NBA.com great article on Rondo

[moiso]

The rolling of the ball annoys me too.  It generally serves more of a showboating purpose than a basketball purpose.  Sometimes he does that when there is a full 24 seconds on the shot clock.  Is one or two extra seconds going to make a difference?
Rondo's shooting appears better to me.  Last year he went through a hot month where he was left open, took passes and nailed open 15 footers.  Then he became very inconsistent again.  This year he seems to be showing much better form shooting off the dribble.  I'd like him to shoot that shot at least 4 times per game.  In the long run it's going to make him more comfortable and confident.  I'd like to subtract 3 Wallace 3's per game and add 3 Rondo jumpers per game.  I think that would have a real benefit on the team.

[SalmonAndMashedPotatoes]

The rolling of the ball annoys me too.  It generally serves more of a showboating purpose than a basketball purpose.  Sometimes he does that when there is a full 24 seconds on the shot clock.  Is one or two extra seconds going to make a difference?

Every second makes a difference.  For each second saved, it means an additional second to make a pass, probe the defense, and get a better shot; saved seconds which ultimately result in more efficient offense.  Almost all the great point guards 'walk the dog' on occasion, especially around quarters (to get an extra possession) or when their team is behind (to save time on the clock).  It's a smart play from all angles--there is no showboating involved.

[ThaPreacher]

The rolling of the ball annoys me too.  It generally serves more of a showboating purpose than a basketball purpose.  Sometimes he does that when there is a full 24 seconds on the shot clock.  Is one or two extra seconds going to make a difference?

Every second makes a difference.  For each second saved, it means an additional second to make a pass, probe the defense, and get a better shot; saved seconds which ultimately result in more efficient offense.  Almost all the great point guards 'walk the dog' on occasion, especially around quarters (to get an extra possession) or when their team is behind (to save time on the clock).  It's a smart play from all angles--there is no showboating involved.

I think that we have really forgotten the most important thing here.  Its not a question of Rondo showboating.  And whether shaving a few seconds off the clock helps a team in any discernible manner is still unclear.  It has never  been statistically proven...
However, there is a rumor that.... each and every time Rondo allows the ball to role up the court: God kills a puppy

[BballTim]

The rolling of the ball annoys me too.  It generally serves more of a showboating purpose than a basketball purpose.  Sometimes he does that when there is a full 24 seconds on the shot clock.  Is one or two extra seconds going to make a difference?

Every second makes a difference.  For each second saved, it means an additional second to make a pass, probe the defense, and get a better shot; saved seconds which ultimately result in more efficient offense.  Almost all the great point guards 'walk the dog' on occasion, especially around quarters (to get an extra possession) or when their team is behind (to save time on the clock).  It's a smart play from all angles--there is no showboating involved.

I think that we have really forgotten the most important thing here.  Its not a question of Rondo showboating.  And whether shaving a few seconds off the clock helps a team in any discernible manner is still unclear.  It has never  been statistically proven...

  First of all he does it a lot in games when it's late and we're behind. extending the game by 10-15 seconds can make a difference. Secondly I'm sure it's been statistically proven that teams have a lower fg% at the end of the shot clock than they do earlier on. It's easy to see from the team stats on 82games.com.

[Roy Hobbs]

The rolling of the ball annoys me too.  It generally serves more of a showboating purpose than a basketball purpose.  Sometimes he does that when there is a full 24 seconds on the shot clock.  Is one or two extra seconds going to make a difference?

Every second makes a difference.  For each second saved, it means an additional second to make a pass, probe the defense, and get a better shot; saved seconds which ultimately result in more efficient offense.  Almost all the great point guards 'walk the dog' on occasion, especially around quarters (to get an extra possession) or when their team is behind (to save time on the clock).  It's a smart play from all angles--there is no showboating involved.

I think that we have really forgotten the most important thing here.  Its not a question of Rondo showboating.  And whether shaving a few seconds off the clock helps a team in any discernible manner is still unclear.  It has never  been statistically proven...

  First of all he does it a lot in games when it's late and we're behind. extending the game by 10-15 seconds can make a difference. Secondly I'm sure it's been statistically proven that teams have a lower fg% at the end of the shot clock than they do earlier on. It's easy to see from the team stats on 82games.com.

It all comes down to risk versus reward.  If Rondo does it when nobody is around him, it's a smart play.  If he does it when opposing point guards come up to guard him, though, it doesn't make much sense to me.  It only takes one steal to completely kill a comeback.

[SalmonAndMashedPotatoes]

The rolling of the ball annoys me too.  It generally serves more of a showboating purpose than a basketball purpose.  Sometimes he does that when there is a full 24 seconds on the shot clock.  Is one or two extra seconds going to make a difference?

