Did Rondo Out Play Teague in Game 3?

[cman88]

if you just look at ppg and shooting percentage, then yes..

but rondo does soo much more for his team than just score. he gave them extra opportunities with his rebounding and easy baskets with his assists

[Yogi]

Rondo had a very good 4th quarter and OT.  He was not playing well until that point.  He deserves credit for getting the team going when they finally raced out to an 11 point lead.  Conversely he also showed zero urgency in the first half when the Celtic's offense was terrible.  And in the last 4 minutes of the 4th quarter where the Celtics didn't score was painful.  Twice the C's couldn't even get shots off to hit the rim largely because Rondo was standing around and showing no urgency as the shot clock wound down.  

And as mentioned earlier if KG doesn't crash the boards there it would be another missed point blank layup.  Rondo seems to miss the shot often on that ball reversal trick, sure the move is great to see but have to make the layup to complete the play.

And defensively yes Rondo had key steals but also played poorly when guarding Teague on key possessions.  Twice in the 4th quarter Teague had the ball with the shot clock winding down.  Instead of just staying in front of Teague and forcing up a contested jumper, Rondo went for the lazy reach around steal and what happened --- Teague drove right by and converted baskets twice as the shot clock expired.  Rondo has got to be smarter knowing that the clock is winding down and just play solid position defense instead of going for the flashy steal.

Rondo converted zero jump shots, missed several layups, had 6 turnovers, led a Celtic's offensive meltdown in the last 4 minutes of regulation and had several key defensive lapses.  However he also ignited the team during the 4th quarter, and was the most aggressive Celtic during overtime on both sides of the ball.

He also had 12 of the C's 18 assists, 4 steals, 17 points and incredibly led the team in rebounding.  His aggression on both ends likely saved the game for the Celtics.

To just look at stats and say 'Rondo had a triple double he was awesome' makes no sense.  To watch the game and put into context his actual performance on both ends shows he was great in some facets, terrible in others but ultimately led the team to victory which is what mattered most tonight...

TP to anyone who understands how meaningless the triple-double actually is. It's the most worthless, overrated stat in basketball. I mean, four more turnovers and Rondo had a quadruple-double.

With that said ... this analysis is spot-on. Rondo's game turned markedly in the fourth quarter. He was better -  not great, but better, as some of the garish misses from point-blank range and the off-target passes indicate - in the final period, and then found the greatness that he can deliver when he's playing intelligently in overtime.

NO question Rondo had a significant impact on the win. Equally no question that he could have had a more significant impact in the first three quarters if he'd attack off the dribble, keep the basketball moving and play with some modicum of defensive effort instead of that lazy reach-around nonsense that rarely works..

Numbers and facts aside you sound pretty good.  Celtics 19-1 when Rondo triple doubles.  Meaningless?  That lazy reach around nonsense made Rondo a minimum top 3 steals guy for the last three years, and multiple All-NBA defense teams.  Rondo always plays spectacular defense.  He gambles well.  He gets a ton of steals and opponents rarely score on him.  Bill Russel didn't contest every shot and lost guys occasionally too.  No body does.

[chambers]

Rondo had a very good 4th quarter and OT.  He was not playing well until that point.  He deserves credit for getting the team going when they finally raced out to an 11 point lead.  Conversely he also showed zero urgency in the first half when the Celtic's offense was terrible.  And in the last 4 minutes of the 4th quarter where the Celtics didn't score was painful.  Twice the C's couldn't even get shots off to hit the rim largely because Rondo was standing around and showing no urgency as the shot clock wound down. 

And as mentioned earlier if KG doesn't crash the boards there it would be another missed point blank layup.  Rondo seems to miss the shot often on that ball reversal trick, sure the move is great to see but have to make the layup to complete the play.

And defensively yes Rondo had key steals but also played poorly when guarding Teague on key possessions.  Twice in the 4th quarter Teague had the ball with the shot clock winding down.  Instead of just staying in front of Teague and forcing up a contested jumper, Rondo went for the lazy reach around steal and what happened --- Teague drove right by and converted baskets twice as the shot clock expired.  Rondo has got to be smarter knowing that the clock is winding down and just play solid position defense instead of going for the flashy steal.

