Celtics trade Rondo to Dallas

[PedroKsBambino]

I think his point was that Rondo isn't able to make mediocre players better (as, for example, Magic and Bird could)...but plays very well with players who are already good themselves.  So, the theory conveniently skips the last couple years!  He did include statistics which demonstrate value with the Big 3, so don't fully agree he fails to illustrate the 'amplify goodness point' since what's cited reflects team stats.
 
Personally, I think he just hasn't has his heart in it the last couple of years and I think that's quite worrisome overall.   But I am willing to believe that fully motivated he can be the impact guy he was in the late Big 3 era, too...and I think that's what Mavs are curious to see.   I think 15 years or so of heavy baseball analytics has proven to us that there's plenty we don't know at any point in time, and we should be aware of that for basketball metrics right now---which are at about 2006 or so in baseball analytics terms.

 

[luckiestman]

 
The Goldsberry piece referenced there felt off to me. There's an insistence that Rondo "amplifies the goodness around him" but no attempt to illustrate that, which you think wouldn't be all that difficult to do. That's why Rondo is such an interesting and polarizing player; his reputation is as an excellent floor general and pure point guard, and traditional basketball thinking assumes that pure point guardery make one's teammates better. But for about 3 years now, the numbers don't bear that out in Rondo's case. And yet, even a guy like Goldsberry makes that idea the thesis of his argument in favor of Rondo. You'd think it wouldn't be all that difficult to find examples of players who Rondo truly made better if that were the case, right?

 
I like Rondo, and I wanted him to be great this year. This is the first year I have basketball streams so I have watched every minute of every game (i never used to dvr the games, just watch them if I was home and they were on). It was really getting hard to think Rondo was good for the team. He had a couple of good games and he did some shit that when you saw it had a lot of WOW factor. But the whole offense seemed weird when he was in the game. I got mocked for saying the team didnt look worse with Phil Pressey at pg. People took this to mean I thought Pressey was better, I don't. It was just very strange to watch the best player on our team not make the team substantially better than the worst player on our team.
 
I get that they played the wolves and the wolves suck, but the offense looked as good as it has all year last night. I hope Rondo does great in Dallas. It will be interesting to see what happens to their numbers with Rondo in and Nelson (a JAG at best) out. 

 

[Grin&MartyBarret]

I think his point was that Rondo isn't able to make mediocre players better (as, for example, Magic and Bird could)...but plays very well with players who are already good themselves.  So, the theory conveniently skips the last couple years!  He did include statistics which demonstrate value with the Big 3, so don't fully agree he fails to illustrate the 'amplify goodness point' since what's cited reflects team stats.
 
Personally, I think he just hasn't has his heart in it the last couple of years and I think that's quite worrisome overall.   But I am willing to believe that fully motivated he can be the impact guy he was in the late Big 3 era, too...and I think that's what Mavs are curious to see.   I think 15 years or so of heavy baseball analytics has proven to us that there's plenty we don't know at any point in time, and we should be aware of that for basketball metrics right now---which are at about 2006 or so in baseball analytics terms.

Right, but why is the amplification only going one way? Isn't it just as likely--more likely, even--that the big 3 amplified Rondo's skills?

I'm going to go look again, I might have missed some things, it's been a while. But I remember that bugging me at the time.

 

[crystalline]

Interesting quick Rondo piece from Neil Paine at 538:
 
http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/celtic-or-maverick-rajon-rondo-remains-a-mystery/ 
 
Many number-focused fans tend to gravitate to what's easy to measure and forget there's a lot else going on; thought this was a good brief description of why it's more complicated than that...and why Rondo is a great example of why 'unique skillsets make for messy analytics' at this point in the evolution of analytics.

The article implies that the problem is we lack the right math to measure guys like Rondo. I think the problem with basketball analytics is we lack the data necessary.
If you ask me the outside temperature after locking me in a windowless room for 5 days, no math will save me: the estimates will be bad. There's even a theorem about this, the Data Processing Inequality.
I doubt anyone will come up with the right way to measure Rondo, unless they obtain wildly new data, like the motion capture data teams are rumored to be working with- and that they are likely to keep away from sites like 538.

I'm really looking forward to see what Rondo becomes in Dallas.

 

[PedroKsBambino]

Right, but why is the amplification only going one way? Isn't it just as likely--more likely, even--that the big 3 amplified Rondo's skills?

