Rondo is a poor mans Dennis Rodman

[FatjohnReturns]

Obviously they play different positions, but they are essentially the same type of player i.e. excellent defender and excellent rebounder (Rodman) or passer (Rondo).  Both are efficient when they shoot (which is rarely), but generally awful offensively as a whole.  Neither can shoot foul shots.  Both have attitude issues, but both work incredibly hard at their craft.

Rodman ended up in the HOF but no one would have ever came close to calling him a franchise player.  Rondo has a ton of value, but he isn't a franchise player (and never will be) because of the glaring weakness in his game, just like Rodman.  

I dont buy that Rondo works hard at his craft because

I don't see why he can't develop a jumper over time. Anyone can become a decent shooter with enough dedication and practice, Jason Kidd did it.

and this is absolutely wrong

I'm not getting the comparison - Rondo CAN score (not shoot, but score); Rodman couldn't.  Many scorers in the league aren't pure shooters.  Rodman was one of the top 5 role players of all time.  Rondo has arguably been MVP of his team for the last 3 years imo (and he's still very young)

For his career - Rondo has averaged 10 ppg, with a career high of 14 ppg in 09-10

His playoff averages are even better at 14 ppg...

Rodman's career ppg is 7.3 (and I bet a ton of those points are offensive rebounds) - career high 11.6 ppg his second year and his playoff scoring average actually goes down to 6.4 ppg

different class of scorers - Rondo can score but also sets up the offense - Rodman couldn't score period

KG has been the MVP not Rondo.
The comparison is good except Rodman is Rondos ceiling lol.

[cdif911]

take KG out of the picture, the team still performs admirably....take Rondo out and they spiral out of control

[GreenEnvy]

take KG out of the picture, the team still performs admirably....take Rondo out and they spiral out of control

I'm not positive I agree with that.

Maybe in the regular season that would hold true. But in the playoffs, KG would make us more elite than Rondo, if only because of the backups.

I can fathom DWest holding his own for 35 minutes a game against any PG. BBD for 35 minutes against any PF? Over an entire series? O Boy.

One is our defensive anchor, and the other our offensive crutch. KG turns our good defensive team into arguably the best. We rely on Rondo to get things going both in the fast break and in the half court.

[BballTim]

Obviously they play different positions, but they are essentially the same type of player i.e. excellent defender and excellent rebounder (Rodman) or passer (Rondo).  Both are efficient when they shoot (which is rarely), but generally awful offensively as a whole.  Neither can shoot foul shots.  Both have attitude issues, but both work incredibly hard at their craft.

Rodman ended up in the HOF but no one would have ever came close to calling him a franchise player.  Rondo has a ton of value, but he isn't a franchise player (and never will be) because of the glaring weakness in his game, just like Rodman. 

  I can't believe you ever saw Rodman play of you're trying to compare them offensively. His sole contribution to the offense was offensive rebounding. Think a slightly (very slightly) better offensive version of Ben Wallace.

I saw Rodman's entire career and early on he did shoot and score much more, because he wanted to.  He never really cared about offense and later on just chose not the focus on it.  I mean Rodman is a career 52.1% shooter and in his most prolific seasons he was well above his career percentage.  It isn't like he was efficient, he just never shot the ball.  Pretty much like Rondo.

  If you saw Rodman's entire career then it boggles the mind that you'd consider this to be a reasonable comparison. Most of his shots were either wide open or putbacks, and he *still* only hit 52% of them. During Rondo's playoff career 125 players averaged at least 25 minutes a game. Rondo's 60rh in scoring among that group. During Rodman's playoff career 206 players averaged at least 25 minutes a game. Rodman was 205th in scoring in that list. People who think this is a good comparison need to figure out the difference between average and historically bad.

[BballTim]

Obviously they play different positions, but they are essentially the same type of player i.e. excellent defender and excellent rebounder (Rodman) or passer (Rondo).  Both are efficient when they shoot (which is rarely), but generally awful offensively as a whole.  Neither can shoot foul shots.  Both have attitude issues, but both work incredibly hard at their craft.

