Hypothetically if you replaced Rondo with LeBron, how many games would we win?

[LarBrd33]

Bird, you start with your opinion that we are at best a 30 win team, and repeat it as a fact.  That's obviously far from a known at this point.

And, of course, no one would argue that Lebron James wouldn't make this team better.  You could literally replace him with any player in the league and he would make that team better. 

So, while, sure, you're right that having Lebron James instead of Rajon Rondo would make us considerably better, your point seems kind of empty.

I'm not sure it's empty.  Where does "guard who passes really good" fall in the list of desirable NBA strengths?   We have arguably the best passing guard in the world.. and yet we've all collectively decided the team would be 15-20 games better if we lost that strength and added "elite superstar scorer". 

I was having a discussion with a friend recently about NFL position importance.  Like... having the world's greatest kicker is nice, but you'd probably trade the world's greatest kicker for a improved running back.   We've established that having the world's (maybe) greatest passing point guard is nice... but is it more important than having an elite scorer?  No.  More important than having an elite interior defender?  What do you think, Celtics18?

But, you aren't talking about "elite superstar scorer" in the abstract.  You are talking about Lebron James, arguably one of the top five players to ever play the game.  We aren't talking about Demar Derozan, Rudy Gay, Chandler Parsons, Monta Ellis, Bradley Beal or even Carmelo Anthony.  If you replaced Lebron James with any of those names in your hypothetical, it would be a much more debatable point.

I had to establish a premise that not all all-stars are created equally... that not all NBA strengths are created equally.   I had to start with an undebatable extreme before getting into the more niche questions.   

So how about it, Celtics18... instead of debating about how over-the-top obvious my initial question is (we'd clearly improve by 15-20 wins)... take on a more difficult hypothetical.

What happens if this team were to replace Rondo with Melo?  More or less wins?

What happens if the team were to replace Rondo with Gasol?  More or less wins?

What about something disgusting like replacing Rondo with Roy Hibert?  What then?

I honestly don't know the answer to either of the three that you presented.  Also, I'm not trying to be rude here, but I do find these types of hypotheticals a bit silly.

But, I guess I can play along. 

Melo;  slightly better.

Marc:  about the same.

Hibbert:  way worse.

How much worse would we be if we replaced Rondo with Hibbert?  Talk me through it.

PG - Smart
SG - Bradley
SF - Green
PF - Sully
C - HIbbert
... Oly backs up Sully/HIbbert.  We have Turner and Thornton backing up the guards.

If anything, that lineup establishes an identity of an elite defensive squad, right?  Does Hibbert not solve our most glaring weakness?  Our offense would be worse, but how much worse would it be?...

Jeff Green would be our best offensive player, and Marcus Smart would be our primary ball handler, tasked with running the team.  I love Marcus Smart.  I looooooove Marcus Smart, but I don't think he's ready offensively to lead an NBA team to the playoffs as the primary playmaker.

Sorry, I don't think it would come close to making up for the slight upgrade defensively.  I say "slight upgrade" because, replacing Rondo with Hibbert would mean that both Smart and Bradley would have much more offensive responsibility, much less opportunity to rest, and a harder time shouldering the burden of attempting to do what their jobs are on this team, which is to be pit bulls defensively. 

Maybe "way worse" was too much, though.  I'm changing it to significantly to somewhat worse.

Fair enough.  Tommypoint. 

Sorry about making a boring/disinteresting thread.  Happy to let it die

[GreenFaith1819]

How about we wait until most of the season is over before we start replacing anyone with LeBron James or Marc Gasol?

While the comparisons are interesting, I'd rather let this bunch play out.

I think that if we had one either the HOU or DAL game this thread wouldn't even be here.

[Celtics18]

Bird, you start with your opinion that we are at best a 30 win team, and repeat it as a fact.  That's obviously far from a known at this point.

And, of course, no one would argue that Lebron James wouldn't make this team better.  You could literally replace him with any player in the league and he would make that team better. 

So, while, sure, you're right that having Lebron James instead of Rajon Rondo would make us considerably better, your point seems kind of empty.

I'm not sure it's empty.  Where does "guard who passes really good" fall in the list of desirable NBA strengths?   We have arguably the best passing guard in the world.. and yet we've all collectively decided the team would be 15-20 games better if we lost that strength and added "elite superstar scorer". 

I was having a discussion with a friend recently about NFL position importance.  Like... having the world's greatest kicker is nice, but you'd probably trade the world's greatest kicker for a improved running back.   We've established that having the world's (maybe) greatest passing point guard is nice... but is it more important than having an elite scorer?  No.  More important than having an elite interior defender?  What do you think, Celtics18?

