If rondo comes back as rondo, do we trade him?

[Tr1boy]

Um, why would you trade one of the best PG's and passers in the entire NBA? I've seen hundreds of rationalizations for that, and NONE of them balance out or even come close, IMO. Unless it's part of some incredible blockbuster trade to bring a true superstar with a future to Boston, I see nothing that would warrant even considering it.

You trade him because you, as the GM, believe it would make the team better, either from a roster standpoint or a bookkeeping standpoint.

The same reason you, as the GM, trade anyone else. That's why.

good points.

If sacrifing Rondo gets you back a more balanced/better team, you trade him. It's like how the wolves traded KG, as KG was one of the best players in the league, but the team was horrible.

They didn't really succeed with the trade they made with the Celts, but the risk was worth it and best for everyone. Can't see a guy like KG wanting to continue to keep losing. Same with Rondo.

I have a hunch either Detroit or Sacramento will pursue Rondo the hardest. And if Detroit gives you Drummond, you make the trade in a heartbeat. If Sacramento gives you Mclemore and a 1st , you might have to consider making a trade.

With Rondo's injury and contract uncertainty, Danny will pull the trigger at the right offer

[Celtics18]

Um, why would you trade one of the best PG's and passers in the entire NBA? I've seen hundreds of rationalizations for that, and NONE of them balance out or even come close, IMO. Unless it's part of some incredible blockbuster trade to bring a true superstar with a future to Boston, I see nothing that would warrant even considering it.

You trade him because you, as the GM, believe it would make the team better, either from a roster standpoint or a bookkeeping standpoint.

The same reason you, as the GM, trade anyone else. That's why.

I haven't seen a lot of proposed trades including Rondo that are likely to make the team better from a roster standpoint.  As to the bookkeeping standpoint, personally, I'm not in this whole Celtics fan thing to see Wyc and Co. save some bucks.  In the end, I don't really think getting rid of Rondo helps their bottom line too much anyway.  That dude's a fairly big draw. 

[D.o.s.]

Um, why would you trade one of the best PG's and passers in the entire NBA? I've seen hundreds of rationalizations for that, and NONE of them balance out or even come close, IMO. Unless it's part of some incredible blockbuster trade to bring a true superstar with a future to Boston, I see nothing that would warrant even considering it.

You trade him because you, as the GM, believe it would make the team better, either from a roster standpoint or a bookkeeping standpoint.

The same reason you, as the GM, trade anyone else. That's why.

I haven't seen a lot of proposed trades including Rondo that are likely to make the team better from a roster standpoint.  As to the bookkeeping standpoint, personally, I'm not in this whole Celtics fan thing to see Wyc and Co. save some bucks.  In the end, I don't really think getting rid of Rondo helps their bottom line too much anyway.  That dude's a fairly big draw.

That's not really the point, though. Where each of us draws the line at the worth of Rajon Rondo isn't all that important--because it's going to be different for each poster. We all know BBallTim isn't going to trade Rondo for 2001 Shaq and 1993 Michael Jordan and every first round draft pick over the next 20 years, and we know that LB will trade him for a bag of doritos if the 7-11 will take Brandon Bass too.

All those dudes are convinced that they're right, and none of them are Danny Ainge, so the question of "why trade him" can't have anything to do with value. You trade him to make the team better. If you can't trade him to make the team better, you don't. QED.

 And bookkeeping insofar as things like the salary cap are concerned,--the roster, free agency, MLE's and other exceptions, and so forth.

[bballdog384]

OFFICIAL DO WE TRADE RONDO THREAD !!!!

Sticking with it lol

[chambers]

Official Do we trade rondo or keep him Thread.

Rondo as we all know it will be back the very latest the next two weeks. Possibly this week.
Yes there will be minute constrictions, but let's say rondo comes back and wins us about 4-5 games in a row and is playing like the too 3 PG rondo is, we obviously would not beat Indiana or Miami in the playoffs, and the goal is to get the lottery not the playoffs

What are some trade possibilities you guys are thinking if? Any ideas as of what Danny is thinking? Do we keep Rondo?  Let's debate all the way till rondo gets traded or kept !!

  I don't think that getting rid of a top 3 point guard in order to get a better draft pick is a good move.

Depends on what the plan is. If Danny has put feelers out and thinks he really has no avenue of getting a supporting star for Rondo to lackey then perhaps the best avenue is moving him while his value is highest-as in the scenario the OP describes and he's playing at top level Rondo.

