Are these PGs better than our Rondo?

[BballTim]

There's something to be said for the fact that as Rondo's role in the offense has grown, the offense as a whole has become worse and worse. This is due to a lack of offensive rebounding, but Rondo certainly contributes to that. All those point guards run better offenses.

  How exactly do you think Rondo contributes to a lack of offensive rebounding? I'd start looking at the fact that we haven't had any post players on offense since Perk/Shaq/Krstic, which clearly isn't Rondo's fault.

It's true that his shooting affects how teams defend him but it doesn't change the fact that Rondo generates good scoring chances for his teammates.

Generally, yes. But his own inability to score, shoot or get to the line negates some of that. And there's something to be said that players like Green, Lee and and Terry all played much better once Rondo went down.

  Not really true at all. Terry played as well in November as he did any month on the team but he was playing through an injury in Dec/Jan. Green's play improved fairly steadily through much of the season and his improvement happened well before Rondo left the lineup. Lee's play was streaky/inconsistent last year. He played well for a few weeks after Rondo left the lineup and then his play slumped again, clearly Rondo wasn't the issue.

[BballTim]

You have to consider (at least in Rondo's case) how efficient his "play-making" is. This was (most recently) in another thread, but someone from the Wizards looked at every pass from Rondo that either resulted in a shot or a turnover (where a shot would have likely happened without the turnover) over a 3 month period and found that the Celts scored on (IIRC) 55% or so of those passes.

  Since that includes turnovers, the actual conversion rate on the shots taken would have to be higher than 55%. So the raw fg% on shots taken from Rondo's passes is over 55%. Consider the percentage of Rondo's assists that are for 3s, if the raw fg% is over 55% than the eFG% will be over 61%. The study ignored and-1s and it ignored any passes that resulted in fouls that would lead to foul shots, so (estimating, the league average for TS% is about 8% higher than eFG%) the TS% would be higher than 65%.

  How many point guards have a TS% higher than 65%? *That's* why it doesn't necessarily make sense to value scoring over "play-making".

This doesn´t really address my question, either.
It´s Rondo´s job in the offense (designed with that in mind) to give his teammates better looks. It´s probably the reason why he has a starting spot in the NBA, he should be good at it. Doesn´t prove how it´s more valuable than scoring.

For example, did you subtract the loss in conversion rate of passes from his teammates? Can you even estimate it? Rondo´s not exactly spacing the floor, you know?

What about the fact that opposing defenses know who´s going for the killer pass and can adjust accordingly? Could that potentially increase total turnovers, especially in tight games? What about KG and Pierce, do you think they played a role in Rondo´s "conversion rate from passes" stat?
I could go on, that´s only scratching the surface...

Once you figured all this out, then put his conversion rate on passes in relation to the league average, converse it in total, absolute point increase on average, compare the increase with a hypothetical scenario where, say, Kyrie Irving (as an example for a scoring pg) played the point for us (I know, that´s unfair), optionally weigh the seperate assists (and shots, of course) from "up 10 in the first" to "down 4 in crunch time", maybe you can come back and explain how his "play-making" ability justifies his usage rate...and even more importantly, almost certain salary increase once his contract expires.

The thing I can't ignore -- and I know the Rondo "believers" have counter-arguments for this -- is that despite Rondo's gradual improvement and increasing assist per game average over the Big 3 era, the team's offense got continuously worse, and was for the most point pretty below average.  The main exception being when Shaq was healthy at the start of the 2010-2011 season.

Whereas, most of the other point guards on the list have been the focal point of teams that are pretty dangerous offensively.

Which team is harder to shut down offensively, the team with Rondo running the offense, or the team with "shoot first" guards like Westbrook, Rose, Curry, and Irving handling the ball?  The on-court evidence that we have from the past few seasons says that the latter group is more dangerous.

  So you're claiming that a team with 3 of the top 4 players declining at the level PP/KG/RA did over the last few years wouldn't have gotten any worse if Paul or Rose or Curry had been the pg instead of Rondo? I find that to be laughable.

