Rubio > Rondo, right?

[PosImpos]

There's probably people on this blog who still believe Devin Harris and Mo Williams are better than Rondo.  Heck, I bet people still pine for Sebass.

Whatever!   

I don't know about that, but I know one thing for sure -- people love straw man arguments on this blog, especially those who defend Rondo against any and all criticism.

What straw man arguments?

"People on this blog probably think [insert list of obviously inferior score-first point guards here] are better than Rondo!"

According to you the fact that Rubio gets alot of assists late in game means he's a clutch performer, when Rondo does it, it means that he's "disappearing."

I never said any such thing.

What you did say was, "at a time in the game when Rondo tends to disappear and defer, Rubio steps up."

I apologize for paraphrasing.

what you wrote wasnt paraphrasing, it was altering the meaning of what i wrote, adding a correlation that i never asserted

I'm sorry for the confusion, but you did say that Rondo "tends to disappear and defer."  I also took you to mean that the fact that Rubio has been dishing out a lot of 4th quarter assists is what has led you to the conclusion that he "steps up."

The stats show that Rondo has been one of the best in the league at assisting his teammates for baskets late in close games.  Yet, according to you he "disappears" and Rubio steps up.  I don't get it.

You read what I wrote and assumed that I was making a correlation that was not actually implied by what I wrote.

As I already acknowledged in response to BBallTim's post, I was not aware about the stat that Rondo lead the league in assists per 48 in the 4th quarter last season.  My original post therefore had nothing to do with that.  I was merely citing an observation made by somebody else about Rubio's assist numbers in the fourth quarter.  Combined with anecdotal evidence I have read about the fact that Rubio plays almost all of every fourth quarter so far this season, and that he has stepped up and taken -- and made -- big shots for the T-Wolves in crunch time, I made the assertion that Rubio does not shy from the spotlight.

In contrast to that, while Rondo does get assists in crunchtime  -- which is admittedly valuable -- I do not think there's much to argue about with respect to the fact that Rondo does avoid taking shots late in games, even when he's been successful scoring earlier on.  Late in games, Rondo slows down the pace, doesn't attack the rim or take shots unless he's forced to at the end of the shot clock, and frequently defers to Paul Pierce to run the offense or try to score in isolation. 

Late in games, even recently, there have been some truly cringe-worthy moments when Rondo and KG have played hot-potato with the basketball as Ray and Pierce stand still on the other side of the court, covered tight by their defenders.

Despite his free throw woes, there's no excuse for Rondo, as our best player, to take a back seat late in a close game, especially when he has 15-20 points already and his teammates are struggling to hit shots.  He is absolutely capable of putting pressure on a defense; at the very least he should be able to put the other team in the penalty by driving.  When our team is struggling to score, we need him to step up to the plate and do that. 

There are times when a pass-first mentality is a bad thing, and amounts to a lack of killer instinct.  Ball movement is great, but to win close games against tough opponents, you need a guy who thinks he's the best and has confidence in his ability to score against anyone. 

That's just another reason I'm uneasy with the idea of committing to Rondo as "the guy" long term.  Maybe his play-style / mentality will change once Pierce is gone, but I'm not so sure.

[Celtics18]

There's probably people on this blog who still believe Devin Harris and Mo Williams are better than Rondo.  Heck, I bet people still pine for Sebass.

Whatever!   

I don't know about that, but I know one thing for sure -- people love straw man arguments on this blog, especially those who defend Rondo against any and all criticism.

What straw man arguments?

"People on this blog probably think [insert list of obviously inferior score-first point guards here] are better than Rondo!"

According to you the fact that Rubio gets alot of assists late in game means he's a clutch performer, when Rondo does it, it means that he's "disappearing."

I never said any such thing.

What you did say was, "at a time in the game when Rondo tends to disappear and defer, Rubio steps up."

I apologize for paraphrasing.

what you wrote wasnt paraphrasing, it was altering the meaning of what i wrote, adding a correlation that i never asserted

I'm sorry for the confusion, but you did say that Rondo "tends to disappear and defer."  I also took you to mean that the fact that Rubio has been dishing out a lot of 4th quarter assists is what has led you to the conclusion that he "steps up."

The stats show that Rondo has been one of the best in the league at assisting his teammates for baskets late in close games.  Yet, according to you he "disappears" and Rubio steps up.  I don't get it.

You read what I wrote and assumed that I was making a correlation that was not actually implied by what I wrote.

