Rondo for Lawson and #11

[Kane3387]

Not a huge Lawson fan.

Wonder if we could then flip Lawson to la or Sacramento for pick 7 or 8 and filler?

Build around nothing but rookie deals.

[kozlodoev]

Not a huge Lawson fan.

Wonder if we could then flip Lawson to la or Sacramento for pick 7 or 8 and filler?

Build around nothing but rookie deals.

Don't think it's a very good idea.

[Evantime34]

Not a huge Lawson fan.

Wonder if we could then flip Lawson to la or Sacramento for pick 7 or 8 and filler?

Build around nothing but rookie deals.

I do not want us going full rebuild mode, but if we are, rebuilding with 8 and 11 for Rondo wouldn't be a terrible way to start. With that many lotto picks I bet we could move into the top 4 and have another pick to spare

[gpap]

Let's try to get as many draft picks as possible.

Find out what the record is for the most amount of picks a team has ever had at one time and then break that record

[moiso]

Not a huge Lawson fan.

Wonder if we could then flip Lawson to la or Sacramento for pick 7 or 8 and filler?

Build around nothing but rookie deals.

I do not want us going full rebuild mode, but if we are, rebuilding with 8 and 11 for Rondo wouldn't be a terrible way to start. With that many lotto picks I bet we could move into the top 4 and have another pick to spare

We've been in full rebuild mode since we traded Paul and KG as far as I'm concerned.  Which doesn't mean Danny gives away Rondo and Green for pennies on the dollar.  If adequate offers were made to Ainge those guys would have been gone last season.

[celticsfan8591]

seems about right.   I think we'd be lucky to get a Top 10 pick for Rondo.  #11 + Lawson makes sense.

  Danny's asking price was supposedly a young emerging star and a draft pick or a couple of unprotected draft picks. I think "we'd be lucky to get a top 10 pick for him" is fairly far-fetched. As for this trade though, what's the point? We get a lesser pg who's almost Rondo's age and has a fairly large salary and a pick that's likely to yield a rotation level player or borderline starter.

You never know what a pick is going to yield. I'd be the devil's advocate here and argue that Lawson will be easier to build with, as he's the more conventional player of the two (has three point range and can score in a pinch).

I agree with this.  I wouldn't trade Rondo for Lawson straight up because he's just a better player but the talent difference is somewhat offset by the additional flexibility you get with Lawson.  Also, in addition to being a bit younger, Lawson's game will probably age better since he can actually make shots.  Once Rondo's quickness goes his effectiveness is going to fall off a cliff.  I don't think it's far fetched to say that Lawson will be a better player in 5 years, and that's  when we're likely to be a contender.

  Rondo's game will age better because so much of it is based on a high bbiq, great court vision and great passing skills. Lawson's game is much more likely to fall off a cliff than Rondo's. If Rondo couldn't get by without his quickness he never would have been able to put up decent numbers when he was recovering from knee surgery.

His superficial stats were decent but his efficiency/advanced stats declined pretty sharply.  Rondo's a genius, but if you can't shoot or get by people off the dribble, you just aren't going to be a very effective offensive player.  Rondo's win shares/48 minutes ranked 323rd out of 482 guys who played in the NBA this season.

[BballTim]

I'll never understand the desire to downgrade somewhat at PG and get one extra asset in these trades.

I'm not eager, but at some point you have to consider it, having in mind how long the list of requirements for players that supposedly should fit well with Rondo is getting.

  "Good players" seems to pretty much cover it. The requirements for a team that won't fit well with Rondo is narrower.

  I know people get excited about the assumption that better scoring point guards who aren't really good distributors would be more effective on a team with bad scorers but I'm less interested in trying to build a contender comprised of 4 bad scorers and a volume scoring pg than many people seem to be.

[pearljammer10]

Not a huge Lawson fan.

Wonder if we could then flip Lawson to la or Sacramento for pick 7 or 8 and filler?

Build around nothing but rookie deals.

I do not want us going full rebuild mode, but if we are, rebuilding with 8 and 11 for Rondo wouldn't be a terrible way to start. With that many lotto picks I bet we could move into the top 4 and have another pick to spare

We've been in full rebuild mode since we traded Paul and KG as far as I'm concerned.  Which doesn't mean Danny gives away Rondo and Green for pennies on the dollar.  If adequate offers were made to Ainge those guys would have been gone last season.

Just because we are in rebuild mode doesn't mean we should try to start and collect as many in-experienced rookies as possible. How many championship teams in the last however many years were build on just drafted players? The answer isn't hard to come up with.

[BballTim]

seems about right.   I think we'd be lucky to get a Top 10 pick for Rondo.  #11 + Lawson makes sense.

  Danny's asking price was supposedly a young emerging star and a draft pick or a couple of unprotected draft picks. I think "we'd be lucky to get a top 10 pick for him" is fairly far-fetched. As for this trade though, what's the point? We get a lesser pg who's almost Rondo's age and has a fairly large salary and a pick that's likely to yield a rotation level player or borderline starter.

You never know what a pick is going to yield. I'd be the devil's advocate here and argue that Lawson will be easier to build with, as he's the more conventional player of the two (has three point range and can score in a pinch).

