Even Acie Earl scored 40 points once...
Are you implying Rondo's 44/10/8 is overrated?
Its overrated because we lost the game. The number themselves aren't overrated but once the game was lost it became irrelevant. Just like if lebron took over game 6 but the heat still lost nobody would have cared.
How is it possibly irrelevant in talking about Rondo as a player? It's an individual accomplishment.
It's one of the best playoff performances I've ever seen. Unfortunately for us LeBron had maybe the best I've ever seen a few games later.
I put so much into winning *As does every NBA great*. To me stats mean very very little if you don't get the win. I can promise you rondo felt the same way. Think he cares about those numbers after the celtics lost?
Yes the numbers look great but again, his team lost the game. I personally stopped caring about those stats the very second that happend. Those great numbers weren't enough to get the W which at the end of the day, again, is all that matters. *To me and most players*
I've never understood this argument. People dismissed Curry's game against The Knicks because The Warriors lost. I perfectly grasp that to Rondo, or Curry, or many players, the numbers mean nothing in a loss. But to those watching, and utilizing statistics to understand what happened in a game, dismissing statistics because of a loss makes zero sense. Yes, one can say wins trump individual achievements, but because The Warriors are not as good a team as The Knicks, were without Lee, and barely lost that game, that doesn't negate what Curry did. If Curry doesn't do that do they come even close to winning? Numbers aren't negated by a loss. Numbers are shaped by context and are to be viewed in context. If a player has a great game and the team over achieves, though still come up short, that doesn't mean it was all for naught. You can still see how the individual played a great game that led to the team playing better than one had the expectation they would. That is an achievement.