Rondo on the trading block?

[TehSwimGuy]

According to hoopsrumor...

On STR, someone suggested a proposal of

Reke, Jimmer, JJ, & Whiteside for Rondo & Pierce.

I kind of like the idea of a Pierce/Rondo/Cousins trio...If people can keep the pettiness and sarcastic remarks aside, does this trade hold any merit in their minds?

Personally, I'd like to see Salmons in place of Whiteside or Jimmer, but we know he doesn't hold any value.

 

[MassachusettsKingsFan]

I've been all for going after Rondo for as long as he's been semi available.

There is kind of a feeling that Rondo is overrated on this board. Not sure who is doing the rating, but I know he's one fantastic PG who doesn't need a lot of shots to be effective, and he has one great contract.

I'd be shocked if Boston ever traded Pierce, and a Rondo trade would certainly have to include Tyreke Evans.

A deal would most likely have to have us dealing Evans, Hickson, a 1st rounder, and Honeycutt for Rondo (and boston may throw in Avery Bradley, Moore, or Steimsma because they would have to cut someone anyways).

And honestly, I would do just about anything to get Rondo and Cousins on the same team. That's the pairing I want for the next 10 years. As Kings fans, we think (and want to believe) that we can win with an Evans/Cousins core ... but I KNOW we can win with a Rondo/Cousins core. I'm sure of it.

And I think Boston would do Tyreke some good. He's had too much freedom and a severe lack of leadership/stability during his time in Sacramento. With Doc, KG, and Pierce he'd learn a lot. He'd be better for it.

Rondo is what this team needs. Structure, leadership, star power .. remember, we are talking about the Sacramento Kings. The only way were getting good players is if we draft them or trade for them. This would be a golden opportunity I wouldn't want to see us pass up.

 

[Section 101]

According to hoopsrumor...

On STR, someone suggested a proposal of



I kind of like the idea of a Pierce/Rondo/Cousins trio...If people can keep the pettiness and sarcastic remarks aside, does this trade hold any merit in their minds?

Personally, I'd like to see Salmons in place of Whiteside or Jimmer, but we know he doesn't hold any value.

That's not even close salary wise. Rondo and Pierce are $25 mil. Boston is at 14 players so the most they can take on is one extra without having to waive someone too.

Basically, you would need to add Salmons and Garcia while removing Whiteside and either JJ or Jimmer.

 

[itzcoatl]

I like Rondo on the team, but I wouldn't trade Evans. I think we just need to be patient with our players and see how they develop.

I can see trying to work a Thornton + JT + JJ + Jimmer for Rondo + filler. Although, I'm a big JT fan and I wouldn't really want to part with JT.

 

[bajaden]

I have mixed feelings on this one. I like Rondo, but I'm not delusional over him. He's a very good defender, but then, so is Evans. He's a terrible outside shooter, but then, so is Evans. Evans is a better freethrow shooter, and he's 6'5", while Rondo is 6'1". Evans is younger, and hasn't had the advantage of playing with three experienced stars. There's no doubt that Rondo is the better PG. Question is, would he rack up close to 10 assists a game on a team like the Kings where no one seems to be able to finish? How much of a difference maker would he be on the Kings? Enough to give up not only Evans, but a couple of other players and a first round pick?

I'm not sure. And when I'm not sure, I don't do the deal. Now if we were talking Chris Paul, then we'd have a different conversation.

 

[BMiller52]

I have mixed feelings on this one. I like Rondo, but I'm not delusional over him. He's a very good defender, but then, so is Evans. He's a terrible outside shooter, but then, so is Evans. Evans is a better freethrow shooter, and he's 6'5", while Rondo is 6'1". Evans is younger, and hasn't had the advantage of playing with three experienced stars. There's no doubt that Rondo is the better PG. Question is, would he rack up close to 10 assists a game on a team like the Kings where no one seems to be able to finish? How much of a difference maker would he be on the Kings? Enough to give up not only Evans, but a couple of other players and a first round pick?

I'm not sure. And when I'm not sure, I don't do the deal. Now if we were talking Chris Paul, then we'd have a different conversation.

