(Merged) Celtics better with/without Rondo debate

[eugen]

Not again....

Mods, please do something

 

[eugen]

I wonder what kind of a thread we would have if the Celtics record were 4-13 since Rondo left.    There would probably be all kinds of correlation/causation arguments about Rondo’s greatness.  The people that know Rondo is not top drawer material would be shouted down – “but look at our record, look at our record.”

Some Rondo supporters, try to argue why Rondo would fit with the team now.  That seems to be an admission that the team is playing a more desirable and effective style of basketball.  However, there is no evidence to believe that Rondo would change his bad habits.  His strengths do not appear to fit in with the new style of play; and his weaknesses do not allow the new and effective style of play.

So, should Rondo adapt to the new style of play or the Celtics go back to Rondo style of play?  Perhaps the best direction for the Celtics is to get badly needed rebounding and interior defense in exchange for Rondo’s services.

Some Rondo supporters must believe there IS causation or they wouldn’t be suggesting that Rondo adapt his style of play to fit in with the new and more effective group.   

Also, many people on here need to read the book:  “How to Lie with Statistics” by Darrell Huff.

TP. If the score was with opposite value, 4-13, I bet some Rondo supporters will ask moderators to ban me and you

I am saying again...

To win a title you need a superstar...well...but Rondo is not the superstar who can give you the title. Rondo is a great point guard but not a superstar, not  a game closer or kind of player to resolve the games like Lebron, Durant, Koby etc. There is no team during all NBA history winning NBA title based on point guard. See the Chicago of 90s, who based the team on 2 big guys: Jordan and Pippen

[BballTim]

Then I'm not sure how I'm ignoring the "most recent games". Rondo had a great series against Cleveland in the Eastern semis, was largely the same guy in other series.

  I don't know why you wouldn't consider ignoring the Cleveland series and pointing to his play to be anything other than ignoring "the most recent games". Maybe you're confused about the order of our opponents that year.

I'm not "ignoring the Cleveland series". I'm pointing out that the norm for Rondo was something different from what happened in the Cleveland series.

Also, I suggest you check the order of opponents that year yourself (Miami, Cleveland, Orlando, LA).

  I don't think there was anything wrong with my ordering of teams. And if you want to talk about Rondo's "norm" it's the 17/6/11 including the Cleveland series, not the 14/6/8 without it. In 09 he went for 17/10/10, in 10 before the injury he was 17/6/11, in 11 before the elbow he was 17/7/11, in 12 he was 17/7/12. See a pattern there?

  If you remember the playoffs from that year his play against Miami was much better than his play against LA, you could see just by looking at him that something was off.

[fitzhickey]

I wonder what kind of a thread we would have if the Celtics record were 4-13 since Rondo left.    There would probably be all kinds of correlation/causation arguments about Rondo’s greatness.  The people that know Rondo is not top drawer material would be shouted down – “but look at our record, look at our record.”

Some Rondo supporters, try to argue why Rondo would fit with the team now.  That seems to be an admission that the team is playing a more desirable and effective style of basketball.  However, there is no evidence to believe that Rondo would change his bad habits.  His strengths do not appear to fit in with the new style of play; and his weaknesses do not allow the new and effective style of play.

So, should Rondo adapt to the new style of play or the Celtics go back to Rondo style of play?  Perhaps the best direction for the Celtics is to get badly needed rebounding and interior defense in exchange for Rondo’s services.

Some Rondo supporters must believe there IS causation or they wouldn’t be suggesting that Rondo adapt his style of play to fit in with the new and more effective group.   

Also, many people on here need to read the book:  “How to Lie with Statistics” by Darrell Huff.

TP. If the score was with opposite value, 4-13, I bet some Rondo supporters will ask moderators to ban me and you

I am saying again...

