Rondo's rank as PG in the NBA

MVP16 · Post #61 » by **MVP16** » Fri Jun 20, 2008 2:39 am

I'm a huge Rondo fan and he's is certainly climbing the charts, but just including this season he's probably right on the edge of being a top 10 pg. Right now, I would put Paul, Williams, Billups, Arenas, Davis, Nash, Kidd, Parker and Miller ahead of him. That's 9 pgs. Then you have guys like Ford, Calderon, Harris, Mo Williams and maybe 1 or 2 others whom an argument could be made for either way.

But Rondo just finished his second year and pgs usually make a big leap in their 3rd year. The pg position is the hardest one to learn in the league and it take 2 or 3 years for players to get it. We saw it with Chris Paul who jumped from being a borderline all star to MVP candidate. Deron Williams also made a jump as well as Calderon.

I wouldn't be surprised of Rondo is a borderline all star player next season in the eastern conference. The 6th game of the finals shows just how special he is...putting up 21 points, 8 assists, 7 rebounds and 6 steals in just 32 minutes. How many players have ever come this close to a quadruple double in an NBA finals game, I'm guessing not too many. And if the game was closer he probably would have played 10 more minutes and gotten even closer. Rondo just fills up the stat sheet. Also in the finals, he got the most assists in an NBA finals game since Magic and was the first 2nd year starting pg to win a championship since Magic and Parker.

Rondo also put up 3 stinkers in the finals. Part of it was due to injury, but also all of them came in LA. This shows that he is inconsistent and plays better at home which is not unusual for a 2nd year pg. He'll gain more consistency and put up less stinkers next year.

Lastly, the argument that Rondo is a product of the big 3 has zero validity. Two of Rondo's strength's are his defense and rebounding. I don't see how the big 3 change that since he was regarded a very good defender and rebounder last year pre-big 3. So the only aspect where you could say the big 3 effect his game is on the offensive end. But even here I don't agree. If you just saw the finals you would see why. Since the big 3 are great individual players, they have the ball in their hands much of the time and Rondo is forced to shoot spot up jumpers many times. And even though he is wide open, it still plays to his weakness. He is much better when the ball is in his hands on the offensive end and in the Celtics system he doesn't have the ball in his hands as much as an average pg.

If you look at Rondo stats as a starter in 25 games last year pre-big 3, they are comparable to this year's stats. If you look at Rondo's stats when at least 1 of the big 3 is out, they are much better then with the big 3. I can't see how a legit argument can be made saying that Rondo is a product of playing with Pierce, Allen and KG.

T-Spot · Post #62 » by **T-Spot** » Fri Jun 20, 2008 3:22 am

wigglestrue wrote:
Cusp, can't decide, probably would not:

Raptors

Considering they have two point-guards who are better than Rondo, I can't see why hey are even on a "cusp, can't decide" list. Probably, on the list of where Rondo would be a potential third stringer.

Lastly, the argument that Rondo is a product of the big 3 has zero validity..

So, you are honestly saying that having 3 HoF does not make Rondo look any better? Really?

I don't see how the big 3 change that since he was regarded a very good defender and rebounder last year pre-big 3.

So, you're saying adding the DPOY, a motivated Pierce and a collection of defensive role-players have done nothing to make Rondo look better on defense? Really?

Since the big 3 are great individual players, they have the ball in their hands much of the time and Rondo is forced to shoot spot up jumpers many times. And even though he is wide open, it still plays to his weakness. He is much better when the ball is in his hands on the offensive end and in the Celtics system he doesn't have the ball in his hands as much as an average pg.

So, here's the question. If he is much more effective with the ball in his hands, but the Celtics system does not allow him to have the ball in his hands [for good reason], how will he ever be a top point-guard/All-Star? Its pretty contradictory to say that the Celtic's system maximizes his deficiencies on offense and minimizes his strengths, but also say that he will be a top point-guard/All-Star.

