Would you trade Rondo for the top pick in the draft?

[Jon]

The whole point of the draft is to build for the future.  Unfortunately, by the time any draft pick is ready to really dominate, our Big Three will be done.  So what's the point?  All it would do would ensure that we'd be the 2000's version of the Indiana Pacers: a perennial good team that could never win it all. 

I'll take a couple more championships with the group we have and worry about the future when it happens. 

[Casperian]

If Ainge is really considering a Rondo trade, it is not for the highest pick possible, it is for a certain player he wants. I think if heīs sure that this guy will drop to, say, #5, he doesnīt care if he gets the #2 or #4.

I love Rondo (and hyping him up) as much as the next guy, but if Ainge thinks he can get a player of equal or higher value + another prospect he likes, then it would be foolish not to think about it, imo.
Spencer Hawes, for example. I donīt know why, but I simply donīt like him as a person, but you have to admit that heīs a highly talented, young player on a position that is hard to fill.

How many high Draft Picks were busts? Look at the superstars that picks from 5-15 produced over the years. This may be a weak Draft, but that doesnīt mean thereīs not a diamond in the rough. The experts were too often wrong for my taste to trust them when it comes to Rookies.
If Ainge knows something we donīt know about a player in this yearīs draft (and I bet thatīs the case here), I trust him to make the right decision.

[ACF]

Yes. By the way, hello all from 1984.   

TP.

[Jon]

If Ainge is really considering a Rondo trade, it is not for the highest pick possible, it is for a certain player he wants. I think if heīs sure that this guy will drop to, say, #5, he doesnīt care if he gets the #2 or #4.

I love Rondo (and hyping him up) as much as the next guy, but if Ainge thinks he can get a player of equal or higher value + another prospect he likes, then it would be foolish not to think about it, imo.
Spencer Hawes, for example. I donīt know why, but I simply donīt like him as a person, but you have to admit that heīs a highly talented, young player on a position that is hard to fill.

How many high Draft Picks were busts? Look at the superstars that picks from 5-15 produced over the years. This may be a weak Draft, but that doesnīt mean thereīs not a diamond in the rough. The experts were too often wrong for my taste to trust them when it comes to Rookies.
If Ainge knows something we donīt know about a player in this yearīs draft (and I bet thatīs the case here), I trust him to make the right decision.

True.  But even if the pick ends up being a superstar, it won't matter unless he can be a superstar right away. 

I'm not against trading Rondo because I'm obsessed with him; I'm against doing anything that hurts this team's chances of winning it all over the next 2 years.  And trading a guy who can clearly run this team for a rookie would probably do that. 

[Celtics17]

The only way you trade Rondo for the first pick right now is if you felt you were going to get a better player and immediately, through trades or whatever. So, I think maybe a more appropriate question should be "Do you think you can trade the top pick in this years draft for a player that better fits our system" and I would have to say that I dont think so.

[Casperian]

If Ainge is really considering a Rondo trade, it is not for the highest pick possible, it is for a certain player he wants. I think if heīs sure that this guy will drop to, say, #5, he doesnīt care if he gets the #2 or #4.

I love Rondo (and hyping him up) as much as the next guy, but if Ainge thinks he can get a player of equal or higher value + another prospect he likes, then it would be foolish not to think about it, imo.
Spencer Hawes, for example. I donīt know why, but I simply donīt like him as a person, but you have to admit that heīs a highly talented, young player on a position that is hard to fill.

How many high Draft Picks were busts? Look at the superstars that picks from 5-15 produced over the years. This may be a weak Draft, but that doesnīt mean thereīs not a diamond in the rough. The experts were too often wrong for my taste to trust them when it comes to Rookies.
If Ainge knows something we donīt know about a player in this yearīs draft (and I bet thatīs the case here), I trust him to make the right decision.

True.  But even if the pick ends up being a superstar, it won't matter unless he can be a superstar right away. 