To win a title you need a superstar...well...but Rondo is not the superstar who can give you the title. Rondo is a great point guard but not a superstar, not  a game closer or kind of player to resolve the games like Lebron, Durant, Koby etc. There is no team during all NBA history winning NBA title based on point guard. See the Chicago of 90s, who based the team on 2 big guys: Jordan and Pippen

That's not true, magic Johnson and isisah Thomas, just to name two

[Celtics18]

I wonder what kind of a thread we would have if the Celtics record were 4-13 since Rondo left.    There would probably be all kinds of correlation/causation arguments about Rondo’s greatness.  The people that know Rondo is not top drawer material would be shouted down – “but look at our record, look at our record.”

Some Rondo supporters, try to argue why Rondo would fit with the team now.  That seems to be an admission that the team is playing a more desirable and effective style of basketball.  However, there is no evidence to believe that Rondo would change his bad habits.  His strengths do not appear to fit in with the new style of play; and his weaknesses do not allow the new and effective style of play.

So, should Rondo adapt to the new style of play or the Celtics go back to Rondo style of play?  Perhaps the best direction for the Celtics is to get badly needed rebounding and interior defense in exchange for Rondo’s services.

Some Rondo supporters must believe there IS causation or they wouldn’t be suggesting that Rondo adapt his style of play to fit in with the new and more effective group.   

Also, many people on here need to read the book:  “How to Lie with Statistics” by Darrell Huff.

TP. If the score was with opposite value, 4-13, I bet some Rondo supporters will ask moderators to ban me and you

I am saying again...

To win a title you need a superstar...well...but Rondo is not the superstar who can give you the title. Rondo is a great point guard but not a superstar, not  a game closer or kind of player to resolve the games like Lebron, Durant, Koby etc. There is no team during all NBA history winning NBA title based on point guard. See the Chicago of 90s, who based the team on 2 big guys: Jordan and Pippen

I'd like to refer you to the Pistons of '89 and '90, the 2007 Spurs, the 2004 Pistons, and of course the Lakers of the 1980s. 

[eugen]

I'd like to refer you to the Pistons of '89 and '90, the 2007 Spurs, the 2004 Pistons, and of course the Lakers of the 1980s.

You wrong. All of them had at least a big guy, or 2-3 superstars. For example Spurs had Tim Duncan+Ginobili+Parker

Lakers of 80s? Kareem Abdul-Jabbar?

[BballTim]

Some Rondo supporters, try to argue why Rondo would fit with the team now.  That seems to be an admission that the team is playing a more desirable and effective style of basketball.  However, there is no evidence to believe that Rondo would change his bad habits.  His strengths do not appear to fit in with the new style of play; and his weaknesses do not allow the new and effective style of play.

  One of the biggest fallacies of this discussion is that Rondo's "bad habits" are the reason we were playing the way we were, like somehow not only PP and KG but the coaches had no say in the style of play that we saw. He's implementing Doc's game plan, and we've seen plenty of evidence over the years that it's a successful plan.

[BballTim]

I'd like to refer you to the Pistons of '89 and '90, the 2007 Spurs, the 2004 Pistons, and of course the Lakers of the 1980s.

You wrong. All of them had at least a big guy, or 2-3 superstars. For example Spurs had Tim Duncan+Ginobili+Parker

Lakers of 80s? Kareem Abdul-Jabbar?

  So when you said "There is no team during all NBA history winning NBA title based on point guard" you meant "no team has ever won a title without a big guy"? Because it's beyond ridiculous to say that Magic and Isiah didn't lead those teams to titles.

[Celtics18]

I'd like to refer you to the Pistons of '89 and '90, the 2007 Spurs, the 2004 Pistons, and of course the Lakers of the 1980s.

You wrong. All of them had at least a big guy, or 2-3 superstars. For example Spurs had Tim Duncan+Ginobili+Parker

Lakers of 80s? Kareem Abdul-Jabbar?

In 1988, Kareem was--I believe--about 75 years old.

[BballTim]

I'd like to refer you to the Pistons of '89 and '90, the 2007 Spurs, the 2004 Pistons, and of course the Lakers of the 1980s.

