Hoovtrain
All-Star
Gotta agree. I used to think he was overrated, but have become a believer. He truly controls the PG position on both the offensive and defensive side. His attitude is the only thing that I would be concerned with.
Trade for Rondo??
- Thread starter Peter_Gibbons
- Start date
- Status
Gotta agree. I used to think he was overrated, but have become a believer. He truly controls the PG position on both the offensive and defensive side. His attitude is the only thing that I would be concerned with.
Chupacabra
Starter
Or Landry. It's easy to forget that he's a player and not a suit model.
Sac.Kings
All-Star
True, I tend to forget he is on the roster as he hasn't even played yet for us this season.
bajaden
Hall of Famer
Everything you just said is true, but the reverse is also true. Rondo doesn't get all those assists without Allen, Pierce, and Garnett. Which is the point I was trying to make. I'm not being critical of what Rondo's has accomplished, but I'am saying that he's not going to have the same impact on a team without that kind of talent. If his name was Chris Paul ( Sorry Cuz ) then we'd be having a different discussion. Paul is outstanding on both ends of the court. he may not be the elite defender that Rondo is, but he's a good defender, and in my opinion, the best all around PG in the NBA. But that's just my opinion.
Baja, what is it you have against Rondo?
I know he's got his limitations but I get the impression you just find his style of play personally distasteful for some reason. Which I certainly understand if that's the case, we all have our preferences. Basketball in particular is an aesthetic game when it's played well. That's why I haven't been watching many games this season. I just can't stand watching ball dominant guards like Thornton, IT, and Jimmer dribble around screens and launch up jumpers. I've had my fill of watching bad basketball from those guys, and I'm looking forward to a time a short while off when I won't have to watch it anymore.I take it you don't like it when a PG can't space the floor properly with the threat of a 3pt shot? I look at it a little differently -- swap Vasquez out for Rondo and we still have a playmaker who can get the ball to our high-flying wing duo and bruising All-Star center, plus we have a respectable perimeter defense (or will anyway, once Ben learns to slow down and just focus on keeping the ball in front of him). I like Paul too (well, except for the flopping business) -- he is the prototypical pro PG, but there's something about Rondo's fearlessness around the basket, on the ball, and fighting for offensive boards that I like even more. But then I'm a non-traditional kindof guy.
Sac.Kings
All-Star
I never claimed that Rondo was the best PG in the league because he isn't, but he is, at the very least, top 5 at his position. Rondo's skills are always going to shine with good players around him because he is a passer and that's what he does. He breaks down the defense and either a) gets a layup or b) fouled or c) passes out to the open man. What you are saying would be like me telling a John Stockton fan, he never gets those assists without the mailman alongside him. Obviously that is true, but did that take away from John Stockton? Not one bit. He was still a great passer and he just happened to have a great big man next to him and took full advantage. Rondo took full advantage of his situation and come playoff time, he stepped his game up considerably. That's the sign of a competitor, and quite possibly a leader. Sure he may have some stubbornness and may not be the easiest person in the world to coach, but we have Cousins and the growing pains we endured from him far outweigh whatever Rondo has done on and off the court.
rainmaker
Hall of Famer
The idea behind Rondo here, as I see it, is that we're not all that different in theory from Boston's contending team if Rondo was here(assuming continued maturation and growth). Cuz is somewhat similar to KG, I'd say even more versatile on offense. Actually, clearly more versatile that KG on offense but they occupy similar spots on the floor and can have a low or high post offense run through them. MLM is compared to a young Allen. Will he ever get into true Allen territory? Remains to be seen, but the hope would be he can offer the same type of contributions and fill the same type role as Allen did with Boston, or even a Klay Thompson type role. So the missing piece really would be at SF, as it's been for years. But take Pierce away from Boston, while it would have hurt Rondo at times it's not like his contributions would have suffered all that much. Pierce offered another floor spreader and 1v1 player who can get his own but Rondo would likely have still been in full effect.
It's not like Rondo's game is so shaky that if you took Pierce out of the lineup it went to crap. He's wasn't that reliant on Pierce, Pierce was just a piece that made the foursome click that much smoother and become that much more potent. A very important piece but not one which determined Rondo's success.
But a Cuz/Rondo/MLM would be a helluva trio. Add a SF and that's extremely enticing. Of course, I see no way for us to get Rondo, best shot would have been resigning Reke and trying to move one for the other given Ainge's repeated interest in Reke.
