A PG comparison for Rondo's upcoming deal..

[CoachBo]

Nobody seems to be be focusing on the most glaring problem with his play last year which was his lack of lateral quickness on defense. He was completely useless on defense and discussing his contract extension is premature until he can show that he is able to play on both ends of the court.

I'm sure there's some ridiculous out-of-context misapplication of a stat to refute what you see, along with scouts in the league.

I'd be OK with 4 at $60 for Rondo. Any more, and trade him or he can walk. He is simply not skilled enough on both ends of the floor to warrant even the slightest consideration of a max contract. Perhaps someday his fans will understand that there's a difference between unrequited love for an individual player and an honest, eyes-don't-lie talent evaluation.

TP.

[Eddie20]

Lin is more along the lines of 8M so I'll exclude him from the discussion. The key thing to me is the ages.  Paul and Williams are roughly Rondo's age and in Williams' case he has really fallen off (Paul has declined ever so slightly too). So I don't mind paying Rondo the same amount as Wall, Westbrook, Irving, etc. if he were approximately the same age. However, we'll be paying Rondo on past performance if we reward him with a 5 year deal at max, or near max, money. He simply won't fulfill that contract with his play especially during the later years of the deal. His athletically reliant game isn't one that ages well and unlike other PG's, who can compensate with any decreased athleticism with their shooting, Rondo can't.

I would love to see a chart on how athletically dependent players say 6-3 and under have performed during ages 29-34, which is more or less the age Rondo will be with a 5 year deal. Iverson, Marbury, Lever, KJ, Pack, Hardaway, Tiny, and Francis are a few that immediately come to mind. Trying to think of others.

First one that comes to mind is Chauncey Billups, who basically doubled himself as a player at Rondo's age.  If Rondo does that it would be a bargain to have him locked up at 20 million for 5 years.

Billups wasn't ever an athletically reliant player and he could really shoot. If Rondo could shoot like that I would have no problem whatsoever giving him a 5 year deal, but unfortunately he can't. I'm still hoping that he can reach that elusive 65% FT mark for a season.

[cltc5]

Rondo desrves to make money somewhere else.  He's not worth dumpin all that money into.

[cltc5]

Nobody seems to be be focusing on the most glaring problem with his play last year which was his lack of lateral quickness on defense. He was completely useless on defense and discussing his contract extension is premature until he can show that he is able to play on both ends of the court.

I'm sure there's some ridiculous out-of-context misapplication of a stat to refute what you see, along with scouts in the league.

I'd be OK with 4 at $60 for Rondo. Any more, and trade him or he can walk. He is simply not skilled enough on both ends of the floor to warrant even the slightest consideration of a max contract. Perhaps someday his fans will understand that there's a difference between unrequited love for an individual player and an honest, eyes-don't-lie talent evaluation.

TP.

tp

[Nerf DPOY]

 Perhaps someday his fans will understand that there's a difference between unrequited love for an individual player and an honest, eyes-don't-lie talent evaluation.

People who you disagree with are grossly biased. You are not biased at all. Your eyes don't lie. You've more or less said this before, a lot.

[Vox_Populi]

What's funny about that list is that every deal on there looks bad in retrospect barring Wall's, Westbrook's and Paul's. And even then, Paul is almost a guarantee to miss 10+ games a season and Westbrook has already has numerous knee surgeries. In general, the only star point guards on bargain deals are Lowry, Parker, Curry and Rondo.

Rondo isn't a max guy, but if he has a strong season, I do think he should be one of the better paid players.

[cb8883]

He deserves as much as Lin now.

He's better than Lin this is true. Rondo is far too old to build around though. Id say his max that is reasonable is what he's making right now. He's not at the level that Westbrook Wall and a healthy Derrick Rose are at.

[BballTim]

Nobody seems to be be focusing on the most glaring problem with his play last year which was his lack of lateral quickness on defense. He was completely useless on defense and discussing his contract extension is premature until he can show that he is able to play on both ends of the court.

I'm sure there's some ridiculous out-of-context misapplication of a stat to refute what you see, along with scouts in the league.

I'd be OK with 4 at $60 for Rondo. Any more, and trade him or he can walk. He is simply not skilled enough on both ends of the floor to warrant even the slightest consideration of a max contract. Perhaps someday his fans will understand that there's a difference between unrequited love for an individual player and an honest, eyes-don't-lie talent evaluation.