You wrong. All of them had at least a big guy, or 2-3 superstars. For example Spurs had Tim Duncan+Ginobili+Parker

Lakers of 80s? Kareem Abdul-Jabbar?

In 1988, Kareem was--I believe--about 75 years old.

  I can remember he'd have what seemed like 1-2 plays a game where he wouldn't bother to run back on defense, just wait under the basket while the team played 4v5 and hope for a long outlet pass if they got a rebound.

[eugen]

I'd like to refer you to the Pistons of '89 and '90, the 2007 Spurs, the 2004 Pistons, and of course the Lakers of the 1980s.

You wrong. All of them had at least a big guy, or 2-3 superstars. For example Spurs had Tim Duncan+Ginobili+Parker

Lakers of 80s? Kareem Abdul-Jabbar?

In 1988, Kareem was--I believe--about 75 years old.

I bet you are a teenager and never seen NBA on 80 or 90s...

[BballTim]

I'd like to refer you to the Pistons of '89 and '90, the 2007 Spurs, the 2004 Pistons, and of course the Lakers of the 1980s.

You wrong. All of them had at least a big guy, or 2-3 superstars. For example Spurs had Tim Duncan+Ginobili+Parker

Lakers of 80s? Kareem Abdul-Jabbar?

In 1988, Kareem was--I believe--about 75 years old.

I bet you are a teenager and never seen NBA on 80 or 90s...

  Did you see the 80s? I can't believe anyone that did would claim teams built around point guards have never won titles.

[eugen]

I'd like to refer you to the Pistons of '89 and '90, the 2007 Spurs, the 2004 Pistons, and of course the Lakers of the 1980s.

You wrong. All of them had at least a big guy, or 2-3 superstars. For example Spurs had Tim Duncan+Ginobili+Parker

Lakers of 80s? Kareem Abdul-Jabbar?

In 1988, Kareem was--I believe--about 75 years old.

I bet you are a teenager and never seen NBA on 80 or 90s...

  Did you see the 80s? I can't believe anyone that did would claim teams built around point guards have never won titles.

I am sure you are a teenager. Telling me that Jaabar was 75 years old in 80s is the biggest stupidity I ever read in this forum. Learn the history and stop contaminating every topic

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kareem_Abdul-Jabbar

[Donoghus]

I'd like to refer you to the Pistons of '89 and '90, the 2007 Spurs, the 2004 Pistons, and of course the Lakers of the 1980s.

You wrong. All of them had at least a big guy, or 2-3 superstars. For example Spurs had Tim Duncan+Ginobili+Parker

Lakers of 80s? Kareem Abdul-Jabbar?

In 1988, Kareem was--I believe--about 75 years old.

I bet you are a teenager and never seen NBA on 80 or 90s...

  Did you see the 80s? I can't believe anyone that did would claim teams built around point guards have never won titles.

I am sure you are a teenager. Telling me that Jaabar was 75 years old in 80s is the biggest stupidity I ever read in this forum. Learn the history and stop contaminating every topic

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kareem_Abdul-Jabbar

You might want to settle down there rather than just blindly go after people you don't know anything about. 

[CelticConcourse]

I'd like to refer you to the Pistons of '89 and '90, the 2007 Spurs, the 2004 Pistons, and of course the Lakers of the 1980s.

You wrong. All of them had at least a big guy, or 2-3 superstars. For example Spurs had Tim Duncan+Ginobili+Parker

Lakers of 80s? Kareem Abdul-Jabbar?

In 1988, Kareem was--I believe--about 75 years old.

I bet you are a teenager and never seen NBA on 80 or 90s...

  Did you see the 80s? I can't believe anyone that did would claim teams built around point guards have never won titles.

I am sure you are a teenager. Telling me that Jaabar was 75 years old in 80s is the biggest stupidity I ever read in this forum. Learn the history and stop contaminating every topic

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kareem_Abdul-Jabbar

You might want to settle down there rather than just blindly go after people you don't know anything about.

He's not even 75 now. Hahaha.