Rondo's return (& Ainge)

[jpotter33]

I couldn't be happier to see Rondo house us tonight.

I cannot sufficiently verbalize how frustrated I am when I see junk like this.

Junk?

I'd call it "a frustrated fan that hated to see Rondo gone, for as little as we got back, or gone, period".

Not junk.

So if it was Anti-Rondo then you'd approve?

No.

I'm wondering how you rationalized that conclusion. Stop generalizing those who don't drool over Rondo.

Yep. You can either love Rondo and defend him until your death, or you can hate everything he does. Apparently the slightest bit of Rondo criticism puts you into the latter camp.

  ..while the slightest disagreement with a criticism (no matter how ridiculous) puts you in the former camp. Welcome to the internet.

No no no, let's not mix this up now. A slight disagreement with A Rondo criticism makes you reasonable. A slight disagreement with EVERY Rondo criticism puts you in that camp. On this blog, the Rondo supporters come out in droves to support him no matter what the criticism, fair or not. (Granted, there are Rondo-haters that do the same thing, but they're not nearly as numerous.) It's just frustrating the pedestal that some people put Rondo on in this blog.

[aingeforthree]

I don't want to see Danny fired, but rebuilding sucks.

Do you wish Danny would have traded some assets and put some pieces around Rondo and Green or (although it sucks) do you think our current plan is the best long term move?

By far the best move is what Danny is currently doing.  Rondo wasn't worth the max, let him get paid somewhere else.  Rebuilding through the draft is how it's done, and I've never seen a rebuilding team with this many draft assets before.

It's the correct way and it will work.  People, fans just don't have the patience to wait it out like our organization does so that's where all this crying comes about.  They want it NOW NOW NOW NOW....Well guess what, you'll have to wait.  So sit back and enjoy the ride.  He'll build you a champion once again, and all will be well.

[Kuberski33]

Danny did make the right move after they couldn't get a good player (i.e. Love) here this summer.  Tankers you got your wish.  This team is going to not be competitive for quite awhile. 

Enjoy the crappy basketball - like last night.   Lots more to come.  As Roy said, rebuilding the NBA sucks.  To me it's the big problem with the league's business model.  Too many teams (like this one) with absolutely no chance of contending anytime soon.

[BballTim]

I couldn't be happier to see Rondo house us tonight.

I cannot sufficiently verbalize how frustrated I am when I see junk like this.

Junk?

I'd call it "a frustrated fan that hated to see Rondo gone, for as little as we got back, or gone, period".

Not junk.

So if it was Anti-Rondo then you'd approve?

No.

I'm wondering how you rationalized that conclusion. Stop generalizing those who don't drool over Rondo.

Yep. You can either love Rondo and defend him until your death, or you can hate everything he does. Apparently the slightest bit of Rondo criticism puts you into the latter camp.

  ..while the slightest disagreement with a criticism (no matter how ridiculous) puts you in the former camp. Welcome to the internet.

No no no, let's not mix this up now. A slight disagreement with A Rondo criticism makes you reasonable. A slight disagreement with EVERY Rondo criticism puts you in that camp. On this blog, the Rondo supporters come out in droves to support him no matter what the criticism, fair or not. (Granted, there are Rondo-haters that do the same thing, but they're not nearly as numerous.) It's just frustrating the pedestal that some people put Rondo on in this blog.

  So basically, since you feel that your criticisms are fair, people who don't agree with them are "in that camp". Again, welcome to the internet.

[jpotter33]

I couldn't be happier to see Rondo house us tonight.

I cannot sufficiently verbalize how frustrated I am when I see junk like this.

Junk?

I'd call it "a frustrated fan that hated to see Rondo gone, for as little as we got back, or gone, period".

Not junk.

So if it was Anti-Rondo then you'd approve?

No.

I'm wondering how you rationalized that conclusion. Stop generalizing those who don't drool over Rondo.

Yep. You can either love Rondo and defend him until your death, or you can hate everything he does. Apparently the slightest bit of Rondo criticism puts you into the latter camp.

  ..while the slightest disagreement with a criticism (no matter how ridiculous) puts you in the former camp. Welcome to the internet.

