Franchise Players?

[Jailan34]

this is why I want us to get a high draft pick. if we can get a parker/wiggins etc. to pair with Rondo/sullinger and they can develop into that durant style player we will be all set.

but does Rondo playing take us out of contention for that pick? How do we get that pick with Rondo playing?

Also, that's a long rebuild. That's at least three years before we would be competing for a Title IMO....

It's not that long of a rebuild, plus those would still be three great years watching the development of a great player. At the same time our team would (hopefully) be improving every year as more pieces are added.

To me thats all a fan can ask for.

[winsomme]

But, there are seven in this year's draft.  All we have to do is get one of them.

I guess you're being a bit sarcastic here but I do think there will be at least two franchise players out of this draft...not sure which they are yet.

Still, the problem is whether or not Rondo playing takes us out of the running for these guys..

And, we probably won't be sure which two they are until they've played at least three NBA seasons.  At least three or four of the teams picking in the top six are bound to take a player who doesn't end up being a "franchise" player. 

This, to me, gets to the crux of why "tanking" for a future franchise player isn't the best strategy for rebuilding.  The draft is a risky business.  I'd love to get a couple of really good players in this year's draft, and in the five to follow.  The sheer volume of picks greatly increases our chances of landing a special player at some point over the next few years. 

I'd prefer to see Rondo help take us out of the running for a top pick.  I think there's more to be gained from beginning to develop a winner than there is by trying to lose our way to the "next franchise player."

I agree that it is a bit of crapshoot to get the next franchise player out of this draft class but I definitely trust Danny in that regard. Give him a top pick in this draft and I have confidence that he will draft the right player or trade to our advantage.

I'm not, however, sure how us not getting a pick due to Rondo putting us back into contention helps Danny. I don't see a low-win season hindering the development of Sully or AB or hindering the value of them as chips. I just don't see the long term value of this team playing their way out of the tankerzone. I just think that makes Danny's job that much harder because he will have fewer premium assets.

I think these are the advantages to winning:

I do believe playing for a club that is winning ball games makes our players more valuable assets.  We hear phrases like, "the guy puts up good numbers on a crappy team, but can he really contribute to a winner?'  all the time.  I think that if our guys remain at their current level of production, but start to do so on a team that wins 50% of their games, they'll be likely to be viewed as more valuable assets around the league.

Not only do I believe that winning some games makes players more valuable as "assets", but I believe that it actually can make them better basketball players.  I know this isn't a popular opinion around these parts, but I still believe that learning to play for wins on a competitive team early in ones career can be extremely helpful in development. 

I also think that if we show that we can be a team that can become a contender with the right help--that we already have some of the pieces in place--that we will be a more attractive destination for good to great players around the league.

So, I do think there is something to be gained from winning from the perspective of building for the future.

I see some value there but not enough to out-weigh the value of a top 5 pick. I think the value and the career path of Sully, for instance, varies very little with a bottom 5 finish versus a limited playoff run this season.

Whereas a top 5 pick is a concrete, premium chip that Danny could turn into a franchise player....

Either way, getting back to my original point, it  is threading a needle because there simply are not that many franchise players out there. Other than Carmelo and Love, I'm not even sure who is on the list. and further, without a top 5 pick AND Rondo, these guys might be un-gettable.

But how do we keep Rondo AND get a top 5 pick...

[Jailan34]

But, there are seven in this year's draft.  All we have to do is get one of them.

I guess you're being a bit sarcastic here but I do think there will be at least two franchise players out of this draft...not sure which they are yet.

Still, the problem is whether or not Rondo playing takes us out of the running for these guys..

And, we probably won't be sure which two they are until they've played at least three NBA seasons.  At least three or four of the teams picking in the top six are bound to take a player who doesn't end up being a "franchise" player. 

This, to me, gets to the crux of why "tanking" for a future franchise player isn't the best strategy for rebuilding.  The draft is a risky business.  I'd love to get a couple of really good players in this year's draft, and in the five to follow.  The sheer volume of picks greatly increases our chances of landing a special player at some point over the next few years. 

