Rondo Trade w/ Jazz

[Moranis]

i didnt know we were in rebuild mode
i thought we were developing the talent already have

that implies there is actually young talent on the team.  There is not.

[PhoSita]

i didnt know we were in rebuild mode
i thought we were developing the talent already have

that implies there is actually young talent on the team.  There is not.

That's not exactly true.

I like to think of young assets in terms of how many "stars" I'd give them (I play a lot of NBA 2k).

Examples:

1 star - Marquis Teague
2 stars - Mo Harkless
3 stars - Dion Waiters
4 stars - Bradley Beal
5 stars - Anthony Davis

The Celtics have:

Olynyk: 2-3 stars (raw physical ability isn't there so needs to produce to show he's 3 stars; could be 3.5 stars by season's end if he really has a nice year)

Sullinger: 2.5-3 stars

Bradley: 2-2.5 stars (would be 3-4 if he were an above average offensive player and weren't terrible as a pg)

Faverani: 1-1.5 stars (age is the limiting factor here)

Pressey: 0-1 stars (if he fills in for Rondo and plays well, could up his value a lot)



What the Celtics are desperately lacking are 4+ star prospects.  Every rebuilding team wants to get a 5 star prospect, but it's very difficult to get one.  You almost always need to get a #1 pick.

The worst thing that can happen when you rebuild is that you just get a bunch of 3 star prospects.  It's the 4 and 5 star guys that help you climb back out of mediocrity.

[Moranis]

i didnt know we were in rebuild mode
i thought we were developing the talent already have

that implies there is actually young talent on the team.  There is not.

That's not exactly true.

I like to think of young assets in terms of how many "stars" I'd give them (I play a lot of NBA 2k).

Examples:

1 star - Marquis Teague
2 stars - Mo Harkless
3 stars - Dion Waiters
4 stars - Bradley Beal
5 stars - Anthony Davis

The Celtics have:

Olynyk: 2-3 stars (raw physical ability isn't there so needs to produce to show he's 3 stars; could be 3.5 stars by season's end if he really has a nice year)

Sullinger: 2.5-3 stars

Bradley: 2-2.5 stars (would be 3-4 if he were an above average offensive player and weren't terrible as a pg)

Faverani: 1-1.5 stars (age is the limiting factor here)

Pressey: 0-1 stars (if he fills in for Rondo and plays well, could up his value a lot)



What the Celtics are desperately lacking are 4+ star prospects.  Every rebuilding team wants to get a 5 star prospect, but it's very difficult to get one.  You almost always need to get a #1 pick.

The worst thing that can happen when you rebuild is that you just get a bunch of 3 star prospects.  It's the 4 and 5 star guys that help you climb back out of mediocrity.

Guys who you call Dion Waiters level players do not fit the bill of young talent as it was implied in this thread.  Young talent are guys that can actually someday be the centerpiece (or at least a real starting level contributor) on a title team.  The only person on the entire team that fits that bill is Rondo (and he is far from young and is currently injured).  Sully and Oly could be nice players and certainly rotation guys on contenders, but I just can't see either one being the starting PF on a true contender at any point in their career.  When you don't have that level of player, then you don't have sufficient young talent to do much of anything.

[LarBrd33]

The teams I could potentially see both wanting Rondo, having a need for Rondo, and possibly packaging enough to get him are:

Atlanta
Houston
Milwaukee
Sacramento

I'd add Indiana to that list--I think LrBrd brought that to my attention, but Rondo to Indiana for Granger + Hill + possibly a third team involved makes a lot of sense for Indiana, provided RR is healthy and playing as well as he has by the trade deadline. His inclusion makes that team Scary, with a capital S.

The trouble is that trade doesn't hit any of the checkmarks that the Celtics need in order for a Rondo trade to be palatable.

Those checkmarks, by the way, are the following:

1. At least one 3-4 star prospect (e.g. Kanter, Barnes, McLemore, Beal, Noel, etc) or a high pick (top 5-8).
2. Unload one or more of the longer term veteran contracts (Lee, Bass, Green, Wallace).
3. A secondary asset, either a decent young player (e.g. Burke, Isiah Thomas, Steven Adams, etc) or a mid to late 1st.