I've been over this a million times with Tim, in a million different threads. His opinion differs to mine regarding Rondo.
That being said I'm not sure if I've heard the scenario in which Tim would trade Rondo. I'm assuming there is one?
My preference is to keep Rondo, but I'd probably deal him for a top 5 pick if we couldn't get a star to pair him with.
I'd also re-sign him if he proves to be back to 2011-12 Rondo, and then trade him if there are still no clear or possible scenarios of getting him some legit help by the times he's 30 or 31.
Anyway, under what realistic circumstance would you trade Rondo Tim?
Would you prefer to wait until 2017-18 (assuming he doesn't walk and resigns With us) ?

[Jailan34]

I've seen so many responses saying "no way" or "absolutely not" and I don't see how you can make those kind of statements without knowing the deal. So my answer would be it depends.

If a team comes along and offers a nice young player along with two first round picks, with at least one being in the lottery this year, I'd have to say yes.

By the time we're competitive again Rondo will be on the wrong side of thirty. I think you'd have to consider trading him for the right deal.

[timobusa]

oh no! what if he comes back as ray allen? or mario chalmers. we're doomed

[LarBrd33]

Um, why would you trade one of the best PG's and passers in the entire NBA? I've seen hundreds of rationalizations for that, and NONE of them balance out or even come close, IMO. Unless it's part of some incredible blockbuster trade to bring a true superstar with a future to Boston, I see nothing that would warrant even considering it.

You trade him because you, as the GM, believe it would make the team better, either from a roster standpoint or a bookkeeping standpoint.

The same reason you, as the GM, trade anyone else. That's why.

I haven't seen a lot of proposed trades including Rondo that are likely to make the team better from a roster standpoint.  As to the bookkeeping standpoint, personally, I'm not in this whole Celtics fan thing to see Wyc and Co. save some bucks.  In the end, I don't really think getting rid of Rondo helps their bottom line too much anyway.  That dude's a fairly big draw.

That's not really the point, though. Where each of us draws the line at the worth of Rajon Rondo isn't all that important--because it's going to be different for each poster. We all know BBallTim isn't going to trade Rondo for 2001 Shaq and 1993 Michael Jordan and every first round draft pick over the next 20 years, and we know that LB will trade him for a bag of doritos if the 7-11 will take Brandon Bass too.

All those dudes are convinced that they're right, and none of them are Danny Ainge, so the question of "why trade him" can't have anything to do with value. You trade him to make the team better. If you can't trade him to make the team better, you don't. QED.

 And bookkeeping insofar as things like the salary cap are concerned,--the roster, free agency, MLE's and other exceptions, and so forth.

I think that's me.   What I want us to get for Rondo and what I think we will get for Rondo are two very different things.  If I was in Ainge's seat, I'd probably push hard on acquiring multiple young prospects (22 and under) and unprotected first rounders.  If they will give me fat expiring contracts and take on Wallace and Bass, that's a major bonus.  That's not doritos.  I just think a lot of posters here either #1 - have irrational expectations of what you could get for Rondo and #2 - Have trouble seeing the big picture.

I'd call up the Bobcats and offer Rondo+Bass+Wallace for Gordon/Sessions expiring + Kemba, Biyombo (21 years old) and MKG (20 years old) and multiple unprotected 1st rounders.

That's a pu-pu platter you can't refuse. 

Then Boston bottoms out... lands Embiid (19 years old).

Now you're looking at a pretty sick collection of young talent across the board and boatloads of capspace.  This summer tell LeBron to come to Boston and bring his buddies.  Draft picks for days, bro... and Championships for the next 20 years straight.  It's all how you think about it, I guess. 

[KGs Knee]

Um, why would you trade one of the best PG's and passers in the entire NBA? I've seen hundreds of rationalizations for that, and NONE of them balance out or even come close, IMO. Unless it's part of some incredible blockbuster trade to bring a true superstar with a future to Boston, I see nothing that would warrant even considering it.

You trade him because you, as the GM, believe it would make the team better, either from a roster standpoint or a bookkeeping standpoint.

The same reason you, as the GM, trade anyone else. That's why.

I haven't seen a lot of proposed trades including Rondo that are likely to make the team better from a roster standpoint.  As to the bookkeeping standpoint, personally, I'm not in this whole Celtics fan thing to see Wyc and Co. save some bucks.  In the end, I don't really think getting rid of Rondo helps their bottom line too much anyway.  That dude's a fairly big draw.

That's not really the point, though. Where each of us draws the line at the worth of Rajon Rondo isn't all that important--because it's going to be different for each poster. We all know BBallTim isn't going to trade Rondo for 2001 Shaq and 1993 Michael Jordan and every first round draft pick over the next 20 years, and we know that LB will trade him for a bag of doritos if the 7-11 will take Brandon Bass too.