Rondo would get 10 assists just by running the offense, calling plays, getting guys in the proper places, and making good decisions with the ball IMO. I would do it. Rondo/Thornton/Pierce/JT/Cousins is a ridiculously good starting five. You think Rondo couldn't get 10 assists passing out to Thornton and Pierce(who would fill our SF hole), and JT and Cousins could finish plays for him. That team would make the playoffs IMO even in the holewe're in now.

 

[swisshh]

Rondo is still putting up the assists on a Boston team with far less offensive punch and talent.

I'm sure Boston would want Jimmer, but Jimmer would benefit a lot from having Rondo. It would probably be Reke, Hickson + ?? for Rondo + filler.

 

[UK_King]

I would trade anyone except DMC for Rondo. This guy would elevate us instantly. Him and Josh Smith are the two dream guys for me.

Obviously we'll never have a chance of getting them, but imagine if we could.

 

[KingsCitizen]

I'll trade for Rondo with our first round pick plus any guy not named Evans or Cousins. IMO Evans > Rondo. If you switch Evans and Rondo, Boston would be a much better IMO. So that's it no Evans for Rondo for me.

Boston will clearly rebuild next season. And Danny Ainge would be collecting quality picks for a possibly very busy draft day for Boston.

 

[LWP777]

Get her done Geoff!



It will never happen.....

 

[bajaden]

Rondo would get 10 assists just by running the offense, calling plays, getting guys in the proper places, and making good decisions with the ball IMO. I would do it. Rondo/Thornton/Pierce/JT/Cousins is a ridiculously good starting five. You think Rondo couldn't get 10 assists passing out to Thornton and Pierce(who would fill our SF hole), and JT and Cousins could finish plays for him. That team would make the playoffs IMO even in the holewe're in now.

You could be right, but as I said, I'm just not that sure. I see plenty of good passes that should be baskets not being finished on the Kings. I don't think having Rondo on your team automaticly improves your layup ability. I do agree that both Cousins and Thompson would benefit from having Rondo, and that might be enough to sway me. But right now, Thornton is getting open looks and has very inconsistent this year. Rondo isn't going to improve his shooting.

There are a lot of things wrong with this team, and adding Rondo isn't going to fix all of them. However, if we go after Rondo, then Evans has to be the major peice traded for him. Salaries don't have to match because we can still absorb some salary. So I'd offer Evans, Hickson, and try to get them to take Outlaw (not likely). I'd try to keep my first round pick, simply because we'll get a very good player in the draft, and we'd be losing more bodies than were getting back.

While aquiring Pierce would be fun, I'd rather not for the long term. If they want to force Pierce into the deal, then I try and force either Salmons or Cisco back on them. Not very attractive for either side then. I'm sure what Boston is looking to do is lose salary, and get younger with potential. Rondo is the bait. If I had to throw in a first round pick, then I throw in a pick from 2016, but not this years pick.

 

[MassachusettsKingsFan]

I strongly disagree with the notion that Rondo's numbers would drop if he was playing with the Kings roster.

I've watched almost every Celtics game this season. For a large portion of the season (specifically when Pierce was out) we had a better supporting cast on the Kings then Rondo had in Boston.

RIGHT NOW Rondo is playing with KG and either Chris Wilcox or O'Neal .. I will always have a soft spot for KG, but he isn't nearly the offensive threat he used to be. Cousins and Thompson are MUCH better passing options as big men than what Rondo is playing with right now.

Pierce is far better than our current SF, sure, but he isn't the kind of player Rondo gets his assists with. Paul scores on his own .. he doesn't need to be 'set up'.

And I think MT and Allen would be a push in terms of Rondo's assist numbers. Allen is the better shooter but MT can do more.

Rondo has been hampered by Bostons inability to push the ball. They are old, he is young, super fast, and great in the open court with numbers. Boston can't consistently play like that. The Kings can. He will make everyone better.

Yes, Rondo and Evans can't shoot. The difference is Rondo DOESN'T shoot. Evans keeps shooting and keeps missing. Rondo doesn't fall for defenses that give him space asking him to shoot .. he finds something else to be effective.

Evans has size on Rondo which is great if Evans is actually a PG, which is still debatable. The current Kings starting lineup is playing Evans as a SF defensively, which makes his size irrelevant.

