Are these PGs better than our Rondo?

[Smitty77]

Ill post my thoughts on the OPs list next time but I just have to comment that I really hate it when people cite "none of those players have ever played in the conference finals" or some other form of that as some counter-argument why Rondo is by far a superior player. Rondo is a good player, undoubtedly, but to say that the Celtics' success is HIS doing and not a team effort that featured all-time greats like Pierce and KG (who despite being past their prime are still pretty darn dominant) is pretty disrespectful and ignorant IMO.

The only time that argument will hold water is if the C's actually make the eastern conference finals this year (with a healthy rondo and this current squad) and I'm seriously doubting that will happen.

Would you say that the Spur's run this year and championships in the past were due SOLELY to Parker or more to a team effort???  I would say Parker's and RR's roles are similar, but overall, Rondo raises his level more consistently in then playoff than Parker and is simply a better all around player.  Parker's defense is terrible.

Smitty77

[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.

Curry is NOT a pure PG.  He had a good year, but that means he had ONE good year.  I love Curry.

D. Rose was GIVEN  the MVP that year!!  They decided at the beginning of the year that he WOULD BE the MVP and he got it.  It was gifted.  Simply, he was NOT the Most Valuable Player in the league that year.

Westbrook is NOT a pure PG and is NOT as good a defender as Rondo.  He could NOT guard LeBron like Rondo can and does.

Tony Parker is a very good leader of his team and role player blessed with being able to play with arguably the best PF of all time.  Tony had a great Finals for ONE year.  Rondo overall has a MUCH HIGHER Player Efficiency in the playoffs than Parker.  Not close.

Chris Paul is very overrated.  I tire of people lavishing so much praise on him.  He does not get to the basket very often since his knee injury and he is NOT a good man-to-man defender.

Smitty77

Um, ok.

[ronaldo943]

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

Homer.

[CelticsFan9]

I'd take Paul and (a healthy) Rose over Rondo.

That's a great list, though.

So many top PGs in the league today.

[Smitty77]

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.

Curry is NOT a pure PG.  He had a good year, but that means he had ONE good year.  I love Curry.

D. Rose was GIVEN  the MVP that year!!  They decided at the beginning of the year that he WOULD BE the MVP and he got it.  It was gifted.  Simply, he was NOT the Most Valuable Player in the league that year.

Westbrook is NOT a pure PG and is NOT as good a defender as Rondo.  He could NOT guard LeBron like Rondo can and does.

Tony Parker is a very good leader of his team and role player blessed with being able to play with arguably the best PF of all time.  Tony had a great Finals for ONE year.  Rondo overall has a MUCH HIGHER Player Efficiency in the playoffs than Parker.  Not close.

Chris Paul is very overrated.  I tire of people lavishing so much praise on him.  He does not get to the basket very often since his knee injury and he is NOT a good man-to-man defender.

Smitty77

Um, ok.

DOS,

Thanks so much for you substantive response.

Smitty77

[connor]

Are any of those PGs better? That's incredibly hard to say objectively given how different their playing styles are.

If you were to ask me which of those guys, in a vacuum, would I take over Rondo I think it's an easier question:

I'd take Paul, Irving and Rose over Rondo straight up no problem.

I think Chris Paul is the best PG in the league due to his overall game.

 I think Rose and Irving are on the next level behind Paul and Rondo is arguably there too, but at 24 and 21 respectively they've got longer careers ahead of them compared to Rondo at 27. Additionally I think it's easier to build a team around a scoring PG compared to a facilitator like Rondo because it's a more traditional fit and I think it'd be easier finding players who compliment them than Rondo. That isn't to say you can't do that with Rondo, obviously it worked out with KG and PP, it would just be easier.

Westbrook could easily be in the category above, but I'm just not sold on him yet as a centerpiece for a team. Just like Rondo is hard to evaluate given the talent he has to work with, Russell has had Durant and I'd like to see how he would respond when he is the focus of defenses not Durant. I'd probably take him over Rondo, but it would depend on the roster we were putting together.

Parker and Curry are in the next category due to Parker's age and Curry's ankles. I'd say both near Rondo's level, but I wouldn't give him up for either. They're both too risky. Parker played like an MVP at times last year, but is getting to the age where he could start breaking down. Curry broke out last season, but those ankles are too flimsy to count on as a franchise cornerstone.

Lastly I think Deron Williams should probably be on that list. If I had to rank all the nba PGs Williams would have been falling pretty dramatically over the last 2 seasons, but I think that this year with the help he has and the depth I think he is going to reestablish himself as an arguably top 5 pg in the game. He can facilitate and score and with the options he has there should be plenty of room for him to rack up assists and subsequently plenty of opportunities for him to score. I definitely wouldn't trade Rondo straight up for him, but after this season his stock is going to be mighty high.

It's all very subjective but I think Paul is the only clear upgrade and Irving and Rose both have the upside and youth to be worth it. The rest just come with too many caveats.

[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.

Curry is NOT a pure PG.  He had a good year, but that means he had ONE good year.  I love Curry.

D. Rose was GIVEN  the MVP that year!!  They decided at the beginning of the year that he WOULD BE the MVP and he got it.  It was gifted.  Simply, he was NOT the Most Valuable Player in the league that year.

Westbrook is NOT a pure PG and is NOT as good a defender as Rondo.  He could NOT guard LeBron like Rondo can and does.

Tony Parker is a very good leader of his team and role player blessed with being able to play with arguably the best PF of all time.  Tony had a great Finals for ONE year.  Rondo overall has a MUCH HIGHER Player Efficiency in the playoffs than Parker.  Not close.