If you look at Rondo stats as a starter in 25 games last year pre-big 3, they are comparable to this year's stats.

You mean his meaningless stats on a tanking team?

If you look at Rondo's stats when at least 1 of the big 3 is out, they are much better then with the big 3. I can't see how a legit argument can be made saying that Rondo is a product of playing with Pierce, Allen and KG.

So, when one of the big three is out, there's still a formidable big two left. I'm sure they find ways to still make him look good. I can't see how a legit argument can be made saying that Rondo isn't reaping the benefits of having three HoF'ers next to him. Its like saying Tony Parker doesn't benefit from having Tim Duncan, or Gasol doesn't benefit from having Kobe. There is no doubt in my mind, and in the minds of many others that Rondo is getting a lot of benefit by playing with these guys.

wigglestrue · Post #63 » by **wigglestrue** » Fri Jun 20, 2008 3:36 am

FACT: RONDO WAS BASICALLY JUST AS GOOD AS HE IS NOW IN THE 25 GAMES HE STARTED IN '06-07.

But...last season's stats are invalid because it was a terrible team.
And...this season's stats are invalid because it was a terrific team.

Hmmm.

What kind of team does Rondo need to be on, in order for his production to be valid?
Would a perfectly mediocre one full of outside-shooting softies like your team do the trick?

So, here's the question. If he is much more effective with the ball in his hands, but the Celtics system does not allow him to have the ball in his hands [for good reason], how will he ever be a top point-guard/All-Star? Its pretty contradictory to say that the Celtic's system maximizes his deficiencies on offense and minimizes his strengths, but also say that he will be a top point-guard/All-Star.

It's not contradictory at all, it's just the situation that existed in his second freaking year.

leevii · Post #64 » by **leevii** » Fri Jun 20, 2008 3:37 am

I guess people CAN troll their own thread.

wigglestrue · Post #65 » by **wigglestrue** » Fri Jun 20, 2008 3:43 am

Yup. It was basically me vs. all for a little while there.

"I'm sure they find ways to still make him look good." That's the anti-Rondo attitude in a nutshell: "There's no way this punk is as good a PG as he appears to be (in games I barely watch but will consult the box scores and stats later to confirm my own prejudices)."

leevii · Post #66 » by **leevii** » Fri Jun 20, 2008 3:55 am

wigglestrue wrote:Yup. It was basically me vs. all for a little while there.

"I'm sure they find ways to still make him look good." That's the anti-Rondo attitude in a nutshell: "There's no way this punk is as good a PG as he appears to be (in games I barely watch but will consult the box scores and stats later to confirm my own prejudices)."

I was talking about all the ROFLs, LOLs, emoticons, "HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHA"s, and WTF's being thrown around by you in response to legitimate arguments like "Andre Miller is probably better than Rondo at this point". Relax, enjoy the moment, be happy for KG and PP. Why are you trying to force your point of view on other people? Rondo doesn't have the stats to back your dinosauric claims, so all everyone has to go on is opinions, and you're probably not going to change anyone's opinion on a message board (especially with your 12-year-old-girl like use of emoticons and initialisms).

T-Spot · Post #67 » by **T-Spot** » Fri Jun 20, 2008 3:56 am

wigglestrue wrote:FACT: RONDO WAS BASICALLY JUST AS GOOD AS HE IS NOW IN THE 25 GAMES HE STARTED IN '06-07.

But...last season's stats are invalid because it was a terrible team.
And...this season's stats are invalid because it was a terrific team.

Hmmm.

What kind of team does Rondo need to be on, in order for his production to be valid?
Would a perfectly mediocre one full of outside-shooting softies like your team do the trick?

