Not saying I want to trade Rondo, but if we did, what would you demand?

[LarBrd33]

"What does Chris Paul have to do to prove that he's better than Rondo?"  He has to keep doing it at the level he's been doing it for the past six seasons, and hope that Rondo, instead of continuing to improve like he's done every year, actually starts to regress at a healthy 25 years of age.

Forgive me for paraphrasing your words, Celtics18, these were the words I felt most prescient though.

Also, I agree LarBrd33 does deserve credit for making a specific statement as to the reasons for his opinion.  I'm guilty of the opposite myself sometimes.  Usually I'm just too lazy, to be honest.

For me, this is just a difficult question to answer because the two players have never been in similar situations.  What would Paul's numbers have looked like had he been in Rondo's place, and vice versa?

The likely answer is Paul's number would have been slightly less, while Rondo's would have been substantially less.  At this point though, I truly feel the Big 3 are holding Rondo back, to a certain degree.  Not from team success, but from individual statistical success.  I don't personally care about that, but it seems that's the only way to impress certain folks. (I don't necessarily mean you LarBrd33, just in general)

I'm truly looking forward to the day when Rondo is the unabashed leader of the team, and there will be no more excuses.  Rondo's game has steadily improved, year after year.

What direction will Paul's game go?  Will he maintain his current level, or will his game continue to decline?  I don't think it's debatable his game has, just look at his numbers.  It's due to his health, but that matters.

So, I guess my answer is ultimately the same as Celtics18.  Who does what going forward.

As of this minute, despite Paul's better regular season stats, Rondo just put up better numbers in the playoffs (the games that matter most), and was visibly the better player at the end.  I expect that trend to continue.  If it doesn't, then congrats to Chris Paul for proving me wrong.

Have at it, KGs Knee.  By the way, you didn't paraphrase my words, you quoted me directly.

I want to make a point about your observation that Rondo has been held back by the big three.  I see where you are coming from from a purely statistical perspective, but I actually think starting his career playing with those three was the best thing that could have happened to him. 

Yes, his numbers (scoring numbers, in particular) may have suffered, and his lack of being a big time scorer has led to a significant undervaluing of his game by many.  Ultimately, though, I think that in the long run his experience will prove to make him a much better player than if he had started out in a John Wall or Kyrie Irving type situation where he was just asked to take over and do what he could to put up big individual numbers on bad a team.

Interesting viewpoints.  ROndo being "held back" by three hall-of-famers.  Interesting.  You guys don't think that having three hall-of-famers might be why he averages so many assists?  No?  Hmm.   And I guess the assumption is that when Rondo is suddenly the main player and teams actually can't get away with leaving him wide-open, his mediocre shooting percentages will improve?   Yes, post Big-3 Rondo may indeed average 20+ points, but I'm having a hard time believing his shooting percentages will be anything near 47%, 37% and 87%... and I guess we're assuming that when he's jacking up tons of shots by default, he'll still manage to average 10+ assists as Chris Paul and Deron Williams prove capable of doing?  We'll see. 

I also think it's interesting that you guys are putting so much stock into his playoff performances when he was going up against Mario Chalmers and Jeff Teague.  I agree Rondo was PHENOMENAL in the playoffs and Chris Paul was subpar (which may have had a little to do with the strained right hip flexor and finger injuries).  I guess your assumption is that since he put up big numbers in the playoffs, he'll continue to put up big numbers next season?  I hope you're right.  Unfortunately his 2009 playoff numbers didn't really carry over to the 2010 regular season. 

