Bye Bye Rondo

[Yoki_IsTheName]

We have a higher winning percentage without Rondo than with him over the last four years.

Rondo ranked 29th, 26th, and 31st in PER for all point guards over the last three years.

Trade him now, while he still has some value.

In 2011-2012 we won 39 out of 66 games. That's above 50%.

In 2012-13 Rondo played 38 games. But of course, count the games that we won when he was hurt and just imply that if he was playing all of those wins will be loses, right?

2013-14, he played 30 games, this time with a much inferior roster than last year. Again, let's count the wins where he didn't play and just assume that when he does, all those games wins be loses, correct?

This year he played 18 games, again with a bad rosters. But while I give the benefit of the doubt that the Celtics with Rondo may do well with a rim protector, I'd give you this one.

The other three though, one is already debunked. The other two, you'd have a point if Rondo plays atleast 75% of games and we have a losing record, but he didnt. He could have easily been part of those wins if he played more games. 

 

[inverselock]

Rondo's weird.   

3 games in a row, he wouldn't shoot.

2 games in a row he was aggressive,  attacking on the pick'n roll,  shooting. P

Last night he went into passive mode.   Dancing in front of the pick'n roll,  no attack,  searching for a pass.

I just don't understand why he can't stay aggressive even if he's playing poorly.   He's supposed to be our best player & leader.

[blink]

We have a higher winning percentage without Rondo than with him over the last four years.

Rondo ranked 29th, 26th, and 31st in PER for all point guards over the last three years.

Trade him now, while he still has some value.

In 2011-2012 we won 39 out of 66 games. That's above 50%.

In 2012-13 Rondo played 38 games. But of course, count the games that we won when he was hurt and just imply that if he was playing all of those wins will be loses, right?

2013-14, he played 30 games, this time with a much inferior roster than last year. Again, let's count the wins where he didn't play and just assume that when he does, all those games wins be loses, correct?

This year he played 18 games, again with a bad rosters. But while I give the benefit of the doubt that the Celtics with Rondo may do well with a rim protector, I'd give you this one.

The other three though, one is already debunked. The other two, you'd have a point if Rondo plays atleast 75% of games and we have a losing record, but he didnt. He could have easily been part of those wins if he played more games.

He doesn't understand the word context and how context can change everything.  He is good at being a robot and just posting the same meaningless stuff in every thread though.

[droopdog7]

Haven't read the entire thread but yeah, rondo is good as gone.  But not because of smart because frankly, I am not sure he isn't Marcus banks 2.0.  No, rondo is gone because he was never as good as many around here thought.  And as I predicted, rondo will never ever be able to shoot, which makes him a liability much of the time.  And, because he can't shoot, he was never going to be a good player in the long run.  Soon as his peak athleticism went down, he will plummet.  He simply doesn't have a game that will age well.

But in the end, the Celtics will simply let him walk at the end of the year.  Better that than pay him any kind of decent money.  There won't be a trade partner either.  Good teams won't want to make the adjustment necessary to play with him.  And bad teams, as we are, have no use for him.

Am I killing rondo?  Yeah, I suppose so.  Doesn't mean I don't appreciate what he did when he was here.  Heck, I named my dog after him.  But in the end, he was never a star.  He can't carry a team which is a problem since he needs to dominate the ball to be effective.

[Sixth Man]

Rondo's weird.   

3 games in a row, he wouldn't shoot.

2 games in a row he was aggressive,  attacking on the pick'n roll,  shooting. P

Last night he went into passive mode.   Dancing in front of the pick'n roll,  no attack,  searching for a pass.

I just don't understand why he can't stay aggressive even if he's playing poorly.   He's supposed to be our best player & leader.

Rondo is a dilettante.  He's very good at dribbling and dabbling on offense and playing his own unique brand of matador defense...

[TheFlex]

Haven't read the entire thread but yeah, rondo is good as gone.  But not because of smart because frankly, I am not sure he isn't Marcus banks 2.0.  No, rondo is gone because he was never as good as many around here thought.  And as I predicted, rondo will never ever be able to shoot, which makes him a liability much of the time.  And, because he can't shoot, he was never going to be a good player in the long run.  Soon as his peak athleticism went down, he will plummet.  He simply doesn't have a game that will age well.