So, you think that a few empty stats on a tanking team mean anything? Really? [Besides, is 10 points and 6 assists in a tanking team really that impressive? Ramon Sessions did better than that last season, I guess a lot of boners are being made.] I never said this season stats were invalid. I said that playing next to three HoF'ers made him look better than he is. You can try to pull out whatever justification you want for Rondo, but FACT: RONDO PUT UP 10/5 IN 30MPG WHILE PLAYING WITH 3 HOF'ERS. If that's all it takes to wake your homer boner up, well I guess you are easily impressed.

So, here's the question. If he is much more effective with the ball in his hands, but the Celtics system does not allow him to have the ball in his hands [for good reason], how will he ever be a top point-guard/All-Star? Its pretty contradictory to say that the Celtic's system maximizes his deficiencies on offense and minimizes his strengths, but also say that he will be a top point-guard/All-Star.

It's not contradictory at all, it's just the situation that existed in his second freaking year.

[/quote]

So, Rondo can become an All-Star point-guard, while having to play to his weaknesses on offense and not to his strengths [as many of Rondo's dearest fans accuse the Celtic's system of doing]?

thegreatblaze · Post #68 » by **thegreatblaze** » Fri Jun 20, 2008 3:57 am

I don't know why, but I've always thought Rondo was way overrated. He's never really impressed me much.

T-Spot · Post #69 » by **T-Spot** » Fri Jun 20, 2008 4:01 am

wigglestrue wrote:Yup. It was basically me vs. all for a little while there.

"I'm sure they find ways to still make him look good." That's the anti-Rondo attitude in a nutshell: "There's no way this punk is as good a PG as he appears to be (in games I barely watch but will consult the box scores and stats later to confirm my own prejudices)."

Well, I'm, sorry Ms.Rondo, I guess we all don't think that he would put up 16/6/10/2.5, and become a bonafide stud All-Star and rival Chris Paul next season. I believe being realistic about a 10/5 point guard on a stacked team is the best policy. Its better than talking out of my ass.

thegreatblaze · Post #70 » by **thegreatblaze** » Fri Jun 20, 2008 4:06 am

LOL @ Wiggles. It was entertaining reading your 5-page rant. Talk about a complete meltdown.

wigglestrue · Post #71 » by **wigglestrue** » Fri Jun 20, 2008 4:11 am

leevii wrote:I was talking about all the ROFLs, LOLs, emoticons, "HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHA"s, and WTF's being thrown around by you in response to legitimate arguments like "Andre Miller is probably better than Rondo at this point". Relax, enjoy the moment, be happy for KG and PP. Why are you trying to force your point of view on other people? Rondo doesn't have the stats to back your dinosauric claims, so all everyone has to go on is opinions, and you're probably not going to change anyone's opinion on a message board (especially with your 12-year-old-girl like use of emoticons and initialisms).

He actually does have the stats.

People have eyes, too, if they bothered to watch the playoffs.

This thread = hilarity, sorry, I can't help being entertained.
I'll toss off whatever emoticons and acronyms I feel like, thanks son.

So, you think that a few empty stats on a tanking team mean anything? Really? [Besides, is 10 points and 6 assists in a tanking team really that impressive? Ramon Sessions did better than that last season, I guess a lot of boners are being made.]

His averages from those 25 games just coincidentally happen to match up well with his '07-08 stats.

Right.

I never said this season stats were invalid. I said that playing next to three HoF'ers made him look better than he is. You can try to pull out whatever justification you want for Rondo, but FACT: RONDO PUT UP 10/5 IN 30MPG WHILE PLAYING WITH 3 HOF'ERS. If that's all it takes to wake your homer boner up, well I guess you are easily impressed.

Look up Dennis Johnson and try shoveling your "boner" snark on him. Same for Tony Parker.

Well, I'm, sorry Ms.Rondo, I guess we all don't think that he would put up 16/6/10/2.5, and become a bonafide stud All-Star and rival Chris Paul next season. I believe being realistic about a 10/5 point guard on a stacked team is the best policy. Its better than talking out of my ass.

Oh right, I remember you, you're the person who made **** up and put it in people's mouths.

