Who Says 'No': Bucks or Celtics?

[ssspence]

I think it's actually fairer from the Celtics end, but both teams would probably pass.

From Milwaukee's perspective, they're in full rebuild mode.  Wallace's contract would be cap-crushing when paired with Sanders', and they're too far away from contention to expect to keep Rondo in free agency.  They're better off building around Giannis.

  I don't watch the Bucks much, but are you sure they can build a team around a rookie who's averaging 7 ppg on the worst team in the league and who's stats look to be getting worse as the season progresses?

Rondo's a great player -- he averaged 6.4 ppg his rookie year on a bad team. But no one cared what the box score said.

Giannis is younger than Rondo was, with far less basketball experience. He has more room for development than any player in the NBA, and in the few times I've watch him, I've noticed his basketball instincts are tremendously good.

Example: here's a set of highlights from a single game, against the likely league-MVP this year. I particularly like the missed FT rebound-then-finish over Ibaka.

http://www.brewhoop.com/2014/1/12/5300944/video-giannis-antetokounmpo-complete-highlights-kevin-durant-block

[Fafnir]

You're not building around Giannis as much as you're giving him a chance to grow into a guy you can build around.

Just another prospect you're hoping keeps growing.

[slamtheking]

horrible deal.  dealing a top PG for someone you hope beyond hope might get close to his level?   no other real assets coming from the other team either? 

no thanks. 

[CFAN38]

Both teams say no. Giannis is a ray of hope for a sad team. The cs lose Rondo without a clear cut future stud in return. Giannis is all potential and Knight is solid but no star potential there.

I give the trade credit I think value = value but neither team is really better off afterwards.

[gpap]

I think the Bucks say no.

They'd be dealing their rookie player with a ton of upside and value right now for one year of Rondo.

[BballTim]

I think it's actually fairer from the Celtics end, but both teams would probably pass.

From Milwaukee's perspective, they're in full rebuild mode.  Wallace's contract would be cap-crushing when paired with Sanders', and they're too far away from contention to expect to keep Rondo in free agency.  They're better off building around Giannis.

  I don't watch the Bucks much, but are you sure they can build a team around a rookie who's averaging 7 ppg on the worst team in the league and who's stats look to be getting worse as the season progresses?

Rondo's a great player -- he averaged 6.4 ppg his rookie year on a bad team. But no one cared what the box score said.

Giannis is younger than Rondo was, with far less basketball experience. He has more room for development than any player in the NBA, and in the few times I've watch him, I've noticed his basketball instincts are tremendously good.

Example: here's a set of highlights from a single game, against the likely league-MVP this year. I particularly like the missed FT rebound-then-finish over Ibaka.

http://www.brewhoop.com/2014/1/12/5300944/video-giannis-antetokounmpo-complete-highlights-kevin-durant-block

  He's clearly a great athlete but the only thing he does that's noteworthy in that video is block a shot or two and get to the rim. "He has more room for development than any player in the NBA" pretty much means he's far from being the player you hope he will. There's no guarantee he gets there.

   While it's possible that he'll get to an all-star level, is it more likely that he will now than it was when he was drafted? Because when he was drafted Danny preferred Olynyk (who he freely claimed wasn't expected to be more than a role player) to Giannis. Now you have him trading a much better player to get him. I just don't see how he's seen as significantly more of a sure thing now than a few months ago.

[wdleehi]

Celtics have to say no.

[Donoghus]

I think both teams say no.

Does Milwaukee really wanna take on Wallace's contract with Rondo as a big question mark to even resign with them?  Like Roy touched on earlier, Bucks are so far from contention that getting Rondo to stay on board could be a big problem.

From Boston's end, I'm sure they'd love to rid themselves of Wallace's albatross but not sure tying it to Rondo and getting this return is maximizing things.

[ssspence]

"He has more room for development than any player in the NBA" pretty much means he's far from being the player you hope he will. There's no guarantee he gets there.

Again, was Rondo the player we all hoped we could become when he was 19? There are no guarantees in life, with either player or anyone else.

I use these type of trade ideas to gauge whether peers are prepared to sacrifice (or not) to rebuild with compelling talent. There's little chance a deal like this would actually happen, especially from the Bucks side. I did the same with the "Rondo for the 1st Pick in 2014 Draft" idea, which nearly everyone saw as a layup for the Celtics. I'd argue this deal is a better one for a number of reasons.

You see it as too risky for the Cs. Fair argument.

[Yoki_IsTheName]

Celtics.

Nothing in that players coming back will amount to what Rondo can bring impact wise.