RealGM source: "Love deal to Boston pretty much done"

[Fafnir]

What? You don't think Curry is the team's primary ballhandler/ offense initiator? He had 8.5 apg, doubling up Iggy's second most of 4.2 He also averaged 24 ppg, which was 6 more than Thompson's 18 ppg.

He plays off the ball a lot. They had Iggy, Klay, and even Steve Blake initiate the offense to move him off the ball.

Curry gets tired bringing up the ball all the time and isn't the best against pressure and traps.

[Celtics18]

Btw... the most relevant thing about this thread is that we can watch the retardation of the media in action.

Phase 1:  Some random fans on a message board (LarryBirdsFingr and FrankLucas) share their Kevin Love fantasies:  http://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=1324734   (see my cut-and-paste quotes on the previous page to save time)

Phase 2:  Some hacky blog called "rappler.com" reports the fan quotes as a "source" saying Kevin Love is a "done deal":  http://www.rappler.com/sports/by-sport/basketball/59460-holding-court-celtics-pacers-opposite-directions

Phase 3:  This Celticsblog thread

Phase 4:  Gary Tanguay now reports on the rappler article:  http://www.csnne.com/boston-celtics/melo-love-rondo-lets-hope-its-true

Let's see where this stupidity goes from here.

  I think you're getting an education in how 90% of the rumors people talk about here originate. People decide whether the rumor's legitimate based on whether they want it to be true or not.

Well Tim, to be fair... a lot of the "rumors" we discuss here originate from folks like Mark Stein, Chad Ford and Woj... There mods in this community are pretty good about filtering out the riff-raff.  They typically don't allow people to come here pretending to have sources and usually people are quick to point out if something is originating from a bogus twitter feed or a hacky blog that quotes Celtic fans on a message board as "sources".

Granted, you could be speaking more to the idea that the media in general makes stuff up.  I guess that's partially true.  You seem to lean towards the idea that it's always made up... Like when Forsberg reported that Golden State turned down Boston in a Rondo/Curry trade (pre-Steph superstardom), you took it about as seriously as CelticsThug on a RealGM forum.

"In December, the Celtics had discussions with Golden State about a Stephen Curry-for-Rondo deal, and one source says it was Golden State that decided against pulling the trigger. But Curry's recent ankle injuries, which have caused him several problems in his short career, have given the Celtics pause. The potential trade is still being discussed by Boston's braintrust, but they aren't sure they want to go forward with it. It also isn't clear whether the Warriors would be willing to do it. Other players would have to be thrown in to make it work financially."

Are you referring to this rumor by Chris Broussard where he first says Golden State turned down the deal and then implies that Boston turned down the deal?

Sounds pretty flimsy to me.

  Yes, but if you ignore part of thst and claim the rest is almost a fact it works out nicely.

I don't think it's hard to understand even though it's written poorly. Rondo for Curry deal was turned down by Warriors. Teams were still in conversation on a deal, but the C's had to offer more to entice the Warriors. However, Curry's ankle issues at the times made the C's uncertain if they were willing to do that.

What a steal that would've been. Curry would be an amazing fit in Stevens' system and provide the scoring and shooting we desperately lack. A Curry/Love pick and roll game would've been incredibly difficult to stop with the way both can shoot.

It would have been the Warriors who would have had to offer more to make the salaries match as Curry was still on his rookie deal at the time. 


Again, your take is a perfect example of reading what you want to read in this rumor.

Making salaries match by dumping a player would be beneficial to the Warriors. In addition to taking a undesirable contract, a deal could be further sweetened by offering draft picks.

  First of all you're clearly speculating. The rumor could mean different things, you don't know what either team was asking for and "one source said the Warriors turned down the deal" is hardly definitive. But the broader point that you're missing is we're arguing about what some reporter means when he's repeating a *rumor*. You don't know that the discussions ever took place to begin with.

Isn't everything speculation, really? I mean if you don't buy into the report what do you believe in? One thing is for certain, both team were smart. Ainge for trying to trade for him, and GS for not dealing him. Because if there was any doubt then on who the better player was, there surely isn't a doubt now.

You've got to be kidding.  You think there's no doubt as to who is better between Rondo and Curry?

