Is Rondo the best passer in the game?

[BballTim]

The truth is... probably not.

His assist/turnover ratio isn't the best in the league.  He gets a lot of assists, but that's partially because he's a somewhat subpar scorer for a player of his stature.  He scores less, because he takes less shots.  He gets more assists, because he takes less shots.  He takes less shots, because he's not a very good scorer.   There are several point guards in this league that could average as many assists as Rondo if they averaged less shots/points, but there is no point to that since they are better scorers than Rondo and often them taking the shot is the team's best play.

Again... is it better to have a PG who averages 20+ points and 9 assists on extremely efficient shooting?  Or is it better to have a PG who averages 11 assists and only 13 points, because he's a weak scorer?

If Rondo was a better scorer... or if Rondo was asked to score more... he'd average less assists.  And if he averaged less assists, that would effectively kill the main argument for him being the "best passer in the game".

I'm sure others have brought this up.  Chris Paul is a very efficient scorer.  He also leads the league in assist-to-turnover ratio.

CP3 assist-to-turnover = 4.26
Rondo assist-to-turnover = 2.84

Chris Paul per 36 min stats:  18.3 points, 10.5 assists, 2.6 steals 48%/33%/89%

Rondo per 36 min stats: 13.2 points, 10.6 assists, 1.8 steals  48%/24%/64%

is what it is.

  Again, though, it gets down to your opinion of what constitutes a better passer. Paul's a more efficient passer than Rondo because (as you frequently point out) the defense is so concerned about his shooting. If CP3 faced a defense that was playing him more for the pass than the shot then not only would he turn the ball over more often but fewer of his passes would result in shots with the defense sticking closer to his teammates. It's hard to imagine he'd be be as successful a passer as Rondo is under those circumstances. Again, you can claim he's a better passer since (due to his having easier passes available) he's a more efficient passer but in terms of pure passing skill he's probably below Rondo.

[LarBrd33]

The truth is... probably not.

His assist/turnover ratio isn't the best in the league.  He gets a lot of assists, but that's partially because he's a somewhat subpar scorer for a player of his stature.  He scores less, because he takes less shots.  He gets more assists, because he takes less shots.  He takes less shots, because he's not a very good scorer.   There are several point guards in this league that could average as many assists as Rondo if they averaged less shots/points, but there is no point to that since they are better scorers than Rondo and often them taking the shot is the team's best play.

Again... is it better to have a PG who averages 20+ points and 9 assists on extremely efficient shooting?  Or is it better to have a PG who averages 11 assists and only 13 points, because he's a weak scorer?

If Rondo was a better scorer... or if Rondo was asked to score more... he'd average less assists.  And if he averaged less assists, that would effectively kill the main argument for him being the "best passer in the game".

I'm sure others have brought this up.  Chris Paul is a very efficient scorer.  He also leads the league in assist-to-turnover ratio.

CP3 assist-to-turnover = 4.26
Rondo assist-to-turnover = 2.84

Chris Paul per 36 min stats:  18.3 points, 10.5 assists, 2.6 steals 48%/33%/89%

Rondo per 36 min stats: 13.2 points, 10.6 assists, 1.8 steals  48%/24%/64%

is what it is.

  Again, though, it gets down to your opinion of what constitutes a better passer. Paul's a more efficient passer than Rondo because (as you frequently point out) the defense is so concerned about his shooting. If CP3 faced a defense that was playing him more for the pass than the shot then not only would he turn the ball over more often but fewer of his passes would result in shots with the defense sticking closer to his teammates. It's hard to imagine he'd be be as successful a passer as Rondo is under those circumstances. Again, you can claim he's a better passer since (due to his having easier passes available) he's a more efficient passer but in terms of pure passing skill he's probably below Rondo.

How do you figure he's less of a passer of Rondo?  This is silly.  How does one measure the quality of passing?

Maybe it's Damian Lillard... he won the NBA All-Star Weekend Skills Challenge this year.  Lol

Rubio makes some nifty passes.  Steve Nash is still an elite passer.

What makes you even certain the "best passer in the game" is even a point guard?  LeBron is a great passer...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ooEELfpn2C8

Manu tends to make some pretty incredible passes:

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

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yv87FN7lGtQ

I think we're just assuming, because Rondo's game lacks in offensive power and he acts as a quarterback, that he by default must be the "best passer in the game".  Meh.

[Vox_Populi]

I think we're just assuming, because Rondo's game lacks in offensive power and he acts as a quarterback, that he by default must be the "best passer in the game".  Meh.

No, I just think people watch him and reach that conclusion via the looks he gives his teammates. It's not like it's just Boston fans that hold the opinion that he's the best passer in the league.