I'm not against trading Rondo because I'm obsessed with him; I'm against doing anything that hurts this team's chances of winning it all over the next 2 years.  And trading a guy who can clearly run this team for a rookie would probably do that. 

The thing is, in that case, do we need the Rookie to produce right away? There are a lot of good PGīs in Free Agency. If we could land a future superstar + Jason Kidd (or whoever is on Aingeīs mind), weīd have an equally potent starting 5, and fill a backup spot with the MLE (or even vet minimum) in one move.

[BballTim]

If Ainge is really considering a Rondo trade, it is not for the highest pick possible, it is for a certain player he wants. I think if heīs sure that this guy will drop to, say, #5, he doesnīt care if he gets the #2 or #4.

I love Rondo (and hyping him up) as much as the next guy, but if Ainge thinks he can get a player of equal or higher value + another prospect he likes, then it would be foolish not to think about it, imo.
Spencer Hawes, for example. I donīt know why, but I simply donīt like him as a person, but you have to admit that heīs a highly talented, young player on a position that is hard to fill.

How many high Draft Picks were busts? Look at the superstars that picks from 5-15 produced over the years. This may be a weak Draft, but that doesnīt mean thereīs not a diamond in the rough. The experts were too often wrong for my taste to trust them when it comes to Rookies.
If Ainge knows something we donīt know about a player in this yearīs draft (and I bet thatīs the case here), I trust him to make the right decision.

True.  But even if the pick ends up being a superstar, it won't matter unless he can be a superstar right away. 

I'm not against trading Rondo because I'm obsessed with him; I'm against doing anything that hurts this team's chances of winning it all over the next 2 years.  And trading a guy who can clearly run this team for a rookie would probably do that. 

The thing is, do we need the Rookie to produce right now? There are a lot of talented PGīs in Free Agency. If we could land a future superstar + Jason Kidd (or whoever is on Aingeīs mind), weīd have an equally potent starting 5, and fill a backup spot with the MLE (or even vet minimum) in one move.

  That's based on the assumption that none of the FA PGs re-sign with their current teams. And Rondo's easily better than Kidd at this point in their careers.

[Casperian]

If Ainge is really considering a Rondo trade, it is not for the highest pick possible, it is for a certain player he wants. I think if heīs sure that this guy will drop to, say, #5, he doesnīt care if he gets the #2 or #4.

I love Rondo (and hyping him up) as much as the next guy, but if Ainge thinks he can get a player of equal or higher value + another prospect he likes, then it would be foolish not to think about it, imo.
Spencer Hawes, for example. I donīt know why, but I simply donīt like him as a person, but you have to admit that heīs a highly talented, young player on a position that is hard to fill.

How many high Draft Picks were busts? Look at the superstars that picks from 5-15 produced over the years. This may be a weak Draft, but that doesnīt mean thereīs not a diamond in the rough. The experts were too often wrong for my taste to trust them when it comes to Rookies.
If Ainge knows something we donīt know about a player in this yearīs draft (and I bet thatīs the case here), I trust him to make the right decision.

True.  But even if the pick ends up being a superstar, it won't matter unless he can be a superstar right away. 

I'm not against trading Rondo because I'm obsessed with him; I'm against doing anything that hurts this team's chances of winning it all over the next 2 years.  And trading a guy who can clearly run this team for a rookie would probably do that. 

The thing is, do we need the Rookie to produce right now? There are a lot of talented PGīs in Free Agency. If we could land a future superstar + Jason Kidd (or whoever is on Aingeīs mind), weīd have an equally potent starting 5, and fill a backup spot with the MLE (or even vet minimum) in one move.

  That's based on the assumption that none of the FA PGs re-sign with their current teams. And Rondo's easily better than Kidd at this point in their careers.

Itīs based on the idea that we could improve our team, and on the fact that agents and GMs have the phone numbers of each other.
Itīs still a very potent starting five, and if the Rookie is as good as such a trade would demand, we would have a true sixth man, something we canīt get in FA.

