Are we witnessing Rondo's prime?

lukekarts · Post #76 » by **lukekarts** » Sun Nov 18, 2012 10:14 pm

I still don't rate Rondo that highly. He still brings too many negatives to almost every game, just can't pull together all round performances often enough. A few off the top of my head - he played awful defence against Milwaukee, Jennings dominated him, though he did address this a few nights later IIRC. The Philly game everyone got excited about - I could care less about 20 assists when he missed 11 of 17 (34% shooting) against a team that is controlling the boards better. Then the most recent game, he committed 5 turnovers. Don't care how many assists you get, 5 turnovers is potentially 10 easy points for your opponent straight away.

And that is what separates Rondo from the likes of Paul, because the latter will tend to have an efficient, low turnover performance, almost every game.

Post #77 » by **tsherkin** » Sun Nov 18, 2012 10:17 pm

bertrob wrote:
Golabki wrote:Until Rondo runs a team that's actually good offensively I don't think you can say he's a top 15 player. The Celtics have completely gutted their defense to give Rondo a great offensive supporting cast and the Celtics still just look average on offense.

They're in the top 10 of OTRG.....

Top 15 player, top 15 player...

Who would you take over Rondo right now? I'm thinking Rose and Dirk (when healthy), Pierce (until he shows me otherwise, which will happen soon), Steph Curry, Chris Paul, Dwight, Nash, Kobe, Lebron, Deron, Melo and Tony Parker. I'm strong considering adding Kyrie Irving and James Harden to that list.

EDIT: MWAHAHAHAH! I'm a derp and forgot Durant! Doesn't change much, though...

That's, at most, 14 guys, which for me means Rondo's in my top 15, or at least I'd accept the notion that it's debatable. He's hovered in my top 15-17 for the past four seasons, yeah. I'm expecting to drop Kobe and Pierce from that list very soon, and of course neither Dirk nor Rose ARE actually healthy at the moment, and I'm expecting to drop Dirk from that list soon as well. That's at least three guys whom age will claim perhaps as early as this season, leaving Rondo more like borderline top 10 for me.

I think that Rondo CAN run a reasonably good offense even without sick talent. We're still waiting to see it, of course, I mean I look to what Nash did as a pretty high bar to match in terms of success without a ton of talent. No Marion, no Amare, enduring the VC trade, putting up with that duck-faced moron Hedo Turkoglu, he still managed a team 109.5 ORTG (which was 9th in the league). That's pretty impressive, especially since Nash was 36 at the time.

We won't really be able to tell a ton about what Rondo can REALLY do until Pierce and Garnett are gone, or until he shows a major forward leap in scoring ability. We'll have to see. He's playing well right now, he's actually at +1.7% TS over league average, which is a HUGE leap for him. It's 9 games, so it's mostly meaningless, but it's really nice to see. He's been shooting a lot better everywhere under the arc (except as a free throw shooter), and while it's a little high to expect it to sustain away from the rim, he's starting strong. There's about a 0% chance he has turned into a Steve Nash-caliber mid-range and perimeter shooter overnight, so again, regression is coming, but we'll see. Maybe he's turned some kind of corner and will be better than usual in that regard, which would open up a whole new world of possibilities for him. And Pierce and KG ARE still aging, declining, so the Celtics can maintain a top 10 offense with Rondo at the helm, that would at least be something.

We'll see, this season will be very interesting.

NashtyNas · Post #78 » by **NashtyNas** » Sun Nov 18, 2012 10:17 pm

Deathclutch23 wrote:Sorry using some obscure stat won't change the fact that as Rondo goes the Celtics go. He is their best player and Celtics will go as far Rondo takes them.

Nash led some of the best offense, that's cool and stuff and he had an amazing career. But this is Rondo thread and he will lead Celtics in his own way.

Dude, you need to relax. He never said Rondo wasn't good, didn't lead the Celtics, or is worse than Nash; he was just throwing out a comparison and some (non-homer) perspective. This may not be Rondo's prime, but he's close to it, and he may never play with players the calibre of Garnett and Pierce again, so his production will definitely see a drop off.

Problem with guys like Rondo, Nash, Kidd is that their game depends solely on the team around them; if the other players just can't put the ball in the basket or cover their deficiencies, they're gonna have trouble being effective.

