Rondo's Best Game of the Season

[Vermont Green]

Bring in a quality Center ......not knocking Godzeller .....he's learning........but Rondo needs the skills of bigs with soft mitts and size .....

Remember Shaq .....KG .....guys who can handle the ball low . 

Bring in MArc Gasol or such big man on the block

Rondo will have 14 assists every game.

Or just get rind of Rondo and get someone that doesn't have so many "needs" to have a good game.

Rondo can get 14 assists every game with any players but that will not make the team good.  It is like having Kobe getting 25 pts every game or one guy getting 18 rebounds.  I agree with Boris.  If we need to bring in Shaq, KG, or Gasol in order to have a good team with Rondo, that is the essence of the problem that you have with Rondo.

  I don't see why you don't understand that Rondo getting a lot of assists helps make the team good. We score a lot of points off of his passes and we score them more efficiently than average. Also, while it's true that teams generally aren't that good without an above average big on the team, we had a lot of success after KG had his knee injury when we didn't have a player close to the level of those guys in their primes on the court with Rondo.

It just depends.  Getting 14 assists in the flow of the game while not "pounding" the ball is great and Rondo at his best which was the case against the Lakers last night.  Getting 14 assists at the expense of ball movement is not as good which at times has been the case with Rondo in the past.

It is like a scorer who hogs the ball but gets 35 points.  It is not always the best thing for the team.  There are also cases (Love) where a player appears to be going for rebounds at the expense of team defense.

Stats do not always equal good for the team.  If you consider that to be me not understanding something, then so be it.

  The object of the offense should be to score as efficiently as possible. If a guy takes 28 shots and gets 35 points it probably helps the team, if he takes 40 shots and gets 35 points it probably doesn't. Rondo's assists are generally of the "28 shots to get 35 points" type, so they're generally good for the team. As for the "ball movement" stuff, it's just a means to an end, and the end is to get a good shot. Why would getting good shots other ways be inherently worse?

  You said earlier that "We need more than just one pass and a shot, we need two and three passes". My question is, why? If you can get a good shot with only one pass, why not take the shot? What's better about more passes that will lead to a shot no better than the one you'll get with one pass? If anything, you'll end up committing more turnovers with the extra passes.

Yes, I believe that in the long run, it is better for the team to be making multiple passes and have multiple players getting assists over one player making one pass and getting most of the assists.  Same as it is better to have multiple scorers over one guy getting most of the points.  Nothing wrong with Rondo getting assists off one pass so long as it is within the flow of the game.  I understand that "in the flow of the game" is not easy to quantify and that there is not a stat for that but I think it is a very important part of winning basketball.  I don't think this is radical basketball thinking.

[BballTim]

Bring in a quality Center ......not knocking Godzeller .....he's learning........but Rondo needs the skills of bigs with soft mitts and size .....

Remember Shaq .....KG .....guys who can handle the ball low . 

Bring in MArc Gasol or such big man on the block

Rondo will have 14 assists every game.

Or just get rind of Rondo and get someone that doesn't have so many "needs" to have a good game.

Rondo can get 14 assists every game with any players but that will not make the team good.  It is like having Kobe getting 25 pts every game or one guy getting 18 rebounds.  I agree with Boris.  If we need to bring in Shaq, KG, or Gasol in order to have a good team with Rondo, that is the essence of the problem that you have with Rondo.

  I don't see why you don't understand that Rondo getting a lot of assists helps make the team good. We score a lot of points off of his passes and we score them more efficiently than average. Also, while it's true that teams generally aren't that good without an above average big on the team, we had a lot of success after KG had his knee injury when we didn't have a player close to the level of those guys in their primes on the court with Rondo.

It just depends.  Getting 14 assists in the flow of the game while not "pounding" the ball is great and Rondo at his best which was the case against the Lakers last night.  Getting 14 assists at the expense of ball movement is not as good which at times has been the case with Rondo in the past.

It is like a scorer who hogs the ball but gets 35 points.  It is not always the best thing for the team.  There are also cases (Love) where a player appears to be going for rebounds at the expense of team defense.

Stats do not always equal good for the team.  If you consider that to be me not understanding something, then so be it.

