eatyourchildren wrote:
No, he's a complete player. Switch him out with any of the other top 10 point guards and their records stay the same or improve.
Spare me the nightmare.... don't want him.
Moderators: PaulieWal, Doctor MJ, Clyde Frazier, penbeast0, trex_8063
eatyourchildren wrote:
No, he's a complete player. Switch him out with any of the other top 10 point guards and their records stay the same or improve.
evilRyu wrote:eatyourchildren wrote:
No, he's a complete player. Switch him out with any of the other top 10 point guards and their records stay the same or improve.
Spare me the nightmare.... don't want him.
ugkfan2681" wrote: wrote: i dont take **** lightly im from the land of the trill home of the rockets RESPECT OK.
eatyourchildren wrote:Hell, I'd rather have Rodney "When's the last time an NBA player has been named Rodney" Stuckey on my squad than Rondo.
You're telling me you wouldn't rather have mini Rodney on the Celtics? Someone who plays defense and doesn't pass out a wide open layup for a 3 pointer?
dsorc wrote:One thing that I've noticed in this thread is that people keep saying that if he were put somewhere else he would do worse. There are two teams where that would be true Cavs and Lakers as those are two teams that just need thei PG to shoot. Put him anywhere else and let him create and he would actually do a lot better. The defensive schemes used against him in the playoffs only work because he was the 4th option on the team. On any other team he would have the ball in his hands more leading to more assists and more penetration instead of having to clear out so the big three can do their thing. If Calderon could play defense anywhere close to him then that would be a player I would sub in for Rondo. But, as was shown with House and Cassell, just having a guy that's there to be a scorer does not work with what the Celtics want to do.
ugkfan2681" wrote: wrote: i dont take **** lightly im from the land of the trill home of the rockets RESPECT OK.
dsorc wrote:eatyourchildren wrote: If Calderon could play defense anywhere close to him then that would be a player I would sub in for Rondo. But, as was shown with House and Cassell, just having a guy that's there to be a scorer does not work with what the Celtics want to do.
eatyourchildren wrote:dsorc wrote:One thing that I've noticed in this thread is that people keep saying that if he were put somewhere else he would do worse. There are two teams where that would be true Cavs and Lakers as those are two teams that just need thei PG to shoot. Put him anywhere else and let him create and he would actually do a lot better. The defensive schemes used against him in the playoffs only work because he was the 4th option on the team. On any other team he would have the ball in his hands more leading to more assists and more penetration instead of having to clear out so the big three can do their thing. If Calderon could play defense anywhere close to him then that would be a player I would sub in for Rondo. But, as was shown with House and Cassell, just having a guy that's there to be a scorer does not work with what the Celtics want to do.
Are you really trying to argue that the reason that guys sag off Rondo is not because he's an offensive liability? If he had less options to go to on his squad, wouldn't that be even more reason to sag?
How many assist opportunities would he get with the Celtics? Remember, the offense runs through the big three not the PG. Also, Rondo is faster/better penetrator so it's more likely he gets more chances in this case.T-Spot wrote:dsorc wrote: If Calderon could play defense anywhere close to him then that would be a player I would sub in for Rondo. But, as was shown with House and Cassell, just having a guy that's there to be a scorer does not work with what the Celtics want to do.
Are you seriously trying to compare House and Cassell to Calderon?
Calderon is fifth in the league [behind Nash, Deron, Paul, and Kidd] in nearly every assist stat [assist per game, total assists, assist rate] despite not only playing 6 less minutes than the average MPG the other four get, but also has very low usage rate at 16.9 compared to the average of the other four which is at 22.2 [heck, Calderon's usage rate is even lower than Rondo's which is at 18.9]
T-Spot wrote:And he also threw up a disgusting 50/40/90 shooting line [52/43/91] and a TS% of nearly 61% [which is 10% higher than Rondo's TS% of 51]. Oh yeah, his AST/TO ratio is something disgusting like ~5.5/1.
T-Spot wrote:Calderon can do a lot without needing the ball in his hands, is a incredible gifted passer and floor general, is an ace shooter and is the sheer definition of efficiency.
I'm probably getting all defensive over nothing, but you know I need to have my shameless Calderon plug in here somewhere.
penbeast0 wrote:Yes, he did. And as a mod, I can't even put him on ignore . . . sigh.
microfib4thewin wrote:"How many assist opportunities would he get with the Celtics? Remember, the offense runs through the big three not the PG. Also, Rondo is faster/better penetrator so it's more likely he gets more chances in this case."
And until Rondo is the one running the offense, he should not be mentioned as a top 10 PG.
The Main Event wrote:True, but using the same logic one can also assume that when their are big tree's all around the little tree won't get as much light. However; i completely agree that the environment that Rondo is in will only serve to maximize his potential as a PG. As i mentioned before, given his stature i could see him becoming a hybrid between Billups and Monta Ellis. A very strong defender with lightning quick speed to break down defenders and attack the bucket."
wigglestrue wrote:Which game...4? Because that's the only game the Celtics won in which Rondo wasn't starting and playing PG for most of the game. I mean, come on. COME ON. Eddie ******* House was a huge factor in the series...but Rondo wasn't??????? Eddie House was a major factor in winning a single game of the four we won, a game that eventually turned into his kind of let-her-rip atmosphere because the Celtics were down so badly and needed threes. Please tell me when Eddie was a major factor again, and if you weren't joking please tell me if you actually think Eddie House was a more important factor than Rondo.
Rondo > Hinrich
A. Subpar shooting and indecisiveness are individual liabilities in his game.
B. Rondo is not himself a liability.
Malinhion wrote:Doc was consistently benching Rondo in 2nd halves of the finals for the more reliable shooting of House. Or he would put Posey in the game for his shooting/D and run Pierce and Allen at the 1/2. This lineup helped get the Celtics back in some games, or to succeed when things were getting tight. Rondo would tend to get minutes at less critical moments. This is just an observation. I know you're going to yell your head off about this, but I saw what I saw. And I typed this before seeing circushots post, who clearly saw the same thing.
Malinhion wrote:Miller was traded for AI.
Harris was traded for Kidd.
Neither of these situations would have happened if the key player was Rondo.
Malinhion wrote:A. Subpar shooting and indecisiveness are individual liabilities in his game.
B. Rondo is not himself a liability.
You followed this with some blabber on media hype, ESPN, and livestock. I'm not sure what that means, but... Poor shooting and indecisiveness make a point guard an offensive liability. This is not up for debate. It is a fact of basketball.
eatyourchildren wrote:Hell, I'd rather have Rodney "When's the last time an NBA player has been named Rodney" Stuckey on my squad than Rondo.
You're telling me you wouldn't rather have mini Rodney on the Celtics? Someone who plays defense and doesn't pass out a wide open layup for a 3 pointer?