Why does Rondo have to be traded?

[Vermont Green]

Because Rondo's contract expires in a two years, he will demand max dollars, and Boston still won't be a contender.  By the time Boston is ready to compete again, Rondo will be on the wrong side of 30 and no longer young and improving.  And that is if Boston doesn't have any misses in the draft and ends up with at least solid value. 

Rajon Rondo doesn't make sense for this team.  He isn't a franchise championship type player and his skill set isn't that of a guy to lead a team (you have to be a consistent scorer to lead a team as a franchise player).  He is very good and will add 5-10 victories to the team, thus hurting a young rebuilding teams draft position.  He also has a poor attitude, only shows up when he wants to, and will likely generally be a problem on a bad/mediocre team.  Couple all of this with Boston's lack of cap space any time soon and there is no real mechanism for Boston to land a true championship type franchise player with Rondo on the team.  For all of those reasons, I agree with Stein, Boston must trade Rondo.

Pretend it's 2006:

"Because Rondo's Pierce's contract expires in a two years, he will demand max dollars, and Boston still won't be a contender.  By the time Boston is ready to compete again, Rondo Pierce will be on the wrong side of 30 and no longer young and improving.  And that is if Boston doesn't have any misses in the draft and ends up with at least solid value. 

Rajon Rondo Paul Pierce doesn't make sense for this team.  He isn't a franchise championship type player and his skill set isn't that of a guy to lead a team.  He is very good and will add 5-10 victories to the team, thus hurting a young rebuilding teams draft position.  He also has a poor attitude, only shows up when he wants to, and will likely generally be a problem on a bad/mediocre team.  Couple all of this with Boston's lack of cap space any time soon and there is no real mechanism for Boston to land a true championship type franchise player with Rondo Pierce on the team.  For all of those reasons, I agree with Stein, Boston must trade Rondo Pierce."

This is an interesting comparison but I think it breaks down becasue I feel Pierce was a higher level star at that time than Rondo will ever be.

We needed Ray Allen to get KG.  I felt KG and PP were 1a and 1b stars needed for a title.  Allen was a second tier star, like Rondo is.  Rondo may become a tier 1 star but I have my doubts.

I could see Rondo being great on a team like Houston with Harden and Howard but I don't see how we can bring in the kind of talent that would be needed in just 2 years.  Even if Rondo does make the leap to a tier 1 star, we would still need another tier 1 star or maybe 3 tier 2 stars.

[LilRip]

Because Rondo's contract expires in a two years, he will demand max dollars, and Boston still won't be a contender.  By the time Boston is ready to compete again, Rondo will be on the wrong side of 30 and no longer young and improving.  And that is if Boston doesn't have any misses in the draft and ends up with at least solid value. 

Rajon Rondo doesn't make sense for this team.  He isn't a franchise championship type player and his skill set isn't that of a guy to lead a team (you have to be a consistent scorer to lead a team as a franchise player).  He is very good and will add 5-10 victories to the team, thus hurting a young rebuilding teams draft position.  He also has a poor attitude, only shows up when he wants to, and will likely generally be a problem on a bad/mediocre team.  Couple all of this with Boston's lack of cap space any time soon and there is no real mechanism for Boston to land a true championship type franchise player with Rondo on the team.  For all of those reasons, I agree with Stein, Boston must trade Rondo.

Pretend it's 2006:

"Because Rondo's Pierce's contract expires in a two years, he will demand max dollars, and Boston still won't be a contender.  By the time Boston is ready to compete again, Rondo Pierce will be on the wrong side of 30 and no longer young and improving.  And that is if Boston doesn't have any misses in the draft and ends up with at least solid value. 

Rajon Rondo Paul Pierce doesn't make sense for this team.  He isn't a franchise championship type player and his skill set isn't that of a guy to lead a team.  He is very good and will add 5-10 victories to the team, thus hurting a young rebuilding teams draft position.  He also has a poor attitude, only shows up when he wants to, and will likely generally be a problem on a bad/mediocre team.  Couple all of this with Boston's lack of cap space any time soon and there is no real mechanism for Boston to land a true championship type franchise player with Rondo Pierce on the team.  For all of those reasons, I agree with Stein, Boston must trade Rondo Pierce."

and yet, DA has admitted to have wanted to trade PP before for rookie-CP3. Honestly, that would've been the smart thing to do (sentimentality aside) had NOH been willing and had the Allen and KG trades not happened.

In the same vein, while you don't give up a guy like Rondo for peanuts, he's certainly not untouchable.

[Moranis]

Because Rondo's contract expires in a two years, he will demand max dollars, and Boston still won't be a contender.  By the time Boston is ready to compete again, Rondo will be on the wrong side of 30 and no longer young and improving.  And that is if Boston doesn't have any misses in the draft and ends up with at least solid value. 