I'd prefer to see Rondo help take us out of the running for a top pick.  I think there's more to be gained from beginning to develop a winner than there is by trying to lose our way to the "next franchise player."

I agree that it is a bit of crapshoot to get the next franchise player out of this draft class but I definitely trust Danny in that regard. Give him a top pick in this draft and I have confidence that he will draft the right player or trade to our advantage.

I'm not, however, sure how us not getting a pick due to Rondo putting us back into contention helps Danny. I don't see a low-win season hindering the development of Sully or AB or hindering the value of them as chips. I just don't see the long term value of this team playing their way out of the tankerzone. I just think that makes Danny's job that much harder because he will have fewer premium assets.

I think these are the advantages to winning:

I do believe playing for a club that is winning ball games makes our players more valuable assets.  We hear phrases like, "the guy puts up good numbers on a crappy team, but can he really contribute to a winner?'  all the time.  I think that if our guys remain at their current level of production, but start to do so on a team that wins 50% of their games, they'll be likely to be viewed as more valuable assets around the league.

Not only do I believe that winning some games makes players more valuable as "assets", but I believe that it actually can make them better basketball players.  I know this isn't a popular opinion around these parts, but I still believe that learning to play for wins on a competitive team early in ones career can be extremely helpful in development. 

I also think that if we show that we can be a team that can become a contender with the right help--that we already have some of the pieces in place--that we will be a more attractive destination for good to great players around the league.

So, I do think there is something to be gained from winning from the perspective of building for the future.

I see some value there but not enough to out-weigh the value of a top 5 pick. I think the value and the career path of Sully, for instance, varies very little with a bottom 5 finish versus a limited playoff run this season.

Whereas a top 5 pick is a concrete, premium chip that Danny could turn into a franchise player....

Either way, getting back to my original point, it  is threading a needle because there simply are not that many franchise players out there. Other than Carmelo and Love, I'm not even sure who is on the list. and further, without a top 5 pick AND Rondo, these guys might be un-gettable.

But how do we keep Rondo AND get a top 5 pick...

Heavy minutes limit on Rondo, keep him out of back to backs for "rest" and other tanking moves that people hate but are necessary.

I'd much rather do that than trade Rondo, I think he's an important player to have on our team to be a leader for the young guys we will draft. If we somehow land Jabari and we still have rondo on our team his scoring will become so much more efficient, Rondo would just be so great for the development of our next young star.

[winsomme]

But, there are seven in this year's draft.  All we have to do is get one of them.

I guess you're being a bit sarcastic here but I do think there will be at least two franchise players out of this draft...not sure which they are yet.

Still, the problem is whether or not Rondo playing takes us out of the running for these guys..

And, we probably won't be sure which two they are until they've played at least three NBA seasons.  At least three or four of the teams picking in the top six are bound to take a player who doesn't end up being a "franchise" player. 

This, to me, gets to the crux of why "tanking" for a future franchise player isn't the best strategy for rebuilding.  The draft is a risky business.  I'd love to get a couple of really good players in this year's draft, and in the five to follow.  The sheer volume of picks greatly increases our chances of landing a special player at some point over the next few years. 

I'd prefer to see Rondo help take us out of the running for a top pick.  I think there's more to be gained from beginning to develop a winner than there is by trying to lose our way to the "next franchise player."

I agree that it is a bit of crapshoot to get the next franchise player out of this draft class but I definitely trust Danny in that regard. Give him a top pick in this draft and I have confidence that he will draft the right player or trade to our advantage.

I'm not, however, sure how us not getting a pick due to Rondo putting us back into contention helps Danny. I don't see a low-win season hindering the development of Sully or AB or hindering the value of them as chips. I just don't see the long term value of this team playing their way out of the tankerzone. I just think that makes Danny's job that much harder because he will have fewer premium assets.

I think these are the advantages to winning:

I do believe playing for a club that is winning ball games makes our players more valuable assets.  We hear phrases like, "the guy puts up good numbers on a crappy team, but can he really contribute to a winner?'  all the time.  I think that if our guys remain at their current level of production, but start to do so on a team that wins 50% of their games, they'll be likely to be viewed as more valuable assets around the league.

