Rondo Trade Rumors & Ideas (update pg 8)

[15th overall]

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/sports/nba/nba-rumors-jeremy-lin-celtics-rajon-rondo-rockets
NBA Rumors: Jeremy Lin to Celtics, Rajon Rondo to Rockets?

Not sure how legit "Alex Groberman" is. It looks like pure speculation.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2014/ ... story.html
Boston Globe: Rajon Rondo open to staying with Celtics

Ainge had mentioned he expects Rondo to get paid “star money.” On that subject, Rondo said, “I’m making star money now, really. It’s a pretty good living. I’ll let my agent handle those terms.”

This sounds like Pedroia's "I am rich" statement.

Shameful "journalism." He cites Sam Amico, who writes in his list of clearly HYPOTHETICAL trade scenarios:

Imagine a lineup of Rondo, James Harden and Dwight Howard in Houston. You could basically afford to trade the Celtics just about anyone else. What would the Celtics want? Well, young Rockets forward Terrence Jones has looked good lately. But again, any deal involving Rondo will likely have to include draft picks. Rockets GM Daryl Morey seems to truly covet those.

[sully00]

Just to post the idea that I put into the Asik thread. You need to think about this under the concept of where are two years from now instead of a knee jerk reaction.

Rondo(27) and Green(27) to HOU for Lin(25)/Ask(27)/Parsons(25)

This way Ainge can hopefully keep those 3 guys and Bradley around on deals similar to what Green got and you start to collect flexible assets. All 3 guys are good players but at the same time if you draft a guy at their position that is an upgrade you can move them.

If you don't do this then next year probably have to decide whether to extend Rondo/Green at 29 years old or go deeper into the rebuild.

[humblebum]

I don't see the benefit in that for Boston. Not sure that having the luxury of having to overpay Parsons in RFA is incentive enough to lose Rondo all while taking on Lin/Asik.

If I'm even going to consider that type of deal Wallace HAS to be going to Houston with Rondo.

[soxfan2003]

If the Celtics can still get anything decent, they should trade Rondo for picks or perhaps a first year player. Build through the draft. The draft is where the Celtics got Rondo in the first place. Then a star can be added when at least a couple of more talented players then Sullinger/Bradley are ready to blossom. Right now, the Celtics are starting IMHO without a TOP 15 player at any position. Bradley perhaps has a chance to develop into one for a few years if he really improved his 3 point shooting and increased his volume from that distance but he isn't there right now and who knows if he will ever get there. But what we do know with Bradley, his midrange game and inability to draw fouls/finish near the hoop, are much hindrances to his value as a basketball player. He absolutely needs the 3 and Stevens knows it.

These are Rondo's PER/36 numbers so far. Sure Rondo will play much better then these numbers and do so fairly soon but what would you know place the odds of him returning as a top 15 PG next year? I wouldn't bet money on it even if he is trying his hardest in a contract year.

This is Rondo's PER/36 numbers so far.
10 PTS per game
6.4 boards
8.8 assists
14.5 FGA
4.8 turnovers
FG% 29.2
3 PT FG% 25% -- nice to see him shoot more 3's since its a much better bet then his midrange shot in the long run.
2 PT FG% 30.6%

Besides missing preseason, Rondo is having the double whammy of having to come back from a tough injury at an older age and now being a much larger target for defenses.

And for folks who say to rush out and get "a shooter" to help out Rondo, the Celtics (rightfully) just traded Lee and even Crawford not too long ago. The Celtics right now don't have the luxury/need to be focusing too much on certain positions/needs.

This team is way too far off with too much long term assets to try to go for it anytime soon.

There should be no rush to sign ANY high salary players right now. The players worth getting are probably not that attracted to Boston right now.

Keep Sullinger and Bradley if his price going forward is reasonable but I think anyone else can pretty much go for decent trade offer.

[StojkoVrankovic]

What is the chance of Rondo returning to top 15 PG? Tough to return to something you never were.


Did I do that right?

[15th overall]

It's a shame you can't downvote something off the page like on reddit.