Rondo converted zero jump shots, missed several layups, had 6 turnovers, led a Celtic's offensive meltdown in the last 4 minutes of regulation and had several key defensive lapses.  However he also ignited the team during the 4th quarter, and was the most aggressive Celtic during overtime on both sides of the ball.

He also had 12 of the C's 18 assists, 4 steals, 17 points and incredibly led the team in rebounding.  His aggression on both ends likely saved the game for the Celtics.

To just look at stats and say 'Rondo had a triple double he was awesome' makes no sense.  To watch the game and put into context his actual performance on both ends shows he was great in some facets, terrible in others but ultimately led the team to victory which is what mattered most tonight...

TP to anyone who understands how meaningless the triple-double actually is. It's the most worthless, overrated stat in basketball. I mean, four more turnovers and Rondo had a quadruple-double.

With that said ... this analysis is spot-on. Rondo's game turned markedly in the fourth quarter. He was better -  not great, but better, as some of the garish misses from point-blank range and the off-target passes indicate - in the final period, and then found the greatness that he can deliver when he's playing intelligently in overtime.

NO question Rondo had a significant impact on the win. Equally no question that he could have had a more significant impact in the first three quarters if he'd attack off the dribble, keep the basketball moving and play with some modicum of defensive effort instead of that lazy reach-around nonsense that rarely works..

Okay I can't help myself. You continually harp about triple doubles being worthless, overrated blah blah but you never explain why.
Makes me laugh every time.
Can you sit back and examine what the stat involves in Rondos case, from the perspective that he plays point guard and is 6 foot 1?
At least 10 points scoring. At least 20 points of helping team mates score. At least 10 rebounds, blocks or steals.
He also had 4 steals.
We had 90 total points and at least 41 of those points came from Rondo being directly involved in the play.
Yes, he had 6 turnovers, but factor in his 14 rebounds, 11 of which were defensive rebounds, meaning opponents don't get a second shot opportunity.

Think about his kick out pass to Pierce for the momentum swinging 3 ball, or his drive and scoop pass to KG for the wide open jump shot.

It was definitely not his best game, in fact he had parts where he played below average, but he won us the game with his overall performance.

In fact he's had 20 career triple doubles, with 7 of them being in the playoffs. Guess how many of those games we've won? 19.
To say it's a worthless, useless stat is so ignorant and it sounds like something a 60's high school basketball coach would tell his 16 year old players because he perceives it as selfish stat chasing instead of understanding how positively it effects your team.

The guy is a 6 foot 1 point guard with 14 rebounds and 12 assists and people are still riding him for a supposed 'terrible three quarters'. Guess what, without him we probably lose to the Hawks and are down 2-1.

[BballTim]

Rondo had a very good 4th quarter and OT.  He was not playing well until that point.  He deserves credit for getting the team going when they finally raced out to an 11 point lead.  Conversely he also showed zero urgency in the first half when the Celtic's offense was terrible.  And in the last 4 minutes of the 4th quarter where the Celtics didn't score was painful.  Twice the C's couldn't even get shots off to hit the rim largely because Rondo was standing around and showing no urgency as the shot clock wound down.  

And as mentioned earlier if KG doesn't crash the boards there it would be another missed point blank layup.  Rondo seems to miss the shot often on that ball reversal trick, sure the move is great to see but have to make the layup to complete the play.

And defensively yes Rondo had key steals but also played poorly when guarding Teague on key possessions.  Twice in the 4th quarter Teague had the ball with the shot clock winding down.  Instead of just staying in front of Teague and forcing up a contested jumper, Rondo went for the lazy reach around steal and what happened --- Teague drove right by and converted baskets twice as the shot clock expired.  Rondo has got to be smarter knowing that the clock is winding down and just play solid position defense instead of going for the flashy steal.

Rondo converted zero jump shots, missed several layups, had 6 turnovers, led a Celtic's offensive meltdown in the last 4 minutes of regulation and had several key defensive lapses.  However he also ignited the team during the 4th quarter, and was the most aggressive Celtic during overtime on both sides of the ball.

He also had 12 of the C's 18 assists, 4 steals, 17 points and incredibly led the team in rebounding.  His aggression on both ends likely saved the game for the Celtics.

To just look at stats and say 'Rondo had a triple double he was awesome' makes no sense.  To watch the game and put into context his actual performance on both ends shows he was great in some facets, terrible in others but ultimately led the team to victory which is what mattered most tonight...