I do think James probably deserves to be in consideration though.

[BballTim]

The truth is... probably not.

His assist/turnover ratio isn't the best in the league.  He gets a lot of assists, but that's partially because he's a somewhat subpar scorer for a player of his stature.  He scores less, because he takes less shots.  He gets more assists, because he takes less shots.  He takes less shots, because he's not a very good scorer.   There are several point guards in this league that could average as many assists as Rondo if they averaged less shots/points, but there is no point to that since they are better scorers than Rondo and often them taking the shot is the team's best play.

Again... is it better to have a PG who averages 20+ points and 9 assists on extremely efficient shooting?  Or is it better to have a PG who averages 11 assists and only 13 points, because he's a weak scorer?

If Rondo was a better scorer... or if Rondo was asked to score more... he'd average less assists.  And if he averaged less assists, that would effectively kill the main argument for him being the "best passer in the game".

I'm sure others have brought this up.  Chris Paul is a very efficient scorer.  He also leads the league in assist-to-turnover ratio.

CP3 assist-to-turnover = 4.26
Rondo assist-to-turnover = 2.84

Chris Paul per 36 min stats:  18.3 points, 10.5 assists, 2.6 steals 48%/33%/89%

Rondo per 36 min stats: 13.2 points, 10.6 assists, 1.8 steals  48%/24%/64%

is what it is.

  Again, though, it gets down to your opinion of what constitutes a better passer. Paul's a more efficient passer than Rondo because (as you frequently point out) the defense is so concerned about his shooting. If CP3 faced a defense that was playing him more for the pass than the shot then not only would he turn the ball over more often but fewer of his passes would result in shots with the defense sticking closer to his teammates. It's hard to imagine he'd be be as successful a passer as Rondo is under those circumstances. Again, you can claim he's a better passer since (due to his having easier passes available) he's a more efficient passer but in terms of pure passing skill he's probably below Rondo.

How do you figure he's less of a passer of Rondo?  This is silly.  How does one measure the quality of passing

  Yes, I've mentioned this a few times in the thread. People always discuss who's the best passer without any of them having the same definition of what a good passer is.

I think we're just assuming, because Rondo's game lacks in offensive power and he acts as a quarterback, that he by default must be the "best passer in the game".  Meh.

  Sounds like the same amount of thought that goes into all the "any good pg can average as many assists as Rondo" comments.

[Clench123]

A resounding yes

[LarBrd33]

The truth is... probably not.

His assist/turnover ratio isn't the best in the league.  He gets a lot of assists, but that's partially because he's a somewhat subpar scorer for a player of his stature.  He scores less, because he takes less shots.  He gets more assists, because he takes less shots.  He takes less shots, because he's not a very good scorer.   There are several point guards in this league that could average as many assists as Rondo if they averaged less shots/points, but there is no point to that since they are better scorers than Rondo and often them taking the shot is the team's best play.

Again... is it better to have a PG who averages 20+ points and 9 assists on extremely efficient shooting?  Or is it better to have a PG who averages 11 assists and only 13 points, because he's a weak scorer?

If Rondo was a better scorer... or if Rondo was asked to score more... he'd average less assists.  And if he averaged less assists, that would effectively kill the main argument for him being the "best passer in the game".

I'm sure others have brought this up.  Chris Paul is a very efficient scorer.  He also leads the league in assist-to-turnover ratio.

CP3 assist-to-turnover = 4.26
Rondo assist-to-turnover = 2.84

Chris Paul per 36 min stats:  18.3 points, 10.5 assists, 2.6 steals 48%/33%/89%

Rondo per 36 min stats: 13.2 points, 10.6 assists, 1.8 steals  48%/24%/64%

is what it is.

  Again, though, it gets down to your opinion of what constitutes a better passer. Paul's a more efficient passer than Rondo because (as you frequently point out) the defense is so concerned about his shooting. If CP3 faced a defense that was playing him more for the pass than the shot then not only would he turn the ball over more often but fewer of his passes would result in shots with the defense sticking closer to his teammates. It's hard to imagine he'd be be as successful a passer as Rondo is under those circumstances. Again, you can claim he's a better passer since (due to his having easier passes available) he's a more efficient passer but in terms of pure passing skill he's probably below Rondo.

How do you figure he's less of a passer of Rondo?  This is silly.  How does one measure the quality of passing

  Yes, I've mentioned this a few times in the thread. People always discuss who's the best passer without any of them having the same definition of what a good passer is.

