Chris Paul on the block?

[Celtic#9]

Why would they want Rondo? they want to get rid of Paul to get Collison more playing time at PG and they probably want either a SF or SG in return.

[PosImpos]

If the Hornets are indeed looking to trade Paul (horrible idea, but I'd be happy for him), there are many other teams who could make better offers than the Celtics.

As great as Chris Paul is, I'd be sad to see Rondo get traded for him.

[Lucky17]

Chris Paul is not on the block. Period.

Yet another aggravating rumor, drummed up by Camp LeBron, to try to generate attention and interest in their guy.

Who is William Wesley, anyways? I mean, does he have any bona fides in terms of basketball experience, beyond perhaps playing HORSE with his only client?

[StartOrien]

World Wide Wes has A LOT more than one client

http://www.gq.com/sports/profiles/200706/william-wesley-worldwide-wes-nba-basketball

[Lucky17]

World Wide Wes has A LOT more than one client

Anyone of note?

[wiley]

Disagree with a bunch of folks in this thread.  Giving up low-priced Rondo and the #19 pick for Chris Paul is a mistake.  It's not a mistake because Paul is not better than Rondo, but they're way to close to give up #19 too.  Do people understand that Paul has off nights too?   Do people understand Rondo's rebounding and steals?  If you want to watch the Celtics become dominated by a single player instead of remaining very team oriented on offense, trade for Paul.  I'd prefer to keep Rondo and gradually bring in as many shooters as needed.

Also, as the Celtics begin to decline, we can't be giving up assets.  If we were to trade Rondo, I'd rather do it in a deal that increases the number of assets we have.....for example:  A three way in which Rondo, Shrek and Donkey go out, and Darren Collison, O.J. Mayo and two of the Grizzlies draft picks come our way....so we get a better than average PG, a stud, and 2 studly prospects.  That's probably a bad trade for us, but it's an example of adding assets rather than decreasing them....

Paul, Ray and KG are old.  Very old and much used.  Chris Paul and who when they're gone?  As we can see from watching New Orleans he can't do it alone.

[StartOrien]

World Wide Wes has A LOT more than one client

Anyone of note?

Put it this way, the article is entitled "Is this the most powerful man in sports?"

[Lucky17]

World Wide Wes has A LOT more than one client

Anyone of note?

Put it this way, the article is entitled "Is this the most powerful man in sports?"

Thanks for the link, SO. But that article, from July 2007, doesn't really shed any light on the situation. He sounds like a consigliari/manager/unofficial agent for several players, based simply on the fact that he has somehow gained access and social connections during the course of his "career".

The journalist seems as mystified as anyone in trying to explain exactly how Wesley has become such a powerful figure in sports.

To me, Wesley just sounds like another person who has managed to exploit the cult of personality that pervades professional basketball.

What, exactly, are Wesley's credentials? Why should we care what he thinks, besides the fact that he has the ear of LeBron James?

[FallGuy]

Disagree with a bunch of folks in this thread.  Giving up low-priced Rondo and the #19 pick for Chris Paul is a mistake.  It's not a mistake because Paul is not better than Rondo, but they're way to close to give up #19 too.  Do people understand that Paul has off nights too?   Do people understand Rondo's rebounding and steals?  If you want to watch the Celtics become dominated by a single player instead of remaining very team oriented on offense, trade for Paul.  I'd prefer to keep Rondo and gradually bring in as many shooters as needed.

Also, as the Celtics begin to decline, we can't be giving up assets.  If we were to trade Rondo, I'd rather do it in a deal that increases the number of assets we have.....for example:  A three way in which Rondo, Shrek and Donkey go out, and Darren Collison, O.J. Mayo and two of the Grizzlies draft picks come our way....so we get a better than average PG, a stud, and 2 studly prospects.  That's probably a bad trade for us, but it's an example of adding assets rather than decreasing them....

Paul, Ray and KG are old.  Very old and much used.  Chris Paul and who when they're gone?  As we can see from watching New Orleans he can't do it alone.

You're putting way too much emphasis on the 19th pick. That's entirely replaceable. And not likely to bring back a singular talent like Paul, who is already a top-5 player in the league. Rondo's not top-10 and may never be. If you want to win titles, you need a megastar and you can't draw a line in the sand over a mid-first round pick.

The key in the NBA Is not pure volume of assets but quality of assets. Only eight guys or so make up the rotation in the playoffs. You need high-end talent at the top of that group.

