What Does This Season Say About Rondo?

[Vermont Green]

What does the Lakers and Howard have to do with the Celtics and Rondo?

  He said that the Celts are playing poorly with Rondo so we should trade him. I suggested trading him for Howard since the Lakers are doing even worse. Shockingly, he decided that the Lakers trading Howard because the team is off to a slow start was a bad idea.

I think this season is telling us something about Rondo.  It is telling us if a team is "Rondo's" team with him as the best player, that team is not going to contend for a title.  At this point I don't even believe that he is the best player, I think KG and PP are 1a and 1b.

Now regarding the current state of play by PP and KG, yes, they have declined from HoFer level but they are both still really good.  I think this "supporting cast" for Rondo is the best he is going to see for sure unless he goes to a team with a clear super star.  Rondo could still change all of this if he develops a jump shot, but as things stand, he is not going to lead a team as their best player to the promised land.

Now all this Dwight talk, last year people thought I was nutty for thinking he was over-rated and not someone I wanted on the Celtics.  What is this season telling us about Howard?  There are quite a few players that I would trade Rondo for, DH is not one of them.

[BballTim]

What does the Lakers and Howard have to do with the Celtics and Rondo?

  He said that the Celts are playing poorly with Rondo so we should trade him. I suggested trading him for Howard since the Lakers are doing even worse. Shockingly, he decided that the Lakers trading Howard because the team is off to a slow start was a bad idea.

I think this season is telling us something about Rondo.  It is telling us if a team is "Rondo's" team with him as the best player, that team is not going to contend for a title.  At this point I don't even believe that he is the best player, I think KG and PP are 1a and 1b.

  Two of the last 3 postseasons have shown the opposite. It might be the case that you don't think Rondo's our best player, that's probably been the minority view for the last couple of years.

Now regarding the current state of play by PP and KG, yes, they have declined from HoFer level but they are both still really good.  I think this "supporting cast" for Rondo is the best he is going to see for sure unless he goes to a team with a clear super star.  Rondo could still change all of this if he develops a jump shot, but as things stand, he is not going to lead a team as their best player to the promised land.

  Rondo's hitting long twos at better than a 50% clip, probably leading all point guards in that category. How much better would he need to do in order for you to say he's developing a jump shot? Leading the league?

[PhoSita]

  Maybe we should trade him for Dwight Howard, he's got Kobe on his team and they're in worse shape than we are.

I think the Lakers are a resounding, neon-bright example of the truism that it is impossible to succeed in this league without a legitimate point guard.  As mediocre as Derek Fisher was statistically, he still had an intangible, steadying quality, and he worked in that triangle system.  Without the triangle, and without a legitimate point guard to run the offense, the Lakers are horribly inconsistent.

It isn't a truism because Fisher was bad. So were all the PGs that played with Jordan. So is Chalmers, in case you wanted to use the triangle offense argument to explain away all of Phil Jackson's bad PGs.

Pointing to "intangibles" is just a way to use magic to make a claim no one can respond to.

Championship teams are more likely to have good players at every position because they are very good teams. Yet no one position is mandatory, just an overall level of talent.

Look at what Fisher does with the Mavericks.  The guy has stuck in the league long after he's been a productive player, yet people still keep him around.  Why? 

Also, I should clarify that I mean that a team in the modern NBA cannot win without a legitimate point guard.  Yes, Chalmers counts -- though the Heat use LeBron or Wade as the point guard most of the time, so they can get by without Chalmers being any better than replacement level.

[PhoSita]

What does the Lakers and Howard have to do with the Celtics and Rondo?

  He said that the Celts are playing poorly with Rondo so we should trade him. I suggested trading him for Howard since the Lakers are doing even worse. Shockingly, he decided that the Lakers trading Howard because the team is off to a slow start was a bad idea.

Woah. When did we have this conversation?  Because unless the "he" you're referring to was you talking to yourself, I never said any of those things that you're attributing to me.

[scaryjerry]

that he's a rising star who's criticized too much within his own fan base.

