Rondo is our Carmelo

[ballin]

Just a little theory I've been thinking about lately.

Both are talented, but ultimately flawed players that need to be surrounded by exactly the right sort of talent in order to flourish. Both are borderline "max"players whose reputations might exceed their actual abilities.

In my opinion, both are the type of players that should NOT be kept by rebuilding teams, as they will only continue to delay the rebuilding process and eat up valuable cap space that can be used to facilitate better deals for the team's long-term health.

I would hate to see my Celtics do what the Knicks did this offseason, which is essentially confine themselves to basketball purgatory for the next half-decade.

Keep in mind that since 08-09, advanced stats measuring Rondo's performance have fairly steadily declined. This is during a time when Rondo should be entering his prime. Keep in mind that the next contract Rondo signs will continue to pay him until he's ripe old 33 (very old, for a point guard that doesn't have a 3 point shot). Even if you consider Rondo to be a max player now, will he still be in 4-5 years, which would be when the Celtics are back in contention (assuming everything goes as planned)? Highly unlikely, based on the stats trend.

One of the reasons that Rondo is so controversial is because a lot of what he does is so hard to measure. But lately the intangibles that he used to thrive on (such as his defense) have been withering up. Expected progress in FT's and 3 point shooting simply never materialized, and at 28 it's pretty silly to assume that they will. Rondo also never drives to the basket anymore, which is partially why his fg% has been dropping like a rock for years at this point.

Long story short: has Rondo played like a max player in the past? Yes. Will he ever regain that form? Maybe. Is it worth it to gamble the entire future of this team on one player defying the odds and playing like a top player again? I would have to say no.

Rondo is our Carmelo. For the love of all that's holy, let's try NOT to be the NY Knicks.

[D.o.s.]

a couple of thoughts:

-There are many supremely talented NBA players that never had the right sort of lineup to win an NBA championship, which seems to be the unspoken criteria here.

-I don't think Carmelo's a particularly unique talent the same way #9 is -- I like his game a lot, but he's 'just' an immensely gifted wing scorer who has a special aptitude for rebounding. I think Rondo's got a bit more in common with Chris Webber, as far as his a-typicality is concerned.

[acieEarl]

Terrible comparison. Rondo is a first pass PG who makes average players better. Carmelo is a scorer who almost never benefits the rest of his team.

Any good/great team needs multiple All star caliper players. Rondo is one of the pieces. They are hard to come by in this league. You either get lucky in this league and draft one, or some how get one to sign here. Boston has never been able to sign a top free agent. I still believe guys want to play with a guy like Rondo, who's looking to get you the ball. Keeping him gives us a better shot to get another complimentary All-star type player.

[ballin]

a couple of thoughts:

-There are many supremely talented NBA players that never had the right sort of lineup to win an NBA championship, which seems to be the unspoken criteria here.

-I don't think Carmelo's a particularly unique talent the same way #9 is -- I like his game a lot, but he's 'just' an immensely gifted wing scorer who has a special aptitude for rebounding. I think Rondo's got a bit more in common with Chris Webber, as far as his a-typicality is concerned.

Well winning a championship is certainly the goal, and so of course when we're looking at Rondo we have to consider whether or not it's feasible to build around him based on his skillset.

The reality about Rondo at this point is, sadly, that he's not what he used to be and everyone apparently knows it. Fans on here like to talk about how great he is, but you can scarcely find a team that would trade their point guard for him.

Think about how crazy that is: almost nobody would do a 1 for 1 swap with their point guard to obtain Rondo. Cleveland has no interest in moving Irving. OKC won't move Westbrook. The Raptors won't move Lowry. Seriously doubt that we could get Rubio for Rondo. Who could we get for him? Jeremy Lin? Jameer Nelson? Patrick Beverly?

It's ironic - he's worth so little in a trade (because other teams have realized how seriously flawed he is) that it leads some people like Ainge and fans on CB to conclude that we might as well keep him. The irony is that the reasons he's worth so little are exactly the same reasons why he shouldn't be kept. Keeping Rondo is a franchise-risking gamble, and a bad one at that.

[kozlodoev]

Terrible comparison. Rondo is a first pass PG who makes average players better. Carmelo is a scorer who almost never benefits the rest of his team.

Yeah, that's why our roster is full of average players who have looked distinctly average this season. 

[ballin]

Terrible comparison. Rondo is a first pass PG who makes average players better. Carmelo is a scorer who almost never benefits the rest of his team.

Any good/great team needs multiple All star caliper players. Rondo is one of the pieces. They are hard to come by in this league. You either get lucky in this league and draft one, or some how get one to sign here. Boston has never been able to sign a top free agent. I still believe guys want to play with a guy like Rondo, who's looking to get you the ball. Keeping him gives us a better shot to get another complimentary All-star type player.

You say all-star type player, but what makes you so sure that Rondo ever makes it to an all-star game again? All-defensive team Rondo is gone, so that's not helping his cause. Do you really think someone shooting 39% from the field, 32% from the line, 27% from 3 and averaging less than 9 points a game will make it to the all-star game?

