I like the way the Celtics play without Rondo

[BballTim]

This was the general sentiment of the blog last season after Rondo went down. And then look what happened to us in the playoffs. Easy concept, you don't win without stars.

I don't think that was the general sentiment of the blog last season.  Certainly some vocal people were yelling & screaming that the Celtics were better without Rondo but there were also plenty of people here calling that viewpoint a mirage (one which was ultimately realized, IMO).

The Celtics played very well without Rondo last season. The fact that they faltered without Rondo in the playoffs doesn't really say much about how they would have fared _with_ Rondo.

  The Celtics faltering in the playoffs without Rondo was very predictable. Not only were there a fair amount of posters telling people that the offense was going to be severely impacted in the playoffs without Rondo, but you were hearing Doc, Danny and Wyc saying the same thing. While you can't say with certainty that having Rondo would have made a difference last year, it's similar to how you can't prove that the Bulls would have done better in 2012 with Rose or the Celts would have gone farther in 2009 with KG.

[BballTim]

This was the general sentiment of the blog last season after Rondo went down. And then look what happened to us in the playoffs. Easy concept, you don't win without stars.

I don't think that was the general sentiment of the blog last season.  Certainly some vocal people were yelling & screaming that the Celtics were better without Rondo but there were also plenty of people here calling that viewpoint a mirage (one which was ultimately realized, IMO).

  As one of the "mirage" people, I think I was generally outnumbered in the discussions, at least until the playoffs started.

[BballTim]

This was the general sentiment of the blog last season after Rondo went down. And then look what happened to us in the playoffs. Easy concept, you don't win without stars.

I don't think that was the general sentiment of the blog last season.  Certainly some vocal people were yelling & screaming that the Celtics were better without Rondo but there were also plenty of people here calling that viewpoint a mirage (one which was ultimately realized, IMO).

The Celtics played very well without Rondo last season. The fact that they faltered without Rondo in the playoffs doesn't really say much about how they would have fared _with_ Rondo.

+1 . With rondo with the way we were losing we were not even going to make the playoffs. Yes he was stuffing his stats but we were still losing. He played horrible defense also.

But ppl blame our early playoff exit bc rondo was missing? Lol

  The team went through long(ish) stretches of poor play every year after 2009. We would have made the playoffs and we wouldn't have had any trouble with the Knicks.

[Donoghus]

This was the general sentiment of the blog last season after Rondo went down. And then look what happened to us in the playoffs. Easy concept, you don't win without stars.

I don't think that was the general sentiment of the blog last season.  Certainly some vocal people were yelling & screaming that the Celtics were better without Rondo but there were also plenty of people here calling that viewpoint a mirage (one which was ultimately realized, IMO).

  As one of the "mirage" people, I think I was generally outnumbered in the discussions, at least until the playoffs started.

Well, let's be honest, you are also one of the biggest ligthtning rods on here when it comes to Rondo discussion.  Given your active involvement in those debates, it was only natural you were getting more of the brunt of it than other people claiming it was a mirage.

[BballTim]

This was the general sentiment of the blog last season after Rondo went down. And then look what happened to us in the playoffs. Easy concept, you don't win without stars.

I don't think that was the general sentiment of the blog last season.  Certainly some vocal people were yelling & screaming that the Celtics were better without Rondo but there were also plenty of people here calling that viewpoint a mirage (one which was ultimately realized, IMO).

  As one of the "mirage" people, I think I was generally outnumbered in the discussions, at least until the playoffs started.

Well, let's be honest, you are also one of the biggest ligthtning rods on here when it comes to Rondo discussion.  Given your active involvement in those debates, it was only natural you were getting more of the brunt of it than other people claiming it was a mirage.

  It's true I end up in many of the Rondo discussions but it's also true that I rarely start any of the conversations. It's not like I was starting threads about how the wins without Rondo were a mirage, it's more that I was responding to some of the multitude of "THIS TEAM is better without Rondo" posts.

[BballTim]

#RondoStalker

  Your posts get more insightful by the day.

[Vermont Green]

Funny what people remember.  I remember that the Celtics really did play better after Rondo got hurt last year.  They won more games.  It wasn't a mirage.  That lasted until Garnett got injured and missed some games.  He came back and was never quite healthy in my opinion.