Not only do I believe that winning some games makes players more valuable as "assets", but I believe that it actually can make them better basketball players.  I know this isn't a popular opinion around these parts, but I still believe that learning to play for wins on a competitive team early in ones career can be extremely helpful in development. 

I also think that if we show that we can be a team that can become a contender with the right help--that we already have some of the pieces in place--that we will be a more attractive destination for good to great players around the league.

So, I do think there is something to be gained from winning from the perspective of building for the future.

I see some value there but not enough to out-weigh the value of a top 5 pick. I think the value and the career path of Sully, for instance, varies very little with a bottom 5 finish versus a limited playoff run this season.

Whereas a top 5 pick is a concrete, premium chip that Danny could turn into a franchise player....

Either way, getting back to my original point, it  is threading a needle because there simply are not that many franchise players out there. Other than Carmelo and Love, I'm not even sure who is on the list. and further, without a top 5 pick AND Rondo, these guys might be un-gettable.

But how do we keep Rondo AND get a top 5 pick...

Heavy minutes limit on Rondo, keep him out of back to backs for "rest" and other tanking moves that people hate but are necessary.

I'd much rather do that than trade Rondo, I think he's an important player to have on our team to be a leader for the young guys we will draft. If we somehow land Jabari and we still have rondo on our team his scoring will become so much more efficient, Rondo would just be so great for the development of our next young star.

But Rondo has said that when he's back, he's back...not sure he would agree to these limits if he really is ready to play...

I hear you, but I'm not sure this would work with Rondo.

[Jailan34]

But, there are seven in this year's draft.  All we have to do is get one of them.

I guess you're being a bit sarcastic here but I do think there will be at least two franchise players out of this draft...not sure which they are yet.

Still, the problem is whether or not Rondo playing takes us out of the running for these guys..

And, we probably won't be sure which two they are until they've played at least three NBA seasons.  At least three or four of the teams picking in the top six are bound to take a player who doesn't end up being a "franchise" player. 

This, to me, gets to the crux of why "tanking" for a future franchise player isn't the best strategy for rebuilding.  The draft is a risky business.  I'd love to get a couple of really good players in this year's draft, and in the five to follow.  The sheer volume of picks greatly increases our chances of landing a special player at some point over the next few years. 

I'd prefer to see Rondo help take us out of the running for a top pick.  I think there's more to be gained from beginning to develop a winner than there is by trying to lose our way to the "next franchise player."

I agree that it is a bit of crapshoot to get the next franchise player out of this draft class but I definitely trust Danny in that regard. Give him a top pick in this draft and I have confidence that he will draft the right player or trade to our advantage.

I'm not, however, sure how us not getting a pick due to Rondo putting us back into contention helps Danny. I don't see a low-win season hindering the development of Sully or AB or hindering the value of them as chips. I just don't see the long term value of this team playing their way out of the tankerzone. I just think that makes Danny's job that much harder because he will have fewer premium assets.

I think these are the advantages to winning:

I do believe playing for a club that is winning ball games makes our players more valuable assets.  We hear phrases like, "the guy puts up good numbers on a crappy team, but can he really contribute to a winner?'  all the time.  I think that if our guys remain at their current level of production, but start to do so on a team that wins 50% of their games, they'll be likely to be viewed as more valuable assets around the league.

Not only do I believe that winning some games makes players more valuable as "assets", but I believe that it actually can make them better basketball players.  I know this isn't a popular opinion around these parts, but I still believe that learning to play for wins on a competitive team early in ones career can be extremely helpful in development. 

I also think that if we show that we can be a team that can become a contender with the right help--that we already have some of the pieces in place--that we will be a more attractive destination for good to great players around the league.

So, I do think there is something to be gained from winning from the perspective of building for the future.

I see some value there but not enough to out-weigh the value of a top 5 pick. I think the value and the career path of Sully, for instance, varies very little with a bottom 5 finish versus a limited playoff run this season.

Whereas a top 5 pick is a concrete, premium chip that Danny could turn into a franchise player....

