would you trade Rondo for a lottery pick?

[LatterDayCelticsfan]

Rondo's a Bird in hand. Worth much more than the 2 in the lottery bush.

[moiso]

Rondo's value will reside with teams that are probably drafting in the 10-20 range.  Teams that already have some pieces, but need another star to put them over the top.  Teams at the top of the lottery probably wouldn't be interested in him, unless it is a perfect storm, where they do have their other star or stars under control, but injuries kill this season.

How about this -- what if a team like the Hawks deals with some injuries and has a bit of a down season, but a guy like Jeff Teague has a nice year.

Would you trade Rondo for a young player on a reasonable contract, like Teague, and a pick in the 9-12 range?

For me, the answer would be a resounding "yes" assuming they also take a longer-term contract off our hands e.g. Bass, Lee, or Wallace.

Goodness, no.  I thought the whole point was to acquire star players.  Why trade the one star player that we already have on the roster for role players?

a) Because Rondo is just a complementary star who will be 30+ by the time we have our young core in place

b) Because trading Rondo for younger / developing assets sooner rather than later will make it easier for us to get a true star in the draft because it will help our draft position.

I think that the problem that many of you have is that you think that there are multiple "true stars" out there in the 2014 draft.  If the definition of "true stars" is someone at the level of Elrod Enchilada's gold and platinum list, I think it's highly unlikely that there will be multiples of those in any single draft, even one as highly touted as 2014. 

Possibly the phenom Andrew Wiggins will one day reach that status, but I'm not interested in throwing everything away to buy that lottery ticket.

What are you throwing away though?  I mean I see this team as a mediocre at best team that isn't a title contender and won't be any time soon.  I just don't see the point in that.  Even if guys like Sully, Oly, etc. develop into great players, that is years down the road when Rondo will be well in his 30's and on a brand new shiny max deal.  I just don't see the point in the status quo.  At some point every team needs to purge and start over.  I just think Boston is at that point right now and sadly Boston isn't going to get a whole lot more than a first round pick for Rondo.  There are just too many great PG's in the league and his offense will always keep his value down.

We purged everybody except Pierce and won a title.  We could purge everyone except Rondo this time.

[bfrombleacher]

Rondo's a Bird in hand. Worth much more than the 2 in the lottery bush.

Their argument is that there's about 4 birds in the bush in this draft.

But from what I've seen of past historically "strong" drafts, it's more like 1 and a quarter birds if you're lucky. If Rondo is the standard for one bird, playing the lottery game will most likely yield us less than a bird - a Hinrich, a Jeff Green.

Their other argument is that we'll tank easier without Rondo. The top 2-4 picks look like they might be sure things.

A "sure thing" might be Carmelo. Some would say he is marginally better than Rondo. I don't think any would say Melo is SIGNIFICANTLY better.

But Melo has not led a team to victory by himself, which is the problem some have with Rondo.

The last argument is the trade would fit our rebuild better. Rondo is nearing 30. And here, we enter into Rondo territory, another dividing topic.

I don't think there are absolutes though. We could hypothetically be just as successful keeping Rondo as we would be trading Rondo. I personally prefer not playing the lottery but it doesn't mean the lottery is absolutely not the way.

[rutzan]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

 

[LilRip]

am i the only one who finds statements like "<Player> hasn't led his team to a title, that's why i won't trade him for Rondo" really ironic? I mean, pre-Decision days when Lebron hadn't led his team to a title, i would've traded Rondo for Lebron (despite my dislike for Lebron).

anyway, even if we do land a pick in the top3-5 using Rondo (assuming the lottery has been drawn), there's always a risk when it comes to "potential". And with the whole bird-in-the-hand argument being brought up, it's all about your appetite for risk. There's a chance you could land yourself an Oden or a Darko, both of whom were picked in the top5 and are worse than Rondo, or land yourself a Lebron or a Durant, both of whom were picked in the top5 and are better than Rondo.