Rajon Rondo doesn't make sense for this team.  He isn't a franchise championship type player and his skill set isn't that of a guy to lead a team (you have to be a consistent scorer to lead a team as a franchise player).  He is very good and will add 5-10 victories to the team, thus hurting a young rebuilding teams draft position.  He also has a poor attitude, only shows up when he wants to, and will likely generally be a problem on a bad/mediocre team.  Couple all of this with Boston's lack of cap space any time soon and there is no real mechanism for Boston to land a true championship type franchise player with Rondo on the team.  For all of those reasons, I agree with Stein, Boston must trade Rondo.

Pretend it's 2006:

"Because Rondo's Pierce's contract expires in a two years, he will demand max dollars, and Boston still won't be a contender.  By the time Boston is ready to compete again, Rondo Pierce will be on the wrong side of 30 and no longer young and improving.  And that is if Boston doesn't have any misses in the draft and ends up with at least solid value. 

Rajon Rondo Paul Pierce doesn't make sense for this team.  He isn't a franchise championship type player and his skill set isn't that of a guy to lead a team.  He is very good and will add 5-10 victories to the team, thus hurting a young rebuilding teams draft position.  He also has a poor attitude, only shows up when he wants to, and will likely generally be a problem on a bad/mediocre team.  Couple all of this with Boston's lack of cap space any time soon and there is no real mechanism for Boston to land a true championship type franchise player with Rondo Pierce on the team.  For all of those reasons, I agree with Stein, Boston must trade Rondo Pierce."

This is an interesting comparison but I think it breaks down becasue I feel Pierce was a higher level star at that time than Rondo will ever be.

We needed Ray Allen to get KG.  I felt KG and PP were 1a and 1b stars needed for a title.  Allen was a second tier star, like Rondo is.  Rondo may become a tier 1 star but I have my doubts.

I could see Rondo being great on a team like Houston with Harden and Howard but I don't see how we can bring in the kind of talent that would be needed in just 2 years.  Even if Rondo does make the leap to a tier 1 star, we would still need another tier 1 star or maybe 3 tier 2 stars.

exactly, Pierce has the exact skill set required to be a franchise player i.e. superb scorer from anywhere on the floor, can beat you off the dribble, can post up, and has solid overall skills in all aspects (passing, rebouding, defending, etc.).  He was a much better player than Rondo will ever be and certainly is a much better building block.  And all that said, Ainge tried to trade him at least a couple of times.

In addition, the 2006 Boston Celtics had Al Jefferson who was already looking like he could be a real player and is far better asset than anything on this team (which as it turns out was the guy that was needed to land a player like Kevin Garnett).

[Celtics18]

Because Rondo's contract expires in a two years, he will demand max dollars, and Boston still won't be a contender.  By the time Boston is ready to compete again, Rondo will be on the wrong side of 30 and no longer young and improving.  And that is if Boston doesn't have any misses in the draft and ends up with at least solid value. 

Rajon Rondo doesn't make sense for this team.  He isn't a franchise championship type player and his skill set isn't that of a guy to lead a team (you have to be a consistent scorer to lead a team as a franchise player).  He is very good and will add 5-10 victories to the team, thus hurting a young rebuilding teams draft position.  He also has a poor attitude, only shows up when he wants to, and will likely generally be a problem on a bad/mediocre team.  Couple all of this with Boston's lack of cap space any time soon and there is no real mechanism for Boston to land a true championship type franchise player with Rondo on the team.  For all of those reasons, I agree with Stein, Boston must trade Rondo.

Pretend it's 2006:

"Because Rondo's Pierce's contract expires in a two years, he will demand max dollars, and Boston still won't be a contender.  By the time Boston is ready to compete again, Rondo Pierce will be on the wrong side of 30 and no longer young and improving.  And that is if Boston doesn't have any misses in the draft and ends up with at least solid value. 

Rajon Rondo Paul Pierce doesn't make sense for this team.  He isn't a franchise championship type player and his skill set isn't that of a guy to lead a team.  He is very good and will add 5-10 victories to the team, thus hurting a young rebuilding teams draft position.  He also has a poor attitude, only shows up when he wants to, and will likely generally be a problem on a bad/mediocre team.  Couple all of this with Boston's lack of cap space any time soon and there is no real mechanism for Boston to land a true championship type franchise player with Rondo Pierce on the team.  For all of those reasons, I agree with Stein, Boston must trade Rondo Pierce."

This is an interesting comparison but I think it breaks down becasue I feel Pierce was a higher level star at that time than Rondo will ever be.

We needed Ray Allen to get KG.  I felt KG and PP were 1a and 1b stars needed for a title.  Allen was a second tier star, like Rondo is.  Rondo may become a tier 1 star but I have my doubts.

I could see Rondo being great on a team like Houston with Harden and Howard but I don't see how we can bring in the kind of talent that would be needed in just 2 years.  Even if Rondo does make the leap to a tier 1 star, we would still need another tier 1 star or maybe 3 tier 2 stars.

exactly, Pierce has the exact skill set required to be a franchise player i.e. superb scorer from anywhere on the floor, can beat you off the dribble, can post up, and has solid overall skills in all aspects (passing, rebouding, defending, etc.).  He was a much better player than Rondo will ever be and certainly is a much better building block.  And all that said, Ainge tried to trade him at least a couple of times.