[mwhis21]

^^^

I agree Humble. The ONLY benefit to entertaining a Rondo trade right now is to shed salary. (See Jeff Green and Gerald Wallace). But honestly, if we're not competing in the next two years as you mentioned Sully, who cares if we have a dead contract like Wallace on the books. After next year he's a big expiring.

There's a complex here: Rondo is worth more to the C's than to most other teams both on the court and in the sales department. Now, there could be teams in the summer that are looking for that one missing piece (maybe Sac or Det). Rondo could be that piece, but the idea is to have a few teams involved to maximize the return.

There's also the alternative idea that I happen to be in favor of-- Let Rondo hit free agency. Let the market determine what his value is...If I'm not mistaken the C's can offer more money and more years than anyone else.

It's more likely that Rondo is NOT a max player than IS. The C's situation is different than that of Denver and Orlando for instance where they knew for sure that Carmelo/Dwight would get max money, but yet they still didn't want to force those players to leave money on the table. The C's are in a much better position to judge Rondo's market value and not rush into trading/resigning him.

[ryaningf]

much better then these numbers and do so fairly soon but what would you know place the odds of him returning as a top 15 PG next year? I wouldn't bet money on it even if he is trying his hardest in a contract year.

Stop trolling. The chances of Rondo being an above-average starting point guard in the NBA in 2014-2015 are about 100000000% and that's just a rough estimate it's probably higher than that.

This is Rondo's PER/36 numbers so far.
10 PTS per game
6.4 boards
8.8 assists
14.5 FGA
4.8 turnovers
FG% 29.2
3 PT FG% 25% -- nice to see him shoot more 3's since its a much better bet then his midrange shot in the long run.
2 PT FG% 30.6%

It's very early but Rondo's doing exactly what he should be doing in his comeback. He's shooting more than ever (14.5 FGA/36 minutes; career high was 11.8 last season), taking more 3s (3.6/36 minutes, previous career high was 1.3 last year), rebounding more (defensive rebounding % and overall rebounding rate currently at career high) while trusting his teammates more with the ball by passing it up the court and not fishing for assists (a rap he never really earned except during the end of that assist streak) (his assist % is back down to 2008-2009 levels). He's rusty as all hell and not at 100% but he can still rebound and facilitate and basically do what he's always done which is control the pace of the game, get easy buckets for his teammates, and put people in spots to be successful.

Where he's really affected right now by the injury is in lateral quickness, perimeter defensive ability, balance on his jump shot, and his overall fitness/wind. Those things haven't returned and probably won't return to pre-injury levels until next season but that's okay we don't need him to be 100% right now we just need him to continue to expand his FG/game and his 3 point shot while not suffering any setbacks. It's about peaking at the beginning of 2014-2015, not in some virtually meaningless games in January during a stretch when we've lost 17 of our last 20 games.

[sully00]

^^^

I agree Humble. The ONLY benefit to entertaining a Rondo trade right now is to shed salary. (See Jeff Green and Gerald Wallace). But honestly, if we're not competing in the next two years as you mentioned Sully, who cares if we have a dead contract like Wallace on the books. After next year he's a big expiring.

There's a complex here: Rondo is worth more to the C's than to most other teams both on the court and in the sales department. Now, there could be teams in the summer that are looking for that one missing piece (maybe Sac or Det). Rondo could be that piece, but the idea is to have a few teams involved to maximize the return.

There's also the alternative idea that I happen to be in favor of-- Let Rondo hit free agency. Let the market determine what his value is...If I'm not mistaken the C's can offer more money and more years than anyone else.

It's more likely that Rondo is NOT a max player than IS. The C's situation is different than that of Denver and Orlando for instance where they knew for sure that Carmelo/Dwight would get max money, but yet they still didn't want to force those players to leave money on the table. The C's are in a much better position to judge Rondo's market value and not rush into trading/resigning him.

All of that makes sense as well but the truth is that Rondo's trade value is probably higher at this deadline than it will be after as long as he is healthy and effective. The reason you trade for Lin, Asik, and Parsons is that they are good young players, not draft picks who are hit or miss and don't benefit you till years down the line.

I am far more concerned with Boston not even being in a position for it to be worth their while to resign Rondo than I am about him leaving the team high and dry. This has been my concern all season if this team doesn't improve on the court next year how do you give Rondo a 4 or 5 year deal? I don't think the market for Rondo is going to be huge, maybe a half dozen teams and while I think they will want him really badly and willing to pay him for his services I am not sure of the compensation for Boston.

