THE SMART MOVE: TRADE RAJON RONDO

WEEI - BEM ROHRBACH

It's finally time for the Celtics to say goodbye to Rajon Rondo. (AP)

It’s almost as if the Celtics had their 2014-15 marketing campaign in mind upon selecting players named Smart and Young with their two first-round picks.

After respectively taking Oklahoma State sophomore point guard Marcus Smart and Kentucky freshman wing James Young with the Nos. 6 and 17 picks, team president Danny Ainge might as well have posted a Rajon Rondo ad on Craigslist.

In the hours leading up to the draft, the Kevin Love trade discussion grew quieter than a Trappist monk, and the possibility of him landing in Boston seems even less likely after the fact. Love is no longer the answer, and therefore neither is Rondo.

While Ainge and Celtics coach Brad Stevens answered the requisite inquiries about the possibility of Rondo and Smart coexisting with an emphatic “absolutely,” the real question still remains: What’s the point of keeping Rondo now?

When asked if he planned on moving forward with Rondo, Ainge offered a one-word response: “Yes.” Any other answer would have sent the current Celtics captain’s trade stock spiraling to a new low. (Ainge admitted the C’s received a few intriguing offers on draft night, but “nothing exciting” enough came across his desk.)

There’s simply no sense having an All-Star point guard babysit a bunch of kids for another 25-win season, only to see him leave as a free agent. Ainge might as well get what he can before Rondo walks for free. It’s not like he’ll be more valuable come February, when the C’s are even closer to losing him for nothing in return.

“For sale: A 28-year-old, 4-time NBA All-Star. Fully restored, like new! Wanted: future picks, young talent or b/o in return. Call 555-TANK w/ serious inquires.”

Realistically, Rondo will be closer to Pierce’s age last summer by the time the team’s two newest teenagers make any serious impact on the league. For those of you holding out hope Smart and Young somehow transform these Celtics into a playoff team, don’t hold your breath. It’s Ping Pong balls all over again next spring. And as bad as they were this past season, Thursday proved they weren’t bad enough.

Nothing against their new additions. By all accounts, Smart and Young were the best players available when Boston was on the board. But even Ainge admitted he wasn’t acquiring anything more than a potential starter with the sixth pick. Not a star. A starter. Almost as soon as they announced the Smart pick, Celtics owner Wyc Grousbeck couched his infamous “fireworks” comments earlier this offseason.

“I always said fireworks were a possibility," he said. "It takes two to tango around here, but there just hasn’t been much movement tonight. There just hasn’t been. Typically on draft day we make at least two trades, if not three. It’s just sort of the way we roll. Trader Danny. And it’s had great effect for us. We like to be aggressive about rebuilding this team. We’d like to try to become contenders as quickly as possible. We’ll keep working the phones, but it takes two partners to make a trade.”

As if on cue, Smart said of joining the Celtics, “It felt like fireworks. It felt like the Fourth of July.” Apparently, he’s never seen the display we’re used to in Boston. Except, LeBron James, Carmelo Anthony and every other available franchise player won't be wearing green, so the Celtics are left sorting through the few sparklers and bottle rockets remaining on the free agent market.

Sadly, the only fireworks remaining for these C’s are the inevitable Rondo trade rumors. I’m one of the few passengers left on the Rondo rollercoaster. For me, his best is underappreciated and his worst is overblown, but neither matters anymore.

The best-case scenario for Smart is to become Rondo, and there's no doubt the two could coexist for a season. But then what? With the heir apparent now in place, why should Ainge sign Rondo to anything near a max contract? And why should Rondo waste his prime on a team that's lightyears from contending?

The Celtics faced a fork in the road this summer -- reload or rebuild -- and whether by free will or fate, they just drove down the latter on Thursday. Since Ainge won’t reach his destination for quite some time, he might as well drop Rondo off now.

112288

Hi,
Mr. Rohrbach (I wonder if Bem is Ben+Bum/2   ) made up his mind about Rondo based on the last night's picks. It's good that he's not moonlighting as the Celtics GM.
I think that a simpler explanation for Smart and Young is BAP.
Also, let's not forget that FA season starts July 1. On top of that I have hard time to believe that DA will let $10.3M to disappear unused.
Unfortunately, we didn't get answers about Celtics future last night, just more questions. The next couple months should clear the picture, IMO.

AK

This writer is an idiot, we can still make a move for a 5 by seasons start or during season.

Smart is ready to make an impact right away. Sully and AB and KO will all be more improved. We might not contend, but in the East we could be a lower seed playoff team.

if we can keep AB with Rondo and Smart that is gonna be some hellacious defense in the back court.

