Trading Rondo...
- Thread starter kazuneko
- Start date
Nothing of particular current or future value, either. Howard & Harden (& Parsons?) make the playoffs.Ed Hillel said:
Houston has no contracts to send out to make the money work though. With Lin and Asik gone, all they have are minimum guys and Howard/Harden/Parsons
Didn't the Asik deal hit a snag? If so, Houston's got the salaries but not the talent. Asik is not much of a return as the centerpiece in a Love deal. Even Asik and Parsons is not a great return, especially since MN doesn't need a center.
Just Parsons--if they match. They've also got Motiejunas and Terrence Jones. They may also be willing to take Crash. Who knows?
I haven't talked to anyone in Houston about Rondo in a while, but as of a year ago, they had basically no interest in him.
My skepticism of his value is based largely on conversations with them. They don't think he's a good defender, and while his passing is valuable, he's not worth much to them.
It's possible that they feel differently now that he's on a one year deal and they missed on Bosh, but they don't seem like a fit.
My skepticism of his value is based largely on conversations with them. They don't think he's a good defender, and while his passing is valuable, he's not worth much to them.
It's possible that they feel differently now that he's on a one year deal and they missed on Bosh, but they don't seem like a fit.
Well if Houston doesn't like Rondo, so be it. Right now their starting point guard is Patrick Beverly. Good luck with that.
Harden's essentially their point guard. Not sure there's enough ball for Rondo and Harden next to each other.
So who is going to defend the other team's pg? And IMHO they'd be a better offensive team if Harden played off the ball.
That's basically right. Avery Bradley who can defend SGs is closer to what they want.
Rondo's perimeter game is a real problem for how Houston wants to play. Take a look at the Vipers to see what they're thinking.
Rondo's perimeter game is a real problem for how Houston wants to play. Take a look at the Vipers to see what they're thinking.
Patrick Beverly? Harden gets to the line better than anybody in the NBA. Why take the ball out of his hands?Brickowski said:
Because it's a one dimensional offense and teams will put all of their defensive focus on Harden because no one else will be scoring the ball. Let Harden have his 30 with 10-12 free throws.
This is a team that was beaten in the first round by Portland. They had no one to defend Aldridge (maybe Deng could do that, but they haven't signed him yet) and no one to defend Lillard. Houston is screwed unless they make changes, and by losing Asik and Lin, they've just gotten worse.
Brickowski said:
This was the defensive scheme the Celtics used to great success against LBJ in his first stint in Cleveland. It works remarkably well, particularly against someone like Harden because of his flat out refusal to play anything remotely resembling defense.
Is Rondo going to guard Aldridge? Is he suddenly going to become a scoring guard? How does he solve either of the problems you just identified?Brickowski said:
Edit: also, Beverly is a much better defender than Rondo.
Woulda, coulda, shoulda, mighta. Houston is toast against any well-coached reasonably talented WC team if Hardin is their entire offense from beyond 3 feet from the basket.
I feel badly for Morey. Sweet dreams and flying machines in pieces on the ground...
Point guard play really hurt Houston in the playoffs against Portland. That's a position they definitely need to upgrade. I like Beverly, but he's a role player.Brickowski said:
I'm not sure what you and Brick were watching but Beverley is a good player and pretty perfect for what Houston needs in a PG. Since Harden basically always has the ball, they need a PG that isn't ball dominant, that can hit an open 3, and (since Harden is terrible defensively) a bulldog defender who can hound the other teams best offensive guard. That's pretty much Beverley to a T.NWsoxophile said:
Bosh would've been such a perfect fit for that team that, as a basketball fan, it's disappointing that he chose the money and comfort of South Beach over the Rockets. Basically Houston needs a 4 that is good defensively but also can play outside the paint and hit jumpers. I wouldn't be surprised if they signed Deng to a big short term contract to basically be their super charged version of what Battier did in MIA in 2013. A small ball 4 who can play on the perimeter on offense but is capable of banging down low as well
If the Rockets had gotten anything out of Beverly in the first round,on either side of the floor, they win. Lillard abused Beverly all series. Beverly did not lock Lillard down, at all. He provided next to nothing on the offensive end either. He's an ideal role player, but no a starting point guard for a team that will make a deep run.tbb345 said:
NWsoxophile said:
Lillard likely would have abused most opponents the way he played that series. As sublime as Aldridge was, Lillard took a leap during those games.
Beverly is an ideal second unit, energy guy though. He can defend a little, score some and handle the ball. That said, he took a step back this past season on both sides of the ball but mostly on defense, as his minutes increased (his dRtg fell from 105 to 108, his PER went down from 15.4 to 12.4 and his TS% and eFG also both declined. Interestingly, RPM has him as the fifth best PG in the league this season?!?!?)
I wouldn't. You have that trademarked.BigSoxFan said:You might even say that he was "garbage" in that series
It's important to remember, Beverley had a torn meniscus and was at about 50% strength in the playoffs. The guy made second team All-NBA defense- that he got abused by Lillard is a function of Lillard's talent and Beverley's injury.