In addition, the 2006 Boston Celtics had Al Jefferson who was already looking like he could be a real player and is far better asset than anything on this team (which as it turns out was the guy that was needed to land a player like Kevin Garnett).

2006 Al Jefferson averaged 8 points, 5 rebounds a game in 18 minutes.  He definitely wasn't a sure thing at the time. 

I don't know how you come to the conclusion that a player who has finished in the top ten in MVP voting twice, has been a four time all-star,  a four time all-defensive team player, and one of the best playoff performers in the league on a team that has made it to game seven of the conference finals and game seven of the finals can't be a building block? 

That just seems like personal bias to me.   

[Moranis]

Because Rondo's contract expires in a two years, he will demand max dollars, and Boston still won't be a contender.  By the time Boston is ready to compete again, Rondo will be on the wrong side of 30 and no longer young and improving.  And that is if Boston doesn't have any misses in the draft and ends up with at least solid value. 

Rajon Rondo doesn't make sense for this team.  He isn't a franchise championship type player and his skill set isn't that of a guy to lead a team (you have to be a consistent scorer to lead a team as a franchise player).  He is very good and will add 5-10 victories to the team, thus hurting a young rebuilding teams draft position.  He also has a poor attitude, only shows up when he wants to, and will likely generally be a problem on a bad/mediocre team.  Couple all of this with Boston's lack of cap space any time soon and there is no real mechanism for Boston to land a true championship type franchise player with Rondo on the team.  For all of those reasons, I agree with Stein, Boston must trade Rondo.

Pretend it's 2006:

"Because Rondo's Pierce's contract expires in a two years, he will demand max dollars, and Boston still won't be a contender.  By the time Boston is ready to compete again, Rondo Pierce will be on the wrong side of 30 and no longer young and improving.  And that is if Boston doesn't have any misses in the draft and ends up with at least solid value. 

Rajon Rondo Paul Pierce doesn't make sense for this team.  He isn't a franchise championship type player and his skill set isn't that of a guy to lead a team.  He is very good and will add 5-10 victories to the team, thus hurting a young rebuilding teams draft position.  He also has a poor attitude, only shows up when he wants to, and will likely generally be a problem on a bad/mediocre team.  Couple all of this with Boston's lack of cap space any time soon and there is no real mechanism for Boston to land a true championship type franchise player with Rondo Pierce on the team.  For all of those reasons, I agree with Stein, Boston must trade Rondo Pierce."

This is an interesting comparison but I think it breaks down becasue I feel Pierce was a higher level star at that time than Rondo will ever be.

We needed Ray Allen to get KG.  I felt KG and PP were 1a and 1b stars needed for a title.  Allen was a second tier star, like Rondo is.  Rondo may become a tier 1 star but I have my doubts.

I could see Rondo being great on a team like Houston with Harden and Howard but I don't see how we can bring in the kind of talent that would be needed in just 2 years.  Even if Rondo does make the leap to a tier 1 star, we would still need another tier 1 star or maybe 3 tier 2 stars.

exactly, Pierce has the exact skill set required to be a franchise player i.e. superb scorer from anywhere on the floor, can beat you off the dribble, can post up, and has solid overall skills in all aspects (passing, rebouding, defending, etc.).  He was a much better player than Rondo will ever be and certainly is a much better building block.  And all that said, Ainge tried to trade him at least a couple of times.

In addition, the 2006 Boston Celtics had Al Jefferson who was already looking like he could be a real player and is far better asset than anything on this team (which as it turns out was the guy that was needed to land a player like Kevin Garnett).

2006 Al Jefferson averaged 8 points, 5 rebounds a game in 18 minutes.  He definitely wasn't a sure thing at the time. 

I don't know how you come to the conclusion that a player who has finished in the top ten in MVP voting twice, has been a four time all-star,  a four time all-defensive team player, and one of the best playoff performers in the league on a team that has made it to game seven of the conference finals and game seven of the finals can't be a building block? 

That just seems like personal bias to me.

I never said he was a sure thing, but a PF/C straight from high school that showed modest improvement from his rookie to second year and whose per 36 were basically 16/11 through two seasons is a darn good asset, and far better than any asset Boston currently has. 


as for you second part, Rondo is a guy that is a great complimentary piece, but he isn't a #1 guy.  He isn't even a #2 guy.  You have to consistently score and consistently play at a high level to be one of those guys.  Rondo isn't that guy.  All the Rondo supporters always point out the great playoff series, but can't explain why Rondo doesn't do that all the time and ignore his multitude of playoff game stinkers.  Rondo shows up occassionally and when he does he is great, but just doesn't do it enough to be relied upon or counted on as a building block.

[Boris Badenov]

Because Rondo's contract expires in a two years, he will demand max dollars, and Boston still won't be a contender.  By the time Boston is ready to compete again, Rondo will be on the wrong side of 30 and no longer young and improving.  And that is if Boston doesn't have any misses in the draft and ends up with at least solid value. 