Needless to say, I'm going after Rondo and I'm going after him with all I got.

 

[bluntsnbball]

Before we get ahead of ourselves here, would someone please tell me why the C's are even thinking of parting with Rondo? I dont understand why they would want to trade away the youngest of their "big 4" who undoubtedly has a long career ahead of him while the rest of the squad are quickly deteriorating. I mean if they are in "win now mode," it doesnt make sense to trade rondo, as far as i can see. And if they are in "rebuild mode" it still doesnt seem like they would want to ditch him.

Is there something that i am missing here? I mean the kid is tearing it up this season, why would they trade him now?

 

[Bricklayer]

Before we get ahead of ourselves here, would someone please tell me why the C's are even thinking of parting with Rondo? I dont understand why they would want to trade away the youngest of their "big 4" who undoubtedly has a long career ahead of him while the rest of the squad are quickly deteriorating. I mean if they are in "win now mode," it doesnt make sense to trade rondo, as far as i can see. And if they are in "rebuild mode" it still doesnt seem like they would want to ditch him.

Is there something that i am missing here? I mean the kid is tearing it up this season, why would they trade him now?

Because they know what everybody else should know: Rondo is not a star who can carry you. he's the guy who supports the stars that can carry you. And heading into a deep rebuid, what the Celtics need is a new Pierce, a new major star to start over with.

Also Rondo's a bit of a pain in the ***. And of course he's the guy with the trade value if they want to jumpstart the rebuild.

The interesting note is that Evans and Rondo have been attached for a long time. Boston loved Evans and we were in talks to trade the pick for Rondo until we got a look at him in workouts. But that's not our best deal. Our deal is nealry impossible, but you throw the kitchen sink at them with our pick (if its in the lottery), Jimmer, Hickson, any of Donte, Whiteside or Honeycutt they want, take a bad contract if they want to dump it, etc. Then you cross your fingers.

 

[MassachusettsKingsFan]

Because they know what everybody else should know: Rondo is not a star who can carry you. he's the guy who supports the stars that can carry you. And heading into a deep rebuid, what the Celtics need is a new Pierce, a new major star to start over with.

Also Rondo's a bit of a pain in the ***. And of course he's the guy with the trade value if they want to jumpstart the rebuild.

The interesting note is that Evans and Rondo have been attached for a long time. Boston loved Evans and we were in talks to trade the pick for Rondo until we got a look at him in workouts. But that's not our best deal. Our deal is nealry impossible, but you throw the kitchen sink at them with our pick (if its in the lottery), Jimmer, Hickson, any of Donte, Whiteside or Honeycutt they want, take a bad contract if they want to dump it, etc. Then you cross your fingers.

But the thing is, Rondo isn't being paid like 'a star that can't carry you' while other 'stars who can't carry you' are terrible values because they suck up all your cap room.

Joe Johnson comes to mind.

You hit the nail on the head with why he's available though. I was about to write the same thing before I saw that you already responded. He's a very strange dude. I don't know if I'd call him an ***. He's not the kind of person who will ruin a locker room or anything like that. He's just different.

The local talk and heat on him is the same one that Kings fans have with Evans - how do you win with a point guard who can't shoot? When the Celtics lose, the radio idiots blame Rondo.

I truly believe Cousins is our star. He's our Dwight Howard, our Lamarcus Aldridge, our Dirk, our Zach Randolph, and any other team who's best player is their big.

Marcus Thornton is our perimeter scorer. Without Evans shots he can go back to putting up 20ppg. Especially with a passing point guard in Rajon Rondo.

And I'm one of the Kings fans who actually like Tyreke Evans. But I don't know if this team can work with our current '3'. On one hand, it may be to early to bail on them as a group.. but on the other hand, we may not have another opportunity to get a player of Rondo's caliber.

I know you've said it a ton of times, brick. Teams with two 20ppg scorers in the back court don't win historically. The scoring numbers are down for both of them, which is most likely a result of playing with each other.

Again, its not an attack on Tyreke. He's just our only shot at Rondo. They wouldn't take Thornton/JJ/Pick. And I don't know if they would take Evans/JJ/pick either, but I think it would be closer to what they are looking for.

