks acquired via trade that landed in the lottery, and the third number is the number of FRPs acquired via trade overall. The last number is just the ratio between the second and third number, the % of acquired picks that ended up in the lotto.

2023: 11; 1; 10; 10%
2022: 8; 2, 9; 22%
2021: 7; 2; 7; 29%
2020: 14; 1; 10; 10%
2019: 10; 2; 6; 33%
2018: 8; 3; 9; 33%
2017: 1, 3; 10; 30% (More on this below)
2016: 3; 4; 10; 40% (Also more on this below)
2015: 15, 0, 5; 0%
2014: 9; 3; 10; 30%

The 2016 and 2017 results were from the 2013 trade that sent KG, Paul Pierce, and a 2017 FRP(#27) amongst some other scraps to BKY for 3 FRPs (#17 in 2014, #3 in 2016, #8 in 2018) and a Swap (#1 in 2017). This is the only draft pick trades that have hit the ultimate jackpot of a Top 5 pick.

One thing we can draw from this is just how rare it is for this Toronto pick to potentially thread the needle so perfectly, and the FO certainly deserves a lot of credit for that move. The data is also a makes the case that a Top-6 protection has been just as good as an unprotected pick from a practical perspective, since outside of the BKY-BOS trade, no traded FRP has made it that high into the lottery (with one potential caveat, below).

However, I think this should put some perspective on the ATL picks. The data above is a good illustration of what is common sense: teams will not hard tank when they don't have their picks. Boston capitalized on BKY going all in on some aging stars. KG was 37 at the time of the trade, and was traded by BKY during the following season (for or old friend, Thad Young). Paul Peirce was 36 and had a good season for BKY but bolted to WAS after one season. BKY with the ultimate fail of a trade here, and also a great example of Danny Ainge will ruin you if you trade with him .

Anything can happen (like injuries), but it's probably a fair bet to assume that the ATL picks have a realistic cap around #8-10, and that they'll certainly be trying to improve their team along the way so long as they don't have their picks. IMO, the Hawks likely will not entertain packages for Trae Young that are primarily based on far out picks. The Hawks would likely entertain trades for Trae (or Dejounte) to immediately improve their team and only entertain a rebuild-move if it is with the Spurs for their own picks back.

The caveat I mentioned above: in the 2017 draft where Boston had the #1 pick from BKY, they then traded that pick to Philly, there was another swap that went into play. The Kings (#3) had previously traded a swap to Philly (#5), so that was exercised. So we actually have 3 instances where a pick or swap ended up "in the money" of a top 5 pick.

Thanks for this Scott. Enjoy your analysis. I too am down for Trae for the right price. But you can put me in the camp - if it takes a bit of an over pay I'd still pull the trigger.