Are these PGs better than our Rondo?

[Mazingerz]

http://www.hoopsworld.com/top-6-2013-2014-nba-point-guards

Steph Curry
Russell Westbrook
Derrick Rose
Kyrie Irving
Tony Parker
Chris Paul

Who in your opinion is better than Rondo from the above?

IMHO Rondo is better.

[D.o.s.]

http://www.hoopsworld.com/top-6-2013-2014-nba-point-guards

Steph Curry
Russell Westbrook
Derrick Rose
Kyrie Irving
Tony Parker
Chris Paul

Who in your opinion is better than Rondo from the above?

IMHO Rondo is better.

Better is an astonishingly useless word when it isn't qualified with another comparative factor.

All those guys are great NBA players, including Rondo.

To elaborate:

Curry just became the most prolific 3 point shooter in NBA history (for one individual season).

Derrick Rose is the youngest NBA MVP ever.

Russell Westbrook's first four seasons in the league put him in Oscar Robertson's zip code, statistically.

Tony Parker is a three time NBA champion and Finals MVP who has become the focal point of his team's offense at the age of 31, a full five or so years after his prime.

Chris Paul may be the best half-court PG playing today and is a model prototypical PG.


I take issue with ranking Irving that high because of health, but I think we can all agree that the potential is certainly obvious.

[Mazingerz]

http://www.hoopsworld.com/top-6-2013-2014-nba-point-guards

Steph Curry
Russell Westbrook
Derrick Rose
Kyrie Irving
Tony Parker
Chris Paul

Who in your opinion is better than Rondo from the above?

IMHO Rondo is better.

Better is an astonishingly useless word when it isn't qualified with another comparative factor.

All those guys are great NBA players, including Rondo.

What Im after is in terms of overall productivity. The above article broke it down into PPG, APG, RPG, APG and PER;

Who makes the greatest impact? If that certain player is out for whaever reason, his team will suffer.

[D.o.s.]

http://www.hoopsworld.com/top-6-2013-2014-nba-point-guards

Steph Curry
Russell Westbrook
Derrick Rose
Kyrie Irving
Tony Parker
Chris Paul

Who in your opinion is better than Rondo from the above?

IMHO Rondo is better.

Better is an astonishingly useless word when it isn't qualified with another comparative factor.

All those guys are great NBA players, including Rondo.

What Im after is in terms of overall productivity. The above article broke it down into PPG, APG, RPG, APG and PER;

Who makes the greatest impact? If that certain player is out for whaever reason, his team will suffer.

From that list, then, I'd say Irving, Rondo, or Paul. The other teams on that list have done well without their star PG's--though not as well as they would have if their guys hadn't gone down with injuries, obviously.

To me that seems to have a lot more to do with rosters and coaching than it does individual accolades, skills, and abilities.

I don't think these guys have much in common aside from acting as the primary ball-handlers on their respective teams.

[chambers]

I think Rondo is about the 3rd or 4th best PG in the league. The league wide consensus might not have him in the top 6 or 7 though. Unfortunately because he doesn't score 20 ppg, people don't appreciate him enough. They think his All Star/ HOF team mates got him where he is and without them he'd be around number 10 in such a listing.

I'm confident he'll prove those notions wrong but will still get criticized because we'll suck. CP3 is considered by many as the best PG but what has he done career wise? Played for USA/All Stars and ummm...? Tony Parker is surrounded by All Stars but because he scores and dishes he's given the keys to the city.

Why is this? It's because of the PER system.
Thankfully Rondo's PER will skyrocket now that the big 3 are gone.


My list of top PG's would be:


1.Rose
2.Parker
3.CP3
4.Rondo
5.Westbrook
6.Conley
7.D Williams
8.Irving
9.John Wall
10.Lillard


Consider Lillard at number 10 with stats in 2013 of:
19.0 points, 3.1 rebounds, 6.5 assists, 0.2 blocks, 0.9 steals, 16.4 PER as a rookie.

Next to Rondo's
13.7 points, 5.6 rebounds, 11.1 assists, 0.2 blocks, 1.8 steals, 18.1 PER

Lillard at number 10 is impressive.
As I said, the great thing about this season is that now Rondo will get the recognition he deserves because Pierce and KG/Ray are all gone because his PER will skyrocket to 22-25. Even though we'll still lose, people will see how good he can be, just like CP3 in New Orleans.

[CelticConcourse]

I say "No". I believe Rajon Rondo is the Number 1 best PG in the world.

[action781]

http://www.hoopsworld.com/top-6-2013-2014-nba-point-guards

Steph Curry
Russell Westbrook
Derrick Rose
Kyrie Irving
Tony Parker
Chris Paul

Who in your opinion is better than Rondo from the above?