I'm going to go look again, I might have missed some things, it's been a while. But I remember that bugging me at the time.

 
I think it depends what lens someone brings into it, really.  It's not a thorough comparsion article so much as it is about Rondo's growth, so fair to say it's hardly conclusive of anything.   However, the description Goldsberry gives in the article is that Rondo's game improved from 2010 to 2012, and obviously the big 3 were there the whole time, and that once he went down their performance without him went down. I do not think your conclusion follows from what is in the article, though certainly if you come in with a strong view one can exit with that view intact.
 
I don't think anyone would doubt that playing with the big 3 made Rondo better---but I think most of us who watched those years would agree that by the time he blew out his knee he was a much bigger part of things than he had been early on, too.  Hard for me to see how that doesn't tell a story of him helping them at the end quite a bit.

 

[Grin&MartyBarret]

 
I think it depends what lens someone brings into it, really.  It's not a thorough comparsion article so much as it is about Rondo's growth, so fair to say it's hardly conclusive of anything.   However, the description Goldsberry gives in the article is that Rondo's game improved from 2010 to 2012, and obviously the big 3 were there the whole time, and that once he went down their performance without him went down. I do not think your conclusion follows from what is in the article, though certainly if you come in with a strong view one can exit with that view intact.
 
I don't think anyone would doubt that playing with the big 3 made Rondo better---but I think most of us who watched those years would agree that by the time he blew out his knee he was a much bigger part of things than he had been early on, too.  Hard for me to see how that doesn't tell a story of him helping them at the end quite a bit.

Can't bold on mobile, but he says that when Rondo went down, the C's weren't real contenders without their floor general.

But the C's offense actually improved substantially without him that year, as did the shooting percentages of multiple players. I don't remember the thread, but we tracked it here at the time and Zach Lowe referenced it multiple times as well.

 

[Devizier]

There are few good hypotheses to explain Rondo's variable performance throughout his career. It's more complicated than just attributing the variance to injuries. Effort (or lack thereof) might be part of it, but I'm not sure it's everything. In any event, I wouldn't be surprised if he thrives in Dallas. I also wouldn't be surprised if he continued getting worse as he aged out of his game.
 
Anyways, it's worth mentioning that 34-year old Jason Kidd was looking pretty washed up when the Nets traded him to Dallas. 

 

[PedroKsBambino]

 
 
Can't bold on mobile, but he says that when Rondo went down, the C's weren't real contenders without their floor general. 

But the C's offense actually improved substantially without him that year, as did the shooting percentages of multiple players. I don't remember the thread, but we tracked it here at the time and Zach Lowe referenced it multiple times as well. 

 
They weren't.  And again, you are filtering and drawing your own conclusions, which is fine...but not what Goldsberry says.   He notes Rondo was an elite defensive player at that time (I'd note opinions go both ways there) so shooting percentages of some players going up in no way changes that his injury was a loss.  You criticized his article and it's clear what you really mean is 'i disagree'
 
You have a strong view on this---and you really don't seem all that interested in seeing anything that is inconsistent with it.  That's ok with me, because I'm not a huge Rondo believer either, but it creates a silly discussion to say that people should try to convince you that the cherrypicked memories you have of stats and threads are wrong, too.
 
Like Dev, I think Rondo may thrive in Dallas and that there's lots of moving pieces in analyzing him.

 

[Grin&MartyBarret]

 
They weren't.  And again, you are filtering and drawing your own conclusions, which is fine...but not what Goldsberry says.   He notes Rondo was an elite defensive player at that time (I'd note opinions go both ways there) so shooting percentages of some players going up in no way changes that his injury was a loss.  You criticized his article and it's clear what you really mean is 'i disagree'
 
You have a strong view on this---and you really don't seem all that interested in seeing anything that is inconsistent with it.  That's ok with me, because I'm not a huge Rondo believer either, but it creates a silly discussion to say that people should try to convince you that the cherrypicked memories you have of stats and threads are wrong, too.
 
Like Dev, I think Rondo may thrive in Dallas and that there's lots of moving pieces in analyzing him.

I dont think my view on this is as strong as you think, just asking questions. Somewhere in these Rondo threads I said, up front, that Dallas is a good fit for Rondo. I wouldnt be surprised at all to see him thrive either.

