Is Tony Parker the Best PG in the League?

[Chief]

Jalen Rose thinks so.

https://twitter.com/intent/user?screen_name=JalenRose&tw_i=339247273965916160&tw_p=tweetembed&xd_token=c9f911c90f552

[crimson_stallion]

In what way?

If you are asking who is the best PG in the NBA overall, then it's Chris Paul - no debate.  He's the only PG in the NBA with no flaw in his game. 

* Elite playmaker
* Elite court vision
* Elite ball handling
* Rarely turns the ball over
* Frequentl among league steal leaders
* Multiple All-Defense team selections
* Rebounds above average for a PG
* High percentage scorer from anywhere on the floor
* Good strength and athleticism
* Constantly among the top clutch scorers in the NBA
* Natural leadership ability

Chris Paul is easilly the most complete PG in the league, and is the type of guy who can and will improve any team he goes to.  He basically turned the Clippers from a league-wide joke to a playoff team to a borderline contender within two seasons.

The next best PG (i.e. true PG)...I'd probably say Rondo to be honest.  He's the best passing and rebounding PG in the entire league.  He has the ability to be the best defensive PG in the league (when he can be bothered) and though he's not a natural scorer, he can still average 14-15 PPG if he wants to.  His improved jumper has pushed his value up considerably, and his toughness and competitiveness are second to none at his positon.

Third would have to be Deron.  He's one of the few star PG's in the leaugue with genuine PG skills - i.e. he's an excellent ball handler and has great court vision.  His size gives him an advantage on many nights and hes a solid rebounder.  His ability as a pure PG though isn't on par with that of Paul or Rondo.  He's also not as good a shooter as Paul. 

With Nash finally dropping off, these are really the only pure PG's in the league today. 

Next you come to the guys who are really more scoring guards, but still very capable of playing PG.  That includes the likes of Derek Rose, Russel Westbrook and Tony Parker.  All of these guys are capable of averaging 8 assists a night in the NBA, but they are really shoot-first guys who look to score as a first priority and pass when the shot isn't there. 

I'd say Westbrook is probably the most complete player (talent wise) in this group, but he's also the lead composed mentally and emotionally and that seems to hold him back.

Rose and Parker both have a good head on their shoulders, but I'd probably put Rose above because I think he can dominate a game at will more readilly than Parker can.

So I'd probably say:

1. C Paul
2. R Rondo
3. D Williams
4. Derek Rose
5. Tony Parker
6. Russel Westbrook

[LarBrd33]

Not sure there's a PG I'd rather have in the playoffs than Parker.

Skillset-wise, he's top 5 (not even sure top 3) but the kid really seems to step it up come playoff time.

He's certainly the most successful.  If I had to pick any point guard to lead my team in a playoff series, it would be Parker.

Yeah, Parker, like Rondo, is a beast of a PG in the playoffs. They both really raise their games under the microscope of the playoffs whereas players like CP3, Westbrook, Rose and Williams pretty much play at the level they always play at or play slightly worse come playoff time.

To me, I think its because both are such great half court floor generals which is the style of offense played for the most part in the playoffs. As guys who run offenses in the half court I think they are the best. Then CP3 and Williams. Then the next level is the guys that are outstanding PGs but their half court offenses revolve around them scoring like Irving, Rose, Westbrook, Curry, etc.

Yes this both guys will put up whatever stat the TEAM needs, Chris Paul and Williams just don't seem to have in terms of leading a group.   Knock rondo all you can but his playoff numbers are all time great levels.   I feel rondo Parker and rose can raise any part of their game to affect the team in a payoff win situation

Chris Paul has better career playoff numbers than Rajon Rondo in virtually every single statistic (Rondo only beats Paul in rebounds at 6 to 5, turnovers 2.8 to 3, and fouls 2.5 to 2.7).

  Since 2009 Paul's averaged 20/5/9, Parker's averaged 21/4/6, Rondo's averaged 16/7/10. I'd say that the numbers for the players are pretty comparable.

  If you look at their on/off numbers over that time period, they aren't comparable at all though. My math might be slightly off, but it looks like since the 2009 playoffs Paul's teams are -226 when he plays and -12 when he's on the bench. The Spurs are a +175 when Parker's in the game, -43 when he's on the bench. The Celts (not counting this year) are a +257 when Rondo's in the game and -159 when he's on the bench.

  So for the playoffs Paul's teams (who were generally poor) did better when he was out of the game than when he played, but I don't think that's a reflection on Paul. On a per48 minute basis the Spurs were 5 points better than their opponents when Parker played and 4 points worse than their opponents when he sat. For the Celts, they're 5 points better than their opponents when Rondo plays and 15 points worse than their opponents when he sits.