IMHO Rondo is better.

Better is an astonishingly useless word when it isn't qualified with another comparative factor.

All those guys are great NBA players, including Rondo.

To elaborate:

Curry just became the most prolific 3 point shooter in NBA history (for one individual season).

Derrick Rose is the youngest NBA MVP ever.

Russell Westbrook's first four seasons in the league put him in Oscar Robertson's zip code, statistically.

Tony Parker is a three time NBA champion and Finals MVP who has become the focal point of his team's offense at the age of 31, a full five or so years after his prime.

Chris Paul may be the best half-court PG playing today and is a model prototypical PG.


I take issue with ranking Irving that high because of health, but I think we can all agree that the potential is certainly obvious.

This post said it all extremely well.

I had an email exchange with my cousin earlier this afternoon and this is what I sent:

I think there is a class of PGs that are in a level far superior to the PG right after.  I think CP3, Parker, Rose, Russy Russ, Curry, Kyrie along with Rondo make up that class. They are all worth well over 10 mil per season.  Deron williams is pretty close to there too.  Ty Lawson is close but a little farther than Deron.  Then there is a drop...

Point guards #10 through (i don't know where off the top of my head) maybe 18 or so is pretty similar.  Players like Holliday, Nash (currently), Teague, Lowry, Rubio, Wall, Lilliard, Jennings, Conley, etc.  These are the guys you can't overpay for.  It's enticing to because they are very nice players to have and they do make a very big impact on the court, but not a big enough impact as that top tier and they will spring up out of nowhere every once in a while so are much easier to find/acquire.  They can be found in the draft around or after pick #7 on an almost regular basis.  Of that group, I think only Wall has the potential to make the leap to the elite tier, but I don't think he'll make it.

[tarheelsxxiii]

So hard to answer this question. Depends on what you want out of a PG. If I understand correctly, you're considering overall impact on a team. Still nearly impossible to estimate - variance depending on team.

That said, Rondo and Rose are wildcards right now. They're too hard to judge. I'd probably keep both within top 5 by default, but we have no idea how they'll return. Rose has a lower floor due to his reliance on explosiveness.

Parker has to be top 5 by default. Same with CP3. I think both are on the decline, though.

Westbrook is who he is. More of a hybrid than PG, but deserves a top 5 simply b/c he's so dominant and technically a PG. I don't think he will become much of a different player. Maybe improve with maturity, but has probably shown us what he's capable of skill-wise.

D. Will is who he is, too. I'd argue Conley as well; some will say he has improved so much this year that he hasn't reached his potential... but he was given full reigns and utilized his skill set about as well as he could this year, imo.

Irving is an absolute stud. Healthy or not, he hovers around 5-6 imo. If healthy, he will near the top of the list soon enough.

Curry is too much of a hybrid for me to feel comfortable judging. Incredible scorer, probably lifetime liability on defense. I'd rather not even classify him as a PG.

Lillard is better than Wall. Not sure Wall has shown anything to this point. Lawson is better than both (Lillard probably passes him, though).

Post by D.o.s. is better than mine, per usual, in that it's fact-based. Just my anecdotal 2 cents Feel pretty strongly about these guys, though, and have always enjoyed following PGs more than any other position in the league.

Edit: Realize I hardly mentioned Rondo. If he comes back near his old form, I think he'll have a strong season. I've always been in the camp that he can make ANY team better and was not just the product of his environment. If I absolutely had to bet, I'd put my money on him playing at the same level on a team with a janky surrounding cast.

[PhoSita]

For various reasons, I'd take any of those players over Rondo.

[tarheelsxxiii]

For various reasons, I'd take any of those players over Rondo.

That's a bold statement, if that is your decision regardless of context...

To be fair, we've never even seen Rondo play on a team that was not loaded... does his injury affect your opinion? If not, I'd be interested to know why you think he will be at the bottom of this pack.

[Galeto]

All these guys are better.  I'd take all of them over Rondo.  These guys aren't overrated by their flashy scoring.  Scoring is a pretty big deal for a point guard too.  They all happen to be pretty good to great passers too, yes, even Westbrook. 

Rondo's on/off offensive impact including games he's missed entirely aren't even all that good.  They're actually in the negative.  Sure Rondo's assist number are gaudy but maybe pounding the ball for 85 percent of possessions isn't the most optimal way to run an offense.  If he doesn't pound the ball, it's hard to run anything through the  middle of the court if he stands on the wing because his defender can wreak havoc.  He's also by far the most turnover prone point guard in transition.  I scoff whenever I hear the phrase "run with Rondo."  For one, Rondo has to cut down on his transition turnovers.  Two, he has to have a faster internal clock to take advantage of secondary transition opportunities.

