Kings are putting together a package for Rondo

[Kane3387]

the original source appears to have named MarcOs Thornton as one of the chips being dangled

ummm...

Makes salaries work. The kings are in a hole. If one of the picks is unprotected 2014 then I'm doing it. It's better then the holiday trade. Sac will be lottery this year.

Macklemore has a nice ceiling. Can really shoot. Good athlete. On rookie deal for three years after this. Thomas could be flipped for a pick. Again two more firsts are good assets for future trades. One could be lottery this year.

Thornton expires next year with bass etc. Don't like the length of thompsons deal but it's not a high number. He can play center and space the floor. Still young and a solid role player for a contender. He could be flipped.

We trade Wallace!

Rondo is coming off ACL surgery and will want a max extension at 29...

[Vermont Green]

So you trade an impact player (who's easily retainable)

Where is this assumption coming from?  How do you know Rondo is going to be easily retainable?  Heaven forbid but a team may sign Rondo to huge money in 1.5 years only to have him rapidly decline due to knee or other injuries.  If you decide to go all in on Rondo, there are risks (as there are with trading him).  He could also go for greener pastures and end up on the Lakers (for example).

As for the deal, wow, I think it is a great deal for us.  I have not seen McLemore play in the pros so my comment is based on the assumption that he is playing up to the potential of a top pick (which was stated above).

I agree that we don't really need more draft picks but they do have value.  They may help us get someone like Asik.  There also seems to be some confusion about Wallace.  I am assuming they are taking Wallace back.  That is how I read the deal.

Rumors are rumors but with what Sac has done lately, this just may be true.  Say we flip the two picks plus Humphries for Asik, that would be:

Asik, Mclemore, I. Thomas, Thornton, Thompson

for

Rondo, Wallace, and Humphries.

We probably have to cut Pressey and Brooks (oh well).

So yes, I do this.

[guava_wrench]

I don't think Boston needs any more draft picks, so I'd say this deal really comes down to how good you think Thomas and McLemore can be.  Also, if you make this deal, you better have other trades lined up for Green, Bass and Lee because getting rid of Rondo also means going full on tank this season.  There's ZERO reason to trade Rondo unless you're determined to outsuck Philly and company for the 2014 draft.

Mike

You trade the picks.

There is more than zero reason to trade Rondo. Accumulating assets is big. You also don't have to worry about Rondo deciding to leave at the end of his contract, which is a real threat. His future here looks like mediocrity at best for the next few years.

Keep in mind that adding Rondo doesn't mean we improve greatly since it will diminish the impact of Crawford who has been incredible lately.

Moving Wallace is also a big help. BIG help.

[Kane3387]

I only do this deal if there 2014 pick is involved. Not sure it can be bc Cleveland owns some rights to it.

[RJ87]

So you trade an impact player (who's easily retainable)

Where is this assumption coming from?  How do you know Rondo is going to be easily retainable?  Heaven forbid but a team may sign Rondo to huge money in 1.5 years only to have him rapidly decline due to knee or other injuries.  If you decide to go all in on Rondo, there are risks (as there are with trading him).  He could also go for greener pastures and end up on the Lakers (for example).

As for the deal, wow, I think it is a great deal for us.  I have not seen McLemore play in the pros so my comment is based on the assumption that he is playing up to the potential of a top pick (which was stated above).

I agree that we don't really need more draft picks but they do have value.  They may help us get someone like Asik.  There also seems to be some confusion about Wallace.  I am assuming they are taking Wallace back.  That is how I read the deal.

Rumors are rumors but with what Sac has done lately, this just may be true.  Say we flip the two picks plus Humphries for Asik, that would be:

Asik, Mclemore, I. Thomas, Thornton, Thompson

for

Rondo, Wallace, and Humphries.

We probably have to cut Pressey and Brooks (oh well).

So yes, I do this.

If we trade Rondo away, we def aren't going after Asik. He'd make no sense here.

the original source appears to have named MarcOs Thornton as one of the chips being dangled

ummm...

Lol, exactly. And NBABuzz? Really?

I don't think this is legit.

[manl_lui]

as most of you already said...I refuse to move Rondo unless a top 10 2014 pick is involved and unprotected. Otherwise you are really banking on Maclemore being an all star with a high ceiling.

While tempting, at this point, i will risk sticking with Rondo

[Vermont Green]

If we trade Rondo away, we def aren't going after Asik. He'd make no sense here.

I am not sure I follow the logic here?

[Jailan34]

If we trade Rondo away, we def aren't going after Asik. He'd make no sense here.

I am not sure I follow the logic here?

Asik is on a fairly large contract who belongs on a win now team, not a rebuilding one?

[Jeff]

the original source appears to have named MarcOs Thornton as one of the chips being dangled

ummm...

Makes salaries work....

my point is that they spelled the guy's name wrong - kinda puts the whole thing in doubt to me since most well respected sites have editors

...well, except CelticsBlog, we just have me LOL

[RJ87]

If we trade Rondo away, we def aren't going after Asik. He'd make no sense here.

I am not sure I follow the logic here?

He's 27 and only under contract for this year and next - he'd likely walk in free agency.  We'd be completely bottoming out, why bring in a year and a half rental?

[YoungOne87]

why should we take on thompson?

he has 4 years left on his contract and we are stacked at his position.

[guava_wrench]

If we trade Rondo away, we def aren't going after Asik. He'd make no sense here.

I am not sure I follow the logic here?

Asik is on a fairly large contract who belongs on a win now team, not a rebuilding one?

Asik only makes sense if he is being sold cheap. If Houston can't get value, we might be able to get Asik with a lesser first round pick. Buy low, sell high.

Asik is 27. He will be able to contribute a while longer. He is also a major financial commitment, as Houston signed him to a big contract so that the Bulls would not able to match it. Trading for him would be Ainge putting a schedule on our turnaround.

[Boris Badenov]

I only do this deal if there 2014 pick is involved. Not sure it can be bc Cleveland owns some rights to it.

Cleveland gets the pick if it's outside the top 12. Sac could trade the rights in the 1-12 range to us.

[ssspence]

I am not in favor of trading Rondo...but if this deal is correct (which I REALLY doubt it is), I might have to change my opinion:

Rondo and Wallace for:

Thomas, McLemore, Thornton, Thompson, and 2 first round picks.

That would be an absolute haul, and would be nearly impossible to turn down, depending on the specifics of the picks. 

Mostly though, I think this deal is BS.

This.

[86MaxwellSmart]

Historically,the Team that gets the BEST player in a trade, wins out...so, No to this deal. You don't trade your All-Star player for multiple mediocre players...Unless your All-Star wants out.