That's a meaningless comment. That's like saying Durant's job is to score so he should be good at it.
That´s not meaningless, that´s essentially correct. If Durant is the designated scorer, he should be good at it. You´re still not addressing my question.
Rondo's playmaking is more valuable than Rondo (or another point guard scoring because his passes lead to more efficient scoring chances than any point guards trying to score will. It turns out that how many points you get in a certain amount of possessions is important, at least to some people.
Which isn´t just on Rondo, and doesn´t account for the deficiencies his lack of scoring ability potentially brings.
Can you provide any evidence whatsoever that a loss in conversion rate happens at all?
What would you accept as evidence?
Currently, I´m accepting you telling me about some vague stat from a Wizards blog as evidence for your claims. Would you like me to just assume that the lack of floor spacing and amount of ball-pounding Rondo brings to the table has no effect on his teammates?
I´m saying it´s you who has to provide these numbers if you want them to back up your claim.
Again, this was people looking at *every pass* Rondo made that led to a shot or a turnover (that otherwise would have led to a shot) over a three month period. Clearly that takes into account all of the killer passes, and whether the defense is prepared for the passes. And, yes, the person put his conversion rate into the average and into point increase on average.
Rondo is a part of the offense whether he passes or not. It´s 5-on-5.
Over the period of time in question, the Celts converted roughly 35% of their offensive chances that didn't start with a pass from Rondo and 55% of the chances that did come from a Rondo pass. The 20% increase compares to a league average (from 82games) of about 8%. And since KG and PP try to score with and without passes from Rondo they have something to do with the overall conversion rate but not necessarily with the 20% increase.
Or, it could be an indicator that if Rondo doesn´t happen to pass the ball, he´s basically a non-entity in the offense. True or not, it doesn´t back up your claim.
People come up with perfectly valid and well thought out reasons why a player with Rondo's flaws shouldn't be successful on the court. There seems to be the belief that if people don't see a flaw in their argument or agree with it that the argument somehow trumps what actually happens on the court.
Oh the irony.
Anyway, I never said he couldn´t be successful. I think Rondo´s good, he´s just not that good.
Again, the question you failed to answer was "why do you have a problem with valuing scoring from the PG position more highly than "play-making"?
Your claim was I´d have to consider just how good Rondo´s play-making really is, and you backed it up with a story about a stat on some Wizards blog, but didn´t deliver any context, and on top of that essentially demanded from me to do what should be your job.
If you use stats, Tim, make sure to use them correctly.
I'm not using stats incorrectly, you're just having a harder time understanding what I'm talking about than most posters do. The question you're asking is "why do you have a problem with valuing scoring over play-making from the point guard position? The answer I've been giving is that our team is more likely to score when the shot comes after a pass from Rondo than other point guards are when they shoot the ball. In other words, if you look at 100 times when the Celts shot the ball after a pass from Rondo and 100 times when Rose or Westbrook shot the ball you'd see more points come from the Celts shots. The real question is, why do you value less efficient ways of scoring over more efficient ways of scoring?
As to your other point, you have a hunch that the team has trouble scoring because Rondo's defender sags off of him when he doesn't have the ball, and it's somehow *my* job to come up with numbers about it? You can't even demonstrate that it's happening at all. Can you tell me how far Rondo's defender strays from him when he doesn't have the ball compared to, for instance, Parker's defender? I'm guessing you can't.
Case in point, look at two of the conversations going on in this thread. One's about whether teams leaving Rondo alone when he doesn't have the ball is a detriment to the offense. The other is about whether Rondo's a bad defender because he strays from his man when the guy doesn't have the ball and "gambles. When teams stray from Rondo people here recognize it as a strategy. When Rondo does it the thought that it's a strategy doesn't even occur to them.
Why not? Because they don't watch the games closely enough to have any idea how far away from the average player defenders are when they don't have the ball. How do people imagine KG gets so many open perimeter shots, or that someone who's among the best 3 point shooters in the league (like Novak) can be so wide open when he's been standing still for 5 seconds? It's the same reason people always claim that Rondo's the only player in the league that's left wide open to shoot the ball. A fairly large percentage of those outside shots are relatively uncontested, it's what the defenses give up in order to defend against the more efficient shots (3's and shots at the rim).
Topic: Are these PGs better than our Rondo? (Read 48631 times)