So No Rondo, No Triple Double and We Win

[Rondo9]

Why? Why is it every time the Celtics win without Rondo, threads like these pop up?

But that's just it, they sure seem to win a lot without him. If that weren't the case, and this team would consistently collapse without him, then these doubts would never pop up.

You could say the same for Rose.....

Perhaps, but this topic is about Rondo not Rose.

I think it just shows how the players are buying in to Stevens system,  and I'm pretty sure they much prefer Rondo igniting the offense.

[LarBrd33]

We basically have three years of proof that the team wins more when Rondo sits. Check the win loss records.  We lose his playmaking ability, but having competent scorers out there is a powerful thing.


We were dreadful last year in games rondo played. I think we won 3 out of 33 games or something.

The year prior we were under 500 until rondo got hurt and the team rallied and made the playoffs.

Rondo is a terrific player and can be big in the right system, but his contributions are a bit overrated.

[zimbo]

I can't wait til he re-signs, and the haters scatter up outta here.

Unless Rondo manages to get a no-trade clause, people can always purpose various trade ideas. 

Yeah but that would be no fun for them. It goes against their narrative. They want him out by February.

[zimbo]

We basically have three years of proof that the team wins more when Rondo sits. Check the win loss records.  We lose his playmaking ability, but having competent scorers out there is a powerful thing.

Without putting it into context you would make sense. But you need to include context. When he re-signs in July, I can't say I will miss your posts.

[Tr1boy]

We basically have three years of proof that the team wins more when Rondo sits. Check the win loss records.  We lose his playmaking ability, but having competent scorers out there is a powerful thing.


We were dreadful last year in games rondo played. I think we won 3 out of 33 games or something.

The year prior we were under 500 until rondo got hurt and the team rallied and made the playoffs.

Rondo is a terrific player and can be big in the right system, but his contributions are a bit overrated.

+1.

[hwangjini_1]

We basically have three years of proof that the team wins more when Rondo sits. Check the win loss records.  We lose his playmaking ability, but having competent scorers out there is a powerful thing.


We were dreadful last year in games rondo played. I think we won 3 out of 33 games or something.

The year prior we were under 500 until rondo got hurt and the team rallied and made the playoffs.

Rondo is a terrific player and can be big in the right system, but his contributions are a bit overrated.

i was perhaps the first poster to broach this topic consistently here and the numbers you cite need deeper analysis. yes, in the celtics w/l record over the past 2 seasons + 6 games the celtics win more without rondo than with him. but, not dramatically so. last year is hard to count (or needs to be counted very carefully) given his recovery from injury. this year, he did not make training camp and it is, after all, 6 games.

the way i put the conundrum was to ask WHY the celtics w/l record does not reflect what rondo is supposed to bring to this team, an improved offense and defense and thus more wins. any possible answer can NOT be provided after 6 games this season, but only at mid-season or later.

[LarBrd33]

We basically have three years of proof that the team wins more when Rondo sits. Check the win loss records.  We lose his playmaking ability, but having competent scorers out there is a powerful thing.


We were dreadful last year in games rondo played. I think we won 3 out of 33 games or something.

The year prior we were under 500 until rondo got hurt and the team rallied and made the playoffs.

Rondo is a terrific player and can be big in the right system, but his contributions are a bit overrated.

i was perhaps the first poster to broach this topic consistently here and the numbers you cite need deeper analysis. yes, in the celtics w/l record over the past 2 seasons + 6 games the celtics win more without rondo than with him. but, not dramatically so. last year is hard to count (or needs to be counted very carefully) given his recovery from injury. this year, he did not make training camp and it is, after all, 6 games.

the way i put the conundrum was to ask WHY the celtics w/l record does not reflect what rondo is supposed to bring to this team, an improved offense and defense and thus more wins. any possible answer can NOT be provided after 6 games this season, but only at mid-season or later.

Rondo is a really good player and in the right system surrounded by the right talent he's dangerous. But it's hard to ignore the fact that he's a terrible shooter and replacing him with even a mediocre shooter like Jordan Crawford or Evan turner impacts the lineups offense enough that it offsets his contributions.  I'm sure in the long run 82 games with rondo would be better than 82 games without him, but I certainly wasn't surprised to see the offense humming along without him on the court.