[PhoSita]

The conclusion is that Rondo is not one of this guy who you can surround with half a dozen of "solid players" and expect a great season. And that's not necessarily bad -- Rondo is part of the solution, but the solution is to bring another all-star caliber player. Otherwise, you'll be the Orlando Magic with Dwight Howard for years to come.

I agree, you can't surround Rondo with a half dozen solid players and have a great season.

However, you CAN surround Rondo with a half dozen solid players (actually, the C's have more than a half dozen), and beat ANY team in the league on a given night, if Rondo is healthy and focussed.  And that could be enough to make some real noise in the playoffs.

But that's exactly the point of this post, which some people seem to be missing.

Danny has surrounded Rondo with a collection of solid talent.  This should be enough to be a more than adequate supporting cast.  Rondo is having one of his best years yet, if not his best.

Yet the team looks decidedly mediocre.  Where's the disconnect?  That's all I'm asking.

By a number of metrics, Rondo is having his best season yet. 

I don't agree with this at all.  His production this season is similar to his other seasons.  His assists are up, but so are his turnovers.  His steals are down.  Granted, he is shooting MUCH better than he did last year, but his overall FG% is slightly better than some of his other seasons.

If he gets his PER over 20, I will give him the nod.

Well I guess the point is, do you think this season more or less represents the best we can expect from Rondo during the regular season? 

Rondo is definitely a different player in the post-season, but as far as leading the team to wins in the regular season, I think we pretty much know what to expect at this point.

  I don't see why one of the worst seasons we've had with Rondo here (when even you are expecting improvement) is "the best we can expect". That's kind of like saying the more mediocre teams we've seen Paul or KG on is the best we can expect from them in terms of wins.

I guess it's like those mediocre seasons we've seen from teams with Paul and KG if you think this supporting cast is analogous to those supporting casts.  Is this team on par with those Celtics and T-Wolves teams featuring guys like Wally Z, Sam Cassell, Antoine Walker, etc?  That may be so.

But if it is so, can we really expect Danny to put much more talent than this around Rondo?  When and how is that going to happen? 

If not, is "above average to pretty good" the best we can expect of teams built around Rondo? 

Or do you think that Rondo is going to take another step and become a guy who plays like a superstar almost every night, rather than just in nationally televised games, or two out of every three games in the playoffs?

[SHAQATTACK]

The conclusion is that Rondo is not one of this guy who you can surround with half a dozen of "solid players" and expect a great season.

Thats well put,  LoL ...I think thats what has been on my mind all along.    Rondo is a star cal. player , but he an't Lebron or Jordon , he can't carry  the team on his back a whole season, just as CP3 can't do it by himself either,  he has some nice young bigs  . Just adding some good role players like, Lee, Bass and Wilcox isn't going to put the Celtics on a deep playoff level.  I feel to put the Celtics "BACK" on the map so to speak , the addition or 1-2 star power bigs  will be required.   Or in the short term , a near-star such as Cousins would go along way to improve the team .  AB is part of the Solution, a pair of nice guards,  NOW we need SOME MEAT to go with them !!

I hope Danny can pull off a trade for a big , that won't break the back of the current Celtics too bad.

[Celtics18]

What does the Lakers and Howard have to do with the Celtics and Rondo?

  He said that the Celts are playing poorly with Rondo so we should trade him. I suggested trading him for Howard since the Lakers are doing even worse. Shockingly, he decided that the Lakers trading Howard because the team is off to a slow start was a bad idea.

I think this season is telling us something about Rondo.  It is telling us if a team is "Rondo's" team with him as the best player, that team is not going to contend for a title.  At this point I don't even believe that he is the best player, I think KG and PP are 1a and 1b.

Now regarding the current state of play by PP and KG, yes, they have declined from HoFer level but they are both still really good.  I think this "supporting cast" for Rondo is the best he is going to see for sure unless he goes to a team with a clear super star.  Rondo could still change all of this if he develops a jump shot, but as things stand, he is not going to lead a team as their best player to the promised land.

Now all this Dwight talk, last year people thought I was nutty for thinking he was over-rated and not someone I wanted on the Celtics.  What is this season telling us about Howard?  There are quite a few players that I would trade Rondo for, DH is not one of them.