So basically I'll paraphrase your answers... You three are basically telling me that you'll believe Chris Paul is better than Rajon Rondo when Chris Paul continues to be better than Rajon Rondo... and Rajon Rondo doesn't become better than Chris Paul.  Lol.  Ok.  Again, I'm paraphrasing, but I'm not sure how else I can interpret, "if Rondo doesn't put up better stats in the post big three era and  CP3 puts up averages comparable to [what he's already putting up, I'll be convinced]" or "[Chris Paul] has to keep doing it at the level he's been doing it for the past six seasons, and hope that Rondo, instead of continuing to improve like he's done every year, actually starts to regress at a healthy 25 years of age.  " ..  Those are both kinda wishy-washy answers.  I guess we'll just wait 5 more years to see what Rondo is capable of in the Post Big 3 era.

 More pointed question:  If Chris Paul continues to consistently earn 1st team All NBA honors over Rondo, continues to average better overall stats than Rondo and takes the Clippers further than Rondo takes the post-big 3 Celtics... Will you concede?... or are you guys just going to find some loop holes to argue that Rondo is better?  It was only a couple season ago that Pierce vs LeBron was a relevant argument here.  Thankfully, there doesn't seem to be any Boston homers brave enough to continue that silly nonsense now.  Actually, I shouldn't say "Thankfully".  As a Celtic fan, I wish I still lived in a world where loopholes existed that allowed green-glasses-wearing Celtic fans to believe Pierce was better than LeBron James... that would presumably mean we were in the Finals right now. 

[BballTim]

"What does Chris Paul have to do to prove that he's better than Rondo?"  He has to keep doing it at the level he's been doing it for the past six seasons, and hope that Rondo, instead of continuing to improve like he's done every year, actually starts to regress at a healthy 25 years of age.

Forgive me for paraphrasing your words, Celtics18, these were the words I felt most prescient though.

Also, I agree LarBrd33 does deserve credit for making a specific statement as to the reasons for his opinion.  I'm guilty of the opposite myself sometimes.  Usually I'm just too lazy, to be honest.

For me, this is just a difficult question to answer because the two players have never been in similar situations.  What would Paul's numbers have looked like had he been in Rondo's place, and vice versa?

The likely answer is Paul's number would have been slightly less, while Rondo's would have been substantially less.  At this point though, I truly feel the Big 3 are holding Rondo back, to a certain degree.  Not from team success, but from individual statistical success.  I don't personally care about that, but it seems that's the only way to impress certain folks. (I don't necessarily mean you LarBrd33, just in general)

I'm truly looking forward to the day when Rondo is the unabashed leader of the team, and there will be no more excuses.  Rondo's game has steadily improved, year after year.

What direction will Paul's game go?  Will he maintain his current level, or will his game continue to decline?  I don't think it's debatable his game has, just look at his numbers.  It's due to his health, but that matters.

So, I guess my answer is ultimately the same as Celtics18.  Who does what going forward.

As of this minute, despite Paul's better regular season stats, Rondo just put up better numbers in the playoffs (the games that matter most), and was visibly the better player at the end.  I expect that trend to continue.  If it doesn't, then congrats to Chris Paul for proving me wrong.

Have at it, KGs Knee.  By the way, you didn't paraphrase my words, you quoted me directly.

I want to make a point about your observation that Rondo has been held back by the big three.  I see where you are coming from from a purely statistical perspective, but I actually think starting his career playing with those three was the best thing that could have happened to him. 

Yes, his numbers (scoring numbers, in particular) may have suffered, and his lack of being a big time scorer has led to a significant undervaluing of his game by many.  Ultimately, though, I think that in the long run his experience will prove to make him a much better player than if he had started out in a John Wall or Kyrie Irving type situation where he was just asked to take over and do what he could to put up big individual numbers on bad a team.

Interesting viewpoints.  ROndo being "held back" by three hall-of-famers.  Interesting.  You guys don't think that having three hall-of-famers might be why he averages so many assists?  No? Hmm. 

  I have to shake my head when I read things like this. You realize that none of the big three are in their prime, or have been recently, don't you? You make it sound like all three of them are averaging 25 a game and all Rondo has to do is get them the ball and they'll do the rest, no matter how tightly they're covered. Ray takes half the shot clock to get open a lot of the time, and how many shots did we see KG miss in the playoffs when Rondo got him the ball within 2 feet of the rim?
 