Given how supposedly deep the upcoming draft is though, and if the one year college stint shows proof of that depth, i think i would pay the price of a Rondo in order to take the risk of landing an Oden/Darko if it meant an equal chance of landing Lebron/Durant.

[BballTim]

am i the only one who finds statements like "<Player> hasn't led his team to a title, that's why i won't trade him for Rondo" really ironic? I mean, pre-Decision days when Lebron hadn't led his team to a title, i would've traded Rondo for Lebron (despite my dislike for Lebron).

anyway, even if we do land a pick in the top3-5 using Rondo (assuming the lottery has been drawn), there's always a risk when it comes to "potential". And with the whole bird-in-the-hand argument being brought up, it's all about your appetite for risk. There's a chance you could land yourself an Oden or a Darko, both of whom were picked in the top5 and are worse than Rondo, or land yourself a Lebron or a Durant, both of whom were picked in the top5 and are better than Rondo.

Given how supposedly deep the upcoming draft is though, and if the one year college stint shows proof of that depth, i think i would pay the price of a Rondo in order to take the risk of landing an Oden/Darko if it meant an equal chance of landing Lebron/Durant.

  Sure, if "take the risk of landing an Oden/Darko if it meant an equal chance of landing Lebron/Durant" was true. Obviously it isn't. Who was the last LeBron level of player that was taken with the 4th or 5th pick in the draft? How many players at KD's level are chosen then?

[BballTim]

Rondo's value will reside with teams that are probably drafting in the 10-20 range.  Teams that already have some pieces, but need another star to put them over the top.  Teams at the top of the lottery probably wouldn't be interested in him, unless it is a perfect storm, where they do have their other star or stars under control, but injuries kill this season.

How about this -- what if a team like the Hawks deals with some injuries and has a bit of a down season, but a guy like Jeff Teague has a nice year.

Would you trade Rondo for a young player on a reasonable contract, like Teague, and a pick in the 9-12 range?

For me, the answer would be a resounding "yes" assuming they also take a longer-term contract off our hands e.g. Bass, Lee, or Wallace.

Goodness, no.  I thought the whole point was to acquire star players.  Why trade the one star player that we already have on the roster for role players?

a) Because Rondo is just a complementary star who will be 30+ by the time we have our young core in place

b) Because trading Rondo for younger / developing assets sooner rather than later will make it easier for us to get a true star in the draft because it will help our draft position.

  How do you know that we're going to build through the draft and start all over with a young core that isn't on the roster yet? I haven't heard anything like that from Danny.

[chambers]

here's a good one from a year ago that most haven't seen.
This is Wiggins vs Randle at age 16-17. Randle is one of the most improved top 10 picks since then. Of course all the top 10 will change as we get closer to the draft.
Wiggins is in a league of his own.
I love the defense on Randle, he rejects him and then swats the put back by Randle's team mate.

As one Western Conference NBA GM pointed out. "He's not on a Lebron Level, but he's very close-definitely the best high school prospect since Lebron James'.

Father was a pro and mother was a pro who also was an Olympic sprinter.
Watch this guy in the open court- he makes Russell Westbrook look slow- and he's 6 feet 8 at 17 years old.
Mother of god he's 16 in this video...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYpwWYw7lvc

[D.o.s.]

Rondo's value will reside with teams that are probably drafting in the 10-20 range.  Teams that already have some pieces, but need another star to put them over the top.  Teams at the top of the lottery probably wouldn't be interested in him, unless it is a perfect storm, where they do have their other star or stars under control, but injuries kill this season.

How about this -- what if a team like the Hawks deals with some injuries and has a bit of a down season, but a guy like Jeff Teague has a nice year.

Would you trade Rondo for a young player on a reasonable contract, like Teague, and a pick in the 9-12 range?

For me, the answer would be a resounding "yes" assuming they also take a longer-term contract off our hands e.g. Bass, Lee, or Wallace.

Goodness, no.  I thought the whole point was to acquire star players.  Why trade the one star player that we already have on the roster for role players?

a) Because Rondo is just a complementary star who will be 30+ by the time we have our young core in place

b) Because trading Rondo for younger / developing assets sooner rather than later will make it easier for us to get a true star in the draft because it will help our draft position.

