The blame of Rondo is getting ridiculous..

[CelticsFanNC]

  Basketball is a TEAM SPORT.  Ideally NO ONE should have to carry an entire team to wins.  That is how the Boston Celtic's have always been successful.

  It is not his problem he cannot carry an inferior supporting cast to wins.  There are only a few guys in NBA history who can do so with any regularity.  Rondo isn't one of them.

  If you're expecting Rondo to carry this team to wins night in and night out that's your problem, not Rondo's problem.

[greenpride32]

I just read somewhere above that 'Rondo cannot carry a team'.
I'm not sure what he's done the past three games but I think it probably constitutes carrying a team.

Yep, that's precisely how he'd carry a team -- more likely to losses than to wins.

C's are 6-2 without Rondo, and 9-12 with him.  Defensively we appear to be just as good in either case.  Offensively this team really struggles to score with Rondo (4 on 5 shorthanded offense).  It's hard to be impressed by his scoring numbers when teams are laying off him; pretty much other teams are saying I'll let you beat me with Rondo, and it's working... for them.  Also it's such a double standard on these boards when guys like Monta and Melo score big and lose people say their stats were meaningless; but when Rondo gets a rare big scoring night somehow it shows he's an elite player even if we lost.

[bfrombleacher]

I just read somewhere above that 'Rondo cannot carry a team'.
I'm not sure what he's done the past three games but I think it probably constitutes carrying a team.

Yep, that's precisely how he'd carry a team -- more likely to losses than to wins.

With Paul Pierce, KG and Ray Allen on the team, he shouldn't have to carry us every night, he should be able to rely on Pierce and Ray to be getting their own shots and making them.

Actually, with those three in their mid-thirties, he probably should have to carry us every night, since neither of the three is able to get their own shot with regularity now.

And while we'll be very lucky to get a supporting cast for Rondo that's better than the Big 3 in their thirties, this is very clearly what they are at this stage of their careers -- a supporting cast.

Rondo has, at this point, somehow lost the ability to make anything click in a half-court game, which lends some credence to the argument that our superior offensive half-court execution may have been chiefly due to the (now diminished) ability of a younger big 3.

It's really unfathomable how our best offensive chance is now reduced to praying that Rondo can scramble up the floor before everyone else.

Maybe things will turn around radically if he have Rudy Gay and Dwight Howard instead of Pierce, Allen, and Garnett. But what if we can only get someone like Jason Richardson, Matt Barnes and Chris Humphries?

That's Chris spelled with a K (I know lol).

They're not even playing to the level of a role player these past few games though. This is Rondo carrying the team with KG (who has been fantastic), Wilcox and Jajuan Johnson. Rondo made Wilcox look like a legit starter though.

[kozlodoev]

And while we'll be very lucky to get a supporting cast for Rondo that's better than the Big 3 in their thirties, this is very clearly what they are at this stage of their careers -- a supporting cast.

  If we're not going to have a supporting cast better than what we've seen the last few games when Rondo "carried the team to losses" then complaining about Rondo is a waste of your time. Magic Johnson probably couldn't turn a supporting cast like that into a contending team.

Tony Parker is winning with the calcified remains of Duncan, Jefferson, and Ginobili. Just saying.

Also, you can make the argument that the best 3 players outside of Rose in Chicago, while younger, are not considerably better.

[BballTim]

And while we'll be very lucky to get a supporting cast for Rondo that's better than the Big 3 in their thirties, this is very clearly what they are at this stage of their careers -- a supporting cast.

  If we're not going to have a supporting cast better than what we've seen the last few games when Rondo "carried the team to losses" then complaining about Rondo is a waste of your time. Magic Johnson probably couldn't turn a supporting cast like that into a contending team.

Tony Parker is winning with the calcified remains of Duncan, Jefferson, and Ginobili. Just saying.

Also, you can make the argument that the best 3 players outside of Rose in Chicago, while younger, are not considerably better.

  Do you think you can make an argument that the overall cast that surround Parker and Rose is no better than Rondo's? And did you watch that game last night thinking that PP/KG/RA wer playing as well as Deng/Boozer/Noah? Just asking.

[PosImpos]

Difference between Rondo and CP3:

PORTLAND, Ore. -- "All I care about is that fourth quarter," said Chris Paul, and in Thursday's 74-71 win over the Portland Trail Blazers it appeared he meant it literally. Through three quarters, he was virtually nonexistent -- no points, one assist -- and his Los Angeles Clippers were down by eight after trailing by as much as 18.

"I couldn't get it going," he said.

And then in the fourth, he blew up. Seeing his teammates' heads dragging, he brought the team together for a little pep talk to remind them it was still a winnable game, and then he backed it up by taking over the game. First he got off the schneid with a 10-foot fadeaway jumper in the corner over Wes Matthews, a shot that he said got him going.