Rondo is a more complete player than Nash, but he doesn't have the shooting touch so he doesn't require the defensive pressure that Nash does. Teams are fine going under the pick, giving him a ton of space, which does work for him because he can see the court better, but it does work against him because teams can double onto other players.

To me, he's a top 3 point guard behind Paul and Rose/Westbrook (tied for 2). If he can get his jump shot to a respectable level (even 33% from for 3 and around 40% from 17-18 feet) then he's going to be the clear cut best point guard in the NBA.

CoachKobe · Post #79 » by **CoachKobe** » Sun Nov 18, 2012 10:20 pm

love rondo, but i feel he's overrated at the same time. he's an average scorer at best so he's always relying on a couple of good/great teammates. mvp candidates, really great players are more independent in their play.
also, i give him a lot of credit for his assist numbers, but i don't trust today's scorekeepers when it comes to assists, that's why i'm not a huge fan of those records. check out his 20 assists video vs toronto. count them. it's a joke.

not saying he's the only one who gets that treatment. not at all. but i'm pretty sure cousy or robertson didn't get that treatment.

still a fan tho.

lukekarts · Post #80 » by **lukekarts** » Sun Nov 18, 2012 10:27 pm

tsherkin wrote:Who would you take over Rondo right now?

I know you weren't asking me, but..

Point guard-wise, I'd take Paul, Rose (pending injury recovery), Parker, Irving, possibly Westbrook depending on his form this season. Beyond that, I'd take LeBron, Kobe, Durant, Chris Bosh, Dirk, Dwight Howard of course, 50:50 on Melo, Harden, Marc Gasol. Need to see how Wade & Bynum recover from injury but assuming they do then they bump straight above him. Older guys like Duncan and Pierce I'd still rank above in the short term. May have missed someone obvious. But yeah that ranks him somewhere 13-20.

msg4k90 · Post #81 » by **msg4k90** » Sun Nov 18, 2012 10:38 pm

rondo is nowhere close to chris paul. he's a terrible ft shooter. when the game in on the line, would you rather have rondo or paul?? i'd have paul cause hes a better shooter and he's clutch.

Post #82 » by **tsherkin** » Sun Nov 18, 2012 10:41 pm

lukekarts wrote:he played awful defence against Milwaukee, Jennings dominated him,

Is this really what happened? Jennings was 1/7 from 3 in the second game against the Celtics, which is kind of what sunk him. He's always had awful shot selection and a remarkably streaky jumper. He was 8/14 under the arc, hit a 3 and was 2/3 at the line against Rondo. The passing was great, I mean he was hitting guys all over for shots, but did Rondo really play awful defense?

Let's look at his 21 points:

He hit those free throws in the first minute of the game.

Then, PnR, Rondo slides under the screen but stays close, then gets shook a bit on a dribble move but is still there to contest a pull-up fade. Shot went. Not bad defense at all.

Next bucket, loses Jennings after two different screens along the baseline, Jennings dives instead of spotting up and hits a floater in the lane. You get double-screened, and that's tough to get through... it's kind of the basis of the careers of Ray Allen and Reggie Miller, yes? Nothing especially wrong there.

Wiped out on a screen and Sullinger utterly fails to stop dribble penetration, so it's a layup for Jennings. Not really Rondo's fault.

Illegal screen, then Jennings gets free and Pierce knocks him on his ass but Jennings flubs the FT and "only" gets 3 points. Kinda hard to pin that one on Rondo. Feet shuffling, full-out shove screen? That was a Garnett-esque screen, so you can't blame him.

Dunk in transition off of a Bass turnover.

Wiped out on a screen, changed sides, boom. Not Rondo's fault.

Iso, Rondo angles him left, stays tight, he fades and hops into a jumper going out of bounds with a second defender contesting him. Not bad defense. Jennings got past him, but he's small and fast, and guys pretty much always get past the first defender. He didn't get an angle to the rim, though, Rondo made him flare wide, the second defender was right there contesting... it just dropped. Boogly shot, that was actually solid defense.

Wiped out on a screen, but he's still there to contest the shot (as is a second defender). It just dropped. Not bad defense.

Beat in an iso for the bucket. Finally, a bucket where Rondo screwed up. Jennings shook him because Rajon wandered too high above the 3pt line and Brandon had all the space in the world to work.

So, basically 2 of Jennings' 21 points came from Rondo messing up. Not a great start.

13 assists suggest he was doing other things as well, though, so let's examine.