  The object of the offense should be to score as efficiently as possible. If a guy takes 28 shots and gets 35 points it probably helps the team, if he takes 40 shots and gets 35 points it probably doesn't. Rondo's assists are generally of the "28 shots to get 35 points" type, so they're generally good for the team. As for the "ball movement" stuff, it's just a means to an end, and the end is to get a good shot. Why would getting good shots other ways be inherently worse?

  You said earlier that "We need more than just one pass and a shot, we need two and three passes". My question is, why? If you can get a good shot with only one pass, why not take the shot? What's better about more passes that will lead to a shot no better than the one you'll get with one pass? If anything, you'll end up committing more turnovers with the extra passes.

Bc the other guys are just standing around.  This is not two on two basketball.  Look at the way the Spurs play. Even the Heat (with Lebron) and the 2008-2010 celtcs how they played. 

  You can talk about the Spurs all you like, but most of the top teams have great offensive players who can create their own shots and dominate the ball. The Heat were more about iso plays for Wade and James than ball movement, and teams like that, the Shaq-Lakers, the MJ Bulls and a host of other top teams would fall well short of your expectations of how much ball movement a team needs.

Tim come on.  For most of the games, the Spurs and Heat are zipping the ball around. How do you think Chalmers made shots, Haslem etc.  Spurs and Heat did not/don't have a pure pg

I do agree players that can excel in ISO is needed to be good . But for most of the game teams like the 2008 celts, Spurs, Heat are passing the ball around

  The way those guys made shots was to basically *stand around* and wait for LeBron or Wade to suck in the defense and then pass them the ball. They weren't zipping the ball around like the Spurs. Did you watch them play much?

[Tr1boy]

Bring in a quality Center ......not knocking Godzeller .....he's learning........but Rondo needs the skills of bigs with soft mitts and size .....

Remember Shaq .....KG .....guys who can handle the ball low . 

Bring in MArc Gasol or such big man on the block

Rondo will have 14 assists every game.

Or just get rind of Rondo and get someone that doesn't have so many "needs" to have a good game.

Rondo can get 14 assists every game with any players but that will not make the team good.  It is like having Kobe getting 25 pts every game or one guy getting 18 rebounds.  I agree with Boris.  If we need to bring in Shaq, KG, or Gasol in order to have a good team with Rondo, that is the essence of the problem that you have with Rondo.

  I don't see why you don't understand that Rondo getting a lot of assists helps make the team good. We score a lot of points off of his passes and we score them more efficiently than average. Also, while it's true that teams generally aren't that good without an above average big on the team, we had a lot of success after KG had his knee injury when we didn't have a player close to the level of those guys in their primes on the court with Rondo.

It just depends.  Getting 14 assists in the flow of the game while not "pounding" the ball is great and Rondo at his best which was the case against the Lakers last night.  Getting 14 assists at the expense of ball movement is not as good which at times has been the case with Rondo in the past.

It is like a scorer who hogs the ball but gets 35 points.  It is not always the best thing for the team.  There are also cases (Love) where a player appears to be going for rebounds at the expense of team defense.

Stats do not always equal good for the team.  If you consider that to be me not understanding something, then so be it.

  The object of the offense should be to score as efficiently as possible. If a guy takes 28 shots and gets 35 points it probably helps the team, if he takes 40 shots and gets 35 points it probably doesn't. Rondo's assists are generally of the "28 shots to get 35 points" type, so they're generally good for the team. As for the "ball movement" stuff, it's just a means to an end, and the end is to get a good shot. Why would getting good shots other ways be inherently worse?

  You said earlier that "We need more than just one pass and a shot, we need two and three passes". My question is, why? If you can get a good shot with only one pass, why not take the shot? What's better about more passes that will lead to a shot no better than the one you'll get with one pass? If anything, you'll end up committing more turnovers with the extra passes.

Yes, I believe that in the long run, it is better for the team to be making multiple passes and have multiple players getting assists over one player making one pass and getting most of the assists.  Same as it is better to have multiple scorers over one guy getting most of the points.  Nothing wrong with Rondo getting assists off one pass so long as it is within the flow of the game.  I understand that "in the flow of the game" is not easy to quantify and that there is not a stat for that but I think it is a very important part of winning basketball.  I don't think this is radical basketball thinking.

