Predict what we will end up getting for Rondo

[Future Celtics Owner]

There's been too much smoke coming out of Sacramento for there to be no fire, in my opinion. I think that we're getting McLemore and a Brooklyn-esque, ultra-high-variance 1st rounder. The reason it hasn't happened yet is because they have to fix things with Detroit first.

Since they got Stauskus your probably right. I would have fathered traded Rondo draft night and selected Noah Vonleh. I just do not think Rondo should be traded for Mclemore and a future first. And I like Mclemore but do not think that is good enough for Rondo.

[BballTim]

A championship ring and a number nine jersey hanging in the rafters of the Garden.

  That's the hope, although selling him for pennies on the dollar so we can suck longer seems to be quite appealing to others.

Yeah? So, what is a fair return, in your opinion? Do you think the Wolves should hold onto Love because he could entice star FAs to come to Minny?

  Do you somehow think that Rondo's said the same things about leaving that Love has? Because that's not the case. I don't see "some players want to leave their teams so we need to unload Rondo for whatever we can get" as a well thought out strategy.

[timpiker]

Going young - can't get Love, didn't get Asik or Afflo....going young man.

[Casperian]

A championship ring and a number nine jersey hanging in the rafters of the Garden.

  That's the hope, although selling him for pennies on the dollar so we can suck longer seems to be quite appealing to others.

Yeah? So, what is a fair return, in your opinion? Do you think the Wolves should hold onto Love because he could entice star FAs to come to Minny?

Completely different scenarios.  Kevin Love has made it very clear that he has no desire to stay in Minnesota, while Rondo has repeatedly said that he would like to stay a Celtic.

Again, what is a fair return for Rondo, and why do you think we're not getting it for him? Until people answer those questions, this discussion is going nowhere.

Chris Paul, Russell Westbrook, Steph Curry, Damian Lillard . . .

I don't think we are getting those guys in return for Rondo, because I imagine that their respective teams are happy with their starting point guards.  Luckily, I also think Danny is happy with his.

That's not a fair return. Those guys are on long-term deals, while Rondo is in the last year of his contract. You can see that those are unrealistic expectations, right?

Would you rather see him walk for nothing?

Because we would turn into the laughing stock of the league if we lose our "star" PG for nothing. Let's hope we can win the lottery 3 times in 4 years like the Cavs did when they lost LeBron.

A championship ring and a number nine jersey hanging in the rafters of the Garden.

  That's the hope, although selling him for pennies on the dollar so we can suck longer seems to be quite appealing to others.

Yeah? So, what is a fair return, in your opinion? Do you think the Wolves should hold onto Love because he could entice star FAs to come to Minny?

  Do you somehow think that Rondo's said the same things about leaving that Love has? Because that's not the case. I don't see "some players want to leave their teams so we need to unload Rondo for whatever we can get" as a well thought out strategy.

That's not the point. I was speaking in hypotheticals, like everyone else. I though that was obvious.

Both Love and Rondo are in the last year of their contract. If you can't see the similarities, then I have to assume you don't want to see them, because of your affection for Rondo.

[BballTim]

 I guess the better question is what is the sell low price on rondo. I'm afraid it's a middle of the first round type deal coming. Slim pickings.

It would be better to risk letting him walk than to trade him for a mid first round pick.

No, certainly not.

Put it this way.  If there is a 50/50 chance of playing the season with Rondo and adding a player like Love next offseason vs. watching Rondo leaving as a free agent, do you take that risk?  Or do you trade the mid round pick for Rondo now?  I think you would have to take the risk.

So now two in the bush is better than one in the hand?

  It's more like two birds in the bush being worth more than the under-sized egg that probably won't hatch that you're holding.

[Kane3387]

Roll into the season with rondo and smart. Let it go from there.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=_RGeQKJpA7s

[Celtics18]

A championship ring and a number nine jersey hanging in the rafters of the Garden.

  That's the hope, although selling him for pennies on the dollar so we can suck longer seems to be quite appealing to others.

Yeah? So, what is a fair return, in your opinion? Do you think the Wolves should hold onto Love because he could entice star FAs to come to Minny?

Completely different scenarios.  Kevin Love has made it very clear that he has no desire to stay in Minnesota, while Rondo has repeatedly said that he would like to stay a Celtic.

