State Your Price for Rondo

[BballTim]

Not for draft picks...we already have a busload of picks.

We do have a lot of picks, but what the team lacks is really high picks.  A fist-full of mid-1st round picks are not worth as much as one single top 5 pick.

  That's a fairly bold prediction considering the number of picks and the number of years involved.

The future picks from other teams are total unknowns right now.  It's possible that one or more of the Brooklyn picks ends up as a top 5 pick.  But odds are, as with any future picks, that it skews toward the middle of the 1st round.

The Celtics' own picks could turn into a top 5 pick as soon as this season, too, but given the talent on the team and assuming Rondo's return continues to go smoothly, a top 5 pick seems fairly unlikely, this year and beyond.

I don't think it's so bold to say that, much more likely than not, none of the picks the Celtics currently hold turns into a top 5 pick.  In light of that, I think Ainge would value a pick in that range (or with an exceeding probability of being in that range, if acquired at the deadline) very highly.

  Picks seem to be pretty valuable in general, which comes up in most trade discussions in the form of "teams are loathe to part with draft picks". But beyond that, what exactly does "future picks tend to skew towards the middle of the round" mean? Aren't they more likely to be evenly distributed than cluster into a certain range?

What I mean is that where picks end up is determined by standings.

There tends to be a lot more competition on the extremes of the spectrum -- really high in the rankings, and really low in the rankings.

So, especially when a pick is owed by one team to another team (hence the original owner of the pick has no incentive to be bad), it seems more likely that the pick will end up in the middle range, rather than in the top 5 or the bottom 5.

  I think your assumptions on how heavily the draft influences teams to be bad are exaggerated, kind of a "tail wagging the dog" type of thing. Most teams that are bad are there by circumstance and not design, and most teams in the 10-15 range would rather make the playoffs than get a 2% chance at a high draft pick. The reason teams put protections on the picks they trade is that they're frequently bad in years they didn't intend to be. Those protections come into play quite often.

[LilRip]

haven't read through the entire thread so apologies if this has been said before, but my price for Rondo is either a proven superstar (e.g. Durant lol) or a young player on the cusp of being great (e.g. Anthony Davis or Andre Drummond) but has clearly shown signs of it.

the only time i would "settle" for a lateral move (e.g. getting a Kevin Love-level player), would be dependent on team construct. For example, if we had some budding PG ready to break out as Rondo's backup and had no decent PF, then it would make sense to get Kevin Love because he fills a need and at the same time, frees up space at the 1 position.

[scotto1205]

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=k3yqd3a
We would get Milwaukees 1st this year.
 
New Orleans gets the nets first  from us this year.

Just an idea.

[scotto1205]

Gives us 2 potential top 10 picks this year. With a sanders, Sullinger, Bradley core to build around mayo as our 6th man. Humphries butler expire bogans could be cut. I figure we have those 2 top picks and room to add a max level free agent or near max level not sure on the numbers though.  It  could be an idea

[biggs]

Traded Rondo for Conley & Gasol in 2K14 

Real life Memphis says no, but that's the type of return I would want.

Having said that, keep Rondo! 

[PhoSita]

Not for draft picks...we already have a busload of picks.

We do have a lot of picks, but what the team lacks is really high picks.  A fist-full of mid-1st round picks are not worth as much as one single top 5 pick.

  That's a fairly bold prediction considering the number of picks and the number of years involved.

The future picks from other teams are total unknowns right now.  It's possible that one or more of the Brooklyn picks ends up as a top 5 pick.  But odds are, as with any future picks, that it skews toward the middle of the 1st round.

The Celtics' own picks could turn into a top 5 pick as soon as this season, too, but given the talent on the team and assuming Rondo's return continues to go smoothly, a top 5 pick seems fairly unlikely, this year and beyond.

I don't think it's so bold to say that, much more likely than not, none of the picks the Celtics currently hold turns into a top 5 pick.  In light of that, I think Ainge would value a pick in that range (or with an exceeding probability of being in that range, if acquired at the deadline) very highly.

  Picks seem to be pretty valuable in general, which comes up in most trade discussions in the form of "teams are loathe to part with draft picks". But beyond that, what exactly does "future picks tend to skew towards the middle of the round" mean? Aren't they more likely to be evenly distributed than cluster into a certain range?

What I mean is that where picks end up is determined by standings.

There tends to be a lot more competition on the extremes of the spectrum -- really high in the rankings, and really low in the rankings.

So, especially when a pick is owed by one team to another team (hence the original owner of the pick has no incentive to be bad), it seems more likely that the pick will end up in the middle range, rather than in the top 5 or the bottom 5.