TP to anyone who understands how meaningless the triple-double actually is. It's the most worthless, overrated stat in basketball. I mean, four more turnovers and Rondo had a quadruple-double.

  TP to anyone who understands that getting a lot of assists or rebounds helps your team win games, and doing both is more valuable than doing just one and not the other. Double TPs for people who understand that the fact that people keep track of such games and came up with a catchy name for them doesn't invalidate the contributions of the player who makes all of those plays.

[Roy H.]

Rondo had a very good 4th quarter and OT.  He was not playing well until that point.  He deserves credit for getting the team going when they finally raced out to an 11 point lead.  Conversely he also showed zero urgency in the first half when the Celtic's offense was terrible.  And in the last 4 minutes of the 4th quarter where the Celtics didn't score was painful.  Twice the C's couldn't even get shots off to hit the rim largely because Rondo was standing around and showing no urgency as the shot clock wound down.  

And as mentioned earlier if KG doesn't crash the boards there it would be another missed point blank layup.  Rondo seems to miss the shot often on that ball reversal trick, sure the move is great to see but have to make the layup to complete the play.

And defensively yes Rondo had key steals but also played poorly when guarding Teague on key possessions.  Twice in the 4th quarter Teague had the ball with the shot clock winding down.  Instead of just staying in front of Teague and forcing up a contested jumper, Rondo went for the lazy reach around steal and what happened --- Teague drove right by and converted baskets twice as the shot clock expired.  Rondo has got to be smarter knowing that the clock is winding down and just play solid position defense instead of going for the flashy steal.

Rondo converted zero jump shots, missed several layups, had 6 turnovers, led a Celtic's offensive meltdown in the last 4 minutes of regulation and had several key defensive lapses.  However he also ignited the team during the 4th quarter, and was the most aggressive Celtic during overtime on both sides of the ball.

He also had 12 of the C's 18 assists, 4 steals, 17 points and incredibly led the team in rebounding.  His aggression on both ends likely saved the game for the Celtics.

To just look at stats and say 'Rondo had a triple double he was awesome' makes no sense.  To watch the game and put into context his actual performance on both ends shows he was great in some facets, terrible in others but ultimately led the team to victory which is what mattered most tonight...

TP to anyone who understands how meaningless the triple-double actually is. It's the most worthless, overrated stat in basketball. I mean, four more turnovers and Rondo had a quadruple-double.

  TP to anyone who understands that getting a lot of assists or rebounds helps your team win games, and doing both is more valuable than doing just one and not the other. Double TPs for people who understand that the fact that people keep track of such games and came up with a catchy name for them doesn't invalidate the contributions of the player who makes all of those plays.

You guys are both right.  I suspect that what CoachBo is responding to is the argument that a triple-double is somehow uniquely special, and that a triple-double is automatically a great game.

Certainly, a triple double is a sign that a player contributed in a lot of areas.  However, you also have to look at things like defense, shooting efficiency, turnovers, etc. when determining how individually great a player was in a game.  Rondo has had some truly amazing triple-doubles in his career.  Last night wasn't one of those; it was merely "good".

Triple doubles are fairly arbitrary.  I think most of us can agree that a 30-8-8 game is better than a 10-10-10 game, but to some fans, the second game is more special than the first.

[BballTim]

Rondo had a very good 4th quarter and OT.  He was not playing well until that point.  He deserves credit for getting the team going when they finally raced out to an 11 point lead.  Conversely he also showed zero urgency in the first half when the Celtic's offense was terrible.  And in the last 4 minutes of the 4th quarter where the Celtics didn't score was painful.  Twice the C's couldn't even get shots off to hit the rim largely because Rondo was standing around and showing no urgency as the shot clock wound down.  

And as mentioned earlier if KG doesn't crash the boards there it would be another missed point blank layup.  Rondo seems to miss the shot often on that ball reversal trick, sure the move is great to see but have to make the layup to complete the play.

And defensively yes Rondo had key steals but also played poorly when guarding Teague on key possessions.  Twice in the 4th quarter Teague had the ball with the shot clock winding down.  Instead of just staying in front of Teague and forcing up a contested jumper, Rondo went for the lazy reach around steal and what happened --- Teague drove right by and converted baskets twice as the shot clock expired.  Rondo has got to be smarter knowing that the clock is winding down and just play solid position defense instead of going for the flashy steal.