[Meadowlark_Scal]

Rondo is so limited offensively as some say...his shooting is not as strong as cp3....but his driving ability is as good or better...and ball handling he may be 2nd to no one.....cp3 can turn it over more than rondo...NO ONE steals the ball from rondo...parker has had a better set of players around him the last 3 years....or the last 2....

[PhoSita]

  So you're claiming that a team with 3 of the top 4 players declining at the level PP/KG/RA did over the last few years wouldn't have gotten any worse if Paul or Rose or Curry had been the pg instead of Rondo? I find that to be laughable.

Would they have gotten worse?  I'm sure they would have.

But would they have been in the bottom third of teams in the league in offensive efficiency, plagued by crippling scoring droughts?  I really doubt that.

[BballTim]

  So you're claiming that a team with 3 of the top 4 players declining at the level PP/KG/RA did over the last few years wouldn't have gotten any worse if Paul or Rose or Curry had been the pg instead of Rondo? I find that to be laughable.

Would they have gotten worse?  I'm sure they would have.

But would they have been in the bottom third of teams in the league in offensive efficiency, plagued by crippling scoring droughts?  I really doubt that.

  So you're fairly confident we can check out all of the point guards you're talking about and see that they've had more of a positive impact on their team's offenses than Rondo? And if you can't ignore the fact that the the Celts offense has gotten worse under Rondo but you also realize it would have gotten worse under *any* point guard, what do you do with the un-ignorable data?

[mattch]

I registered to celticsblog after reading this site for almost 3 years now. long time reader.

I have to say, there are a lot of homers on this site, and there should be.

This thread is full of homerism. There is no evidence to show that Rondo is better at driving to the hoop, with the simple eye test, Rondo misses easy layups. Rondo might make some fancy passes, but so does Paul, Rubio, and many other point guards.

Rondo might have more fancy ones than others, but that's at the cost of turnovers. Now I want to make a football comparison... Tom Brady has never had the best arm, but always makes the best decisions with the football. CP3 is Tom Brady to me. His efficiency speaks volumes. CP3 can make every pass, can make every shot (free throws and jumpers), can rebound well, and play defense.

Rondo might rebound slightly better (but for a championship team that should already have good rebounding bigs, a PG that can rebound well is negligible.)

I also find it comical that some people say Rondo plays great defense. Rondo is one of the laziest defenders, and has no motor to play great defense. What was more comical was when someone said Rondo could cover Lebron. No one can cover Lebron, and certainly not Rondo. Now that Lebron has a post game, which was developed last year, Rondo would be obliterated.

To me the top PGs are

1. Paul
2. Parker
3. Westbrook
4. Irving
5. Rose

Rondo is 6 or 7.

[mattch]

Curry and Westbrook are the two I have pause about mostly because I think they are more SG then PG.

Okay, let's forget about position for a second.  Who brings the most value to their team?  Who is the hardest for the other team to defend?  Who depends less on their teammates in order to be successful?

The latter point is really what's most relevant to the "build around" question.  Rondo is a nice player, but I think it's hard to argue that he doesn't depend on his teammates to a large degree in order to do what he does best. 

You can't say the same for the other guards on the list, other than that as point guards they are all very reliant on their big men to back them up defensively, and, to a lesser extent, on their shooters to spread the floor so they have space to drive and kick.

  That's completely meaningless unless you're planning on putting Rondo on the court with 4 players who are completely unable to put the ball in the basket. Maybe you're planning on surrounding him with players who don't see very well?

The Celtics are planning on putting him on the floor at all times with 4 guys who have never averaged more than 16 points a game for a full season.

I think it's pretty hard to argue that Rondo will be surrounded with anything better than mediocre offensive talent this season.

In that situation, any of the listed point guards could just take more shots and average 20-25 points a game.

Rondo, on the other hand, is limited in how much of a role he can take on offensively because he has a much more limited set of offensive tools to work with.