Rajon Rondo doesn't make sense for this team.  He isn't a franchise championship type player and his skill set isn't that of a guy to lead a team (you have to be a consistent scorer to lead a team as a franchise player).  He is very good and will add 5-10 victories to the team, thus hurting a young rebuilding teams draft position.  He also has a poor attitude, only shows up when he wants to, and will likely generally be a problem on a bad/mediocre team.  Couple all of this with Boston's lack of cap space any time soon and there is no real mechanism for Boston to land a true championship type franchise player with Rondo on the team.  For all of those reasons, I agree with Stein, Boston must trade Rondo.

Pretend it's 2006:

"Because Rondo's Pierce's contract expires in a two years, he will demand max dollars, and Boston still won't be a contender.  By the time Boston is ready to compete again, Rondo Pierce will be on the wrong side of 30 and no longer young and improving.  And that is if Boston doesn't have any misses in the draft and ends up with at least solid value. 

Rajon Rondo Paul Pierce doesn't make sense for this team.  He isn't a franchise championship type player and his skill set isn't that of a guy to lead a team.  He is very good and will add 5-10 victories to the team, thus hurting a young rebuilding teams draft position.  He also has a poor attitude, only shows up when he wants to, and will likely generally be a problem on a bad/mediocre team.  Couple all of this with Boston's lack of cap space any time soon and there is no real mechanism for Boston to land a true championship type franchise player with Rondo Pierce on the team.  For all of those reasons, I agree with Stein, Boston must trade Rondo Pierce."

This is an interesting comparison but I think it breaks down becasue I feel Pierce was a higher level star at that time than Rondo will ever be.

We needed Ray Allen to get KG.  I felt KG and PP were 1a and 1b stars needed for a title.  Allen was a second tier star, like Rondo is.  Rondo may become a tier 1 star but I have my doubts.

I could see Rondo being great on a team like Houston with Harden and Howard but I don't see how we can bring in the kind of talent that would be needed in just 2 years.  Even if Rondo does make the leap to a tier 1 star, we would still need another tier 1 star or maybe 3 tier 2 stars.

exactly, Pierce has the exact skill set required to be a franchise player i.e. superb scorer from anywhere on the floor, can beat you off the dribble, can post up, and has solid overall skills in all aspects (passing, rebouding, defending, etc.).  He was a much better player than Rondo will ever be and certainly is a much better building block.  And all that said, Ainge tried to trade him at least a couple of times.

In addition, the 2006 Boston Celtics had Al Jefferson who was already looking like he could be a real player and is far better asset than anything on this team (which as it turns out was the guy that was needed to land a player like Kevin Garnett).

2006 Al Jefferson averaged 8 points, 5 rebounds a game in 18 minutes.  He definitely wasn't a sure thing at the time. 

I don't know how you come to the conclusion that a player who has finished in the top ten in MVP voting twice, has been a four time all-star,  a four time all-defensive team player, and one of the best playoff performers in the league on a team that has made it to game seven of the conference finals and game seven of the finals can't be a building block? 

That just seems like personal bias to me.

I never said he was a sure thing, but a PF/C straight from high school that showed modest improvement from his rookie to second year and whose per 36 were basically 16/11 through two seasons is a darn good asset, and far better than any asset Boston currently has. 


as for you second part, Rondo is a guy that is a great complimentary piece, but he isn't a #1 guy.  He isn't even a #2 guy.  You have to consistently score and consistently play at a high level to be one of those guys.  Rondo isn't that guy.  All the Rondo supporters always point out the great playoff series, but can't explain why Rondo doesn't do that all the time and ignore his multitude of playoff game stinkers.  Rondo shows up occassionally and when he does he is great, but just doesn't do it enough to be relied upon or counted on as a building block.

Put a healthy 2012 Rondo on a team with 2007 KG, 2007 Ray Allen and a young but budding All-Star at SF - someone like Paul George of 2011-12. Surround them with a solid center like Perk and the rest of that 2007 supporting cast.

In other words, reverse Rondo's and Pierce's roles as completely as possible (where a young budding Rondo of 2007 at PG is subbed for a young budding SF, and 2012 Rondo is subbed for 2007 Pierce).

This would be the lineup:

Rondo ('12)
Allen ('07)
George ('11)
KG ('07)
Perk ('07)

Plus the 2007 bench.

Are you saying that team couldn't contend for a championship?

[Moranis]

Because Rondo's contract expires in a two years, he will demand max dollars, and Boston still won't be a contender.  By the time Boston is ready to compete again, Rondo will be on the wrong side of 30 and no longer young and improving.  And that is if Boston doesn't have any misses in the draft and ends up with at least solid value. 