 And I guess the assumption is that when Rondo is suddenly the main player and teams actually can't get away with leaving him wide-open, his mediocre shooting percentages will improve?   Yes, post Big-3 Rondo may indeed average 20+ points, but I'm having a hard time believing his shooting percentages will be anything near 47%, 37% and 87%... and I guess we're assuming that when he's jacking up tons of shots by default, he'll still manage to average 10+ assists as Chris Paul and Deron Williams prove capable of doing?  We'll see. 

  Rondo can easily shoot 47% from the field, he won't hit 87% from the line, and I don't really have a bead on his 3p%, do you? I don't think I've seen any evidence that his fg% will plummet when he's more the focus of the offense. I also don't see why his assists would drop. Aside from getting more transition assists with more athletic teammates, you're assuming that defenses will cover him more tightly, that will leave everyone else more open. He should have an easier time getting assists, not a harder time.

I also think it's interesting that you guys are putting so much stock into his playoff performances when he was going up against Mario Chalmers and Jeff Teague.

  Allow me to re-phrase your statement: Rondo had a phenomal postseason and put up great numbers despite the fact that he played all of his games against teams were among the top 6 defenses in the league this year.

So basically I'll paraphrase your answers... You three are basically telling me that you'll believe Chris Paul is better than Rajon Rondo when Chris Paul continues to be better than Rajon Rondo... and Rajon Rondo doesn't become better than Chris Paul.  Lol.  Ok.  Again, I'm paraphrasing, but I'm not sure how else I can interpret, "if Rondo doesn't put up better stats in the post big three era and  CP3 puts up averages comparable to [what he's already putting up, I'll be convinced]" or "[Chris Paul] has to keep doing it at the level he's been doing it for the past six seasons, and hope that Rondo, instead of continuing to improve like he's done every year, actually starts to regress at a healthy 25 years of age.  " ..  Those are both kinda wishy-washy answers.  I guess we'll just wait 5 more years to see what Rondo is capable of in the Post Big 3 era.

  First of all, CP3 hasn't been playing at the same level for the last 6 years, his play has dropped off since 2008 or so. It must have escaped your attention, the same way you missed that the big three are no longer playing at a HOF level. Secondly, you evaluate players solely on individual production, and I don't think that works terrifically well with Rondo.

  When you're comparing players, how do you account for Rondo's ability to dictate the pace of the game? How about Rondo's ability to run an offense? What about all the time Rondo spends directing his teammates around to create mismatches that he then exploits? How about how well placed and well timed his passes are and how that makes it easier for the recipient to score? How does your comparison account for things like that?

  I don't know if you ever saw this, but some guy on a Wizards website did a comparison between Wall and Rondo in terms of how many assists they got compared to the number of end of possession plays (shots or turnovers) from their passes. In other words, if Rondo makes 20 passes that are potential assists, the Celts might end up with 11 baskets and 9 misses/turnovers, if Wall makes 20 passes the Wizards might end up with 8-9  baskets and 11-12 misses/turnovers. They came to the conclusion that the Celts scoring efficiency was much higher off of a Rondo pass than otherwise, and that increase in efficiency was about 2.5 times higher than expected.

Pointed question: When you compare Rondo to other players, how do you account for that increased scoring efficiency that his passing brings to the team? Where does it fit into your statistic that shows Rondo to be the 29th best player in the league?

 

More pointed question:  If Chris Paul continues to consistently earn 1st team All NBA honors over Rondo, continues to average better overall stats than Rondo and takes the Clippers further than Rondo takes the post-big 3 Celtics... Will you concede?... or are you guys just going to find some loop holes to argue that Rondo is better?  It was only a couple season ago that Pierce vs LeBron was a relevant argument here.  Thankfully, there doesn't seem to be any Boston homers brave enough to continue that silly nonsense now.  Actually, I shouldn't say "Thankfully".  As a Celtic fan, I wish I still lived in a world where loopholes existed that allowed green-glasses-wearing Celtic fans to believe Pierce was better than LeBron James... that would presumably mean we were in the Finals right now. 