  First of all the less able his teammates are to create their own shots and score on their own, the more valuable Rondo is to the team. He'll still get a lot more assists than those other point guards despite scoring less. Not to mention, those other point guards will all be less efficient scorers with the defenses loaded up against them.

  Beyond that, though, how well a player performs when they're on a weak team seems like a pretty poor method of deciding whether you're able to build around them. In other words, how relevant do you think how Rondo performs with no good teammates is to how he performs when he *does* have good teammates? Rondo's value (according to you) goes down when he's on a team of bad scorers, so clearly it rises when he's on a good team. Likewise, a player's ability to take a ton of shots when you surround them with flotsam is less valuable when you put better players on the floor with them.

I think Derrick Rose's career is a great example that bears out Tim's point. Especially the bolded, we saw that with Miami shutting him down in the playoffs two years ago.

Full disclosure: I think Rose is/was a phenomenal player, but you know, I realize not everyone sees him that way.

Sure, but that's true of almost any scorer.

How efficient a scorer will Rondo be with defenses loaded up against him?

If anything, it'll just give Rondo better angles to pass it to his teammates. If the defense focuses on him, someone will be open.

So you mean instead of 4 feet of space in front of him a defender usually gives him, he will now be guarded closely, thus not being able to see the whole floor as well, and thus resulting in less assists?

[LilRip]

I registered to celticsblog after reading this site for almost 3 years now. long time reader.

I have to say, there are a lot of homers on this site, and there should be.

This thread is full of homerism. There is no evidence to show that Rondo is better at driving to the hoop, with the simple eye test, Rondo misses easy layups. Rondo might make some fancy passes, but so does Paul, Rubio, and many other point guards.

Rondo might have more fancy ones than others, but that's at the cost of turnovers. Now I want to make a football comparison... Tom Brady has never had the best arm, but always makes the best decisions with the football. CP3 is Tom Brady to me. His efficiency speaks volumes. CP3 can make every pass, can make every shot (free throws and jumpers), can rebound well, and play defense.

Rondo might rebound slightly better (but for a championship team that should already have good rebounding bigs, a PG that can rebound well is negligible.)

I also find it comical that some people say Rondo plays great defense. Rondo is one of the laziest defenders, and has no motor to play great defense. What was more comical was when someone said Rondo could cover Lebron. No one can cover Lebron, and certainly not Rondo. Now that Lebron has a post game, which was developed last year, Rondo would be obliterated.

To me the top PGs are

1. Paul
2. Parker
3. Westbrook
4. Irving
5. Rose

Rondo is 6 or 7.

pretty much my thoughts on this, except i'd have healthy Rose at number 2. and i don't know about 6th or 7th but definitely in the top 10. nonetheless, TP for you sir.

to add to it though, i don't agree with the whole "Rondo is the best playmaker. He averages X many assists per game" notion. Like many things, I think playmaking should be viewed in tiers rather than rankings. There are elite playmakers of which Rondo is a part of, along with some other guys. His league leading assists are a result of the system he plays in. For example, when Nash was leading the league in assists, but i didn't think he had better court vision or was a better playmaker than Kidd. Another example would be Lebron. If he really wanted to average more assists, he would be making the homerun pass every time but i read somewhere some time ago that there's this craze on the Heat roster for having "hockey assists" (i don't follow their team so closely, forgive me).

[eugen]

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

Excluding Curry( he is a better scorer than Rondo) all other PG are a galactic way from Rondo

[Vox_Populi]

I also find it comical that some people say Rondo plays great defense. Rondo is one of the laziest defenders, and has no motor to play great defense.

This season Rondo tied a career worst DRTG of 103. 103 is the best DRTG Westbrook has ever had, is lower than Paul and Parker's career ratings, while tying Paul's second best rating, and would count as a very good defensive season for Rose. DRTG, like every metric, is flawed. But it does boil down defense performance into a manageable number and it's useful reference for comparison.