He's not the Rockets biggest problem.
He's not the Rockets biggest problem.
Well, no. They also chased Melo for one thing.DrewDawg said:
The reason the Bosh thing worked out poorly is that between Melo and Bosh being around, they thought they had a good chance at one of them, and so they declined Parsons's option at $1M. That was going to let them add a max guy and keep Parsons.
Instead, they're probably losing Parsons entirely now.
But generally, having a shot at two max guys is a fine offseason plan. It's the NBA- you basically need a series of unlikely events to compete. What was Cleveland's plan? What is anyone's plan. You hope you either get the right ping pong balls and get a star, or you hope a star randomly decides that your team is the right fit.
Houston's plan is field a competitive team, acquire assets, and take a shot at getting a 3rd star. That's basically everyone's plan, except most teams don't have the first two stars in place already.
bowiac said:
If the Celtics didn't snag Garnett after trading for Allen, they would have been a decent playoff team but Ainge would have been in a tough spot. Even if he were able to get Gasol down the line, I don't see any championships.
At this point, Morey must be a little thankful that the Asik deal fell through.
The Rockets were less impressed with Asik's defense in a full time role than his rebounding numbers would suggest. Like a lot of guys, once he needed to worry about fouling out, his rim protection data fell declined.
They were eager to get an asset for him regardless of Bosh.
They were eager to get an asset for him regardless of Bosh.
Agreed, good points. He's hugely overrated defensively. A product of playing with Thibs & Noah and later Howard. He intimates no one on his own for 30+ minutes.bowiac said:
Hasn't Sacramento been rumored for some time as a landing spot for Rondo? They currently have nothing resembling even a backup PG on their roster now that Thomas is gone (unless I am missing some other move they have made). There isn't much on their roster that intrigues me outside of Cousins though. Seems ripe for a three way with Rondo going there.
bowiac said:
Is a highly protected first rounder that much of an asset? I'm thinking Asik's value might be in getting another player on an expiring contract. The TPE doesn't have the 25% provision. If the Rockets don't match Parsons, they have an actual roster issue on their hands.
The Rondo to Sacramento rumors were swirling (which is what rumors do) at the same time as Josh Smith to Sacramento rumors. I think Sac felt like they'd be able to convince Rondo to stay to play with Cousins and Smith (a good friend, apparently). I suspect they'll be less willing to offer the same value without Smith around.swingin val said:
Is it highly protected? The last report I saw said it had the "double" protection that the Lowry trade carried. The Rockets get the pick if it falls between 4 and 19, which is basically where I think most of us expect the Pelicans to land. That's a pretty nice get I think, in a draft that's rumored to be pretty decent.Devizier said:
As far as the roster issue, the Rockets are chasing free agents (Ariza), and they are nothing if not deep. Morey has been very successful in filling out the back end of his roster effectively. They're very high on Clint Capela (long term) and Troy Daniels (short term), plus god knows who else off that bizarre Rio Grande roster. Plus they may still match Parsons (although I doubt it).
DrewDawg said:
Effectively, Houston gambled they could add a top guy and lost. The gamble they made was Parsons' option, and so it looks rather bad now because they lost on both parts of the play. But it was a calculated gamble to try to be great, I'd say, and the cost wasn't as huge as people think.
I say because I imagine they realize Parsons is as much a very good fit there as a truly great player; he's overpaid at the max and they are smart enough to know it. So, the scenario that actually occurred is one where a competitor does something kind of irrational, which certainly happens in the NBA, but is not necessarily what you plan for, either
Yeah I have no problem with Houston positioning themselves to be great. With Bosh, signing Parsons at max is fine since he's such a great fit and will continue to produce......without Bosh this becomes an overpay however on a short term max deal they salary slot gives Morey some flexibility over the next two summers on making a big splash.PedroKsBambino said:
It would be a mistake to simply allow Parsons to walk unless they can effectively fill that max slot this summer with another quality player.
I think they'd have no concern giving Parsons the max for a year (or maybe 2), but it's the 3rd year that causes problems. The Rockets still want to chase a 3rd star, be it Love, Durant, or Westbrook. Giving out a three year max deal to Parsons constrains them in that regard (although not impossibly, they can always package assets with Parsons later to move him if needed).HomeRunBaker said:
They may prefer to give Ariza the money they'd be giving Parsons, but on a two year basis instead of three.
if sacramento's interested, i'd go rondo for salary filler plus one of: mclemore or derrick williams or stauskas or top-3 protected 1st. I'd try to get Quincy Acy as a throw-in too.
I think there's a zero percent chance we'll ever get back full rondo basketball value. I think we'll have to be happy to get back 50 cents on the dollar, otherwise we'll get nothing. Rondo's value as a trading asset is not anywhere close to his basketball value because of his contract status.
I think there's a zero percent chance we'll ever get back full rondo basketball value. I think we'll have to be happy to get back 50 cents on the dollar, otherwise we'll get nothing. Rondo's value as a trading asset is not anywhere close to his basketball value because of his contract status.