Author Topic: If we were to trade Rondo to sacramento what would we want back.  (Read 40282 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: If we were to trade Rondo to sacramento what would we want back.
« Reply #105 on: August 28, 2014, 09:16:50 PM »

Offline gpap

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8224
  • Tommy Points: 417
But the problem is our roster is so weak and unbalanced right now that I don't know that Rondo would get a chance to show how good he can be.

I don't see how playing with this kind of roster can give anyone a good read on Rondo's true abilities and value.

Re: If we were to trade Rondo to sacramento what would we want back.
« Reply #106 on: August 28, 2014, 09:39:31 PM »

Offline MBunge

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4661
  • Tommy Points: 471
The chance Mclemore and Stauskas have of becoming solid players is the same as every other first round rookie. They're solid young players with 10 years ahead of them and we don't know what their ceiling is.

They are not "solid young players with 10 years ahead of them".  One looked awfully close to being a bust his rookie year and the other is COMPLETELY unproven at the NBA level and probably would have gone undrafted if he'd played at a mid-major.

When you start the conversation with such a ridiculous proposal, you can't snooty over ridiculous responses.

Mike

Re: If we were to trade Rondo to sacramento what would we want back.
« Reply #107 on: August 29, 2014, 07:03:08 AM »

Offline chambers

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7482
  • Tommy Points: 943
  • Boston Celtics= Championships, nothing less.
The chance Mclemore and Stauskas have of becoming solid players is the same as every other first round rookie. They're solid young players with 10 years ahead of them and we don't know what their ceiling is.

They are not "solid young players with 10 years ahead of them".  One looked awfully close to being a bust his rookie year and the other is COMPLETELY unproven at the NBA level and probably would have gone undrafted if he'd played at a mid-major.

When you start the conversation with such a ridiculous proposal, you can't snooty over ridiculous responses.

Mike

If you re-read what you are quoting, you notice that I said
'The chance Mclemore and Stauskas have of becoming solid players is the same as every other first round rookie. They're solid young players with 10 years ahead of them and we don't know what their ceiling is.'

One was the 7th pick, and one was the 8th pick. To say Ben Mclemore is nearly a bust after one season at the terrible Kings organisation is reaching at its finest. Have you actually watched him play? Did you see the changes in line up? The acquisition of Rudy Gay and Isiah Thomas into the starting line up?
 And yes, when you score 16 points, 5 rebounds and 2 assists in 32 minutes a game on one of the best college teams in the USA, whilst shooting 50% from the field and 42% from three point land over 37 games and just under 5 three point attempts a game, you're a solid young player.

 That's why Ben Mclemore was drafted #7. Stauskas shot even better on a very good Michigan team. They are both solid young players. You're full of crap if you're going to write them off as valuable trade assets as freshly drafted and rookie year players.
 As I said, they have 10 years ahead of them and we don't know how good they'll be. They were however very good in college and both have a huge amount of potential.

That's not the basis of the argument with Tim here though...actually I'm not sure why you're selectively picking parts of my argument with Tim here but I'll say the same thing to you since you didn't read the whole post. In fact I'll quote what I said to Tim and direct it at you:

'That's not the point here. The point is Rondos trade value.
At this stage, you honestly believe if we attempted to trade Rondo without an extension, that we'd get more than two top 10 draft picks? After he's openly stated he wants to be courted during free agency?'


Do you think that any NBA executive would give up two young, cost controlled top 10 picks like Stauskas and Mclemore for an expiring Rajon Rondo coming back from a major injury?

Would you give up Marcus Smart after his first season and our top 10 pick this year for 10 months of Rondo at this stage of his career and injury situation?

Tim didn't want to answer the question because unfortunately he can't answer the question logically, so I hope you can. I don't care if you want to trade him or not. The question is 'what is his current trade value'.
 If you think it's more than Stauskas and Mclemore then what is it?
"We are lucky we have a very patient GM that isn't willing to settle for being good and coming close. He wants to win a championship and we have the potential to get there still with our roster and assets."

quoting 'Greg B' on RealGM after 2017 trade deadline.
Read that last line again. One more time.

