Rondo's rank as PG in the NBA

[leevii]

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.

Let me summarize...

Me: Rondo doesn't have the stats
You: Yes he does
Me: No, really, 10/5/4 is nothing special
You: But look, Dennis Johnson and Tony Parker had similar stats!!! That obviously means every young pg with mediocre stats is going to follow the same growth curve and eventually have great success!!!

Whoopdifreakindoo. One of the most flawed arguments I see in consistent use on realgm. Who cares if other successful players once posted mediocre stats. Does it make Rondo's stats any less mediocre? Dajuan Wagner posted better stats his rookie year.Charlie Frye posted Peyton Manning stats his first two years. Exactly, so what?

[leevii]

also, guess what wigglestrue, if we're projecting superstardom from mediocre stats... not once in his career has Bibby posted worse than 13.2/6.5/2.7 (including last year). Andre Miller's worst statistical season (rookie) is a 11.1/5.8/3.4. All better than Rondo. Don't feed us (and yourself) this bs.

[MVP16]

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

Well, I gave my argument why the big 3 don't make Rondo look that much better, give me an argument to counter it and back it up with analysis. The big 3 allows for Rondo to get a lot of open shots...doesn't really improve his game that much, but highlights his biggest weakness instead. How does the big 3 make Rondo look better?

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?

Was KG a DPOY before this year? For the Celtics to be so good defensively this year, everybody makes everybody else look better on defense with great help and rotation. So while KG (and Perkins, Posey, etc.) made Rondo look better on defense, he made them look better too. Doesn't subtract from the fact that Rondo was a very good defender pre-big 3, was one this year and will be throughout his career.

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.

You have a 2nd year pg, who is very talented but inconsistent and vulnerable to "rookie like" mistakes. Then you have potentially 3 future HOF. Who does the coach trust more with the all in his hands?

You mean his meaningless stats on a tanking team?

So when will Rondo's stats become legit? It's not when the team is bad, not when the team has 3 great players and not when the team has 2 great players like in your quote below. What's the criteria because I want to know?

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.

So why do you think Rondo's averages jumped to 15 points, 5 assists, 6 rebounds and 1.8 steals when at least 1 of the big 3 is out? Because with only 2 of the big 3, it's much harder to make him look good. But somehow Rondo's game looks so much better. Explain that to me.

[wigglestrue]

Let me summarize...

Me: Rondo doesn't have the stats
You: Yes he does
Me: No, really, 10/5/4 is nothing special
You: But look, Dennis Johnson and Tony Parker had similar stats!!! That obviously means every young pg with mediocre stats is going to follow the same growth curve and eventually have great success!!!

Whoopdifreakindoo. One of the most flawed arguments I see in consistent use on realgm. Who cares if other successful players once posted mediocre stats. Does it make Rondo's stats any less mediocre? Dajuan Wagner posted better stats his rookie year.Charlie Frye posted Peyton Manning stats his first two years. Exactly, so what?

also, guess what wigglestrue, if we're projecting superstardom from mediocre stats... not once in his career has Bibby posted worse than 13.2/6.5/2.7 (including last year). Andre Miller's worst statistical season (rookie) is a 11.1/5.8/3.4. All better than Rondo. Don't feed us (and yourself) this bs.

Yeah, haha, I just picked those two PG randomly, not because they -- like Rondo -- were the floor generals for a championship team that featured multiple stars, and put up quite similar lines. Remember wayyyyyy back in the day when people cited his stats as proof he's nothing to write home about, especially playing with such great teammates? Faced with the comparison to DJ and Tony Parker, now stats mean nothing to you, because...ummm...some bottom-feeding scrubs in history have posted really good stats. You're a laugh riot, for real.

Hey, as for Bibby and Miller, that's cool about their averages.
Of course, they don't play defense even remotely like Rondo.

I think I've earned my pwnage badge for the day. Rondo-deniers FTL.

[Cevap]

I guess people CAN troll their own thread.

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).

[wigglestrue]

You and NetsForce must be pretty bitter this week, eh?

[leevii]

Let me summarize...

