CelticsStrong
Celtics Basketball => Celtics Talk => Topic started by: LooseCannon on May 07, 2013, 09:47:27 PM
-
I've suggested this hypothetical in comments in "blow it up" threads, but I feel like polling it now. Some people would like the team to be rid of Kevin Garnett and Paul Pierce so that the team can tank and "earn" a high draft pick in 2014. The Charlotte Bobcats are a bad team with a roster mostly devoid of talent. Just by being themselves, they have a good shot at having one of the worst records in the league next season.
If Kevin Garnett and Paul Pierce retired and you couldn't use their contracts in some sort of trade to bring in other players or draft picks, would you be willing to swap rosters with the Bobcats to maximize the Celtics' shot at a high pick in the 2014 draft? Assume that you are only trading players under contract for next season and not 2013 draft picks.
I would argue that if you believe this team needs to get really bad before it can get really good again (something that I don't believe), then you should say yes.
-
Good. God. No.
-
One team has successfully built a franchise mostly through the draft. A thousand have failed. This idea that you have to be 'bad' to rebuild isn't accurate. You have to be smart with your money, and get a few good bounces.
-
It's not a bad option.
I am not sure I am ready to give up on Rondo though so I don't think it would be my first preference but I wouldn't be completely against it either. It's a good place to rebuild from. Top 5 picks are so valuable to the rebuilding process. Gives you a great footing to build from.
I wish Rondo was a few years younger. I wouldn't consider this at all if he were 24/25 years old but 27/28 years old coming off ACL surgery and with a rebuilding process on the horizon. Nerve wracking.
-
In the spirit of this thread... I'd argue that the Charlotte Bobcats are closer to winning a championship than this team.
It's the short-view vs long-view.
At first, that sounds crazy-town.
Look at it this way... The New Orleans Hornets initially were set to trade Chris Paul for a package that would net them Lamar Odom, Kevin Martin, Luis Scola and Goran Dragic.
The NBA (acting owner of the Hornets) smartly declined the trade. WHy? ... well it was simple really. It wasn't petty. It wasn't corruption. It was "baskeball reasons" and those "basketball reasons" made a heck of a lot of sense. Short-sighted fans looked at that trade and said, "That's not a bad deal! That's a lot of talent... they could make the playoffs with that talent!" ... And sure, maybe they would. But they were eliminating a Top-5 player in Chris Paul and replacing him with a bunch of mediocre fringe-stars. None of those guys were all-stars. At most they would have won 35-45 games. Meanwhile, they would have saddled themselves with 100 million dollars worth of bad salary if they made that deal... they would have ruined any shot of drafting a franchise player... and they would have stuck themself into a rut of perpetual mediocrity.
At the time, I thought the veto made TOTAL sense. In retrospect, it made even more sense. Odom was a travesty in Dallas. Scola was so mediocre, his team didn't mind amnestying him. K-Mart is currently coming off the bench. I like Dragic, but Dragic isn't an impact player.
The alternative? Young Eric Gordon, the pick that became #10 (Austin Rivers) and most importantly... addition-by-subtraction... putting yourself in position to tank and land a top 5 pick (the superstar scratch ticket). Now, Gordon and Rivers so far look underwhelming... but that superstar scratch ticket nabbed them the second coming of Kevin Garnett (Anthony Davis). I'd gladly take that Hornets roster over ours... Davis is the future. You absolutely can build a contender around Anthony Davis if he develops the way we expect him to.
"Running it back" is akin to accepting that Scola/Odom/Martin/Dragic trade. You'll put yourself in a fine position to win 45 games. If KG/PP retire and we decide to march out a team built around Rondo, Green, Bradley, Bass and Sully... you're looking at a 25-38 win team. Best case: 1st round exist. Worst case: Mid-Lotto.
As much as I love Rondo, there isn't a single player on this team you can build a contender around. There is no Anthony Davis on this squad. We're severely lacking in quality assets... Bradley alone probably wouldn't net a lotto pick. Sully was a late 1st rounder for a reason. Beyond that, there's nothing on this team in terms of value. The contracts of Bass, Terry and Lee are borderline terrible. Green is alright, but will never be an all-star. If KG and Pierce retire, you're looking at a perpetually mediocre team. Too good to suck. Too bad to contend.
Compare that to the Bobcats position. They have 9 players 26 years old and younger.
Kemba Walker - Solid young player (22 years old) ... was the 9th pick in 2011. 2nd year player currently averaging 18 points and 6 assists and 2 steals on a bad team. Good asset.
Gerald Henderson - Good young SG (25 years old) with proper size (6'5 215)... was the 12th pick in 2009. Averaged 15.5 points and 4 rebounds. Solid asset.
Bismack Biyomobo - Good young big. (20 years old). Was the 7th pick in 2011. Averaged 7 boards and 2 blocks. Solid asset.
Michael Kidd-Gilcrest - Only 19 years old. Was the 2nd pick this year. Was one of the top rookies in the league in terms of efficiency. He's one of the best young prospects in the league. Elite asset.
Byron Mullins and Jeff Taylor also have some value...
Additionally, they have the 2nd best odds in this upcoming draft... which means they could luck into Nerlens Noel.
Let me pause for a second. I'd argue that MKG has more trade value than Rondo. I'd also argue that their pick (projected #2 in this draft) also has more trade value than Rondo.
Let's take it a step further... that team has all their key players locked into rookie deals. They have boatloads of cap space.
And most importantly, they'll stink again next year... meaning they'll be one of the frontrunners to land a top 5 pick in the HUGE 2014 draft (with Andrew Wiggins the star player).
With the Bobcats, you're looking at a team who (if properly managed) could be a contender within the next 4 years. THey are LOADED with young assets and cap space. Danny Ainge would be salivating to have that kind of flexibility. That's the kind of assets you either build a contender around (the OKC route) or you flip for established vets (the 2007 Celtics route).
Boston, on the other hand, is in a very poor position to contend in the short and long term. For all of these reasons, I'd argue that the Charlotte Bobcats are far closer to contending than the Boston Celtics are. Yes, Boston might make the playoffs for a the next couple years (and get walloped by the contenders) while in the short term the Bobcats will remain a lotto team... but if I had to put money on one of these teams winning a title in 2018... I'd put money on the Bobcats.
-
Firstly, I like the way you bury the caveats all through your post. It's a nice rhetorical strategy.
It happens first when you call Davis the second coming of KG, and then spend another ten or so words before you acknowledge the point that he has to develop the way you think he will in order for that statement to make sense.
That extends out to your vision of the Bobcats and their tank adventure--namely, I would say that you don't give the "if properly managed" portion of that plan enough credit. Hiding it in a parenthetical statement doesn't change the fact that anyone can blow a team up. It remains to be seen if Rich Cho can build a better one.
That said, I think that Charlotte made the right decision in blowing it up. While that Gerald Wallace/Capt. Jack team was a lot of fun to watch, they'd pretty clearly hit their ceiling.
Now, you could say that our team, as presently constructed, hit our ceiling last year when we snuck into the ECF by the skin of our teeth. I'd probably agree with that.
-
I'd argue that MKG has more trade value than Rondo.
Just false.
-
I'd argue that MKG has more trade value than Rondo.
Just false.
