Forget Nash, boston maybe?

[Natebishop3]

Trading for Steve Nash doesn't make any sense. The guy is 38. Our team isn't THAT good, and giving up cap space to essentially put together a team that will (at the most) make it to the WCF is just stupid.

What about the Celtics? Their window seems like it has closed, or is very nearly closed, and we have some pretty solid vets that we could deal them that would jar the window back open for at least one more or two more years.

I'm not sure what they value right now, but I'd send Wallace, Felton, Crawford, and possibly Camby for Rondo, Jermaine, Wilcox, and whatever other garbage they want to move.

Wallace, Felton, and Crawford account for about 23 million.

Rondo, Jermaine, and Wilcox account for 19 million, so a couple other scrubs would have to be included.

This would give Boston a lineup of

Felton
Allen
Pierce
Wallace
Garnett

with Crawford coming off the bench.

That's with the assumption that Boston wants to give it one more go. If not, and they want to just let KG and Allen go, then they probably won't deal Rondo for anything but picks and young talent.

 

[RoyToy]

They'd want Batum included for Rondo and that would be fine with me

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

They'd want Batum included for Rondo and that would be fine with me

The reason why I wouldn't do that is because with our lack of overall talent Batum is an essential part of our rebuilding. I'd part with Matthews long before Batum. I also think there are a few better ways to obtain a decent PG without losing Batum.

 

[RoyToy]

The reason why I wouldn't do that is because with our lack of overall talent Batum is an essential part of our rebuilding. I'd part with Matthews long before Batum. I also think there are a few better ways to obtain a decent PG without losing Batum.

Well obviously you would part with Matthews before Batum. The Celtics wouldn't go for it, though. They would want Batum.

And I'd do it in a heartbeat. Not sure why someone wouldn't to be honest. Rondo is one of the true PG's in the NBA and plays both sides of the floor.

 

[Carlito]

Now we are rebuilding?

 

[magnifier661]

Rondo will make us suffer!

 

[PapaG]

I think people are undervaluing just how wide open the West is this year.

 

[Natebishop3]

I think people are undervaluing just how wide open the West is this year.

And that's fine, but do you think a team with Steve Nash could beat the Heat? Or the Thunder? Because it really doesn't matter to me if we can't win it all, and if that's the case, why trade for a 38 year old point guard and mortgage our future? I would much rather try to obtain another All-Star caliber player in his 20s to pair with LMA.

I guess the biggest question about this idea is whether Boston is good enough to contend with the big three AND Wallace, Felton, Crawford. I think that team gets to the ECF, but I don't know if they beat Miami.

 

[jaspitzer]

Boston's big 3 are in rapid decline because of old age. Why in the hell would they trade their only young piece that's worth a damn? These Rondo trades are unrealistic to me. Someone please give me a reason why boston would legitimately move rondo for assets that we have

 

[MickZagger]

Boston isn't giving up Rondo unless they get back a star.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Ainge is going to trade Rondo to the Suns for Telfair.

 

[jaspitzer]

Boston isn't giving up Rondo unless they get back a star.

Good thing we're in such high supply of those.

 

[Masbee]

And that's fine, but do you think a team with Steve Nash could beat the Heat? Or the Thunder? Because it really doesn't matter to me if we can't win it all, and if that's the case, why trade for a 38 year old point guard and mortgage our future? I would much rather try to obtain another All-Star caliber player in his 20s to pair with LMA.

I guess the biggest question about this idea is whether Boston is good enough to contend with the big three AND Wallace, Felton, Crawford. I think that team gets to the ECF, but I don't know if they beat Miami.

Our owner says, Nate I have had cancer several times and don't agree. I want to make moves to take the current core as far as they can go however far that is.

 

[MARIS61]

This team won't be in Portland much longer, and PA has proven he lacks the discipline and patience to ever rebuild a team through youth.

I say make the trades, spend the cash, get us a second title and call it good.

 

[Run BJM]

Boston is going to have roughly 24 million under the cap to spend this offseason. KG and Ray Allen are expiring, as well as most of the rest of their roster. Ainge is clearly making a play for Dwight. They aren't moving an elite young PG for a bunch of shit. They're going to try to sell Dwight on playing with Rondo for the next decade in addition to contending immediately with Pierce under contract and (they hope) KG and/or Allen re-signing at a discounted rate.

If they don't land him then they can just look at moving Rondo in the offseason, perhaps signing Deron Williams to replace him.

 

[Natebishop3]

Boston is going to have roughly 24 million under the cap to spend this offseason. KG and Ray Allen are expiring, as well as most of the rest of their roster. Ainge is clearly making a play for Dwight. They aren't moving an elite young PG for a bunch of shit. They're going to try to sell Dwight on playing with Rondo for the next decade in addition to contending immediately with Pierce under contract and (they hope) KG and/or Allen re-signing at a discounted rate.