Based on the Smart pick, I think the C's will deal Rondo, although I'm not convinced it's inevitable or wise. Our real problem, as fans, even avid fans, is we never see the full picture. Like that fable about touching various parts of an elephant and concluding the beast is a long hose, a giant barrel, or something else, depending on which part you touch, the Smart pick could be BPA, insurance against overpaying a guard in his prime on a rebuilding team, or a chess move related to unveiled plans.
I was surprised to see Gordon go so quickly and believe Ainge anticipated getting him, so the Smart pick might have been a plan B, rather than part of a Rondo strategy.
Still, the picks themselves give the Celtics a different set of assets and liabilities, and even if not premeditated, they may set us on a course of longer-term rebuilding. As for "fireworks," I think this is management talk meant to buck up the fans. As a fan, I don't need that. What I'd like to see is a strategy to return to the top. I could interpret Ainge's draft picks and passing on Asik, as: build a young core, deal high-priced, or soon-to-be high-priced assets like Rondo, Bradley and Green. Then, when the time is ripe, after at least one more trip to the lottery, assemble a contender. All in all, no great insights here; just the way it looks to me on draft day, plus one. Hawk

Great insights at this point are almost impossible, Hawk.  I imagine you have the same "back-of-mind" feeling that I have....namely that any conjecture at this juncture could be futile in light of the many directions (both short- and long-term) Danny might take.

I believe one big question will be answered by the beginning of this coming week, when the fairly significant trade exception will expire.  I agree with Sinus that it's difficult to envision Danny's just letting that go away.

Go Celtics!

Sam

Hmm...its cloudy today. Maybe I'll trade rondo on that premise.



KJ

The injury angle seems to have taken a back seat. This will be Rondo's first full season back since ACL surgery. Will he come close to his pre injury ability? Also I seem to recall several on here having reservations about Bradley and his injury record.

Getting Smart serves as an insurance policy to a degree. Also adds much needed depth.

Still there will be moves no doubt but no move is far better than the wrong move. To me the pick of Smart isn't a bad decision at all.

Just gonna have to find a number for him cause #33 is not available.

beat

Beat,

How do we know that Smart's a better floor general than Bradley?

Just asking.

Sam

By the way, only any form of the verb "to tank" makes me grind my teeth more than the hackneyed "best player available."  But Wyc sent my denture grinding soaring to new heights by adding, "and let it all work out."  Wyc, was your money the result of your business acumen, or did you inherit it?  Did you ever hear of the word "strategy?"  Is there a strategy in place for this team?  I don't care whether it's Strategy #1 or Strategy #7x.  Give me something.....anything....to suggest that there's a desire to control the team's destiny rather than to proceed via the well-known Serendipitous Help Is Tops method—better known as S.H.I.T.

Sam

Now we can add a center and also the Love courtship is not over.

Dboss

Yup, let's dump everyone we can dump (especially Bogans) and get Gortat via free agency and Love by using #6.  Oh, wait!  I wonder how many future picks it would take to supplement Celtics bodies in getting Love.

Sam

sam wrote:Beat,

How do we know that Smart's a better floor general than Bradley?

Just asking.

Sam

Short answer is a question back at you? is Bradley a good floor general? We all saw the failed experiment having him run the point.

I love the kids toughness...........he's NEVER had any injury of significance that I am aware of. He played in a fairly strong conference too. As a freshman he led Oak St to a third place finish in the big 12, think they went 24 -8 (Kansas and K State were 1-2) Kid had a number of High school awards and continued that right into college. Could have come out and been a lottery pick last year but stayed one more year. At this stage I have to rank him above Bradley when we drafted him.

Might not be the shooter Bradley has become BUT I believe he is every bit as tough and probably a bit stronger too. Sure does appear to like being in the post area but there are not to many short PG's he will be able to post up but it can create other problems just being there. Seems to be able to carve out space and goes to the line a lot.

Certainly no one knows how this will translate to the pros but I can't see him failing. And if he earns minutes I can definitely see all rookie team and maybe even ROY.

AND he likes to get out and run with and without the ball.

beat

Beat, I didn't ask that question because I think Bradley has one redeeming feature as a floor general.  I asked it because I lack assurance that Smart's any better at it than Bradley is.  Your response included almost everything except his ability to run a team.

Sam

sam wrote:Beat, I didn't ask that question because I think Bradley has one redeeming feature as a floor general.  I asked it because I lack assurance that Smart's any better at it than Bradley is.  Your response included almost everything except his ability to run a team.