I think that's a very debatable topic.

Yep, without a doubt. The guy is only getting better and just finished 6th in MVP voting. He's also coming off a season where he averaged 24 ppg, 8.5 apg, 4.3 rpg, 1.6 spg, 3.3 3s per game, and did it with excellent percentages (FG-47.1, FT-88.5, 3s- 42.4) and in relatively low minutes per game (36.5).

I would never deny that Curry is a great shooter, and excellent scorer, and has very good ball skills.  He does have some significant flaws, though.  He is a poor defender who doesn't have the tools to ever turn into a good defender.  He is unathletic by NBA point guard standards.  Not only does this affect his defense, but it also challenges him offensively.  Despite his superb skills shooting and dribbling, he will never be a force getting in the lane and getting to the rim.  He doesn't have the speed, strength or explosiveness to live in the lane like players like Rondo, Westbrook, or Parker. 

I think that Steph Curry will continue to be a very good NBA player.  He will be remembered as one of the best shooters to play the game, but I don't think he'll be a consistent top ten player in the league throughout the course of his career. 

Given both players' strength and weaknesses, I think that Rondo and Curry's careers will end up looking very similar as far as impact on the game. 

Personally, I prefer the elite passing skills and defensive impact that Rondo brings to the table to Curry's abilities as a deadly shooter. 

[BballTim]

Yep, without a doubt. The guy is only getting better and just finished 6th in MVP voting. He's also coming off a season where he averaged 24 ppg, 8.5 apg, 4.3 rpg, 1.6 spg, 3.3 3s per game, and did it with excellent percentages (FG-47.1, FT-88.5, 3s- 42.4) and in relatively low minutes per game (36.5).

Also, 3.8 TO's a game.   I love Rondo but even I think that Curry is better player. 

BTW, I just love when someone only posts favorable stuff.  It is not needed here Curry is a better shooter by such a large margin that I don't think hiding his negatives matters.

But to be fair...Curry has had the following TOs per year during his 5 year career:

3.0
3.1
2.5
3.1
3.8

During the same span Rondo had the following:

3.0
3.4
3.6
3.9
3.3

So while I agree that Curry could stand to lower his turnovers, let's not pretend that Rondo turns the ball over at a lesser rate.

Look at their assists per game.

Curry
5.9
5.8
5.3
6.9
8.5

Rondo
9.8
11.2
11.7
11.1
9.8

There's a big difference in assist-to-turnover ratio.  Curry turns the ball over a lot for a small perimeter player who isn't his team's primary ballhandler/offense initiator.

Mike

What? You don't think Curry is the team's primary ballhandler/ offense initiator? He had 8.5 apg, doubling up Iggy's second most of 4.2 He also averaged 24 ppg, which was 6 more than Thompson's 18 ppg.

His assists to turnover ratio won't be as strong as Rondo's because he actually has the ability to shoot and score the ball, so he looks for his shot much more than Rondo. However, when you count his 8.5 apg and 24 ppg that's 41 points that he's accounting for. Rondo's best season in that regard he accounted for 35.9.

  I'd guess you're talking about 2012 for Rondo. Those 35.9 points would be 39% of the points we scored that year. By sheer coincidence, Curry's 41 points amounted to 39% of the points his team scored that year. So they're generating a reasonably similar percentage of their team's points but Rondo was all defense that year and also led all point guards in rebounds per game.
Curry's not known for excelling in either category.

[kozlodoev]

I'd guess you're talking about 2012 for Rondo. Those 35.9 points would be 39% of the points we scored that year. By sheer coincidence, Curry's 41 points amounted to 39% of the points his team scored that year. So they're generating a reasonably similar percentage of their team's points but Rondo was all defense that year and also led all point guards in rebounds per game.
Curry's not known for excelling in either category.

Rondo is averaging 0.8 more rebounds per 36 for his career than Curry, and their TRR is fairly similar. The difference in rebounding is highly overrated.

[MBunge]

What? You don't think Curry is the team's primary ballhandler/ offense initiator? He had 8.5 apg, doubling up Iggy's second most of 4.2 He also averaged 24 ppg, which was 6 more than Thompson's 18 ppg.

