Now that things are starting to gel a little...

[Asaf]

There is a huge difference between Stocktons jumper and Rondo's. One could argue Rondo is the worst shooter out of every starting pg in the league. I never said Rondo was overrated. In the situation he's in right now, IMO, he's a top 5 pg.

Now, if he was on the Kings instead of Tyreke, do I think he'd be as successful, or have the same reputation as he has now? No. Put hin in NO instead of CP3, and would they have the record they currently have? Don't think so. Would the Bulls be better off with Rondo than Rose? Doubtful.

In the right situation, surrounded by vets, HOF's, who are great shooters, who allow rondo's lack of offensive ability to go somewhat unnoiticed, he's terrific. But put him in a position where his offense would be counted on, and needed for the success of the team, then I don't see him being as successful as a player. Boston needed his offense in game 5,6 and 7 of the finals, and it was nowhere to be seen. One missed jumper after another. Just imagine if he was in that position on a regular basis.

You could also reverse that - would Tyreke, CP3, Rose, or Deron be as successful as they are playing for the Celtics? That's also doubtful. Rondo is EXACTLY what the celtics need. He is a genius orchestrator of the offense. His and the Celtics' game is in a way the mirror image of the Triangle offense. While the Triangle exploits what the defense gives it, Rondo is a master of initiating and getting the defense to give him exactly what he wants. There's a reason that Ray Allen at age 35 is shooting by far the best 3-pt percentage of his life. Rondo will get him that open shot whether the defense likes it or not.

IMO Rondo may not be the best overall player out of the PGs in the league, but he is by far the best at being a PG, and it's not even close.

 

[Superman]

I agree with your premise, but I would use Jason Kidd as a better example. Stockton was a very good shooter. Its true he didn't shoot that often, but he could lay 20 points on you if he needed to. You couldn't leave Stockton or Hornacek open or they would kill you.

My argument has nothing to do with Stockton's shooting ability, which I acknowledged was fantastic. It has everything to do with the fact that Stockton was never asked to carry the scoring load.

 

[rainmaker]

You could also reverse that - would Tyreke, CP3, Rose, or Deron be as successful as they are playing for the Celtics? That's also doubtful. Rondo is EXACTLY what the celtics need. He is a genius orchestrator of the offense. His and the Celtics' game is in a way the mirror image of the Triangle offense. While the Triangle exploits what the defense gives it, Rondo is a master of initiating and getting the defense to give him exactly what he wants. There's a reason that Ray Allen at age 35 is shooting by far the best 3-pt percentage of his life. Rondo will get him that open shot whether the defense likes it or not.

IMO Rondo may not be the best overall player out of the PGs in the league, but he is by far the best at being a PG, and it's not even close.

Well, you're talking about him being a perfect fit for his situation, which if you look at my previous posts in the last hr, I commented on. I said in his situation with Boston, he's a top 5 pg. Would Boston be as successful with Tyreke running the point? Most likely not. But I'm not arguing Tyreke being a top 5 pg. My point is put Rondo on a different team, with a different supporting cast, and a different offense, and he will probably not be as dominant of a player. Neither you nor anyone else has said anything which would change my opinion on that.

 

[Asaf]

Well, you're talking about him being a perfect fit for his situation, which if you look at my previous posts in the last hr, I commented on. I said in his situation with Boston, he's a top 5 pg. Would Boston be as successful with Tyreke running the point? Most likely not. But I'm not arguing Tyreke being a top 5 pg. My point is put Rondo on a different team, with a different supporting cast, and a different offense, and he will probably not be as dominant of a player. Neither you nor anyone else has said anything which would change my opinion on that.

I wasn't arguing against that point. What I was saying is that just as you attribute Rondo's success to his situation with the celtics, you can attribute every other PG's success to their specific situation. Put Rose or Nash on the Celtics, and all kinds of problems can arise.

 

[Superman]

There is a huge difference between Stocktons jumper and Rondo's. One could argue Rondo is the worst shooter out of every starting pg in the league. I never said Rondo was overrated. In the situation he's in right now, IMO, he's a top 5 pg.

I'm not comparing their jumpers. I'm comparing their offensive roles on their respective teams. Saying that you can't judge Rondo as a player until you see him have to shoulder the scoring load is unfair, because there are tons of players that we judge in their respective roles without saying "but I want to see him do it on another team." It is what it is. Rondo is doing what is asked of him, and that's what we judge him on. If he's in another situation and they're asking him to shoulder the scoring burden, then we'll judge the coach of that team, because it would be foolish to put him in that situation. But the way it stands, we judge him based on what he does, not on what he doesn't have to do.

And no, you didn't call him overrated. The poster I was responding to originally did. In fact, he called him "very, very overrated, because he can't shoot," and that was the cause of my original dissension.

Now, if he was on the Kings instead of Tyreke, do I think he'd be as successful, or have the same reputation as he has now? No. Put hin in NO instead of CP3, and would they have the record they currently have? Don't think so. Would the Bulls be better off with Rondo than Rose? Doubtful.