[wiley]

Disagree with a bunch of folks in this thread.  Giving up low-priced Rondo and the #19 pick for Chris Paul is a mistake.  It's not a mistake because Paul is not better than Rondo, but they're way to close to give up #19 too.  Do people understand that Paul has off nights too?   Do people understand Rondo's rebounding and steals?  If you want to watch the Celtics become dominated by a single player instead of remaining very team oriented on offense, trade for Paul.  I'd prefer to keep Rondo and gradually bring in as many shooters as needed.

Also, as the Celtics begin to decline, we can't be giving up assets.  If we were to trade Rondo, I'd rather do it in a deal that increases the number of assets we have.....for example:  A three way in which Rondo, Shrek and Donkey go out, and Darren Collison, O.J. Mayo and two of the Grizzlies draft picks come our way....so we get a better than average PG, a stud, and 2 studly prospects.  That's probably a bad trade for us, but it's an example of adding assets rather than decreasing them....

Paul, Ray and KG are old.  Very old and much used.  Chris Paul and who when they're gone?  As we can see from watching New Orleans he can't do it alone.

You're putting way too much emphasis on the 19th pick. That's entirely replaceable. And not likely to bring back a singular talent like Paul, who is already a top-5 player in the league. Rondo's not top-10 and may never be. If you want to win titles, you need a megastar and you can't draw a line in the sand over a mid-first round pick.

The key in the NBA Is not pure volume of assets but quality of assets. Only eight guys or so make up the rotation in the playoffs. You need high-end talent at the top of that group.

Rondo is that high end talent imo.  That's why I don't give up 19 in a deep draft.  But it's more about how much I value Rondo than the 19.  The 19 just ices it for me.  I'd rather have low-cost Rondo and James Anderson than Chris Paul.  And again, that's like 80% due to Rondo.  In other words, going on a big 3 model, Rondo is good enough to be part of a big 3, and at what we pay him we can get another big 3 not too far off.....

[PosImpos]

Disagree with a bunch of folks in this thread.  Giving up low-priced Rondo and the #19 pick for Chris Paul is a mistake.  It's not a mistake because Paul is not better than Rondo, but they're way to close to give up #19 too.  Do people understand that Paul has off nights too?   Do people understand Rondo's rebounding and steals?  If you want to watch the Celtics become dominated by a single player instead of remaining very team oriented on offense, trade for Paul.  I'd prefer to keep Rondo and gradually bring in as many shooters as needed.

Also, as the Celtics begin to decline, we can't be giving up assets.  If we were to trade Rondo, I'd rather do it in a deal that increases the number of assets we have.....for example:  A three way in which Rondo, Shrek and Donkey go out, and Darren Collison, O.J. Mayo and two of the Grizzlies draft picks come our way....so we get a better than average PG, a stud, and 2 studly prospects.  That's probably a bad trade for us, but it's an example of adding assets rather than decreasing them....

Paul, Ray and KG are old.  Very old and much used.  Chris Paul and who when they're gone?  As we can see from watching New Orleans he can't do it alone.

You're putting way too much emphasis on the 19th pick. That's entirely replaceable. And not likely to bring back a singular talent like Paul, who is already a top-5 player in the league. Rondo's not top-10 and may never be. If you want to win titles, you need a megastar and you can't draw a line in the sand over a mid-first round pick.

The key in the NBA Is not pure volume of assets but quality of assets. Only eight guys or so make up the rotation in the playoffs. You need high-end talent at the top of that group.

Yeah.  Get a top 5 player and a top 10-15 player and you have a championship core.  Surround it with solid role players to create a balanced squad on both ends of the floor and you're good to go.

Massing assets is only worthwhile if you're trying to eventually trade for top players (e.g. the Big 3 trades).

Rondo's ceiling is probably top 10 player in the NBA...you'd have to get another guy at his talent level or better to really have a shot at a title once the Big 3 have retired.

[FallGuy]

Disagree with a bunch of folks in this thread.  Giving up low-priced Rondo and the #19 pick for Chris Paul is a mistake.  It's not a mistake because Paul is not better than Rondo, but they're way to close to give up #19 too.  Do people understand that Paul has off nights too?   Do people understand Rondo's rebounding and steals?  If you want to watch the Celtics become dominated by a single player instead of remaining very team oriented on offense, trade for Paul.  I'd prefer to keep Rondo and gradually bring in as many shooters as needed.