Rodman ended up in the HOF but no one would have ever came close to calling him a franchise player.  Rondo has a ton of value, but he isn't a franchise player (and never will be) because of the glaring weakness in his game, just like Rodman.  

I dont buy that Rondo works hard at his craft because

I don't see why he can't develop a jumper over time. Anyone can become a decent shooter with enough dedication and practice, Jason Kidd did it.

  Jason Kidd became an average to above average three point shooter in his *30s*.

and this is absolutely wrong

I'm not getting the comparison - Rondo CAN score (not shoot, but score); Rodman couldn't.  Many scorers in the league aren't pure shooters.  Rodman was one of the top 5 role players of all time.  Rondo has arguably been MVP of his team for the last 3 years imo (and he's still very young)

For his career - Rondo has averaged 10 ppg, with a career high of 14 ppg in 09-10

His playoff averages are even better at 14 ppg...

Rodman's career ppg is 7.3 (and I bet a ton of those points are offensive rebounds) - career high 11.6 ppg his second year and his playoff scoring average actually goes down to 6.4 ppg

different class of scorers - Rondo can score but also sets up the offense - Rodman couldn't score period

KG has been the MVP not Rondo.
The comparison is good except Rodman is Rondos ceiling lol.

  Opinions vary. Rondo's had the highest PER of the big four over the last 3 years. KG's averages over that time are 15 points, 8 rebounds and 3 assists. Rondo's are 16 points, 7 rebounds and 10 assists.

[BballTim]

take KG out of the picture, the team still performs admirably....take Rondo out and they spiral out of control

I'm not positive I agree with that.

Maybe in the regular season that would hold true. But in the playoffs, KG would make us more elite than Rondo, if only because of the backups.

I can fathom DWest holding his own for 35 minutes a game against any PG. BBD for 35 minutes against any PF? Over an entire series? O Boy.

One is our defensive anchor, and the other our offensive crutch. KG turns our good defensive team into arguably the best. We rely on Rondo to get things going both in the fast break and in the half court.

  KG averaged 38 minutes a game vs the Heat, Rondo averaged 35. We were a +18 with Rondo on the court and a -40 with him off. We were a -8 with KG playing and -14 with him out. To be fair to KG, he was a net plus until the run at the end of game 5. This is a small sample, and varies due to lineups, and isn't really indicative of their relative importance, but it's something to think about.

[TitleMaster]

Rodman's role, in terms of setting up the offense, was nowhere near as critical as Rondo's.

Rodman simply maned the boards, played dirty defense on other 3s & 4s, and fed the offensive boards to either Kukoc, Jordan, or Pippen. And the Bull's three scorers pretty much did the rest.

I guess in a way, this division of roles was probably one of Phil Jackson's greatest achievements in getting the late 90s Bulls, into a perpetual winning machine, since the lack of scoring in the 4 spot didn't effect the overall results.

The difference, however, was that the Bull's three scorers were young, healthy, and in their respective primes. The Celts, on the other hand, needed Rondo to be both a playmaker and a scorer because he's the youngest of the *star* players & as we know, our big three has had far more scoring slumps than the Bull's 3 scorers. And even with all the WWF wrestling nonsense, Rodman still shutdown Malone pretty well during the finals.

[Moranis]

Obviously they play different positions, but they are essentially the same type of player i.e. excellent defender and excellent rebounder (Rodman) or passer (Rondo).  Both are efficient when they shoot (which is rarely), but generally awful offensively as a whole.  Neither can shoot foul shots.  Both have attitude issues, but both work incredibly hard at their craft.

Rodman ended up in the HOF but no one would have ever came close to calling him a franchise player.  Rondo has a ton of value, but he isn't a franchise player (and never will be) because of the glaring weakness in his game, just like Rodman.  

I dont buy that Rondo works hard at his craft because

I don't see why he can't develop a jumper over time. Anyone can become a decent shooter with enough dedication and practice, Jason Kidd did it.

  Jason Kidd became an average to above average three point shooter in his *30s*.

Kidd's 4th highest 3PT% was his 3rd season when he was 23 years old. 