I may just be reading it wrong, I dont know. But to me it feels like there's no attempt by Goldsberry to try and find out if his thesis (that Rondo amplifies greatness) holds true with the numbers we do have, and instead insists we dont have the right stats to find his value. It feels like he purposefully avoids mention of seasons and stats that would counter that. That doesnt necessarily make his theory wrong, it just feels incomplete, is all. Call that cherry picking if you like, just asking questions.

 

[PedroKsBambino]

Well, to put it more simply, what's the case that he didn't amplify their games and is it more convincing?  if so, we certainly haven't seen it made in this thread yet

 

[wutang112878]

It would take some digging into the on/off but it would be interesting to look at individual players, as opposed to overall team, FG%, eFG% and TS% with Rondo on the court vs off the court.  I bet we'd find things like Ray Allens spot up 3pt FG% increased significantly.  Perk's FG% increased due to Rondo assists that gave him some layups.  These are all just guesses and I'd be willing to bet there are certain types of players that Rondo doesnt really have an impact on for example: Maybe PPs FG% didnt improve because he played more isolation basketball. 
 
I dont think anyone is making the case that Rondo is a defensive difference maker but there is a decent amount of data to look at the ancillary benefits on the offensive side of the ball if you can drill down into the details but its just not terribly simple to do.

 

[Grin&MartyBarret]

Well, to put it more simply, what's the case that he didn't amplify their games and is it more convincing?  if so, we certainly haven't seen it made in this thread yet

 
You're right, we haven't seen it made in this thread. It was in the other thread years back, which I referenced. I dug around and here's what I was referencing: 
 
In 2012-2013, prior to Rondo's ACL tear the C's offense scored 99.6 points per 100 possessions. Post injury, they scored 102.9 points/100. Defensively, there was virtually no difference with/without Rondo (100.3/100 pre-injury vs. 100.5/100 post-injury). Now, that's not a perfect way to go about it as Rondo missed a handful of games before his injury, but perhaps somebody more adept with NBA.com/stats can figure out a way to isolate only the games that Rondo played in. On a team level, before Rondo's injury the team's eFG% was .490%, TS% was 53.1% and post trade those numbers jumped to .519% and .556%. 
 
Individually, the following happened that year: 
 
Garnett shot .502% with Rondo, .487% after Rondo. 
Green shot .428% with Rondo, .497% after Rondo.
Pierce shot .419% with Rondo, .462% after Rondo.
Terry shot .423% with Rondo, .448% after Rondo. 
Lee shot .465% with Rondo, ..463% after Rondo.
Bass shot .441% with Rondo, .531% after Rondo.
 
If I had the time, I'd dig into this a bit deeper and play around with the NBA stats database to see if I could find more specific numbers. I also have no idea how to go about finding the on/off numbers, but Zach Lowe has this to say: 
 

The C’s have scored at a worse rate with Rondo on the floor for three years running, and they were generally mediocre even at their championship peak.

 
Obviously, this isn't the perfect way to go about this, and there are a ton of variables at work here, but this is the rough outline of the discussion that was had during the second half of that 2012-2013 season, and the discussion that I suspect will continue this year if the C's offense performs better going forward. 

 

[Van Everyman]

In his press conference with Dallas he said this:

“It was really challenging these past couple years for me in my career,” Rondo said. “Each year you start training camp, all you talk about is winning a championship, but being realistic, the last two years our focus was just making the playoffs.

“For me, being a competitor, I felt like we put five guys out there who played extremely hard, but I didn’t feel like we were going to win many games. That’s just how my mentality’s been since I’ve been in the league. Fortunate enough to play with future Hall of Famers and great teams and coach with Doc Rivers, so to get back to that situation, being able to play with future Hall of Famers, great coach, and a team that’s ready to contend for a title, I’m fired up. I’m ready to go.”

I think it's pretty clear the guy had a hard time playing with the same edge he had during the Big Three era. I give him credit for admitting as much and imagine it must've been tough after you pretty much were spoiled with talent around you for the balance of your career.

Also, Perk says Rondo wanted out of Boston ... like a month after he said he wanted to stay. Is it time to admit that pretty much everything players and their "insiders" say about loyalty to a team is total bullshit?