But in the end, the Celtics will simply let him walk at the end of the year.  Better that than pay him any kind of decent money.  There won't be a trade partner either.  Good teams won't want to make the adjustment necessary to play with him.  And bad teams, as we are, have no use for him.

Am I killing rondo?  Yeah, I suppose so.  Doesn't mean I don't appreciate what he did when he was here.  Heck, I named my dog after him.  But in the end, he was never a star.  He can't carry a team which is a problem since he needs to dominate the ball to be effective.

Are there any similarities between Smart and Banks worthy of noting or do people just keep calling Smart this because they both are named Marcus?

[Rondo9]

Haven't read the entire thread but yeah, rondo is good as gone.  But not because of smart because frankly, I am not sure he isn't Marcus banks 2.0.  No, rondo is gone because he was never as good as many around here thought.  And as I predicted, rondo will never ever be able to shoot, which makes him a liability much of the time.  And, because he can't shoot, he was never going to be a good player in the long run.  Soon as his peak athleticism went down, he will plummet.  He simply doesn't have a game that will age well.

But in the end, the Celtics will simply let him walk at the end of the year.  Better that than pay him any kind of decent money.  There won't be a trade partner either.  Good teams won't want to make the adjustment necessary to play with him.  And bad teams, as we are, have no use for him.

Am I killing rondo?  Yeah, I suppose so.  Doesn't mean I don't appreciate what he did when he was here.  Heck, I named my dog after him.  But in the end, he was never a star.  He can't carry a team which is a problem since he needs to dominate the ball to be effective.

Rondo is a 4 time all star who so far leads the league in assists despite playing with lesser teammates and is leading all Point Guards in rebounding. His scoring is down, but I suspect it'll be back up as the season goes along. But to say he's never a star is ridiculous and just shows how underapprieciated he can be at times.

[tarheelsxxiii]

I'll say that when he went toe-to-toe with Lebron on the biggest stage, I considered him nothing but the best PG in the league, and a top overall player. And I recognize he's coming back from a significant amount of time sitting out. I just hope he returns to normal form. A lot of people (commonly NYK fans, imagine that) negged Rondo that he was nothing more than the beneficiary of playing with 3 HOFers. I adamantly argued that, and I still do. But despite our record, and what I consider to be clowns on the roster, a lot of these guys can still score. So his numbers should not really dip, imo. Once he brushes off the rust, I hope he will return to true form. I am concerned, though, but possibly overreacting.

[makaveli]

I'll say that when he went toe-to-toe with Lebron on the biggest stage, I considered him nothing but the best PG in the league, and a top overall player. And I recognize he's coming back from a significant amount of time sitting out. I just hope he returns to normal form. A lot of people (commonly NYK fans, imagine that) negged Rondo that he was nothing more than the beneficiary of playing with 3 HOFers. I adamantly argued that, and I still do. But despite our record, and what I consider to be clowns on the roster, a lot of these guys can still score. So his numbers should not really dip, imo. Once he brushes off the rust, I hope he will return to true form. I am concerned, though, but possibly overreacting.

how do you perceive his true form? because IMO this is it...his assist numbers and rebounding are as good as ever, his shooting is little bit worse, and defense as well

[Chris22]

We have a higher winning percentage without Rondo than with him over the last three years.

Rondo ranked 29th, 26th, and 31st in PER for all point guards over the last three years.

Trade him now, while he still has some value.

In 2011-2012 we won 39 out of 66 games. That's above 50%.

In 2012-13 Rondo played 38 games. But of course, count the games that we won when he was hurt and just imply that if he was playing all of those wins will be loses, right?

2013-14, he played 30 games, this time with a much inferior roster than last year. Again, let's count the wins where he didn't play and just assume that when he does, all those games wins be loses, correct?

This year he played 18 games, again with a bad rosters. But while I give the benefit of the doubt that the Celtics with Rondo may do well with a rim protector, I'd give you this one.

The other three though, one is already debunked. The other two, you'd have a point if Rondo plays atleast 75% of games and we have a losing record, but he didnt. He could have easily been part of those wins if he played more games.