I believe the struggles in the playoffs had more to with Garnett than Rondo.  I don't believe Rondo ever "carried" the Celtics through any playoffs, that was always Garnett 1 and Pierce 1A.  Even last season, Garnett playing better made up for what we lost in Rondo.  It was about KG, not Rondo.

All that said, I like the game that Rondo is trying to play so far this year.  I think he has improved his shooting and his approach.  He can't make this team all that much better though, as evidenced by Sunday's game.  Rondo is Rondo, good but limited by flaws.

[BballTim]

Funny what people remember.  I remember that the Celtics really did play better after Rondo got hurt last year.  They won more games.  It wasn't a mirage.  That lasted until Garnett got injured and missed some games.  He came back and was never quite healthy in my opinion.

I believe the struggles in the playoffs had more to with Garnett than Rondo.  I don't believe Rondo ever "carried" the Celtics through any playoffs, that was always Garnett 1 and Pierce 1A.  Even last season, Garnett playing better made up for what we lost in Rondo.  It was about KG, not Rondo.

  Garnett didn't play better after Rondo went out last year. In fact, out of the entire team, he was probably the only player who was fairly steady from beginning to end. Green played better as the season went on, Pierce was up and down due to injury (as we Terry), the bigs other than KG played significantly better defense as the season went on and AB started playing in the middle of the season.

  KG rebounded better in the 2013 playoffs and also shot the ball a little better, but he didn't get as many shots off without Rondo, who assisted the bulk of KG's 2012 baskets. Rondo scored or assisted a higher percentage of his team's points than anyone else in the 2012 playoffs, losing him was too much to overcome. You basically took the 2012 playoff team, took off Rondo, added a player who gave you 20 ppg in the playoffs (Green), played a poor defensive team and set records for offensive ineptitude.

[mmmmm]

Regarding Rondo and last night's game, if players were hitting open shots and layups, my count is that Rondo would have had about 20 assists.

The woes against Dallas had nothing to do with Rondo and everything to do with the fact that Bradley, Green, Sully, Olynyk and Bayless couldn't hit the water if they were throwing the basketball off the side of a boat.

Rondo pushed the pace, pushed in transition, initiated the offense without over dribbling, rebounded and shot well. His defense, as has been since coming back, was not good.

The offense as a whole ran better last night than when Rondo was not playing this year, its just the people he was passing the ball to couldn't hit a shot to save their lives until the last 4 minutes of the game.

While I totally agree with your overall point, Green's eFG for the game was actually a solid 50% - so in the end, it was an 'average' shooting day for him.

It was a hot shooting day for Rondo and Johnson and a suck, cold-as-antartica day for everyone else.

Everyone not named Rondo, Green or Johnson shot a combined 17 of 58 (29%) including a miserable 1 of 9 on 3PT attempts.

What really accentuates how bad we were shooting is that we had a total of 17 ORBs (11 individual plus 6 team ORBs) yet only scored 14 second-chance points off them.  We in fact only made 4 shots from the field off those 17 ORBs (two were 3PT shots and then we got another 4 points off FTs).

Considering that most post-ORB shots are bunny put-backs, that's pretty frustratingly awful.

But I suppose according to triboy16 it was Rondo's fault that Sully, Hump & Bass couldn't put the ball back in the hoop from 1 foot away...

[Eddie20]

Funny what people remember.  I remember that the Celtics really did play better after Rondo got hurt last year.  They won more games.  It wasn't a mirage.  That lasted until Garnett got injured and missed some games.  He came back and was never quite healthy in my opinion.

I believe the struggles in the playoffs had more to with Garnett than Rondo.  I don't believe Rondo ever "carried" the Celtics through any playoffs, that was always Garnett 1 and Pierce 1A.  Even last season, Garnett playing better made up for what we lost in Rondo.  It was about KG, not Rondo.

All that said, I like the game that Rondo is trying to play so far this year.  I think he has improved his shooting and his approach.  He can't make this team all that much better though, as evidenced by Sunday's game.  Rondo is Rondo, good but limited by flaws.

Agree on all counts.

I do want to add the injuries to Sullinger and Barbosa as probably another reason we lost to the Knicks in the playoffs. Also, because of the Barbosa injury we were forced to trade Collins, something we really didn't want to do, in order to acquire Crawford, who didn't play too well for us last season.

