So No Rondo, No Triple Double and We Win

[playdream]

If our team (at least so far) don't look apparently good or bad without him
The question is do you want to pay Rondo MAX, only for the playoffs?
because the Super-Rondo that can really dominate games and be a difference maker almost only appears in playoffs and national televised games
you can use the money or trade him to relatively increase our regular season record which the seed position(home court) is very very important(the crowd/officiating)
thus also increase the likelyhood of lure other big names, especially Rondo haven't lure anyone yet
and doesn't look so attractive, too

[Evantime34]

More wins without Rondo for the last four years....

 2011-12
w/out
8 wins 5 losses
win percentage 62%

with
31 wins 22 losses
win percentage 58%

2012-13
w/out
21 wins 17 losses
win percentage 55%

with
20 wins 23 losses
win percentage 46%

2013-14
w/out
19 wins 33 loses
win percentage 36%

with
6 wins 24 losses
win percentage 20%

2014-15
w/out
1 win 0 losses
win percentage 100%

with
2 wins 3 losses
win percentage 40%

So what is your solution to this problem? Bench Rondo? Trade him for whatever you can get?

There have to be more variables involved to get the true picture than just with Rondo vs without Rondo. Using only that one variable assumes that everything else is the same. Some seasons they were missing other players when Rondo was healthy, some seasons they had easier schedules, some seasons the team took time to gel without Rondo.

My best response was how the team played when Rondo first tore his acl. They immediately played much better under a long outlet pass in place of a point guard strategy. Then teams started denying that pass and without Rondo to run the offense the team seriously struggled.

In my opinion, Rondo gives the Celtics a much higher ceiling than they have without him. Maybe the results aren't as consistent but when attempting to build a championship team, the players who can sometimes improve their play enough to carry you in a seven game series are a lot more important than those that will help you pull out some less important regular season games.

[blink]

More wins without Rondo for the last four years....

 2011-12
w/out
8 wins 5 losses
win percentage 62%

with
31 wins 22 losses
win percentage 58%

2012-13
w/out
21 wins 17 losses
win percentage 55%

with
20 wins 23 losses
win percentage 46%

2013-14
w/out
19 wins 33 loses
win percentage 36%

with
6 wins 24 losses
win percentage 20%

2014-15
w/out
1 win 0 losses
win percentage 100%

with
2 wins 3 losses
win percentage 40%

You literally copied and pasted eddie20's earlier post from page 5.  That is so lame.  Too bad you didn't bother to read and copy clip all of the well thought out responses to it when it was posted the first time.  It isn't any more reasonable now with you posting it, than it was then.

[Chris22]

More wins without Rondo for the last four years....

 2011-12
w/out
8 wins 5 losses
win percentage 62%

with
31 wins 22 losses
win percentage 58%

2012-13
w/out
21 wins 17 losses
win percentage 55%

with
20 wins 23 losses
win percentage 46%

2013-14
w/out
19 wins 33 loses
win percentage 36%

with
6 wins 24 losses
win percentage 20%

2014-15
w/out
1 win 0 losses
win percentage 100%

with
2 wins 3 losses
win percentage 40%

So what is your solution to this problem? Bench Rondo? Trade him for whatever you can get?

There have to be more variables involved to get the true picture than just with Rondo vs without Rondo. Using only that one variable assumes that everything else is the same. Some seasons they were missing other players when Rondo was healthy, some seasons they had easier schedules, some seasons the team took time to gel without Rondo.

My best response was how the team played when Rondo first tore his acl. They immediately played much better under a long outlet pass in place of a point guard strategy. Then teams started denying that pass and without Rondo to run the offense the team seriously struggled.

In my opinion, Rondo gives the Celtics a much higher ceiling than they have without him. Maybe the results aren't as consistent but when attempting to build a championship team, the players who can sometimes improve their play enough to carry you in a seven game series are a lot more important than those that will help you pull out some less important regular season games.

We are a better team without Rondo.
Trade him at the deadline.

[D.o.s.]

Are we going to talk about why that data set, presented as such could actively damage someone's brain?

As in, can we get a warning label for it? Caution: May Cause Intellectual Sloth?

[blink]

Are we going to talk about why that data set, presented as such could actively damage someone's brain?

As in, can we get a warning label for it? Caution: May Cause Intellectual Sloth?