TP.

  Hilarious. As someone who you frequently refer to as such a fan, I'll refer to an earlier post in this thread to show how oblivious I've been to Rondo's lack of lateral quickness last year because of my "unrequited love":

  Rondo struggled with his shooting this year due to health issues but he didn't struggle to get past his man. He was near the top of the league in drives per game despite a lack of explosiveness or lateral quickness,

  On the good side, your lack of accuracy in describing other opinions pretty much matches your analysis of Rondo, so at least you're consistent.

[BballTim]

Lin is more along the lines of 8M so I'll exclude him from the discussion. The key thing to me is the ages.  Paul and Williams are roughly Rondo's age and in Williams' case he has really fallen off (Paul has declined ever so slightly too). So I don't mind paying Rondo the same amount as Wall, Westbrook, Irving, etc. if he were approximately the same age. However, we'll be paying Rondo on past performance if we reward him with a 5 year deal at max, or near max, money. He simply won't fulfill that contract with his play especially during the later years of the deal. His athletically reliant game isn't one that ages well and unlike other PG's, who can compensate with any decreased athleticism with their shooting, Rondo can't.

I would love to see a chart on how athletically dependent players say 6-3 and under have performed during ages 29-34, which is more or less the age Rondo will be with a 5 year deal. Iverson, Marbury, Lever, KJ, Pack, Hardaway, Tiny, and Francis are a few that immediately come to mind. Trying to think of others.

First one that comes to mind is Chauncey Billups, who basically doubled himself as a player at Rondo's age.  If Rondo does that it would be a bargain to have him locked up at 20 million for 5 years.

Billups wasn't ever an athletically reliant player and he could really shoot. If Rondo could shoot like that I would have no problem whatsoever giving him a 5 year deal, but unfortunately he can't. I'm still hoping that he can reach that elusive 65% FT mark for a season.

  Haha. So Billups doesn't work in the list because there's a difference between his game and Rondo's (shooting). Yet your list is fine because, as far as you know, there's no discernible difference between the way Rondo plays and the way those players played?

[Nerf DPOY]

Lin is more along the lines of 8M so I'll exclude him from the discussion. The key thing to me is the ages.  Paul and Williams are roughly Rondo's age and in Williams' case he has really fallen off (Paul has declined ever so slightly too). So I don't mind paying Rondo the same amount as Wall, Westbrook, Irving, etc. if he were approximately the same age. However, we'll be paying Rondo on past performance if we reward him with a 5 year deal at max, or near max, money. He simply won't fulfill that contract with his play especially during the later years of the deal. His athletically reliant game isn't one that ages well and unlike other PG's, who can compensate with any decreased athleticism with their shooting, Rondo can't.

I would love to see a chart on how athletically dependent players say 6-3 and under have performed during ages 29-34, which is more or less the age Rondo will be with a 5 year deal. Iverson, Marbury, Lever, KJ, Pack, Hardaway, Tiny, and Francis are a few that immediately come to mind. Trying to think of others.

First one that comes to mind is Chauncey Billups, who basically doubled himself as a player at Rondo's age.  If Rondo does that it would be a bargain to have him locked up at 20 million for 5 years.

Billups wasn't ever an athletically reliant player and he could really shoot. If Rondo could shoot like that I would have no problem whatsoever giving him a 5 year deal, but unfortunately he can't. I'm still hoping that he can reach that elusive 65% FT mark for a season.

  Haha. So Billups doesn't work in the list because there's a difference between his game and Rondo's (shooting). Yet your list is fine because, as far as you know, there's no discernible difference between the way Rondo plays and the way those players played?

I just assumed the list had the height cutoff at 6-3 to eliminate Kidd as a comparison. Much better to compare Rondo to Marbury, a shoot first guard with a lack of dedication who was likely a drug addict throughout his career.

[BballTim]

Lin is more along the lines of 8M so I'll exclude him from the discussion. The key thing to me is the ages.  Paul and Williams are roughly Rondo's age and in Williams' case he has really fallen off (Paul has declined ever so slightly too). So I don't mind paying Rondo the same amount as Wall, Westbrook, Irving, etc. if he were approximately the same age. However, we'll be paying Rondo on past performance if we reward him with a 5 year deal at max, or near max, money. He simply won't fulfill that contract with his play especially during the later years of the deal. His athletically reliant game isn't one that ages well and unlike other PG's, who can compensate with any decreased athleticism with their shooting, Rondo can't.

