can Rondo play in the Spurs system?

[chambers]

Can Rondo play in the Spurs system= Yes
Is Parker better than Rondo= Yes

Parker is more suited to the Spurs system (he's played in it his whole career, and whilst it's changed a lot, he's been through each transition).

Again, do people forget that the Celtics of 2008-2013 were one of the best ball movement teams in the NBA?
Each system is different and takes time to adjust to. Put Tony Parker out there with our terrible shooters last season and he'd look average as well. No spacing, no shooting threats, no capable big men passers (other than Sully and Olynyk for a few games). He wouldn't have the space to drive and dish without those elite shooters.

Rondo would absolutely carve up opposing defenses in the Spurs system, but only a handful of guards in the NBA would.

[Tr1boy]

Can Rondo play in the Spurs system= Yes
Is Parker better than Rondo= Yes

Parker is more suited to the Spurs system (he's played in it his whole career, and whilst it's changed a lot, he's been through each transition).

Again, do people forget that the Celtics of 2008-2013 were one of the best ball movement teams in the NBA?
Each system is different and takes time to adjust to. Put Tony Parker out there with our terrible shooters last season and he'd look average as well. No spacing, no shooting threats, no capable big men passers (other than Sully and Olynyk for a few games). He wouldn't have the space to drive and dish without those elite shooters.

Rondo would absolutely carve up opposing defenses in the Spurs system, but only a handful of guards in the NBA would.

So why does Rondo forget what has worked before and hang onto the ball more now?

[lurkerStrips]

[mmmmm]

In regards to the ball sticking -- I think you can excuse that because, as the C's are currently constructed, Rondo's penchant of passing for the assist (which is real) constitutes the best possible opportunity to put points on the board. The Celtics are really, really bad at scoring, and more ball movement, rather than more player movement, isn't necessarily the answer.

I'm into this thread pretty late, but I wanted to quote this for emphasis.  It is dead-on correct.

The Celtics were a horrific  shooting team last season -- tied for second worse in the league at a miserable 43.5% FG%.

Yet, when taking shots off Rondo's passes, the team shot an excellent 49% FG% (slightly better than the Spurs' 48.6%).

And your very last words are critical.  The principal behind a motion offense -- which is what the Spurs run and what Stevens wants the C's to run - is player motion, not necessarily ball movement.

Finally, just to address the difference in touches per game - well, a big part of it is Rondo played in more _minutes_ per game (33.3) this season (in the games that he played) than Parker (29.4).

When you do the math, you find that Rondo and Parker held the ball very nearly the identical amount of time per touch of the ball and as a percentage of their team's possession time when on the floor.

Also, for what it's worth, when Rondo was on the floor, his team generated more shots per minute than the Spurs did with Parker on the floor (in particular more 3PT shots),  The big difference being that the Spurs have a bunch of really, really, really good shooters taking those shots while the Celtics did not.  As I pointed out above, the Celtics were much better shooters when taking shots off Rondo's passes.  Unfortunately, he could not stop his fellows from sometimes taking (bad) shots independent of him. 

[mmmmm]

Also, there are some rampant misconceptions flying about throughout this thread in regards to what the nature of a motion offense is and the actual hard facts of how much Rondo and Parker each control the ball.

I did a very detailed analysis of this a few weeks ago on the front page:

http://www.celticsblog.com/2014/4/17/5625374/pounding-the-ball

The net net is that, in reality, Rondo and Parker had almost identical time-of-possession characteristics.  When on the floor, Parker controlled the ball 20.5% of the time.  For Rondo, he had possession of the ball 22.9% of the time he was on the floor.

If you don't want to read the above article, which is long, here is probably the most relevant summary concerning these two players:

The only major difference really, is that a larger percentage of Rondo's touches (78.8%) end with a pass compared with Tony's (73.3%). The difference has been that Tony takes a couple more shots per game than Rondo. But Rondo's passes, result far more often in a shot attempt for a teammate: Some 27.2% of Rondo's passes result in 20 shot attempts per game, compared to just 12 per game for Parker (off 21.5% of his passes). In aggregate, Rondo's touches result in a shot either by himself or the person he passes to more often.

The bottom-line productivity of a point guard is point-creation: Points he scores or assists in scoring. And by that measure, Rondo and Parker were virtually indistinguishable this season, despite their very different respective teams:

Rondo scored or assisted the scoring of .377 points per touch.

Parker scored or assisted the scoring of .378 points per touch.

Now, given that a larger share of those points per touch for Rondo were off assists to a really crappy-shooting set of teammates, one wonders just how much higher his point-creation number would be if he had the same quality of shooters around him as Parker did...

Bottom line:  Rondo played in a motion offense this year and his point creation per touch was nearly identical to Parker's point-creation per touch in the Spurs system.