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2014/12/19/kendrick-perkins-says-rajon-rondo-wanted-out-boston/iSwrG0UP7WPB6MEXpat6xO/story.html?p1=Article_Related_Box_Article

 

[crystalline]

Also, Perk says Rondo wanted out of Boston ... like a month after he said he wanted to stay. Is it time to admit that pretty much everything players and their "insiders" people say about loyalty to a team in public is total bullshit?
 

 
fixed that...
It's not just limited to sports.  Pretty much anything that is said to a news organization is total bullshit, as people say whatever helps their negotiating position or image.  I used to get annoyed but I've come to terms with it - it's just the way the world works.
 
Every once in a while you get unvarnished true feelings from someone like Romney with the comment that "47 percent of Americans are victims and takers who pay no income tax and won't vote for me", but it's rare to get video like that in a private setting.
 
(When I say "anyone" I mean Americans; this may be slightly different in other cultures?)
 
edit: whoops on the diversion from Rondo, this will be my last on the topic

 

[jon abbey]

Rondo has drawn four offensive charges so far tonight, admittedly against the Spurs B team (top six players all hurt or sitting out).

 

[Devizier]

So, Monta does okay playing off the ball...

 

[Devizier]

And then he took the ball at the end to close the game out. I think that'll be the formula for Dallas although it makes Rondo a pretty worthless spectator.

 
Except for the part where Rondo was still on the floor and still active in the offense at the end of the game (missing two of his last three shots, which is the point you could have made).

 

[swingin val]

Not many teams have a stretch 4 like Dirk though. There are almost always going to be 1 or 2 non shooters on the floor. If the non shooters on the court are Rondo/Chandler or random PF/C I am not sure the results are drastically different.

 

[Kooz]

Dallas had to have been happy with Rondo's first game. He made fast friends with Monta and in fact dished half of the team's assists. The help the team needs is on defense, though, and Cory Joseph is not a test that will provide a lot of information. On that end to my own naked eye the start was a little rough. I'd expect Rondo's lack of skill guarding the ball will be exposed going forward, even while his offensive production on an already good team will look pretty good.
 
In other words, the debate over Rondo's value will rage.  

 

[HomeRunBaker]

Dallas had to have been happy with Rondo's first game. He made fast friends with Monta and in fact dished half of the team's assists. The help the team needs is on defense, though, and Cory Joseph is not a test that will provide a lot of information. On that end to my own naked eye the start was a little rough. I'd expect Rondo's lack of skill guarding the ball will be exposed going forward, even while his offensive production on an already good team will look pretty good.
 
In other words, the debate over Rondo's value will rage.  

It's refreshing to debate Rondo's value to his team without having a stranglehold on all Celtics talk. If for nothing else it makes for better discussion on these boards.

Dallas entered last nights game leading the league in PPG at 110 on 48% shooting. Last night Rondo QB'd his team to 99 on 43%. They won which of course is good but the Spurs sat everyone last night. Some of you feel this makes Dallas a contender I think he will make them worse or at best have little impact. Fun to watch how this plays out moving forward.

 

[Cellar-Door]

It's refreshing to debate Rondo's value to his team without having a stranglehold on all Celtics talk. If for nothing else it makes for better discussion on these boards.

Dallas entered last nights game leading the league in PPG at 110 on 48% shooting. Last night Rondo QB'd his team to 99 on 43%. They won which of course is good but the Spurs sat everyone last night. Some of you feel this makes Dallas a contender I think he will make them worse or at best have little impact. Fun to watch how this plays out moving forward.

 
That's some impressive stat cherry Picking. If we plan to use a 1 game sample, they give up 103 PPG and only gave up 93. Of course it's pretty ridiculous to take anything from single games. On the season I'd expect their offensive efficiency to decline some, but for the defensive efficiency to come up some. They lost Wright and Crowder which hurts on D, but Nelson at this point is much worse even than bad Rondo on D.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

 
That's some impressive stat cherry Picking. If we plan to use a 1 game sample, they give up 103 PPG and only gave up 93. Of course it's pretty ridiculous to take anything from single games. On the season I'd expect their offensive efficiency to decline some, but for the defensive efficiency to come up some. They lost Wright and Crowder which hurts on D, but Nelson at this point is much worse even than bad Rondo on D.

Of course it's one game.....which is why I said it will be fun to see how this all plays out. Personally I feel Nelson is much better at defending high screens and is a equal or better positional defender. I do feel the trade makes Dallas worse by losing Wright and Crowder off their bench. They even had to give Ricky Ledo some minutes so I'm sure they will make more moves to add some depth.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

Game 2: Rondo gets torched by Schroeder, the Mavs score 10 below their season avg and lose at home to the Hawks. Uh-oh. #samplesize

 

[Devizier]

This thread is going to run about 100 pages long with HRB firmly affixed on one side of the leger, a la subjects about the forum's titular character.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

This thread is going to run about 100 pages long with HRB firmly affixed on one side of the leger, a la subjects about the forum's titular character.