Re: If we were to trade Rondo to sacramento what would we want back.
« Reply #108 on: August 29, 2014, 08:52:17 AM »

Offline BballTim

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23724
  • Tommy Points: 1123
The chance Mclemore and Stauskas have of becoming solid players is the same as every other first round rookie. They're solid young players with 10 years ahead of them and we don't know what their ceiling is.

They are not "solid young players with 10 years ahead of them".  One looked awfully close to being a bust his rookie year and the other is COMPLETELY unproven at the NBA level and probably would have gone undrafted if he'd played at a mid-major.

When you start the conversation with such a ridiculous proposal, you can't snooty over ridiculous responses.

Mike

If you re-read what you are quoting, you notice that I said
'The chance Mclemore and Stauskas have of becoming solid players is the same as every other first round rookie. They're solid young players with 10 years ahead of them and we don't know what their ceiling is.'

One was the 7th pick, and one was the 8th pick. To say Ben Mclemore is nearly a bust after one season at the terrible Kings organisation is reaching at its finest. Have you actually watched him play? Did you see the changes in line up? The acquisition of Rudy Gay and Isiah Thomas into the starting line up?
 And yes, when you score 16 points, 5 rebounds and 2 assists in 32 minutes a game on one of the best college teams in the USA, whilst shooting 50% from the field and 42% from three point land over 37 games and just under 5 three point attempts a game, you're a solid young player.

 That's why Ben Mclemore was drafted #7. Stauskas shot even better on a very good Michigan team. They are both solid young players. You're full of crap if you're going to write them off as valuable trade assets as freshly drafted and rookie year players.
 As I said, they have 10 years ahead of them and we don't know how good they'll be. They were however very good in college and both have a huge amount of potential.

  If you were at all able to step back and take a relatively unbiased look at the conversation, you'd see that Mike's assessment of the Sactown players is in the same tone and tenor as your assessment of "hope to be an all-star again one day" Rondo. Your defense of those kids and explanations for Ben's poor play are the kind of comments you'd label as "spweing blinded stubbornness" or "biased to the highest order" if I said similar things about Rondo.

  I think that your "both have huge potential" comments compared to your "we can't say Rondo will ever be any better than he was immediately after he returned from his knee injury" is fairly illustrative of your bias in the situation, and the fact that you can't see any of that as biased is fairly incredible. Your proclamation of your lack of bias was akin to a post by me claiming to be one of Rondo's harshest critics on celticsblog.

  Seriously, do you really think that your  assessments going forward on those Sactown players  and your expectations for Rondo going forward are equally optimistic/pessimistic/realistic? Read the posts after the one you made, most of them disagree with you and most or all of the trade proposals after your "MOST we could hope for" claim were for more than you claimed we could get for him.

'That's not the point here. The point is Rondos trade value.
At this stage, you honestly believe if we attempted to trade Rondo without an extension, that we'd get more than two top 10 draft picks? After he's openly stated he wants to be courted during free agency?'


Do you think that any NBA executive would give up two young, cost controlled top 10 picks like Stauskas and Mclemore for an expiring Rajon Rondo coming back from a major injury?

Would you give up Marcus Smart after his first season and our top 10 pick this year for 10 months of Rondo at this stage of his career and injury situation?

Tim didn't want to answer the question because unfortunately he can't answer the question logically, so I hope you can. I don't care if you want to trade him or not. The question is 'what is his current trade value'.
 If you think it's more than Stauskas and Mclemore then what is it?

  I didn't answer the question because, after laughing at your "you're horribly biased and I'm not at all biased" nonsense I decided to just walk away instead of responding. But since you're dragging me back into this, what the heck.

  The *only* logical answer to the question is "I don't know". The obvious truth of the matter is that nobody here knows. The fact that people think that he has an actual stable trade value is a testament to how much people don't understand trade value.