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

with
31 wins 22 losses
win percentage 58%

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

with
20 wins 23 losses
win percentage 46%

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

with
6 wins 24 losses
win percentage 20%

[rondohondo]

We have a higher winning percentage without Rondo than with him over the last three years.

Rondo ranked 29th, 26th, and 31st in PER for all point guards over the last three years.

Trade him now, while he still has some value.

In 2011-2012 we won 39 out of 66 games. That's above 50%.

In 2012-13 Rondo played 38 games. But of course, count the games that we won when he was hurt and just imply that if he was playing all of those wins will be loses, right?

2013-14, he played 30 games, this time with a much inferior roster than last year. Again, let's count the wins where he didn't play and just assume that when he does, all those games wins be loses, correct?

This year he played 18 games, again with a bad rosters. But while I give the benefit of the doubt that the Celtics with Rondo may do well with a rim protector, I'd give you this one.

The other three though, one is already debunked. The other two, you'd have a point if Rondo plays atleast 75% of games and we have a losing record, but he didnt. He could have easily been part of those wins if he played more games.

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

with
31 wins 22 losses
win percentage 58%

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

with
20 wins 23 losses
win percentage 46%

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

with
6 wins 24 losses
win percentage 20%

can a Moderator please ban this guy ? I thought trolling was against the rules, but he has posted the same thing in a bunch of threads . He is just copying and pasting into every thread .

[bknova]

Marcus Smart is not a point guard.  Marcus Smart is not a point guard.  Marcus Smart is not a point guard. 

[kozlodoev]

Marcus Smart is not a point guard.  Marcus Smart is not a point guard.  Marcus Smart is not a point guard.

Marcus Smart is a rookie with 8 NBA games under his belt.

[kozlodoev]

We have a higher winning percentage without Rondo than with him over the last four years.

Rondo ranked 29th, 26th, and 31st in PER for all point guards over the last three years.

Trade him now, while he still has some value.

In 2011-2012 we won 39 out of 66 games. That's above 50%.

In 2012-13 Rondo played 38 games. But of course, count the games that we won when he was hurt and just imply that if he was playing all of those wins will be loses, right?

2013-14, he played 30 games, this time with a much inferior roster than last year. Again, let's count the wins where he didn't play and just assume that when he does, all those games wins be loses, correct?

This year he played 18 games, again with a bad rosters. But while I give the benefit of the doubt that the Celtics with Rondo may do well with a rim protector, I'd give you this one.

The other three though, one is already debunked. The other two, you'd have a point if Rondo plays atleast 75% of games and we have a losing record, but he didnt. He could have easily been part of those wins if he played more games.

We got the point. Rondo is great because he's averaging a "near triple double", but he's never accountable for the team losing. Very cushy.

[BballTim]

We have a higher winning percentage without Rondo than with him over the last three years.

Rondo ranked 29th, 26th, and 31st in PER for all point guards over the last three years.

Trade him now, while he still has some value.

In 2011-2012 we won 39 out of 66 games. That's above 50%.

In 2012-13 Rondo played 38 games. But of course, count the games that we won when he was hurt and just imply that if he was playing all of those wins will be loses, right?

2013-14, he played 30 games, this time with a much inferior roster than last year. Again, let's count the wins where he didn't play and just assume that when he does, all those games wins be loses, correct?

This year he played 18 games, again with a bad rosters. But while I give the benefit of the doubt that the Celtics with Rondo may do well with a rim protector, I'd give you this one.

The other three though, one is already debunked. The other two, you'd have a point if Rondo plays atleast 75% of games and we have a losing record, but he didnt. He could have easily been part of those wins if he played more games.

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

with
31 wins 22 losses
win percentage 58%

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

with
20 wins 23 losses
win percentage 46%

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

with
6 wins 24 losses
win percentage 20%

  Could you go a little more in depth than this? For instance, in 13-14, we were 10-12 at one point in time and then lost 12 of our last 14 before Rondo came back. What was the reason for the big change? Why was the team so much worse at times than it was at other times? The difference can't be Rondo, he wasn't in the lineup yet. What was it?

  Similarly, in 2013 we won 7 of 9, lost 8 of 10, won 6 straight, lost 6 straight, won 7 straight and then lost 4 of 6. What was the cause of all this inconsistency? What kept changing? What were the reasons for all of the good and bad streaks?