I posted the reasons why I think it isn't logical back on page 7.  When all a poster is willing to do to engage the conversation is just copy and paste things word for word from earlier in the thread it is just getting idiotic.  Either at least attempt to make a reasonable response or stop re-posting stuff like a robot.  smh

[mmmmm]

Some stats to ponder when complaining that Rondo is holding back the Celtics offense or isn't fitting into the offensive system:

In the 5 games Rondo has played in the Celtics scored 106 points per game.
Against Chicago the Celtics scored 106 points.

In the 5 games Rondo has played in the Celtics have averaged 25 assists per game
Against Chicago the Celtics recorded 25 assists.

The Celtics had a slightly higher shooting percentage against Chicago than when Rondo played in the other 5 games but that comes down to hitting 1 more three pointer and 2 more 2 pointers than they normally do.

The Celtics took 3 less free throws against Chicago and made 3 less free throws against Chicago than they normally do.

To me this signifies that for one game, a few players picked up the slack and the offensive system continued to work at a near league leading pace(the Celtics averaged the 2nd most points per game in the NBA and have the 7th highest offensive rating in the NBA).

Rondo has an offensive rating of 97, one of the worst on the team. His two back ups, Marcus Smart and Evan Turner, have offensive ratings of 94 and 97 respectively, meaning that, the PG position in this offensive system isn't scoring and doesn't have to score to make the offense as a whole very successful.

Draw any conclusions you want from these facts. To me they point to a player that is widely regarded as one of the best passers  and floor generals in the NBA doing his job and making his team's offense very good and that for one game, some others picked up the slack because that's what players do when their best player misses a game, a tale as old as time in sports.

The 'Offensive Rating' number that BBR has for Rondo of 97 seems off.  NBAWowy.com, which counts points and possessions gives a number of 109.6 points per 100 possessions for Rondo (and a Defensive Rating of 110.5).  That's across 332 possessions on each end of the court.

The numbers for the team with Rondo 'off' the court cover 241 possessions and are: 113.7 and 111.6 so the net is that the team has scored slightly better on offense (not surprising since the 2nd half of the Houston game, the Rockets eased up and the bench at least scored respectably) but slightly worse on defense.

The net overall is that the team has played to a difference of -3.0 points per 100 possessions with Rondo ON the floor compared to OFF.

HOWEVER, all these numbers are heavily skewed by the Houston game, which featured historically anomalous shooting woes by the Celtics.  Removing just the 68 possessions that Rondo was 'on' the floor in the Rockets game and the 29 that he was 'off' yields the following numbers for the other 5 games:

RR 'ON'  (264 possessions)
Offense  117.4   Defense  112.1

RR 'OFF' (212 possessions)
Offense  112.3   Defense  111.8

All this reduces to:  Outside of the Houston game, the team has played a net of +4.8 points better per 100 possessions with Rondo 'ON' the floor than off.

So, the data from 5 of the games is dramatically at odds with the data from just one of the games.

The dramatic swing  (a delta of 7.8 points per 100!!) in the overall numbers caused by just the one game (Houston) is indicative of the fragility of small sample size.

Similarly, the Chicago game is just one game.   Drawing large, sweeping conclusions from it is silly.

[Donoghus]

Are we going to talk about why that data set, presented as such could actively damage someone's brain?

As in, can we get a warning label for it? Caution: May Cause Intellectual Sloth?

I posted the reasons why I think it isn't logical back on page 7.  When all posters are willing to do to engage is just copy and paste things word for word from earlier in the thread it is just getting idiotic.  Either at least attempt to make a reasonable response or stop re-posting stuff like a robot.  smh

Stop bringing things like reason & logic into the equation! 

[manl_lui]

Some stats to ponder when complaining that Rondo is holding back the Celtics offense or isn't fitting into the offensive system:

In the 5 games Rondo has played in the Celtics scored 106 points per game.
Against Chicago the Celtics scored 106 points.

In the 5 games Rondo has played in the Celtics have averaged 25 assists per game
Against Chicago the Celtics recorded 25 assists.

The Celtics had a slightly higher shooting percentage against Chicago than when Rondo played in the other 5 games but that comes down to hitting 1 more three pointer and 2 more 2 pointers than they normally do.

The Celtics took 3 less free throws against Chicago and made 3 less free throws against Chicago than they normally do.

To me this signifies that for one game, a few players picked up the slack and the offensive system continued to work at a near league leading pace(the Celtics averaged the 2nd most points per game in the NBA and have the 7th highest offensive rating in the NBA).

Rondo has an offensive rating of 97, one of the worst on the team. His two back ups, Marcus Smart and Evan Turner, have offensive ratings of 94 and 97 respectively, meaning that, the PG position in this offensive system isn't scoring and doesn't have to score to make the offense as a whole very successful.