I agree with this.  I wouldn't trade Rondo for Lawson straight up because he's just a better player but the talent difference is somewhat offset by the additional flexibility you get with Lawson.  Also, in addition to being a bit younger, Lawson's game will probably age better since he can actually make shots.  Once Rondo's quickness goes his effectiveness is going to fall off a cliff.  I don't think it's far fetched to say that Lawson will be a better player in 5 years, and that's  when we're likely to be a contender.

  Rondo's game will age better because so much of it is based on a high bbiq, great court vision and great passing skills. Lawson's game is much more likely to fall off a cliff than Rondo's. If Rondo couldn't get by without his quickness he never would have been able to put up decent numbers when he was recovering from knee surgery.

His superficial stats were decent but his efficiency/advanced stats declined pretty sharply.  Rondo's a genius, but if you can't shoot or get by people off the dribble, you just aren't going to be a very effective offensive player.  Rondo's win shares/48 minutes ranked 323rd out of 482 guys who played in the NBA this season.

  His scoring was fairly inefficient, I don't think the assists (or the assist opportunities) are at all superficial. Despite all the obstacles this year (coming back in mid-season from a serious injury to a team that's floundering with many new teammates) he was still second in the league in points created by assists a game and the team still scored much more efficiently off of passes from Rondo than other opportunities. You're assuming that scoring is the only way to be an effective offensive player. That's not really the case.

[LooseCannon]

While I don't think having a point guard as one of your core stars is an impediment to a championship the way some people insist, I am a bit more skeptical of having your point guard as your go-to scorer.

[CFAN38]

I think this is a good base line for Rondo's market value.

If Love trade doesn't happen this is a decent 1st move toward a total rebuild. Lawson and Smart compliment each other much better then Rondo and Smart. Lawson is a superior outside shooter to Rondo. I do have reservations about his contract. particularly the length. With the #11 I would expect the targets to be Saric or Nurkic.

A similar trade could be something built around Isiah Thomas and #8, he is also a better shooting PG.

A Rondo trade would then logically lead to a Green trade. I like the idea that was brought up of trading Green for Prince and #22.

These two trades would leave the Cs with #6,#11,#17 and #22.

[BballTim]

no, Rondo is worth at least a top 5 pick in my honest opinion, maybe I am overrating him, but I think we can get more value than Lawson + 11

Yah you are. Lawson + 11 is a good haul for Rondo

Agreed.

I really don't want to trade Rondo at all, but this is about as good as you would get and it's nothing to sneeze at. Maybe Ainge could get a small sweetner added by I'm not sure.

Lawson just came off a 17.6 points, 8.8 assists, and 1.6 steals season and is only 26. Locked up for a long time and one of the fastest guards in the league.

I wouldn't be able to get behind this trade. Lawson puts up some decent numbers but he is not a championship caliber point guard. Him and whoever we pick at 11 just puts us in mediocrity for 4 to 5 years and then we'll have to just rebuild all over again. Don't like it.

you mean championship caliber PG's like Mario Chalmers, Steve Kerr, Derek Fisher, etc.

  Yeah, all we need to do is get the kind of star players those PGs had and we're all set.

[BballTim]

I think this is a good base line for Rondo's market value.

If Love trade doesn't happen this is a decent 1st move toward a total rebuild. Lawson and Smart compliment each other much better then Rondo and Smart. Lawson is a superior outside shooter to Rondo. I do have reservations about his contract. particularly the length. With the #11 I would expect the targets to be Saric or Nurkic.

A similar trade could be something built around Isiah Thomas and #8, he is also a better shooting PG.

A Rondo trade would then logically lead to a Green trade. I like the idea that was brought up of trading Green for Prince and #22.

These two trades would leave the Cs with #6,#11,#17 and #22.

  The Kings were supposedly preparing to offer Thomas, McLemore, their pick and possibly a future pick for Rondo before they found out he wasn't interested in playing there. This trade seems like a solid step down from there, as does your other proposal. The #22 probably isn't worth the downgrade from Green to Prince IMO.

[Irish Stew]

This is a trade that I would certainly consider if the Love trade doesn't materialize. Most of the posts have talked about whether we should do the deal with Denver. However, the deal is so close to equal value that I wonder if Denver would do it. They lose two years in age but gain a unique point guard that fills up a stat page. The problem is that this draft is loaded with talented 3s and that is exactly what they need right now. I think that they probably pass.

[gpap]

This is a trade that I would certainly consider if the Love trade doesn't materialize. Most of the posts have talked about whether we should do the deal with Denver. However, the deal is so close to equal value that I wonder if Denver would do it. They lose two years in age but gain a unique point guard that fills up a stat page. The problem is that this draft is loaded with talented 3s and that is exactly what they need right now. I think that they probably pass.

CelticsBlog has got me stumped on what Rondo's trade value is.

Some think we should be able to land a legit star like Paul George or James Harden in exchange for Rondo and some think we can't even land Ty Lawson for him (lol.)

Guess if we're dealing Rondo, we are getting some kind of return ranging from Lebron to the guy mopping the floors for the Staples Center.