Rondo honestly might not ever play like an all-star again.

[wdleehi]

All star level players.   Yep


When on teams with talent around them can go far in the playoffs.   Yep.




Are surrounded by a bad team.  Yep



Have the ability and rep to attract other star players.  Yep.

[TheFlex]

Terrible comparison. Rondo is a first pass PG who makes average players better. Carmelo is a scorer who almost never benefits the rest of his team.

Um... I'm pretty sure the Knicks benefit from having Carmelo on their team.

[TheFlex]

Rondo may be our Carmelo in a sense but it's important to note that Carmelo has been a far more impactful player than Rondo has over the course of his career. If you can't come to that conclusion, you're smoking some serious green (see what I did there?).

Rondo can be the second or third best player on a contending squad. Carmelo can unquestionably be the first.

[D.o.s.]

a couple of thoughts:

-There are many supremely talented NBA players that never had the right sort of lineup to win an NBA championship, which seems to be the unspoken criteria here.

-I don't think Carmelo's a particularly unique talent the same way #9 is -- I like his game a lot, but he's 'just' an immensely gifted wing scorer who has a special aptitude for rebounding. I think Rondo's got a bit more in common with Chris Webber, as far as his a-typicality is concerned.

Well winning a championship is certainly the goal, and so of course when we're looking at Rondo we have to consider whether or not it's feasible to build around him based on his skillset.

The reality about Rondo at this point is, sadly, that he's not what he used to be and everyone apparently knows it. Fans on here like to talk about how great he is, but you can scarcely find a team that would trade their point guard for him.

Think about how crazy that is: almost nobody would do a 1 for 1 swap with their point guard to obtain Rondo. Cleveland has no interest in moving Irving. OKC won't move Westbrook. The Raptors won't move Lowry. Seriously doubt that we could get Rubio for Rondo. Who could we get for him? Jeremy Lin? Jameer Nelson? Patrick Beverly?

It's ironic - he's worth so little in a trade (because other teams have realized how seriously flawed he is) that it leads some people like Ainge and fans on CB to conclude that we might as well keep him. The irony is that the reasons he's worth so little are exactly the same reasons why he shouldn't be kept. Keeping Rondo is a franchise-risking gamble, and a bad one at that.

Disagree. Rondo's not worth much in trade because the point guard position is as stacked as it's ever been in NBA history, not because of the merits of his game -- and precisely because of that, Ainge won't do a 1 for 1 swap. He's unlikely to get a positive return on his investment, and, if you're another GM, you're not going to pay a premium to get Rondo if you can get 80% of what he offers from a Kyle Lowry.

[jambr380]

Rondo may be our Carmelo in a sense but it's important to note that Carmelo has been a far more impactful player than Rondo has over the course of his career. If you can't come to that conclusion, you're smoking some serious green (see what I did there?).

Rondo can be the second or third best player on a contending squad. Carmelo can unquestionably be the first.

Which is exactly why we should bring Carmelo to Boston. Add an adequate, athletic center and we have ourselves quite a team, even if it means a few of our young core players would be on the move.

Unfortunately for the Cs, NY most likely already has their eyes on Rondo, not the other way around.

[ballin]

a couple of thoughts:

-There are many supremely talented NBA players that never had the right sort of lineup to win an NBA championship, which seems to be the unspoken criteria here.

-I don't think Carmelo's a particularly unique talent the same way #9 is -- I like his game a lot, but he's 'just' an immensely gifted wing scorer who has a special aptitude for rebounding. I think Rondo's got a bit more in common with Chris Webber, as far as his a-typicality is concerned.

Well winning a championship is certainly the goal, and so of course when we're looking at Rondo we have to consider whether or not it's feasible to build around him based on his skillset.

The reality about Rondo at this point is, sadly, that he's not what he used to be and everyone apparently knows it. Fans on here like to talk about how great he is, but you can scarcely find a team that would trade their point guard for him.

Think about how crazy that is: almost nobody would do a 1 for 1 swap with their point guard to obtain Rondo. Cleveland has no interest in moving Irving. OKC won't move Westbrook. The Raptors won't move Lowry. Seriously doubt that we could get Rubio for Rondo. Who could we get for him? Jeremy Lin? Jameer Nelson? Patrick Beverly?

It's ironic - he's worth so little in a trade (because other teams have realized how seriously flawed he is) that it leads some people like Ainge and fans on CB to conclude that we might as well keep him. The irony is that the reasons he's worth so little are exactly the same reasons why he shouldn't be kept. Keeping Rondo is a franchise-risking gamble, and a bad one at that.

Disagree. Rondo's not worth much in trade because the point guard position is as stacked as it's ever been in NBA history, not because of the merits of his game -- and precisely because of that, Ainge won't do a 1 for 1 swap. He's unlikely to get a positive return on his investment, and, if you're another GM, you're not going to pay a premium to get Rondo if you can get 80% of what he offers from a Kyle Lowry.

