Can we just appreciate Rondo?

[cb8883]

Here are some guys that i have hear mentioned that we would want over Rondo this are cold hard facts, Parker is better, but at this point I take Rondo: The Green is the stats Rondo wins:

Too bad scoring and floor spacing are pretty important parts of the job of a point guard in today's league.

Which proves my point that Rondo isn't elite. Would you rather take Rondo or Wall? Because by Walls numbers Rondo has slightly more dishes, which again is helped by having HOFers next to you and a slightly better FG% or would you take more points slightly less dishes and a better overall shooter. Boston's problem is that Rondo is looked as a franchise talent when he's far from it. I'd take any of those three over Rondo because Rondo isn't guarded as the #1 option if he was I assure you his FG% would go down as well as his PPG. I feel like the Rondo apologists are like the baseball fans who claim player A is better than player B because player A had more RBI's. The who argument is defensive intangibles and assists. Really?

I think the issue is that there's this dichotomy set up between thinking Rondo is a good PG or feeling that a #1 overall talent like Irving or Wall is probably better than Rondo, either now or in the future.

We should be able to acknowledge that Rondo is a nice point guard while also recognizing that guys like Wall, Irving, Westbrook, Curry etc are better because they have the tools to more consistently take over games and pressure the opposing defense, not to mention that they're younger.  It's just easier to build a team around a player who can give you 20-30 points pretty much every night. 

That doesn't mean that Rondo can't have a prominent place on a really good team.  We know already that he can.

Exactly! There is nothing wrong with acknowledging that these guys are superior overall players to Rondo. He's still probably a top 10 point guard. Youth and talent ceiling play a huge role in this. It's not like anyone is saying Brandon Jennings is better or anything these are just upper tier/elite point guards which Rondo will never be. As you said he's a great role player on a contender much like Perkins. People have pointed to Rondo's playoff performance to which I can't disagree but if you watched baseball guys like Jack Morris and Schilling were viewed as big game pitchers, were they considered elite? In football, Eli Manning is a big game QB, is he elite? Neither is Rondo. He's a good player to have but in no way shape or form does he deserve to be the captain of a franchise that has won 17 titles. That's like Kobe moving on and giving Derek Fisher the C.

[2short]

what does being an elite player have to do with being the captain of a team?
dee brown was captain wasn't he?

[BballTim]

I think the critical questions are (a) whether Rondo's good enough to be a PG on a championship team, and (b) what kinds of players he needs around him.

I'm not sure why a) is a "critical question."  Is Rondo good enough to be the point guard on a championship team?  Yes.  Other point guards who were good enough: Derek Fisher, Mario Chalmers, Avery Johnson, Antonio Daniels, Steve Kerr . . . etc.

It's fairly obvious that simply being good enough to be a starter on a championship team doesn't mean much.  That's a relatively low bar. 

What does mean a lot, however, is being good enough to be the focal point, or at least a core piece, of a title contender.  That gets to your second question.  What kind of teammates does Rondo need to have in order for his team to be a title contender?

Personally, I think there are probably a number of different ways that you can build a team around Rondo.  It doesn't have to emulate the Big 3 setup, and it doesn't have to be a bunch of young athletes who can run. 

I do think you'd need to give Rondo at least two really high level scoring options who can command extra attention from the opposing defense.  I'd say also that the supporting cast for Rondo's team needs to feature a number of floor spacers to give him plenty of room to operate.  Danny has done a pretty good job of assembling the right kind of players for the supporting cast, so far.  But the two elite scoring options are still missing (with all respect to Jared Sullinger), and those are the hardest to acquire.

  Rondo's a good enough offensive player that you'd probably only need to add one good wing scorer and a decent bench scorer. It's also helpful that you need players that can hit open shots more than players that can create their own offense, so the players you're looking for are easier to acquire.

[BballTim]

Here are some guys that i have hear mentioned that we would want over Rondo this are cold hard facts, Parker is better, but at this point I take Rondo: The Green is the stats Rondo wins:

Too bad scoring and floor spacing are pretty important parts of the job of a point guard in today's league.

Which proves my point that Rondo isn't elite. Would you rather take Rondo or Wall? Because by Walls numbers Rondo has slightly more dishes, which again is helped by having HOFers next to you and a slightly better FG% or would you take more points slightly less dishes and a better overall shooter. Boston's problem is that Rondo is looked as a franchise talent when he's far from it. I'd take any of those three over Rondo because Rondo isn't guarded as the #1 option if he was I assure you his FG% would go down as well as his PPG. I feel like the Rondo apologists are like the baseball fans who claim player A is better than player B because player A had more RBI's. The who argument is defensive intangibles and assists. Really?

I think the issue is that there's this dichotomy set up between thinking Rondo is a good PG or feeling that a #1 overall talent like Irving or Wall is probably better than Rondo, either now or in the future.

We should be able to acknowledge that Rondo is a nice point guard while also recognizing that guys like Wall, Irving, Westbrook, Curry etc are better because they have the tools to more consistently take over games and pressure the opposing defense, not to mention that they're younger.  It's just easier to build a team around a player who can give you 20-30 points pretty much every night. 

