1-15. Rank 'em if you got 'em

[Celtics18]

"What does Doc substitution pattern have to do with how each one performs? What position was KG put in to succeed? KG was preserved for the playoffs." GreenEnvy

Basically, Rondo spends more time on the court without KG than KG does without Rondo. 


" Rondo may have played 5 more minutes per game, and although I'm not sure how many of each of their minutes was without each other, I know Rondo benefited more from KG than vice versa." GreenEnvy

I disagree.  I think they benefit each other equally. 

"What does Rondo do that doesn't show up on the stat sheets? Overgamble on defense? Highlight-worthy passes? Can't think of anything else really." GreenEnvy

Make hockey assists, and passes that lead to a teammate getting to the line.  Track down loose balls and earn an extra possession by knocking the ball off the opponent.  Play the passing lanes, and disrupt the opposing offense by making them have to be wary of where Rondo is.  He's also an underrated pick setter for a small guard. 

1. Rondo obviously plays at least 5 more minutes without him, but I'm sure some of KG's minutes come without Rondo, don't know where to find it, but it doesn't really matter.

(Not that it means too much, but KG played an entire playoff game without Rondo and put up 15/12/5, just saying)

2. Yeah, who really knows. There's no way for either of us to prove it.

3. The hockey assist still requires the actual "assister" to make the extra pass. He tracks down balls that others make the initial play on? OK, he's fast. I guess that's immeasurable on the court. I don't think playing the passing lanes like he does is a good thing though. Nothing about his picks are memorable to me, so perhaps you are right, I don't know.

He does many things great, but he's not a true intangibles guy to me.

1.  Now you say it really doesn't matter, but before you were using plus/minus stats as definite proof that KG was more valuable than Rondo.  I'm just trying to point out that it's not necessarily the case.  Glad you agree.

2.  O.K.

3.  Perhaps, I am right.  You don't know.

[Celtics18]

Folks on here recognize that we weouldnt have made it to 7 games in the miami series without Rondo right? I mean, we might have lost the Philly series if Rondo hadnt stepped up at the end.

Didn't we beat Philly without RR in the playoffs (of course I don't mean the entire series)? Now ask yourself this, how many times do you/anyone think we beat them without KG?

actually you're wrong..he missed a game in the Atlanta series...but just to throw it out there we won a series against the bulls when rr averaged a triple double and kg didn't play a single minute and then made it to a game 7 against the eventual east champ Magic....Before KG came to Boston he had been out of the first round exactly once. just saying.

First let me start by saying, stop patting yourself on the back b/c you CAN'T read or chose not to, I corrected that TWICE within a few posts of each other, I don't need to again! Second, I was talking about LAST season (you could see that in my post), we won a game without RR could you say in all honesty if KG had gone down we would have won ONE game in the playoffs? I NEVER said RR couldn't win playoff games without KG (last year we wouldn't have... I bet anyone would agree there), I am talking about games just a few months ago, without KG, Atlanta would have taken us out in a sweep!

Don't be silly.  No they wouldn't have.

LOL, without KG? I would have taken that bet all day everyday and twice on Sunday! You do remember us barely getting by them WITH KG right?

LOL, right back atcha.  It's a silly discussion.  We did have KG, and we did have Rondo for six out of seven games, and we did win the series.  That's reality.

What you are talking about is purely flights of your own fancy, no matter how many LOL's you throw in there.

[ImShakHeIsShaq]

Folks on here recognize that we weouldnt have made it to 7 games in the miami series without Rondo right? I mean, we might have lost the Philly series if Rondo hadnt stepped up at the end.

Didn't we beat Philly without RR in the playoffs (of course I don't mean the entire series)? Now ask yourself this, how many times do you/anyone think we beat them without KG?

actually you're wrong..he missed a game in the Atlanta series...but just to throw it out there we won a series against the bulls when rr averaged a triple double and kg didn't play a single minute and then made it to a game 7 against the eventual east champ Magic....Before KG came to Boston he had been out of the first round exactly once. just saying.

First let me start by saying, stop patting yourself on the back b/c you CAN'T read or chose not to, I corrected that TWICE within a few posts of each other, I don't need to again! Second, I was talking about LAST season (you could see that in my post), we won a game without RR could you say in all honesty if KG had gone down we would have won ONE game in the playoffs? I NEVER said RR couldn't win playoff games without KG (last year we wouldn't have... I bet anyone would agree there), I am talking about games just a few months ago, without KG, Atlanta would have taken us out in a sweep!

Don't be silly.  No they wouldn't have.

LOL, without KG? I would have taken that bet all day everyday and twice on Sunday! You do remember us barely getting by them WITH KG right?

LOL, right back atcha.  It's a silly discussion.  We did have KG, and we did have Rondo for six out of seven games, and we did win the series.  That's reality.

