Would you like to see Rondo get traded?

[D.o.s.]

I voted yes. I don't think Rondo can be your best player if you want to be a contender.

If we got Parsons, Jones and 2 picks (throw in Asik or Lin to make the salaries work), I'd be happy. I don't know why the rockets are hesitant to include CP in the deal. Rondo as their #3 pretty much solidifies their status as a true contender.

I also kinda liked that Kings deal (Mclemore, Thomas and 2 picks) to be honest.

Yes, but Rondo has already been the best player on a contender . . . twice.  This actually happened.

  Agreed.

Making him 0-2 as the best player on the team when it comes to winning a ring?

What does that mean exactly? LeBron was 0-2 before he made his super team or was it 0-3... pfft I can't remember.

Meaning that we should hold onto Rondo simply because he has been the best player on a title contender (I don't agree with that distinction, by the way), is silly.

I absolutely wouldn't trade him for that Rockets package, though.

[BballTim]

I voted yes. I don't think Rondo can be your best player if you want to be a contender.

If we got Parsons, Jones and 2 picks (throw in Asik or Lin to make the salaries work), I'd be happy. I don't know why the rockets are hesitant to include CP in the deal. Rondo as their #3 pretty much solidifies their status as a true contender.

I also kinda liked that Kings deal (Mclemore, Thomas and 2 picks) to be honest.

Yes, but Rondo has already been the best player on a contender . . . twice.  This actually happened.

  Agreed.

Making him 0-2 as the best player on the team when it comes to winning a ring?

  Sure. For reference, though, LeBron was pitching an Ofer at the age Rondo was in 2012, so was MJ. Expecting more from Rondo than you would from those two is a little over the top. I know it seems shocking to you that he hadn't led a team to a title by the time he was 26 but it's more common than you imagine.

[BballTim]

I voted yes. I don't think Rondo can be your best player if you want to be a contender.

If we got Parsons, Jones and 2 picks (throw in Asik or Lin to make the salaries work), I'd be happy. I don't know why the rockets are hesitant to include CP in the deal. Rondo as their #3 pretty much solidifies their status as a true contender.

I also kinda liked that Kings deal (Mclemore, Thomas and 2 picks) to be honest.

Yes, but Rondo has already been the best player on a contender . . . twice.  This actually happened.

  Agreed.

Making him 0-2 as the best player on the team when it comes to winning a ring?

What does that mean exactly? LeBron was 0-2 before he made his super team or was it 0-3... pfft I can't remember.

Meaning that we should hold onto Rondo simply because he has been the best player on a title contender (I don't agree with that distinction, by the way), is silly.

  Holding on to Rondo because he's been the best player on a title contender may be silly, but trading him for pieces that you aren't confident will be best players on contenders is pretty foolish unless you already have such a player on your roster.

[Celtics18]

I voted yes. I don't think Rondo can be your best player if you want to be a contender.

If we got Parsons, Jones and 2 picks (throw in Asik or Lin to make the salaries work), I'd be happy. I don't know why the rockets are hesitant to include CP in the deal. Rondo as their #3 pretty much solidifies their status as a true contender.

I also kinda liked that Kings deal (Mclemore, Thomas and 2 picks) to be honest.

Yes, but Rondo has already been the best player on a contender . . . twice.  This actually happened.

  Agreed.

Making him 0-2 as the best player on the team when it comes to winning a ring?

What does that mean exactly? LeBron was 0-2 before he made his super team or was it 0-3... pfft I can't remember.

Meaning that we should hold onto Rondo simply because he has been the best player on a title contender (I don't agree with that distinction, by the way), is silly.

I absolutely wouldn't trade him for that Rockets package, though.

You're getting ridiculous.  Some posters are making the claim that we can't be a contender with Rondo as our best player, and, therefore, it would make sense to trade him.

I simply pointed out that he's already been the best player on a contender.  I wasn't making any claims beyond that. 

Whatever verbal game of twister you are playing is getting fairly silly.

[rondofan1255]

trading him is risky - we might get what Deron Williams netted and have it not work out all that well. Anthony is a similar story, and Chris Paul's return hasn't amounted to much.

however, for the sake of tanking this year, trading him has some advantages. I don't want to see a desperation trade like the Harden one though

[LarBrd33]

I voted yes. I don't think Rondo can be your best player if you want to be a contender.

