0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.
First, I do not believe that the Celtics are better without Rondo but to say that somehow this series proves that Rondo is better than say KG, just isn't logical.The Celtics were playing great without Rondo for what, 40 games or something like that. It was not because Rondo was out but because KG was playing great. Then KG got hurt and the team did a nose dive. Now KG is playing but not 100%. KG is a much more significant barameter than Rondo, that is very clear if you look at it objectively.I am not sure we could beat the Knicks even with KG 100%, they are playing very well and Carmelo is dominating. I also feel it is very doubtful that we beat the Knicks even with Rondo and a gimpy KG, but I can't prove that any more than the reverse argument can be proved.