His assists to turnover ratio won't be as strong as Rondo's because he actually has the ability to shoot and score the ball, so he looks for his shot much more than Rondo. However, when you count his 8.5 apg and 24 ppg that's 41 points that he's accounting for. Rondo's best season in that regard he accounted for 35.9.

1.  Jarrett Jack was GSW's primary ballhandler and the guy who initiated the offense last season.  Larry Bird may have scored the points but anyone who watched the Celtics play knew that Dennis Johnson was the guy running the offense.  Curry doesn't really do that, yet still turns the ball over a lot.

2.  I don't think you understand the assist-to-turnover concept.

Mike

[Fafnir]

I'd guess you're talking about 2012 for Rondo. Those 35.9 points would be 39% of the points we scored that year. By sheer coincidence, Curry's 41 points amounted to 39% of the points his team scored that year. So they're generating a reasonably similar percentage of their team's points but Rondo was all defense that year and also led all point guards in rebounds per game.
Curry's not known for excelling in either category.

Rondo is averaging 0.8 more rebounds per 36 for his career than Curry, and their TRR is fairly similar. The difference in rebounding is highly overrated.

You don't think a 2 point difference in rebounding rate is significant? That's a 31% difference and also is the difference between Glen Davis and Blake Griffin.

3rd compared to 22nd

[Eddie20]

What? You don't think Curry is the team's primary ballhandler/ offense initiator? He had 8.5 apg, doubling up Iggy's second most of 4.2 He also averaged 24 ppg, which was 6 more than Thompson's 18 ppg.

His assists to turnover ratio won't be as strong as Rondo's because he actually has the ability to shoot and score the ball, so he looks for his shot much more than Rondo. However, when you count his 8.5 apg and 24 ppg that's 41 points that he's accounting for. Rondo's best season in that regard he accounted for 35.9.

1.  Jarrett Jack was GSW's primary ballhandler and the guy who initiated the offense last season.  Larry Bird may have scored the points but anyone who watched the Celtics play knew that Dennis Johnson was the guy running the offense.  Curry doesn't really do that, yet still turns the ball over a lot.

2.  I don't think you understand the assist-to-turnover concept.

Mike

1. This past season Curry was their primary ballhandler as he was last year. Do they put him off the ball? Sure. They run him off picks to free him up from ballhandling duties. Again, being the sole ballhandler and the primary one are two totally different things.

2. I understand the stat, but I'm explaining how Curry is hurt in that department because he can actually shoot the ball. If Curry didn't play to his shooting strength, and instead passed the ball more often, his assists would increase, but his game/team production will suffer as a result. So he gets penalized in this stat because he looks for his shot more.

Edit: DJ usually brought the ball down the court (Ainge sometimes did too), but make no mistake that Bird was the one that was facilitating and running that offense.

[D.o.s.]

I think Steph Curry's one of the most interesting point guards in the game, mostly because he is, far and away, the best shooter at the one spot in the modern NBA. He's like a smaller Ray Allen (Milwaukee era) with better handles and a green light in a much more uptempo offense.

That said, comparing 'better' between Rondo and Curry really does seem to be apples and chainsaws. Different systems, different strengths, different conferences, different sweatband preferences.

[LarBrd33]

lol... I only brought up that Steph Curry/Rondo thing as an example of a perceived "legitimate" rumor (it was reported by ESPN's CHris Broussard) vs a perceived "fake" rumor (random fan conversation on RealGM that gets reported as a "source" on a hacky blog and eventually makes its way on CSNE and Weei)

My point was, typically Celticsblog is good about filtering out the riffraff and only sharing "rumors" that originate from "legitimate" media people quoting their own sources.  But I understand that some folks seem to think a rumor is a rumor... whether it comes from Woj's twitter or a fan's butt.  I tend to disagree.

Not sure how that turned into Rondo vs. CUrry.  My bad.

[D.o.s.]

I think most of us would rather argue the merits of players than the merits of sources.

[BballTim]

2. I understand the stat, but I'm explaining how Curry is hurt in that department because he can actually shoot the ball. If Curry didn't play to his shooting strength, and instead passed the ball more often, his assists would increase, but his game/team production will suffer as a result. So he gets penalized in this stat because he looks for his shot more.