Again, what is a fair return for Rondo, and why do you think we're not getting it for him? Until people answer those questions, this discussion is going nowhere.

Chris Paul, Russell Westbrook, Steph Curry, Damian Lillard . . .

I don't think we are getting those guys in return for Rondo, because I imagine that their respective teams are happy with their starting point guards.  Luckily, I also think Danny is happy with his.

That's not a fair return. Those guys are on long-term deals, while Rondo is in the last year of his contract. You can see that those are unrealistic expectations, right?

Would you rather see him walk for nothing?

Because we would turn into the laughing stock of the league if we'd lose our "star" PG for nothing. Let's hope we can win the lottery 3 times in 4 years like the Cavs did when they lost LeBron.

Sure, the possibility exists that we could lose our star PG for nothing if we don't trade him and he decides to walk away in free agency.  The possibility also exists that we could re-sign him and add pieces around him to facilitate speeding up the rebuild process.

If we trade him away now for unproven prospects and or mediocre draft picks, we are almost assured of a lengthy rebuilding process.  If we hold on to him, we at least have a shot at accelerating the rebuilding process and being back in contention sooner rather than later.

If we lose him in free agency, then our rebuild looks to be rather lengthy, but that would have been the case even if he trade him away for pennies on the dollar.  To me, it looks like trying to hold on to him is clearly the gamble worth taking. 

[rondohondo]

- We have smart on a rookie contract for 5 years. What is the rush to move rondo ?

- Why not let smart learn under him for a year ?

- What if we can clear enough money next year to sign Love outright without giving up anything ?  There's no chance of that happening if Rondo is gone .

- Smart could be a very good 6th man on a team with Love and Rondo .

- Rondo is still only 28 years old and the best passer in the league .

[Celtics18]

- We have smart on a rookie contract for 5 years. What is the rush to move rondo ?

- Why not let smart learn under him for a year ?

- What if we can clear enough money next year to sign Love outright without giving up anything ?  There's no chance of that happening if Rondo is gone .

- Smart could be a very good 6th man on a team with Love and Rondo .

- Rondo is still only 28 years old and the best passer in the league .

Haven't you read the news that's all over CelticsBlog? Rondo's already in his thirties. 

[Larry for 3]

There's been too much smoke coming out of Sacramento for there to be no fire, in my opinion. I think that we're getting McLemore and a Brooklyn-esque, ultra-high-variance 1st rounder. The reason it hasn't happened yet is because they have to fix things with Detroit first.

Since they got Stauskus your probably right. I would have fathered traded Rondo draft night and selected Noah Vonleh. I just do not think Rondo should be traded for Mclemore and a future first. And I like Mclemore but do not think that is good enough for Rondo.

That's the issue right there. People have this expectation and belief that Rondo is worth so much. He's not.  Most teams in the NBA are all set with their point guard situation. And the few that aren't are not going going to give a "haul" for a guy who's contact is up coming off a torn acl. They can just try to sign him 2015 or draft someone else. I know that's hard for people to get because they think this guy is a top player. But think for a second, if Danny had got a good offer RR would be gone by now IMO. RR is worth more to the Celtics than to other teams.
    Now if RR comes back this season healthy and playing better than maybe he might have more value but who's going to trade for 2 months of RR and give what Celtics blog thinks he's worth?  It's not adding up more me, people need to take emotion out of it, hard yes. That's why the Kings for Macklemore or Stauskus and a first seems right. Take a step back------ was anybody else surprised the Kings took Staukus @ 8?   I was and the first thing i thought of was Rondo for Staukus.  That pick made no sense, unless they were picking for Boston or it's Mcklemore who goes.  Maybe I'm crazy, but sometimes the pieces can be put together especially after the Wojo confirmed C's -  Kings rumor.  May never happen-- but I can totally see it,

[knuckleballer]

A three way trade between the Celtics, Kings, and Pistons could still happen.  Something similar to what Simmons suggested.   http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/celtics/post/_/id/4713486/could-smith-lead-to-rondo-for-kings

[Casperian]

Sure, the possibility exists that we could lose our star PG for nothing if we don't trade him and he decides to walk away in free agency.  The possibility also exists that we could re-sign him and add pieces around him to facilitate speeding up the rebuild process.