[chambers]

Can Rondo play in the Spurs system= Yes
Is Parker better than Rondo= Yes

Parker is more suited to the Spurs system (he's played in it his whole career, and whilst it's changed a lot, he's been through each transition).

Again, do people forget that the Celtics of 2008-2013 were one of the best ball movement teams in the NBA?
Each system is different and takes time to adjust to. Put Tony Parker out there with our terrible shooters last season and he'd look average as well. No spacing, no shooting threats, no capable big men passers (other than Sully and Olynyk for a few games). He wouldn't have the space to drive and dish without those elite shooters.

Rondo would absolutely carve up opposing defenses in the Spurs system, but only a handful of guards in the NBA would.

So why does Rondo forget what has worked before and hang onto the ball more now?

I'm not sure if you actually read replies to your questions, because you've asked this multiple times, and been given the answer multiple times.
The answer is that he doesn't hold on to the ball as much as you think he does, but when he does hold onto it it's generally because his team mates aren't getting as good of an open look as he'd like, so he waits for the next play/scheme to start and tries to get them a better shot.

[chambers]

In regards to the ball sticking -- I think you can excuse that because, as the C's are currently constructed, Rondo's penchant of passing for the assist (which is real) constitutes the best possible opportunity to put points on the board. The Celtics are really, really bad at scoring, and more ball movement, rather than more player movement, isn't necessarily the answer.

I'm into this thread pretty late, but I wanted to quote this for emphasis.  It is dead-on correct.

The Celtics were a horrific  shooting team last season -- tied for second worse in the league at a miserable 43.5% FG%.

Yet, when taking shots off Rondo's passes, the team shot an excellent 49% FG% (slightly better than the Spurs' 48.6%).

And your very last words are critical.  The principal behind a motion offense -- which is what the Spurs run and what Stevens wants the C's to run - is player motion, not necessarily ball movement.

Finally, just to address the difference in touches per game - well, a big part of it is Rondo played in more _minutes_ per game (33.3) this season (in the games that he played) than Parker (29.4).

When you do the math, you find that Rondo and Parker held the ball very nearly the identical amount of time per touch of the ball and as a percentage of their team's possession time when on the floor.

Also, for what it's worth, when Rondo was on the floor, his team generated more shots per minute than the Spurs did with Parker on the floor (in particular more 3PT shots),  The big difference being that the Spurs have a bunch of really, really, really good shooters taking those shots while the Celtics did not.  As I pointed out above, the Celtics were much better shooters when taking shots off Rondo's passes.  Unfortunately, he could not stop his fellows from sometimes taking (bad) shots independent of him.

TP. Awesome.

[RockinRyA]

Can Rondo play in the Spurs system= Yes
Is Parker better than Rondo= Yes

Parker is more suited to the Spurs system (he's played in it his whole career, and whilst it's changed a lot, he's been through each transition).

Again, do people forget that the Celtics of 2008-2013 were one of the best ball movement teams in the NBA?
Each system is different and takes time to adjust to. Put Tony Parker out there with our terrible shooters last season and he'd look average as well. No spacing, no shooting threats, no capable big men passers (other than Sully and Olynyk for a few games). He wouldn't have the space to drive and dish without those elite shooters.

Rondo would absolutely carve up opposing defenses in the Spurs system, but only a handful of guards in the NBA would.

So why does Rondo forget what has worked before and hang onto the ball more now?

I'm not sure if you actually read replies to your questions, because you've asked this multiple times, and been given the answer multiple times.
The answer is that he doesn't hold on to the ball as much as you think he does, but when he does hold onto it it's generally because his team mates aren't getting as good of an open look as he'd like, so he waits for the next play/scheme to start and tries to get them a better shot.

Thing is, he doesnt. He's been proven wrong time and time again, by stats and what not about whatever he is saying but its as if we've never said anything at all.

People like to criticize Rondo for the sake of criticizing him. People blame him for the struggles of this team not taking into account other factors (familiarity, recovering from injury, crappy teammates, lineup synergies).  The Celtics sucked playing with Rondo, therefore Rondo sucks - you cannot draw conclusions based on the end result without analyzing the controlling factors that leads it to that.

[D.o.s.]

In regards to the ball sticking -- I think you can excuse that because, as the C's are currently constructed, Rondo's penchant of passing for the assist (which is real) constitutes the best possible opportunity to put points on the board. The Celtics are really, really bad at scoring, and more ball movement, rather than more player movement, isn't necessarily the answer.

I'm into this thread pretty late, but I wanted to quote this for emphasis.  It is dead-on correct.

The Celtics were a horrific  shooting team last season -- tied for second worse in the league at a miserable 43.5% FG%.

Yet, when taking shots off Rondo's passes, the team shot an excellent 49% FG% (slightly better than the Spurs' 48.6%).

And your very last words are critical.  The principal behind a motion offense -- which is what the Spurs run and what Stevens wants the C's to run - is player motion, not necessarily ball movement.