If they don't land him then they can just look at moving Rondo in the offseason, perhaps signing Deron Williams to replace him.

I'm willing to bet, with KG and Allen most likely gone, that Boston doesn't have a snowballs chance in hell of signing Dwight. They've got about as good a shot at signing him as the Blazers do. If Garnett and Allen are gone, the team will be in rebuilding mode and will most likely try to deal Pierce too. They might be able to make a big push for Williams, but I suspect Deron will go to Dallas if he ends up leaving the Nets. Boston is fucked. They will be going back to what things were like before Garnett and I suspect Ainge/Doc Rivers will be fired within a year or two.

Let's not forget: Ainge was handed Garnett on a silver platter and he dealt a lottery pick for an aging Allen. This is also the guy who traded a lottery pick for Sebastian freaking Telfair. If he hadn't lucked into KG, that team wouldn't have won shit and he would have been fired within a year or two. With Garnett and Allen set to leave, they've got maybe one more shot at a championship. That was the only reason why I proposed a deal that would get them Wallace and Crawford, with Felton who may or may not do better with a change of scenery. If it's not enough to get Rondo, so be it. It was a shot in the dark.

Boston will not get Deron or Dwight. I guarantee that. Rajon Rondo is not enough to convince Dwight Howard to play in Boston.

Dwight will either stay in Orlando or will go to LA.

Deron will most likely sign with a team like Dallas.

 

[KingSpeed]

Trading for Steve Nash doesn't make any sense. The guy is 38. Our team isn't THAT good, and giving up cap space to essentially put together a team that will (at the most) make it to the WCF is just stupid.
.

Are you serious? Making the WCF would be the most fun we've had in years. And as for Boston, lots of people thought they were stupid for getting older with KG and Allen and not one writer on ESPN.com picked them to win the title, but they did. Getting Nash hardly guarantees a title, but it would mean we have a chance. You might think it's a long shot, but did you give Dallas a shot in hell last year at this time when they were in a 6 game losing streak, the Lakers were two time defending champs, and Miami was heating up?

 

[Natebishop3]

Are you serious? Making the WCF would be the most fun we've had in years. And as for Boston, lots of people thought they were stupid for getting older with KG and Allen and not one writer on ESPN.com picked them to win the title, but they did. Getting Nash hardly guarantees a title, but it would mean we have a chance. You might think it's a long shot, but did you give Dallas a shot in hell last year at this time when they were in a 6 game losing streak, the Lakers were two time defending champs, and Miami was heating up?

Dallas had a hell of a lot more weapons than we have right now. Aldridge, as much as I love his game, is not Dirk. Not even Dirk at this age. Boston got KG at the very end of his prime, Allen at the very end of his prime, and Pierce at the peak of his prime. The reason why most people didn't think they'd win it all was because it didn't appear as if they had any bench. Rondo turned out to be a star and they actually had some pretty decent talent on their bench after all. We don't have that. We don't have three future HOFers on this roster. Adding Nash would give us one future HOFer, and unlike you I would rather keep Batum and try to use our cap space on adding a third talented young player this offseason. I don't see the point in trading Batum for maybe half of one year of Nash. It doesn't make any sense to me. Maybe if we had Roy and a healthy Oden. Only then would I say, fuck it, let's go for broke.

 

[KingSpeed]

Dallas had one All Star and Dirk was the only consistent high level scorer in their STARTING LINEUP.

We could lock up Nash for two to three years. I don't see any difference maker who we can realistically sign with our capspace. When you get a chance with Nash who sees us as a "terrific situation" for him, you take it. OR you can continue to be mediocre or worse for the next ten years.

 

[Run BJM]

Ainge didn't "luck" into anything. This is his M.O. He goes for the homerun on superstar players because thats what wins championships and that is all that matters in Boston. He set up the Ray Allen deal to expire the same time as the KG extension. He gets in on the action where ever he can. Didn't work out with trading for CP3, now hes a darkhorse for Dwight/Deron, but hes in the race. If those fall by the wayside then start over, tank, get a new crop of young talented players and trade all their asses for another superstar.

KG on a silver platter? He put out the best deal available to Minny because he had stockpiled a bunch of young talent and he wasn't afraid to move them. Who could have beaten Al Jefferson, Gerald Green, Ryan Gomes, Sebastian Telfair, and a couple first rounders at the time of that trade? You think he regrets moving all those losers for KG? And a lottery pick that ended up being Jeff Green for Ray Allen. He murdered in both of those trades because young prospects have incredible value in the NBA. He got a ring out of it, what did Minny and Seattle/OKC get from those moves?

