Say OKC gets booted , would they trade Westbrook for Rondo then ? and would you?

[pokeKingCurtis]

TP to Rondohara for having a green heart. 

Make that double.

And honestly, you can't honestly look at posts by mmmmm, BballTim and many other users who defend Rondo and say it's blind, irrational fandom. They use stats and use stats reasonably. Their opinions are reasoned.

You could disagree with them and that's fine. But just because you disagree with them doesn't mean they're fools who would blindly defend Rondo. With the things Bo keeps asserting, you'd think these users would put Rondo above LeBron or Durant or even Bird.

I'm sorry to say, again, what CoachBo has been doing is maybe a step above poop flinging. Call it elaborate poop flinging.

You could replace the usernames and the positions in this thread and write the exact same post.

Absolutely. The other side also raises some good points.

I've always been one to try and stay as tolerant and as open as possible to the other side. Maybe I don't come across as such but I do make a concerted effort.

When it comes to tanking, or trading Rondo, right now I'm like "I hate that...but while I disagree it may be right or it may not be." I'm not anti-tank. Nor am I going to ignore the possibility (however much) that Rondo may be traded for draft picks.

To presuppose the incorrectness of the other side, which I've seen a lot of, closes off possibilities in what is basically a massive thought experiment (these forums). But what's worse is to completely dismiss them.

[Eja117]

Westbrook is also an All-Star. He also played better defense last season. Westbrook is much more likely to make another All-Star team before Rondo.

Explain "generates similar amounts of offense." Be detailed when you say "inefficient" Otherwise the first is a throwaway statement and the second is basically "westbrook shoots too much", which isn't anything beyond a subjective measuring of what you think a point guard should be doing presented as an objective reason why Rondo would improve the team's offense.


John Stockton would definitely make the Thunder better. Rondo's no John Stockton, he's not even the best point guard in the league. I still like his game more than Westbrook's.

I'm trying to get your overall point here. 

You like Rondo better, but you think Westbrook's a better player?

Or, do you just think he's a better fit for the Thunder?

Yes, I like Rondo's game/attitude better, yes I think Westbrook's a better fit for the Thunder.

Westbrook is also an All-Star. He also played better defense last season. Westbrook is much more likely to make another All-Star team before Rondo.

Explain "generates similar amounts of offense." Be detailed when you say "inefficient" Otherwise the first is a throwaway statement and the second is basically "westbrook shoots too much", which isn't anything beyond a subjective measuring of what you think a point guard should be doing presented as an objective reason why Rondo would improve the team's offense.


John Stockton would definitely make the Thunder better. Rondo's no John Stockton, he's not even the best point guard in the league. I still like his game more than Westbrook's.

Wait a second. I thought you follow basketball. But you need "generates similar amounts of offense" and "inefficient" explained to you?   Soooo...which is it? Do you follow basketball or do you need these explained to you?

Hey I get that you don't buy that Superman could beat Aquaman in a fight even in water. Do you think maybe that's part of the problem?

You know when you were in school and your teacher asked you to show your work, because just giving an answer without any evidence wasn't proof that the student know what he or she was talking about?

You've continually refused to provide anything beyond your subjective analysis that Rondo would make the Thunder better because Rondo is Rondo and Westbrook is not. While I can't fault you for that position, it's a pretty shallow one to hold in the absence of any tangible evidence one way or another.

So show your work.

yeah, but you know those "teachers" where you make great points and ask great questions and they have nothing useful to say because they just look at the class like they rolled out of bed and had a doobie?  Yeah. Sometimes at school you just know that this is happening and look forward to college, where you know you'll be around people fluent in the topic.

[BballTim]

TP to Rondohara for having a green heart. 

Make that double.

And honestly, you can't honestly look at posts by mmmmm, BballTim and many other users who defend Rondo and say it's blind, irrational fandom. They use stats and use stats reasonably. Their opinions are reasoned.

You could disagree with them and that's fine. But just because you disagree with them doesn't mean they're fools who would blindly defend Rondo. With the things Bo keeps asserting, you'd think these users would put Rondo above LeBron or Durant or even Bird.

I'm sorry to say, again, what CoachBo has been doing is maybe a step above poop flinging. Call it elaborate poop flinging.

You could replace the usernames and the positions in this thread and write the exact same post.