  We're talking in this thread about trading Rondo to the kings. Say that this is somewhat valid, the kings really want to have a good season and are willing to take a chance on getting Rondo to re-sign and are going to pursue a trade all the way up to the trade deadline. What will he be worth to them on new years day?

  If the Kings get off to a good start and look like they could make some noise in the playoffs if they added Rondo then his value would be pretty high. If they got off to a terrible start and were unlikely to get into the playoffs if they traded for Rondo his value would be pretty low. If their pg was playing much better than expected (like Lowry last year) Rondo's trade value with them is low. If Cousins gets injured trading for Rondo doesn't make much sense. If Cousins starts demanding a trade because there isn't enough talent around him Rondo's value goes up. Also, if Rondo suddenly decides he might re-sign with the kings then his trade value would soar.

  So for one team I listed 6 things that could have a large effect on Rondo's trade value and I haven't even touched on Rondo's level of play next year. You could do the same with many other teams, and we haven't even started to consider the financial aspects of any proposed trade, which can also have a drastic impact on the amount of talent exchanged in a trade. So for  these reason I don't know what Rondo's trade value is, and I'm well aware that you don't either.

Re: If we were to trade Rondo to sacramento what would we want back.
« Reply #109 on: August 29, 2014, 09:03:59 AM »

Offline Celtics4ever

  • NCE
  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20000
  • Tommy Points: 1323
Quote
And yes, when you score 16 points, 5 rebounds and 2 assists in 32 minutes a game on one of the best college teams in the USA, whilst shooting 50% from the field and 42% from three point land over 37 games and just under 5 three point attempts a game, you're a solid young player.

 That's why Ben Mclemore was drafted #7

Sadly his skillset has not transferred to the NBA just yet.

http://cdn0.sbnation.com/assets/4098987/Shotchart_1394143057995.png

Looking at the shot chart one can see he lacks range.  He shoots ok in what would be the college three.   Maybe he ought to study Rip Hamilton and the mid range game.

Quote
Ben McLemore's rookie season has definitely been a struggle, and in fact, historically bad. Of players who have played at least 1400 minutes, only 7 have had a PER of less than 8 and a True Shooting Percentage of less than .470 in their rookie season: Gene Wiley, Mike Farmer, Ben McLemore, Larry Demic, Junior Harrington, Austin Rivers and Adam Morrison. That's not good company to be with.

http://www.sactownroyalty.com/2014/3/7/5479020/ben-mclemore-rookie-struggles-shooting

The leap from college three point to NBA can be a hard one.  It's a longer shot by almost three feet.
« Last Edit: August 29, 2014, 09:09:44 AM by Celtics4ever »

Re: If we were to trade Rondo to sacramento what would we want back.
« Reply #110 on: August 29, 2014, 09:31:35 AM »

Offline fantankerous

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 915
  • Tommy Points: 122

And yes, when you score 16 points, 5 rebounds and 2 assists in 32 minutes a game on one of the best college teams in the USA, whilst shooting 50% from the field and 42% from three point land over 37 games and just under 5 three point attempts a game, you're a solid young player.

 That's why Ben Mclemore was drafted #7.

You present Mclemore's college success and draft placement as evidence that he's not a bust.  In fact, this is a prerequisite for being a bust.  If he didn't have previous success and wasn't drafted highly, he couldn't be a bust.

Also, you in part excuse Mclemore's poor rookie season with the canard that the Kings are a terrible organization.  It's time to update your prejudices because the Maloofs aren't running the show anymore.  The Kings may not be a winning organization, but they are not terrible.  From ownership down to the coaching staff, the Kings have/are creating an environment for players to succeed.  Mclemore has simply failed.

Re: If we were to trade Rondo to sacramento what would we want back.
« Reply #111 on: August 29, 2014, 09:48:41 AM »

Offline Celtics18

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11688
  • Tommy Points: 1469
TP to Tim for making some great points about how the value of an NBA player is much more dynamic than static.

