If this sounds like the stupidest idea ever, then good. We are on the same page.

What do we do if we get to the end on next season and it becomes clear that Dwight Howard isn't taking his talents to Boston? We'll have Rondo, Pierce, a couple other cheap pieces and a zillion bucks in cap space. As much as I like Rondo, he's not "best guy on a title contender material". (If you go back over the past 30yrs, the number of teams that won the title without a guy who was i the top 3 guys in the NBA is maybe 2-3... Pistons 2004, maybe our Celts and the Mavs (was Dirk top 3 heading into the playoffs? not sure i would have said that). The point being, I don't think you can have Rondo and add some mid/high level free agents and expect to contend. You need to get a "best guy on a title contender" -- Howard is one, but its a short list. What DA is trying to do is set us up to find that guy.

So we finish next year and DH12 is not coming. I don't think DA will pull a Joe Dumars and just spend the money just because he has it. Dumars had cash and went out and got Charlie Villanueva and Ben Gordon -- those moves will have killed that franchise for a few years. They basically CREATED terrible contracts and got nothing in return except for heartache and the virtual guarantee you will be picking in the top 10 for a few years. Terrible.

If there's no other player worthy of a big big deal, Danny COULD trade for Arenas... take on the worst contract in the league for the remaining 2yrs, but also say "we have the cap space to take this trade on, but we need to PAID to take it on... probably needs to be a 3 or 4 team trade, but get us a sack full of picks and we're willing to do this". Orlando, especially if they retain Howard, will do virtually anything to get out from under that contract. If they could just trade their next 3 #1s and Arenas for someone right now for nothing, they would do it in a second. (PLEASE NOTE, JUST PICKS FROM ORLANDO WON'T BE ENOUGH TO TAKE ON THIS AWFUL CONTRACT... WILL NEED UNPROTECTED PICKS FROM OTHERS IN A 3 WAY DEAL.) The Celts could do that with 2-3 guys, all with deals expiring in 2014 and have the same cap situation as this year- a few cheap guys and a zillion bucks of cap space, but also with a ton of picks and assets. If you are trying to get one of the handful of "best guy on a title contender" guys instead of overpaying for mediocre guys, this is an option.

Not saying we should do this. Just food for thought. I think a very cold, calculated GM makes this kind of move.

Want to make a quick modification/addition to this.

The basic philosophy behind this is as follows:

1) Titles are won by almost always won by superstars with good teams around them, not by teams of good/very good players. These players are typically the #1 pick in the draft, but sometimes circumstances mean a superstar calibur player falls in the draft. Almost every title over the past 30yrs was won by a #1 pick (Magic, Hakeem, Shaq, Isiah, Duncan) or a player who would have gone #1 given a full 4yrs in US college ball (Kobe, Dirk, KG, MJ). Bird was stolen by Red at #6. That covers almost all the titles.

Thus, a team that wants to win titles, not just by pretty good and make the playoffs, is always always searching for a way to find one of these guys.

2) There are 3 ways to actively try to find these guys:

A. Draft early and hope its a year with a great great player (or 2).
B. Build up mega cap space and try to sign a FA superstar (Shaq, Lebron)
C. Build up a roster of young talent and accumulate picks to trade for a superstar (IE, the Ainge Method -- i guess i'm still surprised people think that Ainge sucks as a GM as he's one of maybe 2-3 GMs that's been able to put together a title contender without drafting very very early or by signing a FA... this is definitely the hard way, but sometimes the only way).

Obviously, everyone is hoping to strike gold with all of their picks in hopes of getting a "Kobe-at-13" scenario, but that's not really an active way to try to get a superstar.

3) A team of good/very good players RARELY wins a title in the NBA. Let's use Al Horford as an example. A very good player and borderline All Star kind of guy. Perhaps the ideal guy to be your THIRD best player, but even if you have 3, 4 or 5 "Al Horford quality" guys on a team, that team has typically not won an NBA title. Teams with superstars usually win NBA titles.

3) A cold calculated logical GM could care less if his team is the 5th best or 25th best team. He'd prefer to be at the very top (obviously) or at the very bottom with a chance to hit on a top pick. Its all about getting into position to get that "best guy on a title contender".

4) A "best guy on a title contender" is worth overpaying for, but are few and far between. Almost all other FAs aren't worth the money they are paid, and unless you are putting them next to a "best guy on a title contender", they can only improve your team to a level just under "title contender" and not any higher.

5) So, if we have Rondo and an aging Pierce, spending money on OJ Mayo, Chris Kaman and Eric Gordon probably doesn't make us a title contender. (I have to say, i love Gordon though). It probably makes us pretty good, but not good enough.

6) A cold, calculated, logical GM (also, operating in a vacuum with no concerns of filling seats, keeping fans happy for a year or two, etc) who is SINGULARLY bent on winning a title would have to seriously entertain the following... finding 3 guys with awful contracts, all expiring in 2014. Taking on those contracts while picking up a slew of unprotected #1 picks in the future and not just from an Orlando team that should be title contenders... need shots at future lottery picks).

Under the scenario of signing some good to possibly very good FAs (even if all goes well and they live up to their very large contracts), its very likely we don't have a title to show for it.

Under the "Agent 0 Scorched Earth Plan", we come out with a few high picks of our own, plus a bunch of other picks and again massive cap room in 2014.