All those dudes are convinced that they're right, and none of them are Danny Ainge, so the question of "why trade him" can't have anything to do with value. You trade him to make the team better. If you can't trade him to make the team better, you don't. QED.

 And bookkeeping insofar as things like the salary cap are concerned,--the roster, free agency, MLE's and other exceptions, and so forth.

I think that's me.   What I want us to get for Rondo and what I think we will get for Rondo are two very different things.  If I was in Ainge's seat, I'd probably push hard on acquiring multiple young prospects (22 and under) and unprotected first rounders.  If they will give me fat expiring contracts and take on Wallace and Bass, that's a major bonus.  That's not doritos.  I just think a lot of posters here either #1 - have irrational expectations of what you could get for Rondo and #2 - Have trouble seeing the big picture.

I'd call up the Bobcats and offer Rondo+Bass+Wallace for Gordon/Sessions expiring + Kemba, Biyombo (21 years old) and MKG (20 years old) and multiple unprotected 1st rounders.

That's a pu-pu platter you can't refuse. 

Then Boston bottoms out... lands Embiid (19 years old).

Now you're looking at a pretty sick collection of young talent across the board and boatloads of capspace.  This summer tell LeBron to come to Boston and bring his buddies.  Draft picks for days, bro... and Championships for the next 20 years straight.  It's all how you think about it, I guess.

Hahaha!

That's worse than a bag of doritos, that's the cheapo generic brand.

Terrible idea if I ever heard one.

[chambers]

Um, why would you trade one of the best PG's and passers in the entire NBA? I've seen hundreds of rationalizations for that, and NONE of them balance out or even come close, IMO. Unless it's part of some incredible blockbuster trade to bring a true superstar with a future to Boston, I see nothing that would warrant even considering it.

You trade him because you, as the GM, believe it would make the team better, either from a roster standpoint or a bookkeeping standpoint.

The same reason you, as the GM, trade anyone else. That's why.

I haven't seen a lot of proposed trades including Rondo that are likely to make the team better from a roster standpoint.  As to the bookkeeping standpoint, personally, I'm not in this whole Celtics fan thing to see Wyc and Co. save some bucks.  In the end, I don't really think getting rid of Rondo helps their bottom line too much anyway.  That dude's a fairly big draw.

That's not really the point, though. Where each of us draws the line at the worth of Rajon Rondo isn't all that important--because it's going to be different for each poster. We all know BBallTim isn't going to trade Rondo for 2001 Shaq and 1993 Michael Jordan and every first round draft pick over the next 20 years, and we know that LB will trade him for a bag of doritos if the 7-11 will take Brandon Bass too.

All those dudes are convinced that they're right, and none of them are Danny Ainge, so the question of "why trade him" can't have anything to do with value. You trade him to make the team better. If you can't trade him to make the team better, you don't. QED.

 And bookkeeping insofar as things like the salary cap are concerned,--the roster, free agency, MLE's and other exceptions, and so forth.

I think that's me.   What I want us to get for Rondo and what I think we will get for Rondo are two very different things.  If I was in Ainge's seat, I'd probably push hard on acquiring multiple young prospects (22 and under) and unprotected first rounders.  If they will give me fat expiring contracts and take on Wallace and Bass, that's a major bonus.  That's not doritos.  I just think a lot of posters here either #1 - have irrational expectations of what you could get for Rondo and #2 - Have trouble seeing the big picture.

I'd call up the Bobcats and offer Rondo+Bass+Wallace for Gordon/Sessions expiring + Kemba, Biyombo (21 years old) and MKG (20 years old) and multiple unprotected 1st rounders.

That's a pu-pu platter you can't refuse. 

Then Boston bottoms out... lands Embiid (19 years old).

Now you're looking at a pretty sick collection of young talent across the board and boatloads of capspace.  This summer tell LeBron to come to Boston and bring his buddies.  Draft picks for days, bro... and Championships for the next 20 years straight.  It's all how you think about it, I guess.

The problem with this viewpoint Brd is that we can keep Rondo and still have draft picks for days and still have room for Lebron. To say that Lebron would rather play with some kids outta college over Rondo and pick 'potential' over the games best passer and arguably best floor general is a little far fetched- no matter how great that draftee potential may be.

You share a similar 'new school' approach to me, one which strikes fear in the hearts of many Celtics fans that cringe at the thought of change and hold on to Rondo as their only hope of staving off a long, tedious and painful rebuild from ground up.
Rondo is the rock between a nice NBA team and a hard place for Celtics fans.

