A bold, nearly unstomachable "win now then rebuild" trade:

[davemonsterband]

How many teams have won a ring with a PG that can't guard anyone? I wouldn't take MVP Steve Nash over rookie Rondo if I had to think into the playoffs.

[BballTim]

Maybe I'm too soured on Rondo right now. I just think that if Nash is on this team last year, we beat the Lakers fairly easily. I do think he is that much better on offense, and PG is not the basis of our defense. On offense, I think Nash can do everything Rondo can, but can do many more things: free throws, 3 pointers, midrange, etc. He needs to be double teams; rondo can be sagged off.

  Why would you be soured on Rondo when he's playing so well this year? On defense, you're underestimating what Rondo does. He's a great transition defender, a great perimeter defender, and he causes a lot of turnovers. And Nash doesn't need to be double teamed. Phoenix scores a lot more of their points early in the shot clock than we do, and they don't score nearly as well as we do late in the shot clock.

[BballTim]

Now, would you do it if Howard and Williams' agents told you that they both wanted to team up if one team had the cap space in 2012?

  I might try and convince Howard's agent to have Dwight team up with Rajon and PP instead. I might take a look at some of the teams that cleared cap space to sign LeBron and came up empty. Or, if I was really committed to Williams and Howard, I might keep Rondo until then and trade him to a team with cap space for younger players and picks.

[Fan from VT]

And finally, i'm a little soured in general on the hype ALL point guards are getting right now. I cannot objectively say I would definitely want rondo over Wall, Williams, CP3 (if healthy), Rose, Westbrook, Curry...I think it's become increasingly easy to be a greatly productive PG, probably due to the trickle down of the rule changes a few years ago, and many fan bases quite legitimately think they have a top-3 pg in the game. So therefore I do think the "value" of speedy pg's is a little inflated right now, because the replacement pool is extensive and not as far behind the elite class as it is for other positions right now.

Edit:
For all the "top 3 talk," i really can't say that Rondo has truly separated himself at all from the Rose/Wall/Westbrook/Curry/Paul/Williams group for now or the next 5 years. Additionally, the above group have all figured out how to already greatly improve their shooting problems, which is a skill that truly lasts, especially being able to make a living at the free throw line.

[Finkelskyhook]

Nash would have fit in perfect with River's teams pre-Garnett...You know...Those Magic and Celtics teams that essentially played some of the most embarassing defense in NBA history?

But on a team that is defense-first, Nash is a joke defensively....And that's being kind.  There's a reason why Nash always falls short.  His teams are always playing a man short defensively.

In addition to being a jerk. 

I'd take Hill in a heartbeat, though.
No Nash. No thanks.

[Fan from VT]

How many teams have won a ring with a PG that can't guard anyone? I wouldn't take MVP Steve Nash over rookie Rondo if I had to think into the playoffs.

Later lakers with Magic, Lakers again with Fisher, Miami with over the hill payton.

[slamtheking]

I don't really see an upside to this deal at all.

It would impact team chemistry and cohesion.  Nash and Hill are probably great teammates but they would need time to get familiar with the offensive sets and a LOT more time to learn the defense.  It'd throw a lot of integral team play right off kilter in the hopes of marginally improving the team immediately---and that's a huge assumption that would actually be the case.

Nash is a better shooter than Rondo no question but I rate Rondo better as a ballhandler, passer and especially as a defender.  The kid's gritty and faster.  Not to mention younger and with an improving game.  Rondo's better than Nash right now.

Hill's better than Wafer and Quisy but they're more than holding down the fort off the bench.  No real need to bring in Hill other than for stacking the current deck.

JO's improving with each game.  I'm not sending him out of town when he's showing he'll make real contributions going into and during the playoffs.  

As for rebuilding, how?  Praying you can land free agents or land top draft picks once this team's in the toilet after the oldsters retire?  Horrible idea.  You're giving away the type of player that we'd be trying to draft or sign for no appreciable short or longterm improvement.  If you really think this is still a great idea for rebuilding, I suggest you keep in mind what happened to all the teams with spending money this past summer that didn't get a big name FA (or got one when they were targetting 2) and also keep in mind the C's own history of lottery day disasters when, for example, we should have landed Duncan as well as landing Oden/Durant and came out each time with the worst pick possible.

