Author Topic: Would you trade Rondo For..  (Read 16019 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Would you trade Rondo For..
« Reply #45 on: December 14, 2012, 11:41:39 AM »

Offline angryguy77

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4300
  • Tommy Points: 371
Only if the player being traded for can give us what Rondo does in the playoffs. There's reg season Rondo and then there's playoff Rondo.

Re: Would you trade Rondo For..
« Reply #46 on: December 14, 2012, 11:42:55 AM »

Offline BballTim

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23724
  • Tommy Points: 1123

Jason Thompson, I. Thomas, Tyreke EvanS, and Demarcus Cousins.

 Just would you or wouldn't you keep it simple. Let's say Sac loves Rondo and they are into this deal. Would you trade away Super Rajon for that package.

Value-wise, yes, however, it would need a third team to make it work, because those players don't work together.

I disagree that it's equal value.  A bunch of players with potential don't equal a proven superstar.

I think 'a bunch of players with potential' is stretching it. Evans (career: 18, 5 and 5) and Cousins (career: 16, 10 and a block) are both very good NBA players, despite being on a bad team with poor, inconsistent coaching.

I agree that they are both "very good NBA players," and I would go as far as to add that they have the potential to get even better.  But, Rondo is a superstar, top ten NBA player, the kind of player that is the cornerstone of a franchise.  You need a guy like that, and there's no guarantee that DeMarcus Cousins or Tyreke Evans will ever reach that status.

When you have that guy entering his prime, you don't trade him away for guys who are "very good NBA players."

http://www.nba.com/history/finals/champions.html

When you factor that NBA champions are never built around PGs -- particularly one's who struggle intensely with shooting -- i think calling Rondo a superstar or a top 10 NBA player is a reach... even if you consider him the best player at his position (which I don't).

There are very few bigs in the NBA who are a better combo of existing ability, youth, and potential to improve than Cousins. If one believes he can grow up -- a big if -- you'd trade Rondo for him every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

I'd also keep in mind that Ainge has long been a fan of Evans -- he'd be a major reason why the Cs would consider a package of the two should that opportunity arise.

  Rondo's led teams to the finals and to the conference finals in separate years and he's only 26. The odds on your being able to make a similar claim about Cousins (or Evans) is shockingly low.

Re: Would you trade Rondo For..
« Reply #47 on: December 14, 2012, 12:38:03 PM »

Offline ssspence

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6375
  • Tommy Points: 403

Jason Thompson, I. Thomas, Tyreke EvanS, and Demarcus Cousins.

 Just would you or wouldn't you keep it simple. Let's say Sac loves Rondo and they are into this deal. Would you trade away Super Rajon for that package.

Value-wise, yes, however, it would need a third team to make it work, because those players don't work together.

I disagree that it's equal value.  A bunch of players with potential don't equal a proven superstar.

I think 'a bunch of players with potential' is stretching it. Evans (career: 18, 5 and 5) and Cousins (career: 16, 10 and a block) are both very good NBA players, despite being on a bad team with poor, inconsistent coaching.

I agree that they are both "very good NBA players," and I would go as far as to add that they have the potential to get even better.  But, Rondo is a superstar, top ten NBA player, the kind of player that is the cornerstone of a franchise.  You need a guy like that, and there's no guarantee that DeMarcus Cousins or Tyreke Evans will ever reach that status.

When you have that guy entering his prime, you don't trade him away for guys who are "very good NBA players."

http://www.nba.com/history/finals/champions.html

When you factor that NBA champions are never built around PGs -- particularly one's who struggle intensely with shooting -- i think calling Rondo a superstar or a top 10 NBA player is a reach... even if you consider him the best player at his position (which I don't).

There are very few bigs in the NBA who are a better combo of existing ability, youth, and potential to improve than Cousins. If one believes he can grow up -- a big if -- you'd trade Rondo for him every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

I'd also keep in mind that Ainge has long been a fan of Evans -- he'd be a major reason why the Cs would consider a package of the two should that opportunity arise.

  Rondo's led teams to the finals and to the conference finals in separate years and he's only 26. The odds on your being able to make a similar claim about Cousins (or Evans) is shockingly low.

Those teams had 3 HOFs on them -- the 'Big 3' -- including one of the top 5 defensive bigs of all time. So I don't agree that he led them to those events -- rather that he was a strong contributor -- just as I wouldn't look at Cousins & Evans ability to do the same in a vaccuum without factoring the other players and coaches around them.