It's also fair to admit that you can't get point guards with RR's IQ and rebounding ability with 90% of top 5 picks- let alone number one picks.
I'm all for trading him if the price is right but I think you're undervaluing him if you think the Bobcats deal is reasonable value with Biyombo as some kind of prospect- their own pick currently projects outside the lottery. Obviously the majority of Rondo fans here overrate him in your eyes (and mine too) so it's all subjective.

I couldn't see Ainge giving him up for anything less than a  premium lottery pick in the top 5.

I think if he gets traded he'll go to the Kings for their first round pick. They're pretty much the only lottery team that has the pieces we want- that would actually follow through with giving up the farm for Rondo. Their pick currently projects at #4 which is pretty sweet.

Something like Rondo +Wallace+ Bass for

Marcus Thornton
Ben Mclemore
Jason Thompson
Carl Landry
Derrick Williams
2014 SAC unprotected first rounder (top 5)
-The Williams+Bass trade would have to be a separate move but is doable like Pierce to Brooklyn was.

I'd do this trade on draft night after ensuring we stink terribly so we end up with two potential top 5 picks.

Of course the above would hinge on whether or not Danny has decided to go balls deep for the 2014 and 15 drafts.
I'd see him then trying to re-sign Bradley on the Cheap, and then move Green+Bradley for a 2015 top 10 pick. With Sully and Olynyk the only survivors.

I still believe it's more like a 90% chance he attempts to put pieces around Rondo via trade/free agency and uses our picks as trade cogs.

The speculation is the part that brings us the most fun and pain at the same time
Good ol' Celtics blog.

[BballTim]

I've seen so many responses saying "no way" or "absolutely not" and I don't see how you can make those kind of statements without knowing the deal. So my answer would be it depends.

If a team comes along and offers a nice young player along with two first round picks, with at least one being in the lottery this year, I'd have to say yes.

By the time we're competitive again Rondo will be on the wrong side of thirty. I think you'd have to consider trading him for the right deal.

  I don't think Danny has any interest in waiting a long time to be competitive again.

[Moranis]

Um, why would you trade one of the best PG's and passers in the entire NBA? I've seen hundreds of rationalizations for that, and NONE of them balance out or even come close, IMO. Unless it's part of some incredible blockbuster trade to bring a true superstar with a future to Boston, I see nothing that would warrant even considering it.

You trade him because you, as the GM, believe it would make the team better, either from a roster standpoint or a bookkeeping standpoint.

The same reason you, as the GM, trade anyone else. That's why.

I haven't seen a lot of proposed trades including Rondo that are likely to make the team better from a roster standpoint.  As to the bookkeeping standpoint, personally, I'm not in this whole Celtics fan thing to see Wyc and Co. save some bucks.  In the end, I don't really think getting rid of Rondo helps their bottom line too much anyway.  That dude's a fairly big draw.

That's not really the point, though. Where each of us draws the line at the worth of Rajon Rondo isn't all that important--because it's going to be different for each poster. We all know BBallTim isn't going to trade Rondo for 2001 Shaq and 1993 Michael Jordan and every first round draft pick over the next 20 years, and we know that LB will trade him for a bag of doritos if the 7-11 will take Brandon Bass too.

All those dudes are convinced that they're right, and none of them are Danny Ainge, so the question of "why trade him" can't have anything to do with value. You trade him to make the team better. If you can't trade him to make the team better, you don't. QED.

 And bookkeeping insofar as things like the salary cap are concerned,--the roster, free agency, MLE's and other exceptions, and so forth.

I think that's me.   What I want us to get for Rondo and what I think we will get for Rondo are two very different things.  If I was in Ainge's seat, I'd probably push hard on acquiring multiple young prospects (22 and under) and unprotected first rounders.  If they will give me fat expiring contracts and take on Wallace and Bass, that's a major bonus.  That's not doritos.  I just think a lot of posters here either #1 - have irrational expectations of what you could get for Rondo and #2 - Have trouble seeing the big picture.

I'd call up the Bobcats and offer Rondo+Bass+Wallace for Gordon/Sessions expiring + Kemba, Biyombo (21 years old) and MKG (20 years old) and multiple unprotected 1st rounders.

That's a pu-pu platter you can't refuse. 

Then Boston bottoms out... lands Embiid (19 years old).

Now you're looking at a pretty sick collection of young talent across the board and boatloads of capspace.  This summer tell LeBron to come to Boston and bring his buddies.  Draft picks for days, bro... and Championships for the next 20 years straight.  It's all how you think about it, I guess.

Hahaha!

That's worse than a bag of doritos, that's the cheapo generic brand.

Terrible idea if I ever heard one.

and Charlotte would never make that trade.