Me: Rondo doesn't have the stats
You: Yes he does
Me: No, really, 10/5/4 is nothing special
You: But look, Dennis Johnson and Tony Parker had similar stats!!! That obviously means every young pg with mediocre stats is going to follow the same growth curve and eventually have great success!!!

Whoopdifreakindoo. One of the most flawed arguments I see in consistent use on realgm. Who cares if other successful players once posted mediocre stats. Does it make Rondo's stats any less mediocre? Dajuan Wagner posted better stats his rookie year.Charlie Frye posted Peyton Manning stats his first two years. Exactly, so what?

also, guess what wigglestrue, if we're projecting superstardom from mediocre stats... not once in his career has Bibby posted worse than 13.2/6.5/2.7 (including last year). Andre Miller's worst statistical season (rookie) is a 11.1/5.8/3.4. All better than Rondo. Don't feed us (and yourself) this bs.

Yeah, haha, I just picked those two PG randomly, not because they -- like Rondo -- were the floor generals for a championship team that featured multiple stars, and put up quite similar lines. Remember wayyyyyy back in the day when people cited his stats as proof he's nothing to write home about, especially playing with such great teammates? Faced with the comparison to DJ and Tony Parker, now stats mean nothing to you, because...ummm...some bottom-feeding scrubs in history have posted really good stats. You're a laugh riot, for real.

Hey, as for Bibby and Miller, that's cool about their averages.
Of course, they don't play defense even remotely like Rondo.

I think I've earned my pwnage badge for the day. Rondo-deniers FTL.

So basically my statement stands. Only 3 arguments to claim Rondo (or any other young player) as a future all-star:

- You having the ability to bend space-time continuum to go the future.

- Rondo posting good stats. Not in Rondo's case. No matter what you say, 10/5/4 is not a good enough for an argument of "he's posting future all-star like stats"

- Respond to detractors with "ROFL your opinions are WRONG OMG WTFBBQSAUCEPWNED" (a strategy subtly employed by you).

Opinions are indeed like ass-holes.

[wigglestrue]

Your statement stands, yes. Luckily, there are people on this board who know how to read, and they can read what I wrote, they can read the stats and links I posted, and they know where this thread stands. No matter what I say, no matter what kind of evidence and logic I offer, you're going to keep on hatin'. Right? Cool. Indistinguishable from trolling, basically.

[leevii]

Your statement stands, yes. Luckily, there are people on this board who know how to read, and they can read what I wrote, they can read the stats and links I posted, and they know where this thread stands. No matter what I say, no matter what kind of evidence and logic I offer, you're going to keep on hatin'. Right? Cool. Indistinguishable from trolling, basically.

Stats you're posting are pointless. There is no way to argue 10/5/4 is future all-star like, no matter what TP, DJ, etc were able to do. How do you know Rondo is going to mature like them? The only relevant stats are 10/5/4, no better than Bibby, Jameer, Miller, Terry, Felton, Alston, Fisher etc. Hence, you just can't use stats to justify your outlandish claims. Which only leaves room for opinions. Your OPINION is that Rondo will be an all-star, keep it to yourself instead of personally attacking everyone that has a different OPINION.

[NO-KG-AI]

I think Boston would have been better with Calderon or Miller quite easily. Maybe a slip defensively, but Rondo was too passive on pick and rolls, and missed a lot of rollers. Miller and Calderon could have created easier shots, and the whole doubling off of Rondo thing wouldn't work at all with Calderon.

[thegreatblaze]

Jarrett Jack averaged 12/5/3 with solid defense in his 2nd year. Boy, he's sure ripping up that ASG!

[wigglestrue]

Jarrett Jack averaged 12/5/3 with solid defense in his 2nd year. Boy he's sure ripping up that ASG!

1 - He did that in 33.6 minutes per game, as opposed to 30. 2 - How in the hell was his defense "solid", let alone even close to being as good as Rondo's to be worth mentioning? It wasn't, is how. 3 - Per 36 their numbers look like this -- 12.8/2.8/5.7/1.2 vs. 12.7/5.0/6.1/2.0 -- with Jack playing for a 32 win team and Rondo playing for a 66 win team. Pretty obvious. 4 - When did Jack average something like 10.2 pts, 4.1 reb, 6.6 ast, and 1.7 stl in 26 games during the NBA playoffs? Oh right, he didn't.