[zimbo]

We basically have three years of proof that the team wins more when Rondo sits. Check the win loss records.  We lose his playmaking ability, but having competent scorers out there is a powerful thing.


We were dreadful last year in games rondo played. I think we won 3 out of 33 games or something.

The year prior we were under 500 until rondo got hurt and the team rallied and made the playoffs.

Rondo is a terrific player and can be big in the right system, but his contributions are a bit overrated.

i was perhaps the first poster to broach this topic consistently here and the numbers you cite need deeper analysis. yes, in the celtics w/l record over the past 2 seasons + 6 games the celtics win more without rondo than with him. but, not dramatically so. last year is hard to count (or needs to be counted very carefully) given his recovery from injury. this year, he did not make training camp and it is, after all, 6 games.

the way i put the conundrum was to ask WHY the celtics w/l record does not reflect what rondo is supposed to bring to this team, an improved offense and defense and thus more wins. any possible answer can NOT be provided after 6 games this season, but only at mid-season or later.

Rondo is a really good player and in the right system surrounded by the right talent he's dangerous. But it's hard to ignore the fact that he's a terrible shooter and replacing him with even a mediocre shooter like Jordan Crawford or Evan turner impacts the lineups offense enough that it offsets his contributions.  I'm sure in the long run 82 games with rondo would be better than 82 games without him, but I certainly wasn't surprised to see the offense humming along without him on the court.

That same humming offense with him on the court. The only difference is better execution down the stretch with Rondo.

[Vox_Populi]

I would need to double check, but I'm fairly certain there was more than one season where our record with KG was worse than without. Basic Win % with vs. w/out is almost useless without context like the strength of the opponent, other missing players, point in season, ect. It's about as useful as raw +/-, in that it's somewhat good for one game samples, but inconclusive long term without a filter.

But this is beating a dead horse.

[sunnyd656]

Year before last we lost six games in a row with Rondo starting.
When Rondo got hurt, we immediately won seven games in a row.

Please don't give Rondo another multi million dollar contract.

Just a heads up. I literally never post so don't care if I get banned lulz, also I ignore trihard16f although he is arguably #1 troll on all of internet, so can't reply to whatever his hilarious comments are.

#1. Celtics won the 7 games before you started your great argument there. Learn to throw out better stats fool.
 

"I don't think Rondo is worse than Smart or Pressy as a player, nor is he a bad player
it's just he didn't fit into the system(at least so far)
<If you can put 3 HoFs around him he will give you the ring, for example>
and for that you don't give him max contract
so if he want max it's better to trade him when you can "

#2 Your first sentence shows how much of a brain you have. lololol. Good to know you don't think Rondo is worse than Smart (who didn't play tonight? Duh?) or Pressey....a guy who literally doesn't play on our own team....
But on the other hand you don't think Rondo fits in this system, all though you forget to mention he makes more passes than anyone else on our team? Weird.

"Uh I still like to think that Rondo is a great point guard. On offense, he just needs to reduce the predictable one pass and shoot offense, and trust his teammates' ability to create shots more. The major issue with Rondo in my opinion is his lazy defense. Rondo got the skill and experience to play top notch D, but simply refuses to do so, which baffles me a lot."

#3 The 4 all-defense teams he has made spit in your face.

"He would excel in a 1/4 type offense where Rondo is running a lot of high pick and rolls, is surrounded by catch and shoot players who excel without the ball, and he has the ball in his hands the majority of the shot clock. In Stevens' system, where ball movement and floor spacing is paramount, I don't think he moves the needle as much as many think. That said, I wouldn't mind re-signing him, even if it's at near max money. Simply because I don't want to lose him for nothing and think that a 4 or 5 year deal at that price would be reasonable due to the expected rise in salary cap. We could eventually trade him and the return would likely be better since he'd be locked up for several seasons."

#4 Good call, the assist leader in the league can't excel with players without the ball.

"But that's just it, they sure seem to win a lot without him. If that weren't the case, and this team would consistently collapse without him, then these doubts would never pop up."

#5 Miami heat are 5-2 I think? Around there atleast. Lebron James is worthless. Good logic pal.

"Rondo never really made a habit of "taking over" games on a regular basis... and rarely with scoring. More than half of his assists were kick outs to KG and set plays for Allen running off of screens. He was a perfect fit for that team... but is not a DIFFERENCE MAKER with this one. The theory is that if we get another top tier player, then Rondo will...do what... set him up?