He's 19 and on his rookie contract. Rondo plays the deepest position in the league, is 28 years old, a top-10 PG and coming off of major surgery. MKG has more trade value. You couldn't get a top 5 pick for rondo at this point
-
I'd argue that MKG has more trade value than Rondo.
Just false.
It's probably true, but has much more to do with contract size than talent.
-
Firstly, I like the way you bury the caveats all through your post. It's a nice rhetorical strategy.
It happens first when you call Davis the second coming of KG, and then spend another ten or so words before you acknowledge the point that he has to develop the way you think he will in order for that statement to make sense.
That extends out to your vision of the Bobcats and their tank adventure--namely, I would say that you don't give the "if properly managed" portion of that plan enough credit. Hiding it in a parenthetical statement doesn't change the fact that anyone can blow a team up. It remains to be seen if Rich Cho can build a better one.
That said, I think that Charlotte made the right decision in blowing it up. While that Gerald Wallace/Capt. Jack team was a lot of fun to watch, they'd pretty clearly hit their ceiling.
Now, you could say that our team, as presently constructed, hit our ceiling last year when we snuck into the ECF by the skin of our teeth. I'd probably agree with that.
Davis compares favorably to KG at the same age... He also compares favorably to kg in year 2. His per-minute numbers are fantastic. He's a franchise player unless something goes horribly wrong The pelicans are in amazing shape right now ... Few teams have a brighter future
-
Firstly, I like the way you bury the caveats all through your post. It's a nice rhetorical strategy.
It happens first when you call Davis the second coming of KG, and then spend another ten or so words before you acknowledge the point that he has to develop the way you think he will in order for that statement to make sense.
That extends out to your vision of the Bobcats and their tank adventure--namely, I would say that you don't give the "if properly managed" portion of that plan enough credit. Hiding it in a parenthetical statement doesn't change the fact that anyone can blow a team up. It remains to be seen if Rich Cho can build a better one.
That said, I think that Charlotte made the right decision in blowing it up. While that Gerald Wallace/Capt. Jack team was a lot of fun to watch, they'd pretty clearly hit their ceiling.
Now, you could say that our team, as presently constructed, hit our ceiling last year when we snuck into the ECF by the skin of our teeth. I'd probably agree with that.
Davis compares favorably to KG at the same age... He also compares favorably to kg in year 2. His per-minute numbers are fantastic. He's a franchise player unless something goes horribly wrong
Sure, he's potentially a franchise talent, but it takes a smart front office to maximize the team around him. The crux of my point doesn't really involve Davis at all, rather I'm curious to see how much you think front office competency plays into the development of a blown up team.
Also worth talking about, I think, is that teams have been much less liberal with trading draft picks since the new CBA was signed. A team like Brooklyn (trading picks for talent) is looking like the exception, not the rule.
-
No
-
Also worth talking about, I think, is that teams have been much less liberal with trading draft picks since the new CBA was signed. A team like Brooklyn (trading picks for talent) is looking like the exception, not the rule.
I like to think of that change in strategy as being less about the CBA and more about what Isaiah Thomas taught other GMs about how to most quickly run an NBA franchise into the ground.
-
Firstly, I like the way you bury the caveats all through your post. It's a nice rhetorical strategy.
It happens first when you call Davis the second coming of KG, and then spend another ten or so words before you acknowledge the point that he has to develop the way you think he will in order for that statement to make sense.
That extends out to your vision of the Bobcats and their tank adventure--namely, I would say that you don't give the "if properly managed" portion of that plan enough credit. Hiding it in a parenthetical statement doesn't change the fact that anyone can blow a team up. It remains to be seen if Rich Cho can build a better one.
That said, I think that Charlotte made the right decision in blowing it up. While that Gerald Wallace/Capt. Jack team was a lot of fun to watch, they'd pretty clearly hit their ceiling.
Now, you could say that our team, as presently constructed, hit our ceiling last year when we snuck into the ECF by the skin of our teeth. I'd probably agree with that.
Davis compares favorably to KG at the same age... He also compares favorably to kg in year 2. His per-minute numbers are fantastic. He's a franchise player unless something goes horribly wrong
Sure, he's potentially a franchise talent, but it takes a smart front office to maximize the team around him. The crux of my point doesn't really involve Davis at all, rather I'm curious to see how much you think front office competency plays into the development of a blown up team.
Also worth talking about, I think, is that teams have been much less liberal with trading draft picks since the new CBA was signed. A team like Brooklyn (trading picks for talent) is looking like the exception, not the rule.
If we were to look at the bobcats.. There's a fair chance they continue to stink. That team is a dream for a GM that knows what he is doing. Plenty of young assets on rookie deals... A top 5 pick in 2013, cap space... I'd personally tank for one more year in an effort to land wiggins and let the value increase for the youngins... And then either go the Okc route or use the cap space/assets to trade for established stars.
For example... Boston would probably take MKG or the top 5 pick for rondo right now... The bobcats could swallow the extra salary and Boston would get a young prospect to build around.... But the bobcats don't need to do that. A trade like that is the worst-case scenario for a properly managed bobcats team... Trading your prospects for a 28 year old flawed fringe Allstar.
They will probably mess it up but I promise you that team is a dream for a smart GM. You could turn it into a contender within 4 years.. And that is significantly harder to do with the celtics current roster... Lack of assets, a best player with lack of value, overpaid vets and a lack of cap space in the foreseeable future. When teams "blow it up", the goal is to get in the position the bobcats are in right now. They are years ahead of us in thar regard.
I bet you Danny ainge would rather have the bobcats assets than the crap he has to work with right now.
-
That's the thing, though--it's a two way street. Look at how long Houston was in the "collect assets and wait" mode. How many superstars did they swing and miss with before they landed Harden?
I actually find Houston a much more reasonable model than the Sonics/Thunder, since they weren't really an awful team at any stretch of their post-Yao rebuild, and as a fan, I want my team to at least be entertaining if they can't be good. I've watched more Warriors games than I care to admit, from the We Believe era to the present, and watching them tank aggressively at the end of last year was awful.
-
After how many years of rebuilding (?), Bobcats still don't have a single cornerstone player they can build their franchise around.
They will have to somehow find that player through a trade, using cap space -- not current rostered players -- as the bait.
Going to be a long, long time before Charlotte is relevant in the NBA.
-
I'd argue that MKG has more trade value than Rondo.
Just false.
trade value doesn't equal current talent level.
-
I've said this before when you've asked this, LC, but I'll say it again.
No, I wouldn't, and I think your question is off-base.
The Bobcats are a terrible team, and their roster is mostly devoid of talent.
But that is not because they are a rebuilding team specifically. Rebuilding is not the same thing as having an awful roster with little in the way of redeeming assets. The Bobcats are in that situation because of poor management, some bad luck, a lack of money, and not so great drafting.
The Celtics already have some decent young assets to work with. I think the Celtics could make moves over the next year that would put them in a better position to rebuild than the Bobcats are likely to be in, unless they are lucky enough to get the #1 pick next year (this year not so much).
Just having Rondo and Green already puts the Celtics in a better position because those can be traded for young assets. The most valuable guy the Bobcats have is MKG, and I think the jury is still out on whether he's going to end up being more than a nice role player.
The fact that somebody thinks the Celtics ought to rebuild, or that a team has to draft high at some point to become elite again, does not mean they want the Celtics to become the Bobcats.