Not affixed at all. What has been unbiased? Schroeder making Rondo his bitch on one end while the Mavs once powerful offense falters is certaintly note worthy no? I'd argue that ignoring what is occurring would be the biased angle.

 

[ALiveH]

You might be right in the end but I'm not drawing any conclusions until I see how the Mavs perform in the second half & in the playoffs. 
 
It usually takes time to build chemistry, no? 
 
The Cavs completely overhauled their roster and are on pace for 50.5 wins & a first round playoff exit.  Would you take the over or under on that?

 

[swingin val]

The thing is, if Rondo put up a triple double, and the Mavs win going away, you probably either 1) don't bump the thread, or 2) tell us how they won in spite of Rondo or that his opposing PG is terrible.

We love you as a poster, but you are treading into Brick territory with your Rondo analysis

 

[Conigliaro's Potential]

Unmentioned re: Rondo's performance last night: the Hawks (and Schroeder) may actually be kinda good.

 

[luckiestman]

The hawks are good. Korver is really really good. I won't judge Rondo on dallas for a while but I'm not surprised so far. This is something I want to be wrong about because I like Cuban, Carlisle, Rondo and most of their roster. Would love to see Rondo and Mavs each get another title.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

The thing is, if Rondo put up a triple double, and the Mavs win going away, you probably either 1) don't bump the thread, or 2) tell us how they won in spite of Rondo or that his opposing PG is terrible.

We love you as a poster, but you are treading into Brick territory with your Rondo analysis

Ouch on the Brick comp as I humbly bow down.

If Rondo did all that and Dallas won by 15 I'd expect the supporters to bump the thread and jizz all over it about how Cuban is a mastermind. I mean the alternative is for nobody to post following these games because it is too soon to judge.

As long as there is mutual understanding that one game is one game these Mavericks along with Rondo's performance/integration is the most interesting subplot of the season.

 

[fairlee76]

Sloppy seconds and jizz.  Very nice.
 
I do agree that how well the Rondo experiment works out for the Mavs is the most interesting subplot of the season.  I am sure there are more interesting subplots from an objective standpoint, but none for me as a Celtics fan.

 

[ifmanis5]

Parsons 6 shots and Rondo 15 shots last night is not what Cuban had in mind.

 

[fairlee76]

Parsons 6 shots and Rondo 15 shots last night is not what Cuban had in mind.

I realize this is a master of the obvious comment, but, yeah, what you said.  With rare exceptions, Rondo in Dallas does not work if he is taking more shots than Dirk and Parsons.  Of all the concerns going in, from Dallas's perspective I would be most worried that Rondo thinks of himself as a primary scorer.  With Parsons, Ellis, and Dirk, Rondo needs to realize he should be opportunistic if a good shot (ie, a lay-up) presents itself rather than, like last night, hoisting ten shots from outside the paint.

 

[ifmanis5]

If they had a coach other than Carlisle I'd say Rondo would totally doom their balanced & efficient offense but Rick will get things sorted out.

 

[PedroKsBambino]

 
You're right, we haven't seen it made in this thread. It was in the other thread years back, which I referenced. I dug around and here's what I was referencing: 
 
In 2012-2013, prior to Rondo's ACL tear the C's offense scored 99.6 points per 100 possessions. Post injury, they scored 102.9 points/100. Defensively, there was virtually no difference with/without Rondo (100.3/100 pre-injury vs. 100.5/100 post-injury). Now, that's not a perfect way to go about it as Rondo missed a handful of games before his injury, but perhaps somebody more adept with NBA.com/stats can figure out a way to isolate only the games that Rondo played in. On a team level, before Rondo's injury the team's eFG% was .490%, TS% was 53.1% and post trade those numbers jumped to .519% and .556%. 
 
Individually, the following happened that year: 
 
Garnett shot .502% with Rondo, .487% after Rondo. 
Green shot .428% with Rondo, .497% after Rondo.
Pierce shot .419% with Rondo, .462% after Rondo.
Terry shot .423% with Rondo, .448% after Rondo. 
Lee shot .465% with Rondo, ..463% after Rondo.
Bass shot .441% with Rondo, .531% after Rondo.
 