What you are talking about is purely flights of your own fancy, no matter how many LOL's you throw in there.

You are right, it's pure speka-spekalation (as Bush would say) but like I said, I'd bet we wouldn't win one game in the playoffs last season without KG (even though I would not have taken that bet at the time b/c I woulda been in denial and wishing we could through every second of it). 

[Celtics18]

Folks on here recognize that we weouldnt have made it to 7 games in the miami series without Rondo right? I mean, we might have lost the Philly series if Rondo hadnt stepped up at the end.

Didn't we beat Philly without RR in the playoffs (of course I don't mean the entire series)? Now ask yourself this, how many times do you/anyone think we beat them without KG?

actually you're wrong..he missed a game in the Atlanta series...but just to throw it out there we won a series against the bulls when rr averaged a triple double and kg didn't play a single minute and then made it to a game 7 against the eventual east champ Magic....Before KG came to Boston he had been out of the first round exactly once. just saying.

First let me start by saying, stop patting yourself on the back b/c you CAN'T read or chose not to, I corrected that TWICE within a few posts of each other, I don't need to again! Second, I was talking about LAST season (you could see that in my post), we won a game without RR could you say in all honesty if KG had gone down we would have won ONE game in the playoffs? I NEVER said RR couldn't win playoff games without KG (last year we wouldn't have... I bet anyone would agree there), I am talking about games just a few months ago, without KG, Atlanta would have taken us out in a sweep!

Don't be silly.  No they wouldn't have.

LOL, without KG? I would have taken that bet all day everyday and twice on Sunday! You do remember us barely getting by them WITH KG right?

LOL, right back atcha.  It's a silly discussion.  We did have KG, and we did have Rondo for five out of six games, and we did win the series.  That's reality.

What you are talking about is purely flights of your own fancy, no matter how many LOL's you throw in there.

You are right, it's pure speka-spekalation (as Bush would say) but like I said, I'd bet we wouldn't win one game in the playoffs last season without KG (even though I would not have taken that bet at the time b/c I woulda been in denial and wishing we could through every second of it).

You really think not one single game?  I think we would have taken them to seven, led by Rondo and Pierce.  Don't forget that Avery Bradley was actually playing in the Atlanta series.

Not one single game?

[ImShakHeIsShaq]

Folks on here recognize that we weouldnt have made it to 7 games in the miami series without Rondo right? I mean, we might have lost the Philly series if Rondo hadnt stepped up at the end.

Didn't we beat Philly without RR in the playoffs (of course I don't mean the entire series)? Now ask yourself this, how many times do you/anyone think we beat them without KG?

actually you're wrong..he missed a game in the Atlanta series...but just to throw it out there we won a series against the bulls when rr averaged a triple double and kg didn't play a single minute and then made it to a game 7 against the eventual east champ Magic....Before KG came to Boston he had been out of the first round exactly once. just saying.

First let me start by saying, stop patting yourself on the back b/c you CAN'T read or chose not to, I corrected that TWICE within a few posts of each other, I don't need to again! Second, I was talking about LAST season (you could see that in my post), we won a game without RR could you say in all honesty if KG had gone down we would have won ONE game in the playoffs? I NEVER said RR couldn't win playoff games without KG (last year we wouldn't have... I bet anyone would agree there), I am talking about games just a few months ago, without KG, Atlanta would have taken us out in a sweep!

Don't be silly.  No they wouldn't have.

LOL, without KG? I would have taken that bet all day everyday and twice on Sunday! You do remember us barely getting by them WITH KG right?

LOL, right back atcha.  It's a silly discussion.  We did have KG, and we did have Rondo for five out of six games, and we did win the series.  That's reality.

What you are talking about is purely flights of your own fancy, no matter how many LOL's you throw in there.

You are right, it's pure speka-spekalation (as Bush would say) but like I said, I'd bet we wouldn't win one game in the playoffs last season without KG (even though I would not have taken that bet at the time b/c I woulda been in denial and wishing we could through every second of it).

You really think not one single game?  I think we would have taken them to seven, led by Rondo and Pierce.  Don't forget that Avery Bradley was actually playing in the Atlanta series.

Not one single game?

No, I'm not sure you realize how bad everyone behind KG was or how big KG was for us. When KG wasn't on the floor we look weren't good.

[billysan]

The argument of Rondo versus KG is interesting. I have seen some merit from both sides so far. I still have trouble being so dismissive of Paul Pierce's impact on the game for the Celtics by comparison. To call him laughable is sacrilege. (SP)

Pierce is the guy who usually runs the offense when Rondo is on the bench and sometimes when Rondo is on the floor. Do we always score enough? No, but that isnt all on Pierce either. Is Rondo a faster runner and more athletic? Sure he is, but who do we go to nearly every time we need a bucket? Yes it is often facilitated by Rondo or even KG, but it is Paul Pierce who puts it in nearly every time.