I think we're just assuming, because Rondo's game lacks in offensive power and he acts as a quarterback, that he by default must be the "best passer in the game".  Meh.

  Sounds like the same amount of thought that goes into all the "any good pg can average as many assists as Rondo" comments.

I'm saying that if you have an NFL team with no rushing game and are forced to run an offense where your QB attempts 700 passes in a season... that doesn't automatically make that QB the "best passer in the game". 

Boston has been running a very ineffective sub .500 Rondo-heavy offense where he dominates the ball, plays too many minutes, pads his assists and rarely scores... it results in a lot of assists.  That doesn't make him the best passer in the league.  He's probably one of the best, though. 

FYI, I don't follow football at all so my apologies if the above analogy makes zero sense.

[Clench123]

Why would anyone even dispute that?  He's got the assist record to prove it

[Yogi]

1.  Rondo is clearly the best passer in the league.  Even Chris Paul does not have Rondo's court vision, ball fakes and the sheer ability to get the ball to the players at the right place at the right time.  Chris Paul has been a better basketball player, but Rondo is a much better passer.

2.  Since we are comparing Rondo and CP3, there is a rumor that CP3 threatened to sign with the Rockets if the Clippers did not get Doc Rivers.  Donald Sterling admitted that he would've kept Del Negro if it was up to him, implying that Paul demanded he be fired.  Meanwhile, Rondo has embraced letting Doc Rivers go and hiring a rookie coach.  The media still continues to portray Rondo as the problematic coach-killer, while Paul becomes the new darling of the NBA.  That really p---es me off.

[rondoallaturca]

The media still continues to portray Rondo as the problematic coach-killer, while Paul becomes the new darling of the NBA.  That really p---es me off.

TP x100000000

[syfy9]

Flashy passes does not translate to being a better passer, it just increases your turnovers.

Stockton was in complete control at all time and was on the basketball IQ level with Larry Bird.

What's better - Blake Griffin doing an easy fast break lay-up, or a thunderous poster dunk? Whenever you can, you want to get the crowd in the game. If you get your audience on your side, you can turn the tides of games.

Rondo can get the crowd into the game with that flashy passing. The cheers help soooo much - he can even get the other team's crowd subconsciously rooting for them!

Flashy passing also throws your opponents off-guard. They'll always be wary that you'll fake them out and lose aggression. Easy passes are always the most efficient, I agree, and you should never try to always do flashy passes, but if you can, then do it. It can demoralize almost as much as a Jordan dunk or a Shaq post up.


Rondo is a pretty smart player too. Stockton was brilliant, but Rondo is one of the brightest basketball players in the game today.

Rondo vs Stockton, one on one. Who wins?
If they're playing Connect 4, I'd vote for Rondo.

I don't even think Rondo makes that many flashy passes. He makes flashy layups for sure. He's terrific with those "thread the needle" bounce passes though. That lefty half-court bounce pass to Daniels on the break a couple of years ago in New York, no PG has any business throwing but he can do that. But with KG and Paul gone and a younger, more athletic group left behind, we may actually see more flash in his game than we've seen before though.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlVPA8fZr4Y

Humana humana humana

[BballTim]

The truth is... probably not.

His assist/turnover ratio isn't the best in the league.  He gets a lot of assists, but that's partially because he's a somewhat subpar scorer for a player of his stature.  He scores less, because he takes less shots.  He gets more assists, because he takes less shots.  He takes less shots, because he's not a very good scorer.   There are several point guards in this league that could average as many assists as Rondo if they averaged less shots/points, but there is no point to that since they are better scorers than Rondo and often them taking the shot is the team's best play.

Again... is it better to have a PG who averages 20+ points and 9 assists on extremely efficient shooting?  Or is it better to have a PG who averages 11 assists and only 13 points, because he's a weak scorer?

If Rondo was a better scorer... or if Rondo was asked to score more... he'd average less assists.  And if he averaged less assists, that would effectively kill the main argument for him being the "best passer in the game".

I'm sure others have brought this up.  Chris Paul is a very efficient scorer.  He also leads the league in assist-to-turnover ratio.

CP3 assist-to-turnover = 4.26
Rondo assist-to-turnover = 2.84

Chris Paul per 36 min stats:  18.3 points, 10.5 assists, 2.6 steals 48%/33%/89%

Rondo per 36 min stats: 13.2 points, 10.6 assists, 1.8 steals  48%/24%/64%

is what it is.

