CelticsStrong
Around the League => Transaction Ideas and Rumors => Topic started by: ssspence on January 12, 2013, 07:57:06 AM
-
Both look solid but not spectacular, with good skills but notable flaws. But I like the heart of both players.
I doubt the answer is 'yes' -- I'm curious what people think.
Would be interesting to trot out a young squad built largely around Walker, Bradley, MKG and Sully in future years. Hard-nosed group.
-
I think they'd have to consider it. MKG is a really nice young player, and a hard-worker. He looks like he has a ton of potential. But he seems like he's going to be more of an Andre Iguodala type player than a LeBron. Which is to say, a really great guy to put next to a top scorer, rather than a player who is going to carry your team.
So the Bobcats might consider trading him for an established All-Star PG who is exciting for fans to watch and who can, at least in theory, be the centerpiece of an efficient offense.
-
They should ... but who knows with that whacky front office and ownership.
Anyway, on Boston's side of things, I have zero interest in trading Rondo for those two. I don't think Kemba Walker is anything more than a change of pace point guard off the bench and MKG projects more as a Gerald Wallace type. Not enough value for a player as talented as Rondo.
-
They should ... but who knows with that whacky front office and ownership.
Anyway, on Boston's side of things, I have zero interest in trading Rondo for those two. I don't think Kemba Walker is anything more than a change of pace point guard off the bench and MKG projects more as a Gerald Wallace type. Not enough value for a player as talented as Rondo.
I tend to agree, though I'd strongly consider it if the Cats threw in their 1st round pick this season. I'd also want this deal to be concurrent with the Celtics trading for a quality starting PG prospect (e.g. trading Pierce for Eric Bledsoe).
Also, I think Gerald Wallace is probably a little bit conservative as a comp for MKG. Ideally he's probably closer to Iguodala.
-
omg, yeah and we'll sprinkle green fairy dust on them and they'll be something more than losers in the nba and we'll sprinkle fairy dust on someone else on the team so they'll be capable of running an offense. don't understand these fascinations with trading a young star and playoff stud for lottery team garbage.spare me!
-
They should ... but who knows with that whacky front office and ownership.
Anyway, on Boston's side of things, I have zero interest in trading Rondo for those two. I don't think Kemba Walker is anything more than a change of pace point guard off the bench and MKG projects more as a Gerald Wallace type. Not enough value for a player as talented as Rondo.
I tend to agree, though I'd strongly consider it if the Cats threw in their 1st round pick this season. I'd also want this deal to be concurrent with the Celtics trading for a quality starting PG prospect (e.g. trading Pierce for Eric Bledsoe).
Also, I think Gerald Wallace is probably a little bit conservative as a comp for MKG. Ideally he's probably closer to Iguodala.
In no way is Bledsoe an NBA starter. A reasonably capable backup maybe, but he is definitely not contender point guard material.
He has no consistent jump shooting ability and he is patchy with his passing at best.
Carry on.
-
They should ... but who knows with that whacky front office and ownership.
Anyway, on Boston's side of things, I have zero interest in trading Rondo for those two. I don't think Kemba Walker is anything more than a change of pace point guard off the bench and MKG projects more as a Gerald Wallace type. Not enough value for a player as talented as Rondo.
I tend to agree, though I'd strongly consider it if the Cats threw in their 1st round pick this season. I'd also want this deal to be concurrent with the Celtics trading for a quality starting PG prospect (e.g. trading Pierce for Eric Bledsoe).
Also, I think Gerald Wallace is probably a little bit conservative as a comp for MKG. Ideally he's probably closer to Iguodala.
In no way is Bledsoe an NBA starter. A reasonably capable backup maybe, but he is definitely not contender point guard material.
He has no consistent jump shooting ability and he is patchy with his passing at best.
Carry on.
Right, because Bledsoe is clearly a finished product at the age of 22 with no upside. ::)
Also you haven't been watching the Clippers much if you don't have an appreciation for Bledsoe's upside. He's probably not going to ever be a prolific passer, but he's shown the ability to make really impressive, athletic plays on defense and offense. And he's already a productive scorer.