I was waiting to see when you'd join the discussion and find some wonky way of arguing "Rondo is the best!"...  You didn't disappoint  

Since statistically, it's hard to argue anyone is better than Chris Paul.  And since in terms of success, it's hard to argue anyone is better than Tony Parker.   

I admire your creativity here.  Tommypoint!

Wait a second.

This is pretty funny stuff.  Statistically, it's clear that Rondo has been the Celtics best player in the playoffs (and the regular season, for that matter) since 2009.  Yet, you've been the guy who consistently argues that he's been our third most important player by a wide margin over that stretch. 

Interestingly, the argument that I've generally seen from you to back up your position is based on +/- numbers.

Now you laugh off BBallTim's attempts to use the +/- argument to show that Rondo has had a more positive impact on his team during the playoffs over that stretch than Paul and Parker have had for their respective teams. 

You've got to admit to your own hypocrisy on this one.   

That's pretty much not true.   I know it's not true, because I tried finding out if BBallTim's +/- numbers were even accurate and I couldn't even find a site that shows them.   I might have shown some stats in literally one post yesterday about "win shares per 48 minutes", but I have never used +/- numbers in any argument about Rondo.  I'll give you that I did link to ESPN's analysis on how Boston's defense falls apart without kevin Garnett on the floor, though... and that probably used some variation of +/-.

  No, he's right, every time you talk about how the defense is better when KG plays or when you mention that the team (or the offense) was better during the season without Rondo this year you're using the same type of analysis that I did in my post. It only sounds wonky in my post because I have a good enough grasp of the numbers to discuss them like that.

I agree with you that this discussion is hilarious, though.  I guess if you want to bring up a small sampling of playoff games you could probably argue that you and Tim's binky is the best in the world... but otherwise, it's hard to argue with stats that Rondo is on Chris Paul's level.  And it's hard to argue that Tony Parker isn't the most successful point guard in the league.  I do admire the attempt, though.

  It's only a small sample size when other people use them, right? Because when you started talking about how the team was playing better without Rondo or when you were talking about KG's effect on the defense early in the season you were using much smaller sample sizes than the number of games I'm discussing. FWIW there's only about 30 players in the league right now with more career playoff minutes than Rondo played from 09-12, so I would guess as far as you're concerned playoff performances are never worth discussing because they're all based on small sample sizes.

Generally I think +/- is a waste of time.  It's too dependent on the other players on the court.  I don't generally use +/-, because I genuinely think they are nonsense.   When I was talking about KG's impact on defense, the main quote I kept using is: "Dig deeper and Boston's defensive rating (points allowed per 100 possessions) was a staggering 104.6 with Garnett on the bench and a minuscule 96.2 when he was on the floor. Yes, even at an advanced age, Garnett remains so vital to this team and its success, particularly on the defensive end."

It's pretty clear that KG makes a huge impact on our defense.  In this context, I can see using those kind of stats.  You can watch the games and see how much better our defense rotates and reacts with the lengthy KG holding down the fort... beyond that, this is probably the best way to see how we limit offenses with and without KG on the court.   

The problem I generally have with +/- is that starters typically play with other starters.  We see that when a bench player gets promoted to starter, he suddenly starts having better +/- stats... not much of a shocker considering he went from playing 90% of his time playing with bench scrubs to playing 90% of his time with the best players on the team.

So anyways... in regards to this conversation... pretty much every statistical analysis will show that Chris Paul is better than Rajon Rondo.  If you're talkin playoffs then talk playoffs...

Chris Paul's 40 playoff games:  21 points, 9.5 assists, 5 rebounds, 2.2 steals, 48%/33%/83% in 39.6 minutes

Rondo's 92 playoff games:  14.5 points, 9.2 assists, 6 rebounds, 2 steals, 45%/27%/65% in 38.5 minutes

I mean if you want to keep cherry-picking stats until it shows Rondo as the best, go for it.   But unless you're using some wonky analysis, Chris Paul wins any statistical debate and Tony Parker (166 playoff games and counting) wins any debate about "team success". 

[CelticConcourse]

Then we'll compare actual Playoffs stats.

Parker's playoffs this year are just ignored, huh?

23 points, 7 assists, and a 12-2 record seems relevant.

And I'm gonna compare that to....?

(Also note that Parker is 31 years old whereas Rondo is 27.)

Compare it to whatever you want.  To ignore it is nonsensical.

2012-13
Tony Parker: 23/7/4/1 (14 games)
Rajon Rondo: 0/0/0/0 (0 games)
Tony Parker is the better overall player

Points created
Parker: 37
Rondo: 0
Parker creates more points for his team.