  First of all the team's production shouldn't suffer much, if at all, if he passed the ball more, if he's making good passes the team will score efficiently off of them. Secondly, the rest of your post doesn't make much sense. If he passed the ball more he'd turn it over more as well. It wouldn't magically improve his ast/to ratio. Shooting the ball, especially shooting outside jumpers, doesn't cause a lot of turnovers, so shooting the ball isn't really hurting him there either.

[BballTim]

lol... I only brought up that Steph Curry/Rondo thing as an example of a perceived "legitimate" rumor (it was reported by ESPN's CHris Broussard) vs a perceived "fake" rumor (random fan conversation on RealGM that gets reported as a "source" on a hacky blog and eventually makes its way on CSNE and Weei)

My point was, typically Celticsblog is good about filtering out the riffraff and only sharing "rumors" that originate from "legitimate" media people quoting their own sources.  But I understand that some folks seem to think a rumor is a rumor... whether it comes from Woj's twitter or a fan's butt.  I tend to disagree.

  I'd be curious about how you decide that espn's a legitimate source for rumors and CSN and WEEI aren't. The CSN guys probably spend more time talking to team "sources" than anyone at espn does. How do you know that espn doesn't repeat rumors that they pick up from csn or weei?

[Celtics4ever]

I find it amazing that fans are referenced as a source in this day and age.

[crimson_stallion]

as long as we don't do what NY did a couple years ago for Melo. They gutted half their roster for Melo and it got them no where. 2 1st round exits, 1 2nd round exit and missed playoffs...

There are two key differences:

One is that James Dolan supposedly took over negotiation of the deal and gave Denver everything they wanted, over internal objections by people such as Donnie Walsh.  That's not going to happen in Boston.

Two is that Kevin Love is a better player than Carmelo Anthony.

Kevin Love is not, by any stretch of the imagination,  a better player than Carmelo.  The only thing Love does better is rebounding.  Melo has proven to be better at everything else,  including scoring,  defending and (most importantly) winning.

[crimson_stallion]

What? You don't think Curry is the team's primary ballhandler/ offense initiator? He had 8.5 apg, doubling up Iggy's second most of 4.2 He also averaged 24 ppg, which was 6 more than Thompson's 18 ppg.

His assists to turnover ratio won't be as strong as Rondo's because he actually has the ability to shoot and score the ball, so he looks for his shot much more than Rondo. However, when you count his 8.5 apg and 24 ppg that's 41 points that he's accounting for. Rondo's best season in that regard he accounted for 35.9.

1.  Jarrett Jack was GSW's primary ballhandler and the guy who initiated the offense last season.  Larry Bird may have scored the points but anyone who watched the Celtics play knew that Dennis Johnson was the guy running the offense.  Curry doesn't really do that, yet still turns the ball over a lot.

2.  I don't think you understand the assist-to-turnover concept.

Mike

1. This past season Curry was their primary ballhandler as he was last year. Do they put him off the ball? Sure. They run him off picks to free him up from ballhandling duties. Again, being the sole ballhandler and the primary one are two totally different things.

2. I understand the stat, but I'm explaining how Curry is hurt in that department because he can actually shoot the ball. If Curry didn't play to his shooting strength, and instead passed the ball more often, his assists would increase, but his game/team production will suffer as a result. So he gets penalized in this stat because he looks for his shot more.

Edit: DJ usually brought the ball down the court (Ainge sometimes did too), but make no mistake that Bird was the one that was facilitating and running that offense.

This makes no sense at all. 

Since when does shooting more cause a player to generate more turnovers?  Is a player shooting the ball in to the opponents hands?   Unless the offensive player is frequently running head first in to the defense and losing the ball  (which is a problem in itself) then talking more shots should not push your.assist/To ratio upwards.

Usually pass first players have higher turnover numbers because it's easier to throw a bad pass (or have a pass deflected. / teammate fumble it)  then it is to throw a 3pt shot directly to an opponent.

Chris Paul is the rare exception.  Hes a pass first PG who has always had an elite assist/to ratio