   I wouldn't really agree with that. I don't make a habit of responding to posts about Rondo (which include stats to back up the claims) with nothing tripe about how the only reason the person holds that view is a personal dislike of Rondo. I also (with growing frequency) come upon threads that I haven't been involved or even seen that contain childish remarks about me. I don't tend to make posts like those either.

[D.o.s.]

yeah, but you know those "teachers" where you make great points and ask great questions and they have nothing useful to say because they just look at the class like they rolled out of bed and had a doobie?  Yeah. Sometimes at school you just know that this is happening and look forward to college, where you know you'll be around people fluent in the topic.

Well, that's mildly insulting. All you're doing is throwing out half-baked Justice League analogies and telling the people who don't agree with you, who have tried to express their opinions beyond "this is right and this is not" with data and evidence and seasons-wide view of the game and the players in question, that they're wrong.

You still haven't given any evidence beyond "I can't believe I have to explain why Rondo's clearly a better fit, you troglodytes of basketball knowledge."

   I wouldn't really agree with that. I don't make a habit of responding to posts about Rondo (which include stats to back up the claims) with nothing tripe about how the only reason the person holds that view is a personal dislike of Rondo. I also (with growing frequency) come upon threads that I haven't been involved or even seen that contain childish remarks about me. I don't tend to make posts like those either.

You don't but Eja certainly has.

[Eja117]

yeah, but you know those "teachers" where you make great points and ask great questions and they have nothing useful to say because they just look at the class like they rolled out of bed and had a doobie?  Yeah. Sometimes at school you just know that this is happening and look forward to college, where you know you'll be around people fluent in the topic.

Well, that's mildly insulting. All you're doing is throwing out half-baked Justice League analogies and telling the people who don't agree with you, who have tried to express their opinions beyond "this is right and this is not" with data and evidence and seasons-wide view of the game and the players in question, that they're wrong.

You still haven't given any evidence beyond "I can't believe I have to explain why Rondo's clearly a better fit, you troglodytes of basketball knowledge."

   I wouldn't really agree with that. I don't make a habit of responding to posts about Rondo (which include stats to back up the claims) with nothing tripe about how the only reason the person holds that view is a personal dislike of Rondo. I also (with growing frequency) come upon threads that I haven't been involved or even seen that contain childish remarks about me. I don't tend to make posts like those either.

You don't but Eja certainly has.

What's this stuff about "give evidence" and "show work". Are you even reading this thread or can you just not take what you dish out? I gave evidence. Go read it maybe.

[Moranis]

Westbrook is also an All-Star. He also played better defense last season. Westbrook is much more likely to make another All-Star team before Rondo.

Explain "generates similar amounts of offense." Be detailed when you say "inefficient" Otherwise the first is a throwaway statement and the second is basically "westbrook shoots too much", which isn't anything beyond a subjective measuring of what you think a point guard should be doing presented as an objective reason why Rondo would improve the team's offense.

  "generates a similar amount of offense" would refer to scoring and assists. "Westbrook shoots too much" is probably based on the fact that he takes so many shots compared to teammates who generally score more efficiently than he does. That doesn't concern you at all, it does some people.

well sure, but Rondo doesn't generate a similar amount of offense based on their career numbers and he certainly didn't this last year either.  I mean even if you look at per36 career numbers, Rondo is no where near the similar amount of offense generator that Westbrook is.  When you look at TS%, even there you see that Westbrook is over a full percentage more efficient than Rondo. 

That is what DOS is getting at with EJA.  EJA is just making this broad statements that just aren't supported in reality.  Westbrook is more efficient and generates a much larger amount of offense on the whole throughout their respective careers. 

[footey]

Based on the game last night, maybe we should try to get Reggie Jackson instead of Westbrook, LOL.

[BballTim]

Westbrook is also an All-Star. He also played better defense last season. Westbrook is much more likely to make another All-Star team before Rondo.

Explain "generates similar amounts of offense." Be detailed when you say "inefficient" Otherwise the first is a throwaway statement and the second is basically "westbrook shoots too much", which isn't anything beyond a subjective measuring of what you think a point guard should be doing presented as an objective reason why Rondo would improve the team's offense.