[scaryjerry]

hmmm no
Dennis Rodman is a HOF and an integral part to many title teams..so its not like this is a diss either way...but still...no... more like polar opposites

[Moranis]

Rodman's role, in terms of setting up the offense, was nowhere near as critical as Rondo's.

One is a PG, one is a PF.  They by definition have different roles, which I clearly stated. 

Rodman simply maned the boards, played dirty defense on other 3s & 4s, and fed the offensive boards to either Kukoc, Jordan, or Pippen. And the Bull's three scorers pretty much did the rest.

Now just change mane the boards to pass the rock, and 3s and 4s to 1s and 2s. 

[Capricious]

I'm so sick of hearing that Rondo can't shoot.

- He shot a higher % on long twos than rose, westbrook, wade.. despite the fact that he rarely takes them in rhythm
- His low 3pt % is probably a product of the same thing + 2sec on the shotclock shots

His problem is failing to pull the trigger when hes open, but thats also the product of playing with 3 hall of famers. People want rondo to shoot, but if he shot every time he was open we'd hear complaining from paul/ray.

His low FT % is a serious problem, however.

[BballTim]

Obviously they play different positions, but they are essentially the same type of player i.e. excellent defender and excellent rebounder (Rodman) or passer (Rondo).  Both are efficient when they shoot (which is rarely), but generally awful offensively as a whole.  Neither can shoot foul shots.  Both have attitude issues, but both work incredibly hard at their craft.

Rodman ended up in the HOF but no one would have ever came close to calling him a franchise player.  Rondo has a ton of value, but he isn't a franchise player (and never will be) because of the glaring weakness in his game, just like Rodman.  

I dont buy that Rondo works hard at his craft because

I don't see why he can't develop a jumper over time. Anyone can become a decent shooter with enough dedication and practice, Jason Kidd did it.

  Jason Kidd became an average to above average three point shooter in his *30s*.

Kidd's 4th highest 3PT% was his 3rd season when he was 23 years old. 

  So what? Do you think that's when he became an above average three point shooter, or do you think that the fact that he didn't put up numbers that high again until he was *34* might come into play here?

[BballTim]

Rodman's role, in terms of setting up the offense, was nowhere near as critical as Rondo's.

One is a PG, one is a PF.  They by definition have different roles, which I clearly stated. 

Rodman simply maned the boards, played dirty defense on other 3s & 4s, and fed the offensive boards to either Kukoc, Jordan, or Pippen. And the Bull's three scorers pretty much did the rest.

Now just change mane the boards to pass the rock, and 3s and 4s to 1s and 2s. 

  Oh, and change "was one of the worst scorers in playoff history" to "was one of his team's leading scorers in the playoffs".

[Marcus13]

A very poor mans version I guess.

Dennis Rodman is a Hall of Famer

[nickagneta]

Let's get some facts straight.

- Rodman barely ever shot and most of his shots were put backs on offensive rebounds. Rondo shoots 10 times a game on a team with three Hall of Famers who he sets up to shoot 15 times a game. He doesn't bare ever shoot.

- Rodman was a basket case and was getting thrown out of games and T'ed up constantly. His attitude and persona was a detriment to his team. Rondo is a warrior who's stubborn attitude and desire to win is an asset to his team. Trying to compare Rondo's attitude to Rodman's is like trying to compare a gourmet dinner to beef jerky. Rondo does not have an attitude problem.

- Rodman was a God awful offensive player other than offensive rebounding. Rondo runs the offense, one of the most efficient offenses in the league, and is one of the best finishers around the basket in the league and there might not be a better open court, fast break PG in the league. He is not awful offensively he just isn't the best outside shooter.

- Rodman worked hard at getting his name in the paper and being a distraction to his team. He was a great pure rebounder, defender and athletic freak who worked at keeping in shape. He NEVER worked on his game. Rondo has worked on his game spending one season restructuring his shot with Mark Price and is said to constantly be on a court in the off season working on his game.


The misrepresentations of Rondo is this thread are shocking given what he has done for this team in the short time he has been here.