Fun with basketball-reference.com, for a zany perspective...How many players in recorded history (regardless of position) have averaged 4 rebounds, 5 assists, 1.7 steals, and 49% or better in a single season? http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/ ... i?id=mFA3J Where are all the scrubs that are supposed to have put up similar numbers? Turns out there are only 20 or so players in the last 30-35 years who've put up that measly line or better. And let's not even talk about per 36. How many players have averaged (per 36) 5 rebounds, 6 assists, 2 steals, and 49% or better in a single season? http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/ ... i?id=CvWeq That's some pretty nice company. How many players have averaged (per 36) that same line more or less (5/6/2/46%) in their careers? Two. Jerry West and, so far, Rajon Rondo.

[T-Spot]

Jarrett Jack averaged 12/5/3 with solid defense in his 2nd year. Boy he's sure ripping up that ASG!

1 - He did that in 33.6 minutes per game, as opposed to 30. 2 - How in the hell was his defense "solid", let alone even close to being as good as Rondo's to be worth mentioning? It wasn't, is how. 3 - Per 36 their numbers look like this -- 12.8/2.8/5.7/1.2 vs. 12.7/5.0/6.1/2.0 -- with Jack playing for a 32 win team and Rondo playing for a 66 win team. Pretty obvious. 4 - When did Jack average something like 10.2 pts, 4.1 reb, 6.6 ast, and 1.7 stl in 26 games during the NBA playoffs? Oh right, he didn't.

Fun with basketball-reference.com, for a zany perspective...How many players in recorded history (regardless of position) have averaged 4 rebounds, 5 assists, 1.7 steals, and 49% or better in a single season? http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/ ... i?id=mFA3J Where are all the scrubs that are supposed to have put up similar numbers? Turns out there are only 20 or so players in the last 30-35 years who've put up that measly line or better. And let's not even talk about per 36. How many players have averaged (per 36) 5 rebounds, 6 assists, 2 steals, and 49% or better in a single season? http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/ ... i?id=CvWeq That's some pretty nice company. How many players have averaged (per 36) that same line more or less (5/6/2/46%) in their careers? Two. Jerry West and, so far, Rajon Rondo.

Funniest thing I have ever read.

So, Calderon is really in amazing company too? I mean, look at the guys who also averaged 6 assists on better than 50% FG and 90% FT!!!!

http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/ ... =pts_per_g

So, Ford and Calderon are also mad pimps right? I mean, look who else has averaged higher than 46% FG, 11 or more points per game and 6 or more assists per game!!!

http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/ ... =pts_per_g

...

Your statement stands, yes. Luckily, there are people on this board who know how to read, and they can read what I wrote, they can read the stats and links I posted, and they know where this thread stands. No matter what I say, no matter what kind of evidence and logic I offer, you're going to keep on hatin'. Right? Cool. Indistinguishable from trolling, basically.

This thread is a freakin' comedic gold mind of hilarity.

-----

On to other things besides trying to feed the ego of someone who is doing a great job embarrassing himself.

Well, I gave my argument why the big 3 don't make Rondo look that much better, give me an argument to counter it and back it up with analysis. The big 3 allows for Rondo to get a lot of open shots...doesn't really improve his game that much, but highlights his biggest weakness instead. How does the big 3 make Rondo look better?

Well, without the big three, Rondo wouldn't have all of those open shots. They'd be contested and not even his "feathery touch that is the league's envy" [as wiggles likes to put it] would make them go in at the clip he is now. The big three also gives Rondo lots of open space and lanes to attack, and give him players he can pass it out too, thus improving his assist number.

Was KG a DPOY before this year? For the Celtics to be so good defensively this year, everybody makes everybody else look better on defense with great help and rotation. So while KG (and Perkins, Posey, etc.) made Rondo look better on defense, he made them look better too. Doesn't subtract from the fact that Rondo was a very good defender pre-big 3, was one this year and will be throughout his career.