People always seem to be looking for some kind of "fixed value."  In most cases, that "fixed value" doesn't exist. 
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: If we were to trade Rondo to sacramento what would we want back.
« Reply #112 on: August 29, 2014, 10:43:10 AM »

Offline chambers

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7482
  • Tommy Points: 943
  • Boston Celtics= Championships, nothing less.
TP to Tim for making some great points about how the value of an NBA player is much more dynamic than static.

People always seem to be looking for some kind of "fixed value."  In most cases, that "fixed value" doesn't exist.

I'll respond to Tim's self reflective, hypocritical, biased justification of denial soon.
Example: 'no one knows his true value' but yet Tim can claim that 2 top 10 picks in their rookie and sophomore seasons isn't enough for Rajon Rondo. So much so that he'll openly insult me for voicing that opinion.
Right.

The funniest thing with Tim is that in order to justify his biased opinion on Rondo, he accuses others of having some kind of Rondo anti-bias. Now there are some posters that are definitely holding a certain Rondo anti-bias like Larbrd33- and that's his opinion which I respect and understand. Tim and LarBrd are both perfect examples of the diehard, intelligent sides of the Celtics fanbase that either loves Rondo or think he's 'meh'.
 I don't think I've ever seen a trade proposal involving Rondo that Tim thought the Celtics were getting an even or better return.
 How many times have I logically defended Rondo harder than anyone other than yourself in those criticisms? How many times have I told Larbrd33 that he's being stupidly overly cynical regarding Rondo's value or his over valuing of other NBA players in Rondo trade topics?
 What bias do I have? Is it because I happen to be able to look at Rondo objectively and logically and suggest that 2 top 10 first round picks for Rondo is not an underpayment?
Am I able to see how awesome he is yet also observe his flaws?
 Where does this imaginary Rondo anti bias that I have come from Tim?
When have I not said Rondo in his prime is a top 3-5 point guard in the NBA and defended him when others attacked him ?
 Why would I have bias towards Ben Mclemore or Stauskas when my preference all along is to keep Rondo and try to build around him? I wanted no part of Stauskas in the draft and I was surprised he went that high, but it doesn't mean he's not potentially a great player in the NBA.
       
 Just because I believe that Mclemore+ Stauskas is good value for Rondo doesn't mean I want to trade him. All I'm suggesting is that his current value is good but not as good as it once was (there's no way in hell the Kings give up Mclemore and Stauskas for 10 months of Rondo). The problem for you is that you'll defend Rondo in ANY trade scenario. No matter how realistic it is to the rest of the world.

You know the funniest thing about Tim's hypocrisy? He is in so much denial that he'll blast me for suggesting I'm undervaluing him, then he'll backflip a minute later and start p---ing in the wind that Rondo has no 'minimum' trade value and 'how can we know what it is?'.... just so he doesn't have to give a a logical answer. Why's that? Because with Rondo, his emotions and loyalty cloud his judgement and thus remove his credibility. His trade value right now in the 2014 offseason. You did not answer the question. If Ainge were to trade Rondo yesterday what would be fair? Because Mclemore and Stauskas aren't fair apparently.
 
The difference between Tim and I is that I want what's best for the Celtics. I want whatever makes us a championship contender and I want a championship before any player.
 Tim wants what's best for the Celtics as long as it involves keeping Rondo. For Tim, Rondo comes first and the championship comes next and he doesn't even realise this flaw.
And that loyalty to Rondo is what is ultimately wrong with Tim's arguments on anything to do with trading Rondo.
« Last Edit: August 29, 2014, 12:43:08 PM by chambers »
"We are lucky we have a very patient GM that isn't willing to settle for being good and coming close. He wants to win a championship and we have the potential to get there still with our roster and assets."

quoting 'Greg B' on RealGM after 2017 trade deadline.
Read that last line again. One more time.

Re: If we were to trade Rondo to sacramento what would we want back.
« Reply #113 on: August 29, 2014, 10:50:41 AM »

Offline D.o.s.

  • NCE
  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14061
  • Tommy Points: 1239


I do agree with chambers on one point, actually -- it's a little disingenuous to speak on the dynamism of a player's value without offering an estimation of what a good trade might look like, especially when it comes to evaluating other people's trade estimations.
At least a goldfish with a Lincoln Log on its back goin' across your floor to your sock drawer has a miraculous connotation to it.