The past is hard to forget, but if we were to add a post scorer or consistent slasher/scorer, Rondo would be no better fit than most other NBA pGs.  His value that sticks in peoples minds is that of a genius who controls every play... and without him we would be lost.

Not seeing that if I'm really looking truthfully (without emotion) at the situation right now."

#6 I stopped reading after your first sentence because I don't listen to useless responses, but the Heat 2012 series where rondo averaged over 20 a game, nah forget that, the 2012 PLAYOFFS where Rondo averaged a triple double, would like to say something to you. But again, good call pal.

"We basically have three years of proof that the team wins more when Rondo sits. Check the win loss records.  We lose his playmaking ability, but having competent scorers out there is a powerful thing.


We were dreadful last year in games rondo played. I think we won 3 out of 33 games or something.

The year prior we were under 500 until rondo got hurt and the team rallied and made the playoffs.

Rondo is a terrific player and can be big in the right system, but his contributions are a bit overrated."

#7 KG literally made the statement that you are hilarious if you thought they were better without Rondo than with.

You heard it heard folks, Larbrd33 terrible celtics fan. Not my thoughts, KG's. Also read above comment about useless comments/first sentence.

[Celtics4ever]

Clearly it was MS who holding us back, get real.

[TheFlex]

And I repeat...

Can people just stop responding to this thread so as not to encourage its bigotry?

Troll job complete.

[P stoff]

sunnyd.... its obvious you stopped reading after the first sentence...

you cite a few games where Rondo scored...but the word "regularly" to you must mean 5-6 games out of 100. Also, a triple double, especially when you are controlling almost every play is not as impactful as it sounds.  Scoring 10, assistsing 12, and 11 rebounds is a good night, but hardly "taking over".   Individual stats mean nothing.

If you are so smart, look at the offensive efficiency numbers that show little to no difference in impact on THIS team. Go ahead and live in 2012 all you want...it is irrelevant now.

[Rondo9]

sunnyd.... its obvious you stopped reading after the first sentence...

you cite a few games where Rondo scored...but the word "regularly" to you must mean 5-6 games out of 100. Also, a triple double, especially when you are controlling almost every play is not as impactful as it sounds.  Scoring 10, assistsing 12, and 11 rebounds is a good night, but hardly "taking over".   Individual stats mean nothing.

If you are so smart, look at the offensive efficiency numbers that show little to no difference in impact on THIS team. Go ahead and live in 2012 all you want...it is irrelevant now.

That's a small sample size to make any conclusions. Rondo is great player and past success is just used to help prove that point.

[LarBrd33]

We basically have three years of proof that the team wins more when Rondo sits. Check the win loss records.  We lose his playmaking ability, but having competent scorers out there is a powerful thing.


We were dreadful last year in games rondo played. I think we won 3 out of 33 games or something.

The year prior we were under 500 until rondo got hurt and the team rallied and made the playoffs.

Rondo is a terrific player and can be big in the right system, but his contributions are a bit overrated.

i was perhaps the first poster to broach this topic consistently here and the numbers you cite need deeper analysis. yes, in the celtics w/l record over the past 2 seasons + 6 games the celtics win more without rondo than with him. but, not dramatically so. last year is hard to count (or needs to be counted very carefully) given his recovery from injury. this year, he did not make training camp and it is, after all, 6 games.

the way i put the conundrum was to ask WHY the celtics w/l record does not reflect what rondo is supposed to bring to this team, an improved offense and defense and thus more wins. any possible answer can NOT be provided after 6 games this season, but only at mid-season or later.

Rondo is a really good player and in the right system surrounded by the right talent he's dangerous. But it's hard to ignore the fact that he's a terrible shooter and replacing him with even a mediocre shooter like Jordan Crawford or Evan turner impacts the lineups offense enough that it offsets his contributions.  I'm sure in the long run 82 games with rondo would be better than 82 games without him, but I certainly wasn't surprised to see the offense humming along without him on the court.

That same humming offense with him on the court. The only difference is better execution down the stretch with Rondo.

Hah... what execution down the stretch with Rondo?  Are we pretending like having Rondo on the court somehow makes us execute better down the stretch?... because it seems to me there are tons of games we blow with Rondo leading the charge down the stretch...