Assists
Parker: 7
Rondo: 0
Parker gets more assists than Rondo

Rebounds
Parker: 4
Rondo: 0
Parker gets more rebounds, even in a larger sample size

Steals
Parker: 1
Rondo: 0
Parker gets more steals, even in a larger sample size

Defensive Rating
Parker: 101
Rondo: ∞/0
Parker is a better defender than Rondo

Assist%, Turnover%
Parker: 35.8/11.3
Rondo: 0/0
(this is useless, we actually have to find the quotient)
Parker: 3.17
Rondo: Indeterminate
Parker takes care of the ball and distributes the ball better than Rondo

eFG%
Parker: 49.2
Rondo: 0.0
Parker is a better shooter than Rondo

Win Shares
Parker: 2.1
Rondo: 0.0
Parker wins more games than Rondo.
 
I mean, come on, there's nothing to compare to!!

This is asinine

Exactly. So go ahead and use my first analysis.

He's certainly the most successful.  If I had to pick any point guard to lead my team in a playoff series, it would be Parker.

I don't get that.

What's not to get?  How many other PGs are there playing who have three rings, four Finals appearances, and a Finals MVP?

Facts:

In Tony Parker's first Finals appearance, in two of his games he scored less than 5 points, shooting 38.6% on the series. In one of his games, he shot 1-for-12.

In Tony Parker's second Finals appearance, he had just as many fouls as assists (playing PG). His turnovers+fouls was more than his assists+rebounds.

In Tony Parker's third Finals appearance, he had one less total turnover than total assists. However, he shot 56.8% for the series, which was fantastic (24.5ppg). Being picky, he shot just 52.7% from the foul line which is, mind you, worse than Rondo has shot in all but one series of his playoffs career (15 total)! Not so clutch.

You're going to cherry pick stats of Parker's, while ignoring Rondo's Finals appearances?

In his first Finals, Rondo scored eight or fewer points in four out of six games.  He only had double digit assists in one game, and had four or fewer assists in three games.  He shot 40% or worse (including games where he shot 25% and 14%) in four out of six games.

In his second Finals, Rondo shot below 47% six times, including two games of 33% shooting.  He only reached 10 assists in two out of seven games.  He shot 26.3% on FTs for the series, which is much worse than the 52.7% you criticized Parker for so vehemently.

It seems kind of odd, to criticize Parker for something that he has done far better than Rondo.

First off, I'll say that Rondo is the more versatile player, and by looking at the past 3 Playoffs:
Versatility Index
Tony Parker: 8.8 (23), 7.1 (38), 8.8 (16)
Rajon Rondo: 12.8 (2), 9.4 (6), 10.5 (7)

Then we'll compare actual Playoffs stats.
2008-09
Tony Parker: 29/7/4/1 (5 games)
Rajon Rondo: 17/10/10/3 (14 games)

2009-10
Tony Parker: 17/5/4/1 (10 games)
Rajon Rondo: 16/9/6/2 (24 games)

2010-11
Tony Parker: 20/5/3/1 (6 games)
Rajon Rondo: 14/10/5/1 (9 games)

2011-12
Tony Parker: 20/7/4/1 (14 games)
Rajon Rondo: 17/12/7/2 (19 games)

Obviously, you'll notice that these stats can all be flawed, especially given Parker's small sample sizes. However, you'll notice that even as Rondo plays more games, he keeps up his production; getting to the Finals requires playing more games than in a trip to the (E/W)CSF. I decided to underestimate both players' assists in a way that makes each assist count as two points created. Comparing the points each PG created for his team... (points+assists*2)

Parker: 43, 27, 30, 34
Rondo: 37, 34, 34, 41
Rondo creates more points for his team.

Might as well look at assists totals, right?

Parker: 7, 5, 5, 7
Rondo: 10, 9, 10, 12
Rondo gets more assists than Parker

Then, we'll take a look at rebounds...

Parker: 4, 4, 3, 4
Rondo: 10, 6, 5, 7
Rondo gets more rebounds, even in larger sample sizes

Then, we'll take a look at steals...

Parker: 1, 1, 1, 1
Rondo: 3, 2, 1, 2
Rondo gets more steals, even in larger sample sizes

Then, we'll take a look at Defensive Rating...

Parker: 112, 113, 108, 107, 101
Rondo: 103, 103, 102, 106, 99
Rondo is a better defender than Parker

But who's better at handling the ball?! We'll take a look at assist% n' turnover%...

