How about Chris Paul?

[droopdog7]

Defense = Rondo
Rebounding = Rondo
Playmaking = Draw
Driving to the basket = Draw
Jumpshooting = Paul
FT Shooting = Paul

In a vacuum yes.  But in game play, Rondo's inability to shoot causes a domino effect that at times, can hurt other players on offense. 

Would I trade Rondo for Paul straight up.  Without question (assuming Paul is healthy).  Beyond that, would have to see what else we would have to give up.

[vinnie]

Defense = Rondo
Rebounding = Rondo
Playmaking = Draw
Driving to the basket = Draw
Jumpshooting = Paul
FT Shooting = Paul

In a vacuum yes.  But in game play, Rondo's inability to shoot causes a domino effect that at times, can hurt other players on offense. 

Would I trade Rondo for Paul straight up.  Without question (assuming Paul is healthy).  Beyond that, would have to see what else we would have to give up.

Agreed - I just don't think this is the Celts' priority and there is no way they would get Paul straight up for Rondo. That was the only point I was trying to make. I just did not do a good job of it.

[JSD]

Rondo's an offensive liability in the half court set, and an overrated defender who cheats and gambles way too much.

I'd trade him for Chris Paul in a heartbeat.

[GreenFaith1819]

We have one of the best point guards in the league in Rondo. Not sure why teh Celts would want Chris Paul -- seriously.

Because he's better than Rondo and not a liability on offense.

Since when has Rondo become an offensive liability? He showed he can score when left with an open jumper, and had we won the championship last season there would be no argument about it. We fell short by one W and all of a sudden Rondo's back to year 1 status (where I will agree he WAS a liability on offense).

Also, I'd rather have an offensive liability than a defensive liability.

I'd rather have a (presumably) loyal Rajon Rondo for 5+ years as opposed to CP3 for 2 seasons, but I understand what this team's window is and how a trade would make "sense".

He's been a liability since he came into the the league.  He showed it in the Finals too when Kobe didn't have to defend him and when he couldn't make free throws.

  Thar was the worst free throw shooting stint of his career. And he's not a big liability on offense. He shoots poorly from the outside but he passes and penetrates as well as any point guard in the league. He becomes a liability when they're bogged down in a half court game and the others are struggling as well. The bulk of the time he's a good offensive player.

I have to agree with BBallTim on this one...and if it wasn't for Rondo's offense (And Total all-around game) in that CLE series, we wouldn't have even made it to LA.

Rondo or Chirs Paul? I'll take Rondo, no doubt. Sure - he still has to work on those free throws and his J, but he's coming along nicely. Plus, he has playoff experience for three straight yrs now.

[winsomme]

We have one of the best point guards in the league in Rondo. Not sure why teh Celts would want Chris Paul -- seriously.

Because he's better than Rondo and not a liability on offense.

Since when has Rondo become an offensive liability? He showed he can score when left with an open jumper, and had we won the championship last season there would be no argument about it. We fell short by one W and all of a sudden Rondo's back to year 1 status (where I will agree he WAS a liability on offense).

Also, I'd rather have an offensive liability than a defensive liability.

I'd rather have a (presumably) loyal Rajon Rondo for 5+ years as opposed to CP3 for 2 seasons, but I understand what this team's window is and how a trade would make "sense".

He's been a liability since he came into the the league.  He showed it in the Finals too when Kobe didn't have to defend him and when he couldn't make free throws.

  Thar was the worst free throw shooting stint of his career. And he's not a big liability on offense. He shoots poorly from the outside but he passes and penetrates as well as any point guard in the league. He becomes a liability when they're bogged down in a half court game and the others are struggling as well. The bulk of the time he's a good offensive player.

I have to agree with BBallTim on this one...and if it wasn't for Rondo's offense (And Total all-around game) in that CLE series, we wouldn't have even made it to LA.

Rondo or Chirs Paul? I'll take Rondo, no doubt. Sure - he still has to work on those free throws and his J, but he's coming along nicely. Plus, he has playoff experience for three straight yrs now.