I pulled Indiana out of a hat as a random guess.  I decided that only a couple teams would genuinely consider trading for Rondo.  I don't see the point in a lotto team going after ROndo for the same reason I don't see the point in the Celtics keeping Rondo.  But also there's some teams that just dont' have any need for a star PG (Miami, OKC, Clips) ...   Indiana makes sense to me.  My guess is that we'd get a heck of a lot less than we'd want. 

Boston sends:
Rondo + Lee + Bass
or...
Rondo + Wallace


Indiana sends:
Granger (expiring contract)
George Hill (maybe we can flip him to a 3rd team)
A couple scrub youngins like Solomon Hill and Lance Stephenson
+ a couple unprotected 1sts from Indiana (which would obviously be late 1sts)

That's my wild guess and I'm sticking with it.  People are pegging the Pacers as a legit title threat thanks to Paul George making the leap and Roy Hibbert being one of the premiere centers in the league.  Adding a 3rd star in Rondo could theoretically put them over the top... especially those who subscribe to the "Rondo is a superstar in the playoffs" myth.

Of course, that trade would leave a lot of us fans brutally disappointed.  No star prospect.  Just some late 1st rounders.  But it's addition by subtraction... we completely bottom out with a top 5 pick, get a couple late 1sts and dump some bad contracts.  If we trade Rondo, that's the crap I'm expecting we'll get in return.  I dont' think anyone is giving up star prospects for him.

If that's the case, then Rondo is not going to get traded.  I don't see Danny Ainge trading Rondo simply for the sake of bottoming out.

Unless some team offers us at least 2 out of the 3 things I listed, I doubt Danny even considers any offers.

I'm generally on board with you as far as what the team's priorities ought to be LarBrd33, but I don't believe in dumping significant assets just for the sake getting worse.  I think the team will be plenty bad regardless.

A Rondo trade HAS to put the team in a better position than they are now in terms of future assets and salary.

I agree with you.  I just don't think the demand for Rondo is there.  I think we'll shoot for big time prospects like Drummond and ultimately settle for a poo-poo platter of a couple young prospects and some draft picks. 

Lots of teams have fine point guards already.  Lotto teams likely don't want to build around Rondo... so the idea that they'll give up significant young prospects for him doesn't make sense.   The teams that will want a guy like Rondo are teams that #1 - are close to contention and #2 - actually have use for a quarterback.   That rules out a ton of teams.  Denver is fine with Lawson.  SA is fine with Parker.  Heat don't need him.  Thunder don't need him.  Bulls don't need him.   Pacers are about the only team that I can think of that would take a chance on a wildcard like Rondo.  He could have a Sheed-to-the-Pistons impact on that team potentially. 

Boston, meanwhile, is at least a half decade away from sniffing the playoffs.  By the time this team is relevant again, Rondo will be in his 30s.  He is saying all the right things right now, but I say there's a real risk he bolts after the 2014-15 season if we are still horrible. 

Think George Hill is worth a 1st rounder on the open market?  A couple weak prospects, cap relief, and three 1st rounders for Rondo isn't ideal, but it adds flexibility for the future.

[PhoSita]

The teams I could potentially see both wanting Rondo, having a need for Rondo, and possibly packaging enough to get him are:

Atlanta
Houston
Milwaukee
Sacramento

I'd add Indiana to that list--I think LrBrd brought that to my attention, but Rondo to Indiana for Granger + Hill + possibly a third team involved makes a lot of sense for Indiana, provided RR is healthy and playing as well as he has by the trade deadline. His inclusion makes that team Scary, with a capital S.

The trouble is that trade doesn't hit any of the checkmarks that the Celtics need in order for a Rondo trade to be palatable.

Those checkmarks, by the way, are the following:

1. At least one 3-4 star prospect (e.g. Kanter, Barnes, McLemore, Beal, Noel, etc) or a high pick (top 5-8).
2. Unload one or more of the longer term veteran contracts (Lee, Bass, Green, Wallace).
3. A secondary asset, either a decent young player (e.g. Burke, Isiah Thomas, Steven Adams, etc) or a mid to late 1st.

I pulled Indiana out of a hat as a random guess.  I decided that only a couple teams would genuinely consider trading for Rondo.  I don't see the point in a lotto team going after ROndo for the same reason I don't see the point in the Celtics keeping Rondo.  But also there's some teams that just dont' have any need for a star PG (Miami, OKC, Clips) ...   Indiana makes sense to me.  My guess is that we'd get a heck of a lot less than we'd want. 