[Slartibartfast]

This team is way too far off with too much long term assets to try to go for it anytime soon.

This statement is even less accurate than if it had been applied to the 06/07 Celtics. Pierce was the only win-now asset on the roster as a 29-year-old star. Everyone else was injured/washed-up (Ratliff, Wally), a nobody (Scal, Kandi Man) or a "long term asset" that wasn't ready for primetime (our best young guy, Al, was an absolute defensive sieve).

We've got a younger star this go round, one less injured/washed-up vet, and a comparable number of long term assets (we had more prospects then, but we have more picks now), though none quite as valuable as Big Al. But we've also got a decent veteran player in Jeff Green that we didn't have then.

[soxfan2003]

much better then these numbers and do so fairly soon but what would you know place the odds of him returning as a top 15 PG next year? I wouldn't bet money on it even if he is trying his hardest in a contract year.

Stop trolling. The chances of Rondo being an above-average starting point guard in the NBA in 2014-2015 are about 100000000% and that's just a rough estimate it's probably higher than that.

This is Rondo's PER/36 numbers so far.
10 PTS per game
6.4 boards
8.8 assists
14.5 FGA
4.8 turnovers
FG% 29.2
3 PT FG% 25% -- nice to see him shoot more 3's since its a much better bet then his midrange shot in the long run.
2 PT FG% 30.6%

It's very early but Rondo's doing exactly what he should be doing in his comeback. He's shooting more than ever (14.5 FGA/36 minutes; career high was 11.8 last season), taking more 3s (3.6/36 minutes, previous career high was 1.3 last year), rebounding more (defensive rebounding % and overall rebounding rate currently at career high) while trusting his teammates more with the ball by passing it up the court and not fishing for assists (a rap he never really earned except during the end of that assist streak) (his assist % is back down to 2008-2009 levels). He's rusty as all hell and not at 100% but he can still rebound and facilitate and basically do what he's always done which is control the pace of the game, get easy buckets for his teammates, and put people in spots to be successful.

Where he's really affected right now by the injury is in lateral quickness, perimeter defensive ability, balance on his jump shot, and his overall fitness/wind. Those things haven't returned and probably won't return to pre-injury levels until next season but that's okay we don't need him to be 100% right now we just need him to continue to expand his FG/game and his 3 point shot while not suffering any setbacks. It's about peaking at the beginning of 2014-2015, not in some virtually meaningless games in January during a stretch when we've lost 17 of our last 20 games.

I'm not trolling. I am providing a reality check to those who think Rondo doesn't rely upon his athleticism.
The vast majority of Rondo fans were saying he would be very good this year and fail to comprehend that he suffered the sort of injury that combined with his age/team dynamic may mean his days as even a top 15 PG are over. I certainly think Rondo peaked as someone better then a top 10 PG but I don't think he was at that level last season so what makes me think he will improve after a major injury and getting a year older at a position{(athletic PG) that favors the 23-25 year olds more often then not.

It's pretty darn obvious to me now and always has been that Rondo's athleticism helped him not only get to the rim but finish at the rim. Avery Bradley knows how to make a layup when left unguarded but athleticism helps a tremendous amount in driving and scoring in traffic since it give you confidence that your shot won't be blocked. Tony Parker doesn't have great traditional finishing skills in terms of leaping/length or even pure speed anymore but he is a magician driving to the basket.

Rondo was probably around a top 7 PG or so in 2008-9 and 2009-10 but he has been gradually declining since his skills(shooting) have not been improving at the same rate as his decline in athleticism. Folks can talk about the good year he had shooting from midrange but not only were a very high portion of those uncontested, they won't win you many games. Rondo was better when he was driving more and getting to the line.

I'm not betting he does that much post ACL and as he gets older.

Frankly I sort of consider Rondo a victim in all of this. If he goes to the Milwaukee Bucks, no way in hell does he end up getting overrated.

For the record, shooting wise, I have no problem with what Rondo is trying to do right now. It makes perfect sense for him to try to add the 3 point shot. He continues to make too many risky passes but he should be working on his 3 point shot in a year like this.