I would love to see a chart on how athletically dependent players say 6-3 and under have performed during ages 29-34, which is more or less the age Rondo will be with a 5 year deal. Iverson, Marbury, Lever, KJ, Pack, Hardaway, Tiny, and Francis are a few that immediately come to mind. Trying to think of others.

First one that comes to mind is Chauncey Billups, who basically doubled himself as a player at Rondo's age.  If Rondo does that it would be a bargain to have him locked up at 20 million for 5 years.

Billups wasn't ever an athletically reliant player and he could really shoot. If Rondo could shoot like that I would have no problem whatsoever giving him a 5 year deal, but unfortunately he can't. I'm still hoping that he can reach that elusive 65% FT mark for a season.

  Haha. So Billups doesn't work in the list because there's a difference between his game and Rondo's (shooting). Yet your list is fine because, as far as you know, there's no discernible difference between the way Rondo plays and the way those players played?

I just assumed the list had the height cutoff at 6-3 to eliminate Kidd as a comparison. Much better to compare Rondo to Marbury, a shoot first guard with a lack of dedication who was likely a drug addict throughout his career.

  Obviously he's tailoring his list or some reason. Couple that with a nebulous term like "athletically dependent" and he can include or exclude anyone he wants. Including Rondo, who's "athletically dependent" because he'll be unable to do things he was capable of doing while recovering from a knee injury if he slows down a little as he ages. Nothing to see here...

[SHAQATTACK]

Rondo is still

Our calling card


He is the one certain asset that could entice a FA to sign in cold Boston

We need him to stay.....the money is spent on who he can bring to the team as much as what he can bring to the court right now.....that is

If you want any hope of a faster rebuild

You pay the price


Otherwise ...prepare for five years of tanking for stars.

[Eddie20]

Lin is more along the lines of 8M so I'll exclude him from the discussion. The key thing to me is the ages.  Paul and Williams are roughly Rondo's age and in Williams' case he has really fallen off (Paul has declined ever so slightly too). So I don't mind paying Rondo the same amount as Wall, Westbrook, Irving, etc. if he were approximately the same age. However, we'll be paying Rondo on past performance if we reward him with a 5 year deal at max, or near max, money. He simply won't fulfill that contract with his play especially during the later years of the deal. His athletically reliant game isn't one that ages well and unlike other PG's, who can compensate with any decreased athleticism with their shooting, Rondo can't.

I would love to see a chart on how athletically dependent players say 6-3 and under have performed during ages 29-34, which is more or less the age Rondo will be with a 5 year deal. Iverson, Marbury, Lever, KJ, Pack, Hardaway, Tiny, and Francis are a few that immediately come to mind. Trying to think of others.

First one that comes to mind is Chauncey Billups, who basically doubled himself as a player at Rondo's age.  If Rondo does that it would be a bargain to have him locked up at 20 million for 5 years.

Billups wasn't ever an athletically reliant player and he could really shoot. If Rondo could shoot like that I would have no problem whatsoever giving him a 5 year deal, but unfortunately he can't. I'm still hoping that he can reach that elusive 65% FT mark for a season.

  Haha. So Billups doesn't work in the list because there's a difference between his game and Rondo's (shooting). Yet your list is fine because, as far as you know, there's no discernible difference between the way Rondo plays and the way those players played?

I just assumed the list had the height cutoff at 6-3 to eliminate Kidd as a comparison. Much better to compare Rondo to Marbury, a shoot first guard with a lack of dedication who was likely a drug addict throughout his career.

  Obviously he's tailoring his list or some reason. Couple that with a nebulous term like "athletically dependent" and he can include or exclude anyone he wants. Including Rondo, who's "athletically dependent" because he'll be unable to do things he was capable of doing while recovering from a knee injury if he slows down a little as he ages. Nothing to see here...

Wall, Westbrook, etc. are other players that are athletically dependent and will also suffer as they get older/lose that athleticism. Other types of players, with strong shooting skillsets, tend to age better as history has shown. Your Rondo love is so strong that it blinds you from being slightly objective. Put down the pom pom's for one thread, man.