Every second makes a difference.  For each second saved, it means an additional second to make a pass, probe the defense, and get a better shot; saved seconds which ultimately result in more efficient offense.  Almost all the great point guards 'walk the dog' on occasion, especially around quarters (to get an extra possession) or when their team is behind (to save time on the clock).  It's a smart play from all angles--there is no showboating involved.

I think that we have really forgotten the most important thing here.  Its not a question of Rondo showboating.  And whether shaving a few seconds off the clock helps a team in any discernible manner is still unclear.  It has never  been statistically proven...

  First of all he does it a lot in games when it's late and we're behind. extending the game by 10-15 seconds can make a difference. Secondly I'm sure it's been statistically proven that teams have a lower fg% at the end of the shot clock than they do earlier on. It's easy to see from the team stats on 82games.com.

It all comes down to risk versus reward.  If Rondo does it when nobody is around him, it's a smart play.  If he does it when opposing point guards come up to guard him, though, it doesn't make much sense to me.  It only takes one steal to completely kill a comeback.

If point guards come up and guard him, he doesn't do it (because they'd steal it).  He only tries it when there's not a defender present.  So, that's pretty much all reward and zero risk.

From my memory, I can't recall a time when the ball was actually stolen from him.  In the Orlando series, if I remember correctly, it was almost stolen, but Rondo recovered it or stole it back right away and threw a pass to Ray from his knees.  There have been times where the other team has stolen the inbounds pass, but strictly speaking those weren't times when he let the ball bounce; that's just a bad pass or miscommunication.

Just not seeing the risk v. reward dichotomy here.  Lots of reward, and a statistically insignificant amount of risk. The risk, if there is any, is designed, as Doc points out, to get the defender out of position, which actually makes the risk a reward too

[nickagneta]

The rolling of the ball annoys me too.  It generally serves more of a showboating purpose than a basketball purpose.  Sometimes he does that when there is a full 24 seconds on the shot clock.  Is one or two extra seconds going to make a difference?

Every second makes a difference.  For each second saved, it means an additional second to make a pass, probe the defense, and get a better shot; saved seconds which ultimately result in more efficient offense.  Almost all the great point guards 'walk the dog' on occasion, especially around quarters (to get an extra possession) or when their team is behind (to save time on the clock).  It's a smart play from all angles--there is no showboating involved.

I think that we have really forgotten the most important thing here.  Its not a question of Rondo showboating.  And whether shaving a few seconds off the clock helps a team in any discernible manner is still unclear.  It has never  been statistically proven...

  First of all he does it a lot in games when it's late and we're behind. extending the game by 10-15 seconds can make a difference. Secondly I'm sure it's been statistically proven that teams have a lower fg% at the end of the shot clock than they do earlier on. It's easy to see from the team stats on 82games.com.

It all comes down to risk versus reward.  If Rondo does it when nobody is around him, it's a smart play.  If he does it when opposing point guards come up to guard him, though, it doesn't make much sense to me.  It only takes one steal to completely kill a comeback.

If point guards come up and guard him, he doesn't do it (because they'd steal it).  He only tries it when there's not a defender present.  So, that's pretty much all reward and zero risk.

From my memory, I can't recall a time when the ball was actually stolen from him.  In the Orlando series, if I remember correctly, it was almost stolen, but Rondo recovered it or stole it back right away and threw a pass to Ray from his knees.  There have been times where the other team has stolen the inbounds pass, but strictly speaking those weren't times when he let the ball bounce; that's just a bad pass or miscommunication.

Just not seeing the risk v. reward dichotomy here.  Lots of reward, and a statistically insignificant amount of risk. The risk, if there is any, is designed, as Doc points out, to get the defender out of position, which actually makes the risk a reward too

Cosign...I don't either.

[Roy Hobbs]

If point guards come up and guard him, he doesn't do it (because they'd steal it).  He only tries it when there's not a defender present.  So, that's pretty much all reward and zero risk.

From my memory, I can't recall a time when the ball was actually stolen from him.  In the Orlando series, if I remember correctly, it was almost stolen, but Rondo recovered it or stole it back right away and threw a pass to Ray from his knees.  There have been times where the other team has stolen the inbounds pass, but strictly speaking those weren't times when he let the ball bounce; that's just a bad pass or miscommunication.

Just not seeing the risk v. reward dichotomy here.  Lots of reward, and a statistically insignificant amount of risk. The risk, if there is any, is designed, as Doc points out, to get the defender out of position, which actually makes the risk a reward too

I'm puzzled how you can acknowledge Alston temporarily stealing the ball from him, while at the same time saying that he doesn't do it when the ball can be stolen, and further saying that there's no risk.