As I already acknowledged in response to BBallTim's post, I was not aware about the stat that Rondo lead the league in assists per 48 in the 4th quarter last season.  My original post therefore had nothing to do with that.  I was merely citing an observation made by somebody else about Rubio's assist numbers in the fourth quarter.  Combined with anecdotal evidence I have read about the fact that Rubio plays almost all of every fourth quarter so far this season, and that he has stepped up and taken -- and made -- big shots for the T-Wolves in crunch time, I made the assertion that Rubio does not shy from the spotlight.

In contrast to that, while Rondo does get assists in crunchtime  -- which is admittedly valuable -- I do not think there's much to argue about with respect to the fact that Rondo does avoid taking shots late in games, even when he's been successful scoring earlier on.  Late in games, Rondo slows down the pace, doesn't attack the rim or take shots unless he's forced to at the end of the shot clock, and frequently defers to Paul Pierce to run the offense or try to score in isolation. 

Late in games, even recently, there have been some truly cringe-worthy moments when Rondo and KG have played hot-potato with the basketball as Ray and Pierce stand still on the other side of the court, covered tight by their defenders.

Despite his free throw woes, there's no excuse for Rondo, as our best player, to take a back seat late in a close game, especially when he has 15-20 points already and his teammates are struggling to hit shots.  He is absolutely capable of putting pressure on a defense; at the very least he should be able to put the other team in the penalty by driving.  When our team is struggling to score, we need him to step up to the plate and do that. 

There are times when a pass-first mentality is a bad thing, and amounts to a lack of killer instinct.  Ball movement is great, but to win close games against tough opponents, you need a guy who thinks he's the best and has confidence in his ability to score against anyone. 

That's just another reason I'm uneasy with the idea of committing to Rondo as "the guy" long term.  Maybe his play-style / mentality will change once Pierce is gone, but I'm not so sure.

I guess you don't like offensive and defensive rebounds, deflections, steals and other hustle plays that help teams win either. 

No.  Rondo doesn't shoot a lot down the stretch.  In my opinion, it wouldn't make sense for him to when he has 3 players around him who have scored over 60,000 career points combined to get the ball to. 

If deferring means setting Ray Allen, Paul Pierce, and Kevin Garnett up for big shots, then I'll accept Rajon Rondo deferring on this team.  It doesn't mean he disappears.  He does many things to help his team both throughout the game and down the stretch.  There's much more to helping a team win than taking alot of shots.

 

[BballTim]

As I already acknowledged in response to BBallTim's post, I was not aware about the stat that Rondo lead the league in assists per 48 in the 4th quarter last season.  My original post therefore had nothing to do with that.

  Is this meant to be facetious? Obviously the fact that you had to backtrack from your point doesn't mean you didn't try to make it in the first place. Imagine if I said "Rondo has an assist/bad pass ratio of 4.8/1. Clearly he's a better passer than CP3" and then, after having someone point out that CP3 has a better ratio than Rondo, I claimed that those (only) two statements in my post were completely unrelated to each other. Think people would buy that?

[tyrone biggums]

So in six months we go from

-Rondo is a top PG in the league and hes perfect for this team

to

-Trade Rondo for CP3, even if hes only a Celtic for a year

to

-Rubio > Rondo...This is Ricky Rubio who to date has only played about a dozen games in the NBA. The same point guard who looked terrible in Spain last year. Look I understand the rebuilding aspects and how much people want to just blow it up, but keep it within reason. Rondo and Rubio do not belong in the same sentence, call me in 3 years if Rubio keeps up this production.

[Daddyfatsax]

I'm a Wolves fan and even I know this thread is stupid. Lock it up. Clearly Rondo is better at this point. Revisit this when Rubio is an established player. Give him at least a full year to even TRY to compare the two.

[PosImpos]

As I already acknowledged in response to BBallTim's post, I was not aware about the stat that Rondo lead the league in assists per 48 in the 4th quarter last season.  My original post therefore had nothing to do with that.

  Is this meant to be facetious? Obviously the fact that you had to backtrack from your point doesn't mean you didn't try to make it in the first place. Imagine if I said "Rondo has an assist/bad pass ratio of 4.8/1. Clearly he's a better passer than CP3" and then, after having someone point out that CP3 has a better ratio than Rondo, I claimed that those (only) two statements in my post were completely unrelated to each other. Think people would buy that?

Except I never claimed that Rondo didn't make passes in crunch time, just that Rubio has already shown a penchant to step up in crunch time that Rondo has not consistently shown.  Part of my support for that was the observation that Rubio leads the league in assists in the 4th quarter this season.  Yet, that was not the entirety of my support for that point.