Weīre talking about Danny Ainge here. People always talk about how he was willing to trade Bird or McHale, but when it comes down to it, they want to have nothing to do with the possibility.

[BballTim]

If Ainge is really considering a Rondo trade, it is not for the highest pick possible, it is for a certain player he wants. I think if heīs sure that this guy will drop to, say, #5, he doesnīt care if he gets the #2 or #4.

I love Rondo (and hyping him up) as much as the next guy, but if Ainge thinks he can get a player of equal or higher value + another prospect he likes, then it would be foolish not to think about it, imo.
Spencer Hawes, for example. I donīt know why, but I simply donīt like him as a person, but you have to admit that heīs a highly talented, young player on a position that is hard to fill.

How many high Draft Picks were busts? Look at the superstars that picks from 5-15 produced over the years. This may be a weak Draft, but that doesnīt mean thereīs not a diamond in the rough. The experts were too often wrong for my taste to trust them when it comes to Rookies.
If Ainge knows something we donīt know about a player in this yearīs draft (and I bet thatīs the case here), I trust him to make the right decision.

True.  But even if the pick ends up being a superstar, it won't matter unless he can be a superstar right away. 

I'm not against trading Rondo because I'm obsessed with him; I'm against doing anything that hurts this team's chances of winning it all over the next 2 years.  And trading a guy who can clearly run this team for a rookie would probably do that. 

The thing is, do we need the Rookie to produce right now? There are a lot of talented PGīs in Free Agency. If we could land a future superstar + Jason Kidd (or whoever is on Aingeīs mind), weīd have an equally potent starting 5, and fill a backup spot with the MLE (or even vet minimum) in one move.

  That's based on the assumption that none of the FA PGs re-sign with their current teams. And Rondo's easily better than Kidd at this point in their careers.

Weīre talking about Danny Ainge here. People always talk about how he was willing to trade Bird or McHale, but when it comes down to it, they want to have nothing to do with the possibility.

  They could have traded McHale or not, but they shouldn't have traded Bird. Look at the line of thinking. Keep Bird, hope he's healthy and try for a shot at a title or trade him for some good players, be good for a while, but have no real shot at a title. I'm not ready for that yet. Trade Rondo and hope you can get the services ofwhichever FA PG doesn't re-sign with their own team. At best you end up with a pg worse than Rondo and at worst you end up with a vet min type of player to run your team. Is it worthwhile to do that while Paul and KG are still young enough to win titles in order to gain a good prospect?

[Casperian]

If Ainge is really considering a Rondo trade, it is not for the highest pick possible, it is for a certain player he wants. I think if heīs sure that this guy will drop to, say, #5, he doesnīt care if he gets the #2 or #4.

I love Rondo (and hyping him up) as much as the next guy, but if Ainge thinks he can get a player of equal or higher value + another prospect he likes, then it would be foolish not to think about it, imo.
Spencer Hawes, for example. I donīt know why, but I simply donīt like him as a person, but you have to admit that heīs a highly talented, young player on a position that is hard to fill.

How many high Draft Picks were busts? Look at the superstars that picks from 5-15 produced over the years. This may be a weak Draft, but that doesnīt mean thereīs not a diamond in the rough. The experts were too often wrong for my taste to trust them when it comes to Rookies.
If Ainge knows something we donīt know about a player in this yearīs draft (and I bet thatīs the case here), I trust him to make the right decision.

True.  But even if the pick ends up being a superstar, it won't matter unless he can be a superstar right away. 

I'm not against trading Rondo because I'm obsessed with him; I'm against doing anything that hurts this team's chances of winning it all over the next 2 years.  And trading a guy who can clearly run this team for a rookie would probably do that. 

The thing is, do we need the Rookie to produce right now? There are a lot of talented PGīs in Free Agency. If we could land a future superstar + Jason Kidd (or whoever is on Aingeīs mind), weīd have an equally potent starting 5, and fill a backup spot with the MLE (or even vet minimum) in one move.