Either way, getting back to my original point, it  is threading a needle because there simply are not that many franchise players out there. Other than Carmelo and Love, I'm not even sure who is on the list. and further, without a top 5 pick AND Rondo, these guys might be un-gettable.

But how do we keep Rondo AND get a top 5 pick...

Heavy minutes limit on Rondo, keep him out of back to backs for "rest" and other tanking moves that people hate but are necessary.

I'd much rather do that than trade Rondo, I think he's an important player to have on our team to be a leader for the young guys we will draft. If we somehow land Jabari and we still have rondo on our team his scoring will become so much more efficient, Rondo would just be so great for the development of our next young star.

But Rondo has said that when he's back, he's back...not sure he would agree to these limits if he really is ready to play...

I hear you, but I'm not sure this would work with Rondo.

Pretty sure Ainge or Steven's said in a recent interview Rondo was on the 5 min a quarter plan though, so it is what they're doing.

[TwinTower14]

Steven's said 5 mins a quarter....

[winsomme]

But, there are seven in this year's draft.  All we have to do is get one of them.

I guess you're being a bit sarcastic here but I do think there will be at least two franchise players out of this draft...not sure which they are yet.

Still, the problem is whether or not Rondo playing takes us out of the running for these guys..

And, we probably won't be sure which two they are until they've played at least three NBA seasons.  At least three or four of the teams picking in the top six are bound to take a player who doesn't end up being a "franchise" player. 

This, to me, gets to the crux of why "tanking" for a future franchise player isn't the best strategy for rebuilding.  The draft is a risky business.  I'd love to get a couple of really good players in this year's draft, and in the five to follow.  The sheer volume of picks greatly increases our chances of landing a special player at some point over the next few years. 

I'd prefer to see Rondo help take us out of the running for a top pick.  I think there's more to be gained from beginning to develop a winner than there is by trying to lose our way to the "next franchise player."

I agree that it is a bit of crapshoot to get the next franchise player out of this draft class but I definitely trust Danny in that regard. Give him a top pick in this draft and I have confidence that he will draft the right player or trade to our advantage.

I'm not, however, sure how us not getting a pick due to Rondo putting us back into contention helps Danny. I don't see a low-win season hindering the development of Sully or AB or hindering the value of them as chips. I just don't see the long term value of this team playing their way out of the tankerzone. I just think that makes Danny's job that much harder because he will have fewer premium assets.

I think these are the advantages to winning:

I do believe playing for a club that is winning ball games makes our players more valuable assets.  We hear phrases like, "the guy puts up good numbers on a crappy team, but can he really contribute to a winner?'  all the time.  I think that if our guys remain at their current level of production, but start to do so on a team that wins 50% of their games, they'll be likely to be viewed as more valuable assets around the league.

Not only do I believe that winning some games makes players more valuable as "assets", but I believe that it actually can make them better basketball players.  I know this isn't a popular opinion around these parts, but I still believe that learning to play for wins on a competitive team early in ones career can be extremely helpful in development. 

I also think that if we show that we can be a team that can become a contender with the right help--that we already have some of the pieces in place--that we will be a more attractive destination for good to great players around the league.

So, I do think there is something to be gained from winning from the perspective of building for the future.

I see some value there but not enough to out-weigh the value of a top 5 pick. I think the value and the career path of Sully, for instance, varies very little with a bottom 5 finish versus a limited playoff run this season.

Whereas a top 5 pick is a concrete, premium chip that Danny could turn into a franchise player....

Either way, getting back to my original point, it  is threading a needle because there simply are not that many franchise players out there. Other than Carmelo and Love, I'm not even sure who is on the list. and further, without a top 5 pick AND Rondo, these guys might be un-gettable.

But how do we keep Rondo AND get a top 5 pick...

Heavy minutes limit on Rondo, keep him out of back to backs for "rest" and other tanking moves that people hate but are necessary.

I'd much rather do that than trade Rondo, I think he's an important player to have on our team to be a leader for the young guys we will draft. If we somehow land Jabari and we still have rondo on our team his scoring will become so much more efficient, Rondo would just be so great for the development of our next young star.