[Slartibartfast]

I don't think anyone argued that Rondo doesn't rely to some degree on athleticism (what kind of pro athlete doesn't?). The athleticism is what separates him from the pretty good PGs (like a prime Andre Miller or a post-prime Kidd) and puts him on the elite plane, but his basketball skills ensure him a place on the pretty good PG bus as long as he can stay on the court.

That's a stark contrast with guys like Rose and Westbrook, who would be below average PGs without their athleticism.

[soxfan2003]

This team is way too far off with too much long term assets to try to go for it anytime soon.

This statement is even less accurate than if it had been applied to the 06/07 Celtics. Pierce was the only win-now asset on the roster as a 29-year-old star. Everyone else was injured/washed-up (Ratliff, Wally), a nobody (Scal, Kandi Man) or a "long term asset" that wasn't ready for primetime (our best young guy, Al, was an absolute defensive sieve).

We've got a younger star this go round, one less injured/washed-up vet, and a comparable number of long term assets (we had more prospects then, but we have more picks now), though none quite as valuable as Big Al. But we've also got a decent veteran player in Jeff Green that we didn't have then.

I should have explained myself better perhaps. By "long term assets" for this club in 2014 I'm referring to the Celtics picks from 2015-2018 from teams like the Clippers and Nets and perhaps even Philly. Those are very nice assets cashing them in early is probably going to lead to them getting valued at 70 cents on the dollar or something like that.

As for the 2006/7 Celtics, I actually loved their chances of creating a championship team if they could get KG.
1) Paul Pierce -- A huge "win now" asset at the time who had erased all foolish doubt what he meant to the team. Pierce wasn't really a "long term" asset but given his skill-set figured to have 3-4 years left.
2) Al Jefferson -- huge trade chip who I was strongly advocating should be dealt. He was overrated but just intriguing enough to be packaged for a star.
3) Perkins -- nice, cheap defensive minded center that was slowly getting better.
4) Rondo -- I really liked his potential as a rookie and had no doubt he could play PG well enough with RA, PP and KG. Nice asset of 3 more years left at really cheap money.
5) Tony Allen... if he returned healthy. Always like him.

4 out of those 5 players had clearly proven to me that they could defend. This Celtic team doesn't have Pierce and doesn't have those young cheap defenders.

The Celtics back then had other players that teams may have thought had a chance but I wasn't high on them at all but they weren't around so long that they lacked value.

[StojkoVrankovic]

Brought to you by The Onion since May 29, 2003

[soxfan2003]

I don't think anyone argued that Rondo doesn't rely to some degree on athleticism (what kind of pro athlete doesn't?). The athleticism is what separates him from the pretty good PGs (like a prime Andre Miller or a post-prime Kidd) and puts him on the elite plane, but his basketball skills ensure him a place on the pretty good PG bus as long as he can stay on the court.

That's a stark contrast with guys like Rose and Westbrook, who would be below average PGs without their athleticism.

While I actually agree a loss of athleticism affects Rose/Westbrook a bit more, I think all 3 of these players are well below average starting PG's without their athleticism.

Let's say Rose and Westbrook rely upon their athleticism for 80% of their ability. I've just been arguing with Rondo it's 70%. Both Rose and Westbrook are better pure shooters then Rondo and that has some value which offsets most of Rondo's edge as a passer. And since he simply isn't as good as those 2 in the first place, he is just as finished as they are without his athleticism.

Those are "made up" numbers and folks love to criticize me for them but I'm just trying to point out that he is very heavily dependent upon it as well. Durant loses let's say 20% of his athleticism and he is still easily a top 10 NBA player because of his great shooting and reach that allows him to get his shot off. With Rondo, even the passing angles he is able to create is somewhat dependent upon teams respecting his athleticism. Not all but some.

The point guards that are just knock down shooters/great shooters whether it be a Billups or a Nash are much less dependent upon their athleticism but obviously even they are somewhat dependent upon it as well since every player is. This is one of my points I've been making for the past year and too many folks have refused to accept that Rondo isn't that much different then the typical athletic PG.