I don't think Ainge is a genius. But he knows that its his job to win rings and he does what it takes to get them. He puts himself in position to land the big fish over and over and over. Like I said, he missed on CP3 but LAC almost shit the bed on that one. He's got a shot at Dwight and Deron. And come the next superstar on the way out of their respective team he'll be in on that as well.

There's a reason Boston and LA win so many godamn rings. Mark Cuban didn't let Tyson Chandler go because he couldn't afford to pay the dude. Ainge, Pat Riley, Buss, and Jerry West before him are all trying to get the proven talents of the league. They'll risk a lot to land the real championship winners and they'll continue to be winning championships for the forseeable future. Even if it means dumping the Tyson Chandlers, Lamar Odoms, Michael Beasleys, Kendrick Perkins's and sacrificing a year or two of contention.

 

[MickZagger]

Dallas had one All Star and Dirk was the only consistent high level scorer in their STARTING LINEUP.

We could lock up Nash for two to three years. I don't see any difference maker who we can realistically sign with our capspace. When you get a chance with Nash who sees us as a "terrific situation" for him, you take it. OR you can continue to be mediocre or worse for the next ten years.

...and they had the best bench scorer in the league, who scored like a starter. More importantly though, they had a guy that could defend Lebron in the Finals in Marion. We would be trading our guy like that away if we gave up Batum.

 

[Natebishop3]

Ainge didn't "luck" into anything. This is his M.O. He goes for the homerun on superstar players because thats what wins championships and that is all that matters in Boston. He set up the Ray Allen deal to expire the same time as the KG extension. He gets in on the action where ever he can. Didn't work out with trading for CP3, now hes a darkhorse for Dwight/Deron, but hes in the race. If those fall by the wayside then start over, tank, get a new crop of young talented players and trade all their asses for another superstar.

KG on a silver platter? He put out the best deal available to Minny because he had stockpiled a bunch of young talent and he wasn't afraid to move them. Who could have beaten Al Jefferson, Gerald Green, Ryan Gomes, Sebastian Telfair, and a couple first rounders at the time of that trade? You think he regrets moving all those losers for KG? And a lottery pick that ended up being Jeff Green for Ray Allen. He murdered in both of those trades because young prospects have incredible value in the NBA. He got a ring out of it, what did Minny and Seattle/OKC get from those moves?

I don't think Ainge is a genius. But he knows that its his job to win rings and he does what it takes to get them. He puts himself in position to land the big fish over and over and over. Like I said, he missed on CP3 but LAC almost shit the bed on that one. He's got a shot at Dwight and Deron. And come the next superstar on the way out of their respective team he'll be in on that as well.

There's a reason Boston and LA win so many godamn rings. Mark Cuban didn't let Tyson Chandler go because he couldn't afford to pay the dude. Ainge, Pat Riley, Buss, and Jerry West before him are all trying to get the proven talents of the league. They'll risk a lot to land the real championship winners and they'll continue to be winning championships for the forseeable future. Even if it means dumping the Tyson Chandlers, Lamar Odoms, Michael Beasleys, Kendrick Perkins's and sacrificing a year or two of contention.

You are severely over rating Boston. When was their last championship before this most recent one? That team was TERRIBLE forever, and they would have stayed terrible if they didn't pull off those hail mary's on KG and Allen. Now Allen and KG will be gone and all they've got is an aging Pierce and a headcase in Rondo. Why would that be appealing to Howard or Williams?

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

Well obviously you would part with Matthews before Batum. The Celtics wouldn't go for it, though. They would want Batum.

And I'd do it in a heartbeat. Not sure why someone wouldn't to be honest. Rondo is one of the true PG's in the NBA and plays both sides of the floor.

To me, we gain nothing by losing Batum and adding Rondo. The whole idea of getting better as a team is just that- improve your overall talent level. I think Rondo is a good PG, but not elite. It's like taking a $5 bill out of your wallet and replacing it with another $5 bill. All you have is still $5. Now that he is starting, Batum is showing why he can be a starter on many teams. Therefore, if we can't obtain Rondo and upgrade our overall talent level, look for a different PG. A Brooks or Augustine may not be as good as Rondo, but for what we can probably get them for (nothing as they are free agents) means they upgrade our talent level.

 

[Natebishop3]

To me, we gain nothing by losing Batum and adding Rondo. The whole idea of getting better as a team is just that- improve your overall talent level. I think Rondo is a good PG, but not elite. It's like taking a $5 bill out of your wallet and replacing it with another $5 bill. All you have is still $5. Now that he is starting, Batum is showing why he can be a starter on many teams. Therefore, if we can't obtain Rondo and upgrade our overall talent level, look for a different PG. A Brooks or Augustine may not be as good as Rondo, but for what we can probably get them for (nothing as they are free agents) means they upgrade our talent level.

