Celtics Still Considering Curry for Rondo - Broussard, Insider

[LarBrd33]

When I first hear a rumor I think about what parties would gain by a rumor being leaked. Golden state saying that they think ellis is a better player makes ellis seem more valuable. boston being desperate to move rondo lowers his value. This leads me to believe that golden state put out the rumor to aid a rondo for ellis deal.

Rondo for Ellis would be a mistake.  Ellis will not have the same kind of Iversonian stats elsewhere.

I think as soon as Ellis and Curry are broken up, Curry will end up having bigger numbers and Curry's team will have more success.  

[HUD4]

That's what I wish we could pair Rondo WITH Ellis...

[LarBrd33]

That's what I wish we could pair Rondo WITH Ellis...

Rondo WITH Curry would be far more dangerous.

Curry moves over to his natural SG position... and instead of having Ellis ballhog his way to 20+ shots he has true passing point guard finding him and his 48% shooting (45% from three... 90% from the line)... He'd become a 30 point scorer.  Golden State would be absolutely giddy if they could dump Ellis on the Celtics for Rondo.

[birdbrady]

I'd absolutely be willing to gamble on Curry's health.  It's worth it because Steph is a legit franchise player.  Heck, he's got a 21 PER right now.

He's young, coachable, unselfish, humble, and clutch.  Rondo is only one of those.

Anyways, I doubt this is really out there.  It was on Insider, which always puts up borderline rumors on its website.  Deals that are really close actually do get out there.  Celtics "inquired" that was it.  if there were legitimate discussions, too many people in the know would get this out there and every different news source would have it.  Rather than ESPN trying to scum a couple of bucks off people putting it on their pay-to-read page.


EDIT: Also, isnt GS under the cap?  Can't they make this deal by just absorbing Rondo's deal?

[j804]

meh not real big on curry

[MBunge]

I'd absolutely be willing to gamble on Curry's health.  It's worth it because Steph is a legit franchise player.  Heck, he's got a 21 PER right now.

That's throwing the term "franchise player" around too loosely.  Curry's pretty good, but he's one of those guys who can go off and get you 35 one night but go 4 for 16 another night.

Mike

[birdbrady]

I'd absolutely be willing to gamble on Curry's health.  It's worth it because Steph is a legit franchise player.  Heck, he's got a 21 PER right now.

That's throwing the term "franchise player" around too loosely.  Curry's pretty good, but he's one of those guys who can go off and get you 35 one night but go 4 for 16 another night.

Mike

uhhh??

Well I guess you could say that, because technically Larry Bird could go 4-16 another night.

But don't make it seem like Steph's some wild, inefficient chucker who scores a lot of points on a garbage team (ala Nick Young.)

He routinely shoots around 48% from the field, and is a career 44% shooter from behind the arc.

The only gamble is his healthy, which is a major concern.  But if he gets that ankle sorted out, he's a game changer, imo.  A legit #2 option on a title team, and a #1 option to go to with the game on the line.  He's clutch as hell.

[chambers]

I just saw the poll on the front page and it was 55% saying no to trading Rondo for Curry.
Are you kidding me? Unless his feet/ankles are completely cooked this would be a STEAL for the Celtics. Curry is basically the best pure shooter in the game.
Ellis takes so many shots away from him and he still gets it done scoring wise. 45% from three and even better from mid range.

I would be laughing my way to the bank if Golden State gave up this wonder boy for Curry.
There is basically 1 in a million chance of this happening.
Keep dreaming, and remember you're going to have to waft through a swamp of BS rumors and attention seeking over the next 2 weeks before you get any piece of viable info.

[jdz101]

This has been discussed before. I'm sure all of us would rather take paper ankles than rondo at the moment. It won't happen though.

[MBunge]

I'd absolutely be willing to gamble on Curry's health.  It's worth it because Steph is a legit franchise player.  Heck, he's got a 21 PER right now.

That's throwing the term "franchise player" around too loosely.  Curry's pretty good, but he's one of those guys who can go off and get you 35 one night but go 4 for 16 another night.

Mike

uhhh??

Well I guess you could say that, because technically Larry Bird could go 4-16 another night.

But don't make it seem like Steph's some wild, inefficient chucker who scores a lot of points on a garbage team (ala Nick Young.)