  "generates a similar amount of offense" would refer to scoring and assists. "Westbrook shoots too much" is probably based on the fact that he takes so many shots compared to teammates who generally score more efficiently than he does. That doesn't concern you at all, it does some people.

well sure, but Rondo doesn't generate a similar amount of offense based on their career numbers and he certainly didn't this last year either.  I mean even if you look at per36 career numbers, Rondo is no where near the similar amount of offense generator that Westbrook is.  When you look at TS%, even there you see that Westbrook is over a full percentage more efficient than Rondo. 

That is what DOS is getting at with EJA.  EJA is just making this broad statements that just aren't supported in reality.  Westbrook is more efficient and generates a much larger amount of offense on the whole throughout their respective careers.

  In general it's not more efficient offense because scoring chances off of assists are more efficient scoring chances than Westbrook shooting the ball. I checked OKC's playoff games over the last 4 years. They're 10-5 when Westbrook gets 7 or more assists and 11-14 when he takes 20 or more shots. There's a reason for that.

[mmmmm]

Westbrook is also an All-Star. He also played better defense last season. Westbrook is much more likely to make another All-Star team before Rondo.

Explain "generates similar amounts of offense." Be detailed when you say "inefficient" Otherwise the first is a throwaway statement and the second is basically "westbrook shoots too much", which isn't anything beyond a subjective measuring of what you think a point guard should be doing presented as an objective reason why Rondo would improve the team's offense.

  "generates a similar amount of offense" would refer to scoring and assists. "Westbrook shoots too much" is probably based on the fact that he takes so many shots compared to teammates who generally score more efficiently than he does. That doesn't concern you at all, it does some people.

well sure, but Rondo doesn't generate a similar amount of offense based on their career numbers and he certainly didn't this last year either.  I mean even if you look at per36 career numbers, Rondo is no where near the similar amount of offense generator that Westbrook is.  When you look at TS%, even there you see that Westbrook is over a full percentage more efficient than Rondo. 

That is what DOS is getting at with EJA.  EJA is just making this broad statements that just aren't supported in reality.  Westbrook is more efficient and generates a much larger amount of offense on the whole throughout their respective careers.

Umm... wait.  That bolded statement is measurably not true.

The produced similar amount of net offense THIS season (despite Westbrook having vastly superior shooters on the other end of his passes), as my post earlier in this thread demonstrates.

Ignoring the net offense lost due to generating excessed misses (which go to the defense 75% of the time) is a blatantly incomplete analysis.   

Westbrook turns the ball over at much higher rates (whether by per-minute or per-touch) and he generates far more misses because fundamentally, other than free throws, he is NOT actually, a better shooter than Rondo.   Rondo had a horrible season of FG% this year, of course, but for his career he is a 47.5% FG% and a 48.6% eFG% shooter from the floor.  Westbrook's career numbers are 43.3% FG% and 45.5% eFG%, respectively.

Westbrook's net point creation was only marginally better this season (.191 points per touch) than Rondo's (.182 per touch).  Thats already 'similar' and without the huge advantage in his team's shooting FG%, Westbrook would have trailed Rondo significantly.

I did this analysis based on 'per touch' numbers, but if you include the cost of turnovers and missed shots and do a per-36 analysis instead, you get a similar conclusion.

Similar analysis in the past has shown Rondo, over the years, to consistently be among the top overall net point creators at the PG spot.   This has especially been true, of course, when he had guys like Ray, Paul & Kevin shooting at extremely high efficiency for him.   Chris Paul is really the only guy who has consistently ranked above Rondo (and everybody) year over year.     

Note - I'm not here to defend Eja' commenting style or anything.  I'm just pointing out the inaccuracy of the statements in bold.

I also don't want to come off as suggesting that Westbrook is not a very good, talented basketball player.   His is very good.   But so is Rondo.  And Rondo is better in some meaningful ways relevant to team basketball.   I, personally, would rather have Rondo.  But I can understand how styles of basketball are sometimes matters of taste.

I don't think it's very useful for me to project whether OKC (or Boston) would be better or worse if the two players were swapped.   Way too many variables involved.

[Celtics18]

Westbrook is also an All-Star. He also played better defense last season. Westbrook is much more likely to make another All-Star team before Rondo.

Explain "generates similar amounts of offense." Be detailed when you say "inefficient" Otherwise the first is a throwaway statement and the second is basically "westbrook shoots too much", which isn't anything beyond a subjective measuring of what you think a point guard should be doing presented as an objective reason why Rondo would improve the team's offense.