Parker: 47/15, 30/11, 28/15, 32/14
Rondo: 41/13, 41/16, 42/21, 54/18
(this is useless, we actually have to find the quotient)
Parker: 3.1, 2.7, 1.9, 2.3
Rondo: 2.2, 2.6, 2.0, 3.0
Rondo is getting better and better than Parker

But Parker is a way better shooter than Rondo, right?!
eFG%

Parker: 56.0, 48.1, 46.8, 46.9
Rondo: 43.0, 47.7, 47.7, 48.2
Looks like they're heading in opposite directions to me... Rondo even "out-percentaged" Parker last season

And to cap it all off, we'll check out the win shares:

Parker: 0.5, 0.3, 0.3, 1.4
Rondo: 1.6, 2.7, 0.7, 2.6
Rondo wins more games than Parker.

I hate to say it, but the comparison is almost laughable. Rondo is better.

Is this asinine?

[The Rondo Show]

Then we'll compare actual Playoffs stats.

Parker's playoffs this year are just ignored, huh?

23 points, 7 assists, and a 12-2 record seems relevant.

And I'm gonna compare that to....?

(Also note that Parker is 31 years old whereas Rondo is 27.)

Compare it to whatever you want.  To ignore it is nonsensical.

2012-13
Tony Parker: 23/7/4/1 (14 games)
Rajon Rondo: 0/0/0/0 (0 games)
Tony Parker is the better overall player

Points created
Parker: 37
Rondo: 0
Parker creates more points for his team.

Assists
Parker: 7
Rondo: 0
Parker gets more assists than Rondo

Rebounds
Parker: 4
Rondo: 0
Parker gets more rebounds, even in a larger sample size

Steals
Parker: 1
Rondo: 0
Parker gets more steals, even in a larger sample size

Defensive Rating
Parker: 101
Rondo: ∞/0
Parker is a better defender than Rondo

Assist%, Turnover%
Parker: 35.8/11.3
Rondo: 0/0
(this is useless, we actually have to find the quotient)
Parker: 3.17
Rondo: Indeterminate
Parker takes care of the ball and distributes the ball better than Rondo

eFG%
Parker: 49.2
Rondo: 0.0
Parker is a better shooter than Rondo

Win Shares
Parker: 2.1
Rondo: 0.0
Parker wins more games than Rondo.
 
I mean, come on, there's nothing to compare to!!

This is asinine

Exactly. So go ahead and use my first analysis.

He's certainly the most successful.  If I had to pick any point guard to lead my team in a playoff series, it would be Parker.

I don't get that.

What's not to get?  How many other PGs are there playing who have three rings, four Finals appearances, and a Finals MVP?

Facts:

In Tony Parker's first Finals appearance, in two of his games he scored less than 5 points, shooting 38.6% on the series. In one of his games, he shot 1-for-12.

In Tony Parker's second Finals appearance, he had just as many fouls as assists (playing PG). His turnovers+fouls was more than his assists+rebounds.

In Tony Parker's third Finals appearance, he had one less total turnover than total assists. However, he shot 56.8% for the series, which was fantastic (24.5ppg). Being picky, he shot just 52.7% from the foul line which is, mind you, worse than Rondo has shot in all but one series of his playoffs career (15 total)! Not so clutch.

You're going to cherry pick stats of Parker's, while ignoring Rondo's Finals appearances?

In his first Finals, Rondo scored eight or fewer points in four out of six games.  He only had double digit assists in one game, and had four or fewer assists in three games.  He shot 40% or worse (including games where he shot 25% and 14%) in four out of six games.

In his second Finals, Rondo shot below 47% six times, including two games of 33% shooting.  He only reached 10 assists in two out of seven games.  He shot 26.3% on FTs for the series, which is much worse than the 52.7% you criticized Parker for so vehemently.

It seems kind of odd, to criticize Parker for something that he has done far better than Rondo.

First off, I'll say that Rondo is the more versatile player, and by looking at the past 3 Playoffs:
Versatility Index
Tony Parker: 8.8 (23), 7.1 (38), 8.8 (16)
Rajon Rondo: 12.8 (2), 9.4 (6), 10.5 (7)

Then we'll compare actual Playoffs stats.
2008-09
Tony Parker: 29/7/4/1 (5 games)
Rajon Rondo: 17/10/10/3 (14 games)

2009-10
Tony Parker: 17/5/4/1 (10 games)
Rajon Rondo: 16/9/6/2 (24 games)

2010-11
Tony Parker: 20/5/3/1 (6 games)
Rajon Rondo: 14/10/5/1 (9 games)

2011-12
Tony Parker: 20/7/4/1 (14 games)
Rajon Rondo: 17/12/7/2 (19 games)

Obviously, you'll notice that these stats can all be flawed, especially given Parker's small sample sizes. However, you'll notice that even as Rondo plays more games, he keeps up his production; getting to the Finals requires playing more games than in a trip to the (E/W)CSF. I decided to underestimate both players' assists in a way that makes each assist count as two points created. Comparing the points each PG created for his team... (points+assists*2)

Parker: 43, 27, 30, 34
Rondo: 37, 34, 34, 41
Rondo creates more points for his team.