Exactly, Green. TP.

Why would a team try so many different players guarding an offensively challenged player?

If the guy is so offensively challenged, why were the Cavs trying everybody and their brother to try and guard him....

[GreenFaith1819]

We have one of the best point guards in the league in Rondo. Not sure why teh Celts would want Chris Paul -- seriously.

Because he's better than Rondo and not a liability on offense.

Since when has Rondo become an offensive liability? He showed he can score when left with an open jumper, and had we won the championship last season there would be no argument about it. We fell short by one W and all of a sudden Rondo's back to year 1 status (where I will agree he WAS a liability on offense).

Also, I'd rather have an offensive liability than a defensive liability.

I'd rather have a (presumably) loyal Rajon Rondo for 5+ years as opposed to CP3 for 2 seasons, but I understand what this team's window is and how a trade would make "sense".

He's been a liability since he came into the the league.  He showed it in the Finals too when Kobe didn't have to defend him and when he couldn't make free throws.

  Thar was the worst free throw shooting stint of his career. And he's not a big liability on offense. He shoots poorly from the outside but he passes and penetrates as well as any point guard in the league. He becomes a liability when they're bogged down in a half court game and the others are struggling as well. The bulk of the time he's a good offensive player.

I have to agree with BBallTim on this one...and if it wasn't for Rondo's offense (And Total all-around game) in that CLE series, we wouldn't have even made it to LA.

Rondo or Chirs Paul? I'll take Rondo, no doubt. Sure - he still has to work on those free throws and his J, but he's coming along nicely. Plus, he has playoff experience for three straight yrs now.

Exactly, Green. TP.

Why would a team try so many different players guarding an offensively challenged player?

If the guy is so offensively challenged, why were the Cavs trying everybody and their brother to try and guard him....

Exactly - and that is why we can (and Will) beat anything that MIA will throw at us.

Stick Wade on Rondo? He'll make them pay. Lebron? Then Paul will go off.

And then who will guard Ray? Chalmers? Mike Miller? Nope.

And if they do succeed in taking away Rondo's offense, then he'll make them pay with his assists - even moreso now that we have an Offensively Capable 5.

[Coach]

We have one of the best point guards in the league in Rondo. Not sure why teh Celts would want Chris Paul -- seriously.

Because he's better than Rondo and not a liability on offense.

Since when has Rondo become an offensive liability? He showed he can score when left with an open jumper, and had we won the championship last season there would be no argument about it. We fell short by one W and all of a sudden Rondo's back to year 1 status (where I will agree he WAS a liability on offense).

Also, I'd rather have an offensive liability than a defensive liability.

I'd rather have a (presumably) loyal Rajon Rondo for 5+ years as opposed to CP3 for 2 seasons, but I understand what this team's window is and how a trade would make "sense".

He's been a liability since he came into the the league.  He showed it in the Finals too when Kobe didn't have to defend him and when he couldn't make free throws.

  Thar was the worst free throw shooting stint of his career. And he's not a big liability on offense. He shoots poorly from the outside but he passes and penetrates as well as any point guard in the league. He becomes a liability when they're bogged down in a half court game and the others are struggling as well. The bulk of the time he's a good offensive player.

I have to agree with BBallTim on this one...and if it wasn't for Rondo's offense (And Total all-around game) in that CLE series, we wouldn't have even made it to LA.

Rondo or Chirs Paul? I'll take Rondo, no doubt. Sure - he still has to work on those free throws and his J, but he's coming along nicely. Plus, he has playoff experience for three straight yrs now.

Exactly, Green. TP.

Why would a team try so many different players guarding an offensively challenged player?

If the guy is so offensively challenged, why were the Cavs trying everybody and their brother to try and guard him....

I love Rondo, but anyone who says they would take Rondo over Paul is an unvbelievable homer, or has no clue about basketball.

I would do Perk and Rondo for Paul or Baby and Rondo for Paul in a heart beat.