But in general, the argument Rondo wouldn't have the same impact without the same talent level misses the point imo. You can say that about any talented player on a team where he's not surrounded by top talent or talent which fits. Could easily sit here and say Cuz won't have the same effect on a team that doesn't have a shotblocker next to him and above average shooters spacing the floor. That doesn't take away from Cuz though. You continue to build around him, as we would if we had Rondo. Cuz/MLM would be a helluva start. If a FO can't utilize and surround a talent like Rondo correctly, there's more an issue with the FO than the player. Rondo would do his thing, as Cuz does his, as Love does his, as Harden does his, as Kyrie does his and it's on the FO and coach to place talent around those types which fits. Rubio was more a waste before Martin arrived, but that was more a roster issue than a Rubio issue. Now with a guy like Martin next to him it works better. Rondo wouldn't be any different.
Last edited:
randymoss1881
Starter
The only way I see us trading for rondo is
1.he proves he is past his injury
2.We are able to talk to him and see if he would resign
3.We end up with the 4-6 pick which would mean we are picking rondo over exum, smart, and embiid
I'm sure boston won't trade him during the season but at draft night if they end up picking (6-9) they probably would do a rondo for our pick (3-6)
Rondo will make DMC and mclemore even better add in his defense and his heart.
1.he proves he is past his injury
2.We are able to talk to him and see if he would resign
3.We end up with the 4-6 pick which would mean we are picking rondo over exum, smart, and embiid
I'm sure boston won't trade him during the season but at draft night if they end up picking (6-9) they probably would do a rondo for our pick (3-6)
Rondo will make DMC and mclemore even better add in his defense and his heart.
Kingster
Hall of Famer
Do you think Rondo would get the Kings to the playoffs in Year 1?
Do you think Rondo's assists/defense outweighs his mediocre shooting to the point where he would in fact be complementary with Cousins? Don't we want a guy who can spread the floor?
LPKingsFan
All-Star
Rondo won a title with a team starting Kendrick F. Perkins at center. You can find sufficient spacing in other ways.
rainmaker
Hall of Famer
Rondo's lack of shooting wasn't a problem next to KG. There was one Finals series against LA where it hurt Boston but for the most part it didn't prevent success. I'd love to have that problem in the Finals though as it's farther than we've ever made it in the Sac era.
The spacing can come from others. While it's a preference for your PG to be a floor spacer, it's also a preference for everyone to spread the floor to a certain extent, although not a necessity. Realistically you won't have a spacer at every position. If MLM can continue on the path we all hope he can, there's one floor spacer. Then we'd obviously need a SF who can spread the floor. Just like in Boston that should be enough. It's not like when they were running out Perkins next to KG that he was spacing the floor at all. Not every position 1-4 needs to be a shooter.
But no PG is perfect. Aside from the Lebron/Durant level, no player could really be deemed as the perfect player without at least a weakness or two. Even Wade isn't that great of a floor spacer. I don't understand the need for Kings fans to constantly harp on one or two weaknesses from a player while ignoring many of the strengths a player brings, then turn around and many times ignore the weaknesses of a player on our team they like while focusing on the strengths, or vice versa actually. Many times if a player is liked, weakness are ignored but if a player is disliked, strengths are ignored. We saw this often times with Reke, ignore his strengths then build up the strengths of another like George Hill, Vasquez or even Augustin(all promoted as replacements at one time or another) while ignoring their weaknesses.
MLM's lack of ball handling and his defense thus far are both considerable weaknesses but most still want him here. Vasquez has many more weaknesses than Rondo. Same with IT. Same with just about every player on our roster outside of Cuz. Yet Rondo still impacts a game more than any player we could throw out there aside from Cuz. Basketball is a chess match and a team works as a machine with multiple parts which fit together. You bring in other talent to makeup for weaknesses. Rondo has shown at the least he's an AS level PG with or without a jumper, a jumper which has improved btw. But his lack of a jumper isn't a reason not to make a move for him if that were possible. He's too great a talent too pass on. What you do is plug another shooter into the lineup to help cover for Rondo's weakness. It's the theory that you get 2-3 clear foundational, star pieces and surround those 2-3 players with support players who fit around them, not to instead worry about how a foundational piece fits with the support players. That's backwards. It's much easier to put shooters around a guy like Rondo than to do the reverse and get a guy like Rondo here in the first place. Shooters are easier to come by and attain than top 5-7 PG's.
If Rondo's shooting was such a weakness, teams would just sag off him and he'd struggle, change the complexion of games. Yet that doesn't happen all that often. He still gets into the paint when he wants. Still gets to his spots. Still a top 5-7 PG when defenses decided to sag 5-10 ft off him and he now can hit the 15 footer with some consistency. It's far different than when defenses sag off a guy like Vasquez or even Rubio. That does close down penetration for those two although Vasquez can barely penetrate at all, ever. Rondo time and time again has shown he's crafty enough to still get to his spots no matter how far off the defense plays.
The spacing can come from others. While it's a preference for your PG to be a floor spacer, it's also a preference for everyone to spread the floor to a certain extent, although not a necessity. Realistically you won't have a spacer at every position. If MLM can continue on the path we all hope he can, there's one floor spacer. Then we'd obviously need a SF who can spread the floor. Just like in Boston that should be enough. It's not like when they were running out Perkins next to KG that he was spacing the floor at all. Not every position 1-4 needs to be a shooter.