That doesn't mean that Rondo can't have a prominent place on a really good team.  We know already that he can.

  Those guys are younger than him and score more. They don't really take over games more than he does and they don't put more pressure on an opposing defense. It's no easier to stop Rondo from doing what he does best than it is to stop shoot-first point guards from scoring.

[mmmmm]

Whether he scores himself or uses others, I don't care.  Ultimately, creating points is his job and Rondo is pretty darn good at it.

Most every season, Rondo has averaged somewhere between 37-40 points-created off of shots and assists.   Last year, he averaged just under 39.  This year, in his 10 games back, he's only created about 26 points per game, but his per-36 rate is 34, which indicates he's climbing back towards where he was.  His per-36 rate last year was just over 37.

For comparison, a shoot-first PG like Kyrie Irving currently has a points-created rate right now of 36 per 36.   The thing is, Irving is taking between 18-19 shots per 36, at a low FG% of just 43% to maintain that rate.

Rondo last year maintained his higher rate on only about 12 shots per 36, at a tops-among-PG 48.4 FG%.    This means, in the course of creating those points, Rondo generated far fewer missed shots.

That's important for an offense to be efficient because missed shots are possession-killers.  Over two-thirds of all missed shots go to the defense.

These are the little things that are missed by too many fans.

Of all the PGs mentioned, the only guy who I would take as a clear upgrade over Rondo at point-creation would be Chris Paul - and that's based on his point-creation numbers, only.  Paul has been head-and-shoulders above everyone else in point-creation.   But Rondo, consistently has been among the top 2 or 3 PGs of all the rest at point-creation (often second only to CP3) and, because of the way he scores, Rondo has tended to do it while generating far fewer misses than most of those other guys.

Rondo obviously has a few other things he's good at as well.   

I get that he's not the right cup of tea for some fans.  But I, personally, really enjoy the style of basketball Rondo plays.  I think he plays smart, team-oriented basketball and I hope he continues to be a Celtic for years to come.

I do wish he'd get better at Free Throws, though.  That's the one real weakness in his game, imho.   If he could get his FT% up above 70%, that would be just awesomeness.

[PhoSita]

As for scoring, I'd say the key is really creating points. We've seen Rondo dominate many games where he hardly scores. Some of the point guards mentioned in the thread might as well not be on the court if they aren't scoring. Scoring would be a much more important part of their job than Rondo's.

You make a really good point that the job of a point guard is point creation first and foremost.

The reason that I feel it's easier to build around a more gifted scorer, though, is that individual scorers rely less on having dangerous scorers for teammates to create those points.  Rondo's ability to create points depend to a fair extent on his teammates, though he certainly makes his teammates better, too. 

I also think that when your primary ball-handler is a threat to score from most places on the floor it makes scoring easier for everybody else.  That's the kind of point creation that doesn't necessarily get accounted for in the assists stat. 

Aside from Chris Paul, in my book nobody in the league is better at creating points for his teammates than Tony Parker, even though he doesn't always rack up a lot of assists.


I think mmmmm makes a great point when he talks about free throws.  If Rondo could become even a somewhat better free throw shooter and start consistently generating free throws each game, combined with his gradually improving shooting, I think that could make him a dangerous enough scorer that, combined with his still superlative passing, would allow him to generate points more reliably and consistently (especially at the end of games) while still racking up a bunch of assists.

[wayupnorth]

Amen. Probably less substantial difference between lottery and late first round of this draft than in many past ones. Lot of good players coming out... no reason to give up Rondo. And the dude is a baller. I'd rather lose with Rondo than win with any other PGs in the league. He basically scores the points for our scrubs.

Not to mention Ainge will make another awful decision in this draft, just like the past two years. Best to avoid involving him as much as possible. Passing on Giannis and Hardaway, Jr., and moving up for ____... is just nauseating. My family members refused to watch the rising stars game b/c Olynyk was in it... just to provide my own personal perspective on how awful our last draft was. I like KO, but he's a Euro player, just like JuJuanna.

[CoachBo]

Chuckle.

The OP should spend more time here at Rondo Blog. I'm sure he'll find the support comforting.

[PhoSita]

Amen. Probably less substantial difference between lottery and late first round of this draft than in many past ones. Lot of good players coming out... no reason to give up Rondo. And the dude is a baller. I'd rather lose with Rondo than win with any other PGs in the league. He basically scores the points for our scrubs.

Not to mention Ainge will make another awful decision in this draft, just like the past two years. Best to avoid involving him as much as possible. Passing on Giannis and Hardaway, Jr., and moving up for ____... is just nauseating. My family members refused to watch the rising stars game b/c Olynyk was in it... just to provide my own personal perspective on how awful our last draft was. I like KO, but he's a Euro player, just like JuJuanna.

Statements like that will just get people to ignore anything else you say.  Just plain silly.