Of course there's risk.  Alston stole the ball from him, and luckily, Rondo stole it back.  However, *of course* there's risk, and *of course* there's a chance of the ball being stolen, because it in fact has happened at least once.

Cosign...I don't either.

I'm puzzled by this, too.

How can two bright guys say that there's no risk of something happening, when it has, in fact, happened?

[nickagneta]

If point guards come up and guard him, he doesn't do it (because they'd steal it).  He only tries it when there's not a defender present.  So, that's pretty much all reward and zero risk.

From my memory, I can't recall a time when the ball was actually stolen from him.  In the Orlando series, if I remember correctly, it was almost stolen, but Rondo recovered it or stole it back right away and threw a pass to Ray from his knees.  There have been times where the other team has stolen the inbounds pass, but strictly speaking those weren't times when he let the ball bounce; that's just a bad pass or miscommunication.

Just not seeing the risk v. reward dichotomy here.  Lots of reward, and a statistically insignificant amount of risk. The risk, if there is any, is designed, as Doc points out, to get the defender out of position, which actually makes the risk a reward too

I'm puzzled how you can acknowledge Alston temporarily stealing the ball from him, while at the same time saying that he doesn't do it when the ball can be stolen, and further saying that there's no risk.

Of course there's risk.  Alston stole the ball from him, and luckily, Rondo stole it back.  However, *of course* there's risk, and *of course* there's a chance of the ball being stolen, because it in fact has happened at least once.

Well, it happened once and Rondo has done it hundreds of times since he was here and the adverse effect on the team has been exactly zero since that one steal led to another steal which led to a basket for Boston.

So chance of it becoming a bad play so far....lower than 0.25%.

Total negative effect on the team so far.......0.

[Roy Hobbs]

If point guards come up and guard him, he doesn't do it (because they'd steal it).  He only tries it when there's not a defender present.  So, that's pretty much all reward and zero risk.

From my memory, I can't recall a time when the ball was actually stolen from him.  In the Orlando series, if I remember correctly, it was almost stolen, but Rondo recovered it or stole it back right away and threw a pass to Ray from his knees.  There have been times where the other team has stolen the inbounds pass, but strictly speaking those weren't times when he let the ball bounce; that's just a bad pass or miscommunication.

Just not seeing the risk v. reward dichotomy here.  Lots of reward, and a statistically insignificant amount of risk. The risk, if there is any, is designed, as Doc points out, to get the defender out of position, which actually makes the risk a reward too

I'm puzzled how you can acknowledge Alston temporarily stealing the ball from him, while at the same time saying that he doesn't do it when the ball can be stolen, and further saying that there's no risk.

Of course there's risk.  Alston stole the ball from him, and luckily, Rondo stole it back.  However, *of course* there's risk, and *of course* there's a chance of the ball being stolen, because it in fact has happened at least once.

Well, it happened once and Rondo has done it hundreds of times since he was here and the adverse effect on the team has been exactly zero since that one steal led to another steal which led to a basket for Boston.

So chance of it becoming a bad play so far....lower than 0.25%.

Total negative effect on the team so far.......0.

As I said, he should do it when he's by himself, not when there are defenders nearby.  He certainly hasn't rolled the ball up within range of a defender hundreds of times, so your probability is way off.

[BballTim]

The rolling of the ball annoys me too.  It generally serves more of a showboating purpose than a basketball purpose.  Sometimes he does that when there is a full 24 seconds on the shot clock.  Is one or two extra seconds going to make a difference?

Every second makes a difference.  For each second saved, it means an additional second to make a pass, probe the defense, and get a better shot; saved seconds which ultimately result in more efficient offense.  Almost all the great point guards 'walk the dog' on occasion, especially around quarters (to get an extra possession) or when their team is behind (to save time on the clock).  It's a smart play from all angles--there is no showboating involved.

I think that we have really forgotten the most important thing here.  Its not a question of Rondo showboating.  And whether shaving a few seconds off the clock helps a team in any discernible manner is still unclear.  It has never  been statistically proven...

  First of all he does it a lot in games when it's late and we're behind. extending the game by 10-15 seconds can make a difference. Secondly I'm sure it's been statistically proven that teams have a lower fg% at the end of the shot clock than they do earlier on. It's easy to see from the team stats on 82games.com.

It all comes down to risk versus reward.  If Rondo does it when nobody is around him, it's a smart play.  If he does it when opposing point guards come up to guard him, though, it doesn't make much sense to me.  It only takes one steal to completely kill a comeback.

  But if the opposing guard comes up to steal the ball the risk is pretty low and the reward increases. Not only has Rondo saved some time off of the clock by not touching the ball but he's also drawn his defender at least 25 feet from the  basket and likely gotten him to lunge at the ball. It puts the defense at a disadvantage compared to having Rondo's defender waiting in the lane for the play to set up.