KG was always a very good defensive player. Rondo is a better defender this season than he was last season because of the system the Celtics run and the players the Celts have. Sure, I agree that everyone on the roster benefits from this, [enter unavoidable cliche on how the result is better than the sum of its parts], I'm making the argument that Rondo's defense would be worse on a different team. Why would I make such an accusation? Well, with all this speculation on how much Rondo's offense would flourish on another team [Which I don't really buy, but I guess some people do indeed believe he could put up 16/10/7], why not not speculate on how his defense would be impacted?

[wigglestrue]

"Fun with basketball-reference.com, for a zany perspective..."

Operative words: fun, zany.
It's fun to come up with arbitrary threshholds.

[Malinhion]

The thing is, Rondo is 10x better on the Celtics than he would be on any other team. All he needs to do is bring energy, push the tempo, and play solid defense. That's exactly what he brings. I agree that his ability to keep his turnovers down is underrecognized, but he's also not the focus of most of the defensive pressure, and the majority of his slashing comes on the break when Boston has the advantage. You forget that Boston had a choice of keeping whichever of the three PGs they liked in the Garnett trade. Naturally, they picked the guy who was best-suited to play alongside three all-stars.

I actually don't think Andre Miller would have been as good...on the Celtics. But that's because he's a ballhandling playmaker who's not that great of a shot. His defense is up to par, but its senseless to have a primary playmaker with three 20ppg all-stars. Still, the majority of other teams in the league would be better off with Miller's contribution than Rondo's.

And for the record, I absolutely despite Bibby and I have done so for years, but most GMs would probably take him next season over Rondo.

[The Main Event]

Dude, Rondo shoots 60% from the line. Who does he think he is, Shaq?

[T-Spot]

"Fun with basketball-reference.com, for a zany perspective..."

Operative words: fun, zany.
It's fun to come up with arbitrary threshholds.

True.

[Baller 24]

I was just looking through this thread, and there was talk about Rondo being better then Miller, Hinrich, Bibby, etc. Think about something real fast, Hinrich switches spots with Rondo. Are the Bulls better off with Hinrich or Rondo? How about this, are the Celtics better off with Hinrich or Rondo? Hinrich is the better scorer, playmaker, and a very good defender, which I consider and I'm pretty sure many of the other people will consider that Hinrch is the better defender.

The bottom line is this, to be even considered a top 10 PG in the league you must still produce and win the same amount without the current group of guys. What I'm saying is, can Rondo duplicate not only his stats, but be a quality stater on a different NBA team? That Kidd for example, has been traded 4 times in his career, but hes been able to duplicate his numbers and help teams win even after being traded. Andre Miller is a great example, also been traded 3 times, and hes helped teams succeed, while also putting up the same numbers. Also I'd like to add Rondo's inability to shoot from long range also hurts him, Andre Miller isn't the best shooter, but makes up from it easily with just terrific play making. How about this, trade Rondo to the Rockets for Alston, now for the Rockets did they get better or worse team wise? As a Rockets' fan I'd say much worse, heres why...Alston provided great 3 point shooting which the Rockets needed, Alston also stepped up big time when Yao went down to use his scoring skills, which Rondo can't handle doing. So if he was a top 10 point guard and you trade him for a PG that isn't in the top 10, shouldn't that team get better then worse?


Take Rondo out of his princess fairy tale niche of Garnett, Allen, and Pierce and I guarntee you wouldn't be saying the same.

[The Main Event]

All i know is that Rondo is a stud. As simple as it sounds, take one look at the dudes frame. He looks like a mini Dwight. It's not hard to see that he has got the tools necessary to develop into a top-tier point guard. His defense will improve and so will his offense with time. Playing with the Big 3 will only improve his game as he will constantly be motivated and pushed by his teammates to get better. have no issue with Wiggles arguing that Rondo has got potential to be a top 10; however, at this point i still see him as a work in progress.

[The Main Event]

I don't know why everyone is in denial about Rondo being a potential top 10 pg. I see that as a very likely future for him. What has history shown us regarding role players surrounding superstars that have heart like MJ? They improve accordingly. Being around KG can only motivate and push Rondo to maximize his potential. I would be doubtful of him reaching his potential if he was stuck on a sub 500 team, not because he would be any less skilled but because he would not be as motivated to continually push himself to his limits.