What can the Kings offer for Rondo??

[Aymanelgowainy]

With news that we r the first team calling Thonas, its pretty clear a Rondo to Sacto deal is in place... So what would the deal be? What do they have to offer?
Would the deal be centered around Mclemore and Thomas? Would Stauskas be imcluded? Would they be willing to take back wallace?? So many questions!

But anyway my best case scenario for a rondo to sacto trade would be
Rondo for Thomas (S&T-$7m), Mclemore, and a future unprotected pick..
Im sure Ainge would try to squeeze stauskas out of the deal as well but idk what we would do with Smart,Young,Thomas,Mclemore,Stauskas,Pressey,AB in a backcourt...but u can never have enough young talent...but overall id like to see the trade worked around a Thomas S&T as well as Mclemore and another additional young piece (Stauskas or unprotected first)

[Future Celtics Owner]

Many people on here scoffed at the idea of trading Rondo and dumping Wallace's contract 4 Thomas, Mclemore, the pick(which ended up being Stauskus), thornton, and etc.

[Future Celtics Owner]

Many people on here scoffed at the idea of trading Rondo and dumping Wallace's contract 4 Thomas, Mclemore, the pick(which ended up being Stauskus), thornton, and etc.

Also i do not think Rondo would have changed the outcome of the pick by much or at all.

[CelticBalla32]

I personally have never really been all that excited about what the Kings would offer for Rondo. I like Isiah Thomas, I like Stauskas, McLemore still has time to turn into an impact player but I think the Celtics would be better off waiting until the trade deadline. That way everyone gets a look at a healthy (knock on wood) Rondo, and I have no doubt in my mind he still has some elite basketball ahead of him.

[saltlover]

Many people on here scoffed at the idea of trading Rondo and dumping Wallace's contract 4 Thomas, Mclemore, the pick(which ended up being Stauskus), thornton, and etc.

That's fine and all, but the Celtics could not have gotten Sacramento's pick in December without giving back the Brooklyn pick in return, and may have not gotten the pick at all.  Sacramento owes a protected pick (then to Cleveland, now to Chicago after the Deng trade), which could have conveyed this year.  If it did, the Celtics would have not received any pick from Sacramento this year for Rondo, and would have received nothing until 2016.  If they did wind up with still the #8 pick (or anything top 12 I believe), the Celtics only would have been able to receive the pick if they swapped 1sts, since Sacramento would have been required to have a first in this draft, since they may not next draft.  The rumored proposal of Rondo for a package including Sacramento's 2014 1st was never as good as it sounded, because there were real problems with the availability of that pick.

[pokeKingCurtis]

If you're going for the full rebuild, why dilute Rondo's value with Gerald Wallace's contract? Why are people so eager to dump Wallace?

[clover]

If you're going for the full rebuild, why dilute Rondo's value with Gerald Wallace's contract? Why are people so eager to dump Wallace?

I agree. Wallace is fine on this team. If a SF goes, it is more likely Green, for whom they might be able to get something rather than have to give something.

[clover]

Many people on here scoffed at the idea of trading Rondo and dumping Wallace's contract 4 Thomas, Mclemore, the pick(which ended up being Stauskus), thornton, and etc.

That's fine and all, but the Celtics could not have gotten Sacramento's pick in December without giving back the Brooklyn pick in return, and may have not gotten the pick at all.  Sacramento owes a protected pick (then to Cleveland, now to Chicago after the Deng trade), which could have conveyed this year.  If it did, the Celtics would have not received any pick from Sacramento this year for Rondo, and would have received nothing until 2016.  If they did wind up with still the #8 pick (or anything top 12 I believe), the Celtics only would have been able to receive the pick if they swapped 1sts, since Sacramento would have been required to have a first in this draft, since they may not next draft.  The rumored proposal of Rondo for a package including Sacramento's 2014 1st was never as good as it sounded, because there were real problems with the availability of that pick.

I don't think that's accurate. Sacro could have simply picked at #8 for the C's, then included that player in an official trade. Also, I think Sacro would have given more than you think for Rondo.

[Eddie20]

Many people on here scoffed at the idea of trading Rondo and dumping Wallace's contract 4 Thomas, Mclemore, the pick(which ended up being Stauskus), thornton, and etc.

That's fine and all, but the Celtics could not have gotten Sacramento's pick in December without giving back the Brooklyn pick in return, and may have not gotten the pick at all.  Sacramento owes a protected pick (then to Cleveland, now to Chicago after the Deng trade), which could have conveyed this year.  If it did, the Celtics would have not received any pick from Sacramento this year for Rondo, and would have received nothing until 2016.  If they did wind up with still the #8 pick (or anything top 12 I believe), the Celtics only would have been able to receive the pick if they swapped 1sts, since Sacramento would have been required to have a first in this draft, since they may not next draft.  The rumored proposal of Rondo for a package including Sacramento's 2014 1st was never as good as it sounded, because there were real problems with the availability of that pick.

I don't think that's accurate. Sacro could have simply picked at #8 for the C's, then included that player in an official trade. Also, I think Sacro would have given more than you think for Rondo.

It actually is true. If the trade were made during the season the Kings 2014 pick couldn't have been included. In addition, during the draft Thomas couldn't be packaged in a potential deal, so waiting after July 1 to collect all our targets makes the most sense. Wouldn't be surprised in the least if that Stauskas pick was made on our behalf.

As for what the Kings can offer...they have Thomas and McLemore, both who we have interest in. They also have Stauskas, who we worked out and were interested in as well. They also have the ability to provide cap relief (i.e. expiring contracts) and take on Wallace's deal.

[Nef-Oracle]

The best they can offer is Thomas, McLemore & two picks. If they do then acquire J-Smoove they'll have a lineup of Rondo-Stauskas-Gay-Smoove-DMC
So i think it's what they'll offer for him.

[Endless Paradise]

If you're going for the full rebuild, why dilute Rondo's value with Gerald Wallace's contract? Why are people so eager to dump Wallace?

Yeah, I don't think people quite grasp that when you try to include a contract dump in a trade, it inherently decreases the value of the assets you're dealing.

[gpap]

If the Kings want Rondo, deal us Cousins.

Otherwise, no deal.

[Chris]

This is something I have been thinking about for days.  The problem with Sacramento is that it is really hard for them to trade a future draft pick, since they owe a protected one to another team (Chicago I think?), which complicates things a lot.  There may be a way around it, but realistically, they can't trade a pick until 2019.  What the C's could do is set up pick swaps I suppose.

But including Wallace could make a lot of sense.  I don't think Thomas and either McLemore or Stauskas is enough for Rondo, but if you include a swap of expirings for Wallace, then it makes more sense.

[Endless Paradise]

I think "if x team wants Rondo, they need to trade us their best player or no deal" is a particularly disingenuous way of approaching the trade market.

[celticsfan8591]

I think "if x team wants Rondo, they need to trade us their best player or no deal" is a particularly disingenuous way of approaching the trade market.

Especially when that player is all but untouchable.