Rajon Rondo doesn't make sense for this team.  He isn't a franchise championship type player and his skill set isn't that of a guy to lead a team (you have to be a consistent scorer to lead a team as a franchise player).  He is very good and will add 5-10 victories to the team, thus hurting a young rebuilding teams draft position.  He also has a poor attitude, only shows up when he wants to, and will likely generally be a problem on a bad/mediocre team.  Couple all of this with Boston's lack of cap space any time soon and there is no real mechanism for Boston to land a true championship type franchise player with Rondo on the team.  For all of those reasons, I agree with Stein, Boston must trade Rondo.

Pretend it's 2006:

"Because Rondo's Pierce's contract expires in a two years, he will demand max dollars, and Boston still won't be a contender.  By the time Boston is ready to compete again, Rondo Pierce will be on the wrong side of 30 and no longer young and improving.  And that is if Boston doesn't have any misses in the draft and ends up with at least solid value. 

Rajon Rondo Paul Pierce doesn't make sense for this team.  He isn't a franchise championship type player and his skill set isn't that of a guy to lead a team.  He is very good and will add 5-10 victories to the team, thus hurting a young rebuilding teams draft position.  He also has a poor attitude, only shows up when he wants to, and will likely generally be a problem on a bad/mediocre team.  Couple all of this with Boston's lack of cap space any time soon and there is no real mechanism for Boston to land a true championship type franchise player with Rondo Pierce on the team.  For all of those reasons, I agree with Stein, Boston must trade Rondo Pierce."

This is an interesting comparison but I think it breaks down becasue I feel Pierce was a higher level star at that time than Rondo will ever be.

We needed Ray Allen to get KG.  I felt KG and PP were 1a and 1b stars needed for a title.  Allen was a second tier star, like Rondo is.  Rondo may become a tier 1 star but I have my doubts.

I could see Rondo being great on a team like Houston with Harden and Howard but I don't see how we can bring in the kind of talent that would be needed in just 2 years.  Even if Rondo does make the leap to a tier 1 star, we would still need another tier 1 star or maybe 3 tier 2 stars.

exactly, Pierce has the exact skill set required to be a franchise player i.e. superb scorer from anywhere on the floor, can beat you off the dribble, can post up, and has solid overall skills in all aspects (passing, rebouding, defending, etc.).  He was a much better player than Rondo will ever be and certainly is a much better building block.  And all that said, Ainge tried to trade him at least a couple of times.

In addition, the 2006 Boston Celtics had Al Jefferson who was already looking like he could be a real player and is far better asset than anything on this team (which as it turns out was the guy that was needed to land a player like Kevin Garnett).

2006 Al Jefferson averaged 8 points, 5 rebounds a game in 18 minutes.  He definitely wasn't a sure thing at the time. 

I don't know how you come to the conclusion that a player who has finished in the top ten in MVP voting twice, has been a four time all-star,  a four time all-defensive team player, and one of the best playoff performers in the league on a team that has made it to game seven of the conference finals and game seven of the finals can't be a building block? 

That just seems like personal bias to me.

I never said he was a sure thing, but a PF/C straight from high school that showed modest improvement from his rookie to second year and whose per 36 were basically 16/11 through two seasons is a darn good asset, and far better than any asset Boston currently has. 


as for you second part, Rondo is a guy that is a great complimentary piece, but he isn't a #1 guy.  He isn't even a #2 guy.  You have to consistently score and consistently play at a high level to be one of those guys.  Rondo isn't that guy.  All the Rondo supporters always point out the great playoff series, but can't explain why Rondo doesn't do that all the time and ignore his multitude of playoff game stinkers.  Rondo shows up occassionally and when he does he is great, but just doesn't do it enough to be relied upon or counted on as a building block.

Put a healthy 2012 Rondo on a team with 2007 KG, 2007 Ray Allen and a young but budding All-Star at SF - someone like Paul George of 2011-12. Surround them with a solid center like Perk and the rest of that 2007 supporting cast.

In other words, reverse Rondo's and Pierce's roles as completely as possible (where a young budding Rondo of 2007 at PG is subbed for a young budding SF, and 2012 Rondo is subbed for 2007 Pierce).

This would be the lineup:

Rondo ('12)
Allen ('07)
George ('11)
KG ('07)
Perk ('07)

Plus the 2007 bench.

Are you saying that team couldn't contend for a championship?

Yeah that team could because KG and Allen are #1 scorers and George is well on his way.  Rondo is a great complimentary piece to them, but that team would be a title contender because of KG and Allen, not Rondo.

[BballTim]

as for you second part, Rondo is a guy that is a great complimentary piece, but he isn't a #1 guy.  He isn't even a #2 guy.  You have to consistently score and consistently play at a high level to be one of those guys.  Rondo isn't that guy.  All the Rondo supporters always point out the great playoff series, but can't explain why Rondo doesn't do that all the time and ignore his multitude of playoff game stinkers.  Rondo shows up occassionally and when he does he is great, but just doesn't do it enough to be relied upon or counted on as a building block.

  Rondo's been the best player on teams that went to the finals and the ECF. His "stinkers" in the playoffs generally come when he's injured. Rondo scored or assisted a higher percentage of his team's points than any other player in the 2012 playoffs and his team came within a game of getting to the finals. Claiming a player like that can't be a #1 or #2 guy on a team is pretty ridiculous.