Isn't the greatest indictment of where Rondo stands as a "star player" made by Doc? Hard to leave a team you have been with for so many seasons when you have a "top 5 player" (looking at you Tim) on your team.

[BballTim]

Funny what people remember.  I remember that the Celtics really did play better after Rondo got hurt last year.  They won more games.  It wasn't a mirage.  That lasted until Garnett got injured and missed some games.  He came back and was never quite healthy in my opinion.

I believe the struggles in the playoffs had more to with Garnett than Rondo.  I don't believe Rondo ever "carried" the Celtics through any playoffs, that was always Garnett 1 and Pierce 1A.  Even last season, Garnett playing better made up for what we lost in Rondo.  It was about KG, not Rondo.

All that said, I like the game that Rondo is trying to play so far this year.  I think he has improved his shooting and his approach.  He can't make this team all that much better though, as evidenced by Sunday's game.  Rondo is Rondo, good but limited by flaws.

Agree on all counts.

I do want to add the injuries to Sullinger and Barbosa as probably another reason we lost to the Knicks in the playoffs. Also, because of the Barbosa injury we were forced to trade Collins, something we really didn't want to do, in order to acquire Crawford, who didn't play too well for us last season.

Isn't the greatest indictment of where Rondo stands as a "star player" made by Doc? Hard to leave a team you have been with for so many seasons when you have a "top 5 player" (looking at you Tim) on your team.

  If you were Doc, would you rather be on a team with 1 star or a team with multiple stars? Doc left when he saw a team that wasn't going to contend. But he didn't leave after 2012, he left after 2013. Meaning he thought that the 2013 team could contend, meaning he thought that if you added Rondo to the team that barely escaped getting swept in the first round you could contend. Hardly an indictment against Rondo, more of an indictment about the rest of the team.

[Eddie20]

Funny what people remember.  I remember that the Celtics really did play better after Rondo got hurt last year.  They won more games.  It wasn't a mirage.  That lasted until Garnett got injured and missed some games.  He came back and was never quite healthy in my opinion.

I believe the struggles in the playoffs had more to with Garnett than Rondo.  I don't believe Rondo ever "carried" the Celtics through any playoffs, that was always Garnett 1 and Pierce 1A.  Even last season, Garnett playing better made up for what we lost in Rondo.  It was about KG, not Rondo.

All that said, I like the game that Rondo is trying to play so far this year.  I think he has improved his shooting and his approach.  He can't make this team all that much better though, as evidenced by Sunday's game.  Rondo is Rondo, good but limited by flaws.

Agree on all counts.

I do want to add the injuries to Sullinger and Barbosa as probably another reason we lost to the Knicks in the playoffs. Also, because of the Barbosa injury we were forced to trade Collins, something we really didn't want to do, in order to acquire Crawford, who didn't play too well for us last season.

Isn't the greatest indictment of where Rondo stands as a "star player" made by Doc? Hard to leave a team you have been with for so many seasons when you have a "top 5 player" (looking at you Tim) on your team.

  If you were Doc, would you rather be on a team with 1 star or a team with multiple stars? Doc left when he saw a team that wasn't going to contend. But he didn't leave after 2012, he left after 2013. Meaning he thought that the 2013 team could contend, meaning he thought that if you added Rondo to the team that barely escaped getting swept in the first round you could contend. Hardly an indictment against Rondo, more of an indictment about the rest of the team.

So a coach who is in a place for 9 years, loves the city, has established roots, won a title, has a good rapport with management and ownership still leaves a "top 5 player" entering his prime? This is definitely uncharted waters. Truth is that if Doc really felt Rondo was the star you claim, he would've never left. Rondo is a piece, a very good piece, but not nearly good enough to be the best player on a championship team. Doc knew it and his current residency proves it.

[RJ87]

Funny what people remember.  I remember that the Celtics really did play better after Rondo got hurt last year.  They won more games.  It wasn't a mirage.  That lasted until Garnett got injured and missed some games.  He came back and was never quite healthy in my opinion.

I believe the struggles in the playoffs had more to with Garnett than Rondo.  I don't believe Rondo ever "carried" the Celtics through any playoffs, that was always Garnett 1 and Pierce 1A.  Even last season, Garnett playing better made up for what we lost in Rondo.  It was about KG, not Rondo.