Boston sends:
Rondo + Lee + Bass
or...
Rondo + Wallace


Indiana sends:
Granger (expiring contract)
George Hill (maybe we can flip him to a 3rd team)
A couple scrub youngins like Solomon Hill and Lance Stephenson
+ a couple unprotected 1sts from Indiana (which would obviously be late 1sts)

That's my wild guess and I'm sticking with it.  People are pegging the Pacers as a legit title threat thanks to Paul George making the leap and Roy Hibbert being one of the premiere centers in the league.  Adding a 3rd star in Rondo could theoretically put them over the top... especially those who subscribe to the "Rondo is a superstar in the playoffs" myth.

Of course, that trade would leave a lot of us fans brutally disappointed.  No star prospect.  Just some late 1st rounders.  But it's addition by subtraction... we completely bottom out with a top 5 pick, get a couple late 1sts and dump some bad contracts.  If we trade Rondo, that's the crap I'm expecting we'll get in return.  I dont' think anyone is giving up star prospects for him.

If that's the case, then Rondo is not going to get traded.  I don't see Danny Ainge trading Rondo simply for the sake of bottoming out.

Unless some team offers us at least 2 out of the 3 things I listed, I doubt Danny even considers any offers.

I'm generally on board with you as far as what the team's priorities ought to be LarBrd33, but I don't believe in dumping significant assets just for the sake getting worse.  I think the team will be plenty bad regardless.

A Rondo trade HAS to put the team in a better position than they are now in terms of future assets and salary.

I agree with you.  I just don't think the demand for Rondo is there.  I think we'll shoot for big time prospects like Drummond and ultimately settle for a poo-poo platter of a couple young prospects and some draft picks. 

Lots of teams have fine point guards already.  Lotto teams likely don't want to build around Rondo... so the idea that they'll give up significant young prospects for him doesn't make sense.   The teams that will want a guy like Rondo are teams that #1 - are close to contention and #2 - actually have use for a quarterback.   That rules out a ton of teams.  Denver is fine with Lawson.  SA is fine with Parker.  Heat don't need him.  Thunder don't need him.  Bulls don't need him.   Pacers are about the only team that I can think of that would take a chance on a wildcard like Rondo.  He could have a Sheed-to-the-Pistons impact on that team potentially. 

Boston, meanwhile, is at least a half decade away from sniffing the playoffs.  By the time this team is relevant again, Rondo will be in his 30s.  He is saying all the right things right now, but I say there's a real risk he bolts after the 2014-15 season if we are still horrible. 

Think George Hill is worth a 1st rounder on the open market?  A couple weak prospects, cap relief, and three 1st rounders for Rondo isn't ideal, but it adds flexibility for the future.

I guess I'm a bit more confident than you are that there will eventually be a bit more of a market for Rondo.

I think Rondo could make sense for a team that isn't on the cusp of contention, contrary to your argument.  I do think a team trading for Rondo would have to be a team without a top point guard already that nonetheless has a nice base of young talent with at least one potential star guy (e.g. Cousins, Favors) who would theoretically fit well with a top pass-first ball handler like Rondo.

[D.o.s.]

The teams I could potentially see both wanting Rondo, having a need for Rondo, and possibly packaging enough to get him are:

Atlanta
Houston
Milwaukee
Sacramento

I'd add Indiana to that list--I think LrBrd brought that to my attention, but Rondo to Indiana for Granger + Hill + possibly a third team involved makes a lot of sense for Indiana, provided RR is healthy and playing as well as he has by the trade deadline. His inclusion makes that team Scary, with a capital S.

The trouble is that trade doesn't hit any of the checkmarks that the Celtics need in order for a Rondo trade to be palatable.

Those checkmarks, by the way, are the following:

1. At least one 3-4 star prospect (e.g. Kanter, Barnes, McLemore, Beal, Noel, etc) or a high pick (top 5-8).
2. Unload one or more of the longer term veteran contracts (Lee, Bass, Green, Wallace).
3. A secondary asset, either a decent young player (e.g. Burke, Isiah Thomas, Steven Adams, etc) or a mid to late 1st.

I pulled Indiana out of a hat as a random guess.  I decided that only a couple teams would genuinely consider trading for Rondo.  I don't see the point in a lotto team going after ROndo for the same reason I don't see the point in the Celtics keeping Rondo.  But also there's some teams that just dont' have any need for a star PG (Miami, OKC, Clips) ...   Indiana makes sense to me.  My guess is that we'd get a heck of a lot less than we'd want. 