[BASS_THUMPER]

lol

rondo gots to be reading this thread
and im sure he is feelin the love

*sippin*

[RJ87]

Count me among those who don't think we have to trade Rondo. I actually think it's silly to consider it without seeing how he responds to life without KG and Pierce. Because if he steps up, then we're already shortening the rebuilding process. We look like  we're on our way to a top 5 pick in next year's draft and Danny has acquired some pretty good assets that he can trade if an opportunity presents itself.

We're not going to be a bottom feeding team for the next 5 years. We are not the Charlotte Bobcats - this organization is too competent run for that. We have management and an ownership group that understand winning is conducive to making money.

[LatterDayCelticsfan]

On a side note. What are the odds Danny finds the kind of superstars  he needs to complement Rondo in situations that the Sonics and Timberwolves were in again?

[chambers]

as for you second part, Rondo is a guy that is a great complimentary piece, but he isn't a #1 guy.  He isn't even a #2 guy.  You have to consistently score and consistently play at a high level to be one of those guys.  Rondo isn't that guy.  All the Rondo supporters always point out the great playoff series, but can't explain why Rondo doesn't do that all the time and ignore his multitude of playoff game stinkers.  Rondo shows up occassionally and when he does he is great, but just doesn't do it enough to be relied upon or counted on as a building block.

  Rondo's been the best player on teams that went to the finals and the ECF. His "stinkers" in the playoffs generally come when he's injured. Rondo scored or assisted a higher percentage of his team's points than any other player in the 2012 playoffs and his team came within a game of getting to the finals. Claiming a player like that can't be a #1 or #2 guy on a team is pretty ridiculous.

He's saying he's not the 'guy' on a championship team.
That's a pretty widely agreed on consensus throughout the NBA.
to be the guy on a title team puts you in an elite class. Rondo's currently a bench All star-not the number one option on a serious contender.

[Celtics18]

as for you second part, Rondo is a guy that is a great complimentary piece, but he isn't a #1 guy.  He isn't even a #2 guy.  You have to consistently score and consistently play at a high level to be one of those guys.  Rondo isn't that guy.  All the Rondo supporters always point out the great playoff series, but can't explain why Rondo doesn't do that all the time and ignore his multitude of playoff game stinkers.  Rondo shows up occassionally and when he does he is great, but just doesn't do it enough to be relied upon or counted on as a building block.

  Rondo's been the best player on teams that went to the finals and the ECF. His "stinkers" in the playoffs generally come when he's injured. Rondo scored or assisted a higher percentage of his team's points than any other player in the 2012 playoffs and his team came within a game of getting to the finals. Claiming a player like that can't be a #1 or #2 guy on a team is pretty ridiculous.

He's saying he's not the 'guy' on a championship team.
That's a pretty widely agreed on consensus throughout the NBA.
to be the guy on a title team puts you in an elite class. Rondo's currently a bench All star-not the number one option on a serious contender.

Actually, he's saying he's not even the number two guy on a serious contender.  I consider both the 2012 team and the 2010 teams to have been "serious contenders."  Rondo was, at least, the number two guy, debatably the number one guy, on both of those teams. 

So, based on history, yes, Rondo has shown that he can be a number one or number two guy on a serious contender. 

[Boris Badenov]

Because Rondo's contract expires in a two years, he will demand max dollars, and Boston still won't be a contender.  By the time Boston is ready to compete again, Rondo will be on the wrong side of 30 and no longer young and improving.  And that is if Boston doesn't have any misses in the draft and ends up with at least solid value. 

Rajon Rondo doesn't make sense for this team.  He isn't a franchise championship type player and his skill set isn't that of a guy to lead a team (you have to be a consistent scorer to lead a team as a franchise player).  He is very good and will add 5-10 victories to the team, thus hurting a young rebuilding teams draft position.  He also has a poor attitude, only shows up when he wants to, and will likely generally be a problem on a bad/mediocre team.  Couple all of this with Boston's lack of cap space any time soon and there is no real mechanism for Boston to land a true championship type franchise player with Rondo on the team.  For all of those reasons, I agree with Stein, Boston must trade Rondo.

Pretend it's 2006:

"Because Rondo's Pierce's contract expires in a two years, he will demand max dollars, and Boston still won't be a contender.  By the time Boston is ready to compete again, Rondo Pierce will be on the wrong side of 30 and no longer young and improving.  And that is if Boston doesn't have any misses in the draft and ends up with at least solid value. 

Rajon Rondo Paul Pierce doesn't make sense for this team.  He isn't a franchise championship type player and his skill set isn't that of a guy to lead a team.  He is very good and will add 5-10 victories to the team, thus hurting a young rebuilding teams draft position.  He also has a poor attitude, only shows up when he wants to, and will likely generally be a problem on a bad/mediocre team.  Couple all of this with Boston's lack of cap space any time soon and there is no real mechanism for Boston to land a true championship type franchise player with Rondo Pierce on the team.  For all of those reasons, I agree with Stein, Boston must trade Rondo Pierce."