-
omg, yeah and we'll sprinkle green fairy dust on them and they'll be something more than losers in the nba and we'll sprinkle fairy dust on someone else on the team so they'll be capable of running an offense. don't understand these fascinations with trading a young star and playoff stud for lottery team garbage.spare me!
Yes, because players who are on a losing team are by nature losers not worth investing in. It's not possible for a player to be really valuable and still be on a team that loses a lot of games.
Obviously since Pierce and Rondo both played on that '06'-7 team that set the franchise record for losing streak they are lottery team garbage. Total losers.
::)
-
They should ... but who knows with that whacky front office and ownership.
Anyway, on Boston's side of things, I have zero interest in trading Rondo for those two. I don't think Kemba Walker is anything more than a change of pace point guard off the bench and MKG projects more as a Gerald Wallace type. Not enough value for a player as talented as Rondo.
I tend to agree, though I'd strongly consider it if the Cats threw in their 1st round pick this season. I'd also want this deal to be concurrent with the Celtics trading for a quality starting PG prospect (e.g. trading Pierce for Eric Bledsoe).
Also, I think Gerald Wallace is probably a little bit conservative as a comp for MKG. Ideally he's probably closer to Iguodala.
In no way is Bledsoe an NBA starter. A reasonably capable backup maybe, but he is definitely not contender point guard material.
He has no consistent jump shooting ability and he is patchy with his passing at best.
Carry on.
Right, because Bledsoe is clearly a finished product at the age of 22 with no upside. ::)
Also you haven't been watching the Clippers much if you don't have an appreciation for Bledsoe's upside. He's probably not going to ever be a prolific passer, but he's shown the ability to make really impressive, athletic plays on defense and offense. And he's already a productive scorer.
My original post probably came out a little harsh on the guy and I do like his active defense and athleticism.
To be brutally honest though, there isn't much evidence that he can properly run an offense for any period of time or shoot the ball comfortably from anywhere on the floor. His game so far this year has benefitted from extra shooters spacing the floor so he can slash inside and finish around the rim.
-
They should ... but who knows with that whacky front office and ownership.
Anyway, on Boston's side of things, I have zero interest in trading Rondo for those two. I don't think Kemba Walker is anything more than a change of pace point guard off the bench and MKG projects more as a Gerald Wallace type. Not enough value for a player as talented as Rondo.
I tend to agree, though I'd strongly consider it if the Cats threw in their 1st round pick this season. I'd also want this deal to be concurrent with the Celtics trading for a quality starting PG prospect (e.g. trading Pierce for Eric Bledsoe).
Also, I think Gerald Wallace is probably a little bit conservative as a comp for MKG. Ideally he's probably closer to Iguodala.
In no way is Bledsoe an NBA starter. A reasonably capable backup maybe, but he is definitely not contender point guard material.
He has no consistent jump shooting ability and he is patchy with his passing at best.
Carry on.
Right, because Bledsoe is clearly a finished product at the age of 22 with no upside. ::)
Also you haven't been watching the Clippers much if you don't have an appreciation for Bledsoe's upside. He's probably not going to ever be a prolific passer, but he's shown the ability to make really impressive, athletic plays on defense and offense. And he's already a productive scorer.
My original post probably came out a little harsh on the guy and I do like his active defense and athleticism.
To be brutally honest though, there isn't much evidence that he can properly run an offense for any period of time or shoot the ball comfortably from anywhere on the floor. His game so far this year has benefitted from extra shooters spacing the floor so he can slash inside and finish around the rim.
I'll admit that I haven't watched him a ton, and it is obvious that there are flaws in his game.
But PG is one of the toughest positions to learn in the NBA and when a guy has only ever played limited minutes, and the role he's been asked to play has been combo guard off the bench -- hustle plays and scoring, basically -- it's hard to fault a young player for not being great at running the offense.
Poise to run the point and shooting are two things that young players tend to develop over time, when given the chance. It's not a guarantee that he will, but I think it's safe to say with Bledsoe that the potential is there. And he has a ton of talent and ability already to do lots of other things, most notably to make impressive defensive plays (blocks and steals) and to blow by defenders to get to the rim.