[tarheelsxxiii]

All these guys are better.  I'd take all of them over Rondo.  These guys aren't overrated by their flashy scoring.  Scoring is a pretty big deal for a point guard too.  They all happen to be pretty good to great passers too, yes, even Westbrook. 

Rondo's on/off offensive impact including games he's missed entirely aren't even all that good.  They're actually in the negative.  Sure Rondo's assist number are gaudy but maybe pounding the ball for 85 percent of possessions isn't the most optimal way to run an offense.  If he doesn't pound the ball, it's hard to run anything through the  middle of the court if he stands on the wing because his defender can wreak havoc.  He's also by far the most turnover prone point guard in transition.  I scoff whenever I hear the phrase "run with Rondo."  For one, Rondo has to cut down on his transition turnovers.  Two, he has to have a faster internal clock to take advantage of secondary transition opportunities.

Which of them would you prefer to have over Rondo in a huge playoff game? I can't imagine you choosing someone else... maybe CP3 and Parker. Literally, every other choice seems incredibly silly.

[ManUp]

Play-off Rondo is better regular season Rondo depends what your team needs.

[D.o.s.]

All these guys are better.  I'd take all of them over Rondo.  These guys aren't overrated by their flashy scoring.  Scoring is a pretty big deal for a point guard too.  They all happen to be pretty good to great passers too, yes, even Westbrook. 

Rondo's on/off offensive impact including games he's missed entirely aren't even all that good.  They're actually in the negative.  Sure Rondo's assist number are gaudy but maybe pounding the ball for 85 percent of possessions isn't the most optimal way to run an offense.  If he doesn't pound the ball, it's hard to run anything through the  middle of the court if he stands on the wing because his defender can wreak havoc.  He's also by far the most turnover prone point guard in transition.  I scoff whenever I hear the phrase "run with Rondo."  For one, Rondo has to cut down on his transition turnovers.  Two, he has to have a faster internal clock to take advantage of secondary transition opportunities.

Which of them would you prefer to have over Rondo in a huge playoff game? I can't imagine you choosing someone else... maybe CP3 and Parker. Literally, every other choice seems incredibly silly.

I don't know if you can separate the player from the team at that point (the "VERY IMPORTANT GAME"), but I'm absolutely taking the Spurs and the Bulls over the Cavs or the Clippers, with all players completely healthy.

Which is another wrinkle in this idea of "better." How much does team success determine our assessment of individual ability? (here's looking at you, Chris Paul). What about health--interesting because almost all of these guys have had season ending injuries except for Parker and Irving--who is made of glass/victim to Cleveland's overcaution anyway?

[tarheelsxxiii]

All these guys are better.  I'd take all of them over Rondo.  These guys aren't overrated by their flashy scoring.  Scoring is a pretty big deal for a point guard too.  They all happen to be pretty good to great passers too, yes, even Westbrook. 

Rondo's on/off offensive impact including games he's missed entirely aren't even all that good.  They're actually in the negative.  Sure Rondo's assist number are gaudy but maybe pounding the ball for 85 percent of possessions isn't the most optimal way to run an offense.  If he doesn't pound the ball, it's hard to run anything through the  middle of the court if he stands on the wing because his defender can wreak havoc.  He's also by far the most turnover prone point guard in transition.  I scoff whenever I hear the phrase "run with Rondo."  For one, Rondo has to cut down on his transition turnovers.  Two, he has to have a faster internal clock to take advantage of secondary transition opportunities.

Which of them would you prefer to have over Rondo in a huge playoff game? I can't imagine you choosing someone else... maybe CP3 and Parker. Literally, every other choice seems incredibly silly.

I don't know if you can separate the player from the team at that point (the "VERY IMPORTANT GAME"), but I'm absolutely taking the Spurs and the Bulls over the Cavs or the Clippers, with all players completely healthy.

Which is another wrinkle in this idea of "better." How much does team success determine our assessment of individual ability? (here's looking at you, Chris Paul). What about health--interesting because almost all of these guys have had season ending injuries except for Parker and Irving--who is made of glass/victim to Cleveland's overcaution anyway?

I agree with the top. If we are talking final possession, game on the line, opinion probably changes... but again, and like I said at the outset, it's nearly impossible to answer this question without addressing a LOT of caveats...

Making a team better is where I think Rondo will excel. Granted, he hasn't done it with a weak cast, I still think he can carry a team when it matters (big game, big series, etc). And reiterating the above... I made tentative suggestions based on variability in health. If Rose comes back a shell of his former self, for example, he's going to fall drastically.