This is an interesting comparison but I think it breaks down becasue I feel Pierce was a higher level star at that time than Rondo will ever be.

We needed Ray Allen to get KG.  I felt KG and PP were 1a and 1b stars needed for a title.  Allen was a second tier star, like Rondo is.  Rondo may become a tier 1 star but I have my doubts.

I could see Rondo being great on a team like Houston with Harden and Howard but I don't see how we can bring in the kind of talent that would be needed in just 2 years.  Even if Rondo does make the leap to a tier 1 star, we would still need another tier 1 star or maybe 3 tier 2 stars.

exactly, Pierce has the exact skill set required to be a franchise player i.e. superb scorer from anywhere on the floor, can beat you off the dribble, can post up, and has solid overall skills in all aspects (passing, rebouding, defending, etc.).  He was a much better player than Rondo will ever be and certainly is a much better building block.  And all that said, Ainge tried to trade him at least a couple of times.

In addition, the 2006 Boston Celtics had Al Jefferson who was already looking like he could be a real player and is far better asset than anything on this team (which as it turns out was the guy that was needed to land a player like Kevin Garnett).

2006 Al Jefferson averaged 8 points, 5 rebounds a game in 18 minutes.  He definitely wasn't a sure thing at the time. 

I don't know how you come to the conclusion that a player who has finished in the top ten in MVP voting twice, has been a four time all-star,  a four time all-defensive team player, and one of the best playoff performers in the league on a team that has made it to game seven of the conference finals and game seven of the finals can't be a building block? 

That just seems like personal bias to me.

I never said he was a sure thing, but a PF/C straight from high school that showed modest improvement from his rookie to second year and whose per 36 were basically 16/11 through two seasons is a darn good asset, and far better than any asset Boston currently has. 


as for you second part, Rondo is a guy that is a great complimentary piece, but he isn't a #1 guy.  He isn't even a #2 guy.  You have to consistently score and consistently play at a high level to be one of those guys.  Rondo isn't that guy.  All the Rondo supporters always point out the great playoff series, but can't explain why Rondo doesn't do that all the time and ignore his multitude of playoff game stinkers.  Rondo shows up occassionally and when he does he is great, but just doesn't do it enough to be relied upon or counted on as a building block.

Put a healthy 2012 Rondo on a team with 2007 KG, 2007 Ray Allen and a young but budding All-Star at SF - someone like Paul George of 2011-12. Surround them with a solid center like Perk and the rest of that 2007 supporting cast.

In other words, reverse Rondo's and Pierce's roles as completely as possible (where a young budding Rondo of 2007 at PG is subbed for a young budding SF, and 2012 Rondo is subbed for 2007 Pierce).

This would be the lineup:

Rondo ('12)
Allen ('07)
George ('11)
KG ('07)
Perk ('07)

Plus the 2007 bench.

Are you saying that team couldn't contend for a championship?

Yeah that team could because KG and Allen are #1 scorers and George is well on his way.  Rondo is a great complimentary piece to them, but that team would be a title contender because of KG and Allen, not Rondo.

Exactly my point. The facts that Rondo is not a #1 guy, or his age, or his contract, or our cap situation, say nothing about whether we can or cannot rebuild while retaining him. If we replicate something like the 2007 rebuilding strategy around him, we can contend. So, why take the view that we "must trade" him?

I think if you want to hold that view, it has to be because you believe we don't have similar assets to move, relative to what we had in 2007 - i.e., that we can't get a KG-type player back along with someone as good as Ray.

I'm personally not sold on that either - though as with '07, I think where we end up in this year's draft will have a big effect on that.

We do have other assets too. Sully and Green might have value. We have all those future first round picks. Etc.

And while you might think it's insane to believe that we could flip our current assets for players like '07 KG and '07 Ray - how many of us would have thought such a thing was insane back then with the assets we had at the time, before the fact? It happened, right?

I don't know for sure how things will turn out, but I think the "must trade Rondo" argument is pretty extreme. Why not just wait and see what happens?

[Moranis]

Because Rondo's contract expires in a two years, he will demand max dollars, and Boston still won't be a contender.  By the time Boston is ready to compete again, Rondo will be on the wrong side of 30 and no longer young and improving.  And that is if Boston doesn't have any misses in the draft and ends up with at least solid value. 

Rajon Rondo doesn't make sense for this team.  He isn't a franchise championship type player and his skill set isn't that of a guy to lead a team (you have to be a consistent scorer to lead a team as a franchise player).  He is very good and will add 5-10 victories to the team, thus hurting a young rebuilding teams draft position.  He also has a poor attitude, only shows up when he wants to, and will likely generally be a problem on a bad/mediocre team.  Couple all of this with Boston's lack of cap space any time soon and there is no real mechanism for Boston to land a true championship type franchise player with Rondo on the team.  For all of those reasons, I agree with Stein, Boston must trade Rondo.