But Rondo has said that when he's back, he's back...not sure he would agree to these limits if he really is ready to play...

I hear you, but I'm not sure this would work with Rondo.

Pretty sure Ainge or Steven's said in a recent interview Rondo was on the 5 min a quarter plan though, so it is what they're doing.

For how long?

[winsomme]

Pretty sure Ainge or Steven's said in a recent interview Rondo was on the 5 min a quarter plan though, so it is what they're doing.

Plus, it kinda doesn't matter what they do, it matters how Rondo responds to it...

[BballTim]

I have to agree that Rondo is not take seriously enough as a "franchise player". The guy is the best pure point in the league and his value always seems underestimated. He may not be the best scorer but his offense through passing and running the team are top flight and his defense can be extremely good as is his rebounding Any player who drops the games on Miami that Rondo has should get more consideration.

he is not the best pure PG in the league, Chris Paul is the best, Paul does just about everything on the floor better than Rondo except for rebound.  Rondo is a very good player but I don't consider him a franchise talent.  I guess we will see if DA thinks he is when his contract is up at the end of next season...

  I'd say Rondo does just about everything better than Paul other than score or defend (they're fairly equal). Paul's probably the best pg in the league but if he couldn't shoot or hit free throws any better than Rondo he'd be fairly mediocre IMO.

I guess we can disagree but if you go by their career numbers...Paul scores more, averages more assist, shoots better from the line and 3, turns it over less and the rebounding numbers are the same and Paul averages more steals... So I think Paul does just about everything better than Rondo.  Don't get me wrong, I like Rondo, he just isn't in Paul class...

  You can't really go by career numbers because Rondo took much more time to develop than Paul (hence the difference in their draft positions. Rondo's been the better rebounder in both the regular season and the playoffs. He's also gotten more assists over the last few years, both in the regular season and the playoffs. It's true that Paul turns the ball over less than Rondo, especially on passes. But that's pretty dependent on the way he's defended.

  Paul's man sticks with him and other defenders help out on covering him. Teams that defend against the Celts tend to stick closer to Rondo's teammates when he has the ball (playing him for the pass) and his teammate cheats off of him.  If Paul couldn't shoot or hit free throws any better than Rondo(my initial premise) he'd have a tougher time passing the ball to his teammates, having a harder time getting assists and turning the ball over more often.

[D.o.s.]

If Paul couldn't shoot or hit free throws any better than Rondo(my initial premise) he'd have a tougher time passing the ball to his teammates, having a harder time getting assists and turning the ball over more often.

Didn't you just chide someone else for throwing out opinion as fact in another thread?

[droopdog7]

Forget about franchise player.  The question is, how many guys in the league are untradeable because you cannot reallt get enough value back?  The list probably only included Lebron if we are being strict but one could probably stretch it out to another handful of guys. 

Rondo is not on that list.  So obviously, the question of trading Rondo always comes back to what we would get for him?  No guarantees but would people trade Rondo for a top five pick this year? Not everyone would I suppose many I susptect might.

[Jailan34]

I have to agree that Rondo is not take seriously enough as a "franchise player". The guy is the best pure point in the league and his value always seems underestimated. He may not be the best scorer but his offense through passing and running the team are top flight and his defense can be extremely good as is his rebounding Any player who drops the games on Miami that Rondo has should get more consideration.

he is not the best pure PG in the league, Chris Paul is the best, Paul does just about everything on the floor better than Rondo except for rebound.  Rondo is a very good player but I don't consider him a franchise talent.  I guess we will see if DA thinks he is when his contract is up at the end of next season...

  I'd say Rondo does just about everything better than Paul other than score or defend (they're fairly equal). Paul's probably the best pg in the league but if he couldn't shoot or hit free throws any better than Rondo he'd be fairly mediocre IMO.

I guess we can disagree but if you go by their career numbers...Paul scores more, averages more assist, shoots better from the line and 3, turns it over less and the rebounding numbers are the same and Paul averages more steals... So I think Paul does just about everything better than Rondo.  Don't get me wrong, I like Rondo, he just isn't in Paul class...