If I had the time, I'd dig into this a bit deeper and play around with the NBA stats database to see if I could find more specific numbers. I also have no idea how to go about finding the on/off numbers, but Zach Lowe has this to say: 
 
 
Obviously, this isn't the perfect way to go about this, and there are a ton of variables at work here, but this is the rough outline of the discussion that was had during the second half of that 2012-2013 season, and the discussion that I suspect will continue this year if the C's offense performs better going forward. 

 
The point in the article was about Rondo's prime---not the 2012-13 season.   Which I believe was a point made back in the original thread you referenced too.  And even back several years Rondo's value defensively was always his best contribution.
 
Again, if there's a statistical case I'm happy to see it.  I question Rondo's offensive value unless he's surrounded by superstars, personally...which was Lowe's point as well.

 

[ALiveH]

The advanced stats seem to say that Rondo was a good player from '07-08 to '11-12 and pretty mediocre since then.  There are various theories: indifference, injuries, not playing with HOFers.  I tend to lean towards indifference (based on the performance of National TV Rondo) and injuries (dislocated elbow, blown ACL, broken hand).  I think we'll get lots of questions answered based on what he does with the Mavs in a brutal West.
 
Anyway, it's way too early to tell.  The Hawks are a sneaky really good team & we don't really know how good Schroder is (or isn't).  But, otoh the win against the Spurs was completely hollow when they're missing 4 of their best players and coming off back to back 3OT.
 
It will be totally fascinating to watch and I'm adopting the Mavs as my second team to follow.

 

[nighthob]

Unmentioned re: Rondo's performance last night: the Hawks (and Schroeder) may actually be kinda good.

The Hawks are good, and have shown it all year long, and Grondo had talent that anyone could see from the pre-draft tape in 2013, and he was my second on my draftboard that year. But he's still a second year point guard, and not that good.

The most interesting subplot of this season might be that Dallas and LA were/are in a precarious spot in the western conference where it's looking like you'll need to be a .600 team to guarantee the postseason. If Dallas' offense takes a step back and their defense doesn't improve to compensate they could absolutely be on that fence where they miss the postseason. The Clippers are pretty much in the same spot given their depth issues. The Thunder are coming hard and sooner or later the Spurs will turn on the jets. If the Suns were able to add a swing forward with some offense they could legitimately knock either Dallas or LA out of the WC playoffs.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

The advanced stats seem to say that Rondo was a good player from '07-08 to '11-12 and pretty mediocre since then.  There are various theories: indifference, injuries, not playing with HOFers.  I tend to lean towards indifference (based on the performance of National TV Rondo) and injuries (dislocated elbow, blown ACL, broken hand).  I think we'll get lots of questions answered based on what he does with the Mavs in a brutal West.
 
Anyway, it's way too early to tell.  The Hawks are a sneaky really good team & we don't really know how good Schroder is (or isn't).  But, otoh the win against the Spurs was completely hollow when they're missing 4 of their best players and coming off back to back 3OT.
 
It will be totally fascinating to watch and I'm adopting the Mavs as my second team to follow.

 
Absolutely! This trade has done wonders for my NBA viewing experience especially with the Mavs in their WC time slots. Tonight is an example of a Celtics and Mavs doubleheader on the couch. Life is good. 

 

[Tony C]

The Hawks are good, and have shown it all year long, and Grondo had talent that anyone could see from the pre-draft tape in 2013, and he was my second on my draftboard that year. But he's still a second year point guard, and not that good.

The most interesting subplot of this season might be that Dallas and LA were/are in a precarious spot in the western conference where it's looking like you'll need to be a .600 team to guarantee the postseason. If Dallas' offense takes a step back and their defense doesn't improve to compensate they could absolutely be on that fence where they miss the postseason. The Clippers are pretty much in the same spot given their depth issues. The Thunder are coming hard and sooner or later the Spurs will turn on the jets. If the Suns were able to add a swing forward with some offense they could legitimately knock either Dallas or LA out of the WC playoffs.

 
I don't see how Dallas and L.A. have to worry much at all. They're clearly in the top 8 and, frankly, at the end of the year I'll bet all 8 will have had their ups and downs and it'll be very hard to pick all 4 opening round series. New Orleans, Phoenix, and Sac are all interesting teams, but not in the class of the top 8 (and I'm now assuming that OKC will climb into that top 8 soon enough).
 