If you put Rondo on the Kings today and took out Evans and Cousins, I don't believe the Kings would suddenly be a contender or even significantly better.

Meanwhile, IMO the Cs chances of winning another title in the PP & KG era is directly tied to their ability to succeed in a grind-it-out style, not the up-and-down one the team is currently pretending they can run and win with. It's fair to say that doesn't exactly work to Rondo's strengths.

I'll believe Rondo can 'lead' a team to a championship when I see it. If he succeeds, he'll be the first point guard to do it since the 80s, if you can say as much about those Lakers and / or Pistons teams.
Mike

(My name is not Mike)

Re: Would you trade Rondo For..
« Reply #48 on: December 14, 2012, 02:48:06 PM »

Offline BballTim

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23724
  • Tommy Points: 1123

Jason Thompson, I. Thomas, Tyreke EvanS, and Demarcus Cousins.

 Just would you or wouldn't you keep it simple. Let's say Sac loves Rondo and they are into this deal. Would you trade away Super Rajon for that package.

Value-wise, yes, however, it would need a third team to make it work, because those players don't work together.

I disagree that it's equal value.  A bunch of players with potential don't equal a proven superstar.

I think 'a bunch of players with potential' is stretching it. Evans (career: 18, 5 and 5) and Cousins (career: 16, 10 and a block) are both very good NBA players, despite being on a bad team with poor, inconsistent coaching.

I agree that they are both "very good NBA players," and I would go as far as to add that they have the potential to get even better.  But, Rondo is a superstar, top ten NBA player, the kind of player that is the cornerstone of a franchise.  You need a guy like that, and there's no guarantee that DeMarcus Cousins or Tyreke Evans will ever reach that status.

When you have that guy entering his prime, you don't trade him away for guys who are "very good NBA players."

http://www.nba.com/history/finals/champions.html

When you factor that NBA champions are never built around PGs -- particularly one's who struggle intensely with shooting -- i think calling Rondo a superstar or a top 10 NBA player is a reach... even if you consider him the best player at his position (which I don't).

There are very few bigs in the NBA who are a better combo of existing ability, youth, and potential to improve than Cousins. If one believes he can grow up -- a big if -- you'd trade Rondo for him every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

I'd also keep in mind that Ainge has long been a fan of Evans -- he'd be a major reason why the Cs would consider a package of the two should that opportunity arise.

  Rondo's led teams to the finals and to the conference finals in separate years and he's only 26. The odds on your being able to make a similar claim about Cousins (or Evans) is shockingly low.

Those teams had 3 HOFs on them -- the 'Big 3' -- including one of the top 5 defensive bigs of all time. So I don't agree that he led them to those events -- rather that he was a strong contributor -- just as I wouldn't look at Cousins & Evans ability to do the same in a vaccuum without factoring the other players and coaches around them.

If you put Rondo on the Kings today and took out Evans and Cousins, I don't believe the Kings would suddenly be a contender or even significantly better.

Meanwhile, IMO the Cs chances of winning another title in the PP & KG era is directly tied to their ability to succeed in a grind-it-out style, not the up-and-down one the team is currently pretending they can run and win with. It's fair to say that doesn't exactly work to Rondo's strengths.

I'll believe Rondo can 'lead' a team to a championship when I see it. If he succeeds, he'll be the first point guard to do it since the 80s, if you can say as much about those Lakers and / or Pistons teams.

  First of all you must have no idea of basketball in the 80s and 90s if you don't think that Magic and Thomas were the best players on their teams. Your comment "NBA champions are never built around PGs" was pretty nonsensical. Secondly, any assumption that Ray, PP and KG were playing like HOF level players in 2010 or 2012 is silly, as is your claim that KG was playing like a top 5 big of all time in either year. Rondo was our best player in the playoffs those years and he led both teams to the ECF. Again, how many times do you expect to say that about Cousins or Evans?

Re: Would you trade Rondo For..
« Reply #49 on: December 14, 2012, 03:38:32 PM »

Offline ssspence

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6375
  • Tommy Points: 403

Jason Thompson, I. Thomas, Tyreke EvanS, and Demarcus Cousins.

 Just would you or wouldn't you keep it simple. Let's say Sac loves Rondo and they are into this deal. Would you trade away Super Rajon for that package.

Value-wise, yes, however, it would need a third team to make it work, because those players don't work together.

I disagree that it's equal value.  A bunch of players with potential don't equal a proven superstar.