Sam

He ran the one at Oak State pretty well. Otherwise we have no data to look at.

beat

Sam,

If you are looking for a pass first floor general, Smart is probably not your guy. He will score, pass, rebound really well and play unbelievable defense against other teams best offensive guard. I think he is as strong as any guard that is in the NBA right now. He will also be one of the best rebounding guards in the league. I just don't see how he and Rondo can co-exist due to their shooting deficiencies. I think Boston knows they will struggle to co-exist but they are not going to do or say anything to decrease Rondo's trade value.

An implicit assumption in many of these arguments is that Rondo and Smart must be able to co-exist on the floor at the same time.  It is a long time-honored Celtic tradition for future starters to be 6th men in their rookie year.

Looking at it that way, Smart might be one helluvan upgrade over Phil Pressey as backup point guard.



bob



.

bobheckler wrote:An implicit assumption in many of these arguments is that Rondo and Smart must be able to co-exist on the floor at the same time.  It is a long time-honored Celtic tradition for future starters to be 6th men in their rookie year.

Looking at it that way, Smart might be one helluvan upgrade over Phil Pressey as backup point guard.



bob



.

I think everyone knows that Boston can make this work for one year.
But what's the long term plan for Smart and Rondo?

tjmakz wrote:

bobheckler wrote:An implicit assumption in many of these arguments is that Rondo and Smart must be able to co-exist on the floor at the same time.  It is a long time-honored Celtic tradition for future starters to be 6th men in their rookie year.

Looking at it that way, Smart might be one helluvan upgrade over Phil Pressey as backup point guard.



bob



.

I think everyone knows that Boston can make this work for one year.
But what's the long term plan for Smart and Rondo?

Why does there need to be a long-term plan for them?

Haven't people ever heard of the term "depth?"



KJ

Sam, You're assessment of: "I imagine you have the same "back-of-mind" feeling that I have....namely that any conjecture at this juncture could be futile in light of the many directions (both short- and long-term) Danny might take," is exactly how I feel, plus a little worn out from trying to decipher plans that may not even be hatched yet. Hawk

k_j_88 wrote:

tjmakz wrote:

bobheckler wrote:An implicit assumption in many of these arguments is that Rondo and Smart must be able to co-exist on the floor at the same time.  It is a long time-honored Celtic tradition for future starters to be 6th men in their rookie year.

Looking at it that way, Smart might be one helluvan upgrade over Phil Pressey as backup point guard.



bob



.

I think everyone knows that Boston can make this work for one year.
But what's the long term plan for Smart and Rondo?

Why does there need to be a long-term plan for them?

Haven't people ever heard of the term "depth?"



KJ

Do you think Smart was drafted to be Rondo's back up over the next x amount of years?

tjmakz wrote:

k_j_88 wrote:

tjmakz wrote:

bobheckler wrote:An implicit assumption in many of these arguments is that Rondo and Smart must be able to co-exist on the floor at the same time.  It is a long time-honored Celtic tradition for future starters to be 6th men in their rookie year.

Looking at it that way, Smart might be one helluvan upgrade over Phil Pressey as backup point guard.



bob



.

I think everyone knows that Boston can make this work for one year.
But what's the long term plan for Smart and Rondo?

Why does there need to be a long-term plan for them?

Haven't people ever heard of the term "depth?"



KJ

Do you think Smart was drafted to be Rondo's back up over the next x amount of years?

I'm not making any assumptions as to why Smart was drafted other than they needed some more guards (which is true).



KJ

KJ,

Having a lot of players (whether on the entire team or at a given position) does not constitute depth.  Depth is present only when a plan is in place that allows the various players to make contributions in roles that are comfortable to them.  The very process of experimenting to find the right roles can often result in some floundering, and some floundering could have a profound impact on whether Rondo lasts out the season and stays or goes in free agency.

Sam

sam wrote:KJ,

Having a lot of players (whether on the entire team or at a given position) does not constitute depth.  Depth is present only when a plan is in place that allows the various players to make contributions in roles that are comfortable to them.  The very process of experimenting to find the right roles can often result in some floundering, and some floundering could have a profound impact on whether Rondo lasts out the season and stays or goes in free agency.

Sam

Very true.

I was also taking the context of people saying Rondo and Smart can't coexist. Obviously that sentiment in and of itself seems to be an endorsement that Smart will become a very good player and could potentially supplant Rondo. If that's the assumption people are going to use then I do think that depth can apply here, at least in a hypothetical sense.


KJ