-
I'd argue that MKG has more trade value than Rondo.
Just false.
He's 19 and on his rookie contract. Rondo plays the deepest position in the league, is 28 years old, a top-10 PG and coming off of major surgery. MKG has more trade value. You couldn't get a top 5 pick for rondo at this point
Interesting aside, in lieu of sarcastic remarks I was preparing to make, MKG is the very worst 19 year old to average at least 9 and 6 in the NBA, but it's a short and intriguing list that includes James, Garnett, Howard, Melo, Bosh, and McGrady - although also Ainge project, Darius Miles.
-
I've said this before when you've asked this, LC, but I'll say it again.
No, I wouldn't, and I think your question is off-base.
The Bobcats are a terrible team, and their roster is mostly devoid of talent.
But that is not because they are a rebuilding team specifically. Rebuilding is not the same thing as having an awful roster with little in the way of redeeming assets. The Bobcats are in that situation because of poor management, some bad luck, a lack of money, and not so great drafting.
The Celtics already have some decent young assets to work with. I think the Celtics could make moves over the next year that would put them in a better position to rebuild than the Bobcats are likely to be in, unless they are lucky enough to get the #1 pick next year (this year not so much).
Just having Rondo and Green already puts the Celtics in a better position because those can be traded for young assets. The most valuable guy the Bobcats have is MKG, and I think the jury is still out on whether he's going to end up being more than a nice role player.
The fact that somebody thinks the Celtics ought to rebuild, or that a team has to draft high at some point to become elite again, does not mean they want the Celtics to become the Bobcats.
Nailed it.
-
You couldn't get a top 5 pick for rondo at this point
The three other top 5 Bobcats draft picks that LarBrd33 wouldn't trade straight up for Rondo? Emeka Okafor, Raymond Felton and Adam Morrison.
-
I'm sorry but it's laughable to think MKG or the top 5 pick of a crappy draft class this year has more value than Rondo right now...ACL tear or not, he's clearly a better asset to have than either of those options.
Does anyone actually want to build around players on the Bobcats roster?
-
I'd argue that MKG has more trade value than Rondo.
Just false.
He's 19 and on his rookie contract. Rondo plays the deepest position in the league, is 28 years old, a top-10 PG and coming off of major surgery. MKG has more trade value. You couldn't get a top 5 pick for rondo at this point
Interesting aside, in lieu of sarcastic remarks I was preparing to make, MKG is the very worst 19 year old to average at least 9 and 6 in the NBA, but it's a short and intriguing list that includes James, Garnett, Howard, Melo, Bosh, and McGrady - although also Ainge project, Darius Miles.
MKG finished behind Chris Copeland in the ROY voting and you're telling me he has more trade value than Rondo?
-
The fact that somebody thinks the Celtics ought to rebuild, or that a team has to draft high at some point to become elite again, does not mean they want the Celtics to become the Bobcats.
One reason that I ask the question is that, unless you get hit with injuries to key players, I think you have to be in the same talent neighborhood as the worst teams in the league to end the season with one of the worst records.
Fans who want to tank for next season want the Celtics to become the Bobcats; they just don't realize it. There are so many bad teams right now that putting together a team that "only" gets 30 wins next season might have you drafting 8th in 2014.
-
I'd argue that MKG has more trade value than Rondo.
Just false.
He's 19 and on his rookie contract. Rondo plays the deepest position in the league, is 28 years old, a top-10 PG and coming off of major surgery. MKG has more trade value. You couldn't get a top 5 pick for rondo at this point
Interesting aside, in lieu of sarcastic remarks I was preparing to make, MKG is the very worst 19 year old to average at least 9 and 6 in the NBA, but it's a short and intriguing list that includes James, Garnett, Howard, Melo, Bosh, and McGrady - although also Ainge project, Darius Miles.
MKG finished behind Chris Copeland in the ROY voting and you're telling me he has more trade value than Rondo?
Due to the size of his contract, more teams can trade for MKG than Rondo. More teams are in play so there is more of a market for MKG in a trade.
Here is an extreme example of how salary cap considerations can trump on-court performance in trade value. Amare Stoudemire is a significantly more talented and useful player than DJ White. Due to his contract, DJ White is more of a trade asset than Amare Stoudemire.
-
You couldn't get a top 5 pick for rondo at this point
The three other top 5 Bobcats draft picks that LarBrd33 wouldn't trade straight up for Rondo? Emeka Okafor, Raymond Felton and Adam Morrison.
There's been a lot of busts picked in the top 5. There's also been a lot of superstars.
No, I don't think Rondo would net you a top 5 pick at this point. He's 28 years old, flawed, probably not an all-star anymore... and although 12 mil a year is a reasonable contract for a fringe allstar who can't shoot... most rebuilding teams would opt to take the top 5 pick. It's a potential superstar and he'll be locked into a rookie deal.
Now, I think most contenders would prefer to go with an established 28 year old (presuming Rondo ever comes back from his injury)... but most teams picking in the top 5 aren't contenders... they are teams looking to rebuild.
-
I'd argue that MKG has more trade value than Rondo.
Just false.
He's 19 and on his rookie contract. Rondo plays the deepest position in the league, is 28 years old, a top-10 PG and coming off of major surgery. MKG has more trade value. You couldn't get a top 5 pick for rondo at this point
Interesting aside, in lieu of sarcastic remarks I was preparing to make, MKG is the very worst 19 year old to average at least 9 and 6 in the NBA, but it's a short and intriguing list that includes James, Garnett, Howard, Melo, Bosh, and McGrady - although also Ainge project, Darius Miles.
Just taking a look at some notable 19 year olds in recent league history:
LeBron James per-36: 19 points, 5.4 assists, 5 rebonds, 1.5 steals 41%/29%/75%
Kevin Garnett per 36: 13 points, 7.9 rebounds, 2.3 assists, 2.1 blocks, 1.4 steals, 49%/28%/70%
Tracy McGrady per 36: 14.9 points, 9 rebounds, 3.7 assists, 1.7 steals, 2.1 blocks, 44%, 23%, 73%
Chris Bosh per 36: 12.3 points, 8 rebounds, 1 assist, 0.8 steals, 1.5 blocks, 46%/36%/70%
Dwight Howard per-36: 13.2 points, 11.1 rebounds, 1 assist, 1 steal, 1.8 blocks, 52%/0%/67%
Carmelo Anthony per 36: 20.7 points, 6 rebounds, 2.7 assists, 1.2 steals, 0.5 blocks, 43%/32%/78%
Kobe Bryant per 36: 21.4 points, 4 rebounds, 3.5 assists, 1.3 steals, 0.7 blocks 43%/34%/79%
Anthony Davis per 36: 17 points, 10.2 rebounds, 1.2 assists, 1.5 steals, 2.2 blocks, 52%/0%/75%
Kevin Durant per 36: 21.1 points, 4.5 rebounds, 2.5 assists, 1 steal, 1 block, 43%/29%/87%
Darius Miles per 36: 12.8 points, 8 rebounds, 1.7 assists. 1 steal, 2.1 blocks, 50%/0%/52%
Michael K-G per 36: 12.5 points, 8 rebounds, 2 assists, 1 steal, 1.2 blocks, 46%/22%/75%
You're actually totally right. TP
FYI, rondo at age 20 per 36: 9.9 points, 5.8 assists, 5.7 rebounds, 2.5 steals 0.2 blocks, 42%/20%/65%
...