There aren't too many point guard prospects (i.e. guys who aren't already established as starters) who I'd want to give an opportunity ahead of Bledsoe. There are a lot of young guards playing more minutes who haven't shown as much as he has. At the least he seems like he could be something like a cross between Ty Lawson and Jrue Holiday.
The prospect of playing Bledsoe next to Bradley, especially defensively, would be very exciting.
Of course, this is all very academic because neither Pierce nor Rondo is likely to get traded anytime soon, if ever.
-
They should ... but who knows with that whacky front office and ownership.
Anyway, on Boston's side of things, I have zero interest in trading Rondo for those two. I don't think Kemba Walker is anything more than a change of pace point guard off the bench and MKG projects more as a Gerald Wallace type. Not enough value for a player as talented as Rondo.
Agreed. Basketball is the last sport where you want to trade a horse for two ponies. The trick is to get three clear All-Stars, with one of them something of a superstar. Rondo might not be our ultimate superstar, but he's a clear All-Star.
-
They should ... but who knows with that whacky front office and ownership.
Anyway, on Boston's side of things, I have zero interest in trading Rondo for those two. I don't think Kemba Walker is anything more than a change of pace point guard off the bench and MKG projects more as a Gerald Wallace type. Not enough value for a player as talented as Rondo.
I tend to agree, though I'd strongly consider it if the Cats threw in their 1st round pick this season. I'd also want this deal to be concurrent with the Celtics trading for a quality starting PG prospect (e.g. trading Pierce for Eric Bledsoe).
Also, I think Gerald Wallace is probably a little bit conservative as a comp for MKG. Ideally he's probably closer to Iguodala.
In no way is Bledsoe an NBA starter. A reasonably capable backup maybe, but he is definitely not contender point guard material.
He has no consistent jump shooting ability and he is patchy with his passing at best.
Carry on.
Right, because Bledsoe is clearly a finished product at the age of 22 with no upside. ::)
Also you haven't been watching the Clippers much if you don't have an appreciation for Bledsoe's upside. He's probably not going to ever be a prolific passer, but he's shown the ability to make really impressive, athletic plays on defense and offense. And he's already a productive scorer.
My original post probably came out a little harsh on the guy and I do like his active defense and athleticism.
To be brutally honest though, there isn't much evidence that he can properly run an offense for any period of time or shoot the ball comfortably from anywhere on the floor. His game so far this year has benefitted from extra shooters spacing the floor so he can slash inside and finish around the rim.
I'll admit that I haven't watched him a ton, and it is obvious that there are flaws in his game.
But PG is one of the toughest positions to learn in the NBA and when a guy has only ever played limited minutes, and the role he's been asked to play has been combo guard off the bench -- hustle plays and scoring, basically -- it's hard to fault a young player for not being great at running the offense.
Poise to run the point and shooting are two things that young players tend to develop over time, when given the chance. It's not a guarantee that he will, but I think it's safe to say with Bledsoe that the potential is there. And he has a ton of talent and ability already to do lots of other things, most notably to make impressive defensive plays (blocks and steals) and to blow by defenders to get to the rim.
There aren't too many point guard prospects (i.e. guys who aren't already established as starters) who I'd want to give an opportunity ahead of Bledsoe. There are a lot of young guards playing more minutes who haven't shown as much as he has. At the least he seems like he could be something like a cross between Ty Lawson and Jrue Holiday.
The prospect of playing Bledsoe next to Bradley, especially defensively, would be very exciting.
Of course, this is all very academic because neither Pierce nor Rondo is likely to get traded anytime soon, if ever.
Maybe you gentlemen could take your discussion about Eric Bledsoe... to a thread about Eric Bledsoe?
-
Maybe you gentlemen could take your discussion about Eric Bledsoe... to a thread about Eric Bledsoe?
I think we seem to have reached something of a consensus here.
But anyway, a little bit of a tangent isn't gonna derail your thread. No need to get protective.
-
They shouldn't.
I mean, that roster's offensive capabilities are known to everyone. As good as Rondo is, he isn't going to turn them into a great team himself. I doubt he would do any better than Kemba, since Kemba is more of a scorer on his own.