  "generates a similar amount of offense" would refer to scoring and assists. "Westbrook shoots too much" is probably based on the fact that he takes so many shots compared to teammates who generally score more efficiently than he does. That doesn't concern you at all, it does some people.

well sure, but Rondo doesn't generate a similar amount of offense based on their career numbers and he certainly didn't this last year either.  I mean even if you look at per36 career numbers, Rondo is no where near the similar amount of offense generator that Westbrook is.  When you look at TS%, even there you see that Westbrook is over a full percentage more efficient than Rondo. 

That is what DOS is getting at with EJA.  EJA is just making this broad statements that just aren't supported in reality.  Westbrook is more efficient and generates a much larger amount of offense on the whole throughout their respective careers.

I don't think there's an easy answer to the question of who generates more offense, but if you just look at basic stats of points per game and assists per game (assists per game would be doubled and then have the amount of assists leading to threes per game added to reflect how many actual points each assist helps lead to), then Rajon Rondo and Russell Westbrook are fairly close in the amount of offense generated.

Not including 2014 (mainly because I got these stats from Hoopdata, which didn't keep stats for this season), here are the respective "points generated" by Rondo and Westbrook over the course of the last five regular seasons:

2013

Rondo--37.8
Westbrook--39.6

2012

Rondo--37.8
Westbrook--36.2

2011

Rondo--35.2
Westbrook--40.0

2010

Rondo--35.6
Westbrook--33.8

2009

Rondo--30.5
Westbrook--26.8

Like I said, I realize these numbers don't tell the whole story.  I don't think there are any that do.  I am interested to know, though, which stats you used that tell you that Rondo generates "nowhere near" the amount of offense as Westbrook over the course of their respective careers. 

[Celtics18]

Westbrook is also an All-Star. He also played better defense last season. Westbrook is much more likely to make another All-Star team before Rondo.

Explain "generates similar amounts of offense." Be detailed when you say "inefficient" Otherwise the first is a throwaway statement and the second is basically "westbrook shoots too much", which isn't anything beyond a subjective measuring of what you think a point guard should be doing presented as an objective reason why Rondo would improve the team's offense.


John Stockton would definitely make the Thunder better. Rondo's no John Stockton, he's not even the best point guard in the league. I still like his game more than Westbrook's.

You have been very strict about insisting that posters are "showing their work."  Could you please show the work that suggest that Westbrook "played better defense last season" than Rondo and that "Westbrook is much more likely to make another All-Star team before Rondo."

[bucknersrevenge]

Westbrook is also an All-Star. He also played better defense last season. Westbrook is much more likely to make another All-Star team before Rondo.

Explain "generates similar amounts of offense." Be detailed when you say "inefficient" Otherwise the first is a throwaway statement and the second is basically "westbrook shoots too much", which isn't anything beyond a subjective measuring of what you think a point guard should be doing presented as an objective reason why Rondo would improve the team's offense.

  "generates a similar amount of offense" would refer to scoring and assists. "Westbrook shoots too much" is probably based on the fact that he takes so many shots compared to teammates who generally score more efficiently than he does. That doesn't concern you at all, it does some people.

well sure, but Rondo doesn't generate a similar amount of offense based on their career numbers and he certainly didn't this last year either.  I mean even if you look at per36 career numbers, Rondo is no where near the similar amount of offense generator that Westbrook is.  When you look at TS%, even there you see that Westbrook is over a full percentage more efficient than Rondo. 

That is what DOS is getting at with EJA.  EJA is just making this broad statements that just aren't supported in reality.  Westbrook is more efficient and generates a much larger amount of offense on the whole throughout their respective careers.

  In general it's not more efficient offense because scoring chances off of assists are more efficient scoring chances than Westbrook shooting the ball. I checked OKC's playoff games over the last 4 years. They're 10-5 when Westbrook gets 7 or more assists and 11-14 when he takes 20 or more shots. There's a reason for that.

/thread

Tim has made this comment before and it still carries weight now with numbers to back it up. In the playoffs(that is to say when you're not facing Minnesota or Detroit every other night) Westbrook's game is not conducive to long term winning. You can put up great numbers and show great efficiency. I don't have a stat-based argument to share so people may choose to dismiss it but If Westbrook isn't hitting his jumpers there is little other way he beats you and against good teams in the playoffs, I think that's a recipe for losing. He makes bad decisions in close games. While doesn't have the gaudy numbers, give this guy a couple of good, talented teammates and he'll make your life a living hell.