Might as well look at assists totals, right?

Parker: 7, 5, 5, 7
Rondo: 10, 9, 10, 12
Rondo gets more assists than Parker

Then, we'll take a look at rebounds...

Parker: 4, 4, 3, 4
Rondo: 10, 6, 5, 7
Rondo gets more rebounds, even in larger sample sizes

Then, we'll take a look at steals...

Parker: 1, 1, 1, 1
Rondo: 3, 2, 1, 2
Rondo gets more steals, even in larger sample sizes

Then, we'll take a look at Defensive Rating...

Parker: 112, 113, 108, 107, 101
Rondo: 103, 103, 102, 106, 99
Rondo is a better defender than Parker

But who's better at handling the ball?! We'll take a look at assist% n' turnover%...

Parker: 47/15, 30/11, 28/15, 32/14
Rondo: 41/13, 41/16, 42/21, 54/18
(this is useless, we actually have to find the quotient)
Parker: 3.1, 2.7, 1.9, 2.3
Rondo: 2.2, 2.6, 2.0, 3.0
Rondo is getting better and better than Parker

But Parker is a way better shooter than Rondo, right?!
eFG%

Parker: 56.0, 48.1, 46.8, 46.9
Rondo: 43.0, 47.7, 47.7, 48.2
Looks like they're heading in opposite directions to me... Rondo even "out-percentaged" Parker last season

And to cap it all off, we'll check out the win shares:

Parker: 0.5, 0.3, 0.3, 1.4
Rondo: 1.6, 2.7, 0.7, 2.6
Rondo wins more games than Parker.

I hate to say it, but the comparison is almost laughable. Rondo is better.

Is this asinine?

Yes. You are completely excluding Parker's stats from this year because it's convenient for you argument.

[CelticConcourse]

Then we'll compare actual Playoffs stats.

Parker's playoffs this year are just ignored, huh?

23 points, 7 assists, and a 12-2 record seems relevant.

And I'm gonna compare that to....?

(Also note that Parker is 31 years old whereas Rondo is 27.)

Compare it to whatever you want.  To ignore it is nonsensical.

2012-13
Tony Parker: 23/7/4/1 (14 games)
Rajon Rondo: 0/0/0/0 (0 games)
Tony Parker is the better overall player

Points created
Parker: 37
Rondo: 0
Parker creates more points for his team.

Assists
Parker: 7
Rondo: 0
Parker gets more assists than Rondo

Rebounds
Parker: 4
Rondo: 0
Parker gets more rebounds, even in a larger sample size

Steals
Parker: 1
Rondo: 0
Parker gets more steals, even in a larger sample size

Defensive Rating
Parker: 101
Rondo: ∞/0
Parker is a better defender than Rondo

Assist%, Turnover%
Parker: 35.8/11.3
Rondo: 0/0
(this is useless, we actually have to find the quotient)
Parker: 3.17
Rondo: Indeterminate
Parker takes care of the ball and distributes the ball better than Rondo

eFG%
Parker: 49.2
Rondo: 0.0
Parker is a better shooter than Rondo

Win Shares
Parker: 2.1
Rondo: 0.0
Parker wins more games than Rondo.
 
I mean, come on, there's nothing to compare to!!

This is asinine

Exactly. So go ahead and use my first analysis.

He's certainly the most successful.  If I had to pick any point guard to lead my team in a playoff series, it would be Parker.

I don't get that.

What's not to get?  How many other PGs are there playing who have three rings, four Finals appearances, and a Finals MVP?

Facts:

In Tony Parker's first Finals appearance, in two of his games he scored less than 5 points, shooting 38.6% on the series. In one of his games, he shot 1-for-12.

In Tony Parker's second Finals appearance, he had just as many fouls as assists (playing PG). His turnovers+fouls was more than his assists+rebounds.

In Tony Parker's third Finals appearance, he had one less total turnover than total assists. However, he shot 56.8% for the series, which was fantastic (24.5ppg). Being picky, he shot just 52.7% from the foul line which is, mind you, worse than Rondo has shot in all but one series of his playoffs career (15 total)! Not so clutch.