Still, MKG has potential. He's 19 years old... he's on his rookie deal. I'd argue he has more trade value than Rajon Rondo coming off ACL surgery... but i'm willing to agree i'll probably lose that argument. :)
-
Jordan only hits on can't miss projects like Davis. He is a horrible GM.
-
Yes. I think a good GM would be able to rebuild the Bobcats quicker than he could the post-Pierce/KG Celtics.
-
With or without Noels?
-
You couldn't get a top 5 pick for rondo at this point
The three other top 5 Bobcats draft picks that LarBrd33 wouldn't trade straight up for Rondo? Emeka Okafor, Raymond Felton and Adam Morrison.
There's been a lot of busts picked in the top 5. There's also been a lot of superstars.
No, I don't think Rondo would net you a top 5 pick at this point. He's 28 years old, flawed, probably not an all-star anymore... and although 12 mil a year is a reasonable contract for a fringe allstar who can't shoot... most rebuilding teams would opt to take the top 5 pick. It's a potential superstar and he'll be locked into a rookie deal.
Now, I think most contenders would prefer to go with an established 28 year old (presuming Rondo ever comes back from his injury)... but most teams picking in the top 5 aren't contenders... they are teams looking to rebuild.
Again, though, you spent months telling everyone that the Celts wouldn't miss Rondo at all in the playoffs this year, and last year you were telling everyone that his assist totals would take a big hit if he didn't have Ray to pass the ball to. You might not have the slightest idea of what a player like Rondo adds to a team but that doesn't somehow mean he's not one of the best playoff performers in the league whenever he's healthy. He's led a team to the ecf and another team to the finals before he turned 27. The odds on more than a quarter of the players you tout over Rondo having that much postseason success in their entire careers is fairly low.
-
If those two retire, and we fail to land an impact player, we are the Bobcats.
-
You couldn't get a top 5 pick for rondo at this point
The three other top 5 Bobcats draft picks that LarBrd33 wouldn't trade straight up for Rondo? Emeka Okafor, Raymond Felton and Adam Morrison.
There's been a lot of busts picked in the top 5. There's also been a lot of superstars.
No, I don't think Rondo would net you a top 5 pick at this point. He's 28 years old, flawed, probably not an all-star anymore... and although 12 mil a year is a reasonable contract for a fringe allstar who can't shoot... most rebuilding teams would opt to take the top 5 pick. It's a potential superstar and he'll be locked into a rookie deal.
Now, I think most contenders would prefer to go with an established 28 year old (presuming Rondo ever comes back from his injury)... but most teams picking in the top 5 aren't contenders... they are teams looking to rebuild.
Again, though, you spent months telling everyone that the Celts wouldn't miss Rondo at all in the playoffs this year, and last year you were telling everyone that his assist totals would take a big hit if he didn't have Ray to pass the ball to. You might not have the slightest idea of what a player like Rondo adds to a team but that doesn't somehow mean he's not one of the best playoff performers in the league whenever he's healthy. He's led a team to the ecf and another team to the finals before he turned 27. The odds on more than a quarter of the players you tout over Rondo having that much postseason success in their entire careers is fairly low.
He also said we would beat the Knicks in 5 ::)
-
You couldn't get a top 5 pick for rondo at this point
The three other top 5 Bobcats draft picks that LarBrd33 wouldn't trade straight up for Rondo? Emeka Okafor, Raymond Felton and Adam Morrison.
There's been a lot of busts picked in the top 5. There's also been a lot of superstars.
No, I don't think Rondo would net you a top 5 pick at this point. He's 28 years old, flawed, probably not an all-star anymore... and although 12 mil a year is a reasonable contract for a fringe allstar who can't shoot... most rebuilding teams would opt to take the top 5 pick. It's a potential superstar and he'll be locked into a rookie deal.
Now, I think most contenders would prefer to go with an established 28 year old (presuming Rondo ever comes back from his injury)... but most teams picking in the top 5 aren't contenders... they are teams looking to rebuild.
Again, though, you spent months telling everyone that the Celts wouldn't miss Rondo at all in the playoffs this year, and last year you were telling everyone that his assist totals would take a big hit if he didn't have Ray to pass the ball to. You might not have the slightest idea of what a player like Rondo adds to a team but that doesn't somehow mean he's not one of the best playoff performers in the league whenever he's healthy. He's led a team to the ecf and another team to the finals before he turned 27. The odds on more than a quarter of the players you tout over Rondo having that much postseason success in their entire careers is fairly low.
I'll try to mediate here and say it probably depends.
My theory: a team with a top 5 pick would only find Rondo very attractive if they already have a franchise-type talent and are starting to assemble pieces around him. Rondo is a perfect #2 guy, but I can't see acquiring him before you have a #1.
The only teams who fill the bill are NOP and CLE, and CLE is out because they have Irving. (This makes my point, I think - if Cleveland had traded for Rondo earlier, then when they had the #1 they would have been forced to trade Rondo or draft someone else).
Rondo is a perfect fit with Davis IMO. He would bring his championship experience and culture, and be a nice fit playing style-wise. I can easily see NOP surrendering a pick in the 3-5 range of a mediocre draft to get Rondo. They could move Vasquez - he's on an attractive deal and might fetch them back a quality first round pick himself.
Another possibility would be DET. They also have some very good pieces (Monroe and Drummond) who would really benefit from Rondo's presence. Those big guys would develop much better mentally and in their games with Rondo as opposed to many of the names being thrown around in the top 5 this year.
That's about it, though. I think most other lottery teams are still interested less in a sure thing and more in...playing the lottery.
-
You couldn't get a top 5 pick for rondo at this point
The three other top 5 Bobcats draft picks that LarBrd33 wouldn't trade straight up for Rondo? Emeka Okafor, Raymond Felton and Adam Morrison.
There's been a lot of busts picked in the top 5. There's also been a lot of superstars.
No, I don't think Rondo would net you a top 5 pick at this point. He's 28 years old, flawed, probably not an all-star anymore... and although 12 mil a year is a reasonable contract for a fringe allstar who can't shoot... most rebuilding teams would opt to take the top 5 pick. It's a potential superstar and he'll be locked into a rookie deal.
Now, I think most contenders would prefer to go with an established 28 year old (presuming Rondo ever comes back from his injury)... but most teams picking in the top 5 aren't contenders... they are teams looking to rebuild.
Again, though, you spent months telling everyone that the Celts wouldn't miss Rondo at all in the playoffs this year, and last year you were telling everyone that his assist totals would take a big hit if he didn't have Ray to pass the ball to. You might not have the slightest idea of what a player like Rondo adds to a team but that doesn't somehow mean he's not one of the best playoff performers in the league whenever he's healthy. He's led a team to the ecf and another team to the finals before he turned 27. The odds on more than a quarter of the players you tout over Rondo having that much postseason success in their entire careers is fairly low.
I'll try to mediate here and say it probably depends.
My theory: a team with a top 5 pick would only find Rondo very attractive if they already have a franchise-type talent and are starting to assemble pieces around him. Rondo is a perfect #2 guy, but I can't see acquiring him before you have a #1.