Draw any conclusions you want from these facts. To me they point to a player that is widely regarded as one of the best passers  and floor generals in the NBA doing his job and making his team's offense very good and that for one game, some others picked up the slack because that's what players do when their best player misses a game, a tale as old as time in sports.

The 'Offensive Rating' number that BBR has for Rondo of 97 seems off.  NBAWowy.com, which counts points and possessions gives a number of 109.6 points per 100 possessions for Rondo (and a Defensive Rating of 110.5).  That's across 332 possessions on each end of the court.

The numbers for the team with Rondo 'off' the court cover 241 possessions and are: 113.7 and 111.6 so the net is that the team has scored slightly better on offense (not surprising since the 2nd half of the Houston game, the Rockets eased up and the bench at least scored respectably) but slightly worse on defense.

The net overall is that the team has played to a difference of -3.0 points per 100 possessions with Rondo ON the floor compared to OFF.

HOWEVER, all these numbers are heavily skewed by the Houston game, which featured historically anomalous shooting woes by the Celtics.  Removing just the 68 possessions that Rondo was 'on' the floor in the Rockets game and the 29 that he was 'off' yields the following numbers for the other 5 games:

RR 'ON'  (264 possessions)
Offense  117.4   Defense  112.1

RR 'OFF' (212 possessions)
Offense  112.3   Defense  111.8

All this reduces to:  Outside of the Houston game, the team has played a net of +4.8 points better per 100 possessions with Rondo 'ON' the floor than off.

So, the data from 5 of the games is dramatically at odds with the data from just one of the games.

The dramatic swing  (a delta of 7.8 points per 100!!) in the overall numbers caused by just the one game (Houston) is indicative of the fragility of small sample size.

Similarly, the Chicago game is just one game.   Drawing large, sweeping conclusions from it is silly.

numbers are good but doesn't tell all the tale. If you actually watch the game, Rondo is actually the leader out there on the court. You need at least one sort of leader out there. No one is expecting Rondo to be the go-to-scorer, but he is a veteran, a leader out there. He directs traffic, brings toughness. He is the only one from the 2008 championship team left so he knows what it takes to win. I have no expectations from anyone else but Rondo to bring that mental toughness during a playoff game. I think Rondo works best if he is a #2 or #3 guy on a championship team. This team is far from complete and still needs many upgrades and a go-to-scorer is one way to start. This team is improving, you don't trade Rondo for garbage to set ourselves back

[nickagneta]

Some stats to ponder when complaining that Rondo is holding back the Celtics offense or isn't fitting into the offensive system:

In the 5 games Rondo has played in the Celtics scored 106 points per game.
Against Chicago the Celtics scored 106 points.

In the 5 games Rondo has played in the Celtics have averaged 25 assists per game
Against Chicago the Celtics recorded 25 assists.

The Celtics had a slightly higher shooting percentage against Chicago than when Rondo played in the other 5 games but that comes down to hitting 1 more three pointer and 2 more 2 pointers than they normally do.

The Celtics took 3 less free throws against Chicago and made 3 less free throws against Chicago than they normally do.

To me this signifies that for one game, a few players picked up the slack and the offensive system continued to work at a near league leading pace(the Celtics averaged the 2nd most points per game in the NBA and have the 7th highest offensive rating in the NBA).

Rondo has an offensive rating of 97, one of the worst on the team. His two back ups, Marcus Smart and Evan Turner, have offensive ratings of 94 and 97 respectively, meaning that, the PG position in this offensive system isn't scoring and doesn't have to score to make the offense as a whole very successful.

Draw any conclusions you want from these facts. To me they point to a player that is widely regarded as one of the best passers  and floor generals in the NBA doing his job and making his team's offense very good and that for one game, some others picked up the slack because that's what players do when their best player misses a game, a tale as old as time in sports.

The 'Offensive Rating' number that BBR has for Rondo of 97 seems off.  NBAWowy.com, which counts points and possessions gives a number of 109.6 points per 100 possessions for Rondo (and a Defensive Rating of 110.5).  That's across 332 possessions on each end of the court.

The numbers for the team with Rondo 'off' the court cover 241 possessions and are: 113.7 and 111.6 so the net is that the team has scored slightly better on offense (not surprising since the 2nd half of the Houston game, the Rockets eased up and the bench at least scored respectably) but slightly worse on defense.