You're going to cherry pick stats of Parker's, while ignoring Rondo's Finals appearances?

In his first Finals, Rondo scored eight or fewer points in four out of six games.  He only had double digit assists in one game, and had four or fewer assists in three games.  He shot 40% or worse (including games where he shot 25% and 14%) in four out of six games.

In his second Finals, Rondo shot below 47% six times, including two games of 33% shooting.  He only reached 10 assists in two out of seven games.  He shot 26.3% on FTs for the series, which is much worse than the 52.7% you criticized Parker for so vehemently.

It seems kind of odd, to criticize Parker for something that he has done far better than Rondo.

First off, I'll say that Rondo is the more versatile player, and by looking at the past 3 Playoffs:
Versatility Index
Tony Parker: 8.8 (23), 7.1 (38), 8.8 (16)
Rajon Rondo: 12.8 (2), 9.4 (6), 10.5 (7)

Then we'll compare actual Playoffs stats.
2008-09
Tony Parker: 29/7/4/1 (5 games)
Rajon Rondo: 17/10/10/3 (14 games)

2009-10
Tony Parker: 17/5/4/1 (10 games)
Rajon Rondo: 16/9/6/2 (24 games)

2010-11
Tony Parker: 20/5/3/1 (6 games)
Rajon Rondo: 14/10/5/1 (9 games)

2011-12
Tony Parker: 20/7/4/1 (14 games)
Rajon Rondo: 17/12/7/2 (19 games)

Obviously, you'll notice that these stats can all be flawed, especially given Parker's small sample sizes. However, you'll notice that even as Rondo plays more games, he keeps up his production; getting to the Finals requires playing more games than in a trip to the (E/W)CSF. I decided to underestimate both players' assists in a way that makes each assist count as two points created. Comparing the points each PG created for his team... (points+assists*2)

Parker: 43, 27, 30, 34
Rondo: 37, 34, 34, 41
Rondo creates more points for his team.

Might as well look at assists totals, right?

Parker: 7, 5, 5, 7
Rondo: 10, 9, 10, 12
Rondo gets more assists than Parker

Then, we'll take a look at rebounds...

Parker: 4, 4, 3, 4
Rondo: 10, 6, 5, 7
Rondo gets more rebounds, even in larger sample sizes

Then, we'll take a look at steals...

Parker: 1, 1, 1, 1
Rondo: 3, 2, 1, 2
Rondo gets more steals, even in larger sample sizes

Then, we'll take a look at Defensive Rating...

Parker: 112, 113, 108, 107, 101
Rondo: 103, 103, 102, 106, 99
Rondo is a better defender than Parker

But who's better at handling the ball?! We'll take a look at assist% n' turnover%...

Parker: 47/15, 30/11, 28/15, 32/14
Rondo: 41/13, 41/16, 42/21, 54/18
(this is useless, we actually have to find the quotient)
Parker: 3.1, 2.7, 1.9, 2.3
Rondo: 2.2, 2.6, 2.0, 3.0
Rondo is getting better and better than Parker

But Parker is a way better shooter than Rondo, right?!
eFG%

Parker: 56.0, 48.1, 46.8, 46.9
Rondo: 43.0, 47.7, 47.7, 48.2
Looks like they're heading in opposite directions to me... Rondo even "out-percentaged" Parker last season

And to cap it all off, we'll check out the win shares:

Parker: 0.5, 0.3, 0.3, 1.4
Rondo: 1.6, 2.7, 0.7, 2.6
Rondo wins more games than Parker.

I hate to say it, but the comparison is almost laughable. Rondo is better.

Is this asinine?

Yes. You are completely excluding Parker's stats from this year because it's convenient for you argument.

Like I asked Roy, what should we compare it to? And again, I'm attempting to disprove his statement "He's certainly the most successful ...  How many other PGs are there playing who have three rings, four Finals appearances, and a Finals MVP?" because it doesn't justify the fact that he's "the best PG in the NBA".

[Boris Badenov]

And to cap it all off, we'll check out the win shares:

Parker: 0.5, 0.3, 0.3, 1.4
Rondo: 1.6, 2.7, 0.7, 2.6
Rondo wins more games than Parker.

For future reference, win shares are a *total* over all games played, so all the numbers above tell you is that Rondo's gone deeper into the playoffs recently. When comparing players with different totals for GP, you should use win shares per 48:

Parker: 0.141, 0.047, 0.070, 0.134, 0.194
Rondo: 0.130, 0.131, 0.102, 0.155

The last number for Parker is 2013.

