Rondo and Celtics now 2-0 on the PG Road Trip From Hell.

[cordobes]

I mean, when you say Rondo's box score stats are a skewed metric of his contributions, what do you mean by that?

I'll quote Jaycelt, who answered this better that I could:

But it seems there are many people who totally overlook how the fact that other teams don't defend him affects his teammates.  It most certainly does. None of these things are going to show up in a box score against Rondo. Shot clock violations, three second calls, desperation shots, turnovers caused by instant double teams.
In Rondo's case his teammates happen to include three hall of fame players who can many times make something out of nothing.

In regards to the rest of your post, I've already conceded you're right and apologized. I don't know what else to say. I suggest you use the PM to talk about off-topic issues from now on.

[cordobes]

No, it is a comment regarding your comment on his shooting precluding him from being amongst the top tier PGs. My argument against your point was made right after that comment and, of course, instead of addressing my point you sarcastically comment on my observation of your comment. You said for someone to point out where you were wrong in your observations. I did and you ignored it completely.

What do you want me to say? Your "comment" was that Rondo is amongst the top tier PG, ahead of Nash and in the mix with Paul and Williams. Personally, I believe that Paul or Williams are a step ahead of him and Rondo is in a 2nd tier of PGs, with guys like Nelson, Calderon, Andre Miller, etc. This is precisely the issue we are discussing, merely stating your POV is not exactly an argument, just another declaration.

Why are you so sure? Does Mo Williams' effectiveness diminish because he is double teamed sooooooo much because he is the #2 option on his team. What about Pau Gasol? Or Chauncey Billups? Or Andre Miller? Or Tony Parker? Or Jameer Nelson? Or Devin Harris? Just because a few team's have tried to play off Rondo and double others doesn't mean that if he was a #2 scoring option that other teams would automatically double team him. In fact, most team's only double true top tier superstars and almost no one else.

Well, re-read what I wrote. Did I ever wrote that he'd be automatically doubled as the 2nd scoring option? No, you made that up. What I wrote:
- He's never the one being doubled. Is he? Do you see Rondo being doubled?
- Heck, he gets ton of open looks precisely because he's the 4th best player in his team, not the best one. Isn't this true? Isn't he left unguarded because teams want to double the Big 3? Don't you think that not being defended makes things a lot easier for him personally? Doesn't that offer him tons of open looks? Now, would he be left unguarded if he was the 1st option of his team?

We must see things diffenrently because I don't see that Charlotte game as Rondo being some huge detriment to the team or even being a horrible game for him.

Yeah, we've already concluded that after your praising of him for his game versus the Hornets. He had 9 or 10 turnovers in that game! This only adds to my feeling that the importance of turnovers are highly underrated. And I just checked the 1st month of the season; his worst series of games: Toronto, Atlanta, Denver, @ Milwaukee. Was he good in any of these four games?

And again, I'm not the one that said he had glaring weaknesses that precluded him from being an elite player. That was you.

What I'm saying is that he isn't an elite player due to his current weaknesses.

So his glaring weaknesses that you have listed are his shooting(that everyone knows and acknowledges is bad) and his struggles with finishing with his off hand(which is extremely common amongst NBA players).

It's not really that common. Others weaknesses have been listed, but read my reply to soap07 to understand why I only focus on a couple of them. The difference from Rondo to many players, and I think this is very important, is not exactly that he has many or a handful weaknesses, but that his main weaknesses are very deep. Not sure if I explained myself better.

I wasn't the one that claimed Rondo was a huge detriment to this team offensively, a team that by all measurements is one of the best and most efficient in the league.

This again? Let me quote another poster:

I think you're misrepresenting his point. His point, at least I believe, was that Rondo can be a huge detriment to the team offensively because he can't hit his outside shot...not that he is. There is a difference. How could you deny that Rondo's lack of shooting ability can be a huge detriment to the team? Ie. Christmas Day? No one is saying the Celtics offense is bad. How about the Knicks game where D'Antoni put Jeffries on Rondo?

Honestly, if I feel I could explain this better, I'd give it a try.

Rondo's lack of being able to hit an outside shot consistently is a weakness that the very specific team I was talking about(the Lkaers) tries to exploit by switching one of the best defenders in the game onto Rondo and then playing off Rondo. Other teams have also attempted it. But most can't because they don't have the matchups elsewhere to exploit that particular Celtic weakness without making themselves even more weak elsewhere.

Rondo's weakness is hidden well in most games by his ability to use his other gifts and most team's inabilities to be able to exploit his weakness to it's fullest.

Why are you so focused with the Lakers? IMO, there were teams that took advantage of that better than the Lakers. The Cavs with Delonte West, for example, in last year playoffs were much more impressive. I really don't see why can't teams do this. They'll just use their point-guard as a centerfield.

I really can't understand your point: if the fact that you have a player who the opponents don't bother to guard isn't a negative, what is it? A good thing? Neutral? No big deal?