Chris Paul is very overrated.  I tire of people lavishing so much praise on him.  He does not get to the basket very often since his knee injury and he is NOT a good man-to-man defender.

Smitty77

Um, ok.

DOS,

Thanks so much for you substantive response.

Smitty77

 

To quote myself: All those guys are great NBA players, including Rondo.

And to reiterate the rest of my posts--I think the whole idea of "better" in this context is remarkably difficult.

[LilRip]

Ill post my thoughts on the OPs list next time but I just have to comment that I really hate it when people cite "none of those players have ever played in the conference finals" or some other form of that as some counter-argument why Rondo is by far a superior player. Rondo is a good player, undoubtedly, but to say that the Celtics' success is HIS doing and not a team effort that featured all-time greats like Pierce and KG (who despite being past their prime are still pretty darn dominant) is pretty disrespectful and ignorant IMO.

  A team with two "pretty darn dominant" players probably shouldn't have had to fight tooth and nail to avoid a sweep at the hands of the Knicks. They're still very good players but they haven't exactly been immune to father time over the last few years.

Well if you want to reference last year's Celtics, then how come in the regular season, the team performed better after Rondo got injured. And besides, what about previous years when the team had more playoff success?

Anyway, my point is that playoff success is not a valid argument as to why Rondo could hypothetically be better than the other PGs on the OP's list. If people want to reference stats, on/off court stats, etc. etc then by all means. But saying "rondo has been to the conference finals and they haven't and that's why he's better" is disrespectful to the impact the likes of KG, Pierce and Allen have had on the team's success.

[LilRip]

Ill post my thoughts on the OPs list next time but I just have to comment that I really hate it when people cite "none of those players have ever played in the conference finals" or some other form of that as some counter-argument why Rondo is by far a superior player. Rondo is a good player, undoubtedly, but to say that the Celtics' success is HIS doing and not a team effort that featured all-time greats like Pierce and KG (who despite being past their prime are still pretty darn dominant) is pretty disrespectful and ignorant IMO.

The only time that argument will hold water is if the C's actually make the eastern conference finals this year (with a healthy rondo and this current squad) and I'm seriously doubting that will happen.

Would you say that the Spur's run this year and championships in the past were due SOLELY to Parker or more to a team effort???  I would say Parker's and RR's roles are similar, but overall, Rondo raises his level more consistently in then playoff than Parker and is simply a better all around player.  Parker's defense is terrible.

Smitty77

I would say team effort. The Spurs were winning games in the season with only pieces of their Big 3. Sometimes, without any of the 3 playing at all.

And I'm not saying your opinion is wrong, but do consider that Parker has won a Finals MVP while playing alongside both Manu and TD. "Raises his level more consistently" is a highly subjective term.

[Eddie20]

The problem with Rondo, and building around him, is that his lack of shooting/scoring presents a problem when trying to build a team around him. He needs players around him that can play off the ball, since Rondo needs the ball in his hands to be effective.  He's best suited if he had a very athletic team with a bunch of catch and shoot types.

Some of the other players mentioned are ball dominant as well, but there game doesn't decline nearly as bad off the ball because they are all arguably better shooters than Rondo and at the very least cause defenses to remain honest.


Edit: I'm not sure how many people were watching Team USA's scrimmages, but Wall and Lillard have greatly improved. I'm curious to see if Rondo is thought of as better than those two this time next season.

[PhoSita]

This idea that Curry doesn't qualify because he's not a "pure" pg is laughable.  Can he defend the position?  Does he help his team win playing at the position?  Yes and yes.  So who cares?

He's a more valuable player all around, and much harder to defend, when he's healthy.

[ayer]

The problem with Rondo, and building around him, is that his lack of shooting/scoring presents a problem when trying to build a team around him. He needs players around him that can play off the ball, since Rondo needs the ball in his hands to be effective.  He's best suited if he had a very athletic team with a bunch of catch and shoot types.

This........

[Vox_Populi]

This idea that Curry doesn't qualify because he's not a "pure" pg is laughable.  Can he defend the position?  Does he help his team win playing at the position?  Yes and yes.  So who cares?

He's a more valuable player all around, and much harder to defend, when he's healthy.

Not particularly well. I do agree with you overall though.

[bfrombleacher]

The problem with Rondo, and building around him, is that his lack of shooting/scoring presents a problem when trying to build a team around him. He needs players around him that can play off the ball, since Rondo needs the ball in his hands to be effective.  He's best suited if he had a very athletic team with a bunch of catch and shoot types.

This........

Same problem with Chris Paul? Would you use Chris Paul as a spot up shooter?

And, yeah, it would be nice if Rondo had a finisher. Like Blake Griffin. Like a 39 year old Shaq.

[BballTim]

Ill post my thoughts on the OPs list next time but I just have to comment that I really hate it when people cite "none of those players have ever played in the conference finals" or some other form of that as some counter-argument why Rondo is by far a superior player. Rondo is a good player, undoubtedly, but to say that the Celtics' success is HIS doing and not a team effort that featured all-time greats like Pierce and KG (who despite being past their prime are still pretty darn dominant) is pretty disrespectful and ignorant IMO.

  A team with two "pretty darn dominant" players probably shouldn't have had to fight tooth and nail to avoid a sweep at the hands of the Knicks. They're still very good players but they haven't exactly been immune to father time over the last few years.

Well if you want to reference last year's Celtics, then how come in the regular season, the team performed better after Rondo got injured. And besides, what about previous years when the team had more playoff success?

  There were plenty of reasons the team got off to a bad start that had nothing to do with Rondo, just like the team got off to a bad start the year before for reasons that had nothing to do with Rondo. It's true that the team's had success in the playoffs in the past but over the last few years it's been more and more dependent on a healthy Rondo.