If we trade him away now for unproven prospects and or mediocre draft picks, we are almost assured of a lengthy rebuilding process.  If we hold on to him, we at least have a shot at accelerating the rebuilding process and being back in contention sooner rather than later.

If we lose him in free agency, then our rebuild looks to be rather lengthy, but that would have been the case even if he trade him away for pennies on the dollar.  To me, it looks like trying to hold on to him is clearly the gamble worth taking.

So, to recap:

Your strategy is built on the hope that, somehow, the rules of the business don't apply for Rondo and our Celtics, that he'd rather play for the (currently) struggling home team than play for a championship while still in his prime, correct? That's your prerogative, but excuse me if that's not enough for me to buy into. I think that straw hut you're building there is not enough to scare the big, bad wolf.

At least we both agree that it's a gamble, one you think is worth taking, and I think is too steep a price to pay if we lose.

[BballTim]

Sure, the possibility exists that we could lose our star PG for nothing if we don't trade him and he decides to walk away in free agency.  The possibility also exists that we could re-sign him and add pieces around him to facilitate speeding up the rebuild process.

If we trade him away now for unproven prospects and or mediocre draft picks, we are almost assured of a lengthy rebuilding process.  If we hold on to him, we at least have a shot at accelerating the rebuilding process and being back in contention sooner rather than later.

If we lose him in free agency, then our rebuild looks to be rather lengthy, but that would have been the case even if he trade him away for pennies on the dollar.  To me, it looks like trying to hold on to him is clearly the gamble worth taking.

So, to recap:

Your strategy is built on the hope that, somehow, the rules of the business don't apply for Rondo and our Celtics, that he'd rather play for the struggling home team than play for a championship while still in his prime, correct? That's your prerogative, but excuse me if that's not enough for me to buy into. I think that straw hut you're building there is not enough to scare the big, bad wolf.

At least we both agree that it's a gamble, one you think is worth taking, and I think is too steep a price to pay if we lose.

  Why don't you start listing all the players in the league that would rather play for a struggling team than a contender. We should concentrate on acquiring them and then we won't run into this dilemma for the foreseeable future.

[LooseCannon]

That's why the Kings for Macklemore or Stauskus and a first seems right. Take a step back------ was anybody else surprised the Kings took Staukus @ 8?   I was and the first thing i thought of was Rondo for Staukus.  That pick made no sense, unless they were picking for Boston or it's Mcklemore who goes.  Maybe I'm crazy, but sometimes the pieces can be put together especially after the Wojo confirmed C's -  Kings rumor.  May never happen-- but I can totally see it,

The Stauskas pick makes sense.  One of Sacramento's biggest needs is three-point shooting. 

I have a suspicion that the Kings were specifically interested in either Gordon or Embiid at #6 and the possibility of a trade evaporated when those guys were taken.

[Celtics18]

Sure, the possibility exists that we could lose our star PG for nothing if we don't trade him and he decides to walk away in free agency.  The possibility also exists that we could re-sign him and add pieces around him to facilitate speeding up the rebuild process.

If we trade him away now for unproven prospects and or mediocre draft picks, we are almost assured of a lengthy rebuilding process.  If we hold on to him, we at least have a shot at accelerating the rebuilding process and being back in contention sooner rather than later.

If we lose him in free agency, then our rebuild looks to be rather lengthy, but that would have been the case even if he trade him away for pennies on the dollar.  To me, it looks like trying to hold on to him is clearly the gamble worth taking.

So, to recap:

Your strategy is built on the hope that, somehow, the rules of the business don't apply for Rondo and our Celtics, that he'd rather play for the (currently) struggling home team than play for a championship while still in his prime, correct? That's your prerogative, but excuse me if that's not enough for me to buy into. I think that straw hut you're building there is not enough to scare the big, bad wolf.

At least we both agree that it's a gamble, one you think is worth taking, and I think is too steep a price to pay if we lose.

Of course it's a gamble.  There's no play from where this team is right now that's a sure thing. 

Would you agree that trading Rondo away for a future pick or two and some prospects represents a gamble, or do you see that as an airtight formula for banner number 18?