  It was just a few years ago when homers wearing green tinted glasses were arguing with people who insisted that Rondo would never even be as good as an average starting point guard in the nba until he started to hit his jump shots consistently and became a good free throw shooter. And the year before all those homers were arguing with people who claimed that Perk would never be a good enough player to be a starting center on a contending team. Thankfully (almost) none of the "unbiased realists" still make those claims. I guess they ran out of loopholes. Is this as relevent to the discussion as the PP/LeBron arguments that other people made?

[Celtics18]

"What does Chris Paul have to do to prove that he's better than Rondo?"  He has to keep doing it at the level he's been doing it for the past six seasons, and hope that Rondo, instead of continuing to improve like he's done every year, actually starts to regress at a healthy 25 years of age.

Forgive me for paraphrasing your words, Celtics18, these were the words I felt most prescient though.

Also, I agree LarBrd33 does deserve credit for making a specific statement as to the reasons for his opinion.  I'm guilty of the opposite myself sometimes.  Usually I'm just too lazy, to be honest.

For me, this is just a difficult question to answer because the two players have never been in similar situations.  What would Paul's numbers have looked like had he been in Rondo's place, and vice versa?

The likely answer is Paul's number would have been slightly less, while Rondo's would have been substantially less.  At this point though, I truly feel the Big 3 are holding Rondo back, to a certain degree.  Not from team success, but from individual statistical success.  I don't personally care about that, but it seems that's the only way to impress certain folks. (I don't necessarily mean you LarBrd33, just in general)

I'm truly looking forward to the day when Rondo is the unabashed leader of the team, and there will be no more excuses.  Rondo's game has steadily improved, year after year.

What direction will Paul's game go?  Will he maintain his current level, or will his game continue to decline?  I don't think it's debatable his game has, just look at his numbers.  It's due to his health, but that matters.

So, I guess my answer is ultimately the same as Celtics18.  Who does what going forward.

As of this minute, despite Paul's better regular season stats, Rondo just put up better numbers in the playoffs (the games that matter most), and was visibly the better player at the end.  I expect that trend to continue.  If it doesn't, then congrats to Chris Paul for proving me wrong.

Have at it, KGs Knee.  By the way, you didn't paraphrase my words, you quoted me directly.

I want to make a point about your observation that Rondo has been held back by the big three.  I see where you are coming from from a purely statistical perspective, but I actually think starting his career playing with those three was the best thing that could have happened to him.  

Yes, his numbers (scoring numbers, in particular) may have suffered, and his lack of being a big time scorer has led to a significant undervaluing of his game by many.  Ultimately, though, I think that in the long run his experience will prove to make him a much better player than if he had started out in a John Wall or Kyrie Irving type situation where he was just asked to take over and do what he could to put up big individual numbers on bad a team.

Interesting viewpoints.  ROndo being "held back" by three hall-of-famers.  Interesting.  You guys don't think that having three hall-of-famers might be why he averages so many assists?  No?  Hmm.   And I guess the assumption is that when Rondo is suddenly the main player and teams actually can't get away with leaving him wide-open, his mediocre shooting percentages will improve?   Yes, post Big-3 Rondo may indeed average 20+ points, but I'm having a hard time believing his shooting percentages will be anything near 47%, 37% and 87%... and I guess we're assuming that when he's jacking up tons of shots by default, he'll still manage to average 10+ assists as Chris Paul and Deron Williams prove capable of doing?  We'll see.  

I also think it's interesting that you guys are putting so much stock into his playoff performances when he was going up against Mario Chalmers and Jeff Teague.  I agree Rondo was PHENOMENAL in the playoffs and Chris Paul was subpar (which may have had a little to do with the strained right hip flexor and finger injuries).  I guess your assumption is that since he put up big numbers in the playoffs, he'll continue to put up big numbers next season?  I hope you're right.  Unfortunately his 2009 playoff numbers didn't really carry over to the 2010 regular season.  