+1. Makes the opposing d work harder, makes the offense harder to read. Its hard to play ball also just being a pilon player. Players that touch the ball , get involved from what ive seen, play better d and the team d is better

[Tr1boy]

Bring in a quality Center ......not knocking Godzeller .....he's learning........but Rondo needs the skills of bigs with soft mitts and size .....

Remember Shaq .....KG .....guys who can handle the ball low . 

Bring in MArc Gasol or such big man on the block

Rondo will have 14 assists every game.

Or just get rind of Rondo and get someone that doesn't have so many "needs" to have a good game.

Rondo can get 14 assists every game with any players but that will not make the team good.  It is like having Kobe getting 25 pts every game or one guy getting 18 rebounds.  I agree with Boris.  If we need to bring in Shaq, KG, or Gasol in order to have a good team with Rondo, that is the essence of the problem that you have with Rondo.

  I don't see why you don't understand that Rondo getting a lot of assists helps make the team good. We score a lot of points off of his passes and we score them more efficiently than average. Also, while it's true that teams generally aren't that good without an above average big on the team, we had a lot of success after KG had his knee injury when we didn't have a player close to the level of those guys in their primes on the court with Rondo.

It just depends.  Getting 14 assists in the flow of the game while not "pounding" the ball is great and Rondo at his best which was the case against the Lakers last night.  Getting 14 assists at the expense of ball movement is not as good which at times has been the case with Rondo in the past.

It is like a scorer who hogs the ball but gets 35 points.  It is not always the best thing for the team.  There are also cases (Love) where a player appears to be going for rebounds at the expense of team defense.

Stats do not always equal good for the team.  If you consider that to be me not understanding something, then so be it.

  The object of the offense should be to score as efficiently as possible. If a guy takes 28 shots and gets 35 points it probably helps the team, if he takes 40 shots and gets 35 points it probably doesn't. Rondo's assists are generally of the "28 shots to get 35 points" type, so they're generally good for the team. As for the "ball movement" stuff, it's just a means to an end, and the end is to get a good shot. Why would getting good shots other ways be inherently worse?

  You said earlier that "We need more than just one pass and a shot, we need two and three passes". My question is, why? If you can get a good shot with only one pass, why not take the shot? What's better about more passes that will lead to a shot no better than the one you'll get with one pass? If anything, you'll end up committing more turnovers with the extra passes.

Bc the other guys are just standing around.  This is not two on two basketball.  Look at the way the Spurs play. Even the Heat (with Lebron) and the 2008-2010 celtcs how they played. 

  You can talk about the Spurs all you like, but most of the top teams have great offensive players who can create their own shots and dominate the ball. The Heat were more about iso plays for Wade and James than ball movement, and teams like that, the Shaq-Lakers, the MJ Bulls and a host of other top teams would fall well short of your expectations of how much ball movement a team needs.

Tim come on.  For most of the games, the Spurs and Heat are zipping the ball around. How do you think Chalmers made shots, Haslem etc.  Spurs and Heat did not/don't have a pure pg

I do agree players that can excel in ISO is needed to be good . But for most of the game teams like the 2008 celts, Spurs, Heat are passing the ball around

  The way those guys made shots was to basically *stand around* and wait for LeBron or Wade to suck in the defense and then pass them the ball. They weren't zipping the ball around like the Spurs. Did you watch them play much?

Yes i did. I dont think you did. You dont remember or have a short memory as to how they got so far in the 1st place. In the regular season the heat zipped the ball around to drive their offense.

In crucial moments, the iso happened. That is not what happened majority of the time.

[BballTim]

Bring in a quality Center ......not knocking Godzeller .....he's learning........but Rondo needs the skills of bigs with soft mitts and size .....

Remember Shaq .....KG .....guys who can handle the ball low . 

Bring in MArc Gasol or such big man on the block

Rondo will have 14 assists every game.

Or just get rind of Rondo and get someone that doesn't have so many "needs" to have a good game.

Rondo can get 14 assists every game with any players but that will not make the team good.  It is like having Kobe getting 25 pts every game or one guy getting 18 rebounds.  I agree with Boris.  If we need to bring in Shaq, KG, or Gasol in order to have a good team with Rondo, that is the essence of the problem that you have with Rondo.