Finally, just to address the difference in touches per game - well, a big part of it is Rondo played in more _minutes_ per game (33.3) this season (in the games that he played) than Parker (29.4).

When you do the math, you find that Rondo and Parker held the ball very nearly the identical amount of time per touch of the ball and as a percentage of their team's possession time when on the floor.

Also, for what it's worth, when Rondo was on the floor, his team generated more shots per minute than the Spurs did with Parker on the floor (in particular more 3PT shots),  The big difference being that the Spurs have a bunch of really, really, really good shooters taking those shots while the Celtics did not.  As I pointed out above, the Celtics were much better shooters when taking shots off Rondo's passes.  Unfortunately, he could not stop his fellows from sometimes taking (bad) shots independent of him.

Right. A large part of what makes 'stagnant ball movement' look 'stagnant' is when it results in bricks.

[LatterDayCelticsfan]

I reckon he would absolutely thrive if he was put in a roster in the image of the Spurs of the past few years. A  solid 2 way big like Tim Duncan, all those dead eye shooters like Danny Green, and even a secondary ball handler like Ginobli. No way a smart, driven playmaker like Rondo doesn't excel with a team like that. 

[BballTim]

In regards to the ball sticking -- I think you can excuse that because, as the C's are currently constructed, Rondo's penchant of passing for the assist (which is real) constitutes the best possible opportunity to put points on the board. The Celtics are really, really bad at scoring, and more ball movement, rather than more player movement, isn't necessarily the answer.

I'm into this thread pretty late, but I wanted to quote this for emphasis.  It is dead-on correct.

The Celtics were a horrific  shooting team last season -- tied for second worse in the league at a miserable 43.5% FG%.

Yet, when taking shots off Rondo's passes, the team shot an excellent 49% FG% (slightly better than the Spurs' 48.6%).
 

  Yet people criticize him for trying to get those assists.

  One thing that's worth mentioning here is that when you look at the fg% and efg%  that the Celts shot off of Rondo's assist opportunities  was actually higher that the Spurs fg% and efg% off of Parker's passes. Think about that for a moment.

  According to most of Rondo's detractors if you took the same 4 teammates and had Parker or Rondo as your pg it would be significantly easier for Parker to get assists than Rondo because Rondo's defender is ignoring him and making it harder for the other players to score. On top of that the defenses don't respect Rondo as a scorer and they're actually defending against the pass and not the shot, which also makes the play difficult. So based on what I've heard from Rondo's detractors, in an apples to apples comparison, Parker's teammates would have an easier time scoring off of Parker's passes than Rondo's.

  But this isn't an apples to apples comparison, far from it. Parker's in close to an ideal situation. People here drool over his team's offense. He's very familiar with his teammates. His team is second in the league in fg% and efg%. People are going on and on about how well he's suited for the system he's playing in.

  It's pretty much the opposite for Rondo though. He missed training camp and the exhibition season. He has a new coach. He has a lot of teammates he's never or hardly played with. He's coming back mid-season and recovering from a major injury. And, aas was mentioned, his team is near the bottom of the league in fg% and 3fg%. Yet despite all this Rondo's teammates shot better off of Rondo's passes than Parker's teammates did off of Parker's passes. That's why the difference in passing between Rondo and Parker is probably greater than the difference in their scoring.


 

[Jailan34]

I think this thread kind of broke down into a RR vs Parker argument which isn't what it was at first, or maybe I misunderstood the OP. I thought this was going to be a discussion about if RR was placed on the Spurs, and they ran all the same plays and passed the ball the same way, could RR thrive? I think he could. Although I do believe RR would statistically preform better in a system tailored to his own style of play.

So while yes based on all these great statistics you guys have provided, which have been very interesting to read, the two point guards do play differently. We always say RR is one of the most unique point guards in the NBA, so I don't think its a knock on him that he preforms better in an offense like we ran with the big 3 compared to what the Spurs run.

[celtsfan44]

Rondo would not be a good fit in the present day Spurs system.  Heck even the Spurs seem better at times this season with Mills than Parker.  When Parker went out vs OKC, SA was fine and when Parker missed games, SA played better then some might expect.   As others have stated, spacing/shooting is extremely important in the Spurs system and Rondo has different strengths as a PG.   Parker isn't a great outside shooting threat but he is good enough that teams really do respect his outside shot much more then Rondo's outside shot.

Even if he knew SA's plays well, Rondo would be playing behind Mills on the 2014 Spurs.   Younger Rondo who played tougher defense would be good enough for Popovich to try to change his system to take advantage of Rondo's defensive capabilities.  Historically Rondo has been better on defense then Parker and Parker better on offense then Rondo.

[Kevin OConnor]

"I think the more we can get movement prior to action, the better for us, whether it's ball or player movement," said coach Stevens. "If you get both, it's really good."

http://sbn.to/1fJWMKc