I think that the problem that many of you have is that you think that there are multiple "true stars" out there in the 2014 draft.  If the definition of "true stars" is someone at the level of Elrod Enchilada's gold and platinum list, I think it's highly unlikely that there will be multiples of those in any single draft, even one as highly touted as 2014. 

Possibly the phenom Andrew Wiggins will one day reach that status, but I'm not interested in throwing everything away to buy that lottery ticket.

What are you throwing away though?  I mean I see this team as a mediocre at best team that isn't a title contender and won't be any time soon.  I just don't see the point in that.  Even if guys like Sully, Oly, etc. develop into great players, that is years down the road when Rondo will be well in his 30's and on a brand new shiny max deal.  I just don't see the point in the status quo.  At some point every team needs to purge and start over.  I just think Boston is at that point right now and sadly Boston isn't going to get a whole lot more than a first round pick for Rondo.  There are just too many great PG's in the league and his offense will always keep his value down.

We purged everybody except Pierce and won a title.  We could purge everyone except Rondo this time.

I think we had better pieces to send away back then--I don't see anyone as highly projected as Al Jeff.

[D.o.s.]

here's a good one from a year ago that most haven't seen.
This is Wiggins vs Randle at age 16-17. Randle is one of the most improved top 10 picks since then. Of course all the top 10 will change as we get closer to the draft.
Wiggins is in a league of his own.
I love the defense on Randle, he rejects him and then swats the put back by Randle's team mate.

As one Western Conference NBA GM pointed out. "He's not on a Lebron Level, but he's very close-definitely the best high school prospect since Lebron James'.

Father was a pro and mother was a pro who also was an Olympic sprinter.
Watch this guy in the open court- he makes Russell Westbrook look slow- and he's 6 feet 8 at 17 years old.
Mother of god he's 16 in this video...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYpwWYw7lvc

Sidenote: While that was a fun video, I'd forgotten how much of High School hoops boils down to "give the ball to your best player on the wing and let him go to work."

[Moranis]

Rondo's value will reside with teams that are probably drafting in the 10-20 range.  Teams that already have some pieces, but need another star to put them over the top.  Teams at the top of the lottery probably wouldn't be interested in him, unless it is a perfect storm, where they do have their other star or stars under control, but injuries kill this season.

How about this -- what if a team like the Hawks deals with some injuries and has a bit of a down season, but a guy like Jeff Teague has a nice year.

Would you trade Rondo for a young player on a reasonable contract, like Teague, and a pick in the 9-12 range?

For me, the answer would be a resounding "yes" assuming they also take a longer-term contract off our hands e.g. Bass, Lee, or Wallace.

Goodness, no.  I thought the whole point was to acquire star players.  Why trade the one star player that we already have on the roster for role players?

a) Because Rondo is just a complementary star who will be 30+ by the time we have our young core in place

b) Because trading Rondo for younger / developing assets sooner rather than later will make it easier for us to get a true star in the draft because it will help our draft position.

I think that the problem that many of you have is that you think that there are multiple "true stars" out there in the 2014 draft.  If the definition of "true stars" is someone at the level of Elrod Enchilada's gold and platinum list, I think it's highly unlikely that there will be multiples of those in any single draft, even one as highly touted as 2014. 

Possibly the phenom Andrew Wiggins will one day reach that status, but I'm not interested in throwing everything away to buy that lottery ticket.

What are you throwing away though?  I mean I see this team as a mediocre at best team that isn't a title contender and won't be any time soon.  I just don't see the point in that.  Even if guys like Sully, Oly, etc. develop into great players, that is years down the road when Rondo will be well in his 30's and on a brand new shiny max deal.  I just don't see the point in the status quo.  At some point every team needs to purge and start over.  I just think Boston is at that point right now and sadly Boston isn't going to get a whole lot more than a first round pick for Rondo.  There are just too many great PG's in the league and his offense will always keep his value down.