The only teams who fill the bill are NOP and CLE, and CLE is out because they have Irving. (This makes my point, I think - if Cleveland had traded for Rondo earlier, then when they had the #1 they would have been forced to trade Rondo or draft someone else).
Rondo is a perfect fit with Davis IMO. He would bring his championship experience and culture, and be a nice fit playing style-wise. I can easily see NOP surrendering a pick in the 3-5 range of a mediocre draft to get Rondo. They could move Vasquez - he's on an attractive deal and might fetch them back a quality first round pick himself.
Another possibility would be DET. They also have some very good pieces (Monroe and Drummond) who would really benefit from Rondo's presence. Those big guys would develop much better mentally and in their games with Rondo as opposed to many of the names being thrown around in the top 5 this year.
That's about it, though. I think most other lottery teams are still interested less in a sure thing and more in...playing the lottery.
I try not to get too involved in the trade value discussions (although sometimes I do) because, let's face it, people here don't have much of an idea about whether what they say is even slightly accurate. I'm just say that characterizing Rondo as a "flawed, fringe all-star who can't shoot" doesn't magically erase what he's been able to accomplish on the court during his career. Is he flawed? Yes. Is he a great shooter? No. Can he dominate playoff games and lead his team deep in the playoffs? Clearly, as he's done so in the recent past.
-
why? even without KG and PP next year, the talent on the C's could still get into the playoffs in the East with Rondo and Sully. Bobcats would be lucky to make the NCAA tournament with that roster.
-
An interesting thread discussion about a roster swap here.
I agree with Roy. A good GM would have an easier time rebuilding the Bobcats than what's going to be left of the Celtics.
And LB, what are you thinking?
Of course Danny can land a top 5 pick for Rondo. Even the top pick. More than one. ;D
-
Just to be clear, Pierce has gone on record to say he is playing next year...
-
An interesting thread discussion about a roster swap here.
I agree with Roy. A good GM would have an easier time rebuilding the Bobcats than what's going to be left of the Celtics.
And LB, what are you thinking?
Of course Danny can land a top 5 pick for Rondo. Even the top pick. More than one. ;D
Probably not since, as you were frequently saying this year, the team clearly proved that they don't need him on the offense, which is an absolute *joy* to watch when he's not playing.
-
but if I had to put money on one of these teams winning a title in 2018... I'd put money on the Bobcats.
I'd take that bet. No team run by Michael Jordan will win a title. great player, horrible executive.
-
but if I had to put money on one of these teams winning a title in 2018... I'd put money on the Bobcats.
I'd take that bet. No team run by Michael Jordan will win a title. great player, horrible executive.
Oh god ya, I'd make that bet a hundred times over and give you odds. The Bobcats are going NOWHERE.
-
An interesting thread discussion about a roster swap here.
I agree with Roy. A good GM would have an easier time rebuilding the Bobcats than what's going to be left of the Celtics.
And LB, what are you thinking?
Of course Danny can land a top 5 pick for Rondo. Even the top pick. More than one. ;D
Probably not since, as you were frequently saying this year, the team clearly proved that they don't need him on the offense, which is an absolute *joy* to watch when he's not playing.
TP for the zing.
-
You couldn't get a top 5 pick for rondo at this point
The three other top 5 Bobcats draft picks that LarBrd33 wouldn't trade straight up for Rondo? Emeka Okafor, Raymond Felton and Adam Morrison.
There's been a lot of busts picked in the top 5. There's also been a lot of superstars.
No, I don't think Rondo would net you a top 5 pick at this point. He's 28 years old, flawed, probably not an all-star anymore... and although 12 mil a year is a reasonable contract for a fringe allstar who can't shoot... most rebuilding teams would opt to take the top 5 pick. It's a potential superstar and he'll be locked into a rookie deal.
Now, I think most contenders would prefer to go with an established 28 year old (presuming Rondo ever comes back from his injury)... but most teams picking in the top 5 aren't contenders... they are teams looking to rebuild.
Again, though, you spent months telling everyone that the Celts wouldn't miss Rondo at all in the playoffs this year,
WE didn't miss Rondo. We were getting our butts handed to us by the Knicks either way if KG and Pierce we're playing vintage ball.
The freedom Jeff Green had (and the impact he made as a result) negated the loss of ball-dominating Rondo in the playoffs. I love your optimism about Boston's chances with Rondo's leadership... but let's agree to disagree on that. Neither of us is convincing the other. Fwiw, I hope I'm wrong and you're right... but I don't see a Rondo-lead team (without KG and PIerce) even making the playoffs.
-
but if I had to put money on one of these teams winning a title in 2018... I'd put money on the Bobcats.
I'd take that bet. No team run by Michael Jordan will win a title. great player, horrible executive.
Oh god ya, I'd make that bet a hundred times over and give you odds. The Bobcats are going NOWHERE.
They are a poorly managed team. A good GM would have a far easier time turning the Bobcats into a contender than this Boston team.
Even poorly-managed, their odds of landing a franchise player is far greater than us, because we're set up to be perpetually mediocre for several years.
So yes, I'd gladly trade our situation for the Bobcats situation... and I'm sure a savvy GM like Danny Ainge would prefer that as well. If Ainge had that roster/picks it would mean one more year of suffering and then Ainge would have a clear path to build a contender using boatloads of premium assets and cap space.
-
but if I had to put money on one of these teams winning a title in 2018... I'd put money on the Bobcats.
I'd take that bet. No team run by Michael Jordan will win a title. great player, horrible executive.
Oh god ya, I'd make that bet a hundred times over and give you odds. The Bobcats are going NOWHERE.
They are a poorly managed team. A good GM would have a far easier time turning the Bobcats into a contender than this Boston team.
Even poorly-managed, their odds of landing a franchise player is far greater than us, because we're set up to be perpetually mediocre for several years.
So yes, I'd gladly trade our situation for the Bobcats situation. One more year of suffering and then Danny Ainge would have a clear path to build a contender using boatloads of premium assets and cap space.
HOW? What moves are you making to improve that roster? How are you attracting free agents to that market to others? People are falling over themselves to play alongside Bismack Biyombo while 5,000 people watch your game?
-
Here's a reminder - the Bobcat are an embaressment of a franchise.
People don't know if their most valuable asset will become more than a sufficient role player.
5,000 people watch their games nightly.
They have a jersey with checker boards on the side which even late 90's WWF tag team High Energy ditched for being too cheezy
They have cap room that no legitimately good player will take. And I can assure you that they're going to waste it on a non-franchise altering player like Josh Smith.
The Bobcats chance of becoming good hing on either 1 of 2 things happening:
1. An MVP-like, sure thing, prospect falls form the sky and hits them squarely in the head
2. They invent a time machine, that allows for an alternate timeline dimension where Michael Jordan in his prime can join the Bobcats. Then, and only if Michael Jordan doesn't trip over his fat jeans on the way there will the Bobcats be competitive.
-
The Bobcats aren't in a great position, I'd take Cleveland, New Orleans, Toronto, Orlando, heck I'll take all the other EC lottery teams over Charlotte
-
You couldn't get a top 5 pick for rondo at this point
The three other top 5 Bobcats draft picks that LarBrd33 wouldn't trade straight up for Rondo? Emeka Okafor, Raymond Felton and Adam Morrison.
There's been a lot of busts picked in the top 5. There's also been a lot of superstars.