Rondo has a number of offensive limitations, and for reasons known, I can understand all those point guards being rated as superior. But his defense, or perceived lack thereof, is being blown out of proportion. I wouldn't call Rondo a lazy defender or question his motor.

[mattch]

I also find it comical that some people say Rondo plays great defense. Rondo is one of the laziest defenders, and has no motor to play great defense.

This season Rondo tied a career worst DRTG of 103. 103 is the best DRTG Westbrook has ever had, is lower than Paul and Parker's career ratings, while tying Paul's second best rating, and would count as a very good defensive season for Rose. DRTG, like every metric, is flawed. But it does boil down defense performance into a manageable number and it's useful reference for comparison.

Rondo has a number of offensive limitations, and for reasons known, I can understand all those point guards being rated as superior. But his defense, or perceived lack thereof, is being blown out of proportion. I wouldn't call Rondo a lazy defender or question his motor.

I don't know how that statistic is measured. I'm not saying Rondo is a bad defender. At times he's an average defender, and at time's he can be a great defender, but he's found in no man's land too often, trying to double someone, and leaving his man wide open for a 3.

Rondo's 1 on 1 defense leaves a lot to be desired. Now in a system where everyone's rotating to a T, the risks Rondo takes on defense can be rewarded quite well. However, just like his risky passes, this risky defense doesn't create the best efficiency. Westbrook to me, plays much better 1v1 defense than Rondo.

[Vox_Populi]

I also find it comical that some people say Rondo plays great defense. Rondo is one of the laziest defenders, and has no motor to play great defense.

This season Rondo tied a career worst DRTG of 103. 103 is the best DRTG Westbrook has ever had, is lower than Paul and Parker's career ratings, while tying Paul's second best rating, and would count as a very good defensive season for Rose. DRTG, like every metric, is flawed. But it does boil down defense performance into a manageable number and it's useful reference for comparison.

Rondo has a number of offensive limitations, and for reasons known, I can understand all those point guards being rated as superior. But his defense, or perceived lack thereof, is being blown out of proportion. I wouldn't call Rondo a lazy defender or question his motor.

I don't know how that statistic is measured. I'm not saying Rondo is a bad defender. At times he's an average defender, and at time's he can be a great defender, but he's found in no man's land too often, trying to double someone, and leaving his man wide open for a 3.

It can be simplified down into OPP points allowed/OPP possessions x 100. If you want the complete calculation, you can go to Basketball-Reference. Anyway I was pointing out that you seemed to be refuting the notion that Rondo plays great defense. In comparison to the majority of point guards, he does play pretty good defense. Yeah, he's going to have lapses, but the majority of the time, Rondo does a decent job of rotating, getting back in transition, contesting shots and stealing the ball.

Rondo's 1 on 1 defense leaves a lot to be desired. Now in a system where everyone's rotating to a T, the risks Rondo takes on defense can be rewarded quite well. However, just like his risky passes, this risky defense doesn't create the best efficiency. Westbrook to me, plays much better 1v1 defense than Rondo.

Rondo did allow too much dribble penetration last season, but his tactic of trying to strip a player is a calculated risk and one the team has benefited from before. If we're comparing him to Westbrook, Westbrook's superior size and strength allow him to have an easier time staying in front of his man. But Westbrook is even more prone to the defensive mistakes you mentioned earlier.

[bobbyv]

I also find it comical that some people say Rondo plays great defense. Rondo is one of the laziest defenders, and has no motor to play great defense.

This season Rondo tied a career worst DRTG of 103. 103 is the best DRTG Westbrook has ever had, is lower than Paul and Parker's career ratings, while tying Paul's second best rating, and would count as a very good defensive season for Rose. DRTG, like every metric, is flawed. But it does boil down defense performance into a manageable number and it's useful reference for comparison.

Rondo has a number of offensive limitations, and for reasons known, I can understand all those point guards being rated as superior. But his defense, or perceived lack thereof, is being blown out of proportion. I wouldn't call Rondo a lazy defender or question his motor.