But if you're calling Steph Curry a "franchise player", what do you call LeBron or Kobe or even Carmello?  "Franchise player" says "this is the best guy on our team" and I'm not sure you're going to win a lot if that guy is Steph Curry.

Mike

[LarBrd33]

meh not real big on curry

This might not apply specifically to you, but I think the kind of people who would want Ellis over Curry are the same kind of people who think the Celtics should sign Allen Iverson or Gilbert Arenas.  In other words, they are the kind of people who probably don't understand shooting percentages and what kind of impact a ball hog can have on his teammates.  They just say "ooOo... He averages 25 points!  He's a stah!" or "Iverson was a superstah!" despite the fact the chucker shot 41% and Philly seemingly improved when they finally dumped him for Andre Miller.

I see Ellis like that.  If you look at his stats you might think he's better than Curry.  

Ellis:  22 points, 5.7 assists, 3.5 rebounds, 1.4 steals.  

Simmons has written about this before... Is Ellis just a guy putting up big stats on a bad team or should we be impressed by his stats?  I'm definitely leaning towards "putting up big stats on a bad team".  He's an undersized SG.  He's shooting 43%.  30% from three.  The guy chucks up 20+ shots a night in 40 minutes a night.

Now you take a look at Curry.

Averages like 18 points, 6.2 assists, 3.7 rebounds, 1.8 steals.

Ok... but the big thing here is that Curry is an OTHERWORLDLY SHOOTER.  48% shooter... 45% from three... 90% from the line.  He averages about 6 less shots than Ellis and about 8 less minutes.  He's sick.  He's 23 years old, he's still on his rookie contract.  Not to mention that the two of them are basically the exact same size (6'3 185).   Ellis plays SG, because he can't play PG.   Curry plays PG, because Ellis plays SG.  

It's not even a debate if you ask me.  Curry is far better than Ellis.  The second that ball hog leaves Golden State, Curry is going to flourish.  As a basketball fan it sickens me to see games where Curry goes 3-6 (3-5 from three) while Ellis is jacking up 20 shots.   They need to be broken up.  Wherever they end up, Curry will go on to be a star... Ellis will take a major step backwards on a legit team.

[PosImpos]

meh not real big on curry

i quite like curry myself, particularly with some naan.

[stylo617617]

curry & beasley core can be exciting , ray for mayo anyone? 3 top picks aka future Okc?

[Lucky17]

meh not real big on curry

i quite like curry myself, particularly with some naan.

Add Alu Gobi for the Indian Big Three.

[Kane3387]

I'd absolutely be willing to gamble on Curry's health.  It's worth it because Steph is a legit franchise player.  Heck, he's got a 21 PER right now.

That's throwing the term "franchise player" around too loosely.  Curry's pretty good, but he's one of those guys who can go off and get you 35 one night but go 4 for 16 another night.

Mike

uhhh??

Well I guess you could say that, because technically Larry Bird could go 4-16 another night.

But don't make it seem like Steph's some wild, inefficient chucker who scores a lot of points on a garbage team (ala Nick Young.)

But if you're calling Steph Curry a "franchise player", what do you call LeBron or Kobe or even Carmello?  "Franchise player" says "this is the best guy on our team" and I'm not sure you're going to win a lot if that guy is Steph Curry.

Mike

Curry is not a franchise player. That term gets thrown around too much. There is literally like 6 or 7 guys that this pertains too.

LBJ, Rose, Wade, Durant, Howard, Dirk, and Paul

Those are the only guys who at this point can presently will their team to the playoffs almost single-handedly.

Curry has never been to the playoffs, and heck has never been an All-Star. I like Curry but the difference between him and Rondo is that the things Curry brings to the table show up on a stat sheet more then the things Rondo does. As far as overall production I think it's even or slightly in Rondo's favor.

That being said Curry is on a rookie deal. If you can attain him without getting a cap killer like Biendrins then you really consider it. Also I believe Curry has more potential then Rondo. I think Rondo has almost peaked and I wonder how good he can be in 3-4 years when he can't just blow  by guys anymore. If he doesn't have a much improved shot by then he won't be a top 40 player.

If you could do Kwame Brown's contract and Stephen Curry for just Rondo then I would do it. Otherwise I will look at other options for Rondo or just not trade him.