[Moranis]

I've seen so many responses saying "no way" or "absolutely not" and I don't see how you can make those kind of statements without knowing the deal. So my answer would be it depends.

If a team comes along and offers a nice young player along with two first round picks, with at least one being in the lottery this year, I'd have to say yes.

By the time we're competitive again Rondo will be on the wrong side of thirty. I think you'd have to consider trading him for the right deal.

  I don't think Danny has any interest in waiting a long time to be competitive again.

I agree, I just think he will move Rondo to acquire assets and then use those assets to build a new competitive team.  I don't think Ainge sees Rondo in the future of the team.

I think something like this would be reasonable for both Boston and Phoenix

Boston - Len, Okafor, Kratsov, Minnesota 1st, Phoenix 1st
Phoenix - Rondo, Wallace

Boston picks up 2 picks, Len, and cap relief.  Phoenix still has the Washington and Indiana 1st's, picks up Rondo, and takes on Wallace.  I get that Rondo and Bledsoe (with Dragic) is a bit duplicative but Bledsoe is currently hurt and is an expiring contract so he may not stick around anyway.  This trade keeps Phoenix relevant and gets them a "star" which they have been seeking for years.  Other pieces could be added with all the reasonable deals on both teams.

[slamtheking]

I've seen so many responses saying "no way" or "absolutely not" and I don't see how you can make those kind of statements without knowing the deal. So my answer would be it depends.

If a team comes along and offers a nice young player along with two first round picks, with at least one being in the lottery this year, I'd have to say yes.

By the time we're competitive again Rondo will be on the wrong side of thirty. I think you'd have to consider trading him for the right deal.

  I don't think Danny has any interest in waiting a long time to be competitive again.

I agree, I just think he will move Rondo to acquire assets and then use those assets to build a new competitive team.  I don't think Ainge sees Rondo in the future of the team.

I don't think YOU see Rondo as the future of the franchise based on the bulk of your posts about him.  I think Ainge has a different opinion.

[BballTim]

Um, why would you trade one of the best PG's and passers in the entire NBA? I've seen hundreds of rationalizations for that, and NONE of them balance out or even come close, IMO. Unless it's part of some incredible blockbuster trade to bring a true superstar with a future to Boston, I see nothing that would warrant even considering it.

You trade him because you, as the GM, believe it would make the team better, either from a roster standpoint or a bookkeeping standpoint.

The same reason you, as the GM, trade anyone else. That's why.

I haven't seen a lot of proposed trades including Rondo that are likely to make the team better from a roster standpoint.  As to the bookkeeping standpoint, personally, I'm not in this whole Celtics fan thing to see Wyc and Co. save some bucks.  In the end, I don't really think getting rid of Rondo helps their bottom line too much anyway.  That dude's a fairly big draw.

That's not really the point, though. Where each of us draws the line at the worth of Rajon Rondo isn't all that important--because it's going to be different for each poster. We all know BBallTim isn't going to trade Rondo for 2001 Shaq and 1993 Michael Jordan and every first round draft pick over the next 20 years, and we know that LB will trade him for a bag of doritos if the 7-11 will take Brandon Bass too.

All those dudes are convinced that they're right, and none of them are Danny Ainge, so the question of "why trade him" can't have anything to do with value. You trade him to make the team better. If you can't trade him to make the team better, you don't. QED.

 And bookkeeping insofar as things like the salary cap are concerned,--the roster, free agency, MLE's and other exceptions, and so forth.

I think that's me.   What I want us to get for Rondo and what I think we will get for Rondo are two very different things.  If I was in Ainge's seat, I'd probably push hard on acquiring multiple young prospects (22 and under) and unprotected first rounders.  If they will give me fat expiring contracts and take on Wallace and Bass, that's a major bonus.  That's not doritos.  I just think a lot of posters here either #1 - have irrational expectations of what you could get for Rondo and #2 - Have trouble seeing the big picture.

I'd call up the Bobcats and offer Rondo+Bass+Wallace for Gordon/Sessions expiring + Kemba, Biyombo (21 years old) and MKG (20 years old) and multiple unprotected 1st rounders.

That's a pu-pu platter you can't refuse. 

Then Boston bottoms out... lands Embiid (19 years old).

Now you're looking at a pretty sick collection of young talent across the board and boatloads of capspace.  This summer tell LeBron to come to Boston and bring his buddies.  Draft picks for days, bro... and Championships for the next 20 years straight.  It's all how you think about it, I guess.

  The post-trade Rondo isn't anything to get excited about, but as long as you add your favorite draft pick and a player like LeBron to the team you're golden. Keeping Rondo and bolstered your team (especially shoring up your center position) is the only shot you'd ever have of getting LeBron.