Larry Bird was the greatest Celtics I've watched and for many years his improvement in skills/shooting offset a minor decline in athleticism. But at some point, his skills no longer improved much or even declined and his athleticism declined due to age/injury.

I'm never disputed that Rondo can't hang around the NBA for another 6-7 years, what I have said is there is a damn good chance his days as a top 10 PG are over and for him to genuinely be at that level again, his shooting is going to have to improve. I predicted his top 10 leve would have been over by last years playoffs based upon what I had been seeing out of Rondo/other players and just the nature of the constantly changing PG position. The players like Stockton, Billups, Nash that are in the top 5 at the position at an older age are almost always great shooters. Even Magic could really shoot by his later years. Parker/Kidd are both evidence that its possible to improve your shooting but I think Rondo is starting from a much lower point.

And perhaps the 3 most controversial players I put on my list ahead of a healthy Rondo were John Wall, Lillard and Stephen Curry. I don't think my prediction with those 3 is looking bad right now with all 3 probably headed for the all-star game which I readily admit doesn't always mean that much.

[Slartibartfast]

This team is way too far off with too much long term assets to try to go for it anytime soon.

This statement is even less accurate than if it had been applied to the 06/07 Celtics. Pierce was the only win-now asset on the roster as a 29-year-old star. Everyone else was injured/washed-up (Ratliff, Wally), a nobody (Scal, Kandi Man) or a "long term asset" that wasn't ready for primetime (our best young guy, Al, was an absolute defensive sieve).

We've got a younger star this go round, one less injured/washed-up vet, and a comparable number of long term assets (we had more prospects then, but we have more picks now), though none quite as valuable as Big Al. But we've also got a decent veteran player in Jeff Green that we didn't have then.

I should have explained myself better perhaps. By "long term assets" for this club in 2014 I'm referring to the Celtics picks from 2015-2018 from teams like the Clippers and Nets and perhaps even Philly. Those are very nice assets cashing them in early is probably going to lead to them getting valued at 70 cents on the dollar or something like that.

As for the 2006/7 Celtics, I actually loved their chances of creating a championship team if they could get KG.
1) Paul Pierce -- A huge "win now" asset at the time who had erased all foolish doubt what he meant to the team. Pierce wasn't really a "long term" asset but given his skill-set figured to have 3-4 years left.
2) Al Jefferson -- huge trade chip who I was strongly advocating should be dealt. He was overrated but just intriguing enough to be packaged for a star.
3) Perkins -- nice, cheap defensive minded center that was slowly getting better.
4) Rondo -- I really liked his potential as a rookie and had no doubt he could play PG well enough with RA, PP and KG. Nice asset of 3 more years left at really cheap money.
5) Tony Allen... if he returned healthy. Always like him.

4 out of those 5 players had clearly proven to me that they could defend. This Celtic team doesn't have Pierce and doesn't have those young cheap defenders.

The Celtics back then had other players that teams may have thought had a chance but I wasn't high on them at all but they weren't around so long that they lacked value.

The Nets picks '16-'18 are gravy. They shouldn't have to be included to land a big star. But the picks 2015 and in are not significantly diminished for being traded this offseason.

1) I like Rondo as a star at his position as much as I liked Pierce back then. You obviously like Pierce better, but maybe we can agree to disagree on that to move on to the next points.
2) Big Al was a better young chip than anything we have now other than our pick. No arguments here.
3) I think AB compares favorably to Perk as a young role player.
4) I think Sully has about as much value as rookie Rondo and about as much appeal as a roleplayer for a contending team. No he's not a defender, but since when is defense the only indicator of short term ability to contribute?
5) TA was pretty much irrelevant until 2010 with rehab (and Posey's presence) limiting him in 2008 and Doc keeping him in the doghouse in 2009.

And meanwhile we have a guy in Green that we didn't have anybody like in 06/07, plus the chance to add a few more minor assets Hump's expiring.

I don't think an exact imitation of 2008 is in the cards - our assets put us more in line for one star and one high level roleplayer (a la Love and Asik), but we don't need as dramatic a turnaround either.

The 06/07 Celtics sucked because most of the roster was DOA. The current Celtics are also bad, but a lot of that has to do with extreme roster imbalance (pretty much 3/5 guys are playing out of position on any given line-up), not so much the overabundance of useless players.