We purged everybody except Pierce and won a title.  We could purge everyone except Rondo this time.

The division winning 04-05 team had: Pierce, Walker, Davis, Payton, LaFrentz, Jefferson, West, Banks, Perkins, and Allen

The 33 win 05-06 team had Pierce, Wally/Davis, West, Jefferson, LaFrentz, Gomes, Perkins, West, Allen, Green

The 24 win 06-07 team had Pierce, Jefferson, Gomes, West, Allen, Perkins, Rondo, Telfair, Wally, Powe, Ratliff

The title winning 07-08 team had Pierce, Garnett, Allen, Perkins, Rondo, Allen, Powe, Davis, House, Posey, Brown, Cassell.  The Celtics basically had a 7 man rotation in the playoffs, 4 of those 7 were on the team the prior year (PP, Perk, Rondo, Powe).  T. Allen was also a contributor. The team could make the trades required because it had a top 5 pick and a stud young big man in Jefferson as well as a number of other solid prospects (West, Gomes, Green).

There is no Al Jefferson on this team.  With Rondo this team has no "real" shot of landing a top 5 pick.  You can make trades, rebuild on the fly, and become a contender, but you have to have assets to do it. Boston doesn't have those assets and doesn't appear likely to get them without purging Rondo.

[slamtheking]

Rondo's value will reside with teams that are probably drafting in the 10-20 range.  Teams that already have some pieces, but need another star to put them over the top.  Teams at the top of the lottery probably wouldn't be interested in him, unless it is a perfect storm, where they do have their other star or stars under control, but injuries kill this season.

How about this -- what if a team like the Hawks deals with some injuries and has a bit of a down season, but a guy like Jeff Teague has a nice year.

Would you trade Rondo for a young player on a reasonable contract, like Teague, and a pick in the 9-12 range?

For me, the answer would be a resounding "yes" assuming they also take a longer-term contract off our hands e.g. Bass, Lee, or Wallace.

Goodness, no.  I thought the whole point was to acquire star players.  Why trade the one star player that we already have on the roster for role players?

a) Because Rondo is just a complementary star who will be 30+ by the time we have our young core in place

b) Because trading Rondo for younger / developing assets sooner rather than later will make it easier for us to get a true star in the draft because it will help our draft position.

I think that the problem that many of you have is that you think that there are multiple "true stars" out there in the 2014 draft.  If the definition of "true stars" is someone at the level of Elrod Enchilada's gold and platinum list, I think it's highly unlikely that there will be multiples of those in any single draft, even one as highly touted as 2014. 

Possibly the phenom Andrew Wiggins will one day reach that status, but I'm not interested in throwing everything away to buy that lottery ticket.

What are you throwing away though?  I mean I see this team as a mediocre at best team that isn't a title contender and won't be any time soon.  I just don't see the point in that.  Even if guys like Sully, Oly, etc. develop into great players, that is years down the road when Rondo will be well in his 30's and on a brand new shiny max deal.  I just don't see the point in the status quo.  At some point every team needs to purge and start over.  I just think Boston is at that point right now and sadly Boston isn't going to get a whole lot more than a first round pick for Rondo.  There are just too many great PG's in the league and his offense will always keep his value down.

We purged everybody except Pierce and won a title.  We could purge everyone except Rondo this time.

The division winning 04-05 team had: Pierce, Walker, Davis, Payton, LaFrentz, Jefferson, West, Banks, Perkins, and Allen

The 33 win 05-06 team had Pierce, Wally/Davis, West, Jefferson, LaFrentz, Gomes, Perkins, West, Allen, Green

The 24 win 06-07 team had Pierce, Jefferson, Gomes, West, Allen, Perkins, Rondo, Telfair, Wally, Powe, Ratliff

The title winning 07-08 team had Pierce, Garnett, Allen, Perkins, Rondo, Allen, Powe, Davis, House, Posey, Brown, Cassell.  The Celtics basically had a 7 man rotation in the playoffs, 4 of those 7 were on the team the prior year (PP, Perk, Rondo, Powe).  T. Allen was also a contributor. The team could make the trades required because it had a top 5 pick and a stud young big man in Jefferson as well as a number of other solid prospects (West, Gomes, Green).