I don't know how that statistic is measured. I'm not saying Rondo is a bad defender. At times he's an average defender, and at time's he can be a great defender, but he's found in no man's land too often, trying to double someone, and leaving his man wide open for a 3.

Rondo's 1 on 1 defense leaves a lot to be desired. Now in a system where everyone's rotating to a T, the risks Rondo takes on defense can be rewarded quite well. However, just like his risky passes, this risky defense doesn't create the best efficiency. Westbrook to me, plays much better 1v1 defense than Rondo.

I agree, he did look lazy at times last season, but statistically wise he was still solid. Actually, according to SynergySports, he was still one of the best point guard defenders in the league, close to Bradley even. Whatever Rondo was doing, it was working.

And theres no way I could put Irving above Rondo. His defense is terrible, and the points he puts up hasn't contributed to enough wins for him to be a top 5 pg. He's NOT a playmaker. He does one thing really really well, and that's score.

[BballTim]

Curry and Westbrook are the two I have pause about mostly because I think they are more SG then PG.

Okay, let's forget about position for a second.  Who brings the most value to their team?  Who is the hardest for the other team to defend?  Who depends less on their teammates in order to be successful?

The latter point is really what's most relevant to the "build around" question.  Rondo is a nice player, but I think it's hard to argue that he doesn't depend on his teammates to a large degree in order to do what he does best. 

You can't say the same for the other guards on the list, other than that as point guards they are all very reliant on their big men to back them up defensively, and, to a lesser extent, on their shooters to spread the floor so they have space to drive and kick.

  That's completely meaningless unless you're planning on putting Rondo on the court with 4 players who are completely unable to put the ball in the basket. Maybe you're planning on surrounding him with players who don't see very well?

The Celtics are planning on putting him on the floor at all times with 4 guys who have never averaged more than 16 points a game for a full season.

I think it's pretty hard to argue that Rondo will be surrounded with anything better than mediocre offensive talent this season.

In that situation, any of the listed point guards could just take more shots and average 20-25 points a game.

Rondo, on the other hand, is limited in how much of a role he can take on offensively because he has a much more limited set of offensive tools to work with.

  First of all the less able his teammates are to create their own shots and score on their own, the more valuable Rondo is to the team. He'll still get a lot more assists than those other point guards despite scoring less. Not to mention, those other point guards will all be less efficient scorers with the defenses loaded up against them.

  Beyond that, though, how well a player performs when they're on a weak team seems like a pretty poor method of deciding whether you're able to build around them. In other words, how relevant do you think how Rondo performs with no good teammates is to how he performs when he *does* have good teammates? Rondo's value (according to you) goes down when he's on a team of bad scorers, so clearly it rises when he's on a good team. Likewise, a player's ability to take a ton of shots when you surround them with flotsam is less valuable when you put better players on the floor with them.

I think Derrick Rose's career is a great example that bears out Tim's point. Especially the bolded, we saw that with Miami shutting him down in the playoffs two years ago.

Full disclosure: I think Rose is/was a phenomenal player, but you know, I realize not everyone sees him that way.

Sure, but that's true of almost any scorer.

How efficient a scorer will Rondo be with defenses loaded up against him?

If anything, it'll just give Rondo better angles to pass it to his teammates. If the defense focuses on him, someone will be open.

So you mean instead of 4 feet of space in front of him a defender usually gives him, he will now be guarded closely, thus not being able to see the whole floor as well, and thus resulting in less assists?

  If you've seen enough Celts games you've seen other teams try all kinds of defenses against Rondo, all the way from giving him 4 feet of space to double teaming him. He always gets his assists, in fact the closer he's guarded the easier time he has picking out targets. The poster you quoted was correct.

[49ers/Celtics]

basically yes assist just aint  gone get it they can score rondo cant pierce and kg gone his assist will drop to now back to averge player