But no PG is perfect. Aside from the Lebron/Durant level, no player could really be deemed as the perfect player without at least a weakness or two. Even Wade isn't that great of a floor spacer. I don't understand the need for Kings fans to constantly harp on one or two weaknesses from a player while ignoring many of the strengths a player brings, then turn around and many times ignore the weaknesses of a player on our team they like while focusing on the strengths, or vice versa actually. Many times if a player is liked, weakness are ignored but if a player is disliked, strengths are ignored. We saw this often times with Reke, ignore his strengths then build up the strengths of another like George Hill, Vasquez or even Augustin(all promoted as replacements at one time or another) while ignoring their weaknesses.
MLM's lack of ball handling and his defense thus far are both considerable weaknesses but most still want him here. Vasquez has many more weaknesses than Rondo. Same with IT. Same with just about every player on our roster outside of Cuz. Yet Rondo still impacts a game more than any player we could throw out there aside from Cuz. Basketball is a chess match and a team works as a machine with multiple parts which fit together. You bring in other talent to makeup for weaknesses. Rondo has shown at the least he's an AS level PG with or without a jumper, a jumper which has improved btw. But his lack of a jumper isn't a reason not to make a move for him if that were possible. He's too great a talent too pass on. What you do is plug another shooter into the lineup to help cover for Rondo's weakness. It's the theory that you get 2-3 clear foundational, star pieces and surround those 2-3 players with support players who fit around them, not to instead worry about how a foundational piece fits with the support players. That's backwards. It's much easier to put shooters around a guy like Rondo than to do the reverse and get a guy like Rondo here in the first place. Shooters are easier to come by and attain than top 5-7 PG's.
If Rondo's shooting was such a weakness, teams would just sag off him and he'd struggle, change the complexion of games. Yet that doesn't happen all that often. He still gets into the paint when he wants. Still gets to his spots. Still a top 5-7 PG when defenses decided to sag 5-10 ft off him and he now can hit the 15 footer with some consistency. It's far different than when defenses sag off a guy like Vasquez or even Rubio. That does close down penetration for those two although Vasquez can barely penetrate at all, ever. Rondo time and time again has shown he's crafty enough to still get to his spots no matter how far off the defense plays.
Last edited:
Dime Dropper
All-Star
Who do you give up for him though? I'm sure as hell not giving up this years pick for him...
randymoss1881
Starter
It looks like we have a great shooter in mclemore and DMC can shoot we would just need a good shooter at SF. Rondo is a great cutter so you can't just leave him on the weak side. Shooting is nice and dandy but what rondo does when the playoffs start is mind boggling in 2012 he averaged 17-10 when the big 3 had slowed down.
Mclemore and Cousins get infinitely better cause of rondo and with him we would have 2 super stars.
He is a complimentary guy to DMC because his pick and roll game is elite, 2nd best to cp3. It would be more lethal than it was with KG because of cousins playmaking skills and ability to dribble. Another thing is he could be a scorer to if needed he put up 44 on Miami in the playoffs. Without researching I could only remember westbrook putting 40 on them in the playoffs
Rose (healthy)
Parker
Cp3
Those are the only pgs better than him and I'd take rondo over all of them in the playoffs based on there playoff history
Rondo: 15-7-9.
Rose: 25-4-7 (42% shooting )
Parker:19-3-5 (48%) been better
Paul: 21-5-9 (49%)
Just to prove how dominate he is in the playoffs he is 4th in all time playoffs triple doubles at 10 lebron has 12 dispite playing in more games and rondo missing last years playoffs
randymoss1881
Starter
So if we got the 3rd pick you wouldn't do one of exum, embiid, randle, or smart for rondo?
Rondo is a superstar you add him with DMC and mclemore and cap space for 1 more player next off season and we are contenders
Padrino
All-Star
no, i don't give up a draft pick that could be used to select a young, healthy marcus smart or dante exum for the oft-injured rondo. as much as i am a fan of rondo's, a young player with as high of a ceiling as any in the '14 draft's top 5 (on rookie-scale contracts, no less) is much more valuable to this team's future than rondo is. and i don't really see an avenue with which to acquire rondo outside of trading the kings' first rounder, so, ultimately, i pass... unless boston is willing to take back scraps. they certainly won't be. if mclemore and change could get it done, though, you'd have to give it some thought...
Dime Dropper
All-Star
McLemore is far from ready and far from a sure thing. Clearly has talent but you can't count on him right now to be a key cog on a contender in two years, that's madness. Also, Rondo is really great but he's not a superstar. I certainly wouldn't trade Parker or Randle for him, and probably not Embiid. You could argue about trading the others for him if you were sure he'd resign, but there's no way to know that and I wouldn't even be that confident that he'll be better in two years than Exum.