[D.o.s.]

Westbrook is also an All-Star. He also played better defense last season. Westbrook is much more likely to make another All-Star team before Rondo.

Explain "generates similar amounts of offense." Be detailed when you say "inefficient" Otherwise the first is a throwaway statement and the second is basically "westbrook shoots too much", which isn't anything beyond a subjective measuring of what you think a point guard should be doing presented as an objective reason why Rondo would improve the team's offense.


John Stockton would definitely make the Thunder better. Rondo's no John Stockton, he's not even the best point guard in the league. I still like his game more than Westbrook's.

You have been very strict about insisting that posters are "showing their work."  Could you please show the work that suggest that Westbrook "played better defense last season" than Rondo and that "Westbrook is much more likely to make another All-Star team before Rondo."

Sure -- Westbrook posted an individual defensive rating of 102 and had a defensive win share of 2.3 this year, while Rondo had a DRtg of 107 and a defensive wins share of 1.0


Notice the difference between that and "do you even watch basketball? Obviously Westbrook had a better year than Rondo, that's like saying Spiderman shoots better webs than The Human Torch!"

As for the All-Star Game -- Rondo could make it as a reserve, but Westbrook will be a starter, and the East looks to be seriously crowded at the point guard between Irving, Williams, and Wall.

I'm also pretty amused that almost everyone else seems to be happy to provide numbers, regardless of which side you fall on in this debate. I'm not asking them to show their work, you know?

[BballTim]

Westbrook is also an All-Star. He also played better defense last season. Westbrook is much more likely to make another All-Star team before Rondo.

Explain "generates similar amounts of offense." Be detailed when you say "inefficient" Otherwise the first is a throwaway statement and the second is basically "westbrook shoots too much", which isn't anything beyond a subjective measuring of what you think a point guard should be doing presented as an objective reason why Rondo would improve the team's offense.

  "generates a similar amount of offense" would refer to scoring and assists. "Westbrook shoots too much" is probably based on the fact that he takes so many shots compared to teammates who generally score more efficiently than he does. That doesn't concern you at all, it does some people.

well sure, but Rondo doesn't generate a similar amount of offense based on their career numbers and he certainly didn't this last year either.  I mean even if you look at per36 career numbers, Rondo is no where near the similar amount of offense generator that Westbrook is.  When you look at TS%, even there you see that Westbrook is over a full percentage more efficient than Rondo. 

That is what DOS is getting at with EJA.  EJA is just making this broad statements that just aren't supported in reality.  Westbrook is more efficient and generates a much larger amount of offense on the whole throughout their respective careers.

I don't think there's an easy answer to the question of who generates more offense, but if you just look at basic stats of points per game and assists per game (assists per game would be doubled and then have the amount of assists leading to threes per game added to reflect how many actual points each assist helps lead to), then Rajon Rondo and Russell Westbrook are fairly close in the amount of offense generated.

Not including 2014 (mainly because I got these stats from Hoopdata, which didn't keep stats for this season), here are the respective "points generated" by Rondo and Westbrook over the course of the last five regular seasons:

2013

Rondo--37.8
Westbrook--39.6

2012

Rondo--37.8
Westbrook--36.2

2011

Rondo--35.2
Westbrook--40.0

2010

Rondo--35.6
Westbrook--33.8

2009

Rondo--30.5
Westbrook--26.8

Like I said, I realize these numbers don't tell the whole story.  I don't think there are any that do.  I am interested to know, though, which stats you used that tell you that Rondo generates "nowhere near" the amount of offense as Westbrook over the course of their respective careers.

  Don't forget the playoffs. I didn't do a year by year, but since 2009 Westbrook's generated 36.9 ppg, Rondo comes in at 40.1. So Rondo's better than his regular season average, Westbrook goes down somewhat.

[BballTim]

As for the All-Star Game -- Rondo could make it as a reserve, but Westbrook will be a starter, and the East looks to be seriously crowded at the point guard between Irving, Williams, and Wall.

   I'd be curious about why you're so certain Westbrook will be a starter. It can't be based on his career thus far, when he's never come anywhere close to starting an all-star game. Rondo missed most of the season because of injury so Westbrook got more votes than him, but generally Rondo gets 2-3 times as many votes as Westbrook. That's a huge shift in the voting you're predicting, what's it based on?