What can the Kings offer for Rondo??

[Fafnir]

A lot of stuff I'm not enthused about. Not a huge Thomas fan, man going from Rondo to him would be an extreme style change at pg.

[Fafnir]

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.

Its a way of ending the conversation. When the Mavs called about Rondo we asked for Dirk as Dallas had nothing else worth much to us.

Kings have more, though the pick owed to Chicago dampens potential returns quite a bit.

[slamtheking]

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.

not a fan of this deal by any means since none of these players will sniff an all-star level career but if they're shipping out Wallace with Rondo to Sac (still don't see this as inevitable) for IT, Mclemore and Stauskas, Sac has to include their next available first rounder in the deal (and preferably remove the top 55 protection on the second rounders they owe us for those prior salary dumps we worked out with them).

[AB_Celtic]

Could a third team be getting involved maybe? Kings have assets, but they're redundant with our assets.

[CFAN38]

I have never had really high Rondo trade expectations as of late.

I think what a team like the Kings will offer the Cs is marginal young talents (thomas.mclemore), unprotected 1st, and they will tale on wallace's deal.

Im not sure how it works under the CBA but I wouldn't mind seeing the Kings make the $$ work by signing Grey to a Bogans like deal. Over pay him but make it non guaranteed for multiple years. This create a valuable trade asset. 

[Boris Badenov]

Another wrinkle to this: the Stauskas pick was a puzzle for SAC at the time. Stauskas projected lower and overlaps with McLemore.

But if SAC picked Stauskas for Danny it might make more sense.

In which case we could be moving Smart + another piece (Bass?) for Stauskas and Thomas.

Or, we could be moving Rondo for Thomas and Stauskas (plus another piece I would hope).

[Gainesville Celtic]

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.

This is right --- unless the team taking the bad contracts is desperate/motivated to get the asset (which SAC might be for Rondo).

BTW, Bulpett (i think) said yesterday that the Cs would be more likely to let Rondo just walk than accept bad contracts or far inferior talent back.

Rondo + Wallace = $23.014M

That means you have to take back at least ~$19M. Is this really worth it?:

• Thomas -- $7M ($21M @ 3yr)
• B. McLemore - $3.026M (4 years rem) -- a slight savings over Bradley i suppose
• Travis Outlaw -- $3M (1 yr) -- just to make #s work
• Derrick Williams or Jason Thompson -- $6.3M or $60M respectively (DW = 1 yr then RFA; JT = 2yr + 3rd partial guaranteed) -- JT is the better player IMO, but taking him over Williams mitigates the benefit of trading Wallace.

Letting Rondo walk leaves us with ~$26.4M in cap room next summer ($35M if Jeff Green opts out) and that's with Wallace still on the books.

Thomas + McLemore + Outlaw + Williams leaves us with ~$26.3 ($35M if Green opts out).


So what are the opportunity costs of each scenario:

Option A (Taking the tade over let Rondo walk): Forgoing any chance to add a 2nd/3rd star (Love, Melo, or other players not yet disgruntled where they are); Forgo any S&T possibilities with Rondo (even if it's a low #1 or some 2nd rounders);

Option B (Letting Rondo walk over trade): Netting IT2 on a relatively team-friendly deal (if he'd sign that), Adding Ben McLemore for 4 years; Maybe increasing the chance Green opts out; Maybe some picks from SAC.

I'm not a fan of moving Rondo -- i think he and Smart can coexist -- but I guess I can at least see the logic of a deal like this. I don't like it but wouldn't jump off the Tobin if it happened.

[Boris Badenov]

Another thought from up here on the grassy knoll: suppose the Rondo "max contract demand" was in fact leaked by the C's front office, to set up a justification for moving him?

[Gainesville Celtic]

Another wrinkle to this: the Stauskas pick was a puzzle for SAC at the time. Stauskas projected lower and overlaps with McLemore.

But if SAC picked Stauskas for Danny it might make more sense.

In which case we could be moving Smart + another piece (Bass?) for Stauskas and Thomas.

Or, we could be moving Rondo for Thomas and Stauskas (plus another piece I would hope).

After watching that intro press. conf. yesterday i don't think there's any way the C's would move Smart -- kid's a leader/winner.

[pokeKingCurtis]

I have never had really high Rondo trade expectations as of late.

Yeah.

Waiting until the deadline makes sense. You never know what happens.

Sure, you run the risk of (*sigh* - now you got me saying it) losing him for nothing but there's upside and value to the wait.

Say the Bucks look great with Jabari and Sanders, for example, and offer Giannis, firsts and Henson.

I'd be a bit happier with that than the Kings deal. There's less strings attached to these prospects than Thomas, who's about to get paid and is undersized. And dumping Wallace isn't much of an asset to us at this point (plus the other team's looking to win now).

[Boris Badenov]

Another wrinkle to this: the Stauskas pick was a puzzle for SAC at the time. Stauskas projected lower and overlaps with McLemore.

But if SAC picked Stauskas for Danny it might make more sense.

In which case we could be moving Smart + another piece (Bass?) for Stauskas and Thomas.

Or, we could be moving Rondo for Thomas and Stauskas (plus another piece I would hope).

After watching that intro press. conf. yesterday i don't think there's any way the C's would move Smart -- kid's a leader/winner.

I hope you're right, he's grown on me too.

[Stanley1]

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.

I honestly don't think we're going to get much better of a package for Rondo.  I'd take that (especially if it includes Stauskas) deal any day of the week.  We might not be getting a star back, but we'd be getting a lot of quality pieces.  Trade pieces.  Bench pieces.  Stauskas might turn into something very helpful down the road.

Haven't we heard rumors of offers for Rondo over the years?  Were any of them really all that much better than this offer?

[Fafnir]

Another wrinkle to this: the Stauskas pick was a puzzle for SAC at the time. Stauskas projected lower and overlaps with McLemore.

But if SAC picked Stauskas for Danny it might make more sense.

In which case we could be moving Smart + another piece (Bass?) for Stauskas and Thomas.

Or, we could be moving Rondo for Thomas and Stauskas (plus another piece I would hope).

After watching that intro press. conf. yesterday i don't think there's any way the C's would move Smart -- kid's a leader/winner.

it's a hype show. They'd move him if the deal was right.

[saltlover]

Another wrinkle to this: the Stauskas pick was a puzzle for SAC at the time. Stauskas projected lower and overlaps with McLemore.

But if SAC picked Stauskas for Danny it might make more sense.

In which case we could be moving Smart + another piece (Bass?) for Stauskas and Thomas.

Or, we could be moving Rondo for Thomas and Stauskas (plus another piece I would hope).

After watching that intro press. conf. yesterday i don't think there's any way the C's would move Smart -- kid's a leader/winner.

it's a hype show. They'd move him if the deal was right.

They would, most certainly.  That said, I don't think that's in their immediate plans.

[manl_lui]

Another wrinkle to this: the Stauskas pick was a puzzle for SAC at the time. Stauskas projected lower and overlaps with McLemore.

But if SAC picked Stauskas for Danny it might make more sense.

In which case we could be moving Smart + another piece (Bass?) for Stauskas and Thomas.

Or, we could be moving Rondo for Thomas and Stauskas (plus another piece I would hope).

After watching that intro press. conf. yesterday i don't think there's any way the C's would move Smart -- kid's a leader/winner.

it's a hype show. They'd move him if the deal was right.

They would, most certainly.  That said, I don't think that's in their immediate plans.

I also don't think we will be moving Rondo OR Smart in the time being. We're trading a proven player or a great player for Stauskas for what? It just doesn't make any sense to me