I do know that Evans is the only player on this Roster Rondo wouldn't make better, which is why the deal works for us. Every other guy on the roster though? Rondo is making all of their jobs easier. I think he'd do wonders for a guy like Jimmer who we aren't doing a very good job of getting the ball to him in his spots.

 

[rainmaker]

Here’s the full answer: The “Ted Stepien Rule” prevents teams from trading their future first round picks in consecutive years. So if a team (like the Knicks) has traded its 2012 first round pick, it can’t trade its 2011 or 2013 picks. Note that the Stepien rule looks only at the future — it doesn’t matter that the team also traded its 2010 pick. That pick is in the past, and the Stepien rule ignores it.

Even if a team might not have a pick (because it’s lottery-protected, for example) it’s still subject to the Stepien rule. If a team might not be without a future first round pick, then they can’t trade the pick in the year before or the year after.

Thank Petrie for that. Because we traded our 7th pick for the opportunity to trade Beno for Salmons, when he could have just taken Jimmer at 7, we can't trade this years pick.

 

[Dime Dropper]

Here’s the full answer: The “Ted Stepien Rule” prevents teams from trading their future first round picks in consecutive years. So if a team (like the Knicks) has traded its 2012 first round pick, it can’t trade its 2011 or 2013 picks. Note that the Stepien rule looks only at the future — it doesn’t matter that the team also traded its 2010 pick. That pick is in the past, and the Stepien rule ignores it.

Even if a team might not have a pick (because it’s lottery-protected, for example) it’s still subject to the Stepien rule. If a team might not be without a future first round pick, then they can’t trade the pick in the year before or the year after.

Thank Petrie for that. Because we traded our 7th pick for the opportunity to trade Beno for Salmons, when he could have just taken Jimmer at 7, we can't trade this years pick.

But we did trade this years pick for Hickson. Obviously conditional, but we did trade it.

 

[Bricklayer]

But we did trade this years pick for Hickson. Obviously conditional, but we did trade it.

Actually an interesting turn of events. Had not considered our little #7 for #10 swap deal might trigger the no two years in a row rule. Not actually sure it would to tell the truth given that we got a pick back, but it is an interesting and unfortunate possibility.

As for Hickson, yeah we made that deal before the Jimmer deal, so that's why that was allowed, if there is any problem with the pick swap in the first place that is.

An interesting question is also if we can trade the reaminder of our pick this year -- if Milwaulkee or Charlotte only gets it if we make the playoffs, can we trade the half of it we would get if we hit the lottery?

 

[VF21]

According to hoopsrumor...

On STR, someone suggested a proposal of



I kind of like the idea of a Pierce/Rondo/Cousins trio...If people can keep the pettiness and sarcastic remarks aside, does this trade hold any merit in their minds?

Personally, I'd like to see Salmons in place of Whiteside or Jimmer, but we know he doesn't hold any value.

As a partial aside, is there really any reason to believe that Paul Pierce will leave the Celtics? I really don't think he would, and there's a little voice in the back of my head saying something about "trade approval clause" in relation to his contract.

 

[bajaden]

Actually an interesting turn of events. Had not considered our little #7 for #10 swap deal might trigger the no two years in a row rule. Not actually sure it would to tell the truth given that we got a pick back, but it is an interesting and unfortunate possibility.

As for Hickson, yeah we made that deal before the Jimmer deal, so that's why that was allowed, if there is any problem with the pick swap in the first place that is.

An interesting question is also if we can trade the reaminder of our pick this year -- if Milwaulkee or Charlotte only gets it if we make the playoffs, can we trade the half of it we would get if we hit the lottery?

This is about the 20th time this has come up, and I've read the rule inside out and upside down, and to my mind, we can't trade the pick. Lets say we're assured of being in the lottery, making the pick ours. And so we go ahead and trade it to Boston. Then what if next year we aren't in the lottery, and our pick get taken consumating the trade. Then we will have traded our pick two years in a row, and we can't. And the only way to prevent that from happening, is to not trade our pick this year. Now maybe I'm wrong on this if a more brilliant mind wants to convince me otherwise, but unless there's a clause somewhere that I missed, I don't think I'm wrong.

