If we blow this thing up do we trade Rondo and Green as well?

[Celtics18]

If Green and Rondo are our two best players, they're on pretty good contracts.  Keep them.  We'll need the $$ for the #1 guy we have yet to pick up.

Barring some outstanding offer, I'd keep both and go from there.  Bradley and Sully seem to fit with them well, too.

Just need a C and we'd have a starting unit (athough Bradley should be 3rd guard).

No reason to trade Rondo or Green.

But if they are our #1 players we will need to resign them for more $ and their contracts will no longer be so good.  I don't think we can get rondo on another 11 mill per year deal.

Well, I suppose an allstar starter should probably be paid the max, right?  That's no reason to trade him.

We still need a 2nd max-type guy, making Green #3, where he should thrive.

We have plenty of other assets to trade for "that guy" without giving up Rondo or Green, including our own picks and the one we got for Rivers, and role players like Bradley, who will want to be paid much more than he's worth much sooner then either RR or JG.

You give max contracts to guys who can bring you a championship, not guys who can be good enough to get you into the playoffs.

You're not comparing Rondo to that guy, are you?

[BballTim]

If Green and Rondo are our two best players, they're on pretty good contracts.  Keep them.  We'll need the $$ for the #1 guy we have yet to pick up.

Barring some outstanding offer, I'd keep both and go from there.  Bradley and Sully seem to fit with them well, too.

Just need a C and we'd have a starting unit (athough Bradley should be 3rd guard).

No reason to trade Rondo or Green.

But if they are our #1 players we will need to resign them for more $ and their contracts will no longer be so good.  I don't think we can get rondo on another 11 mill per year deal.

Well, I suppose an allstar starter should probably be paid the max, right?  That's no reason to trade him.

We still need a 2nd max-type guy, making Green #3, where he should thrive.

We have plenty of other assets to trade for "that guy" without giving up Rondo or Green, including our own picks and the one we got for Rivers, and role players like Bradley, who will want to be paid much more than he's worth much sooner then either RR or JG.

You give max contracts to guys who can bring you a championship, not guys who can be good enough to get you into the playoffs.

  So max contracts for LeBron, Wade, Duncan, Kobe and Dirk, possibly KG, and lesser amounts for everyone else in the league? Due to age, I guess LeBron's the only one in the league worth the max right now.

[PhoSita]

I believe Rondo will be traded, but not until the trade deadline this year or around draft time next year.

As an expiring?

The problem with Rondo is that the point is arguably the deepest position in the league right now. It's going to be a buyer's market.

Not really as an "expiring" but presumably as an All-Star caliber player entering his physical prime (28-32) who may not be a franchise cornerstone but who could be the last piece that makes a team's core truly competitive.

You're right, though, that most teams one or two pieces away from being competitive already have a nice point guard in place.

Rondo will only have one year left on his deal at that point, but I think he is valued enough around the league that somebody would be willing to give up assets for him and take the risk that he could leave in free agency.

[D.o.s.]

If Green and Rondo are our two best players, they're on pretty good contracts.  Keep them.  We'll need the $$ for the #1 guy we have yet to pick up.

Barring some outstanding offer, I'd keep both and go from there.  Bradley and Sully seem to fit with them well, too.

Just need a C and we'd have a starting unit (athough Bradley should be 3rd guard).

No reason to trade Rondo or Green.

But if they are our #1 players we will need to resign them for more $ and their contracts will no longer be so good.  I don't think we can get rondo on another 11 mill per year deal.

Well, I suppose an allstar starter should probably be paid the max, right?  That's no reason to trade him.

We still need a 2nd max-type guy, making Green #3, where he should thrive.

We have plenty of other assets to trade for "that guy" without giving up Rondo or Green, including our own picks and the one we got for Rivers, and role players like Bradley, who will want to be paid much more than he's worth much sooner then either RR or JG.

You give max contracts to guys who can bring you a championship, not guys who can be good enough to get you into the playoffs.

You're not comparing Rondo to that guy, are you?

You don't think giving Rondo a max contract would totally screw up our ability to surround him with the kind of guys he needs to make it to the Finals?

Look at New York--they gave Stat the maximum when he wasn't worth it, and it's haunted them for years. Even before they gutted their team for 'Melo, and even if he wasn't made of glass that team was never going to make serious noise in the playoffs.

You pay a guy proportionally to his ability to bring you to the Finals. Rondo's a great complimentary piece, and we'll see just how good he is as the alpha dog when the season gets underway and he's fully rehabbed from his surgery, but to suggest that he's worth the max right now is Joe Johnson level tomfoolery.

[D.o.s.]

I believe Rondo will be traded, but not until the trade deadline this year or around draft time next year.

As an expiring?

The problem with Rondo is that the point is arguably the deepest position in the league right now. It's going to be a buyer's market.

