It does seem strange the type of argumentative tactics Ive seen being used here when criticizing Rondo. We went (I think) 10-1 without KG, but we never thought we were better without KG, and bought that faith wholesale because of back credit accumulated. But we never brought up KG's lackluster games for parts of the 08 playoffs, never used the recent success as justification that KG was expendable or holding the team back, because he's Kevin Garnett, and we knew he was a critical leader who was the very bedrock of the team.
Rondo doesn't have KG's spotless reputation or his MVP pedigree, Rondo's a unique player whose game and reputation does have worts, and maybe that's why we're so quick to use this win streak as a justification. But the parrellels are there; Rondo is argumentably our most talented player, is indisputably a critical leader in the lockerroom, and is an important piece to the very bedrock of the current incarnation of the franchise. He's earned that.
And the reason why the argument is flawed is the same; the team has seen too much greatness, too much success with Rondo, and he's been so good that a 7 game win streak is a paltry sample size as proof positive that the team is 'better off without Rondo'. It should be dismissed out of hand, and no amount of wins between now and the All-star break can tip the scales to justify trading Rondo for anything other than his full value. As Chuck was once wont to say, 'Anything else, would be uncivilized'.