I can understand why you might assume that I was implying that part of Rondo's not stepping up in crunch time involves him not similarly getting assists.  However, I wasn't doing any such thing, and that assertion does not follow necessarily from anything that I wrote.

I guess you don't like offensive and defensive rebounds, deflections, steals and other hustle plays that help teams win either.  


 

There's one of those good 'ol straw man arguments.

[Celtics18]

As I already acknowledged in response to BBallTim's post, I was not aware about the stat that Rondo lead the league in assists per 48 in the 4th quarter last season.  My original post therefore had nothing to do with that.

  Is this meant to be facetious? Obviously the fact that you had to backtrack from your point doesn't mean you didn't try to make it in the first place. Imagine if I said "Rondo has an assist/bad pass ratio of 4.8/1. Clearly he's a better passer than CP3" and then, after having someone point out that CP3 has a better ratio than Rondo, I claimed that those (only) two statements in my post were completely unrelated to each other. Think people would buy that?

Except I never claimed that Rondo didn't make passes in crunch time, just that Rubio has already shown a penchant to step up in crunch time that Rondo has not consistently shown.  Part of my support for that was the observation that Rubio leads the league in assists in the 4th quarter this season.  Yet, that was not the entirety of my support for that point.

I can understand why you might assume that I was implying that part of Rondo's not stepping up in crunch time involves him not similarly getting assists.  However, I wasn't doing any such thing, and that assertion does not follow necessarily from anything that I wrote.

I guess you don't like offensive and defensive rebounds, deflections, steals and other hustle plays that help teams win either.  


 

There's one of those good 'ol straw man arguments.

When you write that Rondo "disappears" in crunch time, which is the phrase that you used, for me to point out some of the other things he does to help the team down stretch is most certainly no straw man.  It couldn't be more relevant to the discussion of whether or not Rondo disappears down the stretch of close games. 

[jdz101]

Get back to me when Rubio gets his first triple double...which will never happen.

[PosImpos]

When you write that Rondo "disappears" in crunch time, which is the phrase that you used, for me to point out some of the other things he does to help the team down stretch is most certainly no straw man.  It couldn't be more relevant to the discussion of whether or not Rondo disappears down the stretch of close games. 

Clearly when I said he disappears in late games, I was saying that I don't appreciate hustle plays or defense.  That's obviously a fair extrapolation.



Or maybe my point was that he's supposedly our best player, so we should expect him to take charge late in a close game -- which includes continuing to be aggressive and do all of the things which have allowed the team to be successful up until that point.

Rather than, for example, slowing the pace to a crawl, not taking a shot unless he's forced to, not attacking the rim, handing the ball off to teammates even though he's run the offense all game, and so on.

Essentially my point is that Rondo is capable of being great and playing better than anybody else on the team for 3 quarters a certain way, why can't he keep doing that in the 4th?  It's incredibly frustrating to see him change his playstyle for the worse when we need him more than any other time to be assertive. 

That "defer to the Big 3 in crunch time" attitude made sense a few years ago, but now this is Rondo's show, and if it's going to continue to be his show we need him to act like it anytime he's on the floor.

[BballTim]

When you write that Rondo "disappears" in crunch time, which is the phrase that you used, for me to point out some of the other things he does to help the team down stretch is most certainly no straw man.  It couldn't be more relevant to the discussion of whether or not Rondo disappears down the stretch of close games. 

Clearly when I said he disappears in late games, I was saying that I don't appreciate hustle plays or defense.  That's obviously a fair extrapolation.

  What is a fair extrapolation? For starters, you obviously don't consider making big plays on defense or getting key rebounds or making key passes (for Rondo, at least) to be "stepping up". So I guess you appreciate them in the "they're nice plays to see but they don't make much difference in the outcome of the game, unlike scoring" kind of way. Or maybe I'm wrong, and it's more of a "I consider plays like that to be stepping up for players other than Rondo, much like passing".

[Celtics18]

When you write that Rondo "disappears" in crunch time, which is the phrase that you used, for me to point out some of the other things he does to help the team down stretch is most certainly no straw man.  It couldn't be more relevant to the discussion of whether or not Rondo disappears down the stretch of close games. 

Clearly when I said he disappears in late games, I was saying that I don't appreciate hustle plays or defense.  That's obviously a fair extrapolation.



Or maybe my point was that he's supposedly our best player, so we should expect him to take charge late in a close game -- which includes continuing to be aggressive and do all of the things which have allowed the team to be successful up until that point.

Rather than, for example, slowing the pace to a crawl, not taking a shot unless he's forced to, not attacking the rim, handing the ball off to teammates even though he's run the offense all game, and so on.