  Again, though, it gets down to your opinion of what constitutes a better passer. Paul's a more efficient passer than Rondo because (as you frequently point out) the defense is so concerned about his shooting. If CP3 faced a defense that was playing him more for the pass than the shot then not only would he turn the ball over more often but fewer of his passes would result in shots with the defense sticking closer to his teammates. It's hard to imagine he'd be be as successful a passer as Rondo is under those circumstances. Again, you can claim he's a better passer since (due to his having easier passes available) he's a more efficient passer but in terms of pure passing skill he's probably below Rondo.

How do you figure he's less of a passer of Rondo?  This is silly.  How does one measure the quality of passing

  Yes, I've mentioned this a few times in the thread. People always discuss who's the best passer without any of them having the same definition of what a good passer is.

I think we're just assuming, because Rondo's game lacks in offensive power and he acts as a quarterback, that he by default must be the "best passer in the game".  Meh.

  Sounds like the same amount of thought that goes into all the "any good pg can average as many assists as Rondo" comments.

I'm saying that if you have an NFL team with no rushing game and are forced to run an offense where your QB attempts 700 passes in a season... that doesn't automatically make that QB the "best passer in the game". 

Boston has been running a very ineffective sub .500 Rondo-heavy offense where he dominates the ball, plays too many minutes, pads his assists and rarely scores... it results in a lot of assists.  That doesn't make him the best passer in the league.  He's probably one of the best, though. 

  Rondo's also the difference between a historically bad offense in the playoffs and getting to game 7 of the ECF. As for your football analogy, we pretty much saw what kind of a "running game" the Celts had without their quarterback when they were in the playoffs. And you have things a little backwards. He's not a great passer because he leads the league in assists, he leads the league in assists because he's a great passer.

[syfy9]

Flashy passes does not translate to being a better passer, it just increases your turnovers.

Stockton was in complete control at all time and was on the basketball IQ level with Larry Bird.

What's better - Blake Griffin doing an easy fast break lay-up, or a thunderous poster dunk? Whenever you can, you want to get the crowd in the game. If you get your audience on your side, you can turn the tides of games.

Rondo can get the crowd into the game with that flashy passing. The cheers help soooo much - he can even get the other team's crowd subconsciously rooting for them!

Flashy passing also throws your opponents off-guard. They'll always be wary that you'll fake them out and lose aggression. Easy passes are always the most efficient, I agree, and you should never try to always do flashy passes, but if you can, then do it. It can demoralize almost as much as a Jordan dunk or a Shaq post up.


Rondo is a pretty smart player too. Stockton was brilliant, but Rondo is one of the brightest basketball players in the game today.

Rondo vs Stockton, one on one. Who wins?
If they're playing Connect 4, I'd vote for Rondo.

Most flashy passes are unnescessary  ones. They don't give you any extra points. The simple fundamental pass would have gotten there just the same and that one that slips away every 4-5 games out of bounds because you tried to make it flashy never happens. If you don't think that Stockton threw those "thread the needle" bounce passes you never saw him play. There were many examples of that just in that highlight video on here.

 Where Stockton was so much better than everyone else was in his entry passes. He was able to put a ball off the dribble into his post man at the EXACT spot it had to be that allowed the player to maintain his edge and convert an easy bucket. THAT is the definition of a great passer. Under pressure he is able to put the ball right where it needs to be in order for his teammate to get the best shot. I am not saying that Rondo never does, however a large majority of his inbounds passes have been lobs over the top which give the defender the ability to reposition.

I would say that due to his large hands and long wingspan his wraparound passes are some of the best ever though. Physically not many can do that. Rondo is a very good passer and one of the best in the NBA. He is not however in John Stockton's league. Show me double digit assists for 7-8 more seasons and maybe I will reconsider.

Flashy passing and simple passing is similar to Flashy dunking and simple dunking.

Michael Jordan and Dominique Wilkins and Larry Johnson are not going to do a simple dunk when given the opportunity. They would embarrass their opponents or make the crowd ooh and awwww so much that they would be cheering for them.

Momentum. That's the biggest key and that's why people do flashy passing in the first place. I don't advocate everybody doing it - but I do advocate players who have other-worldly vision doing it. Rondo has that, Stockton has that, and many others.


For the record, I do not mean to argue against Stockton's legacy at all (The one-on-one bit I said was meant to be about Connect 4 ), at first. I think that he has been giving the label as "simple", though, which I do not think is the case. He can wow just like all the other fancy shmancy passers.

BUT Rondo does the same as well - he can hit the guy at the exact place he wants it as well. It's been a while since we've seen him play, though, and it's easy to take things for granted.

[blink]

The truth is... probably not.