Re: If we were to trade Rondo to sacramento what would we want back.
« Reply #114 on: August 29, 2014, 11:57:02 AM »

Offline Celtics18

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11688
  • Tommy Points: 1469
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: If we were to trade Rondo to sacramento what would we want back.
« Reply #115 on: August 29, 2014, 01:00:50 PM »

Offline gpap

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8224
  • Tommy Points: 417
Just occurred to me.

Sacramento has NOTHING we would want.

You know why?

Cause I have a feeling in a year's time, Cousins is going to want out of that rat's nest and guess which team might have the assets to make a trade for him?



Watching Rondo and Cousins together on OUR team (not Sacramento) could actually make another bad season worth it.

...and Rudy Gay will be a free agent next summer too (friend of Rondo and teammate of Cousin's.)

Re: If we were to trade Rondo to sacramento what would we want back.
« Reply #116 on: August 29, 2014, 01:09:52 PM »

Offline Donoghus

  • Global Moderator
  • Bill Russell
  • ******************************
  • Posts: 30912
  • Tommy Points: 1604
  • What a Pub Should Be
It's pretty much a crap roster outside of Cousins to raid and SAC isn't give up Cousins for Rondo. 

I've mentioned it before but I hate the SAC trade ideas involving Rondo.  Just not good ones.


2010 CB Historical Draft - Best Overall Team

Re: If we were to trade Rondo to sacramento what would we want back.
« Reply #117 on: August 29, 2014, 01:59:53 PM »

Offline Vermont Green

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11192
  • Tommy Points: 858
Assessing Rondo's trade value in not certain but that is why it is good fodder for a fan blog.  that is the whole point isn't it?

Anyway,  Kevin Love's trade value turned out to be Wiggins, Bennett, and a 2015 #1 Pick (Minni then flipped the #1 pick in another trade but that is what CLE paid to get Love).  But that was only after Love did the secret handshake with LeBron and illegally agreed that he would extend with Cleveland.  Had he not agreed, Wiggins was not going to be part of the deal and Minni would have gotten Bennett and maybe Tristan Thompson plus a pick.

If you compare that to McLemore plus Stauskas, it is not that far off I don't think, depending on what you think of the potential of the two young players.  I believe Love has higher trade value than Rondo.

Personally, I am not that high on Stauskas but I actually think McLemore is going to figure it out and be good.  It is possible that Wiggins will be no better than McLemore and that Stauskas ends up better than Bennett.

I continue to believe that trading Rondo is better than losing him for nothing after what is probably going to be a bad season anyway.  We don't really need more SGs but I feel like we should get the best assets we can and sort it all out later.

Re: If we were to trade Rondo to sacramento what would we want back.
« Reply #118 on: August 29, 2014, 02:34:13 PM »

Offline BballTim

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23724
  • Tommy Points: 1123
TP to Tim for making some great points about how the value of an NBA player is much more dynamic than static.

People always seem to be looking for some kind of "fixed value."  In most cases, that "fixed value" doesn't exist.

I'll respond to Tim's self reflective, hypocritical, biased justification of denial soon.
Example: 'no one knows his true value' but yet Tim can claim that 2 top 10 picks in their rookie and sophomore seasons isn't enough for Rajon Rondo. So much so that he'll openly insult me for voicing that opinion.
Right.

  Oh, I didn't insult you because I think that 2 top 10 picks isn't enough for Rondo, it was because you began your post with "Never ceases to amaze me how much people think Rondo is worth". Like your wild guess is somehow the gold standard.