  I don't see why you don't understand that Rondo getting a lot of assists helps make the team good. We score a lot of points off of his passes and we score them more efficiently than average. Also, while it's true that teams generally aren't that good without an above average big on the team, we had a lot of success after KG had his knee injury when we didn't have a player close to the level of those guys in their primes on the court with Rondo.

It just depends.  Getting 14 assists in the flow of the game while not "pounding" the ball is great and Rondo at his best which was the case against the Lakers last night.  Getting 14 assists at the expense of ball movement is not as good which at times has been the case with Rondo in the past.

It is like a scorer who hogs the ball but gets 35 points.  It is not always the best thing for the team.  There are also cases (Love) where a player appears to be going for rebounds at the expense of team defense.

Stats do not always equal good for the team.  If you consider that to be me not understanding something, then so be it.

  The object of the offense should be to score as efficiently as possible. If a guy takes 28 shots and gets 35 points it probably helps the team, if he takes 40 shots and gets 35 points it probably doesn't. Rondo's assists are generally of the "28 shots to get 35 points" type, so they're generally good for the team. As for the "ball movement" stuff, it's just a means to an end, and the end is to get a good shot. Why would getting good shots other ways be inherently worse?

  You said earlier that "We need more than just one pass and a shot, we need two and three passes". My question is, why? If you can get a good shot with only one pass, why not take the shot? What's better about more passes that will lead to a shot no better than the one you'll get with one pass? If anything, you'll end up committing more turnovers with the extra passes.

Bc the other guys are just standing around.  This is not two on two basketball.  Look at the way the Spurs play. Even the Heat (with Lebron) and the 2008-2010 celtcs how they played. 

  You can talk about the Spurs all you like, but most of the top teams have great offensive players who can create their own shots and dominate the ball. The Heat were more about iso plays for Wade and James than ball movement, and teams like that, the Shaq-Lakers, the MJ Bulls and a host of other top teams would fall well short of your expectations of how much ball movement a team needs.

Tim come on.  For most of the games, the Spurs and Heat are zipping the ball around. How do you think Chalmers made shots, Haslem etc.  Spurs and Heat did not/don't have a pure pg

I do agree players that can excel in ISO is needed to be good . But for most of the game teams like the 2008 celts, Spurs, Heat are passing the ball around

  The way those guys made shots was to basically *stand around* and wait for LeBron or Wade to suck in the defense and then pass them the ball. They weren't zipping the ball around like the Spurs. Did you watch them play much?

Yes i did. I dont think you did. You dont remember or have a short memory as to how they got so far in the 1st place. In the regular season the heat zipped the ball around to drive their offense.

In crucial moments, the iso happened. That is not what happened majority of the time.

  Last year they played at one of the slowest paces in the league and they were below average (18th) in number of passes per game. So they're spending more time in the half court than other teams, and passing the ball less often than average. And they passed the ball less than that in the earlier years.

[Celtics18]

Bring in a quality Center ......not knocking Godzeller .....he's learning........but Rondo needs the skills of bigs with soft mitts and size .....

Remember Shaq .....KG .....guys who can handle the ball low . 

Bring in MArc Gasol or such big man on the block

Rondo will have 14 assists every game.

Or just get rind of Rondo and get someone that doesn't have so many "needs" to have a good game.

Rondo can get 14 assists every game with any players but that will not make the team good.  It is like having Kobe getting 25 pts every game or one guy getting 18 rebounds.  I agree with Boris.  If we need to bring in Shaq, KG, or Gasol in order to have a good team with Rondo, that is the essence of the problem that you have with Rondo.

  I don't see why you don't understand that Rondo getting a lot of assists helps make the team good. We score a lot of points off of his passes and we score them more efficiently than average. Also, while it's true that teams generally aren't that good without an above average big on the team, we had a lot of success after KG had his knee injury when we didn't have a player close to the level of those guys in their primes on the court with Rondo.

It just depends.  Getting 14 assists in the flow of the game while not "pounding" the ball is great and Rondo at his best which was the case against the Lakers last night.  Getting 14 assists at the expense of ball movement is not as good which at times has been the case with Rondo in the past.