When I read these "Rondo can't lead the team to a title" posts, I always wonder, "who can?"

Outside of Lebron James and Kevin Durant what players out there ensure, by simple virtue of being on the team--pretty much regardless of who is around them, that their teams will be in title contention?

Dwight Howard?  Chris Paul?  Carmelo Anthony?  Kevin Love?  Derrick Rose?  Deron Williams?  Blake Griffin?  I don't think so. 

I can't think of anyone who fits that bill, other than possibly James and Durant, and even they need help.

Rondo's a top ten player.  Surround him with the right talent and you've got a championship caliber team.  I'm not saying that's an easy task.  That's why only one in thirty teams wins the title each year. 

But, if there's one guy on this team who is an absolute keeper, it's Rajon Rondo.  We should consider ourselves very lucky to have a legitimate superstar caliber player making about $11million per year. 

[Chris]

The conclusion is that Rondo is not one of this guy who you can surround with half a dozen of "solid players" and expect a great season. And that's not necessarily bad -- Rondo is part of the solution, but the solution is to bring another all-star caliber player. Otherwise, you'll be the Orlando Magic with Dwight Howard for years to come.

I agree, you can't surround Rondo with a half dozen solid players and have a great season.

However, you CAN surround Rondo with a half dozen solid players (actually, the C's have more than a half dozen), and beat ANY team in the league on a given night, if Rondo is healthy and focussed.  And that could be enough to make some real noise in the playoffs.

But that's exactly the point of this post, which some people seem to be missing.

Danny has surrounded Rondo with a collection of solid talent.  This should be enough to be a more than adequate supporting cast.  Rondo is having one of his best years yet, if not his best.

Yet the team looks decidedly mediocre.  Where's the disconnect?  That's all I'm asking.

And what I am saying is that I believe Rondo is not the type of player who can carry a team through a long season.  But, that doesn't mean he can't carry them in the playoffs. 

So, if you are looking for a guy to lead your team to win 60 games, we are looking at some evidence that Rondo might not be your guy.  But that might not translate to the same lack of success in the playoffs.

[Celtics18]

that he's a rising star who's criticized too much within his own fan base.

Succinct and true.  TP.

[BballTim]

What does the Lakers and Howard have to do with the Celtics and Rondo?

  He said that the Celts are playing poorly with Rondo so we should trade him. I suggested trading him for Howard since the Lakers are doing even worse. Shockingly, he decided that the Lakers trading Howard because the team is off to a slow start was a bad idea.

Woah. When did we have this conversation?  Because unless the "he" you're referring to was you talking to yourself, I never said any of those things that you're attributing to me.

  So are you claiming that you said the Lakers should consider trading Howard because the Lakers are off to a bad start or that you didn't respond to my post?

[PhoSita]

The conclusion is that Rondo is not one of this guy who you can surround with half a dozen of "solid players" and expect a great season. And that's not necessarily bad -- Rondo is part of the solution, but the solution is to bring another all-star caliber player. Otherwise, you'll be the Orlando Magic with Dwight Howard for years to come.

I agree, you can't surround Rondo with a half dozen solid players and have a great season.

However, you CAN surround Rondo with a half dozen solid players (actually, the C's have more than a half dozen), and beat ANY team in the league on a given night, if Rondo is healthy and focussed.  And that could be enough to make some real noise in the playoffs.

But that's exactly the point of this post, which some people seem to be missing.

Danny has surrounded Rondo with a collection of solid talent.  This should be enough to be a more than adequate supporting cast.  Rondo is having one of his best years yet, if not his best.

Yet the team looks decidedly mediocre.  Where's the disconnect?  That's all I'm asking.

And what I am saying is that I believe Rondo is not the type of player who can carry a team through a long season.  But, that doesn't mean he can't carry them in the playoffs. 

So, if you are looking for a guy to lead your team to win 60 games, we are looking at some evidence that Rondo might not be your guy.  But that might not translate to the same lack of success in the playoffs.

Okay, I see what you're saying.  And it's legitimate.  There's no doubt that Rondo is a different player in the playoffs.