And just to weigh in on why it might be useful to consider 2013, the thread title asks who "IS," present tense, the best. That means right now. So, Parker's recent play sets the benchmark for how good he is now. You can compare him today to pre-injury Rondo, or some hypothetical post-injury Rondo, but if you ignore 2013 Parker you are addressing a different question: was Parker better than Rondo at the end of 2012?

This is important because, among other things, by win shares and PER, Parker's performance so far in this year's playoffs is better than any performance by Rondo, ever.

And if you hate advanced metrics, that's fine, just watch these highlights from his series-ending evisceration of the Grizzlies, in which he was guarded by Tony Allen (NBA 1st team all-defense) and Mike Conley (NBA 2nd team all-defense):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvoB9iG61ek

[LarBrd33]

And to cap it all off, we'll check out the win shares:

Parker: 0.5, 0.3, 0.3, 1.4
Rondo: 1.6, 2.7, 0.7, 2.6
Rondo wins more games than Parker.

For future reference, win shares are a *total* over all games played, so all the numbers above tell you is that Rondo's gone deeper into the playoffs recently. When comparing players with different totals for GP, you should use win shares per 48:

Parker: 0.141, 0.047, 0.070, 0.134, 0.194
Rondo: 0.130, 0.131, 0.102, 0.155

The last number for Parker is 2013.

And just to weigh in on why it might be useful to consider 2013, the thread title asks who "IS," present tense, the best. That means right now. So, Parker's recent play sets the benchmark for how good he is now. You can compare him today to pre-injury Rondo, or some hypothetical post-injury Rondo, but if you ignore 2013 Parker you are addressing a different question: was Parker better than Rondo at the end of 2012?

This is important because, among other things, by win shares and PER, Parker's performance so far in this year's playoffs is better than any performance by Rondo, ever.

And if you hate advanced metrics, that's fine, just watch these highlights from his series-ending evisceration of the Grizzlies, in which he was guarded by Tony Allen (NBA 1st team all-defense) and Mike Conley (NBA 2nd team all-defense):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvoB9iG61ek

[LarBrd33]

Advanced Stat junkies... do we have any statistics that show Rondo's effectiveness with and without KG and Pierce on the floor?  Do his stats improve when he is sharing the court with them?

That could be a partial explanation for the difference in ROndo's performance in the playoffs.  KG has his minutes increase from around 30 to 37 in the playoffs.  Pierce has his minutes increase to 39.   Not to mention that Rondo averaged 6 more minutes in the playoffs last year than he does in the regular season.  It doesn't totally surprise me that the playoff stats would be different... Boston is a playoff team.  They skate by in the regular season and put everything on the line come playoff time.  There are countless other factors like playoff matchups.  It's not fair to exclusively look at playoff numbers as a measure of one's ability, imo. 

[BballTim]

Advanced Stat junkies... do we have any statistics that show Rondo's effectiveness with and without KG and Pierce on the floor?  Do his stats improve when he is sharing the court with them?

That could be a partial explanation for the difference in ROndo's performance in the playoffs.  KG has his minutes increase from around 30 to 37 in the playoffs.  Pierce has his minutes increase to 39.   Not to mention that Rondo averaged 6 more minutes in the playoffs last year than he does in the regular season.  It doesn't totally surprise me that the playoff stats would be different... Boston is a playoff team.  They skate by in the regular season and put everything on the line come playoff time.  There are countless other factors like playoff matchups.  It's not fair to exclusively look at playoff numbers as a measure of one's ability, imo.

  The team's outscored their opponents in those playoffs by about 130 points (total) more with Rondo in the game than Pierce in the game over those 4 years. It's Pierce benefiting from playing with Rondo more than the other way around. KG had a great +/- in the 2012 playoffs but Rondo had a better +/- than KG in 2010 and 2011 and had the best +/- on the team (IIRC) in 2009.

[Celtics18]

Using NBA.COM's efficiency ratings, I tried to come up with an objective way to look at who have been the most successful guards in the NBA during the playoffs over the course of the last five seasons. 

I'll admit that the reason I started with the 2009 playoffs is because that was the year that Rajon Rondo became a superstar playoff performer.  I wanted to see how our point guard stacked up against other elite guards during that time span. 

Anyway, I multiplied each player's playoff efficiency rating by the number of games each player played in a given year's playoffs, then I added all the yearly totals for each player together, giving the total playoff efficiency since 2009.  The total playoff efficiency divided by the total number of playoff games played over that stretch gives each player's average playoff efficiency over this time span. 