So basically I'll paraphrase your answers... You three are basically telling me that you'll believe Chris Paul is better than Rajon Rondo when Chris Paul continues to be better than Rajon Rondo... and Rajon Rondo doesn't become better than Chris Paul.  Lol.  Ok.  Again, I'm paraphrasing, but I'm not sure how else I can interpret, "if Rondo doesn't put up better stats in the post big three era and  CP3 puts up averages comparable to [what he's already putting up, I'll be convinced]" or "[Chris Paul] has to keep doing it at the level he's been doing it for the past six seasons, and hope that Rondo, instead of continuing to improve like he's done every year, actually starts to regress at a healthy 25 years of age.  " ..  Those are both kinda wishy-washy answers.  I guess we'll just wait 5 more years to see what Rondo is capable of in the Post Big 3 era.

 More pointed question:  If Chris Paul continues to consistently earn 1st team All NBA honors over Rondo, continues to average better overall stats than Rondo and takes the Clippers further than Rondo takes the post-big 3 Celtics... Will you concede?... or are you guys just going to find some loop holes to argue that Rondo is better?  It was only a couple season ago that Pierce vs LeBron was a relevant argument here.  Thankfully, there doesn't seem to be any Boston homers brave enough to continue that silly nonsense now.  Actually, I shouldn't say "Thankfully".  As a Celtic fan, I wish I still lived in a world where loopholes existed that allowed green-glasses-wearing Celtic fans to believe Pierce was better than LeBron James... that would presumably mean we were in the Finals right now.  

I'll try to give a clearer answer so you can understand my position better.  I am not arguing that Rajon Rondo has had a more successful career to date than Chris Paul.  I am arguing that when looking at the arcs of their prospective careers that Rajon Rondo has a very good chance of being the better player than Chris Paul going forward.

As good as Chris Paul is, and he is very, very good, the truth is that, most likely due to his major knee surgery, he has reached a place in his career where he is regressing.

Rondo, on the other hand, keeps improving.  As we have seen in the past, his regular season numbers will most likely dip from his stellar post-season numbers.  I think it's fair to surmise at this point that Rajon Rondo does, indeed, save a little something for the post-season.  I have come to the conclusion that this is not due to laziness or inconsistency, but rather his intelligence as a ball player.  At 6'1", 180, he simply knows that he can't go all out on every regular season play for 82 games.  He saves some for when it really matters: The Playoffs.  This is where he has shined in his short career and often played like a superstar.

Past accomplishments are certainly a factor in evaluating how good players will be moving forward, but you also have to look at things like who is still improving and who isn't.  Somewhat amazingly, Rondo is still improving now having just completed his sixth year.  Paul, well, he's not.  

Another factor that I consider when looking at who has a brighter future starting today is playoff success.  I can't think of many players past or present who have played in, been a major factor in, and taken over in as many big post-season games as Rajon Rondo at his age.  Now, clearly not all of the credit for this playoff success goes to him.  Paul Pierce, Kevin Garnett, and Ray Allen have obviously been significant factors in this success.

That doesn't chance the fact that I think his playoff success will be invaluable as he moves into the prime of his career and will help to make him a better, more valuable player going forward.

I guess, to sum it up, the main difference in our arguments is that you are relying solely on past numbers to predict who will be more successful in the future while I am considering other factors.  You are right about one thing, though, that is; only time will tell.  

To answer your last question;  If those things that you mention happen going forward, then, yes, I'll concede.  The biggest one for me is playoff success.  If Chris Paul can continue to play at a top level and lead that talented, young Clippers team to big time playoff success, and a Rondo led Celtics team ends up as perennial losers, then I'll definitely concede.  I don't see that happening, though.