I think 'a bunch of players with potential' is stretching it. Evans (career: 18, 5 and 5) and Cousins (career: 16, 10 and a block) are both very good NBA players, despite being on a bad team with poor, inconsistent coaching.

I agree that they are both "very good NBA players," and I would go as far as to add that they have the potential to get even better.  But, Rondo is a superstar, top ten NBA player, the kind of player that is the cornerstone of a franchise.  You need a guy like that, and there's no guarantee that DeMarcus Cousins or Tyreke Evans will ever reach that status.

When you have that guy entering his prime, you don't trade him away for guys who are "very good NBA players."

http://www.nba.com/history/finals/champions.html

When you factor that NBA champions are never built around PGs -- particularly one's who struggle intensely with shooting -- i think calling Rondo a superstar or a top 10 NBA player is a reach... even if you consider him the best player at his position (which I don't).

There are very few bigs in the NBA who are a better combo of existing ability, youth, and potential to improve than Cousins. If one believes he can grow up -- a big if -- you'd trade Rondo for him every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

I'd also keep in mind that Ainge has long been a fan of Evans -- he'd be a major reason why the Cs would consider a package of the two should that opportunity arise.

  Rondo's led teams to the finals and to the conference finals in separate years and he's only 26. The odds on your being able to make a similar claim about Cousins (or Evans) is shockingly low.

Those teams had 3 HOFs on them -- the 'Big 3' -- including one of the top 5 defensive bigs of all time. So I don't agree that he led them to those events -- rather that he was a strong contributor -- just as I wouldn't look at Cousins & Evans ability to do the same in a vaccuum without factoring the other players and coaches around them.

If you put Rondo on the Kings today and took out Evans and Cousins, I don't believe the Kings would suddenly be a contender or even significantly better.

Meanwhile, IMO the Cs chances of winning another title in the PP & KG era is directly tied to their ability to succeed in a grind-it-out style, not the up-and-down one the team is currently pretending they can run and win with. It's fair to say that doesn't exactly work to Rondo's strengths.

I'll believe Rondo can 'lead' a team to a championship when I see it. If he succeeds, he'll be the first point guard to do it since the 80s, if you can say as much about those Lakers and / or Pistons teams.

  First of all you must have no idea of basketball in the 80s and 90s if you don't think that Magic and Thomas were the best players on their teams. Your comment "NBA champions are never built around PGs" was pretty nonsensical. Secondly, any assumption that Ray, PP and KG were playing like HOF level players in 2010 or 2012 is silly, as is your claim that KG was playing like a top 5 big of all time in either year. Rondo was our best player in the playoffs those years and he led both teams to the ECF. Again, how many times do you expect to say that about Cousins or Evans?

I hate getting bogged down into these silly semantic debates, particularly with the petty attempts to belittle the poster.

~~ I don't understand that the teams I referred to as the ones that were PG-driven... were PG-driven? And 25 years ago? I think the caveat I added is fair, considering the numerous other HOFs that played on both of those teams, as well.

~~ Where did I say that Paul, Ray or KG was at the absolute peaks of their respective careers when they won in 2008? Each of them was every bit as important to the success of that team as Rondo, and the strength of the 4 of them together was required to get over the top.

My point is valid: as those guys get older, Rondo becomes the cornerstone of the franchise. History suggests that's bad news, particularly considering his inability to lead his team in scoring more than once or twice a season, or take and make late game shots consistently (like both Magic and Zeke did). That you're not fond of Cousins doesn't make me wrong about these points.

Rondo homerism aside, there's very little doubt that the Cs would probably be better off trading Rajon some time in the next couple of years than keeping him if they could get a top 4 or 5 for him. If they can figure out some way to do so without trading him -- awesome -- i'll jump up and down... but current assets sure make that look tough.

« Last Edit: December 14, 2012, 03:46:48 PM by ssspence »
Mike

(My name is not Mike)

Re: Would you trade Rondo For..
« Reply #50 on: December 14, 2012, 04:27:24 PM »

Offline Celtics18

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11688
  • Tommy Points: 1469

Jason Thompson, I. Thomas, Tyreke EvanS, and Demarcus Cousins.

 Just would you or wouldn't you keep it simple. Let's say Sac loves Rondo and they are into this deal. Would you trade away Super Rajon for that package.

Value-wise, yes, however, it would need a third team to make it work, because those players don't work together.

I disagree that it's equal value.  A bunch of players with potential don't equal a proven superstar.

