would you trade Rondo for a lottery pick?

[Moranis]

I do not believe there is a single team that will likely be in next year's lottery that would trade the pick for Rondo at any time before the end of next season.  Pick holds way more value than Rondo.

  Possibly true, but most of those teams will end up with players who never get to Rondo's level. For instance, you'd have probably made a similar comment before each of the last few drafts, but the number of players from any recent draft that will clearly be better than Rondo is pretty small.

I wouldn't have made those statements.  This is a supposed historic level draft.  Those don't come around that often.  Even if at the end of the day it isn't a historic draft (which frankly is likely), no one is going to risk it at this point.

I for example would have made the trade with the Pelicans that Philly made, but the Pelicans preferred Holiday to Rondo so it wasn't on the table.

[Chris]

This is such a hard call.  I think I would do it at midseason, if the team we are trading with looks on track for a bottom 3 record.  Of course, I don't know why a team like that would trade their pick for Rondo. 

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. 

[PhoSita]

At the trade deadline, or especially at the draft, yes -- assuming it's a pick in the top 5-7, depending on how many can't-miss prospects Danny believes are in the draft.

[dreamgreen]

No.

[PhoSita]

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.

[Chris]

depending on how many can't-miss prospects Danny believes are in the draft.

This is another key, and a reason I would be skeptical about trading a guy like Rondo for a pick too early.

Not only are you risking having a pick much lower than you hope.  But, you are also putting a lot of faith that the guys who are projected as top prospects right now, continue to look as good once they are in college, and that these guys actually come out.

Yes, right now the projection is that 7 or 8 possible All-Stars will be in this draft.  But, what happens when 3 or 4 of those guys have tough Freshman seasons, get injurter, or see their chance to be a higher pick the following year (or just decide they like being the big man on campus), and go back to school for another year?

Then, you are looking at a draft without nearly as much top tier depth.  And suddenly you may be trading Rondo for a guy who will be much less likely to be anything more than a quality starter in the NBA, if that. 

I just am really hesitant to trade your best asset for such a gamble, unless you are really sure the other team is going to be TERRIBLE, giving you a likely top 5 pick.

[bfrombleacher]

Unless there's a degree of certainty we get Wiggins, no.

Would you trade Rondo for someone like Melo, Bosh, Kaman or David West in 03?

Rondo for a shot at someone like Camby, Nash, Starbury, Jermaine O'Neal in 96?

There's your alluring mystique of potential and upside solidified and realized.

None of them seem like solitary game changers, which is the gripe many have with Rondo.

[bleedGREENdon]

I say maybe we trade the nets first and a couple other complimentary players, to move into the top 10 with our already top 10 pick that we will acquire due to atrocity of play this year. Its a tough decision whether to keep rondo because it is unsure he will resign with us. Without a doubt though if we dont get the 1st or 2nd overall pick you will see the celtics make a trade of some sort. Whether it be to move up, or trade both picks n players for an already star to pair with rondo.

[Chris]

Unless there's a degree of certainty we get Wiggins, no.

Would you trade Rondo for someone like Melo, Bosh, Kaman or David West in 03?

Rondo for a shot at someone like Camby, Nash, Starbury, Jermaine O'Neal in 96?

There's your alluring mystique of potential and upside solidified and realized.

None of them seem like solitary game changers, which is the gripe many have with Rondo.

Are you kidding?  I would have LOVED to trade Rondo for Melo or Bosh in '03 (although at the time Bosh was not a sure fire star).

At worst, both of those guys were as good as Rondo is for most of their careers, and there is a strong argument that they were both better, or at least more valuable (Bosh, because he is a big man).  If you can guarantee me that the guy we are trading Rondo for, will be as good as Melo, then I would not think twice of trading him. 

[Rakulp]

While the possibility of Rondo leaving after his current contract will always exist, the fact is that the Celtics have traded away everybody else and have basically told him it's his team now.  This seems to clearly indicate they want to build the future around him.

That also tells me they feel like they have confidence that they can resign him, and can then acquire the kind of talent they need at the other positions through their many draft picks and/or free agents that will become available in the coming two years.

The only reason I could see Rondo being traded at this point is if he decided that he couldn't work with the new coach's system and that it would be better for him to be moved to a contending team.  If that were to happen, I have to believe that Danny will get a LOT more for a man of Rondo's talent than "just" a lottery pick.

Rak

[Moranis]

depending on how many can't-miss prospects Danny believes are in the draft.

This is another key, and a reason I would be skeptical about trading a guy like Rondo for a pick too early.

Not only are you risking having a pick much lower than you hope.  But, you are also putting a lot of faith that the guys who are projected as top prospects right now, continue to look as good once they are in college, and that these guys actually come out.

Yes, right now the projection is that 7 or 8 possible All-Stars will be in this draft.  But, what happens when 3 or 4 of those guys have tough Freshman seasons, get injurter, or see their chance to be a higher pick the following year (or just decide they like being the big man on campus), and go back to school for another year?

Then, you are looking at a draft without nearly as much top tier depth.  And suddenly you may be trading Rondo for a guy who will be much less likely to be anything more than a quality starter in the NBA, if that. 

I just am really hesitant to trade your best asset for such a gamble, unless you are really sure the other team is going to be TERRIBLE, giving you a likely top 5 pick.

Of course the other side of that coin is, if Boston trades Rondo for future considerations, it is going to be a worse team and thus would greatly improve the chances of its own pick landing in the top 3. 