-
Both look solid but not spectacular, with good skills but notable flaws. But I like the heart of both players.
I doubt the answer is 'yes' -- I'm curious what people think.
Would be interesting to trot out a young squad built largely around Walker, Bradley, MKG and Sully in future years. Hard-nosed group.
So who gets to pull KG and PP aside and say "Sorry, we decided to cut back on our chances of contending now because we'd like to field a scrappy, hard-nosed team without any stars in the future"?
-
Both look solid but not spectacular, with good skills but notable flaws. But I like the heart of both players.
I doubt the answer is 'yes' -- I'm curious what people think.
Would be interesting to trot out a young squad built largely around Walker, Bradley, MKG and Sully in future years. Hard-nosed group.
So who gets to pull KG and PP aside and say "Sorry, we decided to cut back on our chances of contending now because we'd like to field a scrappy, hard-nosed team without any stars in the future"?
Well I imagine this kind of move would signal that the team is trying to build a core for the future rather than prioritize winning now. So it would probably have to coincide somehow with trading Pierce and KG.
Not saying that's a smart course of action. But clearly this would not be a move intended to make KG or Pierce happy.
-
Both look solid but not spectacular, with good skills but notable flaws. But I like the heart of both players.
I doubt the answer is 'yes' -- I'm curious what people think.
Would be interesting to trot out a young squad built largely around Walker, Bradley, MKG and Sully in future years. Hard-nosed group.
So who gets to pull KG and PP aside and say "Sorry, we decided to cut back on our chances of contending now because we'd like to field a scrappy, hard-nosed team without any stars in the future"?
I'm not a believer that the Cs very slim championship hopes really ride on Rondo. Not in a half-court team built around KG and Pierce.
Kidd-Gilchrist's defense would be a nice boost to their needs, IMO. In short, I don't think this is somehow a rebuild.
-
I really like both players, especially MKG.
But nope.
EDIT: Mis-read the thread - my bad.
I think they (CHA) would offer that. Rondo would be a nice piece to build around.
I'd hope Danny says no, though.
-
They might but I don't like it for us one bit.
-
There is no way Charlotte does this for the following reasons:
1. They really like MKG and do see All-Star potential. He is only 19 and already an average offensive player with room for improvement, and will certainly be an elite defender.
2. Rondo has two years left on his contract and probably would be out of there in a heartbeat, probably to the Lakers or some nonsense just to spite Danny.
3. Even if they don't see MKG as a franchise player, they are going to have at least two more shots at the lottery in the next two years with him on the team, and then it would take 2-3 years for any franchise player they get to develop. By then Rondo is maybe 30 or 31 (or gone!), while MKG is still only 23 and just hitting his peak.
4. Walker has shown close to Ben Gordon-type offensive numbers while being a much better defender. He is a valuable piece in his own right.
5. Rondo has proven to be a great player when surrounded by other great players, but hasn't proved that he can play well surrounded by a weak team. I'm not saying I think he couldn't do that, but for any offensively limited player that is going to be a concern.
-
5. Rondo has proven to be a great player when surrounded by other great players, but hasn't proved that he can play well surrounded by a weak team. I'm not saying I think he couldn't do that, but for any offensively limited player that is going to be a concern.
Rondo played fine earlier in the season when the team struggled, he did last year as well. I wonder how many of the "Rondo can't play well without a great cast" still think his assists will drop significantly when he doesn't have Ray to pass to.
-
5. Rondo has proven to be a great player when surrounded by other great players, but hasn't proved that he can play well surrounded by a weak team. I'm not saying I think he couldn't do that, but for any offensively limited player that is going to be a concern.
Rondo played fine earlier in the season when the team struggled, he did last year as well. I wonder how many of the "Rondo can't play well without a great cast" still think his assists will drop significantly when he doesn't have Ray to pass to.
I think we still have yet to see what Rondo will be like when he's on a team without any scorers like Pierce or KG.
Not making any judgment either way. But it's fair to have some doubts about how effective he might be in that situation, given that he's not a natural scorer, despite the fact that occasionally he does have a good scoring night (and that one 44 point game).