All that said, I like the game that Rondo is trying to play so far this year.  I think he has improved his shooting and his approach.  He can't make this team all that much better though, as evidenced by Sunday's game.  Rondo is Rondo, good but limited by flaws.

Agree on all counts.

I do want to add the injuries to Sullinger and Barbosa as probably another reason we lost to the Knicks in the playoffs. Also, because of the Barbosa injury we were forced to trade Collins, something we really didn't want to do, in order to acquire Crawford, who didn't play too well for us last season.

Isn't the greatest indictment of where Rondo stands as a "star player" made by Doc? Hard to leave a team you have been with for so many seasons when you have a "top 5 player" (looking at you Tim) on your team.

  If you were Doc, would you rather be on a team with 1 star or a team with multiple stars? Doc left when he saw a team that wasn't going to contend. But he didn't leave after 2012, he left after 2013. Meaning he thought that the 2013 team could contend, meaning he thought that if you added Rondo to the team that barely escaped getting swept in the first round you could contend. Hardly an indictment against Rondo, more of an indictment about the rest of the team.

So a coach who is in a place for 9 years, loves the city, has established roots, won a title, has a good rapport with management and ownership still leaves a "top 5 player" entering his prime? This is definitely uncharted waters. Truth is that if Doc really felt Rondo was the star you claim, he would've never left. Rondo is a piece, a very good piece, but not nearly good enough to be the best player on a championship team. Doc knew it and his current residency proves it.

Since we're playing the "I know what Doc is thinking game", the records of each team in question should give good insight into Doc leaving. Top 5 player or not, Doc didn't want to go through a rebuild. We really had no viable assets to acquire additional talent to immediately contend - there aren't many coaches who are a few years removed from an NBA title that would happily sit through a rebuild.

I could argue Doc wouldn't have left the Celtics to coach Cp3 in his last few seasons in New Orleans. I don't think he would've left to coach Deron Williams in New Jersey. I think Doc wants to win and that was his bottom line.

[Eddie20]

Funny what people remember.  I remember that the Celtics really did play better after Rondo got hurt last year.  They won more games.  It wasn't a mirage.  That lasted until Garnett got injured and missed some games.  He came back and was never quite healthy in my opinion.

I believe the struggles in the playoffs had more to with Garnett than Rondo.  I don't believe Rondo ever "carried" the Celtics through any playoffs, that was always Garnett 1 and Pierce 1A.  Even last season, Garnett playing better made up for what we lost in Rondo.  It was about KG, not Rondo.

All that said, I like the game that Rondo is trying to play so far this year.  I think he has improved his shooting and his approach.  He can't make this team all that much better though, as evidenced by Sunday's game.  Rondo is Rondo, good but limited by flaws.

Agree on all counts.

I do want to add the injuries to Sullinger and Barbosa as probably another reason we lost to the Knicks in the playoffs. Also, because of the Barbosa injury we were forced to trade Collins, something we really didn't want to do, in order to acquire Crawford, who didn't play too well for us last season.

Isn't the greatest indictment of where Rondo stands as a "star player" made by Doc? Hard to leave a team you have been with for so many seasons when you have a "top 5 player" (looking at you Tim) on your team.

  If you were Doc, would you rather be on a team with 1 star or a team with multiple stars? Doc left when he saw a team that wasn't going to contend. But he didn't leave after 2012, he left after 2013. Meaning he thought that the 2013 team could contend, meaning he thought that if you added Rondo to the team that barely escaped getting swept in the first round you could contend. Hardly an indictment against Rondo, more of an indictment about the rest of the team.

So a coach who is in a place for 9 years, loves the city, has established roots, won a title, has a good rapport with management and ownership still leaves a "top 5 player" entering his prime? This is definitely uncharted waters. Truth is that if Doc really felt Rondo was the star you claim, he would've never left. Rondo is a piece, a very good piece, but not nearly good enough to be the best player on a championship team. Doc knew it and his current residency proves it.

Since we're playing the "I know what Doc is thinking game", the records of each team in question should give good insight into Doc leaving. Top 5 player or not, Doc didn't want to go through a rebuild. We really had no viable assets to acquire additional talent to immediately contend - there aren't many coaches who are a few years removed from an NBA title that would happily sit through a rebuild.