I think 'a bunch of players with potential' is stretching it. Evans (career: 18, 5 and 5) and Cousins (career: 16, 10 and a block) are both very good NBA players, despite being on a bad team with poor, inconsistent coaching.

I agree that they are both "very good NBA players," and I would go as far as to add that they have the potential to get even better.  But, Rondo is a superstar, top ten NBA player, the kind of player that is the cornerstone of a franchise.  You need a guy like that, and there's no guarantee that DeMarcus Cousins or Tyreke Evans will ever reach that status.

When you have that guy entering his prime, you don't trade him away for guys who are "very good NBA players."

http://www.nba.com/history/finals/champions.html

When you factor that NBA champions are never built around PGs -- particularly one's who struggle intensely with shooting -- i think calling Rondo a superstar or a top 10 NBA player is a reach... even if you consider him the best player at his position (which I don't).

There are very few bigs in the NBA who are a better combo of existing ability, youth, and potential to improve than Cousins. If one believes he can grow up -- a big if -- you'd trade Rondo for him every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

I'd also keep in mind that Ainge has long been a fan of Evans -- he'd be a major reason why the Cs would consider a package of the two should that opportunity arise.

  Rondo's led teams to the finals and to the conference finals in separate years and he's only 26. The odds on your being able to make a similar claim about Cousins (or Evans) is shockingly low.

Those teams had 3 HOFs on them -- the 'Big 3' -- including one of the top 5 defensive bigs of all time. So I don't agree that he led them to those events -- rather that he was a strong contributor -- just as I wouldn't look at Cousins & Evans ability to do the same in a vaccuum without factoring the other players and coaches around them.

If you put Rondo on the Kings today and took out Evans and Cousins, I don't believe the Kings would suddenly be a contender or even significantly better.

Meanwhile, IMO the Cs chances of winning another title in the PP & KG era is directly tied to their ability to succeed in a grind-it-out style, not the up-and-down one the team is currently pretending they can run and win with. It's fair to say that doesn't exactly work to Rondo's strengths.

I'll believe Rondo can 'lead' a team to a championship when I see it. If he succeeds, he'll be the first point guard to do it since the 80s, if you can say as much about those Lakers and / or Pistons teams.

  First of all you must have no idea of basketball in the 80s and 90s if you don't think that Magic and Thomas were the best players on their teams. Your comment "NBA champions are never built around PGs" was pretty nonsensical. Secondly, any assumption that Ray, PP and KG were playing like HOF level players in 2010 or 2012 is silly, as is your claim that KG was playing like a top 5 big of all time in either year. Rondo was our best player in the playoffs those years and he led both teams to the ECF. Again, how many times do you expect to say that about Cousins or Evans?

I hate getting bogged down into these silly semantic debates, particularly with the petty attempts to belittle the poster.

~~ I don't understand that the teams I referred to as the ones that were PG-driven... were PG-driven? And 25 years ago? I think the caveat I added is fair, considering the numerous other HOFs that played on both of those teams, as well.

~~ Where did I say that Paul, Ray or KG was at the absolute peaks of their respective careers when they won in 2008? Each of them was every bit as important to the success of that team as Rondo, and the strength of the 4 of them together was required to get over the top.

My point is valid: as those guys get older, Rondo becomes the cornerstone of the franchise. History suggests that's bad news, particularly considering his inability to lead his team in scoring more than once or twice a season, or take and make late game shots consistently (like both Magic and Zeke did). That you're not fond of Cousins doesn't make me wrong about these points.

Rondo homerism aside, there's very little doubt that the Cs would probably be better off trading Rajon some time in the next couple of years than keeping him if they could get a top 4 or 5 for him. If they can figure out some way to do so without trading him -- awesome -- i'll jump up and down... but current assets sure make that look tough.

To win titles, you need more than one great player.  Neither DeMarcus Cousins or Tyreke Evans are anywhere near the category of great player at this point in their careers.  Rondo is.  If you are going to take a chance on somebody, take a chance on somebody to pair up with Rondo. 

Trading him right now would be foolish.  That's not homerism, that's common sense.  It seems that the only people who still vastly underrate Rondo are a handful of Celtics fans who can't accept that Rajon keeps surpassing their own expectations of him. 