[ryaningf]

I'm not trolling. I am providing a reality check to those who think Rondo doesn't rely upon his athleticism.

I rate Rondo as a special passer, someone with great anticipation, a great competitor, someone with super intelligence and ability to play angles who can think the game 1 to 2 steps ahead of most players, including most of his teammates. He's got incredible athleticism and quickness and a high pain threshold, super big hands, long arms, and can rebound very well for his size.

Of all those things, the ACL injury is going to impact his quickness most. His jumping ability, which he rarely uses (he barely jumped off the ground when shooting layups before his injury), would probably be second on that list of things impacted (not physically but mentally in terms of confidence in his leg). But everything else that makes him a special player--the smarts, seeing the angles, long arms, big hands, ability to make every pass in the book, great anticipation, competitiveness, rebounding, and pain threshold--those things haven't been impacted AT ALL. So, the majority of things that make Rondo RONDO are also the things that age well and allow for players to age gracefully and not like say Stevie Francis.

The vast majority of Rondo fans were saying he would be very good this year and fail to comprehend that he suffered the sort of injury that combined with his age/team dynamic may mean his days as even a top 15 PG are over.

Dude, your strawman called, he left his blackberry on your nightstand.

Exaggerating things people didn't say doesn't make your point stronger. The vast majority understood this season would be about Rondo getting his athleticism back and learning a new role on a new team. Some were hopeful he could lead this team to the playoffs, but that was assuming a quick return to the court and at least staying close to .500 while he was out. Neither happened and it is what it is...a bridge year.

Saying Rondo is not a top 15 PG is ridiculous and is trolling behavior IMO. He's the best pure PG in the game by a mile and even though the game has evolved to account for most offenses using wingman or shoot first PGs to facilitate offense (thus making PG shooting skill more important in general) that doesn't devalue a pass first PG nor make knockdown shooting a prerequisite for being an above average PG in this league. There are several ways to win in basketball--yet you continue to privilege shoot first PGs in your "objective analysis" while assuming there's only one way to win.

[soxfan2003]

This statement is even less accurate than if it had been applied to the 06/07 Celtics. Pierce was the only win-now asset on the roster as a 29-year-old star. Everyone else was injured/washed-up (Ratliff, Wally), a nobody (Scal, Kandi Man) or a "long term asset" that wasn't ready for primetime (our best young guy, Al, was an absolute defensive sieve).

We've got a younger star this go round, one less injured/washed-up vet, and a comparable number of long term assets (we had more prospects then, but we have more picks now), though none quite as valuable as Big Al. But we've also got a decent veteran player in Jeff Green that we didn't have then.

I should have explained myself better perhaps. By "long term assets" for this club in 2014 I'm referring to the Celtics picks from 2015-2018 from teams like the Clippers and Nets and perhaps even Philly. Those are very nice assets cashing them in early is probably going to lead to them getting valued at 70 cents on the dollar or something like that.

As for the 2006/7 Celtics, I actually loved their chances of creating a championship team if they could get KG.
1) Paul Pierce -- A huge "win now" asset at the time who had erased all foolish doubt what he meant to the team. Pierce wasn't really a "long term" asset but given his skill-set figured to have 3-4 years left.
2) Al Jefferson -- huge trade chip who I was strongly advocating should be dealt. He was overrated but just intriguing enough to be packaged for a star.
3) Perkins -- nice, cheap defensive minded center that was slowly getting better.
4) Rondo -- I really liked his potential as a rookie and had no doubt he could play PG well enough with RA, PP and KG. Nice asset of 3 more years left at really cheap money.
5) Tony Allen... if he returned healthy. Always like him.

4 out of those 5 players had clearly proven to me that they could defend. This Celtic team doesn't have Pierce and doesn't have those young cheap defenders.

The Celtics back then had other players that teams may have thought had a chance but I wasn't high on them at all but they weren't around so long that they lacked value.

The Nets picks '16-'18 are gravy. They shouldn't have to be included to land a big star. But the picks 2015 and in are not significantly diminished for being traded this offseason.