The net overall is that the team has played to a difference of -3.0 points per 100 possessions with Rondo ON the floor compared to OFF.

HOWEVER, all these numbers are heavily skewed by the Houston game, which featured historically anomalous shooting woes by the Celtics.  Removing just the 68 possessions that Rondo was 'on' the floor in the Rockets game and the 29 that he was 'off' yields the following numbers for the other 5 games:

RR 'ON'  (264 possessions)
Offense  117.4   Defense  112.1

RR 'OFF' (212 possessions)
Offense  112.3   Defense  111.8

All this reduces to:  Outside of the Houston game, the team has played a net of +4.8 points better per 100 possessions with Rondo 'ON' the floor than off.

So, the data from 5 of the games is dramatically at odds with the data from just one of the games.

The dramatic swing  (a delta of 7.8 points per 100!!) in the overall numbers caused by just the one game (Houston) is indicative of the fragility of small sample size.

Similarly, the Chicago game is just one game.   Drawing large, sweeping conclusions from it is silly.

TP mmmm. I thought that number was wrong but didn't want to go through the mathematical formulations to figure out how in such a small sample size a number could appear to be so skewed.

I do have to say though that if we are not going to draw conclusions from a sample size of one game in the with/without Rondo stats then signifying an outlier in one game of only five seems fairly wrong when removing the numbers from the Houston game. Guess that's just the mathematician in me speaking though.

[mmmmm]

Some stats to ponder when complaining that Rondo is holding back the Celtics offense or isn't fitting into the offensive system:

In the 5 games Rondo has played in the Celtics scored 106 points per game.
Against Chicago the Celtics scored 106 points.

In the 5 games Rondo has played in the Celtics have averaged 25 assists per game
Against Chicago the Celtics recorded 25 assists.

The Celtics had a slightly higher shooting percentage against Chicago than when Rondo played in the other 5 games but that comes down to hitting 1 more three pointer and 2 more 2 pointers than they normally do.

The Celtics took 3 less free throws against Chicago and made 3 less free throws against Chicago than they normally do.

To me this signifies that for one game, a few players picked up the slack and the offensive system continued to work at a near league leading pace(the Celtics averaged the 2nd most points per game in the NBA and have the 7th highest offensive rating in the NBA).

Rondo has an offensive rating of 97, one of the worst on the team. His two back ups, Marcus Smart and Evan Turner, have offensive ratings of 94 and 97 respectively, meaning that, the PG position in this offensive system isn't scoring and doesn't have to score to make the offense as a whole very successful.

Draw any conclusions you want from these facts. To me they point to a player that is widely regarded as one of the best passers  and floor generals in the NBA doing his job and making his team's offense very good and that for one game, some others picked up the slack because that's what players do when their best player misses a game, a tale as old as time in sports.

The 'Offensive Rating' number that BBR has for Rondo of 97 seems off.  NBAWowy.com, which counts points and possessions gives a number of 109.6 points per 100 possessions for Rondo (and a Defensive Rating of 110.5).  That's across 332 possessions on each end of the court.

The numbers for the team with Rondo 'off' the court cover 241 possessions and are: 113.7 and 111.6 so the net is that the team has scored slightly better on offense (not surprising since the 2nd half of the Houston game, the Rockets eased up and the bench at least scored respectably) but slightly worse on defense.

The net overall is that the team has played to a difference of -3.0 points per 100 possessions with Rondo ON the floor compared to OFF.

HOWEVER, all these numbers are heavily skewed by the Houston game, which featured historically anomalous shooting woes by the Celtics.  Removing just the 68 possessions that Rondo was 'on' the floor in the Rockets game and the 29 that he was 'off' yields the following numbers for the other 5 games:

RR 'ON'  (264 possessions)
Offense  117.4   Defense  112.1

RR 'OFF' (212 possessions)
Offense  112.3   Defense  111.8

All this reduces to:  Outside of the Houston game, the team has played a net of +4.8 points better per 100 possessions with Rondo 'ON' the floor than off.

So, the data from 5 of the games is dramatically at odds with the data from just one of the games.

The dramatic swing  (a delta of 7.8 points per 100!!) in the overall numbers caused by just the one game (Houston) is indicative of the fragility of small sample size.

Similarly, the Chicago game is just one game.   Drawing large, sweeping conclusions from it is silly.

TP mmmm. I thought that number was wrong but didn't want to go through the mathematical formulations to figure out how in such a small sample size a number could appear to be so skewed.