No no no, let's not mix this up now. A slight disagreement with A Rondo criticism makes you reasonable. A slight disagreement with EVERY Rondo criticism puts you in that camp. On this blog, the Rondo supporters come out in droves to support him no matter what the criticism, fair or not. (Granted, there are Rondo-haters that do the same thing, but they're not nearly as numerous.) It's just frustrating the pedestal that some people put Rondo on in this blog.

  So basically, since you feel that your criticisms are fair, people who don't agree with them are "in that camp". Again, welcome to the internet.

Well, logically, if I didn't think my criticisms were fair I wouldn't have them or I would just be trolling. So there's that. But who said anything about MY Robdo criticisms? In the last two days, Tim, I've seen you argue against virtually every Robdo criticism you came across. Don't you think that's just a little fishy and your Rondo fandom is skewing reality a bit?

[KeepRondo]

I couldn't be happier to see Rondo house us tonight.

I cannot sufficiently verbalize how frustrated I am when I see junk like this.

Junk?

I'd call it "a frustrated fan that hated to see Rondo gone, for as little as we got back, or gone, period".

Not junk.

So if it was Anti-Rondo then you'd approve?

No.

I'm wondering how you rationalized that conclusion. Stop generalizing those who don't drool over Rondo.

Thank You. That's the only answer I needed.

Judging by the reaction from the crowd last night, I'd say that MANY Celtics Fans (and now MAVS fans) are drooling over Rondo.

That's going to be a long spit trail, all the way to June.

Fair enough. Envying a team or player is still not the same as prioritizing that team or player over the Cs. That's what it seems like many on here have been doing lately. Not to play the "you're not a real fan" card that has been played far too much lately, but this ideology leaves a bitter taste in my mind, much like the one you tasted upon hearing of Rondo's departure.

I understand that.

In the game thread last night, you'd noticed that I posted probably more positives about the Mavs than I did for BOS. First time I've ever did that. TBH, did not feel right to me, but just frustrated over the whole thing.

Seeing Perk gone, then PP34 and KG - even if it was for the right reasons - hurts. Rondo was supposed to be that bridge to the future - to keep us relevant.

Why in the world couldn't Danny swing a deal or convince him to stay? Or gotten more back for him? Just unfathomable.

I started a thread some time ago theorizing that the Celts weren't fond of Rondo as the guy and that this was obvious after they passed on affordable players like Afflalo, Asik and others. If they viewed him as a max guy and wanted him to stay, there's no question in my mind he'd still be on the team and we'd be primed to comfortably make the playoffs.

Where we split is that I'm happy this is not the case. You clearly feel differently. That's perfectly understandable.

You may be right that the Celtics wanted to move on from Rondo, but Afflalo is not an upgrade over Bradley. They are both average, middle of the pack shooting guards. I don't see how them not getting half decent players was a sign they were going to move on from Rondo.

I do think the Celtics looking to add another all star is more plausible. At some point Rondo probably lost his patience with the team and asked out.

[KeepRondo]

tarheelsxxiii... your first post doesn't make any sense at all.  If Rondo didnt' need great players around him to put up those kind of numbers, he would have put up those numbers in Boston while surrounded by mediocrity.   That's the most points Rondo has scored in 2 years.  Lol.  You don't think it had anything to do with the Celtics collectively deciding to leave Rondo wide open and cover guys like Dirk?  It doesn't seem peculiar at all to you that Rondo's been a 25% three point shooter for 9 years and suddenly jumps to 40% shooting on the Mavs?  Rondo is far more effective as the 4th/5th best player on a team.  He can't be the top dog on a contender.

Also... what obnoxiousmime said is correct.  There's a pre-deadline deadline.  The official trade deadline is on Feb 19th.  Players acquired in a trade can't be traded for 60 days.  By trading Rondo on December 18th, it means that all the pieces we acquired (Crowder, Wright, Jameer) can be re-traded on the deadline.

Funny that the 4th or 5th best player on the team was by far the best player on the court last night. Rondo is probably the second best player on the Mavs. Your constant and inaccurate portrayal of Rondo provides a lot of humor, however.

Uh I would take Dirk Parsons Ellis and a healthy Chandler over Rondo. I actually think the Mavs gave us a tremendous deal to be honest since it only helps the tank.

only you would consider a deal that makes us worse and gives us garbage as a 'tremendous' deal

As much as I hate losing Rondo, if we can somehow win the lottery and get the first or second pick, this deal does become easier to stomach.

