Who is more important to the Celtics RIGHT NOW. Pierce or Rondo?

[LarBrd33]

I've seen a surprising amount of disagreement to my claim that Pierce is more important to the Celtics RIGHT NOW than Rondo.  

As I see it, Kevin Garnett is unquestionably the MVP of this team.  It's not even debatable as far as I'm concerned.  You take Kevin Garnett off this team at any point during the past 5 years and there is no way this team is legitimately considered a contender.  What he does for this team on BOTH ends on and off the court is obscenely underrated around here.  KG is the MVP.  Argue with me about that elsewhere... right now I want to talk about who is the 2nd best player on this team.  ROndo or Pierce?

Seems the new company line is that Rondo is the "best player on the team".  I flat out disagree.  I think Rondo is an allstar and a heck of a setup guy, but without Pierce this team is toast.  Second only to Kevin Garnett.  When it comes to our offense, Pierce is hands down our most important player.  I know you'll argue that Rondo gets people the ball in scoring position. I'll give you that.  But rondo himself is a limited offensive player.  Pierce can carry an offense when needed.  

A couple points I want to bring up.

Over the past 5 years... our record when Pierce misses games:  10 wins and 11 losses

Over the past 5 years... our record when Rondo misses games:  22 wins and 13 losses.

Up until late 2009, the ball flowed through Pierce on offense.  Despite this, our team has a LOSING record over the past two years without Pierce (2 wins 5 losses) and a WINNING record without ROndo (18 wins and 10 losses).  Coincidence?  

Pierce also has a tendency to "step it up" when Rondo is out.  Check out Paul's stat lines this year when Rondo missed games:

1/20 (LOSS) 12 points, 6 assists, 3 rebounds, 2 steals, 2 blocks
1/22 (Win) 34 points, 10 assists, 8 rebounds, 3 steals
1/23 (win) 19 points, 7 assists, 5 rebounds
1/26 (win) 24 points, 10 assists, 6 rebounds, 1 block
1/27 (win) 28 points, 8 assists, 10 rebounds, 3 steals,2  blocks
1/29 (loss) 18 points, 5 assists, 6 rebounds
1/31 (win) 20 points, 6 assists, 4 rebounds, 3 steals
2/1 (win) 17 points, 8 assists, 6 rebounds, 1 steal, 1 block
4/18 (win) 29 points, 14 assists, 5 rebounds, 2 steals

Coincidence?  

Don't get me wrong. I think our offense is clearly built around Rondo's talents (and weaknesses).  Rondo is an elite setup guy and passer.  He's range is nonexistent, but he's capable of making layups.  Thankfully we have players who compliment Rondo's abilities almost PERFECTLY.  Ray spreads the floor and demands attention (sometimes double coverage).  Pierce can do anything on offense and demands attention.  KG and Bass both get their offense on mid-range shots which keeps defensive big men out of the paint... giving Rondo room to penetrate inside and giving him multiple options to get assists off.  Rondo is the straw that stirs the drink when all these guys are in.   But when Rondo is out... we seem to cope a lot better than we do when Pierce is out.  Without ROndo, the offense changes.  Pierce controls the ball and players feed off him.  Generally ANY player you put in Rondo's place will be an upgrade shooting the ball and without Rondo on the court, I've observed that we seem to be more comfortable feeding KG in the post.  Essentially what I'm trying to say is... we seem to adjust better without Rondo than we do without Pierce.  Coincidence?  

Thoughts?  

[RajonRondOWNED]

Why are you using records over the past 5 years?

Pierce is obviously not as good as he was 5 years ago and Rondo is lightyears better than he was 5 years ago.

I personally think we are equally screwed if either goes down.

[LarBrd33]

Why are you using records over the past 5 years?

Pierce is obviously not as good as he was 5 years ago and Rondo is lightyears better than he was 5 years ago.

I personally think we are equally screwed if either goes down.

Fine... then our record over the past 2 years.

Without Pierce:  2 wins 5 losses
Without Rondo:  18 wins 10 losses.

Don't be fooled by the fact the old dog is more durable.  We seem to cope a lot better without Pierce than we do without Rondo.  Thankfully we haven't had to lose Pierce for extended periods of time.  Early this season when he missed games, we lossed... and even when Pierce returned (at what seemed like 50%), we struggled mightily.  We dropped 5 in a row while Pierce got his sea legs back... started the season 4-8.  Coincidence?

[Vermont Green]

To me there is no question.  I take Pierce and I am with you on Garnett as well.

We are better with Rondo than without but as shown in game 2, we can win a big game without him.  No way that happens without PP or KG.

[nickagneta]

Right now...Pierce.


From the moment this season ends on...Rondo.

[alajet]

If Pierce was to go down at this moment, we'd get swept, not to mention this is also the case with KG. Heck, it's the case for any of our main rotation players. We lack depth. We won't be surviving any injuries at this point.
But in terms of importance, it has gotta be Paul Pierce. Basically you would have nobody to consistently feed in the flow of the offense without Pierce.