-
5. Rondo has proven to be a great player when surrounded by other great players, but hasn't proved that he can play well surrounded by a weak team. I'm not saying I think he couldn't do that, but for any offensively limited player that is going to be a concern.
Rondo played fine earlier in the season when the team struggled, he did last year as well. I wonder how many of the "Rondo can't play well without a great cast" still think his assists will drop significantly when he doesn't have Ray to pass to.
I think we still have yet to see what Rondo will be like when he's on a team without any scorers like Pierce or KG.
Not making any judgment either way. But it's fair to have some doubts about how effective he might be in that situation, given that he's not a natural scorer, despite the fact that occasionally he does have a good scoring night (and that one 44 point game).
What exactly do you think "scorers like Pierce or KG" means? KG is currently 40th in per36 scoring. Paul's better at 12th, but you make it sound like it's still 2008. I guess your assumption is that Rondo's going to be playing on a team that's roughly equivalent (offensively) to Rondo and last year's Charlotte team but that's fairly unlikely.
-
5. Rondo has proven to be a great player when surrounded by other great players, but hasn't proved that he can play well surrounded by a weak team. I'm not saying I think he couldn't do that, but for any offensively limited player that is going to be a concern.
Rondo played fine earlier in the season when the team struggled, he did last year as well. I wonder how many of the "Rondo can't play well without a great cast" still think his assists will drop significantly when he doesn't have Ray to pass to.
I think we still have yet to see what Rondo will be like when he's on a team without any scorers like Pierce or KG.
Not making any judgment either way. But it's fair to have some doubts about how effective he might be in that situation, given that he's not a natural scorer, despite the fact that occasionally he does have a good scoring night (and that one 44 point game).
What exactly do you think "scorers like Pierce or KG" means? KG is currently 40th in per36 scoring. Paul's better at 12th, but you make it sound like it's still 2008. I guess your assumption is that Rondo's going to be playing on a team that's roughly equivalent (offensively) to Rondo and last year's Charlotte team but that's fairly unlikely.
What I mean is we don't know what would happen if you put Rondo on a team like, say, the Hornets, or the Raptors, or the Magic, or the Wizards, or the Suns, and so on. A team without a player who you can really single out as a capable 1st option on offense.
Even take this Celtics team. Play a few games without Pierce or Garnett and see what happens when the top offensive options are Rondo, Jeff Green, and Jason Terry. I think the belief that some people have is that in that situation Rondo doesn't have the natural scoring ability to efficiently carry the load offensively.
Teams without much talent need players who can take a lot of shots, otherwise their offense completely lacks consistency or focus.
-
5. Rondo has proven to be a great player when surrounded by other great players, but hasn't proved that he can play well surrounded by a weak team. I'm not saying I think he couldn't do that, but for any offensively limited player that is going to be a concern.
Rondo played fine earlier in the season when the team struggled, he did last year as well. I wonder how many of the "Rondo can't play well without a great cast" still think his assists will drop significantly when he doesn't have Ray to pass to.
I think we still have yet to see what Rondo will be like when he's on a team without any scorers like Pierce or KG.
Not making any judgment either way. But it's fair to have some doubts about how effective he might be in that situation, given that he's not a natural scorer, despite the fact that occasionally he does have a good scoring night (and that one 44 point game).
What exactly do you think "scorers like Pierce or KG" means? KG is currently 40th in per36 scoring. Paul's better at 12th, but you make it sound like it's still 2008. I guess your assumption is that Rondo's going to be playing on a team that's roughly equivalent (offensively) to Rondo and last year's Charlotte team but that's fairly unlikely.
What I mean is we don't know what would happen if you put Rondo on a team like, say, the Hornets, or the Raptors, or the Magic, or the Wizards, or the Suns, and so on. A team without a player who you can really single out as a capable 1st option on offense.
I'd guess Rondo would get more points and assists, like he normally has in the games PP/KG/RA missed over the last few years.
-
5. Rondo has proven to be a great player when surrounded by other great players, but hasn't proved that he can play well surrounded by a weak team. I'm not saying I think he couldn't do that, but for any offensively limited player that is going to be a concern.
Rondo played fine earlier in the season when the team struggled, he did last year as well. I wonder how many of the "Rondo can't play well without a great cast" still think his assists will drop significantly when he doesn't have Ray to pass to.