I guess that's the gambler in Ainge.

[wayupnorth]

Yes, it did make a difference. They were trying to get the deal done before the deadline for players who were involved in deals to still be able to be dealt this season. In other words, Brandan Wright, Jameer Nelson, and Jae Crowder can still be dealt this season before the deadline.

Are you referring to the deadline in nearly 1.5 months? I hope not...

Different sport, buddy (in other words)?

If you are going to act as arrogant as you do in this post, at least know what you are talking about.

[BballTim]

I couldn't be happier to see Rondo house us tonight.

I cannot sufficiently verbalize how frustrated I am when I see junk like this.

Junk?

I'd call it "a frustrated fan that hated to see Rondo gone, for as little as we got back, or gone, period".

Not junk.

So if it was Anti-Rondo then you'd approve?

No.

I'm wondering how you rationalized that conclusion. Stop generalizing those who don't drool over Rondo.

Yep. You can either love Rondo and defend him until your death, or you can hate everything he does. Apparently the slightest bit of Rondo criticism puts you into the latter camp.

  ..while the slightest disagreement with a criticism (no matter how ridiculous) puts you in the former camp. Welcome to the internet.

No no no, let's not mix this up now. A slight disagreement with A Rondo criticism makes you reasonable. A slight disagreement with EVERY Rondo criticism puts you in that camp. On this blog, the Rondo supporters come out in droves to support him no matter what the criticism, fair or not. (Granted, there are Rondo-haters that do the same thing, but they're not nearly as numerous.) It's just frustrating the pedestal that some people put Rondo on in this blog.

  So basically, since you feel that your criticisms are fair, people who don't agree with them are "in that camp". Again, welcome to the internet.

Well, logically, if I didn't think my criticisms were fair I wouldn't have them or I would just be trolling. So there's that. But who said anything about MY Robdo criticisms? In the last two days, Tim, I've seen you argue against virtually every Robdo criticism you came across. Don't you think that's just a little fishy and your Rondo fandom is skewing reality a bit?

  I haven't read every post in these threads and haven't argued against every criticism I've come across. Just the ones that I happen to see that I don't believe to be accurate. I don't see why that would be any fishier than you making criticisms that you think are fair.Why don't you show me what I've posted that's clearly "skewed"?

[jpotter33]

I couldn't be happier to see Rondo house us tonight.

I cannot sufficiently verbalize how frustrated I am when I see junk like this.

Junk?

I'd call it "a frustrated fan that hated to see Rondo gone, for as little as we got back, or gone, period".

Not junk.

So if it was Anti-Rondo then you'd approve?

No.

I'm wondering how you rationalized that conclusion. Stop generalizing those who don't drool over Rondo.

Yep. You can either love Rondo and defend him until your death, or you can hate everything he does. Apparently the slightest bit of Rondo criticism puts you into the latter camp.

  ..while the slightest disagreement with a criticism (no matter how ridiculous) puts you in the former camp. Welcome to the internet.

No no no, let's not mix this up now. A slight disagreement with A Rondo criticism makes you reasonable. A slight disagreement with EVERY Rondo criticism puts you in that camp. On this blog, the Rondo supporters come out in droves to support him no matter what the criticism, fair or not. (Granted, there are Rondo-haters that do the same thing, but they're not nearly as numerous.) It's just frustrating the pedestal that some people put Rondo on in this blog.

  So basically, since you feel that your criticisms are fair, people who don't agree with them are "in that camp". Again, welcome to the internet.

Well, logically, if I didn't think my criticisms were fair I wouldn't have them or I would just be trolling. So there's that. But who said anything about MY Robdo criticisms? In the last two days, Tim, I've seen you argue against virtually every Robdo criticism you came across. Don't you think that's just a little fishy and your Rondo fandom is skewing reality a bit?

  I haven't read every post in these threads and haven't argued against every criticism I've come across. Just the ones that I happen to see that I don't believe to be accurate. I don't see why that would be any fishier than you making criticisms that you think are fair.Why don't you show me what I've posted that's clearly "skewed"?