After watching us get absolutely eviscerated by Lowry and Derozan when we played the Raps, I'm inclined to believe that Lowry is closer to offering 180% of what Rondo gives than 80%. Per basketball-reference.com he's posting superior stats in virtually every category other than assists, and leading his team to a winning record. On the other hand, I believe our win/loss record without Rondo has been better than WITH Rondo over the last 3 years.

[csfansince60s]

Rondo may be our Carmelo in a sense but it's important to note that Carmelo has been a far more impactful player than Rondo has over the course of his career. If you can't come to that conclusion, you're smoking some serious green (see what I did there?).

Rondo can be the second or third best player on a contending squad. Carmelo can unquestionably be the first.

Which is exactly why we should bring Carmelo to Boston. Add an adequate, athletic center and we have ourselves quite a team, even if it means a few of our young core players would be on the move.

Unfortunately for the Cs, NY most likely already has their eyes on Rondo, not the other way around.

Melo is a much better fit in Stevens' system than Rondo would be in the triangle. Rondo's shooting inability would be a tremendous detriment to the triangle.

From a system- fit view, it makes much more sense to trade Melo here than Rondo to the NYK.

We have some pieces that would fit real well in the triangle offense, KO and Green in particular, Thornton too.

[D.o.s.]

a couple of thoughts:

-There are many supremely talented NBA players that never had the right sort of lineup to win an NBA championship, which seems to be the unspoken criteria here.

-I don't think Carmelo's a particularly unique talent the same way #9 is -- I like his game a lot, but he's 'just' an immensely gifted wing scorer who has a special aptitude for rebounding. I think Rondo's got a bit more in common with Chris Webber, as far as his a-typicality is concerned.

Well winning a championship is certainly the goal, and so of course when we're looking at Rondo we have to consider whether or not it's feasible to build around him based on his skillset.

The reality about Rondo at this point is, sadly, that he's not what he used to be and everyone apparently knows it. Fans on here like to talk about how great he is, but you can scarcely find a team that would trade their point guard for him.

Think about how crazy that is: almost nobody would do a 1 for 1 swap with their point guard to obtain Rondo. Cleveland has no interest in moving Irving. OKC won't move Westbrook. The Raptors won't move Lowry. Seriously doubt that we could get Rubio for Rondo. Who could we get for him? Jeremy Lin? Jameer Nelson? Patrick Beverly?

It's ironic - he's worth so little in a trade (because other teams have realized how seriously flawed he is) that it leads some people like Ainge and fans on CB to conclude that we might as well keep him. The irony is that the reasons he's worth so little are exactly the same reasons why he shouldn't be kept. Keeping Rondo is a franchise-risking gamble, and a bad one at that.

Disagree. Rondo's not worth much in trade because the point guard position is as stacked as it's ever been in NBA history, not because of the merits of his game -- and precisely because of that, Ainge won't do a 1 for 1 swap. He's unlikely to get a positive return on his investment, and, if you're another GM, you're not going to pay a premium to get Rondo if you can get 80% of what he offers from a Kyle Lowry.

After watching us get absolutely eviscerated by Lowry and Derozan when we played the Raps, I'm inclined to believe that Lowry is closer to offering 180% of what Rondo gives than 80%. Per basketball-reference.com he's posting superior stats in virtually every category other than assists, and leading his team to a winning record. On the other hand, I believe our win/loss record without Rondo has been better than WITH Rondo over the last 3 years.

The win/loss record has so many other factors that I'm heavily disinclined to even acknowledge it. For a period of time in the Big Three era we had won more games, in terms of winning percentage, which is what you're grasping at here, WITHOUT KG than we had won with him. Does that mean that the team was better without KG?

short answer: No, it doesn't -- capitalization doesn't change the fundamental stupidity of the argument being presented. 

That being said, Lowry was an example to illustrate a point. The Raptors nabbed him in a trade with Houston for Gary Forbes (go google him, I'll wait) and a protected first. Think about that for a second.

Ok, now that you've familiarized yourself with Gary Forbes, consider that Lowry, who can give anywhere from 80 to 180% of what Rondo can offer, per this thread, got traded for a guy who isn't in the league right now and a draft pick that's not going to Toronto if it's worth anything. The reason it's stupid to trade Rondo at the moment is this: It's not a good market for point guards around the league right now. There's no demand. None. Zero. Across the board, everyone's got one that's 'good enough', so they're not going to send out much of anything to get one that's 'better'.

[Celtics18]

Rondo may be our Carmelo in a sense but it's important to note that Carmelo has been a far more impactful player than Rondo has over the course of his career. If you can't come to that conclusion, you're smoking some serious green (see what I did there?).

Rondo can be the second or third best player on a contending squad. Carmelo can unquestionably be the first.

Except for the fact that Carmelo has never been the best player on a contending team.  Rondo has.