Stop trolling my thread.

T-Spot · Post #72 » by **T-Spot** » Fri Jun 20, 2008 4:26 am

wigglestrue wrote:This thread = hilarity, sorry, I can't help being entertained.

All the people laughing at you can't help either. I don't think even Rondo's mother would have protected her little 10/5 stud muffin better than you did.

Stop trolling my thread.

You're doing a dandy job of that yourself.

wigglestrue · Post #73 » by **wigglestrue** » Fri Jun 20, 2008 4:33 am

T-Spot wrote:
wigglestrue wrote:This thread = hilarity, sorry, I can't help being entertained.

All the people laughing at you can't help either. I don't think even Rondo's mother would have protected her little 10/5 stud muffin better than you did.

Thanks. Laugh away.

Stop trolling my thread.

You're doing a dandy job of that yourself.

Cool. So that means you'll stop trolling.

Post #74 » by **CBS7** » Fri Jun 20, 2008 4:34 am

Cool down the cheap insults, or I'll lock this thing.

Basileus777 · Post #75 » by **Basileus777** » Fri Jun 20, 2008 4:35 am

Its official; Rondo>Magic>God

Post #76 » by **KF10** » Fri Jun 20, 2008 4:36 am

I wouldn't say that Rondo would start over Beno for the Kings. I would say it could go either way. Beno is the better shooter, scorer, FT shooter, and as well as bigger than him. But Rondo is better in defense, speed, rebounding, and etc. IMO I would start Rondo in certain lineups.

wigglestrue · Post #77 » by **wigglestrue** » Fri Jun 20, 2008 4:37 am

Bibby>Rondo>Magic>God

(fixed)

leevii · Post #78 » by **leevii** » Fri Jun 20, 2008 4:38 am

wigglestrue wrote:He actually does have the stats.

People have eyes, too, if they bothered to watch the playoffs.

This thread = hilarity, sorry, I can't help being entertained.
I'll toss off whatever emoticons and acronyms I feel like, thanks son.

He has the stats? Is it the 10.6/5.1/4.2 in the regular season or 10.2/6.6/4.1 in the playoffs that screams future all-star to you? Am I supposed to be impressed by his Mike James-esque stats?

And I did watch the playoffs. He seemed more inconsistent than a prostitute's period, and teams were more than happy to leave him wide freakin open and he couldn't take advantage of it.

thegreatblaze · Post #79 » by **thegreatblaze** » Fri Jun 20, 2008 4:39 am

leevii wrote:He has the stats? Is it the 10.6/5.1/4.2 in the regular season or 10.2/6.6/4.1 in the playoffs that screams future all-star to you? Am I supposed to be impressed by his Mike James-esque stats?

And I did watch the playoffs. He seemed more inconsistent than a prostitute's period, and teams were more than happy to leave him wide freakin open and he couldn't take advantage of it.

You know what they say, homers will be homers. (Even I fall guilty of it from time-to-time)

wigglestrue · Post #80 » by **wigglestrue** » Fri Jun 20, 2008 4:47 am

leevii wrote:
wigglestrue wrote:He actually does have the stats.

People have eyes, too, if they bothered to watch the playoffs.

This thread = hilarity, sorry, I can't help being entertained.
I'll toss off whatever emoticons and acronyms I feel like, thanks son.

He has the stats? Is it the 10.6/5.1/4.2 in the regular season or 10.2/6.6/4.1 in the playoffs that screams future all-star to you? Am I supposed to be impressed by his Mike James-esque stats?

Mike James, eh?

http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... sde01.html (note the years 1984 and 1986)
http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... eto01.html (note the years 2003 and 2005)

And I did watch the playoffs. He seemed more inconsistent than a prostitute's period, and teams were more than happy to leave him wide freakin open and he couldn't take advantage of it.

He didn't always take advantage of it, true. Couldn't? No, he could. That's what was frustrating.