Boston sends:
Rondo + Lee + Bass
or...
Rondo + Wallace


Indiana sends:
Granger (expiring contract)
George Hill (maybe we can flip him to a 3rd team)
A couple scrub youngins like Solomon Hill and Lance Stephenson
+ a couple unprotected 1sts from Indiana (which would obviously be late 1sts)

That's my wild guess and I'm sticking with it.  People are pegging the Pacers as a legit title threat thanks to Paul George making the leap and Roy Hibbert being one of the premiere centers in the league.  Adding a 3rd star in Rondo could theoretically put them over the top... especially those who subscribe to the "Rondo is a superstar in the playoffs" myth.

Of course, that trade would leave a lot of us fans brutally disappointed.  No star prospect.  Just some late 1st rounders.  But it's addition by subtraction... we completely bottom out with a top 5 pick, get a couple late 1sts and dump some bad contracts.  If we trade Rondo, that's the crap I'm expecting we'll get in return.  I dont' think anyone is giving up star prospects for him.

If that's the case, then Rondo is not going to get traded.  I don't see Danny Ainge trading Rondo simply for the sake of bottoming out.

Unless some team offers us at least 2 out of the 3 things I listed, I doubt Danny even considers any offers.

I'm generally on board with you as far as what the team's priorities ought to be LarBrd33, but I don't believe in dumping significant assets just for the sake getting worse.  I think the team will be plenty bad regardless.

A Rondo trade HAS to put the team in a better position than they are now in terms of future assets and salary.

I agree with you.  I just don't think the demand for Rondo is there.  I think we'll shoot for big time prospects like Drummond and ultimately settle for a poo-poo platter of a couple young prospects and some draft picks. 

Lots of teams have fine point guards already.  Lotto teams likely don't want to build around Rondo... so the idea that they'll give up significant young prospects for him doesn't make sense.   The teams that will want a guy like Rondo are teams that #1 - are close to contention and #2 - actually have use for a quarterback.   That rules out a ton of teams.  Denver is fine with Lawson.  SA is fine with Parker.  Heat don't need him.  Thunder don't need him.  Bulls don't need him.   Pacers are about the only team that I can think of that would take a chance on a wildcard like Rondo.  He could have a Sheed-to-the-Pistons impact on that team potentially. 

Boston, meanwhile, is at least a half decade away from sniffing the playoffs.  By the time this team is relevant again, Rondo will be in his 30s.  He is saying all the right things right now, but I say there's a real risk he bolts after the 2014-15 season if we are still horrible. 

Think George Hill is worth a 1st rounder on the open market?  A couple weak prospects, cap relief, and three 1st rounders for Rondo isn't ideal, but it adds flexibility for the future.

I guess I'm a bit more confident than you are that there will eventually be a bit more of a market for Rondo.

I think Rondo could make sense for a team that isn't on the cusp of contention, contrary to your argument.  I do think a team trading for Rondo would have to be a team without a top point guard already that nonetheless has a nice base of young talent with at least one potential star guy (e.g. Cousins, Favors) who would theoretically fit well with a top pass-first ball handler like Rondo.

Sure, but you're dodging your own criteria there--what trades can those teams make that are palatable to the Celtics without giving away their potential star?

[LooseCannon]

Lots of teams have fine point guards already.  Lotto teams likely don't want to build around Rondo... so the idea that they'll give up significant young prospects for him doesn't make sense.   The teams that will want a guy like Rondo are teams that #1 - are close to contention and #2 - actually have use for a quarterback.   That rules out a ton of teams.

So, a fringe playoff team with a PG who is inferior to Rondo?

Maybe the Toronto's front office wants to clear out the old regime's free agent mistakes and offer DeMar DeRozan, Kyle Lowry, Landry Fields and draft picks for Rondo, Bradley, and Wallace.  Or Portland, desperate to keep Lamarcus Aldridge offers a pupu platter of guys like Meyers Leonard and Thomas Robinson as well as a pick or two in the hopes of going with a three-guard rotation of Rondo, Lillard, and Matthews.

[BballTim]

Boston, meanwhile, is at least a half decade away from sniffing the playoffs. 