[BballTim]

  In the 80s the Celts were always better without Bird than without Parish mainly because we had better backup forwards than centers. I assume that you consider Parish more valuable to that squad than Bird? Or the fact that we have a pretty good record without KG means that he isn't valuable?

[mctyson]

I guess I am the only one who voted Rondo. 

Pierce is great.  But we are not winning a championship without Rondo.

[jbsprinter1]

Here's a good way to think about this question:

It's game 7 of the NBA finals. You need to choose to not have either Pierce or Rondo for this game. Who do you play?

I think, without question, you play Pierce in this game and leave Rondo out. I trust Pierce to carry the team on his back. Rondo is not a go-to guy. I think we need Rondo in the long-run because he gets everyone easy shots and keeps them from getting worn out. But I trust Pierce to get this team a win any day of the week.

[RajonRondOWNED]

Rondo needs to be big against the Heat for us to beat them. Period. The game will be decided at the Pg spot.

[ChefEricT]

Why are you using records over the past 5 years?

Pierce is obviously not as good as he was 5 years ago and Rondo is lightyears better than he was 5 years ago.

I personally think we are equally screwed if either goes down.

Completely agree

[clover]

KG.

[GreenFaith1819]

Both.

[CoachBo]

I've seen a surprising amount of disagreement to my claim that Pierce is more important to the Celtics RIGHT NOW than Rondo.  

As I see it, Kevin Garnett is unquestionably the MVP of this team.  It's not even debatable as far as I'm concerned.  You take Kevin Garnett off this team at any point during the past 5 years and there is no way this team is legitimately considered a contender.  What he does for this team on BOTH ends on and off the court is obscenely underrated around here.  KG is the MVP.  Argue with me about that elsewhere... right now I want to talk about who is the 2nd best player on this team.  ROndo or Pierce?

Seems the new company line is that Rondo is the "best player on the team".  I flat out disagree.  I think Rondo is an allstar and a heck of a setup guy, but without Pierce this team is toast.  Second only to Kevin Garnett.  When it comes to our offense, Pierce is hands down our most important player.  I know you'll argue that Rondo gets people the ball in scoring position. I'll give you that.  But rondo himself is a limited offensive player.  Pierce can carry an offense when needed.  

A couple points I want to bring up.

Over the past 5 years... our record when Pierce misses games:  10 wins and 11 losses

Over the past 5 years... our record when Rondo misses games:  22 wins and 13 losses.

Up until late 2009, the ball flowed through Pierce on offense.  Despite this, our team has a LOSING record over the past two years without Pierce (2 wins 5 losses) and a WINNING record without ROndo (18 wins and 10 losses).  Coincidence?  

Pierce also has a tendency to "step it up" when Rondo is out.  Check out Paul's stat lines this year when Rondo missed games:

1/20 (LOSS) 12 points, 6 assists, 3 rebounds, 2 steals, 2 blocks
1/22 (Win) 34 points, 10 assists, 8 rebounds, 3 steals
1/23 (win) 19 points, 7 assists, 5 rebounds
1/26 (win) 24 points, 10 assists, 6 rebounds, 1 block
1/27 (win) 28 points, 8 assists, 10 rebounds, 3 steals,2  blocks
1/29 (loss) 18 points, 5 assists, 6 rebounds
1/31 (win) 20 points, 6 assists, 4 rebounds, 3 steals
2/1 (win) 17 points, 8 assists, 6 rebounds, 1 steal, 1 block
4/18 (win) 29 points, 14 assists, 5 rebounds, 2 steals

Coincidence?  

Don't get me wrong. I think our offense is clearly built around Rondo's talents (and weaknesses).  Rondo is an elite setup guy and passer.  He's range is nonexistent, but he's capable of making layups.  Thankfully we have players who compliment Rondo's abilities almost PERFECTLY.  Ray spreads the floor and demands attention (sometimes double coverage).  Pierce can do anything on offense and demands attention.  KG and Bass both get their offense on mid-range shots which keeps defensive big men out of the paint... giving Rondo room to penetrate inside and giving him multiple options to get assists off.  Rondo is the straw that stirs the drink when all these guys are in.   But when Rondo is out... we seem to cope a lot better than we do when Pierce is out.  Without ROndo, the offense changes.  Pierce controls the ball and players feed off him.  Generally ANY player you put in Rondo's place will be an upgrade shooting the ball and without Rondo on the court, I've observed that we seem to be more comfortable feeding KG in the post.  Essentially what I'm trying to say is... we seem to adjust better without Rondo than we do without Pierce.  Coincidence?  

Thoughts?  

C'mon.

You're not really surprised, are you?

Nice thread. Should keep things stirred up around here until tipoff.

[Celtics4ever]

Both.