1) I like Rondo as a star at his position as much as I liked Pierce back then. You obviously like Pierce better, but maybe we can agree to disagree on that to move on to the next points.
2) Big Al was a better young chip than anything we have now other than our pick. No arguments here.
3) I think AB compares favorably to Perk as a young role player.
4) I think Sully has about as much value as rookie Rondo and about as much appeal as a roleplayer for a contending team. No he's not a defender, but since when is defense the only indicator of short term ability to contribute?
5) TA was pretty much irrelevant until 2010 with rehab (and Posey's presence) limiting him in 2008 and Doc keeping him in the doghouse in 2009.

And meanwhile we have a guy in Green that we didn't have anybody like in 06/07, plus the chance to add a few more minor assets Hump's expiring.

I don't think an exact imitation of 2008 is in the cards - our assets put us more in line for one star and one high level roleplayer (a la Love and Asik), but we don't need as dramatic a turnaround either.

The 06/07 Celtics sucked because most of the roster was DOA. The current Celtics are also bad, but a lot of that has to do with extreme roster imbalance (pretty much 3/5 guys are playing out of position on any given line-up), not so much the overabundance of useless players.

OK lets agree to forget point #1 but I really do think its a huge consideration since it would be enough to have me be a bit more flexible in my thought process but frankly I'm not sure if I could have recommended keeping PP that much longer without a KG coming. And without a dramatic turnaround, I just don't think it makes sense to keep Rondo/Green. Case can be made for Rondo if he comes ultra cheap since everyone else gives up on him.

3) If we weren't discussing contracts or position importance, I can see Bradley over Perkins or equal to Perkins but I absolutely loved Perkins once he was signed since its hard to find a useful defensive minded center for that price. I looked it up and he was signed to 4 years at less then 4.5 million a year. To get a big who I really thought would be a good role playing defensive minded starter or high quality backup for that money during his prime years is a great underrated asset when constructing a roster.

We don't know what Bradley will sign for but I just see him having a tough time outproducing his second contract like Perkins did. Perkins is obviously overpaid with the Thunder but I though he was seriously underpaid in his second contract with the Celtics. Bradley is much more of a known player so he is less likely to get underpaid but perhaps he has very little interest this off-season and the Celtics can low ball him.

4) I tend to like defenders and floor spacers more then offensive players like Sullinger since there really is just one basketball. Sullinger could be an effective floor spacer but I really don't think he will be good at it without a 3 point shot. Young Rondo was very flawed as a floor spacer but there was no question at all about his PG defense or ball handling. As a rookie, I considered Rondo "as advertised" and I liked it since I do value defense more then offense. And the Celtics were going to have 3 cheap years of Rondo vs 2 cheap years of Sullinger.

5) TA ended up not much of a factor like you said but I was just trying to say how I looked at the team at the time at the end of 2006-7. Without the Ray Allen trade, I obviously think Tony Allen gets much more of a chance those years. There is a good chance if the Celtics keep Rondo, Green, Bradley and Sullinger that one of them washes out in the next year or two or just looks bad from being passed on the depth chart.

Tony Allen had a PER of 17.0 and a TS% of .596 in 2006-7. Granted it was just 33 games but IMHO he was looking good that season. I did expect some decline from where he was after his ACL injury but I just didn't expect it to be that much.

As for Green, I agree he is a good player but he really just isn't much of an asset since he really isn't outperforming his contract by much. To put things in perspective, someone like Tony Allen at most made 2.5 million with the Celtics.

Basically if you do the math and you try to add 2 big contracts to this team for new stars, someone like Green probably has to go.

I'm not a big proponent of building the Celtics into a 45 to even 50 win team if the 2nd and 3rd best players are Rondo and Green/Sullinger/Bradley. Ok if the top player is Durant, it makes a lot of sense to me but I'm trying to be realistic since I highly doubt he changes teams this off-season.

[soxfan2003]

I'm not trolling. I am providing a reality check to those who think Rondo doesn't rely upon his athleticism.

I rate Rondo as a special passer, someone with great anticipation, a great competitor, someone with super intelligence and ability to play angles who can think the game 1 to 2 steps ahead of most players, including most of his teammates. He's got incredible athleticism and quickness and a high pain threshold, super big hands, long arms, and can rebound very well for his size.