But right now, this team doesn't look like it's going to get to 50 wins, let alone 60.

And how many teams go far in the playoffs without having home court advantage . . . ever?  Because even in the weak Eastern Conference you usually need to win at least 50 games to have a shot at home court in the first round, let alone beyond that. 

Indeed, in some more competitive years winning fewer than 48-50 games might see you missing the playoffs.

[PhoSita]

What does the Lakers and Howard have to do with the Celtics and Rondo?

  He said that the Celts are playing poorly with Rondo so we should trade him. I suggested trading him for Howard since the Lakers are doing even worse. Shockingly, he decided that the Lakers trading Howard because the team is off to a slow start was a bad idea.

Woah. When did we have this conversation?  Because unless the "he" you're referring to was you talking to yourself, I never said any of those things that you're attributing to me.

  So are you claiming that you said the Lakers should consider trading Howard because the Lakers are off to a bad start or that you didn't respond to my post?

I'm claiming that you're drastically oversimplifying everything that I've said in response to your posts in order to make me sound like a fool.

1. I never said that because the Celtics are playing poorly they should trade Rondo.

2. What I said about the Lakers is that their early season struggles are not really similar nor do they have anything to do with the Celtics' struggles, so the comparison you made is a poor one, and not worth discussing further.

I sense that you don't particularly respect anybody who disagrees with you, but I'd ask that you at least make an effort to appear as though you do.

[Chris]

The conclusion is that Rondo is not one of this guy who you can surround with half a dozen of "solid players" and expect a great season. And that's not necessarily bad -- Rondo is part of the solution, but the solution is to bring another all-star caliber player. Otherwise, you'll be the Orlando Magic with Dwight Howard for years to come.

I agree, you can't surround Rondo with a half dozen solid players and have a great season.

However, you CAN surround Rondo with a half dozen solid players (actually, the C's have more than a half dozen), and beat ANY team in the league on a given night, if Rondo is healthy and focussed.  And that could be enough to make some real noise in the playoffs.

But that's exactly the point of this post, which some people seem to be missing.

Danny has surrounded Rondo with a collection of solid talent.  This should be enough to be a more than adequate supporting cast.  Rondo is having one of his best years yet, if not his best.

Yet the team looks decidedly mediocre.  Where's the disconnect?  That's all I'm asking.

And what I am saying is that I believe Rondo is not the type of player who can carry a team through a long season.  But, that doesn't mean he can't carry them in the playoffs. 

So, if you are looking for a guy to lead your team to win 60 games, we are looking at some evidence that Rondo might not be your guy.  But that might not translate to the same lack of success in the playoffs.

Okay, I see what you're saying.  And it's legitimate.  There's no doubt that Rondo is a different player in the playoffs.

But right now, this team doesn't look like it's going to get to 50 wins, let alone 60.

And how many teams go far in the playoffs without having home court advantage . . . ever?  Because even in the weak Eastern Conference you usually need to win at least 50 games to have a shot at home court in the first round, let alone beyond that. 

Indeed, in some more competitive years winning fewer than 48-50 games might see you missing the playoffs.

Currently the C's are 1 game out of the 4th spot in the East.

Last year they were the 4 seed and went to the conference finals.  Last year they were on pace to win 48 games, had it been a 62 game season.  In 2010, they won 50 games, had the 4th seed, and went to the finals.

Boston needs to play better, but they are right in the thick of it. 

[SHAQATTACK]

well it might be said that Rondos talent or star output level is highly dependent on the level of talent surrounding him. Which is two has beens and some average players.

He makes everybody better , but when used with Star bigs , ect...  he has point guard skills of taking a team to a level few other guards in history could. ...ie John Stockton , MJ , ect.

Right now , doesn't have the STAR power players in their prime to make that championship team come alive.  HE did with Allen , KG PP , 4 years ago.


The Celtics have TWO and 1/2 pieces .... AB and ROndo and KG  and a nice bench .  There needs to be a high quality big to depend on . and hope that Green is able to play SF in play of Pierce large minutes on day.