If we got Parsons, Jones and 2 picks (throw in Asik or Lin to make the salaries work), I'd be happy. I don't know why the rockets are hesitant to include CP in the deal. Rondo as their #3 pretty much solidifies their status as a true contender.

I also kinda liked that Kings deal (Mclemore, Thomas and 2 picks) to be honest.

Yes, but Rondo has already been the best player on a contender . . . twice.  This actually happened.

  Agreed.

Making him 0-2 as the best player on the team when it comes to winning a ring?

What does that mean exactly? LeBron was 0-2 before he made his super team or was it 0-3... pfft I can't remember.

Meaning that we should hold onto Rondo simply because he has been the best player on a title contender (I don't agree with that distinction, by the way), is silly.

I absolutely wouldn't trade him for that Rockets package, though.

You're getting ridiculous.  Some posters are making the claim that we can't be a contender with Rondo as our best player, and, therefore, it would make sense to trade him.

I simply pointed out that he's already been the best player on a contender.  I wasn't making any claims beyond that. 

Whatever verbal game of twister you are playing is getting fairly silly.

If Rondo is still a Celtic an hour from now... and we haven't made a single move.  It means Ainge is confident we'll be a bottom 5 team regardless of whether or not we make a move.

Btw... that's the best-case scenario.  Keeping our assets and still bottoming out.

[D.o.s.]

I voted yes. I don't think Rondo can be your best player if you want to be a contender.

If we got Parsons, Jones and 2 picks (throw in Asik or Lin to make the salaries work), I'd be happy. I don't know why the rockets are hesitant to include CP in the deal. Rondo as their #3 pretty much solidifies their status as a true contender.

I also kinda liked that Kings deal (Mclemore, Thomas and 2 picks) to be honest.

Yes, but Rondo has already been the best player on a contender . . . twice.  This actually happened.

  Agreed.

Making him 0-2 as the best player on the team when it comes to winning a ring?

What does that mean exactly? LeBron was 0-2 before he made his super team or was it 0-3... pfft I can't remember.

Meaning that we should hold onto Rondo simply because he has been the best player on a title contender (I don't agree with that distinction, by the way), is silly.

  Holding on to Rondo because he's been the best player on a title contender may be silly, but trading him for pieces that you aren't confident will be best players on contenders is pretty foolish unless you already have such a player on your roster.

I agreed with that in the part you left out of the quote. 

Whatever verbal game of twister you are playing is getting fairly silly.

It's not a verbal game of twister at all - I just expect sports fans to be literate.

Maybe that's an unrealistic expectation.

[BballTim]

I voted yes. I don't think Rondo can be your best player if you want to be a contender.

If we got Parsons, Jones and 2 picks (throw in Asik or Lin to make the salaries work), I'd be happy. I don't know why the rockets are hesitant to include CP in the deal. Rondo as their #3 pretty much solidifies their status as a true contender.

I also kinda liked that Kings deal (Mclemore, Thomas and 2 picks) to be honest.

Yes, but Rondo has already been the best player on a contender . . . twice.  This actually happened.

  Agreed.

Making him 0-2 as the best player on the team when it comes to winning a ring?

What does that mean exactly? LeBron was 0-2 before he made his super team or was it 0-3... pfft I can't remember.

Meaning that we should hold onto Rondo simply because he has been the best player on a title contender (I don't agree with that distinction, by the way), is silly.

  Holding on to Rondo because he's been the best player on a title contender may be silly, but trading him for pieces that you aren't confident will be best players on contenders is pretty foolish unless you already have such a player on your roster.

I agreed with that in the part you left out of the quote. 

  You agreed that we shouldn't trade Rondo unless we're getting a player in return that's pretty likely to be the best player on a contender? I must have misunderstood the rest of your quote. Sorry.

[Celtics18]

I voted yes. I don't think Rondo can be your best player if you want to be a contender.

If we got Parsons, Jones and 2 picks (throw in Asik or Lin to make the salaries work), I'd be happy. I don't know why the rockets are hesitant to include CP in the deal. Rondo as their #3 pretty much solidifies their status as a true contender.

I also kinda liked that Kings deal (Mclemore, Thomas and 2 picks) to be honest.

Yes, but Rondo has already been the best player on a contender . . . twice.  This actually happened.

  Agreed.

Making him 0-2 as the best player on the team when it comes to winning a ring?

What does that mean exactly? LeBron was 0-2 before he made his super team or was it 0-3... pfft I can't remember.