  There's no real reason to think that this is true. There are way too many unknowns (including what they're going to do with the plethora of first rounders in the near future) to have any idea what the team will look like in a year or two.

[manl_lui]

Boston, meanwhile, is at least a half decade away from sniffing the playoffs. 

  There's no real reason to think that this is true. There are way too many unknowns (including what they're going to do with the plethora of first rounders in the near future) to have any idea what the team will look like in a year or two.

+1, see 2007...one year we have the worst record in the league, next year we won the championship...

not saying this is the same, but my point is, Danny won't just sit back and see players develop and play our way into the playoffs. He is going to develop them, and trade them for more assets to get us there faster. Waiting for players to develop just to even make playoffs is painful and 5 years is a very long time, if by then he still keeps his job. He is probably going to trade a player or even a lot of players to get someone back within the next year or 2. Besides those first rounders, we also have that 10 mil trade exception which I am anxious to see how he is going to use it for.

[PhoSita]

I guess I'm a bit more confident than you are that there will eventually be a bit more of a market for Rondo.

I think Rondo could make sense for a team that isn't on the cusp of contention, contrary to your argument.  I do think a team trading for Rondo would have to be a team without a top point guard already that nonetheless has a nice base of young talent with at least one potential star guy (e.g. Cousins, Favors) who would theoretically fit well with a top pass-first ball handler like Rondo.

Sure, but you're dodging your own criteria there--what trades can those teams make that are palatable to the Celtics without giving away their potential star?

I think you'd be looking at a team that has a number of young talents.  They'd have that potential star, who they'd want to pair with Rondo, not trade.  Then they'd have other assets that they might be willing to trade in order to get Rondo, which would include players like I mentioned.

I don't think you're going to get a Favors or a Cousins for Rondo.  But I do believe the Celtics might get a McLemore or a Kanter, or maybe a couple of players who aren't quite on that level in addition to a top 10 pick.


I will say that I think Philly pretty much set the market for a Rondo trade when they traded Holiday.  I can't imagine Ainge trading Rondo for a package much less than what Philly got from New Orleans.

[PhoSita]

Boston, meanwhile, is at least a half decade away from sniffing the playoffs. 

  There's no real reason to think that this is true. There are way too many unknowns (including what they're going to do with the plethora of first rounders in the near future) to have any idea what the team will look like in a year or two.

+1, see 2007...one year we have the worst record in the league, next year we won the championship...

It's important to keep it in mind that it was a fairly singular set of circumstances that came together to make those deals possible.

I'm not saying Ainge can't do something similar again, but it's not as if there are always moves to be made to launch the team from the bottom back to top in one off-season.

[D.o.s.]

I guess I'm a bit more confident than you are that there will eventually be a bit more of a market for Rondo.

I think Rondo could make sense for a team that isn't on the cusp of contention, contrary to your argument.  I do think a team trading for Rondo would have to be a team without a top point guard already that nonetheless has a nice base of young talent with at least one potential star guy (e.g. Cousins, Favors) who would theoretically fit well with a top pass-first ball handler like Rondo.

Sure, but you're dodging your own criteria there--what trades can those teams make that are palatable to the Celtics without giving away their potential star?

I think you'd be looking at a team that has a number of young talents.  They'd have that potential star, who they'd want to pair with Rondo, not trade.  Then they'd have other assets that they might be willing to trade in order to get Rondo, which would include players like I mentioned.

I don't think you're going to get a Favors or a Cousins for Rondo.  But I do believe the Celtics might get a McLemore or a Kanter, or maybe a couple of players who aren't quite on that level in addition to a top 10 pick.


I will say that I think Philly pretty much set the market for a Rondo trade when they traded Holiday.  I can't imagine Ainge trading Rondo for a package much less than what Philly got from New Orleans.

On the same side of that coin, I don't think Ainge would get a package that's much better (if at all) than what Philly got for Holiday.

[PhoSita]

I guess I'm a bit more confident than you are that there will eventually be a bit more of a market for Rondo.

I think Rondo could make sense for a team that isn't on the cusp of contention, contrary to your argument.  I do think a team trading for Rondo would have to be a team without a top point guard already that nonetheless has a nice base of young talent with at least one potential star guy (e.g. Cousins, Favors) who would theoretically fit well with a top pass-first ball handler like Rondo.

Sure, but you're dodging your own criteria there--what trades can those teams make that are palatable to the Celtics without giving away their potential star?

