But Fultz is not LeBron James, nor will he be. He might be Kyrie Irving, one of those guys who, in your words, is good enough to create a middling playoff team (at best).
I don't know if the difference between Fultz and Tatum/Jackson is big, small, or zero. But I think Ainge understands asset management (and acts accordingly) as well as any GM in the league, and we know form his previous statements that he also understands that this team needs quality, not quantity. So I have to assume that Ainge (along with the rest of the front office) sees no separation in the top 4, so he's exploiting the fact that Philly disagrees with him. And I don't think he could have gotten more. Philly knew what Ainge was up to; if the Cs were making this deal, it meant they didn't care much about the difference from 1 to 3. So the Philly/Sacto pick was more than enough since the C's were ending up with the guy they want (or close) anyway.
My critique has nothing to do with whether Fultz is LeBron or not, though as Bowiac pointed out, the #1 pick has a much higher chance of being elite than the number 3.
My bigger concern is that Ainge is overvaluing his assets -- both picks and young players -- and that when the music stops in a couple of years, the Celtics are going to be a solid team that's not a real contender. Jaylen Brown's been driven off the lot; he had a surprisingly good rookie year by being like the 6th best (this is a guess, but bet it's close) guy in his class. As an asset, he'll have to see a substantial improvement in year two if he's going to be the centerpiece of any big deals.
Tatum feels like a solid B to me. Nice enough player, but with Crowder, Brown, And potentially Hayward how much growth can reasonably expected out of him?
And now the C's are left waiting and hoping the Nets pick next year is their savior. And if it ends up at 3, what then? What if Luca Doncic is really, really good but that just means he's Danilo Gallinari that stays healthy? Or a year in college exposes Porter or whoever else is meant to make next year's class so great.
People here keep saying "this is about being good in 3 years when the Warriors are declining", but right now, I have trouble seeing how this team's significantly better in three or for years. IT will be gone, Bradley will be gone, Horford will be gone, even Hayward, if they sign him, will be 31.
They don't have a young player to build around. Their picks thus far have netted role players, yet they've been unwilling to include those picks and role players in deals for a guy to build around. Put it this way: people here balked at including Zizic and Brown in a deal for Porzingis. Jaylen Brown and Ante Zizic.
I worry the options are drying up for Ainge. What's the path to getting the guy who makes them a contender I 3-4 years? How will they be better than Minnesota, Milwaukee, Philly, Denver, etc? They're setting themselves up to compete when Golden State's not reigning champs, but in terms of actual talent, there are a lot of teams who look better suited to do that than Boston.