  That's based on the assumption that none of the FA PGs re-sign with their current teams. And Rondo's easily better than Kidd at this point in their careers.

Weīre talking about Danny Ainge here. People always talk about how he was willing to trade Bird or McHale, but when it comes down to it, they want to have nothing to do with the possibility.

  They could have traded McHale or not, but they shouldn't have traded Bird. Look at the line of thinking. Keep Bird, hope he's healthy and try for a shot at a title or trade him for some good players, be good for a while, but have no real shot at a title. I'm not ready for that yet. Trade Rondo and hope you can get the services ofwhichever FA PG doesn't re-sign with their own team. At best you end up with a pg worse than Rondo and at worst you end up with a vet min type of player to run your team. Is it worthwhile to do that while Paul and KG are still young enough to win titles in order to gain a good prospect?

Do you think Ainge is raising the white flag and trades a piece of the puzzle for a lesser player? Or do you think Ainge feels he can outsmart the other teams at the top of the Draft?

The Danny Ainge I know has the balls to do such a trade if he believes it is for the best. And the opinion of fans really shouldnīt matter at all when you pay a good amount of money for a NBA scouting system.
After all, he traded Big Al for KG, when we already had a pretty good team in place, with a marquee big man under 25, just to field an even better team.

I donīt want to trade Rondo (otherwise I wouldīve posted a trade scenario^^), Iīm just trying to figure out what kind of legs this rumor has (if any), how all this limited knowledge we have makes sense, and how Danny Aingeīs line of thinking is if this rumor is indeed true.

[Jon]

The flaw with those that believe Ainge should start planning for the future now because the C's got burned in the '80s for not trading the Big Three are overlooking a lot of crucial facts:

1) The C's had a rebuilding plan: unfortunately, both Bias and Lewis died. 

2) Red went about obtaining both of them without having to give up any of the the Big Three or starters. 

3) Red obtained Bias when McHale was 29 and Bird was 30. 

If the C's had built this team up over the past 10 years, then I would have been on board with the idea that at some point the C's would have to maybe take a temporary hit one year for the good of the future.  However, the C's went all in on this team and got three aging superstars.  They can't afford to take a hit for a year for the good of the future.  A hit for one year could mean that they will never again win a title.  And while Ainge could build up a nice group of young players for the future, there's no guarantee that that team ever wins anything.  The NBA is littered with examples of good teams that never win it all. 

I know it sucks; however, the team should ride this success out, win a couple more titles, and worry about the repercussions later.  Plus, there's no reason the C's can't just extend Ray another year or two, and worry about trading off the expiring salaries of Ray, Paul, and even KG in a couple years. 

[Casperian]

I think there is a hidden plan to this madness.
And imo, Ainge already made clear in which direction this plan goes when he didn`t resign Posey last year. This decision will affect us for more than just one season, in more than just one way. I`m more brainstorming than combining facts here, but I think he is trying to rebuild a contender on the fly, assemble as many pieces as he can, be as flexible as he can be, cap-wise, and strike when the opportunity arises.

He is certainly not sitting on his hands, grinning happy about the awesome team he has assembled. He is working on options, and I like that about him.

[BballTim]

I think there is a hidden plan to this madness.
And imo, Ainge already made clear in which direction this plan goes when he didn`t resign Posey last year. This decision will affect us for more than just one season, in more than just one way. I`m more brainstorming than combining facts here, but I think he is trying to rebuild a contender on the fly, assemble as many pieces as he can, be as flexible as he can be, cap-wise, and strike when the opportunity arises.

He is certainly not sitting on his hands, grinning happy about the awesome team he has assembled. He is working on options, and I like that about him.

  I agree he's likely to try and reload on the fly, but I think that means trying to trade (over time) the big three's contracts to obtain younger players who have teams that want to get out from under their contracts (like Ray and KG for us, Pau for the Lakers or Amare). I don't think that this should mean taking a hit in our starting lineup in order to pick up prospects.

[Gomesfan]

I voted No.
I would vote yes, If there was the right player/players involved!