Are Rondo, Love and/or Melo really "Franchise" guys?

[fairweatherfan]

I agree he is the most franchise guy of that crew.   There have been scorers like King, Gerwin and Nique who won some series.   Let the excuses begin.....

Dominique won 3 playoff series in his career.   Gervin also won 3 (in the NBA).  Bernard King won all of 2 series, one of which was best of 3.  Carmelo's career isn't over yet and he has won 3.  In other words, he's had as much playoff success as any of those guys.  I don't think this comparison is saying what you mean it to say.

You are also basing Melo's playoff record on a 2+ year old article.  He's gone 7-7 since that article, making his real record 23-43 or .349, which is still pretty lousy, but a bit better than your dated numbers.  You should maybe check your facts before putting your post together.

[LarBrd33]

Love and Melo are franchise players.  Rondo isn't. 

[LarBrd33]

I would say:

Rondo - 3rd best player on a championship team.

Love - 2nd best player on a champion.

Melo - 2nd best player on champion.

Of course, you could mix a bunch of good-but-not-great guys and still win a championship but it probably won't be one of those long dynasties unless you have one of the top players in the league.

This is probably true.

The three of those together though would at least contend.

[BballTim]

To put the Franchise label on any of these three is to equate them with Kobe, Pierce, Lebron, Duncan, Shaq, KG and company. None of them are good enough to be more than top level complimentary players, 2nd or 3rd in a big three at this stage. Rondo and Love are young enough to prove themselves as number two of a big three but Melo is past that IMO. He is a mid level complimentary player and marginal number three of a big three.

The sum of Love and Rondo combined with a couple of good solid complimentary players like a Battier, Ginobilli, Gasol, Posey, were to their championship teams would be a force. Still maybe not good enough to win an NBA championship.

  Rondo's closer to PP than PP is to half those players. Whether he's a "franchise" player or not is pretty nebulous because people will tailor their own definition of a franchise player to include or exclude whoever they want. He's been the best player on multiple teams that have made deep playoff runs but the league's loaded with franchise players that haven't. Go figure

[showtime]

Melo and Love are, Rondo no way. KG definitely was, Pierce was not.

[billysan]

To put the Franchise label on any of these three is to equate them with Kobe, Pierce, Lebron, Duncan, Shaq, KG and company. None of them are good enough to be more than top level complimentary players, 2nd or 3rd in a big three at this stage. Rondo and Love are young enough to prove themselves as number two of a big three but Melo is past that IMO. He is a mid level complimentary player and marginal number three of a big three.

The sum of Love and Rondo combined with a couple of good solid complimentary players like a Battier, Ginobilli, Gasol, Posey, were to their championship teams would be a force. Still maybe not good enough to win an NBA championship.

  Rondo's closer to PP than PP is to half those players. Whether he's a "franchise" player or not is pretty nebulous because people will tailor their own definition of a franchise player to include or exclude whoever they want. He's been the best player on multiple teams that have made deep playoff runs but the league's loaded with franchise players that haven't. Go figure

Yeah I get your point. The franchise tag is pretty much a hindsight description. It has to be already earned in most cases, not projected. If a guy is to wear it IMO he must have been a significant factor that carried his team to an NBA or even conference finals for example. At least a serious Finals MVP candidate would also be a qualifier. Without him his team doesn't make the playoffs is a possible qualifier. He would have to  had that type of value and impact over a decent period of time to his team.

The list I made was an example of guys I think would likely have been a GM's first pick to build a new big three in their prime and not less than a number two. Paul Pierce is a cliffhanger on that definition but it is my green loyalty showing I guess. Rondo and Love are as I said are solid potential number twos at this stage.

You could certainly make the argument that Rondo was a the best player on our last finals run but was he the best because of Pierce and Garnett? Not sure I can dismiss that factor in my assessment so I put him as a number two until I see a little more. Love hasn't even been that far but without him His past teams are wholly insignificant much like we were without Rondo last year.