But, you aren't talking about "elite superstar scorer" in the abstract.  You are talking about Lebron James, arguably one of the top five players to ever play the game.  We aren't talking about Demar Derozan, Rudy Gay, Chandler Parsons, Monta Ellis, Bradley Beal or even Carmelo Anthony.  If you replaced Lebron James with any of those names in your hypothetical, it would be a much more debatable point.

I had to establish a premise that not all all-stars are created equally... that not all NBA strengths are created equally.   I had to start with an undebatable extreme before getting into the more niche questions.   

So how about it, Celtics18... instead of debating about how over-the-top obvious my initial question is (we'd clearly improve by 15-20 wins)... take on a more difficult hypothetical.

What happens if this team were to replace Rondo with Melo?  More or less wins?

What happens if the team were to replace Rondo with Gasol?  More or less wins?

What about something disgusting like replacing Rondo with Roy Hibert?  What then?

I honestly don't know the answer to either of the three that you presented.  Also, I'm not trying to be rude here, but I do find these types of hypotheticals a bit silly.

But, I guess I can play along. 

Melo;  slightly better.

Marc:  about the same.

Hibbert:  way worse.

How much worse would we be if we replaced Rondo with Hibbert?  Talk me through it.

PG - Smart
SG - Bradley
SF - Green
PF - Sully
C - HIbbert
... Oly backs up Sully/HIbbert.  We have Turner and Thornton backing up the guards.

If anything, that lineup establishes an identity of an elite defensive squad, right?  Does Hibbert not solve our most glaring weakness?  Our offense would be worse, but how much worse would it be?...

Jeff Green would be our best offensive player, and Marcus Smart would be our primary ball handler, tasked with running the team.  I love Marcus Smart.  I looooooove Marcus Smart, but I don't think he's ready offensively to lead an NBA team to the playoffs as the primary playmaker.

Sorry, I don't think it would come close to making up for the slight upgrade defensively.  I say "slight upgrade" because, replacing Rondo with Hibbert would mean that both Smart and Bradley would have much more offensive responsibility, much less opportunity to rest, and a harder time shouldering the burden of attempting to do what their jobs are on this team, which is to be pit bulls defensively. 

Maybe "way worse" was too much, though.  I'm changing it to significantly to somewhat worse.

Fair enough.  Tommypoint. 

Sorry about making a boring/disinteresting thread.  Happy to let it die

Tommy point returned.  I didn't actually find it boring or disinteresting. 

[Boris Badenov]

I think it's interesting to think about Rondo WITH Lebron.

Suppose you swap Rondo and Irving on that Cavs team. Are they better?

It's the flip side of the "too many shooters" dilemma you sometimes see discussed. Rondo and Lebron are both terrific passers. Would Rondo therefore be redundant on that team? Or would Rondo be able to get Lebron easier shots, allowing him to be more of a scorer and even more (gulp) efficient? Would Love benefit from having two passers on the floor, or be hurt somehow?

Etc.

[Who]

if you replaced our very best player, Rajon Rondo, with an elite interior defender... say Marc Gasol, for instance... Does the loss of Rondo offset the addition of the elite interior defender?  Say it left our lineup as PG - Smart, SG - Bradley, SF - Green, PF - SUlly, C - Gasol... with Oly off the bench.  Still a 30 win team?   

I think that team would win around 45-48 games.

Two important points I want to stress:

(1) I think Boston has one of the best, if not the very best, collection of defensive talent in the league out on the perimeter. Adding a strong interior defender would immediately make Boston one of the best defensive teams in the league.
(2) Not having such an interior defender is a huge weakness for this team and does an injustice to the level of talent currently on this Celtics team.
(3) I am really high on Marcus Smart. So when you take away Rondo, you are replacing him with a solid starting PG with potential to be much more. In contrast to center position which is a train wreck.
(4) I also believe this would be one of the best rebounding teams in the league. Offense wouldn't be pretty. Definitely below average. A team that wins through defense/rebounding and does enough offensively to push into the high 40s in win column. Add a little more offense to the mix and it could quickly breach the 50 win barrier in future seasons. 

Sort of like Indiana two years when they won 49 games while having the #1 ranked defense but the 20th ranked offense. If offense a little lower, say 23rd/24th, then closer to 45 wins. That type of basketball team though.

50. You could play AB/Smart/James without having to worry about size and suffocate teams on defense. Or, even scarier, AB/Smart/Green/James/ Zeller and just run teams out of the gym.

Yep, I go for 50 as well. A 48-52 win type bracket.

Important point to highlight is how little the difference is between swapping Rondo for LeBron vs swapping Rondo for Marc Gasol.