The funniest thing with Tim is that in order to justify his biased opinion on Rondo, he accuses others of having some kind of Rondo anti-bias. Now there are some posters that are definitely holding a certain Rondo anti-bias like Larbrd33- and that's his opinion which I respect and understand. Tim and LarBrd are both perfect examples of the diehard, intelligent sides of the Celtics fanbase that either loves Rondo or think he's 'meh'.
 I don't think I've ever seen a trade proposal involving Rondo that Tim thought the Celtics were getting an even or better return.
 How many times have I logically defended Rondo harder than anyone other than yourself in those criticisms? How many times have I told Larbrd33 that he's being stupidly overly cynical regarding Rondo's value or his over valuing of other NBA players in Rondo trade topics?
 What bias do I have? Is it because I happen to be able to look at Rondo objectively and logically and suggest that 2 top 10 first round picks for Rondo is not an underpayment?
Am I able to see how awesome he is yet also observe his flaws?

  I'd guess that LarBrd feels his opinions are as valid as yours. In fact he even frequently claims to be a big Rondo fan. Sound familiar?

When have I not said Rondo in his prime is a top 3-5 point guard in the NBA and defended him when others attacked him ?

  Rondo's in his prime now. I'm sure the boards are full of claims that you've made about Rondo that you wouldn't make about a top 3-5 pg, including this thread. While you're holding yourself up as a great Rondo supporter don't forget you're also the guy who started a thread about whether the team would be better off in the long run with Jordan Crawford as our starting pg instead of Rondo. Quick, list the other point guards you consider to be top 3-5 that you'd say that about.
       
Just because I believe that Mclemore+ Stauskas is good value for Rondo doesn't mean I want to trade him. All I'm suggesting is that his current value is good but not as good as it once was (there's no way in hell the Kings give up Mclemore and Stauskas for 10 months of Rondo). The problem for you is that you'll defend Rondo in ANY trade scenario. No matter how realistic it is to the rest of the world.

  This will be hard to digest, but your opinion doesn't count as "the rest of the world". As I mentioned earlier, all of the posts that I saw with trade proposals after your "the MOST we could get..." claim were, in fact, better returns than your proclaimed maximum.

You know the funniest thing about Tim's hypocrisy? He is in so much denial that he'll blast me for suggesting I'm undervaluing him, then he'll backflip a minute later and start p---ing in the wind that Rondo has no 'minimum' trade value and 'how can we know what it is?'.... just so he doesn't have to give a a logical answer. Why's that? Because with Rondo, his emotions and loyalty cloud his judgement and thus remove his credibility. His trade value right now in the 2014 offseason. You did not answer the question. If Ainge were to trade Rondo yesterday what would be fair? Because Mclemore and Stauskas aren't fair apparently.

  Cool. So go back over my list of points. Logically you'd have to either know that none of those factors would have much of an effect on Rondo's trade value or you'd have to know specifically which of those would occur. Which is it? Likewise, in order to know how much Sacramento would offer for Rondo you'd have to specifically know their GM's opinion of Rondo or claim that his opinion of Rondo is unrelated to Rondo's trade value. Again, which is it?
 
The difference between Tim and I is that I want what's best for the Celtics. I want whatever makes us a championship contender and I want a championship before any player.
 Tim wants what's best for the Celtics as long as it involves keeping Rondo. For Tim, Rondo comes first and the championship comes next and he doesn't even realise this flaw.
And that loyalty to Rondo is what is ultimately wrong with Tim's arguments on anything to do with trading Rondo.

  Now we're getting to the crux of the matter. Why don't you show me a post where I've claimed that I'd rather keep Rondo than win a title. I'm discussing things you've actually said, not whatever I pluck out of my overactive imagination. If you're claiming that you're at least somewhat less biased than your wild exaggerations of my claims, congratulations on that. At least you have that going for you.

Re: If we were to trade Rondo to sacramento what would we want back.
« Reply #119 on: August 29, 2014, 04:16:39 PM »

Offline D.o.s.

  • NCE
  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14061
  • Tommy Points: 1239
There's little evidence to support the idea that Rondo is in his prime now, and at least one good argument that he's already peaked (courtesy of the Wages of Wins guys).
http://wagesofwins.com/nba-players-age-like-milk/

Stumbling upon wins is also on google books, by the way.
At least a goldfish with a Lincoln Log on its back goin' across your floor to your sock drawer has a miraculous connotation to it.