[nickagneta]

If point guards come up and guard him, he doesn't do it (because they'd steal it).  He only tries it when there's not a defender present.  So, that's pretty much all reward and zero risk.

From my memory, I can't recall a time when the ball was actually stolen from him.  In the Orlando series, if I remember correctly, it was almost stolen, but Rondo recovered it or stole it back right away and threw a pass to Ray from his knees.  There have been times where the other team has stolen the inbounds pass, but strictly speaking those weren't times when he let the ball bounce; that's just a bad pass or miscommunication.

Just not seeing the risk v. reward dichotomy here.  Lots of reward, and a statistically insignificant amount of risk. The risk, if there is any, is designed, as Doc points out, to get the defender out of position, which actually makes the risk a reward too

I'm puzzled how you can acknowledge Alston temporarily stealing the ball from him, while at the same time saying that he doesn't do it when the ball can be stolen, and further saying that there's no risk.

Of course there's risk.  Alston stole the ball from him, and luckily, Rondo stole it back.  However, *of course* there's risk, and *of course* there's a chance of the ball being stolen, because it in fact has happened at least once.

Well, it happened once and Rondo has done it hundreds of times since he was here and the adverse effect on the team has been exactly zero since that one steal led to another steal which led to a basket for Boston.

So chance of it becoming a bad play so far....lower than 0.25%.

Total negative effect on the team so far.......0.

As I said, he should do it when he's by himself, not when there are defenders nearby.  He certainly hasn't rolled the ball up within range of a defender hundreds of times, so your probability is way off.

I think "within the range of a defender" is a pretty obscure reference. He rolls the ball up quite often during end of quarters and the game in close games. My guess is that since the beginning of 2007-08 he's probably averaged doing it 2 times a game for the 180 or so games he has played. That would put my probability at around the right number if that one time is the only time it happens.

[xmuscularghandix]

The rolling of the ball annoys me too.  It generally serves more of a showboating purpose than a basketball purpose.  Sometimes he does that when there is a full 24 seconds on the shot clock.  Is one or two extra seconds going to make a difference?

He's trying to lure the defender into going for the ball, thus taking him out of the play. The only problem is that everyone knows how fast he is so they don't bother.

Also, every second does cound. Instead of taking 3-4 seconds off the clock while coming down court, you have almost the whole 24 with everyone set and ready to go.

[SalmonAndMashedPotatoes]

If point guards come up and guard him, he doesn't do it (because they'd steal it).  He only tries it when there's not a defender present.  So, that's pretty much all reward and zero risk.

From my memory, I can't recall a time when the ball was actually stolen from him.  In the Orlando series, if I remember correctly, it was almost stolen, but Rondo recovered it or stole it back right away and threw a pass to Ray from his knees.  There have been times where the other team has stolen the inbounds pass, but strictly speaking those weren't times when he let the ball bounce; that's just a bad pass or miscommunication.

Just not seeing the risk v. reward dichotomy here.  Lots of reward, and a statistically insignificant amount of risk. The risk, if there is any, is designed, as Doc points out, to get the defender out of position, which actually makes the risk a reward too

I'm puzzled how you can acknowledge Alston temporarily stealing the ball from him, while at the same time saying that he doesn't do it when the ball can be stolen, and further saying that there's no risk.

There's a definite element of cat and mouse in this scenario, but that doesn't change the fundamental character of the cat or the mouse. 

The thing is, part of the play is designed to save valuable seconds, and part of the play is designed as an enticement (and one must court a certain amount of risk to entice).  In short, Rondo only does it when the defender's not pressing him, but then he'll usually push it a bit to entice the defender to gamble and press him, so as to gain another advantage over his defender.  It's a two-pronged attack--one prong always works (the clock-saving feature) and the other has a variable success rate.  This is why it's a smart play--it has guaranteed success.  The 'risk' component is manufactured risk (and ultimately under Rondo's control) designed to increase the reward.

Of course there's risk.  Alston stole the ball from him, and luckily, Rondo stole it back.  However, *of course* there's risk, and *of course* there's a chance of the ball being stolen, because it in fact has happened at least once.

Sure, technically there's risk, but that's why I characterized it as a statistically insignificant risk; it's a manufactured risk (under Rondo's ultimate control) that feeds into greater reward and thus is fundamentally different than the kind of risk associated in the normal risk v reward scenario.

Going back to the cat-and-mouse analogy--there's risk and reward in that scenario, but it's not a risk v reward situation.  The cat has all the control, just like Rondo, and gets all the reward, be that reward the thrill of the chase, or the meat of the mouse.