Rondo goes through full practice

[greece66]

gary washburn
?@GwashburnGlobe
#Celtics G Rajon Rondo made it through today's full contact practice with no glitches or setbacks. Could potentially play Wed vs #nets

[nickagneta]

I am guessing someone is about to get a very stern PM from the mods

[fitzhickey]

I am guessing someone is about to get a very stern PM from the mods

Uh oh.

[pokeKingCurtis]

Troll rule number 1 is to stay within the rules.

Can't troll Rondo fans when you're banned.

[Eddie20]

It's not just the last 2 seasons that the C's have had a better record minus Rondo. We haven't had a better record with Rondo since the 2010-11 season.

So is he really making his teammates around him better? Or is his ball dominating style conducive to big assist numbers, but necessarily in improving teammates and allowing them the opportunity to get much rhythm offensively?


2011-12

w/out
8 wins 5 losses
win percentage 62%

with
31 wins 22 losses
win percentage 58%

Playoffs w/out
1 win 0 losses

Playoffs with 10-9

Not to argue with the point you are trying to make, as I really think it's a moot point, but the sample sizes you reference here, and trying to compare and draw an conclusion from them is ridiculous.

You're comparing a 13 game sample to a 53 game sample.  Who did they play during those 13 games?  Were they cupcakes, or top teams?  Who else was out during the other 53 games, that might have been playing during the 13 games?

And comparing 1 playoff game to an 11 game sample is even more absurd.  You really make yourself look foolish on that one.

It's been pointed out how we had a better record without Rondo the last 2 seasons, but most Rondo supporters have blamed it on many ulterior forces at work rather than placing blame on the individual player.  So I decided to look at the previous season as well. You mentioned "sample size", but the season I'm describing should go hand in hand with the 2 seasons proceeding it rather than standing alone.

Why is comparing the playoff game so "foolish"? Surely the pro-Rondo camp would've used that a crutch argument if they had lost that game.

So in the last 3 seasons we are a combined 57-73 with Rondo, 48-49 without. Is that not a fair enough sample size to raise doubt?

[BballTim]

TP hwang.

I do believe though that no matter how well Rondo plays this team is still going to have a losing record which, unfortunately, will only add to this Rondo W-L phenomenon as people won't take into consideration that the Celtics were going to be bad regardless of Rondo's play, much like last year.

The Celtics are not going to be a good team and that will not be something Rondo alone can correct but the Celtics with a healthy Rondo should play better than the team at the beginning of last season which was winning with Jordan Crawford.

Last season, based on Won-Loss record, the Celtics performed better with Jordan Crawford than they did with Rondo.  The built in excuse for that is that Rondo was not 100%, wasn't explosive, didn't have his timing, was rusty... (and yes, Crawford did play out of this world for a good stretch of that, a level he did not sustain).

So is Jordan Crawford playing at his best more valuable to a team than Rondo coming back from injury?  It appears so.  How about more valuable than Rondo after a whole off season? We will see.

  It's true that Crawford had a handful of good games last year but the wins weren't generally coming because of his impact on the game, they were coming because we were playing above average defense earlier in the year. We gave up just under 97 ppg through the end of December and we gave up about 103 ppg after that. I think you'll have trouble convincing anyone that our good defense early on was due to Crawford, especially considering that the team was playing atrocious defense before he left.