It is like a scorer who hogs the ball but gets 35 points.  It is not always the best thing for the team.  There are also cases (Love) where a player appears to be going for rebounds at the expense of team defense.

Stats do not always equal good for the team.  If you consider that to be me not understanding something, then so be it.

  The object of the offense should be to score as efficiently as possible. If a guy takes 28 shots and gets 35 points it probably helps the team, if he takes 40 shots and gets 35 points it probably doesn't. Rondo's assists are generally of the "28 shots to get 35 points" type, so they're generally good for the team. As for the "ball movement" stuff, it's just a means to an end, and the end is to get a good shot. Why would getting good shots other ways be inherently worse?

  You said earlier that "We need more than just one pass and a shot, we need two and three passes". My question is, why? If you can get a good shot with only one pass, why not take the shot? What's better about more passes that will lead to a shot no better than the one you'll get with one pass? If anything, you'll end up committing more turnovers with the extra passes.

Yes, I believe that in the long run, it is better for the team to be making multiple passes and have multiple players getting assists over one player making one pass and getting most of the assists.  Same as it is better to have multiple scorers over one guy getting most of the points.  Nothing wrong with Rondo getting assists off one pass so long as it is within the flow of the game.  I understand that "in the flow of the game" is not easy to quantify and that there is not a stat for that but I think it is a very important part of winning basketball.  I don't think this is radical basketball thinking.

+1. Makes the opposing d work harder, makes the offense harder to read. Its hard to play ball also just being a pilon player. Players that touch the ball , get involved from what ive seen, play better d and the team d is better

From watching the Celtics this year, I haven't seen a lot of examples of players acting solely as "pilon players."  This is in comparison to other teams I have watched, where I see a lot of players clearing out and standing around watching a "main guy" go to work while they spot up behind the line.

The Celtics do a nice job with off the ball movement based on what my eyes are telling me. 

[Fan from VT]

Of course he had a good game; we laugh about beating the lakers now, but they are laughing their way to the #1 pick, and the next in the lineage of Lakers Bigs who actually win them the titles: Wilt, kareem, shaq, gasol, xxxxx, as well as then signing rondo for just dollars in the offseason without having to give up an assett; so of course rondo has his best game to give his next team the best big possible.

[Vox_Populi]

The Celtics are one of the best passing teams in the NBA.

[inverselock]

Perhaps the most civilized discussion about assist, scoring and Rondo.  Have you guys gone crazy or just having a good weekend?   

[BballTim]

Of course he had a good game; we laugh about beating the lakers now, but they are laughing their way to the #1 pick, and the next in the lineage of Lakers Bigs who actually win them the titles: Wilt, kareem, shaq, gasol, xxxxx, as well as then signing rondo for just dollars in the offseason without having to give up an assett; so of course rondo has his best game to give his next team the best big possible.

  Interesting, but the Lakers didn't draft a single one of the bigs you mentioned.

[Chris22]

Trouble is Zeller does not do it every game.  He has one or two games a year like that.

Because he doesn't get the minutes.

Over the last 5 games Zeller is averaging 10 points and 8 rebounds in 24 minutes while shooting 69% from the field.

[CapnDunks]

Bring in a quality Center ......not knocking Godzeller .....he's learning........but Rondo needs the skills of bigs with soft mitts and size .....

Remember Shaq .....KG .....guys who can handle the ball low . 

Bring in MArc Gasol or such big man on the block

Rondo will have 14 assists every game.

Or just get rind of Rondo and get someone that doesn't have so many "needs" to have a good game.

Rondo can get 14 assists every game with any players but that will not make the team good.  It is like having Kobe getting 25 pts every game or one guy getting 18 rebounds.  I agree with Boris.  If we need to bring in Shaq, KG, or Gasol in order to have a good team with Rondo, that is the essence of the problem that you have with Rondo.

  I don't see why you don't understand that Rondo getting a lot of assists helps make the team good. We score a lot of points off of his passes and we score them more efficiently than average. Also, while it's true that teams generally aren't that good without an above average big on the team, we had a lot of success after KG had his knee injury when we didn't have a player close to the level of those guys in their primes on the court with Rondo.