Put Tyreke in Boston and the Celtics suffer, just like if you put Rondo in Sac, the Kings suffer. Two totally different players playing two totally different roles. If the Kings asked Reke to be more like Rondo, they'd suffer the consequences with decreased production, just like if the Celtics asked Rondo to be more like Reke.

CP3 and Rose, along with Deron Williams (and Nash) are simply the best in the business, players that can score and set their teammates up, and yes, I'd take them over Rondo as pure point guards. But I don't think that means there's anything wrong with Rondo. As a matter of fact, because of the kind of team the Celtics have, and because of his defense, he's a better fit in Boston than any of them would be. That's not the point. I'm just saying let's not sell him short just because he's in the perfect situation.

In the right situation, surrounded by vets, HOF's, who are great shooters, who allow rondo's lack of offensive ability to go somewhat unnoiticed, he's terrific. But put him in a position where his offense would be counted on, and needed for the success of the team, then I don't see him being as successful as a player. Boston needed his offense in game 5,6 and 7 of the finals, and it was nowhere to be seen. One missed jumper after another. Just imagine if he was in that position on a regular basis.

He was 9-12 for 18 points in Game 5. Shot poorly in Game 6, was decent in Game 7 (6-13, 1-2 from outside, including one he stuck on the Lakers when they were purposely playing off, and they started closing out after that). He'd be a much better player, and his team would be better off, if he had a consistent jumper. We say the same thing about Tyreke. But as a pure point guard, he's dominant. I think his lack of a consistent jumper is just the universe's way of course-correcting, because he'd be the best point guard in the NBA if he were automatic from the perimeter.

 

[mr. moustache]

Hmm. The way I remember it, if Ray Allen plays more like Ray Allen and less like Quincy Douby in game 7, Boston wins easily. Like, REALLY easily. Artest and Allen really really helped Kobe's legacy in that deciding game.

While I agree, and yes Rondo can dominate a game, his jumper was arguably the reason they didn't beat LA last year, combined with Perkins getting injured. In games 5,6 and 7, LA practically didn't guard Rondo, and that really hurt the Cletics offense.

I do think Rondo is a top 5 pg, and part of that is his system and surroundings. I personally can't fully judge his talent until he's on a team where he's surrounded by less talent, and more of the scoring burden will be on him. Would he be the same calliber player if he switched places with Deron, CP3, Rose, or Wsetbrook, and was forced to score more, and wasn't surrounded by such great shooters? I don't think he would. His shortcomings would become much more noticable on another team.

 

[rainmaker]

I'm not comparing their jumpers. I'm comparing their offensive roles on their respective teams. Saying that you can't judge Rondo as a player until you see him have to shoulder the scoring load is unfair, because there are tons of players that we judge in their respective roles without saying "but I want to see him do it on another team." It is what it is. Rondo is doing what is asked of him, and that's what we judge him on. If he's in another situation and they're asking him to shoulder the scoring burden, then we'll judge the coach of that team, because it would be foolish to put him in that situation. But the way it stands, we judge him based on what he does, not on what he doesn't have to do.

And no, you didn't call him overrated. The poster I was responding to originally did. In fact, he called him "very, very overrated, because he can't shoot," and that was the cause of my original dissension.



Put Tyreke in Boston and the Celtics suffer, just like if you put Rondo in Sac, the Kings suffer. Two totally different players playing two totally different roles. If the Kings asked Reke to be more like Rondo, they'd suffer the consequences with decreased production, just like if the Celtics asked Rondo to be more like Reke.

CP3 and Rose, along with Deron Williams (and Nash) are simply the best in the business, players that can score and set their teammates up, and yes, I'd take them over Rondo as pure point guards. But I don't think that means there's anything wrong with Rondo. As a matter of fact, because of the kind of team the Celtics have, and because of his defense, he's a better fit in Boston than any of them would be. That's not the point. I'm just saying let's not sell him short just because he's in the perfect situation.



He was 9-12 for 18 points in Game 5. Shot poorly in Game 6, was decent in Game 7 (6-13, 1-2 from outside, including one he stuck on the Lakers when they were purposely playing off, and they started closing out after that). He'd be a much better player, and his team would be better off, if he had a consistent jumper. We say the same thing about Tyreke. But as a pure point guard, he's dominant. I think his lack of a consistent jumper is just the universe's way of course-correcting, because he'd be the best point guard in the NBA if he were automatic from the perimeter.

Well, we agree in some respects and disagree in others. I do think Rondo is a top 5 pg, and fits perfectly with the system Boston runs.

I disagree when it comes to speculating how any given player would perform in another situation. I don't think it's unfair. Anytime a team looks at a potential trade, they have to speculate about how that player would fit. IMO, if GM's were going to hypothetically attempt to trade for the top 5-7 pg's in the league, more often than with the other top pg's, there would be questions about Rondo's lack of a well rounded offensive game, and how he would fit.

I'm not knocking Rondo for what he has accomplished so far. He's dominant in the system he plays. But after Allen/Pierce/KG retire, will it be the same? Could he do the same with a lesser supporting cast? Are there other pg's who could be as successful in Boston? How successful would Rondo be elsewhere? Those are all valid questions IMO.

