For the record Rondo runs our offense all day long and logs assists like they're going out of style and that does benefit the team. It's true that many people seem to enjoy watching the offense more when Rondo's controlling the ball less, it's equally true that our offense is usually worse during those times.
Yes he does run our offense and log assists all day, but where is the evidence to show that our team is far better when he's dong that?
Where is the evidence that shows all of Rondo's double figure assist nights and triple double nights are actually helping us win games?
If you look at our roster we actually have a number of capable offensive players - Kevin Garnett, Paul Pierce, Brandon Bass, Jason Terry, Leandro Barbosa, Courtney Lee, Chris Wilcox, Jeff Green. That may not be the most stacked lineup in the league, but on paper it's right up there in probably the top 5 or 10 in terms of scoring depth.
Now a great PG is supposed to make everybody around him better - think Stockton, Chris Paul, Jason Kidd. Does Rondo really do that? Lets see..
* Bass is having the worst season of his career
* Terry (a great shooter of this generation) is struggling
* Lee struggled at first, and has been up and down since
* Jeff Green doesn't look comfortable at all on offense
* Pierce is shooting the lowest percentage since 2008
* KG is shooting the lowest percentage since 2008
* Barbosa pretty much creates all his own offense
If Rondo is just a great pure PG, why hasn't he been able to get KG and Pierce easy shots? Why hasn't he been able to get the new guys comfortable playing in the new system?
The announcers during today's game quoted Terry saying that he's strugglng because he's still not used to where he needs to be on plays. If Rondo is so good at making teammates better, should't he be getting Terry the ball in his hot spots, where he's most comfortable?
If Rondo makes us SO much better with his assists, then why is it that this team, with a very reasoanble amount of offensive talent, is one of the worst offensive teams in the NBA?
If Rondo is so critical to this team, then why is his net on/off rating a -1.3 (according to NBA.com advanced stats)?
Why did we lost the last two games, even through Rondo recorded triple doubles in both? How come today when Pierce recorded a triple double, we won the game against the best team in the East?
I love Rondo as a player, but I'm just not convinced that he is the absolutely critical piece to this team everybody believes he is.
So aside from objective opinion, quoting of box scores and pure fanboyism, can anybody here actually produce some type of statistical correlation between Rondo playing, and us winning?
Let me help with some words quoted from an NBA.com article:
As good as Rondo has been, keep this in mind: Even with him this season, the Celtics ranked 23rd in the NBA in offensive effiency entering Sunday.
Rondo entered Sunday ranked 49th in PER among players (and 16th among guards) who have played at least 3,000 minutes in the last four seasons. He ranked tied for 54th overall this season among those with at least 500 minutes played.
Celtics With Rajon Rondo
This Season - Per 48 Minutes
| Stat | On Court | Off Court |
| FG % | 45.9 | 45.2 |
| 3PT% | 34.7 | 30.6 |
| Ass | 23.5 | 20.4 |
| Pts | 93.8 | 90.7 |
| Opp Pts | 95.7 | 90.8 |
The Celtics are averaging 93.8 points with Rondo on the court this season, and 90.7 points with him off the court. But they're considerably better in terms of what they allow, as noted in the chart on the right.
Theyve been able to survive his absence in the past.
The Celtics are 145-95 with Rondo over the last four seasons, but they are also 22-13 without him. He's previously missed as many as 14 games in a season.
In that span, they've been a plus-2.9 points per 48 minutes with him on the floor, but plus-4.4 points with him off the floor.
For those who are challenged with a calculator, the above stats show that we have a win record of 0.604 with Rondo, and a record of 0.628 without him.
Yes, not only does Rondo have a negative on/off rating, but we also have a better winning record when he's NOT playing than we do when he is.
So please, somebody give me anything at all which proves that we are a significantly worse team without Rondo. I'd love to have a reason to believe Rondo's league leading assiss and triple doubles mean something, but I just don't see it.