[winsomme]

We have one of the best point guards in the league in Rondo. Not sure why teh Celts would want Chris Paul -- seriously.

Because he's better than Rondo and not a liability on offense.

Since when has Rondo become an offensive liability? He showed he can score when left with an open jumper, and had we won the championship last season there would be no argument about it. We fell short by one W and all of a sudden Rondo's back to year 1 status (where I will agree he WAS a liability on offense).

Also, I'd rather have an offensive liability than a defensive liability.

I'd rather have a (presumably) loyal Rajon Rondo for 5+ years as opposed to CP3 for 2 seasons, but I understand what this team's window is and how a trade would make "sense".

He's been a liability since he came into the the league.  He showed it in the Finals too when Kobe didn't have to defend him and when he couldn't make free throws.

  Thar was the worst free throw shooting stint of his career. And he's not a big liability on offense. He shoots poorly from the outside but he passes and penetrates as well as any point guard in the league. He becomes a liability when they're bogged down in a half court game and the others are struggling as well. The bulk of the time he's a good offensive player.

I have to agree with BBallTim on this one...and if it wasn't for Rondo's offense (And Total all-around game) in that CLE series, we wouldn't have even made it to LA.

Rondo or Chirs Paul? I'll take Rondo, no doubt. Sure - he still has to work on those free throws and his J, but he's coming along nicely. Plus, he has playoff experience for three straight yrs now.

Exactly, Green. TP.

Why would a team try so many different players guarding an offensively challenged player?

If the guy is so offensively challenged, why were the Cavs trying everybody and their brother to try and guard him....

I love Rondo, but anyone who says they would take Rondo over Paul is an unvbelievable homer, or has no clue about basketball.

I would do Perk and Rondo for Paul or Baby and Rondo for Paul in a heart beat.

I don't think many wouldn't trade Paul for Rondo straight up. Personally, I'd be willing to go Sheed's contract, Rondo, Baby, and maybe Bradley....I don't think I'd go Perk instead of Baby. Perk is so important to our interior defense.

[BballTim]

We have one of the best point guards in the league in Rondo. Not sure why teh Celts would want Chris Paul -- seriously.

Because he's better than Rondo and not a liability on offense.

Since when has Rondo become an offensive liability? He showed he can score when left with an open jumper, and had we won the championship last season there would be no argument about it. We fell short by one W and all of a sudden Rondo's back to year 1 status (where I will agree he WAS a liability on offense).

Also, I'd rather have an offensive liability than a defensive liability.

I'd rather have a (presumably) loyal Rajon Rondo for 5+ years as opposed to CP3 for 2 seasons, but I understand what this team's window is and how a trade would make "sense".

He's been a liability since he came into the the league.  He showed it in the Finals too when Kobe didn't have to defend him and when he couldn't make free throws.

  Thar was the worst free throw shooting stint of his career. And he's not a big liability on offense. He shoots poorly from the outside but he passes and penetrates as well as any point guard in the league. He becomes a liability when they're bogged down in a half court game and the others are struggling as well. The bulk of the time he's a good offensive player.

I have to agree with BBallTim on this one...and if it wasn't for Rondo's offense (And Total all-around game) in that CLE series, we wouldn't have even made it to LA.

Rondo or Chirs Paul? I'll take Rondo, no doubt. Sure - he still has to work on those free throws and his J, but he's coming along nicely. Plus, he has playoff experience for three straight yrs now.

Exactly, Green. TP.

Why would a team try so many different players guarding an offensively challenged player?

If the guy is so offensively challenged, why were the Cavs trying everybody and their brother to try and guard him....

I love Rondo, but anyone who says they would take Rondo over Paul is an unvbelievable homer, or has no clue about basketball.

I would do Perk and Rondo for Paul or Baby and Rondo for Paul in a heart beat.

  Paul may be a little better but when he comes here he'll be a better shooter but he'll probably take a few less shots and get a few less assists a game than he does now. We'll end up with a player who puts up slightly better stats than Rondo, and (in your scenario) we'd be giving up a valuable big for a smallish improvement in pg production.