This season KG and Paul have (with Doc's blessing) have handed the teams keys to Rondo. He may very well be the MVP or close, but he hasnt done it yet. I hope he does lead us to the finals, but to put him above KG or Pierce now is a little premature IMHO.

[MJohnnyboy]

Kg and rondo are 1 and 2... whatever order you think...fine. pierce being above rondo as some suggest to me is laughable at this point...hes the clear cut 3rd most important going into the season

Laughable?

Thats my opinion...Pierce had a decent year and a few memorable shots in the playoffs but he was mostly exposed by Andre Igudola and Lebron James while KG and Rondo carried us

1.Pierce had a sprained MCL. Those tend to hinder your abilities on the court.
2.Lebron and Iguodala are arguably the two best defensive wings in the league.

I do agree Paul is our third most valuable player, but Paul's lack of production in the post-season wasn't really his fault.

[MJohnnyboy]

The best players on the team should be ranked through tiers

1.KG: Most valuable player
2.Rondo: Most talented player

3.Pierce: Best scorer

4.Green: Most versatile player
5.Terry: Scoring punch
6.Bradley: Best defensive guard

7.Bass: Lethal pick and pop player
8.Lee: Reserve energy and athleticism
9.Darko: Best back-up defensive big
10.Wilcox: Energy with size
11.Sully: Offensive rebounding with a post game

12.Barbosa: Utility scoring
13.Collins: Utility interior defense

14.Melo: Raw defensive guru in the making
15.Joseph: 3rd wing with promise

Some people are going to disagree on Sully, but we do have to take note that he's still a rookie and we have the depth to give his back some rest. Not to mention his defense has been pretty bad.

[BballTim]

The argument of Rondo versus KG is interesting. I have seen some merit from both sides so far. I still have trouble being so dismissive of Paul Pierce's impact on the game for the Celtics by comparison. To call him laughable is sacrilege. (SP)

Pierce is the guy who usually runs the offense when Rondo is on the bench and sometimes when Rondo is on the floor. Do we always score enough? No, but that isnt all on Pierce either. Is Rondo a faster runner and more athletic? Sure he is, but who do we go to nearly every time we need a bucket? Yes it is often facilitated by Rondo or even KG, but it is Paul Pierce who puts it in nearly every time.

This season KG and Paul have (with Doc's blessing) have handed the teams keys to Rondo. He may very well be the MVP or close, but he hasnt done it yet. I hope he does lead us to the finals, but to put him above KG or Pierce now is a little premature IMHO.

  It's true that Rondo hasn't been the mvp (or close) yet, but it's also true that KG and PP haven't done that lately either, in fact neither of them have come as close as Rondo.

[billysan]

The argument of Rondo versus KG is interesting. I have seen some merit from both sides so far. I still have trouble being so dismissive of Paul Pierce's impact on the game for the Celtics by comparison. To call him laughable is sacrilege. (SP)

Pierce is the guy who usually runs the offense when Rondo is on the bench and sometimes when Rondo is on the floor. Do we always score enough? No, but that isnt all on Pierce either. Is Rondo a faster runner and more athletic? Sure he is, but who do we go to nearly every time we need a bucket? Yes it is often facilitated by Rondo or even KG, but it is Paul Pierce who puts it in nearly every time.

This season KG and Paul have (with Doc's blessing) have handed the teams keys to Rondo. He may very well be the MVP or close, but he hasnt done it yet. I hope he does lead us to the finals, but to put him above KG or Pierce now is a little premature IMHO.

  It's true that Rondo hasn't been the mvp (or close) yet, but it's also true that KG and PP haven't done that lately either, in fact neither of them have come as close as Rondo.

And as much as I like Rondo and respect his game, the MVP will be given to a player with higher scoring numbers than he, KG, or Pierce has a chance of achieving in our offensive set.

Do I still think he merits consideration? Absolutely, I just have to give Pierce and KG the same benefit due to the selection process.

Rondo would need 20 ppg 10+ apg and a few rebounds to crack the top 3. He wont get the points average on this team, it would require him being on a losing team and trying to carry them.

We have had too many weapons, this has precluded the high scoring average for Rondo, KG and PP in recent years IMHO. They have all 'shared' the scoring load with Ray, Bass and others, giving up accolades and so forth. Isnt that part of being a Celtic under Doc?

[crimson_stallion]

but just to throw it out there we won a series against the bulls when rr averaged a triple double and kg didn't play a single minute and then made it to a game 7 against the eventual east champ Magic....Before KG came to Boston he had been out of the first round exactly once. just saying.