DKC Seventy-Sixers:

PG: G. Hill/D. Schroder
SG: C. Lee/B. Hield/T. Luwawu
SF:  Giannis/J. Lamb/M. Kuzminskas
PF:  E. Ilyasova/J. Jerebko/R. Christmas
C:    N. Vucevic/K. Olynyk/E. Davis/C. Jefferson

Re: Would you trade Rondo For..
« Reply #51 on: December 14, 2012, 06:52:08 PM »

Offline BballTim

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23724
  • Tommy Points: 1123

Jason Thompson, I. Thomas, Tyreke EvanS, and Demarcus Cousins.

 Just would you or wouldn't you keep it simple. Let's say Sac loves Rondo and they are into this deal. Would you trade away Super Rajon for that package.

Value-wise, yes, however, it would need a third team to make it work, because those players don't work together.

I disagree that it's equal value.  A bunch of players with potential don't equal a proven superstar.

I think 'a bunch of players with potential' is stretching it. Evans (career: 18, 5 and 5) and Cousins (career: 16, 10 and a block) are both very good NBA players, despite being on a bad team with poor, inconsistent coaching.

I agree that they are both "very good NBA players," and I would go as far as to add that they have the potential to get even better.  But, Rondo is a superstar, top ten NBA player, the kind of player that is the cornerstone of a franchise.  You need a guy like that, and there's no guarantee that DeMarcus Cousins or Tyreke Evans will ever reach that status.

When you have that guy entering his prime, you don't trade him away for guys who are "very good NBA players."

http://www.nba.com/history/finals/champions.html

When you factor that NBA champions are never built around PGs -- particularly one's who struggle intensely with shooting -- i think calling Rondo a superstar or a top 10 NBA player is a reach... even if you consider him the best player at his position (which I don't).

There are very few bigs in the NBA who are a better combo of existing ability, youth, and potential to improve than Cousins. If one believes he can grow up -- a big if -- you'd trade Rondo for him every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

I'd also keep in mind that Ainge has long been a fan of Evans -- he'd be a major reason why the Cs would consider a package of the two should that opportunity arise.

  Rondo's led teams to the finals and to the conference finals in separate years and he's only 26. The odds on your being able to make a similar claim about Cousins (or Evans) is shockingly low.

Those teams had 3 HOFs on them -- the 'Big 3' -- including one of the top 5 defensive bigs of all time. So I don't agree that he led them to those events -- rather that he was a strong contributor -- just as I wouldn't look at Cousins & Evans ability to do the same in a vaccuum without factoring the other players and coaches around them.

If you put Rondo on the Kings today and took out Evans and Cousins, I don't believe the Kings would suddenly be a contender or even significantly better.

Meanwhile, IMO the Cs chances of winning another title in the PP & KG era is directly tied to their ability to succeed in a grind-it-out style, not the up-and-down one the team is currently pretending they can run and win with. It's fair to say that doesn't exactly work to Rondo's strengths.

I'll believe Rondo can 'lead' a team to a championship when I see it. If he succeeds, he'll be the first point guard to do it since the 80s, if you can say as much about those Lakers and / or Pistons teams.

  First of all you must have no idea of basketball in the 80s and 90s if you don't think that Magic and Thomas were the best players on their teams. Your comment "NBA champions are never built around PGs" was pretty nonsensical. Secondly, any assumption that Ray, PP and KG were playing like HOF level players in 2010 or 2012 is silly, as is your claim that KG was playing like a top 5 big of all time in either year. Rondo was our best player in the playoffs those years and he led both teams to the ECF. Again, how many times do you expect to say that about Cousins or Evans?

I hate getting bogged down into these silly semantic debates, particularly with the petty attempts to belittle the poster.

~~ I don't understand that the teams I referred to as the ones that were PG-driven... were PG-driven? And 25 years ago? I think the caveat I added is fair, considering the numerous other HOFs that played on both of those teams, as well.

~~ Where did I say that Paul, Ray or KG was at the absolute peaks of their respective careers when they won in 2008? Each of them was every bit as important to the success of that team as Rondo, and the strength of the 4 of them together was required to get over the top.

My point is valid: as those guys get older, Rondo becomes the cornerstone of the franchise. History suggests that's bad news, particularly considering his inability to lead his team in scoring more than once or twice a season, or take and make late game shots consistently (like both Magic and Zeke did). That you're not fond of Cousins doesn't make me wrong about these points.

Rondo homerism aside, there's very little doubt that the Cs would probably be better off trading Rajon some time in the next couple of years than keeping him if they could get a top 4 or 5 for him. If they can figure out some way to do so without trading him -- awesome -- i'll jump up and down... but current assets sure make that look tough.