I hear what you're sayin BP, but I think the 5 dollar bill analogy is off. Maybe the talent level is comparable, but some five dollar bills are harder to come by than other 5 dollar bills. Wins are easy to find, point guards are not. If they were easy to find, we wouldn't STILL be looking for an elite point guard since Strickland. Miller was the closest thing, but he's in the twilight of his career. I would take Rondo over Batum because PGs like Rondo are much harder to come by.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

I hear what you're sayin BP, but I think the 5 dollar bill analogy is off. Maybe the talent level is comparable, but some five dollar bills are harder to come by than other 5 dollar bills. Wins are easy to find, point guards are not. If they were easy to find, we wouldn't STILL be looking for an elite point guard since Strickland. Miller was the closest thing, but he's in the twilight of his career. I would take Rondo over Batum because PGs like Rondo are much harder to come by.

OK, I agree with what you are saying, but cannot that same point be made about Batum? Matthews as a starter is a C- or D+. Batum as a starter is a B. If we trade Batum we now have to upgrade our talent level at SG (where he currently starts) back to a B in order to improve as a team. Rondo will not turn Matthews into a B player. We've seen the best Matthews has to offer.

My whole point boils down to this- to be a true contender a team has to have a good coach with a good system, and either a few great players or enough good players with great role players if they want to contend. For us to trade away a player like Batum for Rondo really doesn't improve our overall talent level, it merely switches the same talent level from SG to PG. Granted, PG is probably a more important role on most teams than SG, but we're not any closer talent wise to being a contender. So for those reasons I don't like the trade idea. I'd rather make go after a free agent we might get without losing a talent like Batum. A Brooks or Agustine may only upgrade PG from a D- to a C, but it's still an overall talent team upgrade.

 

[Natebishop3]

OK, I agree with what you are saying, but cannot that same point be made about Batum? Matthews as a starter is a C- or D+. Batum as a starter is a B. If we trade Batum we now have to upgrade our talent level at SG (where he currently starts) back to a B in order to improve as a team. Rondo will not turn Matthews into a B player. We've seen the best Matthews has to offer.

My whole point boils down to this- to be a true contender a team has to have a good coach with a good system, and either a few great players or enough good players with great role players if they want to contend. For us to trade away a player like Batum for Rondo really doesn't improve our overall talent level, it merely switches the same talent level from SG to PG. Granted, PG is probably a more important role on most teams than SG, but we're not any closer talent wise to being a contender. So for those reasons I don't like the trade idea. I'd rather make go after a free agent we might get without losing a talent like Batum. A Brooks or Agustine may only upgrade PG from a D- to a C, but it's still an overall talent team upgrade.

EWill could be a B shooting guard, or we could target a shooting guard in the lottery. I guess my point is, there are a lot of ways to acquire a scoring wing. There are very few ways to acquire a point guard that can do as many things as Rondo. Sure, he's not as good as a Deron Williams or Chris Paul, but he's in the next tier down. I'd sacrifice Batum for that.

 

[BBert]

I'd rather add Augustine and keep Batum than trade Batum for a head-case poor-shooting Rondo. I definitely want Nash, but I disagree that trading our second best player and backups for him and taking back their crap makes us a contender. That's crazy. A Nash/Batum/LaMarcus lineup gets me pretty excited to watch Blazers basketball though -- if our coach can stay out of the way, of which I'm highly skeptical.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

I'd rather add Augustine and keep Batum than trade Batum for a head-case poor-shooting Rondo. I definitely want Nash, but I disagree that trading our second best player and backups for him and taking back their crap makes us a contender. That's crazy. A Nash/Batum/LaMarcus lineup gets me pretty excited to watch Blazers basketball though -- if our coach can stay out of the way, of which I'm highly skeptical.

Finally, an ally!!

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

EWill could be a B shooting guard, or we could target a shooting guard in the lottery. I guess my point is, there are a lot of ways to acquire a scoring wing. There are very few ways to acquire a point guard that can do as many things as Rondo. Sure, he's not as good as a Deron Williams or Chris Paul, but he's in the next tier down. I'd sacrifice Batum for that.

Nate, I respect your opinions and appreciate the fair debate, but will simply have to disagree.

 

[Natebishop3]

Nate, I respect your opinions and appreciate the fair debate, but will simply have to disagree.

Well, regardless of what we do, I just don't want to put our eggs in the current basket. I don't see this team going anywhere. We need to strip it down to a single wall and build from there.