Rondo converted zero jump shots, missed several layups, had 6 turnovers, led a Celtic's offensive meltdown in the last 4 minutes of regulation and had several key defensive lapses.  However he also ignited the team during the 4th quarter, and was the most aggressive Celtic during overtime on both sides of the ball.

He also had 12 of the C's 18 assists, 4 steals, 17 points and incredibly led the team in rebounding.  His aggression on both ends likely saved the game for the Celtics.

To just look at stats and say 'Rondo had a triple double he was awesome' makes no sense.  To watch the game and put into context his actual performance on both ends shows he was great in some facets, terrible in others but ultimately led the team to victory which is what mattered most tonight...

TP to anyone who understands how meaningless the triple-double actually is. It's the most worthless, overrated stat in basketball. I mean, four more turnovers and Rondo had a quadruple-double.

  TP to anyone who understands that getting a lot of assists or rebounds helps your team win games, and doing both is more valuable than doing just one and not the other. Double TPs for people who understand that the fact that people keep track of such games and came up with a catchy name for them doesn't invalidate the contributions of the player who makes all of those plays.

You guys are both right.  I suspect that what CoachBo is responding to is the argument that a triple-double is somehow uniquely special, and that a triple-double is automatically a great game.

Certainly, a triple double is a sign that a player contributed in a lot of areas.  However, you also have to look at things like defense, shooting efficiency, turnovers, etc. when determining how individually great a player was in a game.  Rondo has had some truly amazing triple-doubles in his career.  Last night wasn't one of those; it was merely "good".

  While that's true, it's equally true for all stats. Double double, points, assists, rebounds, blocks, steals. You could do well at any of them and have a poor game overall, you could even have a ton of blocks or steals and play bad defensively.

Triple doubles are fairly arbitrary.  I think most of us can agree that a 30-8-8 game is better than a 10-10-10 game, but to some fans, the second game is more special than the first.

  Of course you also have to look at things like defense, shooting efficiency, turnovers, etc. before coming to that conclusion.

[rocknrollforyoursoul]

Teague seems to be mostly having his way against Boston. As for Rondo's Game 3 performance ... horrible shooting, high turnovers, good rebounding. Perhaps his least-impressive triple-double, especially when I consider how many layups he missed.

[thestackshow]

There are some players, no matter what, that just have their way with the Celtics in the playoffs, this year its Teague, he was a relative nobody, an average point guard, that suddely turned into a star during the playoffs. This happens every year, nobodies come out of nowhere and destroy the Celtics and we cant really do anything about it.

[BballTim]

Rondo had a very good 4th quarter and OT.  He was not playing well until that point.  He deserves credit for getting the team going when they finally raced out to an 11 point lead.  Conversely he also showed zero urgency in the first half when the Celtic's offense was terrible.  And in the last 4 minutes of the 4th quarter where the Celtics didn't score was painful.  Twice the C's couldn't even get shots off to hit the rim largely because Rondo was standing around and showing no urgency as the shot clock wound down.  

And as mentioned earlier if KG doesn't crash the boards there it would be another missed point blank layup.  Rondo seems to miss the shot often on that ball reversal trick, sure the move is great to see but have to make the layup to complete the play.

And defensively yes Rondo had key steals but also played poorly when guarding Teague on key possessions.  Twice in the 4th quarter Teague had the ball with the shot clock winding down.  Instead of just staying in front of Teague and forcing up a contested jumper, Rondo went for the lazy reach around steal and what happened --- Teague drove right by and converted baskets twice as the shot clock expired.  Rondo has got to be smarter knowing that the clock is winding down and just play solid position defense instead of going for the flashy steal.

Rondo converted zero jump shots, missed several layups, had 6 turnovers, led a Celtic's offensive meltdown in the last 4 minutes of regulation and had several key defensive lapses.  However he also ignited the team during the 4th quarter, and was the most aggressive Celtic during overtime on both sides of the ball.

He also had 12 of the C's 18 assists, 4 steals, 17 points and incredibly led the team in rebounding.  His aggression on both ends likely saved the game for the Celtics.

To just look at stats and say 'Rondo had a triple double he was awesome' makes no sense.  To watch the game and put into context his actual performance on both ends shows he was great in some facets, terrible in others but ultimately led the team to victory which is what mattered most tonight...