Meaning that we should hold onto Rondo simply because he has been the best player on a title contender (I don't agree with that distinction, by the way), is silly.

  Holding on to Rondo because he's been the best player on a title contender may be silly, but trading him for pieces that you aren't confident will be best players on contenders is pretty foolish unless you already have such a player on your roster.

I agreed with that in the part you left out of the quote. 

Whatever verbal game of twister you are playing is getting fairly silly.

It's not a verbal game of twister at all - I just expect sports fans to be literate.

Maybe that's an unrealistic expectation.

You don't make any sense.  Now, of course, I realize this is probably due to your highly superior intelligence, and the fact that the members of the illiterate masses like myself don't understand your advanced level of mental sophistication.

Now I think I'll go drool all over myself.   

[D.o.s.]

 


You can say "Rondo's been the best player on a championship contender already" but if you ignore the fact that he hasn't won anything as the best player on a championship team (unlike LeBron, or MJ), it rings a little hollow.

Especially if that's the only reason you're giving for not trading him. Go read the discussion between Bball tim and me (not I) for some more detail. It's right here in this thread.

Also, FWIW, literacy has little to do with intelligence.

[mmmmm]

I voted yes. I don't think Rondo can be your best player if you want to be a contender.

If we got Parsons, Jones and 2 picks (throw in Asik or Lin to make the salaries work), I'd be happy. I don't know why the rockets are hesitant to include CP in the deal. Rondo as their #3 pretty much solidifies their status as a true contender.

I also kinda liked that Kings deal (Mclemore, Thomas and 2 picks) to be honest.

Yes, but Rondo has already been the best player on a contender . . . twice.  This actually happened.

  Agreed.

Making him 0-2 as the best player on the team when it comes to winning a ring?

What does that mean exactly? LeBron was 0-2 before he made his super team or was it 0-3... pfft I can't remember.

Meaning that we should hold onto Rondo simply because he has been the best player on a title contender (I don't agree with that distinction, by the way), is silly.

I absolutely wouldn't trade him for that Rockets package, though.

You're getting ridiculous.  Some posters are making the claim that we can't be a contender with Rondo as our best player, and, therefore, it would make sense to trade him.

I simply pointed out that he's already been the best player on a contender.  I wasn't making any claims beyond that. 

Whatever verbal game of twister you are playing is getting fairly silly.

If Rondo is still a Celtic an hour from now... and we haven't made a single move.  It means Ainge is confident we'll be a bottom 5 team regardless of whether or not we make a move.

Btw... that's the best-case scenario.  Keeping our assets and still bottoming out.

Umm ... no, that's not what it means.

It means he didn't get an offer that made sense to act on.

I honestly don't think Ainge cares where in this draft we end up.  It simply doesn't matter to the larger goal of getting back to a title.

[Tr1boy]

I voted yes. I don't think Rondo can be your best player if you want to be a contender.

If we got Parsons, Jones and 2 picks (throw in Asik or Lin to make the salaries work), I'd be happy. I don't know why the rockets are hesitant to include CP in the deal. Rondo as their #3 pretty much solidifies their status as a true contender.

I also kinda liked that Kings deal (Mclemore, Thomas and 2 picks) to be honest.

Yes, but Rondo has already been the best player on a contender . . . twice.  This actually happened.

  Agreed.

Making him 0-2 as the best player on the team when it comes to winning a ring?

What does that mean exactly? LeBron was 0-2 before he made his super team or was it 0-3... pfft I can't remember.

Meaning that we should hold onto Rondo simply because he has been the best player on a title contender (I don't agree with that distinction, by the way), is silly.

I absolutely wouldn't trade him for that Rockets package, though.

You're getting ridiculous.  Some posters are making the claim that we can't be a contender with Rondo as our best player, and, therefore, it would make sense to trade him.

I simply pointed out that he's already been the best player on a contender.  I wasn't making any claims beyond that. 

Whatever verbal game of twister you are playing is getting fairly silly.

If Rondo is still a Celtic an hour from now... and we haven't made a single move.  It means Ainge is confident we'll be a bottom 5 team regardless of whether or not we make a move.

Btw... that's the best-case scenario.  Keeping our assets and still bottoming out.

+1. We will prob not win another game with RR starting this year.

Then trade him at the draft for another nice pick would be genius

[Fafnir]

Locked.