[Rondo_is_better]

Yes, how about Chris Paul? 

[Change]

Rondo is a no no.

Top5 PG discounted for the next 5 years. Easy, Keep Rondo.

[slamdunk]

Rondo, Davis and 2 #1's for Paul.

[Quetzalcoatl]

Defense = Rondo
Rebounding = Rondo
Playmaking = Draw
Driving to the basket = Draw
Jumpshooting = Paul
FT Shooting = Paul

Don't forget Injury History = Rondo and Rondo's contract is $13 million cheaper.  He signed that in 2008 so it's probably not that different by now, but still.  I would trade Rondo for Paul straight up but when you started throwing in picks and whatnot, I would start to get nervous as the playoffs got closer.  Rondo is a champion in the playoffs and I would take that over 3/4ths of a season of highly entertaining play followed by a knee injury.  He should go to the Suns or a team with a proven history of rehabbing your Grant Hills and the like. 

[GreenFaith1819]

We have one of the best point guards in the league in Rondo. Not sure why teh Celts would want Chris Paul -- seriously.

Because he's better than Rondo and not a liability on offense.

Since when has Rondo become an offensive liability? He showed he can score when left with an open jumper, and had we won the championship last season there would be no argument about it. We fell short by one W and all of a sudden Rondo's back to year 1 status (where I will agree he WAS a liability on offense).

Also, I'd rather have an offensive liability than a defensive liability.

I'd rather have a (presumably) loyal Rajon Rondo for 5+ years as opposed to CP3 for 2 seasons, but I understand what this team's window is and how a trade would make "sense".

He's been a liability since he came into the the league.  He showed it in the Finals too when Kobe didn't have to defend him and when he couldn't make free throws.

  Thar was the worst free throw shooting stint of his career. And he's not a big liability on offense. He shoots poorly from the outside but he passes and penetrates as well as any point guard in the league. He becomes a liability when they're bogged down in a half court game and the others are struggling as well. The bulk of the time he's a good offensive player.

I have to agree with BBallTim on this one...and if it wasn't for Rondo's offense (And Total all-around game) in that CLE series, we wouldn't have even made it to LA.

Rondo or Chirs Paul? I'll take Rondo, no doubt. Sure - he still has to work on those free throws and his J, but he's coming along nicely. Plus, he has playoff experience for three straight yrs now.

Exactly, Green. TP.

Why would a team try so many different players guarding an offensively challenged player?

If the guy is so offensively challenged, why were the Cavs trying everybody and their brother to try and guard him....

I love Rondo, but anyone who says they would take Rondo over Paul is an unvbelievable homer, or has no clue about basketball.

I would do Perk and Rondo for Paul or Baby and Rondo for Paul in a heart beat.

Wow - Coach...that is a LOT you are giving up for an injury-prone, unproven (very little playoff experience) PG who has yet to prove himself.

Sure - CP3 is maybe the most well-rounded PG out there, but he has peaked. The only thing thing that CP3 is adding to his resume is injuries, unfortunately.

Rondo? Top 3 PG, Right Now. Maybe the better rebounder out of DWill or CP3. Maybe the best Defender (All-NBA 1st Team Defense last yr). Will be the Top one in a few yrs, maybe sooner.

Say if Danny did in fact do the trade you are suggesting - Ok - we now have CP3, but who will defend Dwight or LA's Twin Towers? Who backs up KG in the event that Baby is in the trade package? JO will certainly hold down the fort, but Kendrick Perkins is the Calvary for the Boston Celtics.

We will need Perk, JO, Glen and KG to beat LA.

And - What is a Homer? When I look it up, all that comes up is baseball terms

[pearljammer10]

1) Why would we wanna get Paul when we already have a top 5, maybe top 3 point guard in the league.

2)How do you propose we get Paul? Just call New Orleans and say we want him and they agree?

I bet Sheed, Gaff, and Laf are by far the best thing the Hornets could get for Paul!!  I mean seriously, seriously?