1) your argument that playoff/national t.v. Rondo is a misnomer/misconception born out of "people who don't watch him enough"
2) your argument that Rondo didn't lack motivation this season some games and that he brought his best effort/game every time he played (an assertion that even the most ardent Rondo supporter can't support)
3) that leading the league in assists and rebounds as a pg equates to bringing your all every night, even though he routinely passed up open shots for assists, averaged a measly 7ish points a night, and routinely took defensive plays off, didn't fight through screens, and let his man pass him.

There are others, too, but I don't feel like scrolling through page after page of the blog. Of course, you're just going to come back and try to justify these claims with anecdotal evidence or some stat that supports your claim in an indirect way, because the eye test doesn't work with a Rondo-tinted perspective. Such is life at a sports blog.

[Celtics4ever]

When we drafted Smart, I think from that time onward, Rondo's days were numbered.  DA could have wanted to move Smart for Love but he is not a top tier guy like Parker or Wiggins, he was in the second tier and not as desired.  Ainge then decided it was a long rebuild and committed to the youth movement to develop assets.  We don't always sub to win games, repeatedly do not play guys who are having good games and keep poor defenders on the floor all the time.   The tanking is getting less subtle all the time.

[thirstyboots18]

I couldn't be happier to see Rondo house us tonight.

I cannot sufficiently verbalize how frustrated I am when I see junk like this.

Junk?

I'd call it "a frustrated fan that hated to see Rondo gone, for as little as we got back, or gone, period".

Not junk.

So if it was Anti-Rondo then you'd approve?

If he was a fan, he would have been angry last night because it demonstrated just how much Rondo was dogging it when he was in Boston.  And not just this year, but for several years before that.

How many more games would the Celtics have won over the last 3 or 4 years if Rondo played like that even 75% of the time?  If Rondo had played like that for the first 20 games of the year, would Ainge have traded him?  If he did, how much more could Ainge have gotten for him?

Being a Rondo fan or a Celtics fan isn't the same thing as being an Ainge hater.

Mike

It is amazing that Rondo was dogging it while here, yet he was leading the league in assists and was the top rebounding guard playing for a really bad team.

This is one of the things that is so frustrating about the Information Age.  It's so easy to find a sliver of data to support ANY opinion you want.

Mike

and if one can't find that sliver...just make up something.  There is sooo much misinformation out there that it is impossible to check.  For example, "Rondo and Doc didn't get along" when both denied this is true, and Rondo wanted to leave, when Rondo stated more than once he wanted to stay.  Everyone is said to be  a liar except the rumor monger.

[BballTim]

I couldn't be happier to see Rondo house us tonight.

I cannot sufficiently verbalize how frustrated I am when I see junk like this.

Junk?

I'd call it "a frustrated fan that hated to see Rondo gone, for as little as we got back, or gone, period".

Not junk.

So if it was Anti-Rondo then you'd approve?

No.

I'm wondering how you rationalized that conclusion. Stop generalizing those who don't drool over Rondo.

Yep. You can either love Rondo and defend him until your death, or you can hate everything he does. Apparently the slightest bit of Rondo criticism puts you into the latter camp.

  ..while the slightest disagreement with a criticism (no matter how ridiculous) puts you in the former camp. Welcome to the internet.

No no no, let's not mix this up now. A slight disagreement with A Rondo criticism makes you reasonable. A slight disagreement with EVERY Rondo criticism puts you in that camp. On this blog, the Rondo supporters come out in droves to support him no matter what the criticism, fair or not. (Granted, there are Rondo-haters that do the same thing, but they're not nearly as numerous.) It's just frustrating the pedestal that some people put Rondo on in this blog.

  So basically, since you feel that your criticisms are fair, people who don't agree with them are "in that camp". Again, welcome to the internet.

Well, logically, if I didn't think my criticisms were fair I wouldn't have them or I would just be trolling. So there's that. But who said anything about MY Robdo criticisms? In the last two days, Tim, I've seen you argue against virtually every Robdo criticism you came across. Don't you think that's just a little fishy and your Rondo fandom is skewing reality a bit?

  I haven't read every post in these threads and haven't argued against every criticism I've come across. Just the ones that I happen to see that I don't believe to be accurate. I don't see why that would be any fishier than you making criticisms that you think are fair.Why don't you show me what I've posted that's clearly "skewed"?