There is no Al Jefferson on this team.  With Rondo this team has no "real" shot of landing a top 5 pick.  You can make trades, rebuild on the fly, and become a contender, but you have to have assets to do it. Boston doesn't have those assets and doesn't appear likely to get them without purging Rondo.

why? we got one without purging Pierce who is a better player than Rondo.  we currenlty have a similar team make up to that team -- underperforming/role-player vets and a number of unproven youth that figures to get a lot of playing time.

[jaketwice]

rondo is a 3 time all-star. the whole point of a lotto pick is crossing your fingers for all-star talent. what would be the point?

i cant believe how under-appreciated rondo is.

THIS!!!! What is with these absurd threads? NO!

[action781]

I would not advocate for doing this trade, unless it was later in the season and I felt the team we'd be trading the pick to had a floor of the #8 pick or so.  Even then, I'd think about it but wouldn't necessarily pull the trigger.

A reason why I would not do it is the same reasons why you've all mentioned.  Rondo is a great player; a draft pick is a somewhat unknown.  Also, I have season tickets and don't want to watch a terrible squad out there.  I love watching Rondo play.

So I'll play devil's advocate and talk about the reason why to do it.. and it doesn't have to do with Rondo as a player.  It has to do with his age. 

When are the celtics going to be competitive again considering the contracts on their roster?  3 years from now?  Rondo will be 30 years old at that point and be on the decline of his career.  Would we rather have a 30 year old Rondo making $15M per season on our roster at that point or take the gamble in a loaded draft on a guy who will still be on a rookie scale?  I don't know the answer to that question.

Then there's the Andrew Wiggins argument.  This is not about Randle or anyone else, its about Wiggins.  This guy is a once-in-a-generation talent.  Yes, it's a gamble, but it may be worth it.  If Earth was on the verge of collapse in the next 5-10 years, and you could trade in your most valuable asset (say your house) for a ticket that has a 5% chance of landing you a house on Elysium... would you make that trade?  There's no right or wrong answer, it's a matter of opinion.

Wiggins could be the player that single handedly brings you 4 championships.  Rondo will never be that player.

[Tr1boy]

I would not advocate for doing this trade, unless it was later in the season and I felt the team we'd be trading the pick to had a floor of the #8 pick or so.  Even then, I'd think about it but wouldn't necessarily pull the trigger.

A reason why I would not do it is the same reasons why you've all mentioned.  Rondo is a great player; a draft pick is a somewhat unknown.  Also, I have season tickets and don't want to watch a terrible squad out there.  I love watching Rondo play.

So I'll play devil's advocate and talk about the reason why to do it.. and it doesn't have to do with Rondo as a player.  It has to do with his age. 

When are the celtics going to be competitive again considering the contracts on their roster?  3 years from now?  Rondo will be 30 years old at that point and be on the decline of his career.  Would we rather have a 30 year old Rondo making $15M per season on our roster at that point or take the gamble in a loaded draft on a guy who will still be on a rookie scale?  I don't know the answer to that question.

Then there's the Andrew Wiggins argument.  This is not about Randle or anyone else, its about Wiggins.  This guy is a once-in-a-generation talent.  Yes, it's a gamble, but it may be worth it.  If Earth was on the verge of collapse in the next 5-10 years, and you could trade in your most valuable asset (say your house) for a ticket that has a 5% chance of landing you a house on Elysium... would you make that trade?  There's no right or wrong answer, it's a matter of opinion.

Wiggins could be the player that single handedly brings you 4 championships.  Rondo will never be that player.

Your serious about wiggins right? He still has to prove himself in college, sl first.  Right now the only thing he can do exceptionally well is drive to the basket and finish acrobatically. Everything else needs work, especially playing with fire for the whole game. You cant be great without this quality