His assist/turnover ratio isn't the best in the league.  He gets a lot of assists, but that's partially because he's a somewhat subpar scorer for a player of his stature.  He scores less, because he takes less shots.  He gets more assists, because he takes less shots.  He takes less shots, because he's not a very good scorer.   There are several point guards in this league that could average as many assists as Rondo if they averaged less shots/points, but there is no point to that since they are better scorers than Rondo and often them taking the shot is the team's best play.

Again... is it better to have a PG who averages 20+ points and 9 assists on extremely efficient shooting?  Or is it better to have a PG who averages 11 assists and only 13 points, because he's a weak scorer?

If Rondo was a better scorer... or if Rondo was asked to score more... he'd average less assists.  And if he averaged less assists, that would effectively kill the main argument for him being the "best passer in the game".

I'm sure others have brought this up.  Chris Paul is a very efficient scorer.  He also leads the league in assist-to-turnover ratio.

CP3 assist-to-turnover = 4.26
Rondo assist-to-turnover = 2.84

Chris Paul per 36 min stats:  18.3 points, 10.5 assists, 2.6 steals 48%/33%/89%

Rondo per 36 min stats: 13.2 points, 10.6 assists, 1.8 steals  48%/24%/64%

is what it is.

CP hasn't averaged over 10apg for a season since 09-10 when he was in NO.

RR's assist to turnover ratio has generally been better than the one year that you have selected *cough(cherry-picked)cough*.

09-10: 3.2
10-11: 3.3
11-12: 3.25
12-13: 2.84

CP's assist to turnover ratio
09-10: 4.0
10-11: 4.4
11-12: 4.4
12-13: 4.3

CP is still better, but Rondo has typically been a lot better than the injury shortened season from last year. 
 

[BballTim]

The truth is... probably not.

His assist/turnover ratio isn't the best in the league.  He gets a lot of assists, but that's partially because he's a somewhat subpar scorer for a player of his stature.  He scores less, because he takes less shots.  He gets more assists, because he takes less shots.  He takes less shots, because he's not a very good scorer.   There are several point guards in this league that could average as many assists as Rondo if they averaged less shots/points, but there is no point to that since they are better scorers than Rondo and often them taking the shot is the team's best play.

Again... is it better to have a PG who averages 20+ points and 9 assists on extremely efficient shooting?  Or is it better to have a PG who averages 11 assists and only 13 points, because he's a weak scorer?

If Rondo was a better scorer... or if Rondo was asked to score more... he'd average less assists.  And if he averaged less assists, that would effectively kill the main argument for him being the "best passer in the game".

I'm sure others have brought this up.  Chris Paul is a very efficient scorer.  He also leads the league in assist-to-turnover ratio.

CP3 assist-to-turnover = 4.26
Rondo assist-to-turnover = 2.84

Chris Paul per 36 min stats:  18.3 points, 10.5 assists, 2.6 steals 48%/33%/89%

Rondo per 36 min stats: 13.2 points, 10.6 assists, 1.8 steals  48%/24%/64%

is what it is.

CP hasn't averaged over 10apg for a season since 09-10 when he was in NO.

RR's assist to turnover ratio has generally been better than the one year that you have selected *cough(cherry-picked)cough*.

09-10: 3.2
10-11: 3.3
11-12: 3.25
12-13: 2.84

CP's assist to turnover ratio
09-10: 4.0
10-11: 4.4
11-12: 4.4
12-13: 4.3

CP is still better, but Rondo has typically been a lot better than the injury shortened season from last year. 
 

  Don't forget the playoffs, where Rondo's career a/t ratio is a little better than Paul's.

[byennie]

He might be, but it's going to either be totally subjective, or I think you have to acknowledge that on the primary measure - assists - there are a few guys who might be able to match him. I think the clear competition is Paul. He gets at least 90% of the assists that Rondo does, while being a far superior scorer. Whether you think his scoring gets him "easy" assists or not, is there any doubt that if he focused on them as much as Rondo he could get 1 or 2 more per night? With the exception of this year, Nash has produced more assists per minute by a comfortable margin as well. I do think he edges guys like Williams, Calderon, Rubio by a small margin.

What's special about Rondo, to me, is that he is an elite talent in EVERY category except for as a scorer. He's an elite passer AND rebounder AND defender. That's why he can go nuts in the playoffs - I don't know if there is a single player in the league who can dominate in more than 3 major categories at the same time, and I can't think of another PG with that ability. He won't do it every night, but he's capable and that's worth something. Paul won't go out and grab 15 rebounds or check the opposing team's best scorer. Rose won't dominate with the pass or play lockdown defense. And so on. Doesn't matter if Rondo is the best passer in the game, but the fact that he's at or near the top in 3 major categories when he really needs to be, is special.