Scal nailed it on the head early on with the Rondo debate.
"Great players make others around them great".
Rondo with the ball in his hands makes Bradley better, Green better, etc. He's never played with a roll big who sucks in the defense, and leaves everything else open outside. If you get him that big who can roll to the bucket, and Rondo has shooting around him, its very difficult to stop us. Rajon with the rock in his hands, in the pick and roll, if you don't come and crash on the big, Rondo finds him for a dunk. If you crash, Rondo finds the open shooter. Its an easy game for him. With shooters like Olynyk, Sullinger at the 4, Bradley at the 2, Green at the 3.....he's got weapons to find who can knock it down when open outside. We need the big who can roll and dominate down low, and protects the rim. That's the final piece.
Rondo creates automatic offense for your team without running a dog gone play.
Ainge isn't stupid. He knows this. Its going to take a kings ransom to land Rondo if you want him, otherwise, Ainge isn't budging. He's got pieces to acquire the big down the road. Just gotta stay patient in the process.
Keywords being for this forum: "patient in the process"
Lots of good points here, but IMHO you have to factor in the risk of losing him for nothing in the summer.
And you have to factor in Ainge not being afraid to gamble, so he is less risk-averse than many posters in this forum. I believe that the current risk assessment is such that Ainge is willing to wait until the summer of 2015 to find those pieces he wants to fit next to Rondo.
I'm not so sure it really has as much to do with Ainge's "gambling" nature as it does the simple fact that something isn't always better than nothing.
What I mean by this is, even if Ainge feels there is a decent to good chance Rondo will likely leave in FA this summer, if the trade offers are as bad as some of the one's I have seen posted here there is now way he would be foolish enough to make such a deal. In that instance, the possibility of losing Rondo for nothing is better than the return on a trade of Rondo. At least if we keep him through the deadline we still have a chance to resign him. If we trade him, that's it, he's gone.
This is spot-on, IMO. I really wish more people on the blog would understand this concept rather than run Rondo out of town for cents on the dollar just because "its something".
Interesting thoughts.
Just to make sure what we disagree about:
You think Ainge wants to keep Rondo unless a really good deal comes.
I think he wants to trade Rondo unless no good deal comes.
Why do you think that? Is it simply a matter of you thinking he doesn't like Rondo?
Argghhhh Good question. I am going out for some fresh air. Let's see if I come back with a good reply.
Took my walk, had a cup of tea and now I am ready to answer the deceitfully easy question.
First off, let me explain where I come from: I was trained as a diplomatic historian, so I have a sweet tooth for speculation, a suspicious frame of mind, and of course
conspiracy. So, do not expect long analyses on % or comparing players on the basis of their % or PIE. It is much more about understanding and interpreting than measuring and comparing.
1. To understand what's happening with Rondo we have to understand what direction the team is moving to. We all agree the team is rebuilding. But there are different ways to rebuild a team.
There is the
Hinkie way. You collect players through the draft hoping that one day you will land the next Kobe or LBJ (or at least the next Melo or Harden). In the meantime, everyone including your young stars like MCW are treated like chips in a Las Vegas gambling game.
BOS
is rebuilding but in a very different way. We have committed long term to a young coach with no pro experience (an unprecedented move in the NBA). The only reason to do this is because you believe Stevens can develop not only players but a
team. We already have some indications of where he is moving to- a read and react offense: quick pace , few dribbles, lots of screens, passes and players ready to shoot whenever they are free. This is a system that takes time to learn and requires a stable core of players.
Ie, it only makes sense if the C's are committed long term to some of their current young players. Rondo is not a perfect fit for this system: he pounds a lot and he is not a good 3p shooter.
2. This follows directly from (1). Since we have committed long term to some young players like Sullynyk there is a glaring problem: by the time these guys reach their peak (4-5 years from now)
Rondo will be past his prime.3. Reading between the lines of the statements that RR and the front office I was not convinced either wanted to show a long term commitment to the other. If RR really wanted to stay with the team all he had to do was to say
Boston is where I belong. Any other team comes second to me. As long as the front office makes me the right offer I will finish my career as a Celtic. And then, just wait and see what will happen if Danny entertains the idea of trading you for some mediocre talent and a future draft pick
Similarly, if Danny wanted RR long term he had to say
I cannot imagine the C's without Rajon. He is our natural leader. I will do everything possible to keep him in the team. And then the ball is in Rondo's court.
Neither side made similar statements- if anything what they said was lukewarm and careful. Which means they are both calculating their alternatives.
4. From the rumours that circulated during the offseason it seems that RR wanted a max or a near max contract and that Ainge was unwilling to make such a commitment (a correct move to my mind, but we can discuss this later on).
Other reasons why I think Rondo might go:
-An elite player should play in a contending team. (OK I know the statement sounds obnoxious as it is, but usually keeping an elite player in a rebuilding team involves overpaying him.)
-There are teams where RR's playing style fits better- NYK for example with Jackson wanting to re-introduce the triangle offence. A really cool guy in these forums made a very good post on this (sorry I cannot remember his name- he has Larry Bird shooting a FT as a profile image)
-What is the point of drafting a PG if you plan to keep Rondo? Yes, I remember what Ainge said "we simply went for the best talent available" but this is simply nonsense. Why add a future elite PG to an already existing PG in a team that already has Pressey (and then go get ET who can also play PG). Where there other good option except from Smart? On top of my head I can think of Julius Randle, Nik Stauskas and Doug McDermott- all of which would make more sense if Ainge planned to keep RR long term.
Some qualifications:
-If RR returns and plays smoothly read and react offense and if (above all) his 3p% has gone up (hey it happened with Sully so why not Rondo), this completely changes things. RR might be more valuable to the C's than any other NBA team.
-We might have a Bledsoe scenario. ie Rondo says "I am going to get a max contract from another team", Ainge says go ahead, and then Rondo fails to do so. Again, RR is an elite player but the market for his skills is a restricted one. If RR decides to stay for less then again everything is possible.
Waiting for your thoughts.