I don't think we're close to contending with Rondo, so I'd be reluctant to trade away a potential all-star for him, or the all elusive defensive anchor that fits next to Cousins (Embiid - and he could be much more than just an anchor), which is what this draft can do for us.
Now what I absolutely WOULD do, but which can't happen due to the fact that Rondo is a FA after this year, is trade next years pick for him if we got, say, Parker in this draft. A core of Cousins/Parker/McLemore/Rondo is one that can go places. But clearly that can't happen.
twslam07
All-Star
I wouldn't. Padrino and Dime Dropper explained my reasons well, but I'll go ahead and add another. Rondo's contract is going to be way more expensive than whoever we take with the 3rd pick. That's extra cap space to bring in whoever we want through free agency. Would I rather have a top 3 pick on a 4 mil/year contract and a 12 mil/year FA (Rondo is making 12 mil this year) or would I rather have Rondo and a 4 mil/year veteran FA? I think the answer is clear.
You have to take into account rookie contracts and how much extra value that adds especially with the new CBA.
rainmaker
Hall of Famer
If it's not a top 5 pick I'd highly consider packaging the pick and IT along with anyone aside from Cuz/MLM Boston might want as I think MLM would be too important in theory alongside Rondo to give up. Basically, I'd give up anything outside a top 4 pick and Cuz/MLM for him. That also goes along with the presumption if we had Rondo/Cuz/MLM that we might become a more attractive landing spot for FA's. Then I'd go after Deng/Granger/Gay(if he opts out) in free agency. I haven't checked to see how that works with cap space though.
I for one am not counting on a top 5 pick. We literally never get lucky with ping pong balls.
I'm doubtful that gets it done though.
Kingster
Hall of Famer
Seems like apples to oranges comparison. So the fact that Perkins who has very little game other than defense could coexist with Rondo makes Rondo and Cousins compatible because of what exactly? And we're comparing a primarily offensive low post player in Cousins to Perkins because of what? I'm confused.
Kingster
Hall of Famer
So Rondo and KG were compatible. Is KG similar to Cousins? If anything, I see KG as much more of a defensive player overall, who on occassion would play in the low post. He wasn't the predominantly offensive low post power player of Cousins. I get your point about harping on weaknesses. The perfect can be the enemy of the good. I just wonder how good it would be.
Kingster
Hall of Famer
And that's why we're getting a top 5 pick this year! MARK IT!
Glenn
Hall of Famer
Kingsfan23
All-Star
IMO you don't give up value for a player coming off serious injury.. there were a lot of folks who wanted to trade for Granger and give up quality talent for him awhile back on here..
DesertFox
Starter
Marcus Thornton and change is what I remember. I would have done that trade even when MT was starting quality, and would definitely do it now even if Granger can barely play.
If the value is not Ben, Cuz, or a top pick, then there is nothing I wouldn't trade for Rondo. IT+MT+ any combo of 2nd rounders and players.
KingsCitizen
Starter
Now that we got Gay and Vasquez gone.
I will now support a case for Rondo.
He would be the best case scenario for us to make sure DMC gets his share.
http://basketball.realgm.com/tradechecker/saved_trade/6372938
Thornton/Jimmer/Outlaw for Rondo works, btw.
I will now support a case for Rondo.
He would be the best case scenario for us to make sure DMC gets his share.
http://basketball.realgm.com/tradechecker/saved_trade/6372938
Thornton/Jimmer/Outlaw for Rondo works, btw.
rainmaker
Hall of Famer
The counter argument would be that Rondo's game doesn't rely on athleticism. He's not a high flier. He's not a scorer who relies on speed/jumping ability to get off shots.
He relies on his handle and vision. Defensively it's his basketball IQ and long arms.
There's some players you take risks on and some you don't, coming off an injury. I'd take a risk on Rondo before a took a risk on a guy like Bynum. A beefy center with bad knees is different than a PG with a bad knee who never relied on athleticism in the first place. And being a small market team, we have to take chances. Gay we just got when his value was low. If we were to get Rondo, it'd likely have to be when his value is low as well, or any star caliber player for that matter.
BTW, Ainge wants draft picks. Still think the likeliest option is a draft day deal, which I'd be willing to do unless it's a top 4-5 pick. This year's #6/IT/JT for example is something I'd do for Rondo, hypothetically.
Every GM wants draft picks for this draft. So that means that no GM is going to get draft picks in this draft. So far the TWolves and Raptors have both caved and not gotten a draft pick in return for their trade asset. I expect that Morey will give up on asking for draft picks for Asik as well. However, I think Ainge will just sit and wait with Rondo if he can't get a draft pick right now.
- Status