 

[king4life89]

lets throw evans in there ill take rondo over evans any day they both cant really shoot but rondo is a better team player and play maker evans is just a sad story everybody says to wait till evans developes but i dont see him getting anybetter....rondos somthin else str8 baller

 

[Dime Dropper]

This is about the 20th time this has come up, and I've read the rule inside out and upside down, and to my mind, we can't trade the pick. Lets say we're assured of being in the lottery, making the pick ours. And so we go ahead and trade it to Boston. Then what if next year we aren't in the lottery, and our pick get taken consumating the trade. Then we will have traded our pick two years in a row, and we can't. And the only way to prevent that from happening, is to not trade our pick this year. Now maybe I'm wrong on this if a more brilliant mind wants to convince me otherwise, but unless there's a clause somewhere that I missed, I don't think I'm wrong.

Hopefully you're right. We're not making the POs and the last thing you want is Petrie being forced into a panic move and trading our pick for a mediocre vet. I don't trust his ability to trade, and he is much better at drafting. This is a great draft and could really go a long way towards pushing the team into competitiveness for next year. I'd be quite happy to know that we have to keep our pick.

 

[Bricklayer]

This is about the 20th time this has come up, and I've read the rule inside out and upside down, and to my mind, we can't trade the pick. Lets say we're assured of being in the lottery, making the pick ours. And so we go ahead and trade it to Boston. Then what if next year we aren't in the lottery, and our pick get taken consumating the trade. Then we will have traded our pick two years in a row, and we can't. And the only way to prevent that from happening, is to not trade our pick this year. Now maybe I'm wrong on this if a more brilliant mind wants to convince me otherwise, but unless there's a clause somewhere that I missed, I don't think I'm wrong.

I think that has to be wrong actually, because otherwise any conditional pick would basically mean you could never trade another pick until the end of the condition. i.e., depending on conditions a pick will vest in 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, or if none of the above, in 2016. Well, you don't know what year its actually going to happen during. it could be 2012. but maybe its 2014. So the only way to be SURE you didn't trade back to back picks would be to say yo couldn't trade a pick until 2017. Its hard ot beleive its that restrictive, and if it was its hard to beleive the conditonal pick format would be so popular.

I don't actually KNOW that BTW. Just trying to figure it our logically.

 

[Section 101]

I think that has to be wrong actually, because otherwise any conditional pick would basically mean you could never trade another pick until the end of the condition. i.e., depending on conditions a pick will vest in 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, or if none of the above, in 2016. Well, you don't know what year its actually going to happen during. it could be 2012. but maybe its 2014. So the only way to be SURE you didn't trade back to back picks would be to say yo couldn't trade a pick until 2017. Its hard ot beleive its that restrictive, and if it was its hard to beleive the conditonal pick format would be so popular.

I don't actually KNOW that BTW. Just trying to figure it our logically.

But you can agree to the trade on draft day then make the trade after July 1st. But I don't think it can be traded until then.

 

[bajaden]

But you can agree to the trade on draft day then make the trade after July 1st. But I don't think it can be traded until then.

I think this is correct. But that wouldn't help you in a trade at the trading deadline. I agree with Bricky that it just doesn't seem plausable that your stuck until either you make the playoffs, or till 2017. But most of the CBA rules will are pretty clear, and any exclusions are usually included.

 

[Larry David]

I think this trade will happen. I think the Kings are experimenting with moving Evans around because they’ve come to the conclusion that Cousins is the centerpiece and they want to see if Evans is a good fit to be his second fiddle. Moving him off the ball, seems to signal they’ve started to realize that he’s not going to play point like Russell Westbrook. It’s time to see it he’s more Clyde Drexler, a great wing scorer that wasn’t a natural shooter but could play winning basketball, or Jerry Stackhouse, a guy that got his numbers, but was such an odd shaped piece that several teams failed miserably to build around him.

Boston is blowing up their team this summer – and almost every scenario leads to them trading Rondo. They aren’t going to get Howard, but they couldn’t have Rondo and Howard bricking free throws to end the game. They might chase Derron Williams, who would look good next to Tyreke but not Rondo. Or they strike out, at which point it’s time to cash out Rondo.