Immediately, the floodgates opened. Two free throws. A runner in the lane. A driving layup. An off-the-dribble 3-pointer over Kurt Thomas. Before the Blazers knew what had hit them, the Clippers had completed an 18-6 run to take control of the game, one in which Paul accounted for 16 of the 18 points. For good measure, he hit a pull-up jumper to seal things in the final minute.

Chris Paul came to life in the fourth, just when the Clippers needed him.
"I don't know if he was playing possum or if he found the energy," said Portland's Jamal Crawford, "but he definitely took over the game."

In the fourth quarter, Paul outscored the Blazers 13-11 and added three dimes, accounting for 18 of L.A.'s 22 points in the quarter.

His late burst of brilliance also salvaged what otherwise was one of the uglier NBA games you'll ever see, between a Clipper team on a back-to-back and a Blazer team on a back-to-back-to-back. It didn't seem possible that L.A. would get back into it after falling into an early hole, especially when Paul missed a technical-foul free throw just eight seconds into the third quarter -- one he hoped would get his offense started after a scoreless first half.

With the Blazers pinning Paul to the sidelines on his pick-and-roll plays and a hot Nicolas Batum leading the offensive charge, Portland led 50-32 early in the third quarter despite missing leading scorer LaMarcus Aldridge.

Things turned with a burst of defense from the Clippers -- fueled by Paul picking up the pressure on the ball -- and a rather epic offensive meltdown from Portland.

[PosImpos]

And while we'll be very lucky to get a supporting cast for Rondo that's better than the Big 3 in their thirties, this is very clearly what they are at this stage of their careers -- a supporting cast.

  If we're not going to have a supporting cast better than what we've seen the last few games when Rondo "carried the team to losses" then complaining about Rondo is a waste of your time. Magic Johnson probably couldn't turn a supporting cast like that into a contending team.

Tony Parker is winning with the calcified remains of Duncan, Jefferson, and Ginobili. Just saying.

Also, you can make the argument that the best 3 players outside of Rose in Chicago, while younger, are not considerably better.

  Do you think you can make an argument that the overall cast that surround Parker and Rose is no better than Rondo's? And did you watch that game last night thinking that PP/KG/RA wer playing as well as Deng/Boozer/Noah? Just asking.

The Spurs and Bulls are definitely better from top to bottom than the Celtics.

[BballTim]

Difference between Rondo and CP3:

PORTLAND, Ore. -- "All I care about is that fourth quarter," said Chris Paul, and in Thursday's 74-71 win over the Portland Trail Blazers it appeared he meant it literally. Through three quarters, he was virtually nonexistent -- no points, one assist -- and his Los Angeles Clippers were down by eight after trailing by as much as 18.

"I couldn't get it going," he said.

And then in the fourth, he blew up. Seeing his teammates' heads dragging, he brought the team together for a little pep talk to remind them it was still a winnable game, and then he backed it up by taking over the game. First he got off the schneid with a 10-foot fadeaway jumper in the corner over Wes Matthews, a shot that he said got him going.

  Something similar between Rondo and CP3 in there as well. CP3 virtually disappearing for long stretches in the game, something you've repeatedly assured me Rondo does but other top players don't. Also, I watched a lot of the first half in that game. If Rondo played like CP3 did in that game, the Celts would go into the fourth quarter down by 25 or so, which would have made those heroics meaningless.

[greenpride32]

  Something similar between Rondo and CP3 in there as well. CP3 virtually disappearing for long stretches in the game, something you've repeatedly assured me Rondo does but other top players don't. Also, I watched a lot of the first half in that game. If Rondo played like CP3 did in that game, the Celts would go into the fourth quarter down by 25 or so, which would have made those heroics meaningless.

I'll take the guy who came out and won the ball game in crunch time any day of the week/month/year/decade/century.  That's the difference between a top player and the rest.

[indeedproceed]

I woke up tired and sore.


RONDOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!

[PosImpos]

Difference between Rondo and CP3:

PORTLAND, Ore. -- "All I care about is that fourth quarter," said Chris Paul, and in Thursday's 74-71 win over the Portland Trail Blazers it appeared he meant it literally. Through three quarters, he was virtually nonexistent -- no points, one assist -- and his Los Angeles Clippers were down by eight after trailing by as much as 18.

"I couldn't get it going," he said.

And then in the fourth, he blew up. Seeing his teammates' heads dragging, he brought the team together for a little pep talk to remind them it was still a winnable game, and then he backed it up by taking over the game. First he got off the schneid with a 10-foot fadeaway jumper in the corner over Wes Matthews, a shot that he said got him going.