I think you'd be looking at a team that has a number of young talents.  They'd have that potential star, who they'd want to pair with Rondo, not trade.  Then they'd have other assets that they might be willing to trade in order to get Rondo, which would include players like I mentioned.

I don't think you're going to get a Favors or a Cousins for Rondo.  But I do believe the Celtics might get a McLemore or a Kanter, or maybe a couple of players who aren't quite on that level in addition to a top 10 pick.


I will say that I think Philly pretty much set the market for a Rondo trade when they traded Holiday.  I can't imagine Ainge trading Rondo for a package much less than what Philly got from New Orleans.

On the same side of that coin, I don't think Ainge would get a package that's much better (if at all) than what Philly got for Holiday.

I agree.  There won't be any offers that are significantly better than what Philly got.  But that doesn't bother me -- I'd be pretty okay with something along those lines, although I'd prefer for the young player they get in the deal to not be in recovery from an ACL tear.

[D.o.s.]

I guess I'm a bit more confident than you are that there will eventually be a bit more of a market for Rondo.

I think Rondo could make sense for a team that isn't on the cusp of contention, contrary to your argument.  I do think a team trading for Rondo would have to be a team without a top point guard already that nonetheless has a nice base of young talent with at least one potential star guy (e.g. Cousins, Favors) who would theoretically fit well with a top pass-first ball handler like Rondo.

Sure, but you're dodging your own criteria there--what trades can those teams make that are palatable to the Celtics without giving away their potential star?

I think you'd be looking at a team that has a number of young talents.  They'd have that potential star, who they'd want to pair with Rondo, not trade.  Then they'd have other assets that they might be willing to trade in order to get Rondo, which would include players like I mentioned.

I don't think you're going to get a Favors or a Cousins for Rondo.  But I do believe the Celtics might get a McLemore or a Kanter, or maybe a couple of players who aren't quite on that level in addition to a top 10 pick.


I will say that I think Philly pretty much set the market for a Rondo trade when they traded Holiday.  I can't imagine Ainge trading Rondo for a package much less than what Philly got from New Orleans.

On the same side of that coin, I don't think Ainge would get a package that's much better (if at all) than what Philly got for Holiday.

I agree.  There won't be any offers that are significantly better than what Philly got.  But that doesn't bother me -- I'd be pretty okay with something along those lines, although I'd prefer for the young player they get in the deal to not be in recovery from an ACL tear.

No love for Brandon Rush?

(actually, I think that he'd be a great target--not for a Rondo trade, just in general).

[PhoSita]

I guess I'm a bit more confident than you are that there will eventually be a bit more of a market for Rondo.

I think Rondo could make sense for a team that isn't on the cusp of contention, contrary to your argument.  I do think a team trading for Rondo would have to be a team without a top point guard already that nonetheless has a nice base of young talent with at least one potential star guy (e.g. Cousins, Favors) who would theoretically fit well with a top pass-first ball handler like Rondo.

Sure, but you're dodging your own criteria there--what trades can those teams make that are palatable to the Celtics without giving away their potential star?

I think you'd be looking at a team that has a number of young talents.  They'd have that potential star, who they'd want to pair with Rondo, not trade.  Then they'd have other assets that they might be willing to trade in order to get Rondo, which would include players like I mentioned.

I don't think you're going to get a Favors or a Cousins for Rondo.  But I do believe the Celtics might get a McLemore or a Kanter, or maybe a couple of players who aren't quite on that level in addition to a top 10 pick.


I will say that I think Philly pretty much set the market for a Rondo trade when they traded Holiday.  I can't imagine Ainge trading Rondo for a package much less than what Philly got from New Orleans.

On the same side of that coin, I don't think Ainge would get a package that's much better (if at all) than what Philly got for Holiday.

I agree.  There won't be any offers that are significantly better than what Philly got.  But that doesn't bother me -- I'd be pretty okay with something along those lines, although I'd prefer for the young player they get in the deal to not be in recovery from an ACL tear.

No love for Brandon Rush?

(actually, I think that he'd be a great target--not for a Rondo trade, just in general).

Rush, at least prior to his injury, was a very solid shooter to bring off the bench.  I like him.

I'm hoping he doesn't suffer the same fate as another wing player I like who had a major knee injury -- Kelenna Azubuike.  Not an NBA player anymore.