No, I don't think Rondo would net you a top 5 pick at this point. He's 28 years old, flawed, probably not an all-star anymore... and although 12 mil a year is a reasonable contract for a fringe allstar who can't shoot... most rebuilding teams would opt to take the top 5 pick. It's a potential superstar and he'll be locked into a rookie deal.
Now, I think most contenders would prefer to go with an established 28 year old (presuming Rondo ever comes back from his injury)... but most teams picking in the top 5 aren't contenders... they are teams looking to rebuild.
Again, though, you spent months telling everyone that the Celts wouldn't miss Rondo at all in the playoffs this year,
WE didn't miss Rondo. We were getting our butts handed to us by the Knicks either way if KG and Pierce we're playing vintage ball.
The freedom Jeff Green had (and the impact he made as a result) negated the loss of ball-dominating Rondo in the playoffs. I love your optimism about Boston's chances with Rondo's leadership... but let's agree to disagree on that. Neither of us is convincing the other. Fwiw, I hope I'm wrong and you're right... but I don't see a Rondo-lead team (without KG and PIerce) even making the playoffs.
We clearly missed Rondo. You're watching games where KG doesn't score much because Rondo wasn't getting him open looks on a regular basis and Pierce was struggling mightily trying to fill Rondo's role and claiming Rondo wouldn't have helped because those two didn't excel. Rondo's not playing is the *reason* they didn't play well.
You can't look at KG's defense and say it was poor, we held the Knicks way below their scoring average. You certainly can't look at his rebounding as a sign he was playing poorly. All you have is his scoring being lower, but you're unable to see the relationship between fewer open shots and fewer shots made.
Likewise, take away most of PP's turnovers because he wouldn't be trying to handle the point guard responsibilities, give him a few more easy shots a game and you'd have better numbers than the year before. Again, one would assume while you were watching PP getting stripped by the Knicks point guards or having his passes intercepted because he was trying to get assists without ever having the thought that we'd be better off with our point guard out there.
It's like having watched Glen Davis trying to guard Rashard Lewis for the 2009 Bos/Orl playoff series and not thinking we'd have been better off with KG playing.
-
but if I had to put money on one of these teams winning a title in 2018... I'd put money on the Bobcats.
I'd take that bet. No team run by Michael Jordan will win a title. great player, horrible executive.
Oh god ya, I'd make that bet a hundred times over and give you odds. The Bobcats are going NOWHERE.
They are a poorly managed team. A good GM would have a far easier time turning the Bobcats into a contender than this Boston team.
A core of Rondo/Pierce/KG/Green with Bass/Sully/Lee/Terry/Bradley has a pretty good chance of getting to the conference finals. If Rondo was healthy we wouldn't have had much trouble at all with the Knicks or the Pacers. Bring back current team, add a FA, maybe make a smallish trade and we'll be closer to being a contender than you could reasonably expect Charlotte to be at any time between now and 2018.
Likewise, the odds of trading PP and/or KG for a good player or two and adding them to the Rondo/Green core are probably higher than Charlotte becoming contenders through the draft over the next 4 years or so. Rondo and Green and the ability to absorb salaries with the contracts of the (ready to retire) PP and KG is a much better starting point to try and contend in the fairly near future than being the Bobcats.
-
I disagree Tim. Pierce and the Boston offense was fine post-Rondo... Pierce averaged 19, 6 and 6 after the all-star break. Check out Paul's shooting percentages:
Pre all-star 42%/36%/79%
Post all-star 49%/43%/78%
Jeff Green's scoring and efficiency increased dramatically after rondo went out.
Pre all-star 44%/34%/81% 10 points
Post all-star 49%/44%/80% 17 points
Brandon Bass... pre all-star 45% shooting... post all-star 54% shooting
Their effectiveness scoring wasn't hinging on Rondo's ability to pass them the ball.
... I wouldn't blame our playoff on Rondo being out. The Knicks owned us. Pierce shot 37% and 23% from three in the playoffs. It wasn't reflective of how we played in the regular season without Rondo. Credit New York's defense and credit our players just shooting horrendously in that series. Rondo wouldn't have made a difference... we still would have been creamed with him.
-
[b
The Bobcats chance of becoming good hing on either 1 of 2 things happening:
1. An MVP-like, sure thing, prospect falls form the sky and hits them squarely in the head
2. They invent a time machine, that allows for an alternate timeline dimension where Michael Jordan in his prime can join the Bobcats. Then, and only if Michael Jordan doesn't trip over his fat jeans on the way there will the Bobcats be competitive.
Use that time machine to give them Larry Bird as the original owner and not Bob Johnson.
And then throw away those bobcats name and colors and bring back the Hornets.
-
I disagree Tim. Pierce and the Boston offense was fine post-Rondo... Pierce averaged 19, 6 and 6 after the all-star break. Check out Paul's shooting percentages:
Pre all-star 42%/36%/79%
Post all-star 49%/43%/78%
Jeff Green's scoring and efficiency increased dramatically after rondo went out.
Pre all-star 44%/34%/81% 10 points
Post all-star 49%/44%/80% 17 points
Brandon Bass... pre all-star 45% shooting... post all-star 54% shooting
Their effectiveness scoring wasn't hinging on Rondo's ability to pass them the ball.
... I wouldn't blame our playoff on Rondo being out. The Knicks owned us. Pierce shot 37% and 23% from three in the playoffs. It wasn't reflective of how we played in the regular season without Rondo. Credit New York's defense and credit our players just shooting horrendously in that series. Rondo wouldn't have made a difference... we still would have been creamed with him.
I think its strange that you think having an all-star point guard wouldn't have mattered when we got nearly zero production from Bradley/Terry/Lee/Crawford/Williams offensively for large stretches of that series and struggled with inbounding the ball, bringing up the ball, and turnovers.
But that wouldn't fit the predefined trench warfare you've had for months with Bballtim.
-
I disagree Tim. Pierce and the Boston offense was fine post-Rondo... Pierce averaged 19, 6 and 6 after the all-star break. Check out Paul's shooting percentages:
Pre all-star 42%/36%/79%
Post all-star 49%/43%/78%
Jeff Green's scoring and efficiency increased dramatically after rondo went out.
Pre all-star 44%/34%/81% 10 points
Post all-star 49%/44%/80% 17 points
Brandon Bass... pre all-star 45% shooting... post all-star 54% shooting
Their effectiveness scoring wasn't hinging on Rondo's ability to pass them the ball.
... I wouldn't blame our playoff on Rondo being out. The Knicks owned us. Pierce shot 37% and 23% from three in the playoffs. It wasn't reflective of how we played in the regular season without Rondo. Credit New York's defense and credit our players just shooting horrendously in that series. Rondo wouldn't have made a difference... we still would have been creamed with him.
Exactly! Heck, with Rondo we barely would of put up 50 points a game! He's that terrible at running an offense. What a bad point guard. The guy that averaged 17ppg and gave Miami fits during last season playoffs definitely wouldn't have made a difference against an overrated Knicks team ::)
But hey, we'll still beat the Knicks in 5 or 6, right?
-
I sincerely believe that the Celtics beat the Knicks in 5 in that series with a healthy Rondo.