Not really as an "expiring" but presumably as an All-Star caliber player entering his physical prime (28-32) who may not be a franchise cornerstone but who could be the last piece that makes a team's core truly competitive.

You're right, though, that most teams one or two pieces away from being competitive already have a nice point guard in place.

Rondo will only have one year left on his deal at that point, but I think he is valued enough around the league that somebody would be willing to give up assets for him and take the risk that he could leave in free agency.

Right, but I think he'll be worth more to us than the teams that could use him--see the last few trade seasons with Paul Pierce and Ray Allen.

[wdleehi]

They both are available, but not cheap.

[Greenback]

Trade 'em both for a couple 1st round draft picks next year. 

Celtics are going absolutely nowhere with what they have.

Save money, get younger, build for the future.

[PhoSita]

I believe Rondo will be traded, but not until the trade deadline this year or around draft time next year.

As an expiring?

The problem with Rondo is that the point is arguably the deepest position in the league right now. It's going to be a buyer's market.

Not really as an "expiring" but presumably as an All-Star caliber player entering his physical prime (28-32) who may not be a franchise cornerstone but who could be the last piece that makes a team's core truly competitive.

You're right, though, that most teams one or two pieces away from being competitive already have a nice point guard in place.

Rondo will only have one year left on his deal at that point, but I think he is valued enough around the league that somebody would be willing to give up assets for him and take the risk that he could leave in free agency.

Right, but I think he'll be worth more to us than the teams that could use him--see the last few trade seasons with Paul Pierce and Ray Allen.

The issue is that the team right now is on track to be rebuilding for at least 3-4 seasons before they have a competitive core and adequate supporting cast in place.  By that time, Rondo will be in his 30s. 

So it might make sense for the Celtics to get longer term assets for Rondo, even if it isn't exactly "fair value" from our perspective.  Trading a star player hardly ever results in an equal exchange.  But the reason you are willing to trade a star in the first place is because you're not in a position to make full use of said star.

[celticinorlando]

pretty sure everyone is available....

[D.o.s.]

I should clarify--when I say worth too much, I mean Danny's price is too high.

How many times have we heard a variation on this theme: "The Celtics were involved in trade discussions about Player X, but were unable to come to a trade agreement by the deadline. Other GM was unwilling to give up the assets Ainge was requesting?"

[oldmanspeaks]

the problem with trading Rondo and Green is their present perceived value. Until Rondo is proven completely healthy and being the major attacking threat, any GM will undervalue him and offer you peanuts. And until Green shows he can rebound and hit the 3, his high salary will cause GMs to undervalue him. This is a new age where money matters to all sports franchises. Risk will be the keystone to all trades because no one will want to eat the contract if it doesn't work out. I follow numerous sports franchises that are doing well as to winning but are doing bad on revenue streams. This will shortly be the norm.

[LooseCannon]

By that time, Rondo will be in his 30s. 

I disagree with treating over-30 players like kryptonite.  I'd even suggest trying to acquire an over-30 All-Star caliber player between now and next off-season, if possible, because such a player might be undervalued due to age.

[D.o.s.]

By that time, Rondo will be in his 30s. 

I disagree with treating over-30 players like kryptonite.  I'd even suggest trying to acquire an over-30 All-Star caliber player between now and next off-season, if possible, because such a player might be undervalued due to age.

My favorite targets are the malcontents--the Randolphs, the 'Sheeds... and guys who weren't Jail Blazers, too. At least half the time it seems like they just need a change of lockerroom and management scenery to buckle down and start performing.

[droopdog7]

By that time, Rondo will be in his 30s. 

I disagree with treating over-30 players like kryptonite.  I'd even suggest trying to acquire an over-30 All-Star caliber player between now and next off-season, if possible, because such a player might be undervalued due to age.

For what it's worth, I think that Rondo will have a relatively short shelf life.  Once his elite athleticism leaves him, Rondo will have little else to fall back on.  Even his passing will no longer be an assset because it too, relies on him ablity to threaten the defense.

[badshar]

Trade 'em both for a couple 1st round draft picks next year. 

Celtics are going absolutely nowhere with what they have.

Save money, get younger, build for the future.

The future IS NOW. When do you want to contend again? 25 years from now? Getting younger is all b.s. We are young. You build for now. We want to win now, not 10 years from now. Some teams can't even get a single star. We have 3 of them plus one up and coming borderline all star.

OKC wasn't saying "We have to build for the future guys." They secured Durant and got lucky in the draft. Had they not gotten lucky, they would have still tried to get good players.

As for that team being young, it isn't getting anywhere as long as Miami is coming out of the East.

Back to the point, we aren't trying to become irrelevant again for another 20+ years like we did before 2007. We build for now and win now while we have good talent on the team that is in their prime or approaching their prime.