But that's exactly the point. According to Tim, Rondo is a top 5 player and has been the best player on the team since the 09-10 season. It was never about KG or Pierce, but about Rondo. Rondo and Sullinger were returning from injury, they added Olynyk, and added a few veterans (Hump, Wallace, Bogans) to off-set the losses of KG and Pierce. So isn't only logical that the team could actually better their 1st rd exit the year before by having their "Top 5" guy back along with those other players?

Rondo is a very good player, but not nowhere the player people think he is. He's made 4 all-star team, yes, terrific. Joe Johnson has made 7. Is Joe Johnson that great?

[Monkhouse]

Funny what people remember.  I remember that the Celtics really did play better after Rondo got hurt last year.  They won more games.  It wasn't a mirage.  That lasted until Garnett got injured and missed some games.  He came back and was never quite healthy in my opinion.

I believe the struggles in the playoffs had more to with Garnett than Rondo.  I don't believe Rondo ever "carried" the Celtics through any playoffs, that was always Garnett 1 and Pierce 1A.  Even last season, Garnett playing better made up for what we lost in Rondo.  It was about KG, not Rondo.

All that said, I like the game that Rondo is trying to play so far this year.  I think he has improved his shooting and his approach.  He can't make this team all that much better though, as evidenced by Sunday's game.  Rondo is Rondo, good but limited by flaws.

Agree on all counts.

I do want to add the injuries to Sullinger and Barbosa as probably another reason we lost to the Knicks in the playoffs. Also, because of the Barbosa injury we were forced to trade Collins, something we really didn't want to do, in order to acquire Crawford, who didn't play too well for us last season.

Isn't the greatest indictment of where Rondo stands as a "star player" made by Doc? Hard to leave a team you have been with for so many seasons when you have a "top 5 player" (looking at you Tim) on your team.

  If you were Doc, would you rather be on a team with 1 star or a team with multiple stars? Doc left when he saw a team that wasn't going to contend. But he didn't leave after 2012, he left after 2013. Meaning he thought that the 2013 team could contend, meaning he thought that if you added Rondo to the team that barely escaped getting swept in the first round you could contend. Hardly an indictment against Rondo, more of an indictment about the rest of the team.

So a coach who is in a place for 9 years, loves the city, has established roots, won a title, has a good rapport with management and ownership still leaves a "top 5 player" entering his prime? This is definitely uncharted waters. Truth is that if Doc really felt Rondo was the star you claim, he would've never left. Rondo is a piece, a very good piece, but not nearly good enough to be the best player on a championship team. Doc knew it and his current residency proves it.

Since we're playing the "I know what Doc is thinking game", the records of each team in question should give good insight into Doc leaving. Top 5 player or not, Doc didn't want to go through a rebuild. We really had no viable assets to acquire additional talent to immediately contend - there aren't many coaches who are a few years removed from an NBA title that would happily sit through a rebuild.

But that's exactly the point. According to Tim, Rondo is a top 5 player and has been the best player on the team since the 09-10 season. It was never about KG or Pierce, but about Rondo. Rondo and Sullinger were returning from injury, they added Olynyk, and added a few veterans (Hump, Wallace, Bogans) to off-set the losses of KG and Pierce. So isn't only logical that the team could actually better their 1st rd exit the year before by having their "Top 5" guy back along with those other players?

Rondo is a very good player, but not nowhere the player people think he is. He's made 4 all-star team, yes, terrific. Joe Johnson has made 7. Is Joe Johnson that great?

Lets see...


    7× NBA All-Star (2007–2012, 2014)
    All-NBA Third Team (2010)
    NBA All-Rookie Second Team (2002)
    Arkansas Mr. Basketball (1999)

It should really be six.... Joe Johnson definitely didn't deserve it this year. Lowry did.


    NBA champion (2008)
    4× NBA All-Star (2010–2013)
    All-NBA Third Team (2012)
    2× NBA All-Defensive First Team (2010–2011)
    2× NBA All-Defensive Second Team (2009, 2012)
    NBA All-Rookie Second Team (2007)
    2× NBA assists leader (2012-2013)
    NBA steals leader (2010)

Who looks better?

I'd take Rondo over Joe Johnson any day.

Rondo is a franchise player, but a unique one.

You can't win a ring as him being the best, but if you have a superstar next to Rondo, then you can compete/contend or win a ring.