Here it is:

Kobe Bryant:          Average:  24.5, total games played: 68, total: 1,666
Dwayne Wade:        Average: 22.0, total games played: 70, total: 1,540
Rajon Rondo:         Average:  22.8, total games played: 66, total: 1,504.8
Tony Parker:           Average: 19.4, total games played: 49, total: 950.6
Russell Westbrook: Average: 20.9, total games played: 45, total: 940.5
James Harden:        Average: 18.0, total games played: 43, total: 774
Chris Paul:             Average:  23.3, total games played: 28, total: 652.4
Derrick Rose:         Average:  21.2, total games played: 29, total: 614.8
Deron Williams:     Average:  23.4, total games played:  22, total: 514.8
Steph Curry:          Average:   22.5, total games played: 12, total:  270

[D.o.s.]

Using NBA.COM's efficiency ratings, I tried to come up with an objective way to look at who have been the most successful guards in the NBA during the playoffs over the course of the last five seasons. 

I'll admit that the reason I started with the 2009 playoffs is because that was the year that Rajon Rondo became a superstar playoff performer.  I wanted to see how our point guard stacked up against other elite guards during that time span. 

Anyway, I multiplied each player's playoff efficiency rating by the number of games each player played in a given year's playoffs, then I added all the yearly totals for each player together, giving the total playoff efficiency since 2009.  The total playoff efficiency divided by the total number of playoff games played over that stretch gives each player's average playoff efficiency over this time span. 

Here it is:

Kobe Bryant:          Average:  24.5, total games played: 68, total: 1,666
Dwayne Wade:        Average: 22.0, total games played: 70, total: 1,540
Rajon Rondo:         Average:  22.8, total games played: 66, total: 1,504.8
Tony Parker:           Average: 19.4, total games played: 49, total: 950.6
Russell Westbrook: Average: 20.9, total games played: 45, total: 940.5
James Harden:        Average: 18.0, total games played: 43, total: 774
Chris Paul:             Average:  23.3, total games played: 28, total: 652.4
Derrick Rose:         Average:  21.2, total games played: 29, total: 614.8
Deron Williams:     Average:  23.4, total games played:  22, total: 514.8
Steph Curry:          Average:   22.5, total games played: 12, total:  270

Not that I necessarily disagree with this list, or this way of ranking, but surely it's slanted towards teams that play more games in the playoffs--which is indicative of longer series as well as deeper runs.

[Moranis]

Using NBA.COM's efficiency ratings, I tried to come up with an objective way to look at who have been the most successful guards in the NBA during the playoffs over the course of the last five seasons. 

I'll admit that the reason I started with the 2009 playoffs is because that was the year that Rajon Rondo became a superstar playoff performer.  I wanted to see how our point guard stacked up against other elite guards during that time span. 

Anyway, I multiplied each player's playoff efficiency rating by the number of games each player played in a given year's playoffs, then I added all the yearly totals for each player together, giving the total playoff efficiency since 2009.  The total playoff efficiency divided by the total number of playoff games played over that stretch gives each player's average playoff efficiency over this time span. 

Here it is:

Kobe Bryant:          Average:  24.5, total games played: 68, total: 1,666
Dwayne Wade:        Average: 22.0, total games played: 70, total: 1,540
Rajon Rondo:         Average:  22.8, total games played: 66, total: 1,504.8
Tony Parker:           Average: 19.4, total games played: 49, total: 950.6
Russell Westbrook: Average: 20.9, total games played: 45, total: 940.5
James Harden:        Average: 18.0, total games played: 43, total: 774
Chris Paul:             Average:  23.3, total games played: 28, total: 652.4
Derrick Rose:         Average:  21.2, total games played: 29, total: 614.8
Deron Williams:     Average:  23.4, total games played:  22, total: 514.8
Steph Curry:          Average:   22.5, total games played: 12, total:  270

Not that I necessarily disagree with this list, or this way of ranking, but surely it's slanted towards teams that play more games in the playoffs--which is indicative of longer series as well as deeper runs.

Yeah but even that list shows that Chris Paul and Deron Williams on a per game basis are better PG's than Rajon Rondo and Steph Curry isn't that far behind.

[D.o.s.]

So that speaks to another break, at least for me--Deron Williams has clearly been "Cutting that Check" for the last three seasons. Dude has mailed in more games than I can count, even/especially in the playoffs.



Now, I can appreciate that some of the best players I've ever seen don't get visibly excited/stressed/whatever, but for a guy who was 1A or 1B in the country depending on your mood, he's definitely fallen off.

[StartOrien]

Ha, of course I start off this thread by coming to the conclusion that what makes Parker the best point guard in the league is something he does that's completely immeasurable and it ends with an extensive conversation in advanced stats.