-
I disagree Tim. Pierce and the Boston offense was fine post-Rondo... Pierce averaged 19, 6 and 6 after the all-star break. Check out Paul's shooting percentages:
Pre all-star 42%/36%/79%
Post all-star 49%/43%/78%
Jeff Green's scoring and efficiency increased dramatically after rondo went out.
Pre all-star 44%/34%/81% 10 points
Post all-star 49%/44%/80% 17 points
Brandon Bass... pre all-star 45% shooting... post all-star 54% shooting
Their effectiveness scoring wasn't hinging on Rondo's ability to pass them the ball.
...and look at what happened to them in the playoffs, where teams have to be able to execute their half court offenses against teams that are more focused on their defense than they are during the season. Go back over the last 3+ months of celticsblog, you'll find tons of posts from many different posters that contained phrases like "wait until the playoffs come".
What happened in the playoffs to the Celts offense was extremely predictable. If you don't believe me check with any number of posters who were saying the same thing, or go back and find the quotes from Doc, Danny and even Wyc saying the same thing.
-
I disagree Tim. Pierce and the Boston offense was fine post-Rondo... Pierce averaged 19, 6 and 6 after the all-star break. Check out Paul's shooting percentages:
Pre all-star 42%/36%/79%
Post all-star 49%/43%/78%
Jeff Green's scoring and efficiency increased dramatically after rondo went out.
Pre all-star 44%/34%/81% 10 points
Post all-star 49%/44%/80% 17 points
Brandon Bass... pre all-star 45% shooting... post all-star 54% shooting
Their effectiveness scoring wasn't hinging on Rondo's ability to pass them the ball.
...and look at what happened to them in the playoffs, where teams have to be able to execute their half court offenses against teams that are more focused on their defense than they are during the season. Go back over the last 3+ months of celticsblog, you'll find tons of posts from many different posters that contained phrases like "wait until the playoffs come".
What happened in the playoffs to the Celts offense was extremely predictable. If you don't believe me check with any number of posters who were saying the same thing, or go back and find the quotes from Doc, Danny and even Wyc saying the same thing.
I hear ya. I thought we'd perform a lot better in the playoffs... but I really don't think having Rondo would have made Pierce shoot higher than 36% (23% from three). He was just off. And we've yet to see any evidence that Jeff Green can be effective with Rondo dominating the ball every possession. I think the Knicks series would have looked a lot different... but I don't think the outcome would have been much different.
It's a wonderful scapegoat though. Denial is a powerful thing. Lot easier pretending this team is still a contender than facing the fact that the Charlotte Bobcats are closer to winning a title than this sitting duck franchise.
-
I disagree Tim. Pierce and the Boston offense was fine post-Rondo... Pierce averaged 19, 6 and 6 after the all-star break. Check out Paul's shooting percentages:
Pre all-star 42%/36%/79%
Post all-star 49%/43%/78%
Jeff Green's scoring and efficiency increased dramatically after rondo went out.
Pre all-star 44%/34%/81% 10 points
Post all-star 49%/44%/80% 17 points
Brandon Bass... pre all-star 45% shooting... post all-star 54% shooting
Their effectiveness scoring wasn't hinging on Rondo's ability to pass them the ball.
...and look at what happened to them in the playoffs, where teams have to be able to execute their half court offenses against teams that are more focused on their defense than they are during the season. Go back over the last 3+ months of celticsblog, you'll find tons of posts from many different posters that contained phrases like "wait until the playoffs come".
What happened in the playoffs to the Celts offense was extremely predictable. If you don't believe me check with any number of posters who were saying the same thing, or go back and find the quotes from Doc, Danny and even Wyc saying the same thing.
I hear ya. I thought we'd perform a lot better in the playoffs... but I really don't think having Rondo would have made Pierce shoot higher than 36% (23% from three). He was just off. And we've yet to see any evidence that Jeff Green can be effective with Rondo dominating the ball every possession. I think the Knicks series would have looked a lot different... but I don't think the outcome would have been much different.
It's a wonderful scapegoat though. Denial is a powerful thing. Lot easier pretending this team is still a contender than facing the fact that the Charlotte Bobcats are closer to winning a title than this sitting duck franchise.
Denial is your desperately clinging to the remnants of your theories on Rondo's play that were pretty much trashed during the playoffs. Here are a couple of factors that could each have a significant effect on Pierce's shooting percentages. First, the responsibility of having to run the offense with Rondo out including bringing the ball up court much of the time just wore him down when he was playing big minutes. Second, the looks he got weren't that great, in part because Rondo wasn't running the offense, in part because Paul had the ball in his hands so much so the defense was focused on him before he got ready to shoot.
Let me know if you don't think that those are things that can effect a player's shooting or if you don't think having Rondo would have changed things.
And you can claim that we don't have evidence that Green can be effective playing with Rondo, but by the same token you have no evidence that he can't. He started the season poorly but his play improved as the season went on and that improvement started before Rondo's injury. Check out his splits and you'll see what I mean.
-
Haha what? This has to be a joke. There's no way. The bobcats are the laughing of Nba history. Why on earth would we want that?
-
For what?
-
I disagree Tim. Pierce and the Boston offense was fine post-Rondo... Pierce averaged 19, 6 and 6 after the all-star break. Check out Paul's shooting percentages:
Pre all-star 42%/36%/79%
Post all-star 49%/43%/78%
Jeff Green's scoring and efficiency increased dramatically after rondo went out.
Pre all-star 44%/34%/81% 10 points
Post all-star 49%/44%/80% 17 points
Brandon Bass... pre all-star 45% shooting... post all-star 54% shooting
Their effectiveness scoring wasn't hinging on Rondo's ability to pass them the ball.
...and look at what happened to them in the playoffs, where teams have to be able to execute their half court offenses against teams that are more focused on their defense than they are during the season. Go back over the last 3+ months of celticsblog, you'll find tons of posts from many different posters that contained phrases like "wait until the playoffs come".
What happened in the playoffs to the Celts offense was extremely predictable. If you don't believe me check with any number of posters who were saying the same thing, or go back and find the quotes from Doc, Danny and even Wyc saying the same thing.
I hear ya. I thought we'd perform a lot better in the playoffs... but I really don't think having Rondo would have made Pierce shoot higher than 36% (23% from three). He was just off. And we've yet to see any evidence that Jeff Green can be effective with Rondo dominating the ball every possession. I think the Knicks series would have looked a lot different... but I don't think the outcome would have been much different.
It's a wonderful scapegoat though. Denial is a powerful thing. Lot easier pretending this team is still a contender than facing the fact that the Charlotte Bobcats are closer to winning a title than this sitting duck franchise.
Denial is your desperately clinging to the remnants of your theories on Rondo's play that were pretty much trashed during the playoffs. Here are a couple of factors that could each have a significant effect on Pierce's shooting percentages. First, the responsibility of having to run the offense with Rondo out including bringing the ball up court much of the time just wore him down when he was playing big minutes. Second, the looks he got weren't that great, in part because Rondo wasn't running the offense, in part because Paul had the ball in his hands so much so the defense was focused on him before he got ready to shoot.
Let me know if you don't think that those are things that can effect a player's shooting or if you don't think having Rondo would have changed things.
And you can claim that we don't have evidence that Green can be effective playing with Rondo, but by the same token you have no evidence that he can't. He started the season poorly but his play improved as the season went on and that improvement started before Rondo's injury. Check out his splits and you'll see what I mean.