It just depends.  Getting 14 assists in the flow of the game while not "pounding" the ball is great and Rondo at his best which was the case against the Lakers last night.  Getting 14 assists at the expense of ball movement is not as good which at times has been the case with Rondo in the past.

It is like a scorer who hogs the ball but gets 35 points.  It is not always the best thing for the team.  There are also cases (Love) where a player appears to be going for rebounds at the expense of team defense.

Stats do not always equal good for the team.  If you consider that to be me not understanding something, then so be it.

  The object of the offense should be to score as efficiently as possible. If a guy takes 28 shots and gets 35 points it probably helps the team, if he takes 40 shots and gets 35 points it probably doesn't. Rondo's assists are generally of the "28 shots to get 35 points" type, so they're generally good for the team. As for the "ball movement" stuff, it's just a means to an end, and the end is to get a good shot. Why would getting good shots other ways be inherently worse?

  You said earlier that "We need more than just one pass and a shot, we need two and three passes". My question is, why? If you can get a good shot with only one pass, why not take the shot? What's better about more passes that will lead to a shot no better than the one you'll get with one pass? If anything, you'll end up committing more turnovers with the extra passes.

Yes, I believe that in the long run, it is better for the team to be making multiple passes and have multiple players getting assists over one player making one pass and getting most of the assists.  Same as it is better to have multiple scorers over one guy getting most of the points.  Nothing wrong with Rondo getting assists off one pass so long as it is within the flow of the game.  I understand that "in the flow of the game" is not easy to quantify and that there is not a stat for that but I think it is a very important part of winning basketball.  I don't think this is radical basketball thinking.

+1. Makes the opposing d work harder, makes the offense harder to read. Its hard to play ball also just being a pilon player. Players that touch the ball , get involved from what ive seen, play better d and the team d is better

Rondo also is clearly concerned with his assist numbers. It looks like sometimes teammates shoot mediocre shots so that Rondo gets the dime instead of making the extra pass for a better shot.

[GreenWarrior]

Bring in a quality Center ......not knocking Godzeller .....he's learning........but Rondo needs the skills of bigs with soft mitts and size .....

Remember Shaq .....KG .....guys who can handle the ball low . 

Bring in MArc Gasol or such big man on the block

Rondo will have 14 assists every game.

Or just get rind of Rondo and get someone that doesn't have so many "needs" to have a good game.

Rondo can get 14 assists every game with any players but that will not make the team good.  It is like having Kobe getting 25 pts every game or one guy getting 18 rebounds.  I agree with Boris.  If we need to bring in Shaq, KG, or Gasol in order to have a good team with Rondo, that is the essence of the problem that you have with Rondo.

  I don't see why you don't understand that Rondo getting a lot of assists helps make the team good. We score a lot of points off of his passes and we score them more efficiently than average. Also, while it's true that teams generally aren't that good without an above average big on the team, we had a lot of success after KG had his knee injury when we didn't have a player close to the level of those guys in their primes on the court with Rondo.

It just depends.  Getting 14 assists in the flow of the game while not "pounding" the ball is great and Rondo at his best which was the case against the Lakers last night.  Getting 14 assists at the expense of ball movement is not as good which at times has been the case with Rondo in the past.

It is like a scorer who hogs the ball but gets 35 points.  It is not always the best thing for the team.  There are also cases (Love) where a player appears to be going for rebounds at the expense of team defense.

Stats do not always equal good for the team.  If you consider that to be me not understanding something, then so be it.

  The object of the offense should be to score as efficiently as possible. If a guy takes 28 shots and gets 35 points it probably helps the team, if he takes 40 shots and gets 35 points it probably doesn't. Rondo's assists are generally of the "28 shots to get 35 points" type, so they're generally good for the team. As for the "ball movement" stuff, it's just a means to an end, and the end is to get a good shot. Why would getting good shots other ways be inherently worse?

  You said earlier that "We need more than just one pass and a shot, we need two and three passes". My question is, why? If you can get a good shot with only one pass, why not take the shot? What's better about more passes that will lead to a shot no better than the one you'll get with one pass? If anything, you'll end up committing more turnovers with the extra passes.