LeBron clearly a much more talented and influential basketball player than Marc Gasol but such is the Celtics (1) weakness at center, and, (2) their strength & depth PG through PF that ...  I do not believe the difference between the two teams is all that great despite the large difference in talent level between these two individuals. Celt

I think this LeBron led non-Rondo Celtics team still suffers in a major way from not having an interior defensive presence. Limits it's upside greatly.

Which is a shame because even a solid starting center in addition to LeBron and this cast of non-Rondo Celtics players would give the Celtics a chance at making a run at an NBA title. Not a frontrunner (since team is short of high end talent outside of LeBron) but one of those teams nobody wants to play in the playoffs and has a legitimate chance of beating anybody because (1) their defense would be top notch (2) plus they got LeBron on the other end and a bunch of guys who would do pretty well playing off of LeBron. Sorta like LeBron's Cleveland teams in 2008, 2009 and 2010.

We won 25 games last year.  Expert consensus seemed to be that we'd win about 26 this year.  So for the sake of argument, let's say this is a 30 win team max. 

Back to Rondo,

My expectations for this team are 35 wins.

That said, such is the giant hole at the center position that I believe this team could easily have been a 45-47 win if Omer Asik had been acquired this summer. As with the Marc Gasol situation up top, I believe Asik would supplied the interior defense Boston needed to complement it's highly talented perimeter defense corps to build a top level defensive team + would be a top level rebounding team. Keeping Rondo would have resulted in a similar level albeit completely different type offensive team. A below average but adequate enough when combined with a top level defense/rebounding team.

This is a pretty solid basketball team Ainge has built with the one exception being the center position. Acquiring a solid starting center would make this group look a lot better than where they currently are. Then throwing in another All-Star (via FA or trade) could quickly put Boston in 50+ win bracket.

There is a solid foundation here that can be built upon and built quickly -- especially since you are building around a 28yo Rondo (win now player) rather than some 19 year old star rookie (win later player). This team is well set up for a quick rebuild. 

[BballTim]

How about if we replaced Phil Pressey with Lebron?

98?

I can see none of you are taking this question seriously, because you think my intention is to insult Rondo.  I'm not trying to insult Rondo here.  I genuinely want to have a conversation about basketball positions and the importance of consistent scoring.  This team is going to struggle this year, because night in and night out, they have nobody they can rely on for consistent buckets.  Rondo will do what he does brilliantly... find open men and rack up the assists.  When the mediocre shooters are streaking, it's going to look glorious (game 1 vs the nets and the end of the game tonight)... but when the mediocre shooters clang them, the team is going to struggle.  They'll have nobody they can feed the ball to and rely on them... it's going to be a guessing game.  Dish it to Sully.. is he feeling it?  Nope.  Hmm...try Oly.  Nope.  Try Bradley.  Nope.   Try Smart.  Nope.  Throw turner in there and see how he does... Nope.  Try Sully agin.  Nope.     My question is, how much does that change when you add a guy who you can consistently rely on to get you buckets every single time he steps on the court.  I genuinely want to know if you guys think it matters... if you replaced Rondo with LeBron, do you think this continues to be a 30 win team... or not?

  If you're just looking to swap Rondo with a scorer to see the difference, pick someone who's mainly a scorer for the swap. How about Melo, who scores almost as well as James? LeBron's seen as the kind of player he is because of what he does aside from scoring. You're talking about replacing Rondo's passing and running the offense with scoring, yet your choice is one of the best forwards in the history of the game at passing and running the offense. It's like asking how the Wolves would have been last year if you'd replaced Love's scoring and rebounding with a good defensive center and then choosing a 20/10 center like Alonzo Mourning. Pick someone who doesn't do much beyond scoring, like Melo or maybe 2006-2008 Ray Allen. How much would they improve the team? That seems to fit more with what you say you're asking.

[Moranis]

I'd say 40-45 wins. There's still no rim protection on that team. LeBron can do a lot, but he's at his best when he's surrounded by shooters and can do what he wants in the paint. I think he could drag that team to the playoffs in the East, go out in round 1 and then LeBron holds a TV special and takes his talents somewhere else.

Lebron has never been on a team with an even above average rim protector.  his teams consistently win 60 games, even teams like his first stint in Cleveland that have overall less talent than would be on Boston.  I'm not saying that if you swapped Rondo for James, the team would automatically win 60, but I think it would be much closer to 60 than to 40 or even 45.  Lebron James is that good.

[Celtics4ever]

Kind of pointless it is not going to happen, he hates Boston, ( maybe acknowledges fans are decent here) and I do not think he would pee on us if we were on fire.