Just do me a favor and point to the quote that has me saying that the Celtics would only win 13 games if Rondo wasn't playing

Sure:

This team could afford to lose any of the other starters for a period of time and still put up wins. But not Rondo. If he goes down, this team will suffer worse than that 7 losses in 9 games stretch.

I just extrapolated the 2/7 record to our current 55 games.

My "radical" view is that Rondo is someday going to be a star.

No. Your radical view is, for example, the believe that it was a "colossal mistake" to not select Rondo to the ASG. I think he had a decent case. IMO he shouldn't be selected ahead of Nelson, Allen or Williams but he was probably the next in line amongst guards. And if he was selected ahead of any of the 3, there was no drama. But a colossal mistake? If Dwight Howard wasn't selected, what would you call it? Or that he "bested Chris Paul easily". Really? Easily?

I think Rondo has a good chance of someday being a star. You believe he's already one of the elite players in the league, whose non-selection to the ASG was a colossal mistake. That's a radical point of view.

[cordobes]

I really don't see why criticism of Rondo upsets people so much. Especially when said critics acknowledge that Rondo is a very good player.

This thread got very personal somehow, it didn't need to be.

Oh, it's not an exclusive of Rondo, I don't think. It happens with almost every player, especially the young guys. It's just more notorious with Rondo and Tony Allen, because they have bigger and more dedicated cults, particularly Rondo. 

[billysan]

Regardless of all the arguing and opinions about Rajon Rondo, one thing is clear. We could not easily replace him via trade, draft, FA or from our bench if he went down in the next game. He now fits our system and has become indispensible from that aspect alone. He will be our PG for the next few years unless a miracle happens.

Young athletic PG's that play excellent defense are just not out there. He certainly isnt the best or in the top few but he is definitely our only option. We dont make the finals and likely not the conference championship this year without him. Likely one and done for us with House or Pruitt running the team.

As long as he plays at his current level or better, I am more than satisfied. We still need a better backup PG so Eddie House can play SG off the bench but that is a different topic.

[winsomme]

I mean, when you say Rondo's box score stats are a skewed metric of his contributions, what do you mean by that?

I'll quote Jaycelt, who answered this better that I could:

But it seems there are many people who totally overlook how the fact that other teams don't defend him affects his teammates.  It most certainly does. None of these things are going to show up in a box score against Rondo. Shot clock violations, three second calls, desperation shots, turnovers caused by instant double teams.
In Rondo's case his teammates happen to include three hall of fame players who can many times make something out of nothing.

In regards to the rest of your post, I've already conceded you're right and apologized. I don't know what else to say. I suggest you use the PM to talk about off-topic issues from now on.

just because something doesn't show up in the box score doesn't give you license to overstate  the amount that it happens and/or the impact that it is having on the team...

would you feel better if we had a PG that could shoot jumpers, but had no idea how to dictate the pace of the game?

the reason so many give high marks to Rondo isn't because he has a perfect game, but that he  possesses skills that are in short supply around the league and those skills far outweigh the deficiencies.

[winsomme]

hey, as long as we are talking about weaknesses, how 'bout we talk about Mo Williams A/TO ratio...from a PG that made the ASG!!

[winsomme]

and Devin Harris' FG% for a PG is just not very good.

and Harris and Mo made the ASG over Rondo....

[nickagneta]

I mean, when you say Rondo's box score stats are a skewed metric of his contributions, what do you mean by that?

I'll quote Jaycelt, who answered this better that I could:

But it seems there are many people who totally overlook how the fact that other teams don't defend him affects his teammates.  It most certainly does. None of these things are going to show up in a box score against Rondo. Shot clock violations, three second calls, desperation shots, turnovers caused by instant double teams.
In Rondo's case his teammates happen to include three hall of fame players who can many times make something out of nothing.

In regards to the rest of your post, I've already conceded you're right and apologized. I don't know what else to say. I suggest you use the PM to talk about off-topic issues from now on.

just because something doesn't show up in the box score doesn't give you license to overstate  the amount that it happens and/or the impact that it is having on the team...

would you feel better if we had a PG that could shoot jumpers, but had no idea how to dictate the pace of the game?
the reason so many give high marks to Rondo isn't because he has a perfect game, but that he  possesses skills that are in short supply around the league and those skills far outweigh the deficiencies.

We already have one and his name is Eddie House. Doesn't the offense run so much better because he can hit an outside shot? 

[RebusRankin]

KG made some great points about Rondo's value in his All-Star interview. Rondo picks up the opposing PG for the full 94 feet all game. He sets the tempo on offense and defense. His playmaking gets everybody involved. His rebounding is huge.

Does he need to develop a better jumpshot? No question. Is he a huge asset and future all-star? Yes.

[goCeltics]

where are all the rondo haters now?, they wanted bassy and delonte over him, i remember once tj ford had a nice game once vs the c's, and all the rondo haters came out of the wordwork, anyways i still say l'll take him @ seven in that draft, over rudy and roy. PGs that can contribute @ both ends of the court are harder to land than flashy wing players.