Yes, I believe that in the long run, it is better for the team to be making multiple passes and have multiple players getting assists over one player making one pass and getting most of the assists.  Same as it is better to have multiple scorers over one guy getting most of the points.  Nothing wrong with Rondo getting assists off one pass so long as it is within the flow of the game.  I understand that "in the flow of the game" is not easy to quantify and that there is not a stat for that but I think it is a very important part of winning basketball.  I don't think this is radical basketball thinking.

+1. Makes the opposing d work harder, makes the offense harder to read. Its hard to play ball also just being a pilon player. Players that touch the ball , get involved from what ive seen, play better d and the team d is better

Rondo also is clearly concerned with his assist numbers. It looks like sometimes teammates shoot mediocre shots so that Rondo gets the dime instead of making the extra pass for a better shot.

no, they shoot mediocre shots regardless of who's passing them the ball.

[BballTim]

Bring in a quality Center ......not knocking Godzeller .....he's learning........but Rondo needs the skills of bigs with soft mitts and size .....

Remember Shaq .....KG .....guys who can handle the ball low . 

Bring in MArc Gasol or such big man on the block

Rondo will have 14 assists every game.

Or just get rind of Rondo and get someone that doesn't have so many "needs" to have a good game.

Rondo can get 14 assists every game with any players but that will not make the team good.  It is like having Kobe getting 25 pts every game or one guy getting 18 rebounds.  I agree with Boris.  If we need to bring in Shaq, KG, or Gasol in order to have a good team with Rondo, that is the essence of the problem that you have with Rondo.

  I don't see why you don't understand that Rondo getting a lot of assists helps make the team good. We score a lot of points off of his passes and we score them more efficiently than average. Also, while it's true that teams generally aren't that good without an above average big on the team, we had a lot of success after KG had his knee injury when we didn't have a player close to the level of those guys in their primes on the court with Rondo.

It just depends.  Getting 14 assists in the flow of the game while not "pounding" the ball is great and Rondo at his best which was the case against the Lakers last night.  Getting 14 assists at the expense of ball movement is not as good which at times has been the case with Rondo in the past.

It is like a scorer who hogs the ball but gets 35 points.  It is not always the best thing for the team.  There are also cases (Love) where a player appears to be going for rebounds at the expense of team defense.

Stats do not always equal good for the team.  If you consider that to be me not understanding something, then so be it.

  The object of the offense should be to score as efficiently as possible. If a guy takes 28 shots and gets 35 points it probably helps the team, if he takes 40 shots and gets 35 points it probably doesn't. Rondo's assists are generally of the "28 shots to get 35 points" type, so they're generally good for the team. As for the "ball movement" stuff, it's just a means to an end, and the end is to get a good shot. Why would getting good shots other ways be inherently worse?

  You said earlier that "We need more than just one pass and a shot, we need two and three passes". My question is, why? If you can get a good shot with only one pass, why not take the shot? What's better about more passes that will lead to a shot no better than the one you'll get with one pass? If anything, you'll end up committing more turnovers with the extra passes.

Yes, I believe that in the long run, it is better for the team to be making multiple passes and have multiple players getting assists over one player making one pass and getting most of the assists.  Same as it is better to have multiple scorers over one guy getting most of the points.  Nothing wrong with Rondo getting assists off one pass so long as it is within the flow of the game.  I understand that "in the flow of the game" is not easy to quantify and that there is not a stat for that but I think it is a very important part of winning basketball.  I don't think this is radical basketball thinking.

+1. Makes the opposing d work harder, makes the offense harder to read. Its hard to play ball also just being a pilon player. Players that touch the ball , get involved from what ive seen, play better d and the team d is better

Rondo also is clearly concerned with his assist numbers. It looks like sometimes teammates shoot mediocre shots so that Rondo gets the dime instead of making the extra pass for a better shot.

  Wait, so now the rest of the team takes bad shots because they're trying to make sure Rondo gets more assists? And Stevens doesn't complain about this or try and do anything to prevent it? This is almost better than 2013, when I kept hearing that Rondo had been forcing  Doc and KG/PP to play a style of basketball they didn't want to so he could control the offense more.

[Tr1boy]

Could not catch the game but saw the highlights. The same Rondo that showed up for the Lakers game looks like showed up today.  Just keep pushing the pace.