Rondo has a very good contract and is locked up for 3 more years. Plus, with his quirky personality, I think he might like living under the radar and in a small market.

Rondo, Thornton, a small forward, Thompson or Hayes, and Cousins seems to fit better than

Evans, Thornton, a small forward, Thompson or Hayes, and Cousins.

I think this is a 2012 draft day trade.

 

[IfAt1st]

Rondo has proven he's a winner.

Tyreke has proven he's not, in my eyes.

If the Kings can get an established winning PG, whether it be Derron Williams or Rondo or Tony Parker, I say they trade anyone but Cousins for them and consider themselves lucky.

We've got to stop projecting possible future talent when they haven't gotten significantly better since they joined the league.
Start putting pieces together that work, today, and can gel to make a team that can compete in the NBA.

Also - don't compare Tyreke's small salary now.
Make your projections with what Tyreke will be making after he extends, or after he signs his big deal.
Let's say he'll get $10+ million a year (just throwing out a number).
I just don't think Tyreke is worth $10+ million dollars a year, when they could put that money into someone who's been a proven winner.

 

[upinsmoke]

Also - don't compare Tyreke's small salary now.
Make your projections with what Tyreke will be making after he extends, or after he signs his big deal.
Let's say he'll get $10+ million a year (just throwing out a number).
I just don't think Tyreke is worth $10+ million dollars a year, when they could put that money into someone who's been a proven winner.

Thats what I have been saying about Evans as well. Rondo/IT Running the show could be great but to be honest it would most likely cost us evans+thompson so sleep on that before you pull the trigger.

 

[AleksandarN]

Actually an interesting turn of events. Had not considered our little #7 for #10 swap deal might trigger the no two years in a row rule. Not actually sure it would to tell the truth given that we got a pick back, but it is an interesting and unfortunate possibility.

As for Hickson, yeah we made that deal before the Jimmer deal, so that's why that was allowed, if there is any problem with the pick swap in the first place that is.

An interesting question is also if we can trade the reaminder of our pick this year -- if Milwaulkee or Charlotte only gets it if we make the playoffs, can we trade the half of it we would get if we hit the lottery?

I think the reason why the Jimmer deal went through was it was draft day trade and the fact that we did not draft Jimmer The Bucks did. We traded for Jimmer not the pick. I do believe we can trade the pic on draft day. We just have to draft the player the other team wants. Then trade that player we drafted. After you draft a player it is no longer considered a pic. So yes we can still trade.

 

[Section 101]

Interesting ESPN article, only giving up Whiteside, IT (more likely Jimmer) and draft pick for Rondo.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/stor...ade-fixes-lakers-clippers-warriors-suns-kings

Sacramento Kings

The problem: At least it appears that the Kings will be staying put, so we know they will continue to have the support of a loyal fan base. What we don't know is how the Kings are going to evolve. On paper, they have a pair of super-talented building blocks in Tyreke Evans and DeMarcus Cousins. The results, however, remain awful. The offense ranks 25th in efficiency despite a third-place standing in offensive rebound percentage and the defense ranks 28th. The Kings just can't score inside the arc, ranking 29th in 2-point percentage.

Sacramento once held hope that Evans could be the primary decision-maker on offense, but he's been used more at the wing positions this year. They've been using rookie Isaiah Thomas as their starting point guard of late, but he really should be used as a streak shooter in limited minutes of the bench.

The fix: The Kings have to continue to develop the Evans-Cousins core and make it work. There is just too much talent there to give up. For that pairing to succeed, the third member of Sacramento's big three needs to be a playmaking point guard, who can make decisions for players who don't make good ones for themselves. If you find that, then you can get a defense-first wing to play alongside Evans on the wing and a rim protector/rebounder to go with Cousins inside. Voila! You've got a playoff contender -- if Evans and Cousins mature. (Not a given.)

The Kings could offer their first-round pick and a couple of young pieces like Thomas or Hassan Whiteside to the Celtics for Rajon Rondo. The Celtics would be creating even more flexibility for the future, adding a high lottery pick and getting rid of a player they seem to want to move. The Kings would gain one of the league's top point guards, one who plays the exact style they need, though a couple of high-percentage perimeter shooters would have to be added.