Essentially my point is that Rondo is capable of being great and playing better than anybody else on the team for 3 quarters a certain way, why can't he keep doing that in the 4th?  It's incredibly frustrating to see him change his playstyle for the worse when we need him more than any other time to be assertive. 

That "defer to the Big 3 in crunch time" attitude made sense a few years ago, but now this is Rondo's show, and if it's going to continue to be his show we need him to act like it anytime he's on the floor.

I disagree.  I think it makes sense to look to get good shots for Ray Allen, Paul Pierce, and Kevin Garnett late in games, even now that Rondo has become the best player on the team.  

Rondo has shown that he is capable of scoring, but his strength offensively is as a set up man.  I don't see a need for that to change.  Even after the big three are gone, I expect Rondo to pass more than he shoots when the game is on the line, and I'm happy with that arrangement.  

You may always see that as disappearing.  I see that as playing good basketball and using a guy with the transcendent passing of Rajon Rondo to the best of his abilities.  

[StartOrien]

When you write that Rondo "disappears" in crunch time, which is the phrase that you used, for me to point out some of the other things he does to help the team down stretch is most certainly no straw man.  It couldn't be more relevant to the discussion of whether or not Rondo disappears down the stretch of close games. 

Clearly when I said he disappears in late games, I was saying that I don't appreciate hustle plays or defense.  That's obviously a fair extrapolation.

  What is a fair extrapolation? For starters, you obviously don't consider making big plays on defense or getting key rebounds or making key passes (for Rondo, at least) to be "stepping up". So I guess you appreciate them in the "they're nice plays to see but they don't make much difference in the outcome of the game, unlike scoring" kind of way. Or maybe I'm wrong, and it's more of a "I consider plays like that to be stepping up for players other than Rondo, much like passing".

Rubio's defensive instincts aren't anything to balk at either, he's got great hands and I actually think he is defensive IQ is stronger than Rondo's (I've always hated how Rondo defends the pick and roll).

I understand Rondo's a better defender, and when Rondo really puts his mind to that end he's incredible. But Rubio's not a complete slouch defensively either.

[kozlodoev]

Get back to me when Rubio gets his first triple double...which will never happen.

Given that he's had a 7 and an 8-rebound game already this season, this is just a matter of time.

[StartOrien]

I've said this before on this thread but it seems worth reiterating:

Again, I think the comparison isn't a negative statement about Rondo. It's a comparison to a young point guard who has shown some incredible skills in his first year, including a basketball IQ I think is comparable to Jason Kidd.

Ricky Rubio probably isn't in that top class of PG yet, but personally, I'd be shocked if he wasn't there in two years of time.

[BballTim]

As I already acknowledged in response to BBallTim's post, I was not aware about the stat that Rondo lead the league in assists per 48 in the 4th quarter last season.  My original post therefore had nothing to do with that.

  Is this meant to be facetious? Obviously the fact that you had to backtrack from your point doesn't mean you didn't try to make it in the first place. Imagine if I said "Rondo has an assist/bad pass ratio of 4.8/1. Clearly he's a better passer than CP3" and then, after having someone point out that CP3 has a better ratio than Rondo, I claimed that those (only) two statements in my post were completely unrelated to each other. Think people would buy that?

Except I never claimed that Rondo didn't make passes in crunch time, just that Rubio has already shown a penchant to step up in crunch time that Rondo has not consistently shown.  Part of my support for that was the observation that Rubio leads the league in assists in the 4th quarter this season.  Yet, that was not the entirety of my support for that point.

  Yes, you never said Rondo doesn't make passes in crunch time. I could claim that it was a fairly obvious implication from your post, but the more relevant point is that you (probably) watch most if not all of the Celts games and had no idea that this might be the case. You see Rondo not score and come to the conclusion that he isn't making big plays that contribute to our success.

I can understand why you might assume that I was implying that part of Rondo's not stepping up in crunch time involves him not similarly getting assists.  However, I wasn't doing any such thing, and that assertion does not follow necessarily from anything that I wrote.

  Too funny. You contradict this in your previous statement.

  "Rubio has already shown a penchant to step up in crunch time that Rondo has not consistently shown.  Part of my support for that was the observation that Rubio leads the league in assists in the 4th quarter this season"

  "you might assume that I was implying that part of Rondo's not stepping up in crunch time involves him not similarly getting assists.  However, I wasn't doing any such thing"

  You're trying to tap dance on the head of a pin. It's one thing to change your argument because your original claim wasn't valid. It's another thing to claim that, in light of information that you were unaware of when you made your post, you're retroactively changing the meaning of what you said.