Of all those things, the ACL injury is going to impact his quickness most. His jumping ability, which he rarely uses (he barely jumped off the ground when shooting layups before his injury), would probably be second on that list of things impacted (not physically but mentally in terms of confidence in his leg). But everything else that makes him a special player--the smarts, seeing the angles, long arms, big hands, ability to make every pass in the book, great anticipation, competitiveness, rebounding, and pain threshold--those things haven't been impacted AT ALL. So, the majority of things that make Rondo RONDO are also the things that age well and allow for players to age gracefully and not like say Stevie Francis.

The vast majority of Rondo fans were saying he would be very good this year and fail to comprehend that he suffered the sort of injury that combined with his age/team dynamic may mean his days as even a top 15 PG are over.

Dude, your strawman called, he left his blackberry on your nightstand.

Exaggerating things people didn't say doesn't make your point stronger. The vast majority understood this season would be about Rondo getting his athleticism back and learning a new role on a new team. Some were hopeful he could lead this team to the playoffs, but that was assuming a quick return to the court and at least staying close to .500 while he was out. Neither happened and it is what it is...a bridge year.

Saying Rondo is not a top 15 PG is ridiculous and is trolling behavior IMO. He's the best pure PG in the game by a mile and even though the game has evolved to account for most offenses using wingman or shoot first PGs to facilitate offense (thus making PG shooting skill more important in general) that doesn't devalue a pass first PG nor make knockdown shooting a prerequisite for being an above average PG in this league. There are several ways to win in basketball--yet you continue to privilege shoot first PGs in your "objective analysis" while assuming there's only one way to win.

Let's remember the Celtics were only a couple of games back from the 8th spot when Rondo returned and they had already completed the horrible part of the schedule.

I advocated trading PP and KG at the end of last season. Did I have something against them as well? Could it be that I just don't play any favorites when evaluating the Celtics and am willing to say the Celtics most entertaining player(Rondo) since Bird should go. Many players have been better then Rondo but prime athletic Rondo was very entertaining.

I don't have alzheimer's yet. The vast majority of Rondo fans this off-season were very confident and some were flat out cocky that he would come back very strong this season. Just go back and read the posts. More then few people said it was impossible to tank effectively with Rondo playing even half of a season and frankly to be fair maybe they are proven right.

Now you are pushing that cockiness to next year. If he is bad then some will say wait another year and maybe Rondo is a legit top 10 PG 2-3 years from now after somehow becoming a much better 3 shooter and more disciplined passer. I wouldn't bet on it but notice I've never ruled it out. I have said, how Rondo WAS a top top 10 PG is no longer going to probably be there without major improvements to his shooting. It is true he is dunking a lot less nowadays and that is a bad thing since obviously dunks are high percentage shots. KG and PP getting less dunks due to age hurt the Celtics.

I realize there is more then one way to win in basketball but when a player that relies upon athleticism(speed/quickness/jumping) starts losing a noticeable amount of it, it is NOT a good sign. I never complained about Rondo from 2008-2010 since I realized the Celtics with 3 HOFers with great offensive game could hide most of his shooting deficiencies and benefit from his strengths. It's very easy to see on more typical teams like Miami/LA/Dallas that won the championship, you often need a PG that shoots better. Eventually PP and RA declined defensively but from 2008 to 2010 Boston clearly had 3 2 way HOFers that could really shoot.

OKC perhaps could have gotten away with a Rondo type at PG since they arguably have the greatest offensive player in the history of the game that is now scoring over double teams and often making it look easy.

[humblebum]

I'm not saying Rondo should be traded, and I don't think he will, but let's cut the nonsense. If Rondo doesn't regain his ELITE quickness, agility and leaping ability his game will suffer in a major way. The only way he could overcome the loss would be to start knocking down triples and free throws.

I get that the guy is smart and you don't have to be an athletic freak to find the open man, but if he can't defend in space and he can't consistently get to the rim while STILL not being able to shoot the ball with consistency, his game just isn't that impressive and you can forget about him being top 5 PG status.

But, realistically I think he can regain most of his old form even if he's a bit more selective about when he uses that athleticism.