I think we still have yet to see what Rondo will be like when he's on a team without any scorers like Pierce or KG.
Not making any judgment either way. But it's fair to have some doubts about how effective he might be in that situation, given that he's not a natural scorer, despite the fact that occasionally he does have a good scoring night (and that one 44 point game).
What exactly do you think "scorers like Pierce or KG" means? KG is currently 40th in per36 scoring. Paul's better at 12th, but you make it sound like it's still 2008. I guess your assumption is that Rondo's going to be playing on a team that's roughly equivalent (offensively) to Rondo and last year's Charlotte team but that's fairly unlikely.
What I mean is we don't know what would happen if you put Rondo on a team like, say, the Hornets, or the Raptors, or the Magic, or the Wizards, or the Suns, and so on. A team without a player who you can really single out as a capable 1st option on offense.
I'd guess Rondo would get more points and assists, like he normally has in the games PP/KG/RA missed over the last few years.
And I'm not saying that couldn't happen. I'm just saying we don't have a significant sample size of that. Rondo's never been forced to play 10-20 straight games doing that. And I think people who raise doubts about that have decent reasons to do so.
-
5. Rondo has proven to be a great player when surrounded by other great players, but hasn't proved that he can play well surrounded by a weak team. I'm not saying I think he couldn't do that, but for any offensively limited player that is going to be a concern.
Rondo played fine earlier in the season when the team struggled, he did last year as well. I wonder how many of the "Rondo can't play well without a great cast" still think his assists will drop significantly when he doesn't have Ray to pass to.
I think we still have yet to see what Rondo will be like when he's on a team without any scorers like Pierce or KG.
Not making any judgment either way. But it's fair to have some doubts about how effective he might be in that situation, given that he's not a natural scorer, despite the fact that occasionally he does have a good scoring night (and that one 44 point game).
What exactly do you think "scorers like Pierce or KG" means? KG is currently 40th in per36 scoring. Paul's better at 12th, but you make it sound like it's still 2008. I guess your assumption is that Rondo's going to be playing on a team that's roughly equivalent (offensively) to Rondo and last year's Charlotte team but that's fairly unlikely.
What I mean is we don't know what would happen if you put Rondo on a team like, say, the Hornets, or the Raptors, or the Magic, or the Wizards, or the Suns, and so on. A team without a player who you can really single out as a capable 1st option on offense.
I'd guess Rondo would get more points and assists, like he normally has in the games PP/KG/RA missed over the last few years.
My point was a little different. Of course you'd expect his numbers to go up. I was just saying that Rondo might be the type of player who's more valuable on a good team than a bad team.
I mean, there are some guys you can add to a 30-win team and it becomes a 50-win team, and other guys where that doesn't happen. And some guys you add to a 50-win team and it becomes a championship team. Other guys, not.
Not saying we know either way. Just that we don't know. And a team like CHA would have to consider that risk.
-
One reason you want Rondo on a good team and not a bad team
is that he is one of the better playoff performers in history.
Goes to waste if your team's not in the playoffs...
-
A lot of posters on this blog think Rondo is over-rated. Yet, they want Kemba Walker?!
-
I mean, there are some guys you can add to a 30-win team and it becomes a 50-win team, and other guys where that doesn't happen. And some guys you add to a 50-win team and it becomes a championship team. Other guys, not.
Not saying we know either way. Just that we don't know. And a team like CHA would have to consider that risk.
This is really well put.
-
omg, yeah and we'll sprinkle green fairy dust on them and they'll be something more than losers in the nba and we'll sprinkle fairy dust on someone else on the team so they'll be capable of running an offense. don't understand these fascinations with trading a young star and playoff stud for lottery team garbage.spare me!
Yes, because players who are on a losing team are by nature losers not worth investing in. It's not possible for a player to be really valuable and still be on a team that loses a lot of games.
Obviously since Pierce and Rondo both played on that '06'-7 team that set the franchise record for losing streak they are lottery team garbage. Total losers.
::)
bravo bravo,let's trade all our players mid season for players on lottery teams right when we're getting it together!