But agree it's all totally fascinating.

 

[wutang112878]

I generally agree with Ainge's evaluations but I really disagree on this one:
 

 Report: Celtics Tried to Trade Rajon Rondo to Lakers for Julius Randle
 

 
PS: I wish Brick was here to say that all we could get is this PF who isnt that good because Rondo is awful.

 

[radsoxfan]

I generally agree with Ainge's evaluations but I really disagree on this one:
 
 
PS: I wish Brick was here to say that all we could get is this PF who isnt that good because Rondo is awful.

 
I don't particularly like Randle either, but he was a top 10 talent in a good draft that will be under contract for reasonable money for a few years.  Isn't that likely to be more than the Celtics got in this trade? The Celtics are clearly in asset acquisition mode, so unless Ainge is convinced Randle is a bust, I can see why he wanted to make that trade.
 
The players he got are just filler for the most part, and the 2 picks won't be as high as #7. I'm not complaining, I think it was the best he could do for a few months of Rondo, but Randle would have been a nice get.

 

[Tony C]

Yeah, that would have been a no-brainer for the Celtics. Randle's going to be a nice player.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

This doesn't bother me much as I'm not a Randle guy at all. He struggled getting his shot off in the paint against college players and his perimeter shot with that windup reeks of inconsistency. I think when all is said and done he's a bench player. 

 

[radsoxfan]

This doesn't bother me much as I'm not a Randle guy at all. He struggled getting his shot off in the paint against college players and his perimeter shot with that windup reeks of inconsistency. I think when all is said and done he's a bench player. 

 
I tend to agree, but I still make that trade if I'm Danny.  I think there is at least a chance Randle is better than that, plus he has value around the league until he proves otherwise.
 
This offseason I think Randle would add more value to the Celtics side of a trade than the 2 picks Danny got. 

 

[wutang112878]

This doesn't bother me much as I'm not a Randle guy at all. He struggled getting his shot off in the paint against college players and his perimeter shot with that windup reeks of inconsistency. I think when all is said and done he's a bench player. 

 
This is why I dont agree with this:
 

Yeah, that would have been a no-brainer for the Celtics. Randle's going to be a nice player.

 
I'm also not sold on his ability to rebound and defend in the NBA until I actually see it because he is slightly undersized and I dont believe he has a huge wingspan and/or athleticism to cover up those warts.
 
However,
 

 
I don't particularly like Randle either, but he was a top 10 talent in a good draft that will be under contract for reasonable money for a few years.  Isn't that likely to be more than the Celtics got in this trade? The Celtics are clearly in asset acquisition mode, so unless Ainge is convinced Randle is a bust, I can see why he wanted to make that trade.
 
The players he got are just filler for the most part, and the 2 picks won't be as high as #7. I'm not complaining, I think it was the best he could do for a few months of Rondo, but Randle would have been a nice get.

 
You've got a point here.  I've really found it incredible that Dallas has continually retooled/rebuilt that roster and they have never really bottomed out, you have to go back to 99 to find their last losing record.  So unless we're waiting for Dirk to retire that pick is going to be in the middle of the draft in which case yup thats really nothing special and Danny could probably flip Randle for something better than that pick

 

[Ed Hillel]

What a prick:

@CelticsHub: Rondo on his good D in Dallas: “I haven’t played defense in a couple years. I had been able to hide a lot with Avery Bradley on the ball.”

 

[tbrown_01923]

What a prick:
 

 
ditto -- while it was obvious to all of us who watched him, it is still very disappointing to hear.  I hope smart destroys him.

 

[NortheasternPJ]

What possessed him to actually say that, even if true?

 

[Koufax]

Posssibly the fact that for the better part of the last two years he was out with his ACL injury; and when he returned, the Celtics were in full tank mode, so why bother risking further injury?   Also, it was a compliment of sorts to AB. 

 

[fairlee76]

Posssibly the fact that for the better part of the last two years he was out with his ACL injury; and when he returned, the Celtics were in full tank mode, so why bother risking further injury?   Also, it was a compliment of sorts to AB. 

I read it as a (poorly stated) compliment as well.  Less "I was not trying, at all" and more "with AB playing on the ball, I was not forced to work as hard on defense."  But, everyone here knows my pro-Rondo bias is strong.