Sorry dude I just don't see it. Pierce shot just as poorly in the playoffs last year (38%/31%/89%)... Ray shot 39%/30%/71% ... and this was despite the fact they were playing with Rondo.
I absolutely love ROndo, but I contend that he is one of the most overrated players in the league. He's limited offensively. He would have struggled penetrating vs New York and his lack of shooting ability would have made him a liability without the ball. He gets assists, but a lot of that has to do with the offense we run, his league-high minutes, and the fact that he monopolizes the ball more than probably anyone in the league.
I know you strongly disagree and I respect that. Rondo earned his all-star appearances. If we had a couple young superstars on this team and ROndo was the 3rd best player, I'd totally want to keep him... but I see no way we are going to land two superstars while keeping Rondo.
I also feel like Jeff Green was never "bad" early in the season... he's about as steady as a player can be. His jump in productivity happened due to him finally getting an opportunity to create his own offense. He's very effective driving into the lane. That's something he rarely got an opportunity to do with Rondo's ball-dominating. Those two never clicked. If they click in the future, it will because Rondo adjusts his game and gives Jeff Green more opportunities to do Jeff Green things...and if that happens, we might see Rondo's assists drop.
We also have seen plenty of rumors over the years that paint a picture of a league not nearly as enamored with Rajon Rondo as you think. Take them with a grain of salt, but according to rumors we were turned down for Steph Curry when Curry was injured. We were turned down by the Lakers when we tried to trade for old Pau Gasol. We were turned down by the Hornets for Chris Paul and couldn't find a 3rd team (the Hornets preferred Steph Curry as well). Going back further, we tried to trade for Russell Westbrook and were turned down. We supposedly tried to trade Rondo for Tyreke Evans and change and were turned down. It seems to paint a picture of a league that values scoring over passing.
I'm rootin for Rondo. I'm rooting for BBallTim. I'd prefer to be wrong. But the way I see it, Rondo is at most a top 6 PG in this league, we don't know when he will return from his injury and if he'll be the same... we absolutely don't have any evidence to suggest he can lead a contender without Pierce and KG. There's a reason Ainge has tried trading him essentially every year.
Rajon Rondo has talent. Antoine Walker had a lot of talent too... I loved Walker when he played here. Walker earned his allstar appearances as well. But there's certain guys you just can't build a champion around. Ainge is aware of that. It would be hard to land a top 5 pick for Rajon Rondo.
-
It seems to paint a picture of a league that values scoring over passing.
There's a legitimate argument to be made that teams tend to overvalue scoring relative to other skills. Rondo is a player I expect to be under-valued, so I believe that trading him is usually going to be a bad proposition. Thus, my fantasy GMing of the Celtics involves assuming that Rondo remains a Celtic and crafting the roster to fit his strengths and weaknesses. I don't think you built around a single player, you try to build around a core of multiple players, including at least two stars, and finding role players who fit the synergies between your top players.
With Rondo, I am looking for the ability to sometimes field a lineup with three capable three-point shooters who can be on the floor at the same time as Rondo. Contrary to a lot of people on this forum, I am not looking for athletic bigs who can run the floor and dunk as their primary offensive attribute. I'm looking for bigs who are useful away from the basket.
-
I disagree Tim. Pierce and the Boston offense was fine post-Rondo... Pierce averaged 19, 6 and 6 after the all-star break. Check out Paul's shooting percentages:
Pre all-star 42%/36%/79%
Post all-star 49%/43%/78%
Jeff Green's scoring and efficiency increased dramatically after rondo went out.
Pre all-star 44%/34%/81% 10 points
Post all-star 49%/44%/80% 17 points
Brandon Bass... pre all-star 45% shooting... post all-star 54% shooting
Their effectiveness scoring wasn't hinging on Rondo's ability to pass them the ball.
...and look at what happened to them in the playoffs, where teams have to be able to execute their half court offenses against teams that are more focused on their defense than they are during the season. Go back over the last 3+ months of celticsblog, you'll find tons of posts from many different posters that contained phrases like "wait until the playoffs come".
What happened in the playoffs to the Celts offense was extremely predictable. If you don't believe me check with any number of posters who were saying the same thing, or go back and find the quotes from Doc, Danny and even Wyc saying the same thing.
I hear ya. I thought we'd perform a lot better in the playoffs... but I really don't think having Rondo would have made Pierce shoot higher than 36% (23% from three). He was just off. And we've yet to see any evidence that Jeff Green can be effective with Rondo dominating the ball every possession. I think the Knicks series would have looked a lot different... but I don't think the outcome would have been much different.
It's a wonderful scapegoat though. Denial is a powerful thing. Lot easier pretending this team is still a contender than facing the fact that the Charlotte Bobcats are closer to winning a title than this sitting duck franchise.
Denial is your desperately clinging to the remnants of your theories on Rondo's play that were pretty much trashed during the playoffs. Here are a couple of factors that could each have a significant effect on Pierce's shooting percentages. First, the responsibility of having to run the offense with Rondo out including bringing the ball up court much of the time just wore him down when he was playing big minutes. Second, the looks he got weren't that great, in part because Rondo wasn't running the offense, in part because Paul had the ball in his hands so much so the defense was focused on him before he got ready to shoot.
Let me know if you don't think that those are things that can effect a player's shooting or if you don't think having Rondo would have changed things.
And you can claim that we don't have evidence that Green can be effective playing with Rondo, but by the same token you have no evidence that he can't. He started the season poorly but his play improved as the season went on and that improvement started before Rondo's injury. Check out his splits and you'll see what I mean.
Sorry dude I just don't see it. Pierce shot just as poorly in the playoffs last year (38%/31%/89%)... Ray shot 39%/30%/71% ... and this was despite the fact they were playing with Rondo.
Seriously? Paul Pierce struggled with a sprained mcl during the 2012 playoffs and Ray was hobbling around on the same bad ankle that caused him to miss time at the end of the season. I provided links to articles about the injuries since this is clearly news to you.
http://espn.go.com/boston/nba/story/_/id/7915973/2012-nba-playoffs-doc-rivers-says-boston-celtics-paul-pierce-attempt-play-mcl-sprain
http://espn.go.com/boston/nba/story/_/id/7806760/boston-celtics-ray-allen-ankle-travel-road-trip
If you look at the wing players in the 2012 playoffs we had PP with the sprained knee ligament, Ray hobbling around on a gimpy ankle, Avery with his shoulders popping out every other game or so and Pietrus, who was still slowed from the concussion/whiplash injury. Also look at the defenses we faced, all of whom were among the best in the league. And how did the offense look? Much better than it looked in this year's playoffs.
I absolutely love ROndo, but I contend that he is one of the most overrated players in the league. He's limited offensively. He would have struggled penetrating vs New York and his lack of shooting ability would have made him a liability without the ball.
That's fairly ridiculous. When's the last time Rondo struggled to penetrate against a team in the playoffs? 2008 or so? Rondo takes about the same number of shots at the rim a game in the postseason as LeBron, and he does so every year. The claim that he'd struggle to penetrate against a below average defensive team is laughable.
One would think that you'd know things like that about a player that you "absolutely love". It's like claiming that KG's always been one of your all-time favorite players right before you mention that you think he's never been a good rebounder and he doesn't add much to a team's defense.