  I'd wonder why you'd refer to the big three as future HOFs and a top 5 defensive big of all time in order to claim that Rondo wasn't leading the team if you realize that none of them were playing at the level that you used to describe them. But beyond that, teams with great players tend to contend for titles. There's no reason teams led by point guards can't win titles, in fact two recent point guards were finals mvps. You keep claiming that we need to trade Rondo for a big because "historically" we're more likely to win with a big, but plenty of teams have had good bigs without winning titles. Rondo's already led multiple teams to deep playoff runs, yet you want to trade him for Cousins not because you seem to be confident that Cousins will have equal postseason success but because he's taller and "taller players win titles".

Re: Would you trade Rondo For..
« Reply #52 on: December 14, 2012, 07:17:30 PM »

Offline KG Living Legend

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6849
  • Tommy Points: 918

 SSSpence. TP. Great point. Can Rondo ever bee Isiah Thomas good. What other small Point guards have ever even "lead" their team to a title.
 I have more respect for Jason Kidd as a basketball player than almost anyone. Great as he is, 3 finals appearances. Never as the best player. If he would have won a title with the nets that would have solidified him as a top 3 point guard ever.

 Kidd and Rondo are both fantastic Basketball players. But it raises a good question would you deal Rondo for the right two players. 

Re: Would you trade Rondo For..
« Reply #53 on: December 14, 2012, 07:21:27 PM »

Offline BballTim

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23724
  • Tommy Points: 1123

 SSSpence. TP. Great point. Can Rondo ever bee Isiah Thomas good. What other small Point guards have ever even "lead" their team to a title.
 I have more respect for Jason Kidd as a basketball player than almost anyone. Great as he is, 3 finals appearances. Never as the best player. If he would have won a title with the nets that would have solidified him as a top 3 point guard ever.

 Kidd and Rondo are both fantastic Basketball players. But it raises a good question would you deal Rondo for the right two players.

  You're trying to claim that Kidd wasn't the best player on those Nets teams?

Re: Would you trade Rondo For..
« Reply #54 on: December 14, 2012, 07:27:27 PM »

Offline KG Living Legend

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6849
  • Tommy Points: 918

 No not at all. I'm saying he clearly was the best on those Nets teams and if he somehow could have came away with a title then. That would have really catapulted him into a new stratosphere in many peoples eyes.

 It's great he won one with Dallas. And he helped. But he was what the third, fourth, fifth best player at that point.

Re: Would you trade Rondo For..
« Reply #55 on: December 14, 2012, 08:45:52 PM »

Offline SHAQATTACK

  • NCE
  • Paul Pierce
  • ***************************
  • Posts: 27368
  • Tommy Points: 2078
Right now I'd pull the trigger for Cousins or Love , in a NEW YORK sec. ;D   we look so old and near dead

Re: Would you trade Rondo For..
« Reply #56 on: December 17, 2012, 07:04:33 AM »

Offline crimson_stallion

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5964
  • Tommy Points: 875
[quote author=Celtics18 I agree that they are both "very good NBA players," and I would go as far as to add that they have the potential to get even better.  But, Rondo is a superstar, top ten NBA player, the kind of player that is the cornerstone of a franchise.  You need a guy like that, and there's no guarantee that DeMarcus Cousins or Tyreke Evans will ever reach that status.

When you have that guy entering his prime, you don't trade him away for guys who are "very good NBA players."
[/quote]

I would say that Rondo is a star, not quite a superstar just yet though.

To me the term "superstar" is reserved for guys like Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, Lebron James, Kevin Durant, Carmello Anthony, Karl Malone. 

IMO a superstar is somebody who is capable of single handedly leading a team into title contention.  Guys who can performing at a high level across a wide range of skill areas, while still being able to dominant a game with their scoring ability on a consistent basis.

John Stockton and Jason Kidd were elite PGs.  They will both be Hall of Fame players and both will go down in history as top 5 or top 10 all time at the PG position.  Both of those guys improved teams dramatically by making the players around them better, and both guys played critical roles to leading their teams to playoff success.

However as much as they could explode for 25 or 30 on the odd occasion, neither of those guys was capable of taking over a game offensively on a consistent basis.  Stockton needed his Karl Malone.  Jason Kidd needed his Vince Carter. Without those guys neither the Jazz nor the Nets would have ever gone deep in the playoffs, and neither of those guys would have received the recognition they deserved.