As I've said I don't see any team in the lottery trading its pick for Rondo.  The one team that I think might be possible would be Charlotte as they own the rights to both Portland and Detroit's picks and their own goes to Chicago if they are outside the top ten.  So say mid-season Charlotte is a horrible team (not a given with Big Al and Zeller being added, but still a real possibility), I could see them saying we will give you the Detroit (top 8.) and Portland (top 12) picks for Rondo (Ben Gordon would be there for salary and is expiring).  They would then get Rondo and still be bad enough to have their own pick this year.  Detroit should be well outside the top 8 and Portland could be outside the top 12.  So Boston could end up with 2 more firsts next year and by trading Rondo would win fewer games and end up in a better position with its own pick.  That would give Boston a ton of flexibility.

[Chris]

depending on how many can't-miss prospects Danny believes are in the draft.

This is another key, and a reason I would be skeptical about trading a guy like Rondo for a pick too early.

Not only are you risking having a pick much lower than you hope.  But, you are also putting a lot of faith that the guys who are projected as top prospects right now, continue to look as good once they are in college, and that these guys actually come out.

Yes, right now the projection is that 7 or 8 possible All-Stars will be in this draft.  But, what happens when 3 or 4 of those guys have tough Freshman seasons, get injurter, or see their chance to be a higher pick the following year (or just decide they like being the big man on campus), and go back to school for another year?

Then, you are looking at a draft without nearly as much top tier depth.  And suddenly you may be trading Rondo for a guy who will be much less likely to be anything more than a quality starter in the NBA, if that. 

I just am really hesitant to trade your best asset for such a gamble, unless you are really sure the other team is going to be TERRIBLE, giving you a likely top 5 pick.

Of course the other side of that coin is, if Boston trades Rondo for future considerations, it is going to be a worse team and thus would greatly improve the chances of its own pick landing in the top 3. 

As I've said I don't see any team in the lottery trading its pick for Rondo.  The one team that I think might be possible would be Charlotte as they own the rights to both Portland and Detroit's picks and their own goes to Chicago if they are outside the top ten.  So say mid-season Charlotte is a horrible team (not a given with Big Al and Zeller being added, but still a real possibility), I could see them saying we will give you the Detroit (top 8.) and Portland (top 12) picks for Rondo (Ben Gordon would be there for salary and is expiring).  They would then get Rondo and still be bad enough to have their own pick this year.  Detroit should be well outside the top 8 and Portland could be outside the top 12.  So Boston could end up with 2 more firsts next year and by trading Rondo would win fewer games and end up in a better position with its own pick.  That would give Boston a ton of flexibility.

I think any deal that sends Rondo out of town, and does not bring back a blue chip prospect, or established star, would require the other team to take on major salary in addition.

Now, if it's Rondo and Wallace for Gordon, Sessions, and the picks, then you might have something to work from.  Although I still would be surprised if Danny trades Rondo without getting a star or potential star back.

[Celtics18]

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?

[bfrombleacher]

Unless there's a degree of certainty we get Wiggins, no.

Would you trade Rondo for someone like Melo, Bosh, Kaman or David West in 03?

Rondo for a shot at someone like Camby, Nash, Starbury, Jermaine O'Neal in 96?

There's your alluring mystique of potential and upside solidified and realized.

None of them seem like solitary game changers, which is the gripe many have with Rondo.

Are you kidding?  I would have LOVED to trade Rondo for Melo or Bosh in '03 (although at the time Bosh was not a sure fire star).

At worst, both of those guys were as good as Rondo is for most of their careers, and there is a strong argument that they were both better, or at least more valuable (Bosh, because he is a big man).  If you can guarantee me that the guy we are trading Rondo for, will be as good as Melo, then I would not think twice of trading him.

My main point was that even the "strong drafts" in the past did not have multiple players who could single handedly carry a team.

We'd potentially be trading Rondo for, again, pieces to the puzzle. The difference in talent is considerable, but not as considerable as some might hope. Melo and Bosh have yet to lead a team to a championship.

As you've pointed out, there is no guarantee either. That somewhat would make up for the difference in talent. And chances are we'd be trading Rondo for Chris Kaman or Kirk Hinrich rather than Melo.

Which is why, after Wiggins, a straight up trade is something I personally would not do.

[Chris]

Unless there's a degree of certainty we get Wiggins, no.

Would you trade Rondo for someone like Melo, Bosh, Kaman or David West in 03?

Rondo for a shot at someone like Camby, Nash, Starbury, Jermaine O'Neal in 96?

There's your alluring mystique of potential and upside solidified and realized.

None of them seem like solitary game changers, which is the gripe many have with Rondo.

Are you kidding?  I would have LOVED to trade Rondo for Melo or Bosh in '03 (although at the time Bosh was not a sure fire star).

At worst, both of those guys were as good as Rondo is for most of their careers, and there is a strong argument that they were both better, or at least more valuable (Bosh, because he is a big man).  If you can guarantee me that the guy we are trading Rondo for, will be as good as Melo, then I would not think twice of trading him.

My main point was that even the "strong drafts" in the past did not have multiple players who could single handedly carry a team.

We'd potentially be trading Rondo for, again, pieces to the puzzle. The difference in talent is considerable, but not as considerable as some might hope. Melo and Bosh have yet to lead a team to a championship.

As you've pointed out, there is no guarantee either. That somewhat would make up for the difference in talent. And chances are we'd be trading Rondo for Chris Kaman or Kirk Hinrich rather than Melo.

Which is why, after Wiggins, a straight up trade is something I personally would not do.

Well, I just think the examples you used were strange, since Melo was one of the most talented players to come out of college in a long time, and would be a steal to get for a guy like Rondo.

But, point taken. 

I do think this draft is more than 1 deep though.  I think if you can get in the top 4, the chances of you getting a guy you can build around easier than you can build around Rondo are high enough that you risk giving Rondo up for one of those picks.

The problem with the trade is the lottery part.  It is hard to even have a great shot at one of those top 4 picks, let alone the #1 pick.