I do have to say though that if we are not going to draw conclusions from a sample size of one game in the with/without Rondo stats then signifying an outlier in one game of only five seems fairly wrong when removing the numbers from the Houston game. Guess that's just the mathematician in me speaking though.

If my intention was to 'remove the Houston game' then I would have simply done so without reporting clearly what I was doing.  All my statements are simple factual ones with no extrapolations made.

The point of the illustration is to show that, given the total data set is so small, a single outlier is way too powerful.   It skews the entire data set dramatically.   That's why we should not try to extrapolate anything too significant yet.

All we can say is, "this is what happened so far".

[tstorey_97]

I am on the "team" side of this debate. If Rondo stays and gets his $100M good, as Ainge will get him some talent and we have our "playoff point guard."

If Ainge moves the kid, I hope he gets a good spot and plays some big games.

To the question, I have always seen this season as the "turning point" in the Rondo debate.
Team management, whom I assume do not post here, hired a new coach who plugged in the "motion offense" thing or whatever the he%* it is. (my first Celtic's point guard played at Holy Cross). Now, call me crazy, but isn't this the effing point?

The team's star PG must now run an offensive system that takes him out of the game. If you are going to secretly email me and present some spreadsheet that says I'm crazy, save the ink, I already know I'm crazy.

In the Brad Stevens offense, the point guard crosses the center line and unloads the ball. What?!
Rajon Rondo-QB-field general- one of the NBA's most creative passers is supposed to run up the court, enter the offensive zone, flip it to Kelly Olynyk at noon on the 3 point arc and disappear.

Well, ladies and gentlemen, isn't that a "proper use of assets."

Back to the action on the court....after passing the ball, Rondo does a "curl" underneath or something and waits for one of the team's shooters to shoot.

Rondo isn't a major league shooter, we all know this....so, a system that sticks him in the corner watching the offense run, to me, is crazy. Hey guess what an opposing coach is thinking? "Well we got their star point guard out of the way, let's tie up their guys who can actually shoot....it's 5 on 4 time, baby."

Oversimplification above to make my point. Elephant in the room. Hire a coach who takes the ball out of the best player's hands....bringing us to the poster's answer:

The Celtic's offense runs OK without Rondo because the Celtic's offense is designed to run OK with Jordan freaking Crawford or Phil Pressey or Gerald Wallace (who started some games at PG last season) or whomever as that is the "system"...so, don't start humming on me, Ainge hired Brad Stevens.


 

[Evantime34]

I am on the "team" side of this debate. If Rondo stays and gets his $100M good, as Ainge will get him some talent and we have our "playoff point guard."

If Ainge moves the kid, I hope he gets a good spot and plays some big games.

To the question, I have always seen this season as the "turning point" in the Rondo debate.
Team management, whom I assume do not post here, hired a new coach who plugged in the "motion offense" thing or whatever the he%* it is. (my first Celtic's point guard played at Holy Cross). Now, call me crazy, but isn't this the effing point?

The team's star PG must now run an offensive system that takes him out of the game. If you are going to secretly email me and present some spreadsheet that says I'm crazy, save the ink, I already know I'm crazy.

In the Brad Stevens offense, the point guard crosses the center line and unloads the ball. What?!
Rajon Rondo-QB-field general- one of the NBA's most creative passers is supposed to run up the court, enter the offensive zone, flip it to Kelly Olynyk at noon on the 3 point arc and disappear.

Well, ladies and gentlemen, isn't that a "proper use of assets."

Back to the action on the court....after passing the ball, Rondo does a "curl" underneath or something and waits for one of the team's shooters to shoot.

Rondo isn't a major league shooter, we all know this....so, a system that sticks him in the corner watching the offense run, to me, is crazy. Hey guess what an opposing coach is thinking? "Well we got their star point guard out of the way, let's tie up their guys who can actually shoot....it's 5 on 4 time, baby."

Oversimplification above to make my point. Elephant in the room. Hire a coach who takes the ball out of the best player's hands....bringing us to the poster's answer:

The Celtic's offense runs OK without Rondo because the Celtic's offense is designed to run OK with Jordan freaking Crawford or Phil Pressey or Gerald Wallace (who started some games at PG last season) or whomever as that is the "system"...so, don't start humming on me, Ainge hired Brad Stevens.

Steven's system also includes pushing the ball the majority of the times up the court which gives Rondo more of a chance to create driving lanes and shots for his teammates. I don't think Stevens system is bad for Rondo it all, I just think that it prevents him from dribbling the air out of the basketball when the team is stuck playing half court ball.