Also, as the Celtics begin to decline, we can't be giving up assets.  If we were to trade Rondo, I'd rather do it in a deal that increases the number of assets we have.....for example:  A three way in which Rondo, Shrek and Donkey go out, and Darren Collison, O.J. Mayo and two of the Grizzlies draft picks come our way....so we get a better than average PG, a stud, and 2 studly prospects.  That's probably a bad trade for us, but it's an example of adding assets rather than decreasing them....

Paul, Ray and KG are old.  Very old and much used.  Chris Paul and who when they're gone?  As we can see from watching New Orleans he can't do it alone.

You're putting way too much emphasis on the 19th pick. That's entirely replaceable. And not likely to bring back a singular talent like Paul, who is already a top-5 player in the league. Rondo's not top-10 and may never be. If you want to win titles, you need a megastar and you can't draw a line in the sand over a mid-first round pick.

The key in the NBA Is not pure volume of assets but quality of assets. Only eight guys or so make up the rotation in the playoffs. You need high-end talent at the top of that group.

Yeah.  Get a top 5 player and a top 10-15 player and you have a championship core.  Surround it with solid role players to create a balanced squad on both ends of the floor and you're good to go.

Massing assets is only worthwhile if you're trying to eventually trade for top players (e.g. the Big 3 trades).

Exactly. It's a fantasy but if you have Chris Paul, you have your #1 guy locked down for years. With PP and KG behind him, you almost have a legit #2 guy. Together they might be enough. With Ray in that group, then all you worry about is adding bulk and rebounding to the frontline. And you have an excellent shot at a title.

I love Rondo and think he has the potential to be a #1 guy but without improving his shooting from the field and at the line and bringing more consistency game-in and game-out, he's destined to lag behind CP3.

[wiley]

Disagree with a bunch of folks in this thread.  Giving up low-priced Rondo and the #19 pick for Chris Paul is a mistake.  It's not a mistake because Paul is not better than Rondo, but they're way to close to give up #19 too.  Do people understand that Paul has off nights too?   Do people understand Rondo's rebounding and steals?  If you want to watch the Celtics become dominated by a single player instead of remaining very team oriented on offense, trade for Paul.  I'd prefer to keep Rondo and gradually bring in as many shooters as needed.

Also, as the Celtics begin to decline, we can't be giving up assets.  If we were to trade Rondo, I'd rather do it in a deal that increases the number of assets we have.....for example:  A three way in which Rondo, Shrek and Donkey go out, and Darren Collison, O.J. Mayo and two of the Grizzlies draft picks come our way....so we get a better than average PG, a stud, and 2 studly prospects.  That's probably a bad trade for us, but it's an example of adding assets rather than decreasing them....

Paul, Ray and KG are old.  Very old and much used.  Chris Paul and who when they're gone?  As we can see from watching New Orleans he can't do it alone.

You're putting way too much emphasis on the 19th pick. That's entirely replaceable. And not likely to bring back a singular talent like Paul, who is already a top-5 player in the league. Rondo's not top-10 and may never be. If you want to win titles, you need a megastar and you can't draw a line in the sand over a mid-first round pick.

The key in the NBA Is not pure volume of assets but quality of assets. Only eight guys or so make up the rotation in the playoffs. You need high-end talent at the top of that group.

Yeah.  Get a top 5 player and a top 10-15 player and you have a championship core.  Surround it with solid role players to create a balanced squad on both ends of the floor and you're good to go.

Massing assets is only worthwhile if you're trying to eventually trade for top players (e.g. the Big 3 trades).

Exactly. It's a fantasy but if you have Chris Paul, you have your #1 guy locked down for years. With PP and KG behind him, you almost have a legit #2 guy. Together they might be enough. With Ray in that group, then all you worry about is adding bulk and rebounding to the frontline. And you have an excellent shot at a title.

I love Rondo and think he has the potential to be a #1 guy but without improving his shooting from the field and at the line and bringing more consistency game-in and game-out, he's destined to lag behind CP3.

Rondo this year was the best player on a team that probably wins the championship with a healthy Perk.  That's my problem. 

[StartOrien]

One general manager said that William Wesley, an advisor of LeBron James, is sending mixed messages to teams.

"Right now Wes is talking out of six sides of his mouth," the GM told Brian Windhorst of The Plain Dealer.



Read more: http://www.realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/67355/20100622/wesley_sending_mixed_messages/#ixzz0rbXaeg1a

[goz421]

Paul is rumored to be on the table.

I would.

I think other pieces would need to be added to make it work.

Rondo has a nice contract as well.