Would you say Felton is a top 5-8 pg, or put it more on the sytem in plays in? Was JWill a top 5-8 pg because he was the starting pg on Miami's championship team? Devin Harris was an all star his last year in Dallas largely because of his upgraded supporting cast compared to what he has in NJ. Is he any less of a player now, or can you thank his surroundings in Dallas for his success? Do you rate Rondo higher than others who don't have a ring eventhough he has a HOF supporting cast?

 

[bajaden]

My argument has nothing to do with Stockton's shooting ability, which I acknowledged was fantastic. It has everything to do with the fact that Stockton was never asked to carry the scoring load.

I agree with you 100%. I was just pointing out the difference between the two. I can't tell you how many times I saw Stockton win games for Utah at the end of games. With 6 seconds left on the clock, it was't Malone they turned to. It was Stockton. I don't think you could put Rondo in that same scenario. But as pure PG's the two are very similar.

 

[Kingster]

..... And the way I remember it, the absence of Perkins was HUGE in that series. Not only that, when he did play he played in handcuffs because he was very cautious about getting another technical. I think Boston is the best team in basketball this year, and last year they would have been NBA championships with Perkins. They are so cohesive, they play like a selfless machine when they get rolling.

 

[Lockehead]

I think Rondo is actually pretty underrated in terms of his offensive skills. He's very very smart at picking his shots, and can finish at the rim pretty damn good. He has a post up game, can go right or left with his handles, and can finish at the rim fairly well. His BBIQ is high, so he makes good decisions, has good knowledge about matchups, switching off, using screens, backdoor cuts, ball fakes, all types of "Smart" moves. Hes also very athletic, always has energy, decent vertical, and very quick. Its easy to forget that this guy is only 6'1 170

Anyway, good to see the Kings doing well, they're only going to get better from here on out

 

[Superman]

Well, we agree in some respects and disagree in others. I do think Rondo is a top 5 pg, and fits perfectly with the system Boston runs.

I disagree when it comes to speculating how any given player would perform in another situation. I don't think it's unfair. Anytime a team looks at a potential trade, they have to speculate about how that player would fit. IMO, if GM's were going to hypothetically attempt to trade for the top 5-7 pg's in the league, more often than with the other top pg's, there would be questions about Rondo's lack of a well rounded offensive game, and how he would fit.

I'm not knocking Rondo for what he has accomplished so far. He's dominant in the system he plays. But after Allen/Pierce/KG retire, will it be the same? Could he do the same with a lesser supporting cast? Are there other pg's who could be as successful in Boston? How successful would Rondo be elsewhere? Those are all valid questions IMO.

Would you say Felton is a top 5-8 pg, or put it more on the sytem in plays in? Was JWill a top 5-8 pg because he was the starting pg on Miami's championship team? Devin Harris was an all star his last year in Dallas largely because of his upgraded supporting cast compared to what he has in NJ. Is he any less of a player now, or can you thank his surroundings in Dallas for his success? Do you rate Rondo higher than others who don't have a ring eventhough he has a HOF supporting cast?

Raymond Felton, Jason Williams and Devin Harris have never been as dominant as Rondo has been the past two seasons, despite having their high points at various times. Ironically, while all are better shooters, they all have lower shooting percentages. And none of it has anything to do with rings, in my opinion. Rondo's role on the 2008 Celtics was nowhere near as dynamic as it's been last year and this year. As a matter of fact, he was the weak link back then. Now, he's the straw the stirs the drink.

And I understand what you're saying about plugging him in somewhere else. Hopefully, for the Celtics' sake, they don't try to make him a primary scorer as the others fall off. Hopefully they surround him with players that he can complement, like they have.

But for right now, he is a Celtic. He does play with other talented players, and he does have specific role that doesn't require him to be a primary scorer. And in that role, he's a top five point guard. What I'm saying is unfair is that you would forestall judging his talent until he's put in a situation that he's not well-suited for. And that's why I brought up John Stockton. He was not well-suited to be a primary scorer, but alongside Malone and other talented players, he was the best pure point guard in the NBA. He'd have done a lot better than Rondo would if he were asked to score more, simply because he was a dead-eye shooter, but his teams wouldn't have been as good if he had to be a primary scorer.

Doesn't really matter. My initial objection was to the other poster's idea that Rondo's overrated simply because he's not a shooter. In my opinion, the only reason he's not the best point guard in the NBA is because he's not a shooter. Recognizing him as a top five or so point guard is more than appropriate.

 

[pshn80]

I agree with you 100%. I was just pointing out the difference between the two. I can't tell you how many times I saw Stockton win games for Utah at the end of games. With 6 seconds left on the clock, it was't Malone they turned to. It was Stockton. I don't think you could put Rondo in that same scenario. But as pure PG's the two are very similar.

I certainly remember this to be true in many games I saw at Arco. He didn't score big numbers but was really the go to guy. Of course, it doesn't hurt to have Malone playing beside you.

 

[Tyndel]

Sorry I should have also pointed out that his Ft % is under 50% meaning you don't even need to wait till Shaq gets the ball to play hack a shack at the end of the game just foul the person bringing the ball up the court if he is even on the floor at the end of the game.