  I think your assumptions on how heavily the draft influences teams to be bad are exaggerated, kind of a "tail wagging the dog" type of thing. Most teams that are bad are there by circumstance and not design, and most teams in the 10-15 range would rather make the playoffs than get a 2% chance at a high draft pick. The reason teams put protections on the picks they trade is that they're frequently bad in years they didn't intend to be. Those protections come into play quite often.

Teams don't typically end up where they end up in the standings by random chance.

[BballTim]

Not for draft picks...we already have a busload of picks.

We do have a lot of picks, but what the team lacks is really high picks.  A fist-full of mid-1st round picks are not worth as much as one single top 5 pick.

  That's a fairly bold prediction considering the number of picks and the number of years involved.

The future picks from other teams are total unknowns right now.  It's possible that one or more of the Brooklyn picks ends up as a top 5 pick.  But odds are, as with any future picks, that it skews toward the middle of the 1st round.

The Celtics' own picks could turn into a top 5 pick as soon as this season, too, but given the talent on the team and assuming Rondo's return continues to go smoothly, a top 5 pick seems fairly unlikely, this year and beyond.

I don't think it's so bold to say that, much more likely than not, none of the picks the Celtics currently hold turns into a top 5 pick.  In light of that, I think Ainge would value a pick in that range (or with an exceeding probability of being in that range, if acquired at the deadline) very highly.

  Picks seem to be pretty valuable in general, which comes up in most trade discussions in the form of "teams are loathe to part with draft picks". But beyond that, what exactly does "future picks tend to skew towards the middle of the round" mean? Aren't they more likely to be evenly distributed than cluster into a certain range?

What I mean is that where picks end up is determined by standings.

There tends to be a lot more competition on the extremes of the spectrum -- really high in the rankings, and really low in the rankings.

So, especially when a pick is owed by one team to another team (hence the original owner of the pick has no incentive to be bad), it seems more likely that the pick will end up in the middle range, rather than in the top 5 or the bottom 5.

  I think your assumptions on how heavily the draft influences teams to be bad are exaggerated, kind of a "tail wagging the dog" type of thing. Most teams that are bad are there by circumstance and not design, and most teams in the 10-15 range would rather make the playoffs than get a 2% chance at a high draft pick. The reason teams put protections on the picks they trade is that they're frequently bad in years they didn't intend to be. Those protections come into play quite often.

Teams don't typically end up where they end up in the standings by random chance.

  Clearly not, the deciding factor more often than not is talent on the court. Injuries (random by most accounts) can have quite an effect on that talent level. I'm just saying that the draft isn't as large a concern you think it is. For instance, some people are fairly certain that we'll end up with 2 future seconds from Philly and not a 1st in the next few years because if they look like they're going to get a low seed in the playoffs their gm will take steps to insure that they end up in the lottery.

  Would Philly turn down a trip to the playoffs, even if it's just for one round, if that meant not getting a 13th or so pick in the draft? I wouldn't count on that. Would Charlotte, if they have their pick and find themselves in a similar position, forgo a trip to the playoffs to end up with the 11th pick and not the 16th? Probably not. The thought that draft picks that low drive the actions of franchises is silly.

[Smokeeye123]

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=k3yqd3a
We would get Milwaukees 1st this year.
 
New Orleans gets the nets first  from us this year.

Just an idea.

So the bucks are getting a player just returning from major reconstructive ACL surgery, the worst contract in the nba in gerald wallace, and a frequently injured guard? Sounds like enough to give up the number one pick to me 

[scotto1205]

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=k3yqd3a
We would get Milwaukees 1st this year.
 
New Orleans gets the nets first  from us this year.

Just an idea.

So the bucks are getting a player just returning from major reconstructive ACL surgery, the worst contract in the nba in gerald wallace, and a frequently injured guard? Sounds like enough to give up the number one pick to me 

If anyone does a trade like this it's the bucks. But if they can get fully healthy their starting 5 would be. Rondo, Gordon, GA, illyasova, and Henson. Give that a year or 2 and you got yourself a heck of a team.

[aingeforthree]

I'm gonna stop arguing because I actually think Ainge is keeping Rondo for the long haul.

Exactly right.  That's been my stance from the get go.  The only way Ainge trades him is if he's given an outlandish package for him...a la:

Thaddeus Young
Philadelphia's 1st round pick in 2014.
Philadelphia's 1st round pick from the Hornets in 2014.
Philadelphia's 2nd round pick in 2014.

It's going to take a kings ransom to get Rondo away from Boston.

[CoachBo]

Don't see it happening.

But sometimes, in the dark of night, the idea of a Rondo trade makes me laugh.

The hysteria that would break out on this blog would be better than Brickowski's post-Garnett trade hissy fit.