  Something similar between Rondo and CP3 in there as well. CP3 virtually disappearing for long stretches in the game, something you've repeatedly assured me Rondo does but other top players don't. Also, I watched a lot of the first half in that game. If Rondo played like CP3 did in that game, the Celts would go into the fourth quarter down by 25 or so, which would have made those heroics meaningless.

when was the last time rondo came alive in the fourth and willed the c's to victory?

usually he plays really well for 3 quarters and then disappears.

i'll agree with you, though, that chris paul is not a model of consistency, either -- otherwise his overall numbers would be better.

but he consistently shows up and takes over when his team really needs him to.  he is that go-to guy in crunch time of a close game, even if he doesn't carry the offensive load throughout the entire game.

[kozlodoev]

And while we'll be very lucky to get a supporting cast for Rondo that's better than the Big 3 in their thirties, this is very clearly what they are at this stage of their careers -- a supporting cast.

  If we're not going to have a supporting cast better than what we've seen the last few games when Rondo "carried the team to losses" then complaining about Rondo is a waste of your time. Magic Johnson probably couldn't turn a supporting cast like that into a contending team.

Tony Parker is winning with the calcified remains of Duncan, Jefferson, and Ginobili. Just saying.

Also, you can make the argument that the best 3 players outside of Rose in Chicago, while younger, are not considerably better.

  Do you think you can make an argument that the overall cast that surround Parker and Rose is no better than Rondo's? And did you watch that game last night thinking that PP/KG/RA wer playing as well as Deng/Boozer/Noah? Just asking.

The Spurs and Bulls are definitely better from top to bottom than the Celtics.

Yep, that's a definite maybe.

[cman88]

So because rondo can't will teams to wins means he's not elite? Someone better tell d.will he shouldn't be an allstar because his team is losing...

Or maybe just maybe you need more than one good player..this year the big 3 have dropped off considerably so its rondo having to do everything.

[PosImpos]

And while we'll be very lucky to get a supporting cast for Rondo that's better than the Big 3 in their thirties, this is very clearly what they are at this stage of their careers -- a supporting cast.

  If we're not going to have a supporting cast better than what we've seen the last few games when Rondo "carried the team to losses" then complaining about Rondo is a waste of your time. Magic Johnson probably couldn't turn a supporting cast like that into a contending team.

Tony Parker is winning with the calcified remains of Duncan, Jefferson, and Ginobili. Just saying.

Also, you can make the argument that the best 3 players outside of Rose in Chicago, while younger, are not considerably better.

  Do you think you can make an argument that the overall cast that surround Parker and Rose is no better than Rondo's? And did you watch that game last night thinking that PP/KG/RA wer playing as well as Deng/Boozer/Noah? Just asking.

The Spurs and Bulls are definitely better from top to bottom than the Celtics.

Yep, that's a definite maybe.

No maybe about it.

[BballTim]

Difference between Rondo and CP3:

PORTLAND, Ore. -- "All I care about is that fourth quarter," said Chris Paul, and in Thursday's 74-71 win over the Portland Trail Blazers it appeared he meant it literally. Through three quarters, he was virtually nonexistent -- no points, one assist -- and his Los Angeles Clippers were down by eight after trailing by as much as 18.

"I couldn't get it going," he said.

And then in the fourth, he blew up. Seeing his teammates' heads dragging, he brought the team together for a little pep talk to remind them it was still a winnable game, and then he backed it up by taking over the game. First he got off the schneid with a 10-foot fadeaway jumper in the corner over Wes Matthews, a shot that he said got him going.

  Something similar between Rondo and CP3 in there as well. CP3 virtually disappearing for long stretches in the game, something you've repeatedly assured me Rondo does but other top players don't. Also, I watched a lot of the first half in that game. If Rondo played like CP3 did in that game, the Celts would go into the fourth quarter down by 25 or so, which would have made those heroics meaningless.

when was the last time rondo came alive in the fourth and willed the c's to victory?

usually he plays really well for 3 quarters and then disappears.

i'll agree with you, though, that chris paul is not a model of consistency, either -- otherwise his overall numbers would be better.

but he consistently shows up and takes over when his team really needs him to.  he is that go-to guy in crunch time of a close game, even if he doesn't carry the offensive load throughout the entire game.

   He's taking over games, but with fairly limited success. He's 11th in the league in clutch scoring, but 15th out of the top 16 in fg%. His assist average is way down in clutch time, so Griffin (only other player I checked) scores a lot less and has a lower efg% in clutch time. Oh, and the Clips clutch time scoring is down about *12%* from last year before they had CP3 to "take over".

  Of course, whether the team's scoring better with Paul running thing his scoring puts Rondo in a bad light.