Pretend it's 2006:

"Because Rondo's Pierce's contract expires in a two years, he will demand max dollars, and Boston still won't be a contender.  By the time Boston is ready to compete again, Rondo Pierce will be on the wrong side of 30 and no longer young and improving.  And that is if Boston doesn't have any misses in the draft and ends up with at least solid value. 

Rajon Rondo Paul Pierce doesn't make sense for this team.  He isn't a franchise championship type player and his skill set isn't that of a guy to lead a team.  He is very good and will add 5-10 victories to the team, thus hurting a young rebuilding teams draft position.  He also has a poor attitude, only shows up when he wants to, and will likely generally be a problem on a bad/mediocre team.  Couple all of this with Boston's lack of cap space any time soon and there is no real mechanism for Boston to land a true championship type franchise player with Rondo Pierce on the team.  For all of those reasons, I agree with Stein, Boston must trade Rondo Pierce."

This is an interesting comparison but I think it breaks down becasue I feel Pierce was a higher level star at that time than Rondo will ever be.

We needed Ray Allen to get KG.  I felt KG and PP were 1a and 1b stars needed for a title.  Allen was a second tier star, like Rondo is.  Rondo may become a tier 1 star but I have my doubts.

I could see Rondo being great on a team like Houston with Harden and Howard but I don't see how we can bring in the kind of talent that would be needed in just 2 years.  Even if Rondo does make the leap to a tier 1 star, we would still need another tier 1 star or maybe 3 tier 2 stars.

exactly, Pierce has the exact skill set required to be a franchise player i.e. superb scorer from anywhere on the floor, can beat you off the dribble, can post up, and has solid overall skills in all aspects (passing, rebouding, defending, etc.).  He was a much better player than Rondo will ever be and certainly is a much better building block.  And all that said, Ainge tried to trade him at least a couple of times.

In addition, the 2006 Boston Celtics had Al Jefferson who was already looking like he could be a real player and is far better asset than anything on this team (which as it turns out was the guy that was needed to land a player like Kevin Garnett).

2006 Al Jefferson averaged 8 points, 5 rebounds a game in 18 minutes.  He definitely wasn't a sure thing at the time. 

I don't know how you come to the conclusion that a player who has finished in the top ten in MVP voting twice, has been a four time all-star,  a four time all-defensive team player, and one of the best playoff performers in the league on a team that has made it to game seven of the conference finals and game seven of the finals can't be a building block? 

That just seems like personal bias to me.

I never said he was a sure thing, but a PF/C straight from high school that showed modest improvement from his rookie to second year and whose per 36 were basically 16/11 through two seasons is a darn good asset, and far better than any asset Boston currently has. 


as for you second part, Rondo is a guy that is a great complimentary piece, but he isn't a #1 guy.  He isn't even a #2 guy.  You have to consistently score and consistently play at a high level to be one of those guys.  Rondo isn't that guy.  All the Rondo supporters always point out the great playoff series, but can't explain why Rondo doesn't do that all the time and ignore his multitude of playoff game stinkers.  Rondo shows up occassionally and when he does he is great, but just doesn't do it enough to be relied upon or counted on as a building block.

Put a healthy 2012 Rondo on a team with 2007 KG, 2007 Ray Allen and a young but budding All-Star at SF - someone like Paul George of 2011-12. Surround them with a solid center like Perk and the rest of that 2007 supporting cast.

In other words, reverse Rondo's and Pierce's roles as completely as possible (where a young budding Rondo of 2007 at PG is subbed for a young budding SF, and 2012 Rondo is subbed for 2007 Pierce).

This would be the lineup:

Rondo ('12)
Allen ('07)
George ('11)
KG ('07)
Perk ('07)

Plus the 2007 bench.

Are you saying that team couldn't contend for a championship?

Yeah that team could because KG and Allen are #1 scorers and George is well on his way.  Rondo is a great complimentary piece to them, but that team would be a title contender because of KG and Allen, not Rondo.

Exactly my point. The facts that Rondo is not a #1 guy, or his age, or his contract, or our cap situation, say nothing about whether we can or cannot rebuild while retaining him. If we replicate something like the 2007 rebuilding strategy around him, we can contend. So, why take the view that we "must trade" him?

I think if you want to hold that view, it has to be because you believe we don't have similar assets to move, relative to what we had in 2007 - i.e., that we can't get a KG-type player back along with someone as good as Ray.

I'm personally not sold on that either - though as with '07, I think where we end up in this year's draft will have a big effect on that.

We do have other assets too. Sully and Green might have value. We have all those future first round picks. Etc.

And while you might think it's insane to believe that we could flip our current assets for players like '07 KG and '07 Ray - how many of us would have thought such a thing was insane back then with the assets we had at the time, before the fact? It happened, right?

I don't know for sure how things will turn out, but I think the "must trade Rondo" argument is pretty extreme. Why not just wait and see what happens?

the wait and see approach in these situations almost always fails and then you are just two years later and no closer to a title team.  That just isn't a place I'd want to be.