[Finkelskyhook]

How many teams have won a ring with a PG that can't guard anyone? I wouldn't take MVP Steve Nash over rookie Rondo if I had to think into the playoffs.

Later lakers with Magic, Lakers again with Fisher, Miami with over the hill payton.

I wouldn't take an any-era Nash over an any-era Rondo if my goal was to win a championship.  If I was Paul Westhead, I would.

The difference between those three examples and Nash is that Earvin had length and also rarely covered opposing PGS.  Payton would be a better defender at 70 years old than Nash is now.  Fisher at least tries to guard an area.  All three at least  care / cared enough to show up on that end of the court.

[2short]

Quite possibly the dumbest idea Ive seen on here.... And believe me, there have been tons of dumb ideas.

I've seen lots of bad ideas but this idea is to trade away arguably our mvp, definately the future of the team? wow
Can we put a vote counter on this for worst trade idea EVER.

[Finkelskyhook]

Quite possibly the dumbest idea Ive seen on here.... And believe me, there have been tons of dumb ideas.

I've seen lots of bad ideas but this idea is to trade away arguably our mvp, definately the future of the team? wow
Can we put a vote counter on this for worst trade idea EVER.

I don't know.  This doesn't rank up there with some of the Scalabrine trade proposals I remember.

[2short]

Quite possibly the dumbest idea Ive seen on here.... And believe me, there have been tons of dumb ideas.

I've seen lots of bad ideas but this idea is to trade away arguably our mvp, definately the future of the team? wow
Can we put a vote counter on this for worst trade idea EVER.

I don't know.  This doesn't rank up there with some of the Scalabrine trade proposals I remember.

hey scal was highlighted on espn sportscenter this morning 
guys got game

[P2]

You must be insane. Giving up Rondo alone isn't worth Nash and Hill. Even if they added a couple more players I wouldn't deal Rondo. In fact there are only a handful of players I would trade Rondo for, and nothing less than that. And those players include LeBron, Wade, Superman... no wait, that's about it!

[MBunge]

The main argument against it is that Nash is actually a little like Iverson.  He can only play one way and every other player on the court has to adjust around him.  It's not as obvious with Nash because his game is based on passing more than scoring, but the reason why Nash's Suns always fall short is they are totally dependent on him to make or facilitate every single play on offense, especially down the stretch in tight games.

Mike

[GreenEnvy]

The only bold move DA could pull would be to trade Rondo for CP3.

It wouldn't necessarily hinder the rebuilding process either, as many players ('Melo, D12, etc.) have all been linked to want to play with CP3.

CP3 may not be the complete player Rondo is, but he too is very good at everything, and an excellent all-around offensive player.

He makes a lot more money (will be making $17.8M vs. $11M for Rondo) which could affect our 2012 FA plans.


Either way, no need for a bold move (or any move, for that matter).

[BballTim]

And finally, i'm a little soured in general on the hype ALL point guards are getting right now. I cannot objectively say I would definitely want rondo over Wall, Williams, CP3 (if healthy), Rose, Westbrook, Curry...I think it's become increasingly easy to be a greatly productive PG, probably due to the trickle down of the rule changes a few years ago, and many fan bases quite legitimately think they have a top-3 pg in the game. So therefore I do think the "value" of speedy pg's is a little inflated right now, because the replacement pool is extensive and not as far behind the elite class as it is for other positions right now.

Edit:
For all the "top 3 talk," i really can't say that Rondo has truly separated himself at all from the Rose/Wall/Westbrook/Curry/Paul/Williams group for now or the next 5 years. Additionally, the above group have all figured out how to already greatly improve their shooting problems, which is a skill that truly lasts, especially being able to make a living at the free throw line.

  These arguments are similar to those that have always claimed that KG was never really a superstar because he didn't carry a team scoring-wise, he just made a myriad of contributions in all areas. Most of those players can score better than Rondo (although most people here seem to agree he could score more if he made it more of a priority) but Rondo does a number of things better than those players. You don't value those things as much as you value scoring so I don't think we'll agree on the value of Rondo.