1) your argument that playoff/national t.v. Rondo is a misnomer/misconception born out of "people who don't watch him enough"
2) your argument that Rondo didn't lack motivation this season some games and that he brought his best effort/game every time he played (an assertion that even the most ardent Rondo supporter can't support)
3) that leading the league in assists and rebounds as a pg equates to bringing your all every night, even though he routinely passed up open shots for assists, averaged a measly 7ish points a night, and routinely took defensive plays off, didn't fight through screens, and let his man pass him.

There are others, too, but I don't feel like scrolling through page after page of the blog. Of course, you're just going to come back and try to justify these claims with anecdotal evidence or some stat that supports your claim in an indirect way, because the eye test doesn't work with a Rondo-tinted perspective. Such is life at a sports blog.

  1) I don't think what I said was overly inaccurate. The whole "nationally televised games" nonsense came from Rondo's great playoff games (which were nationally televised).

  2) I never said that. Most of the recent conversations about Rondo's defense, and what I said about that was that it was poor for the first 8-10 games and then fine (in the games that I saw) after that.

  3) I never said that leading the league in assists or rebounds as a pg equates to bringing your all every night. Again, my stance on this has always been that no player brings their all every night (at least no regular rotation player) and that claims that other players never take defensive plays off (especially players with big roles on offense) is just hyperbole.

  So you've got one fairly accurate claim that I made (although you object to a snarky comment in it) and two that you've made up as your evidence that my views are skewed. Such is life at a sports blog.

[jpotter33]

I couldn't be happier to see Rondo house us tonight.

I cannot sufficiently verbalize how frustrated I am when I see junk like this.

Junk?

I'd call it "a frustrated fan that hated to see Rondo gone, for as little as we got back, or gone, period".

Not junk.

So if it was Anti-Rondo then you'd approve?

No.

I'm wondering how you rationalized that conclusion. Stop generalizing those who don't drool over Rondo.

Yep. You can either love Rondo and defend him until your death, or you can hate everything he does. Apparently the slightest bit of Rondo criticism puts you into the latter camp.

  ..while the slightest disagreement with a criticism (no matter how ridiculous) puts you in the former camp. Welcome to the internet.

No no no, let's not mix this up now. A slight disagreement with A Rondo criticism makes you reasonable. A slight disagreement with EVERY Rondo criticism puts you in that camp. On this blog, the Rondo supporters come out in droves to support him no matter what the criticism, fair or not. (Granted, there are Rondo-haters that do the same thing, but they're not nearly as numerous.) It's just frustrating the pedestal that some people put Rondo on in this blog.

  So basically, since you feel that your criticisms are fair, people who don't agree with them are "in that camp". Again, welcome to the internet.

Well, logically, if I didn't think my criticisms were fair I wouldn't have them or I would just be trolling. So there's that. But who said anything about MY Robdo criticisms? In the last two days, Tim, I've seen you argue against virtually every Robdo criticism you came across. Don't you think that's just a little fishy and your Rondo fandom is skewing reality a bit?

  I haven't read every post in these threads and haven't argued against every criticism I've come across. Just the ones that I happen to see that I don't believe to be accurate. I don't see why that would be any fishier than you making criticisms that you think are fair.Why don't you show me what I've posted that's clearly "skewed"?

1) your argument that playoff/national t.v. Rondo is a misnomer/misconception born out of "people who don't watch him enough"
2) your argument that Rondo didn't lack motivation this season some games and that he brought his best effort/game every time he played (an assertion that even the most ardent Rondo supporter can't support)
3) that leading the league in assists and rebounds as a pg equates to bringing your all every night, even though he routinely passed up open shots for assists, averaged a measly 7ish points a night, and routinely took defensive plays off, didn't fight through screens, and let his man pass him.

There are others, too, but I don't feel like scrolling through page after page of the blog. Of course, you're just going to come back and try to justify these claims with anecdotal evidence or some stat that supports your claim in an indirect way, because the eye test doesn't work with a Rondo-tinted perspective. Such is life at a sports blog.

  1) I don't think what I said was overly inaccurate. The whole "nationally televised games" nonsense came from Rondo's great playoff games (which were nationally televised).

  2) I never said that. Most of the recent conversations about Rondo's defense, and what I said about that was that it was poor for the first 8-10 games and then fine (in the games that I saw) after that.

  3) I never said that leading the league in assists or rebounds as a pg equates to bringing your all every night. Again, my stance on this has always been that no player brings their all every night (at least no regular rotation player) and that claims that other players never take defensive plays off (especially players with big roles on offense) is just hyperbole.