[GreenWarrior]

see, free throws are about the only complaint about rondo that I agree on. he should be better and want to be better at them.

doesn't make me appreciate him any less though. he's a game changer.

[dark_lord]

said this in a different rondo thread before:

my stance on rondo is the following:

1. he can never be "the man" on his team.  If he is your #1 guy, you not a championship calibur team (and ur lucky to be a playoff team in the east).  If he is your #2 guy, ur in the right direction.  If he is your #3 guy, now ur talking!

2. he can be the best guy on the floor at any point in a game....he can also be invisible during the same game.

3. while he is a great pg, he isn't a top 5 imo

4. i dont mind if he cant shoot, but he needs to be at least a 75% ft shooter.  anything under, hinders his game

5. when he is aggresive, he is unbelievable. when he is passive, he is mediocre.

6. "playoff" rondo is one of the best guards i have ever seen in my 3 decades of watching bball

[mmmmm]

Aside from Chris Paul, in my book nobody in the league is better at creating points for his teammates than Tony Parker, even though he doesn't always rack up a lot of assists.

Parker is a player I like a lot, and he's had a couple of really excellent years (including last year), but year over year, he has not been close to Rondo (and definitely nowhere near Paul) in point creation rates.

Last year he was fantastic, with a per-36 point-creation rate of almost 41.   But most of his career his rate has been around 33.

He also has tended to play slightly fewer minutes per game than guys like CP or RR, thus bringing down his per-game point-creation production to about 31.

Like Rondo, Parker is a sensible shooter and doesn't generate excess misses.   He's a very smart overall basketball player.   He does a lot of the little things you need to do to win games.

I would include Parker among my own personal 'top 5' for PGs based on his overall game, but I think he's slightly outside the top 5 as a point-creator.

[BballTim]

As for scoring, I'd say the key is really creating points. We've seen Rondo dominate many games where he hardly scores. Some of the point guards mentioned in the thread might as well not be on the court if they aren't scoring. Scoring would be a much more important part of their job than Rondo's.

You make a really good point that the job of a point guard is point creation first and foremost.

The reason that I feel it's easier to build around a more gifted scorer, though, is that individual scorers rely less on having dangerous scorers for teammates to create those points.  Rondo's ability to create points depend to a fair extent on his teammates, though he certainly makes his teammates better, too. 

I also think that when your primary ball-handler is a threat to score from most places on the floor it makes scoring easier for everybody else.  That's the kind of point creation that doesn't necessarily get accounted for in the assists stat. 

  I think that's true in a vacuum. If, to pull a couple of names from a hat, Kyrie had the same ability to set his teammates up as Felton then his superior scoring will make it easier for his teammates to score. If his playmaking ability is significantly worse than another point guard's then he's not going to make it easier for his teammates to score. So while Rondo's not great at scoring from anywhere on the court at any time he's still able to get his teammates easy looks. Hence the seasons with great assist totals.

Aside from Chris Paul, in my book nobody in the league is better at creating points for his teammates than Tony Parker, even though he doesn't always rack up a lot of assists.

  I don't really agree with this. Maybe it's an odd coincidence that I see this a lot but I think in general they're more comfortable with Manu running the half court offense.

I think mmmmm makes a great point when he talks about free throws.  If Rondo could become even a somewhat better free throw shooter and start consistently generating free throws each game, combined with his gradually improving shooting, I think that could make him a dangerous enough scorer that, combined with his still superlative passing, would allow him to generate points more reliably and consistently (especially at the end of games) while still racking up a bunch of assists.

  Free throw shooting would definitely help. mmmmm also makes a good point when he talks about Rondo generally being among the best in the league in point creation. He seems to do it pretty consistently.

[Kc2135]

Here are some guys that i have hear mentioned that we would want over Rondo this are cold hard facts, Parker is better, but at this point I take Rondo: The Green is the stats Rondo wins:

Too bad scoring and floor spacing are pretty important parts of the job of a point guard in today's league.

Which proves my point that Rondo isn't elite. Would you rather take Rondo or Wall? Because by Walls numbers Rondo has slightly more dishes, which again is helped by having HOFers next to you and a slightly better FG% or would you take more points slightly less dishes and a better overall shooter. Boston's problem is that Rondo is looked as a franchise talent when he's far from it. I'd take any of those three over Rondo because Rondo isn't guarded as the #1 option if he was I assure you his FG% would go down as well as his PPG. I feel like the Rondo apologists are like the baseball fans who claim player A is better than player B because player A had more RBI's. The whole argument is defensive intangibles and assists. Really?

I'm sorry but people are going to have to,stop using the Rondo,needs HOFers for his assists.  Have you seen what he is doing in just 10 games with this team? 2 near triple  doubles  in the last four games, and a game with 13 assists.

[Kc2135]

Rondo is near his career averages in just 10 games back, plus shooting the three now

9.8 ppg. 7.1 apg  1.4 spg. 4.8 rpg  38% 3pt  42%fg

Here's what happens when the celtics win with Rondo's stats

13.5 ppg. 10.5 apg. 2.5 spg. 7.5 rpg  68%fg