[Eddie20]

Lin is more along the lines of 8M so I'll exclude him from the discussion. The key thing to me is the ages.  Paul and Williams are roughly Rondo's age and in Williams' case he has really fallen off (Paul has declined ever so slightly too). So I don't mind paying Rondo the same amount as Wall, Westbrook, Irving, etc. if he were approximately the same age. However, we'll be paying Rondo on past performance if we reward him with a 5 year deal at max, or near max, money. He simply won't fulfill that contract with his play especially during the later years of the deal. His athletically reliant game isn't one that ages well and unlike other PG's, who can compensate with any decreased athleticism with their shooting, Rondo can't.

I would love to see a chart on how athletically dependent players say 6-3 and under have performed during ages 29-34, which is more or less the age Rondo will be with a 5 year deal. Iverson, Marbury, Lever, KJ, Pack, Hardaway, Tiny, and Francis are a few that immediately come to mind. Trying to think of others.

First one that comes to mind is Chauncey Billups, who basically doubled himself as a player at Rondo's age.  If Rondo does that it would be a bargain to have him locked up at 20 million for 5 years.

Billups wasn't ever an athletically reliant player and he could really shoot. If Rondo could shoot like that I would have no problem whatsoever giving him a 5 year deal, but unfortunately he can't. I'm still hoping that he can reach that elusive 65% FT mark for a season.

  Haha. So Billups doesn't work in the list because there's a difference between his game and Rondo's (shooting). Yet your list is fine because, as far as you know, there's no discernible difference between the way Rondo plays and the way those players played?

I just assumed the list had the height cutoff at 6-3 to eliminate Kidd as a comparison. Much better to compare Rondo to Marbury, a shoot first guard with a lack of dedication who was likely a drug addict throughout his career.

You can include Kidd, and Payton for the matter, if you'd like. Both are 3 inches taller than Rondo, and considered huge for the position, which is why they were excluded. Players that are big at their spot tend to do better as they age because of their size advantage over others. Rondo is average in size for the position and arguably the worst shooter out of anyone I mentioned (Kidd and Payton included).

[Nerf DPOY]

Lin is more along the lines of 8M so I'll exclude him from the discussion. The key thing to me is the ages.  Paul and Williams are roughly Rondo's age and in Williams' case he has really fallen off (Paul has declined ever so slightly too). So I don't mind paying Rondo the same amount as Wall, Westbrook, Irving, etc. if he were approximately the same age. However, we'll be paying Rondo on past performance if we reward him with a 5 year deal at max, or near max, money. He simply won't fulfill that contract with his play especially during the later years of the deal. His athletically reliant game isn't one that ages well and unlike other PG's, who can compensate with any decreased athleticism with their shooting, Rondo can't.

I would love to see a chart on how athletically dependent players say 6-3 and under have performed during ages 29-34, which is more or less the age Rondo will be with a 5 year deal. Iverson, Marbury, Lever, KJ, Pack, Hardaway, Tiny, and Francis are a few that immediately come to mind. Trying to think of others.

First one that comes to mind is Chauncey Billups, who basically doubled himself as a player at Rondo's age.  If Rondo does that it would be a bargain to have him locked up at 20 million for 5 years.

Billups wasn't ever an athletically reliant player and he could really shoot. If Rondo could shoot like that I would have no problem whatsoever giving him a 5 year deal, but unfortunately he can't. I'm still hoping that he can reach that elusive 65% FT mark for a season.

  Haha. So Billups doesn't work in the list because there's a difference between his game and Rondo's (shooting). Yet your list is fine because, as far as you know, there's no discernible difference between the way Rondo plays and the way those players played?

I just assumed the list had the height cutoff at 6-3 to eliminate Kidd as a comparison. Much better to compare Rondo to Marbury, a shoot first guard with a lack of dedication who was likely a drug addict throughout his career.

You can include Kidd, and Payton for the matter, if you'd like. Both are 3 inches taller than Rondo, and considered huge for the position, which is why they were excluded. Players that are big at their spot tend to do better as they age because of their size advantage over others. Rondo is average in size for the position and arguably the worst shooter out of anyone I mentioned (Kidd and Payton included).

How about Tony Parker? He turned 32 this year. He's certainly not substantially bigger than Rondo. He's a better shooter, but not a great one.

There were many other factors that likely contributed to the fall of Marbury. To heap all his baggage on Rondo strikes me as being disingenuous.