  So you've got one fairly accurate claim that I made (although you object to a snarky comment in it) and two that you've made up as your evidence that my views are skewed. Such is life at a sports blog.

Whatever, bro. These have obviously been your arguments the whole time, and you've both explicitly stated these things and implied them in many arguments in the recent past. But there's no sense in us going back and forth with it, because you're just going to deny whatever I say and defend Rondo from any criticism, both fair and unfair, at every turn.

[BballTim]

I couldn't be happier to see Rondo house us tonight.

I cannot sufficiently verbalize how frustrated I am when I see junk like this.

Junk?

I'd call it "a frustrated fan that hated to see Rondo gone, for as little as we got back, or gone, period".

Not junk.

So if it was Anti-Rondo then you'd approve?

No.

I'm wondering how you rationalized that conclusion. Stop generalizing those who don't drool over Rondo.

Yep. You can either love Rondo and defend him until your death, or you can hate everything he does. Apparently the slightest bit of Rondo criticism puts you into the latter camp.

  ..while the slightest disagreement with a criticism (no matter how ridiculous) puts you in the former camp. Welcome to the internet.

No no no, let's not mix this up now. A slight disagreement with A Rondo criticism makes you reasonable. A slight disagreement with EVERY Rondo criticism puts you in that camp. On this blog, the Rondo supporters come out in droves to support him no matter what the criticism, fair or not. (Granted, there are Rondo-haters that do the same thing, but they're not nearly as numerous.) It's just frustrating the pedestal that some people put Rondo on in this blog.

  So basically, since you feel that your criticisms are fair, people who don't agree with them are "in that camp". Again, welcome to the internet.

Well, logically, if I didn't think my criticisms were fair I wouldn't have them or I would just be trolling. So there's that. But who said anything about MY Robdo criticisms? In the last two days, Tim, I've seen you argue against virtually every Robdo criticism you came across. Don't you think that's just a little fishy and your Rondo fandom is skewing reality a bit?

  I haven't read every post in these threads and haven't argued against every criticism I've come across. Just the ones that I happen to see that I don't believe to be accurate. I don't see why that would be any fishier than you making criticisms that you think are fair.Why don't you show me what I've posted that's clearly "skewed"?

1) your argument that playoff/national t.v. Rondo is a misnomer/misconception born out of "people who don't watch him enough"
2) your argument that Rondo didn't lack motivation this season some games and that he brought his best effort/game every time he played (an assertion that even the most ardent Rondo supporter can't support)
3) that leading the league in assists and rebounds as a pg equates to bringing your all every night, even though he routinely passed up open shots for assists, averaged a measly 7ish points a night, and routinely took defensive plays off, didn't fight through screens, and let his man pass him.

There are others, too, but I don't feel like scrolling through page after page of the blog. Of course, you're just going to come back and try to justify these claims with anecdotal evidence or some stat that supports your claim in an indirect way, because the eye test doesn't work with a Rondo-tinted perspective. Such is life at a sports blog.

  1) I don't think what I said was overly inaccurate. The whole "nationally televised games" nonsense came from Rondo's great playoff games (which were nationally televised).

  2) I never said that. Most of the recent conversations about Rondo's defense, and what I said about that was that it was poor for the first 8-10 games and then fine (in the games that I saw) after that.

  3) I never said that leading the league in assists or rebounds as a pg equates to bringing your all every night. Again, my stance on this has always been that no player brings their all every night (at least no regular rotation player) and that claims that other players never take defensive plays off (especially players with big roles on offense) is just hyperbole.

  So you've got one fairly accurate claim that I made (although you object to a snarky comment in it) and two that you've made up as your evidence that my views are skewed. Such is life at a sports blog.

Whatever, bro. These have obviously been your arguments the whole time, and you've both explicitly stated these things and implied them in many arguments in the recent past. But there's no sense in us going back and forth with it, because you're just going to deny whatever I say and defend Rondo from any criticism, both fair and unfair, at every turn.

  I ask you to point out things I said that were skewed. You come back with some made up claims, and when I point that out they've obviously been my arguments and even if I don't actually say that I "imply" that. So, yes, I'm denying what you say, which is unrelated to denying what I've said. Whatever.