  You can't really go by career numbers because Rondo took much more time to develop than Paul (hence the difference in their draft positions. Rondo's been the better rebounder in both the regular season and the playoffs. He's also gotten more assists over the last few years, both in the regular season and the playoffs. It's true that Paul turns the ball over less than Rondo, especially on passes. But that's pretty dependent on the way he's defended.

  Paul's man sticks with him and other defenders help out on covering him. Teams that defend against the Celts tend to stick closer to Rondo's teammates when he has the ball (playing him for the pass) and his teammate cheats off of him.  If Paul couldn't shoot or hit free throws any better than Rondo(my initial premise) he'd have a tougher time passing the ball to his teammates, having a harder time getting assists and turning the ball over more often.

But isnt that more of a knock on rondo? Paul demands more attention defensively than rondo because hes better than rondo at just about everything other than rebounding. I mean, this is basketball, to say if he couldnt shoot or defend he'd be average is a pretty silly thing to say. Paul CAN shoot and he CAN defend, thats what makes him great like any other great player.

[BballTim]

I have to agree that Rondo is not take seriously enough as a "franchise player". The guy is the best pure point in the league and his value always seems underestimated. He may not be the best scorer but his offense through passing and running the team are top flight and his defense can be extremely good as is his rebounding Any player who drops the games on Miami that Rondo has should get more consideration.

he is not the best pure PG in the league, Chris Paul is the best, Paul does just about everything on the floor better than Rondo except for rebound.  Rondo is a very good player but I don't consider him a franchise talent.  I guess we will see if DA thinks he is when his contract is up at the end of next season...

  I'd say Rondo does just about everything better than Paul other than score or defend (they're fairly equal). Paul's probably the best pg in the league but if he couldn't shoot or hit free throws any better than Rondo he'd be fairly mediocre IMO.

I guess we can disagree but if you go by their career numbers...Paul scores more, averages more assist, shoots better from the line and 3, turns it over less and the rebounding numbers are the same and Paul averages more steals... So I think Paul does just about everything better than Rondo.  Don't get me wrong, I like Rondo, he just isn't in Paul class...

  You can't really go by career numbers because Rondo took much more time to develop than Paul (hence the difference in their draft positions. Rondo's been the better rebounder in both the regular season and the playoffs. He's also gotten more assists over the last few years, both in the regular season and the playoffs. It's true that Paul turns the ball over less than Rondo, especially on passes. But that's pretty dependent on the way he's defended.

  Paul's man sticks with him and other defenders help out on covering him. Teams that defend against the Celts tend to stick closer to Rondo's teammates when he has the ball (playing him for the pass) and his teammate cheats off of him.  If Paul couldn't shoot or hit free throws any better than Rondo(my initial premise) he'd have a tougher time passing the ball to his teammates, having a harder time getting assists and turning the ball over more often.

But isnt that more of a knock on rondo? Paul demands more attention defensively than rondo because hes better than rondo at just about everything other than rebounding. I mean, this is basketball, to say if he couldnt shoot or defend he'd be average is a pretty silly thing to say. Paul CAN shoot and he CAN defend, thats what makes him great like any other great player.

  No, he's better than Rondo at scoring. Whether it's silly or not is in the eye of the beholder. It's pretty much the same argument you see in discussions about how well Rondo shoots. People claim he's a worse shooter than his stats claim because he'd shoot worse if he was defended differently. The same thought could apply to Paul's passing.

[D.o.s.]

Forget about franchise player.  The question is, how many guys in the league are untradeable because you cannot reallt get enough value back?  The list probably only included Lebron if we are being strict but one could probably stretch it out to another handful of guys. 

Rondo is not on that list.  So obviously, the question of trading Rondo always comes back to what we would get for him?  No guarantees but would people trade Rondo for a top five pick this year? Not everyone would I suppose many I susptect might.

Durant's on that list. Probably moreso than LeBron because of his age.

[timpiker]

DA would be crazy to trade Rondo because there's no way you get what he's worth.  I think Rondo stays.  And I think we've already got Love.  His name is Sully.  We need a dominant scoring center or a dominant scoring 3.