Rondo is IMHO in the same boat.  When all is said and done I believe he will do down in history as one of the best to ever play the PG position...however he will never be able to lead a team deep in the playoffs unless he has a Paul Pierce, Ray Allen or Kevin Garnett by his side.  His dominace is based upon his ability to create for others - if you don't have an elite scorer you can depend on to hit those shots, then your ability to create is diminished.

Magic Johnson, Isiah Thomas, Tim Hardaway, Gary Payton, Steve Nash, Stephon Marbury, Baron Davis (in their primes) are the type of Point Guards you can build a team around.  This is because not only were they all excellent playmakers, but they were also all capable of consistently taking over games with their scoring.  Yes I know that Steph and Baron dropped off (largely due to their attitudes) but they had the type of talent that would have allowed you to build around.

Ray is gone, Pierce and KG are slowing down.  Boston no longer has a clear dominant offensive force this season, and as a result we are starting to see the first signs of what would happen if we tried to rebuild around Rondo.  Because he's not capable of consistently dominating as a scorer, his ability to dominate a game depends on his ability to throw the pass which leads to the score.  If the guy he passes to can't score, then his game is ineffective.  Right now Rondo will score 20 probably once in every 5 games.  He's capable of exploding offensively, but he can't do it consistently enough to be the centrepiece of a team.

Teams generally don't win with a great PG unless either:
1. That PG is also a great scorer or
2. They have a great scorer alongside their PG

Take a look at recent history:

* Miami heat won a title led by Lebron
* Dallas won a title led by Dirk and Terry (scoring PG)
* Lakers have won titles led by Kobe
* Spurs have won titles led by Duncan, Ginobilli, Parker (scoring PG)
* Detroit won a title led by Billups (scoring PG)

Even if you go back to the 80's Lakers and Pistons teams...they were led by Magic and Isiah.  Both of them were Point Guards, but both were 20 PPG + scorers

Long story short...you can't win a title with an elite playmaking PG unless you also have an elite scorer.

You CAN win a title with an elite scorer if you DON'T have an elite playmaking PG.

Newsflash - once Pierce and KG leave, who is our elite scoring player?  Jeff Green is the closest we have, but he's not yet come even close to showing he's capable of that role. We'd essentially have Rondo and a team full of solid role players, and that will NOT win us a title any time soon.

If either Tyreke or Cousins ever developed into Elite (> 20 PPG) scorer  players, while the other remained a solid (15 PPG = 17 PPG) scorer as they already are...then we would have a better chance of winning a title with that combination then we would with Rondo and a bunch of role players.  You NEED a volume go-to scorer to win a title.

Now imagine the next couple of seasons with this lineup:

* Cousins
* Garnett
* Pierce
* Evans
* Bradley

* Barbosa
* Terry
* Green
* Sullinger
* Thompson

* Thomas
* Joseph
* Wilcox
* Melo

Then once Pierce and KG retire in two or three seasons we have about 25 million in cap space to sign another All-Star calibre player to add to this mix.  Lets say we sign Josh Smith:

* Cousins
* Smith
* Green
* Evans
* Bradley

There are just so many possibilities.

If we hold on to Rondo then our entire success depends on our ability to acquire an elite scoring talent to put alongside him.  Josh Smith wouldn't be good enough offensively to work in this equation.  We'd need sombody like Westbrook (won't play well with Rondo), Monta Ellis (won't play well with Rondo), Durant (won't leave OKC), Lebron (would never play in Boston), Carmello (probably a Knick for life now), etc.  Getting a player of that calibre is not easy with the trade assets we have, and getting of one that calibre to sign via free agency i a challenge when your team (outside of Rondo) is made up of mostly role players.

So much as I hate to say it yeah, I think I'd have to accept this trade if it got offered to me.  Especially considering that Thomas and Thompson themselves are not by any means shabby players. 

Re: Would you trade Rondo For..
« Reply #57 on: December 17, 2012, 07:07:54 AM »

Offline crimson_stallion

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5964
  • Tommy Points: 875
Right now I'd pull the trigger for Cousins or Love , in a NEW YORK sec. ;D   we look so old and near dead

I would not for Love. Good player on a bad team syndrome.  Love IMHO does not have the offensive talent to be a go-to scorer for a contending team.  He's a volume shooter who puts points on the board via a high number of shot attempts, but he has no post up game and his jump shot is nowhere near as impressive as people seem to believe (check his shooting percentages from three and midrange, you'll see what I mean). 

