Also, you are sort of moving the goalposts by changing the main topic of the conversation. A top PG might not necessarily be the best player in his team. Parker arguably was not more valuable to his team than Duncan (or last year Leonard) but still he is an elite PG. These are two entirely different questions.
Fair, but I think there is some room for subjectivity. It's not a ranking by statistics; and in my view being a 'better' pg means you lead your team to more wins. That's why I don't include guys like Rubio, Dragic and Carter-Williams. Nice stats, can't figure out how to win.
Also, fwiw, Tony Parker does have a Finals MVP to go with one of those five rings.
I'm going to be "that guy" right now, but if you want to use that argument, on your list, only Rondo and Parker have championship rings. Paul has never been out of the second round, even with a solid supporting cast. Lowry was arguably second fiddle to Derozan last year. Irving hasn't even had a top-20 team yet, but with LeBron and Kevin Love he will this year. Curry has never been to a conference finals (although I would love to have him on a team). Rose hasn't been able to stay healthy for a full year since the ACL (although he is a huge game-changer when healthy). Westbrook has always played second fiddle to Durant (and arguably third wheel to Durant/Harden during the Thunder's Finals run). Lillard does have the "clutch" gene, but he also has Aldridge and other solid teammates.
I think the conslusion here is that, while PG is deeper than ever, the large majority still need the right supporting cast to be at their best. The reality of the situation is that people want: 1) winners 2) shot-creator, "alpha male," will-the-team-to-a-win type of guys, and, unfortunately, these do not often line up. The ones that can do both (Rose and Westbrook) are not hurt all the time by fluke- they put way too much strain on themselves and are almost never 100%.
It is no coincidence that, when we talk about top PGs to compare Rondo to, all of them are on playoff contenders.
However, these players all have arguably the same amount of catering to personel-wise that our very own Rajon Rondo would need to perform to the best of his abilities. Irving needs two other superstars to even break 500. Curry needs a big two guard that can take the best matchup and space the floor and a strong defensive center (Bogut makes a huge difference for them). The Spur's system is basically tailored around the Parker P&R (I actually think CBS should take a page from their book, but that's besides the point). Westbrook needs an iso-type offense to be at his best (and Durant's help doesn't hurt). Wall needs shooters to make up for his lack of confidence in his jumper as well as solid bigs to provide consistency when he can't control things.
Look at CP3. He's commmonly regarded as better than Rondo, but where has he gone in the playoffs? He has almost the perfect situation: a dominant big man, many shooters, a stud defensive big man to help make up for lapses, etc. However, the Los Angeles Clippers have not been past the second round of the playoffs yet. In Chris Paul's last year in new Orleans, he had a team tailor-made for him. It included: David West, Peja Stojakovic, Tyson Chandler, Jared Bayless, Marco Belinelli, Jarrett Jack, Marcus Thorton, Trevor Ariza, Sasha Pavlovic (before he fell off a cliff), and others. Where did they go? To the second round. People are saying how unrealistic getting a good big is, combined with the fact that Rajon Rondo need shooters around him is impractical and telling about his shortcomings. However, where has Chris Paul gone with all of that? Nowhere.
My point is that this issue is more abstract than we are making it. There are many factors to look at, including human psychology. Deep down, we all love the flashy, take over type of guys. We all like the guys on the winning teams. When we look at our team that is losing, we tend to undervalue our commodities. The people we are looking at are in much better situations than Rondo, yet we speak to our team's need to make accommodations as a disadvantage. I wholeheartedly think that Rondo is a top 10 point guard. He may not be the best, but he is certainly not as fallible as we are making him seem. Now, I may be sucking up to him just a little bit in this post, but there will definitely be times where I criticize him. I'm just trying to take the other side here of the underrepresented party. It doesn't help that BBallTim has been off all day, either hahaha
Poll
Topic: Name 10 PGs better than Rondo (Read 5590 times)