Yes, Rondo's play in that series was amazing - it was enough to get us past an 8th seed Chicago team and then lose in the second round to an Orlando team that eventually got slaughtered in the finals.

I'm not taking anything at all away from Rondo - the numbers he put up in that series were epic. He almost averaged a triple double...but think about this...

Take a look at our 2008 Championship run.  We had a Rajon Rondo who was young and undeveloped and it was Ray, Pierce and KG who led us to the title.  We won #18 with a version of Rondo that was only a fraction of who he is right now - he was but a supplementary piece to the puzzle.

Take a look at that Chicago series you mention two or so seasons later.  We lost KG mid season and barely made the playoffs. We then had to struggle through one of the hardest fought playoff series in NBA history against an 8th seed that we should have borderline swept had KG been there.  Then we got beaten by an Orlando team that we were better than - but without KG we couldn't beat them.

Check out team numbers after KG went down that season.  Look at how badly our defensive rating dropped by losing that one single player.  We were trying to outscore our opponents because we couldn't get stops. 

Now fast forward to this season.  KG averaged 20 and 10 in the playoffs for us while shooting >50% from the field and >80% from the foul line.  In each series he had maybe one bad game, two at the most (out of 7).  He was the model of consistency. When he was shooting badly, he was out there making clutch defensive plays and remaining effective with this effort and intensity.

Rondo was amazing too, but he was far less consistent.  Two games he would destroy our opponents with massive triple doubles.  The the next day he would dissapear, force bad shots, make questionable decisions, etc.  As another person here said, Rondo appears to show up when he feels like it.  Some games he just looks like he cant be bothered. I'm sure that's not what it is, but it just seems that way.

Rondo is the offensive leader of this team, KG is the defensive leader of this team.  How has Boston won it's games for the last X years?  With defense. Our success in the playoffs last season (despite being the worst offensive team in the entire playoffs) proves that as much as good offense helps, we win with our defense.

Take out Rondo and our offense obviously gets worse, but if we play top calibre team defense and we have capable scorers on the floor (as we didnt last year, but do now) then we can beat anybody. 

Now there are always going to be games where Rondo just takes over, and you know [dang] well that without his performance we would never have one.  There will be just as many games where KG dominates, and we know that without him we would never had won.  Same is true for Pierce, who has had some monster games himself.  Personally I still believe that KG is more consistently important to the team's success...though it by very small margin.

Perfect example - last year at some points in the season Rondo was hurt and did not play. We started Bradley instead.  Bradley's defense won us games with Rondo out - you could argue his defense almost made up for us not having Rondo.

There is NOBODY on our roster last year who could have made up for KG not being there...nobody.

[mgent]

1. Rondo
2. KG
3. Paul
-----
4. Terry
-----
5. Green
6. Bass
7. Bradley
8. Lee
-----
9. Sullinger
10. Wilcox
11. Darko
12. Barbosa
-----
13. Joseph
14. Collins
-----
15. Melo

In terms of best players.  Team value/importance doesn't mean much, it's a product of your replacements.

Beginning of last year I probably would've easily said it in reverse, Pierce #1, then KG, Rondo.  Rondo's dominance and KG's move to center turning him red hot changed a lot of things.  Regardless, I've considered them on the same tier since 08-09 playoffs, and I think that's still clear today.  Rondo is probably at least a top 15 player, and I wouldn't put Kevin or Paul lower than 25ish, 30 tops.

Edit:  That'd be another fun ranking to see how people would list our top 3 for the past 5 years.

'08:  1.KG / 2.Paul / 3.Ray
'09:  1.KG / 2.Paul / 3.Ray
'10:  1.Paul / 2.KG  [decent gap]  3.Ray / 4.Rondo
'11:  1.Paul / 2.KG / 3.Rondo / 4.Ray
'12:  1.Rondo / 2.KG / 3.Paul / 4.Ray

[BballTim]

Take a look at that Chicago series you mention two or so seasons later.  We lost KG mid season and barely made the playoffs. We then had to struggle through one of the hardest fought playoff series in NBA history against an 8th seed that we should have borderline swept had KG been there.  Then we got beaten by an Orlando team that we were better than - but without KG we couldn't beat them.

  It's not true that we barely made the playoffs that year, we were the #1 seed.

Rondo was amazing too, but he was far less consistent.  Two games he would destroy our opponents with massive triple doubles.  The the next day he would dissapear, force bad shots, make questionable decisions, etc.  As another person here said, Rondo appears to show up when he feels like it.  Some games he just looks like he cant be bothered. I'm sure that's not what it is, but it just seems that way.

  This isn't true at all. I can see the argument that KG was more "consistent" than Rondo because KG didn't have any monster games and Rondo had quite a few, but there were few if any games where Rondo would play poorly. He didn't have any more bad games than KG did.