Cousins is IMHO a far more versatile player offensive and is capable of scoring in the post or with the jump shot.  He's more athletic then Love and physically stronger as well.  Much more upside IMO.  I don't believe replacing Rondo with Kevin Love would make this team any better at all. 

Re: Would you trade Rondo For..
« Reply #58 on: December 17, 2012, 10:13:14 AM »

Offline Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 37047
  • Tommy Points: 1887
Right now I'd pull the trigger for Cousins or Love , in a NEW YORK sec. ;D   we look so old and near dead

I would not for Love. Good player on a bad team syndrome.  Love IMHO does not have the offensive talent to be a go-to scorer for a contending team.  He's a volume shooter who puts points on the board via a high number of shot attempts, but he has no post up game and his jump shot is nowhere near as impressive as people seem to believe (check his shooting percentages from three and midrange, you'll see what I mean). 

Cousins is IMHO a far more versatile player offensive and is capable of scoring in the post or with the jump shot.  He's more athletic then Love and physically stronger as well.  Much more upside IMO.  I don't believe replacing Rondo with Kevin Love would make this team any better at all.

Wow, Kevin Love would be very interesting. Alongside KG. The offensive punch of those two together. The rebounding upgrade for the team.

The team could start Avery Bradley in Rondo's stead. Maybe Terry alongside him in a two guard backcourt. Very different type of offensive team. A PG centric to a non-PG centric offense overnight. Run the offense through the big men in the high post. Pierce on the wing as a secondary playmaker. Terry as an additional creator off the dribble. Workable.

Anyway ... Minnesota would never trade Love for Rondo. They have Rubio.

Re: Would you trade Rondo For..
« Reply #59 on: December 17, 2012, 10:59:02 AM »

Offline BballTim

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23724
  • Tommy Points: 1123

To me the term "superstar" is reserved for guys like Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, Lebron James, Kevin Durant, Carmello Anthony, Karl Malone. 

IMO a superstar is somebody who is capable of single handedly leading a team into title contention.  Guys who can performing at a high level across a wide range of skill areas, while still being able to dominant a game with their scoring ability on a consistent basis.

  You're putting Melo in the Bird/Magic/Jordan class because he "can performing at a high level across a wide range of skill areas, while still being able to dominant a game with their scoring ability on a consistent basis"? Wow.


Teams generally don't win with a great PG unless either:
1. That PG is also a great scorer or
2. They have a great scorer alongside their PG

Take a look at recent history:

* Miami heat won a title led by Lebron
* Dallas won a title led by Dirk and Terry (scoring PG)
* Lakers have won titles led by Kobe
* Spurs have won titles led by Duncan, Ginobilli, Parker (scoring PG)
* Detroit won a title led by Billups (scoring PG)

Even if you go back to the 80's Lakers and Pistons teams...they were led by Magic and Isiah.  Both of them were Point Guards, but both were 20 PPG + scorers

Long story short...you can't win a title with an elite playmaking PG unless you also have an elite scorer.

You CAN win a title with an elite scorer if you DON'T have an elite playmaking PG.

  You can win with an elite playmaking pg, the Celts almost did in 2010. If you can get to game 7 of the finals you're obviously capable of winning a title.

Newsflash - once Pierce and KG leave, who is our elite scoring player?  Jeff Green is the closest we have, but he's not yet come even close to showing he's capable of that role. We'd essentially have Rondo and a team full of solid role players, and that will NOT win us a title any time soon.

  I would expect Danny to try and replace PP and KG with 1-2 good players. I doubt that the plan is to let them leave and replace them with solid role players and I wouldn't plan my future on that assumption.

If either Tyreke or Cousins ever developed into Elite (> 20 PPG) scorer  players, while the other remained a solid (15 PPG = 17 PPG) scorer as they already are...then we would have a better chance of winning a title with that combination then we would with Rondo and a bunch of role players.  You NEED a volume go-to scorer to win a title.

  If this were true there's no way Sacramento would ever trade either of them. Evans has been a 20 ppg scorer in the past, all they need to do is wait for him or Cousins to mature a little and they'll be title contenders for the next 6-8 years.

  But that's nonsensical, Cousins and Evans on the same team with one of them (probably Evans) in the role of a volume scorer is probably more likely to result in a lottery team than a title contender. If Evans and Cousins stay with the Kings for the next 6-7 years, what are the odds they enjoy as much playoff success as Rondo has over the last 3 years (finals, 2nd round, ecf)? I'd say awfully low.