TP to anyone who understands how meaningless the triple-double actually is. It's the most worthless, overrated stat in basketball. I mean, four more turnovers and Rondo had a quadruple-double.

  TP to anyone who understands that getting a lot of assists or rebounds helps your team win games, and doing both is more valuable than doing just one and not the other. Double TPs for people who understand that the fact that people keep track of such games and came up with a catchy name for them doesn't invalidate the contributions of the player who makes all of those plays.

You guys are both right.  I suspect that what CoachBo is responding to is the argument that a triple-double is somehow uniquely special, and that a triple-double is automatically a great game.

Certainly, a triple double is a sign that a player contributed in a lot of areas.  However, you also have to look at things like defense, shooting efficiency, turnovers, etc. when determining how individually great a player was in a game.  Rondo has had some truly amazing triple-doubles in his career.  Last night wasn't one of those; it was merely "good".

Triple doubles are fairly arbitrary.  I think most of us can agree that a 30-8-8 game is better than a 10-10-10 game, but to some fans, the second game is more special than the first.

  FWIW, if you compare triple doubles to exceptional play in any of the three areas (20+ assists, 20+ rebounds, 42+ points) you'll see that the triple double (any triple double, not just the historic ones) are significantly more likely to lead to a win that the others. Most here would agree that a 40 point game is better than a "low level" triple double, but possibly people should  consider that their idea of what constitutes a good game isn't always the one that contributes as much to victory.

[SHAQATTACK]

Of course he did , we WON the game didn't we.

And thats ALL that matters at the end of the day.

[bostonman1]

Great time to look at Rondo's Game 3/4 and see which was better with all the discussion about the relative value of triple doubles...

Game 3 - 17 points on 7-22 shooting.  14 rebounds, 4 steals, 12 assists and 6 turnovers.   Often poor defense on Teague allowing him to have a big game.

Game 4 -  20 points on 8-11 fg's.  2-3 from 3 point range, 3 rebounds, 3 steals, 16 assists and ONE turnover.  Also helping to limit Teague to 3-9 and 7 points.

Rondo's triple double Friday will go down in history because of the sheer numbers.  However tonight was a MUCH better performance and shows that just going by arbitrary numbers does not come close to being a true reflection of a player's performance...

[Celtics18]

Great time to look at Rondo's Game 3/4 and see which was better with all the discussion about the relative value of triple doubles...

Game 3 - 17 points on 7-22 shooting.  14 rebounds, 4 steals, 12 assists and 6 turnovers.   Often poor defense on Teague allowing him to have a big game.

Game 4 -  20 points on 8-11 fg's.  2-3 from 3 point range, 3 rebounds, 3 steals, 16 assists and ONE turnover.  Also helping to limit Teague to 3-9 and 7 points.

Rondo's triple double Friday will go down in history because of the sheer numbers.  However tonight was a MUCH better performance and shows that just going by arbitrary numbers does not come close to being a true reflection of a player's performance...

Yeah, tonight was an absolute classic.  Game 2's triple double was so-so by Rondo's standards. 

[BballTim]

Great time to look at Rondo's Game 3/4 and see which was better with all the discussion about the relative value of triple doubles...

Game 3 - 17 points on 7-22 shooting.  14 rebounds, 4 steals, 12 assists and 6 turnovers.   Often poor defense on Teague allowing him to have a big game.

Game 4 -  20 points on 8-11 fg's.  2-3 from 3 point range, 3 rebounds, 3 steals, 16 assists and ONE turnover.  Also helping to limit Teague to 3-9 and 7 points.

  FWIW, Teague's highlights from game 3 are on youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g2tGiEzuVLI

  Teague scored 9 baskets in the game. Rondo was guarding him on *two* of them. One where he was 10-12 feet away from Teague when Teague got the ball because he was helping on Johnson, and one where Teague used a pick to get past him. There was one play where Rondo was covering Green in transition with Ray and PP in the lane where he conceivably could have left Green to go after Teague, and I recall one play where Teague beat Rondo off the dribble where KG fouled him. Considering neither Pargo nor Hinrich scored and (IIRC) Rondo gave up a basket covering Johnson, people Rondo was covering scored roughly 8 points in 49 minutes.

  I agree with your overall point that Rondo's game 4 was better than his game 3, but I keep reading that Rondo's defense on Teague was terrible. That's not really the case.