1) Lob over to Dalembert, not a backcourt defensive breakdown
2) One-handed shuffle pass to a cutting Monta Ellis in transition. Not Rondo's fault Ellis was THAT wide open with speed to the rim
3) Set offense, Dunleavy comes off the curl, J. Not a backcourt defensive breakdown (especially since it was a 21-footer)
4) Not guarded by Rondo, cross-court pass to Ellis for the 3; Rondo was sagging towards the play and the ball went from right wing to left pocket, so it was a reasonable defensive strategy (especially for a guy who isn't a lights-out 3pt shooter like Ellis);; not GREAT defense, but certainly not crazy-bad defense
5) Pass tipped, Jennings gets it back, Ilyasova open for 3 from the left wing, not a defensive breakdown
6) Rondo right with Jennings through the PnR but Sanders gets wide open and gets the pass for the point-blank shot
7) Pierce turnover, toss pass for transition layup; not involving Rondo
8) Rondo stays with Jennings through the PnR, Jennings resets to Harris on the right wing with Pierce right on him, hits the 3. Not a defensive breakdown, it was a contested 3 after a pass back out to the perimeter
9) 2-on-1 transition break, behind-the-back bounce pass to Harris for the layup; Pierce was the man back. Offense generated by turnover; not Rondo's fault
10) Double down screen, pass to Ellis, takes a WIDE step to get around bass, then slithers in for the layup; Rondo played good D on that play, it was set offense and Ellis got the step on Bass at the top of the key.
11) Lob to Larry Sanders in transition, nothing to do with Rondo
12) Aborted PnR where Jennings gets doubled, finds Harris camped in the pocket for 3; not Rondo's fault
13) Doubled on the PnR, Rondo with him the entire time, a THIRD defender leaves Larry Sanders, so Jennings tosses to him wide open under the rim. Not Rondo's fault.

Tell me again how Rondo "played awful defense" in that Bucks game? Milwaukee ran a bunch of set offense, they exploited transition opportunities with rebounding and timely passes and Rondo actually played really good defense in the pick-and-roll. He made one or two mistakes, but that's a VERY different story that what you're selling here.

Post #83 » by **UGA Hayes** » Sun Nov 18, 2012 10:44 pm

WEll its a small sample size but I think this year does give credence to those who feel Rondo was being unfairly blamed for the offense last year. The offense is now ranked 8th almost entirely due to us becoming a good FT attempts/makes and 3 pt % teams and becoming the 2nd best turnover team ( almost entiely due to replacing RAy Allen it seems). Plus we have maintained our excellent overall FG% numbers from last year which has been consistently good It reinforces the idea that secondary percentage scoring is super important to an offense and not necessarily particularly correlated to what your PG does. In fact if we weren't the worse offensive rebounding team ever and didn't take so few 3 point attempts we would probably be the best or near best offense in the league.

Post #84 » by **og15** » Sun Nov 18, 2012 10:58 pm

I_Socrates wrote:
Deathclutch23 wrote:Sorry using some obscure stat won't change the fact that as Rondo goes the Celtics go. He is their best player and Celtics will go as far Rondo takes them.

Nash led some of the best offense, that's cool and stuff and he had an amazing career. But this is Rondo thread and he will lead Celtics in his own way.

Dude, you need to relax. He never said Rondo wasn't good, didn't lead the Celtics, or is worse than Nash; he was just throwing out a comparison and some (non-homer) perspective. This may not be Rondo's prime, but he's close to it, and he may never play with players the calibre of Garnett and Pierce again, so his production will definitely see a drop off.

Problem with guys like Rondo, Nash, Kidd is that their game depends solely on the team around them; if the other players just can't put the ball in the basket or cover their deficiencies, they're gonna have trouble being effective.

Rondo is a more complete player than Nash, but he doesn't have the shooting touch so he doesn't require the defensive pressure that Nash does. Teams are fine going under the pick, giving him a ton of space, which does work for him because he can see the court better, but it does work against him because teams can double onto other players.

To me, he's a top 3 point guard behind Paul and Rose/Westbrook (tied for 2). If he can get his jump shot to a respectable level (even 33% from for 3 and around 40% from 17-18 feet) then he's going to be the clear cut best point guard in the NBA.

You can't lump a prime Nash into the same category as Rondo and Kidd in terms of scoring ability, that just isn't accurate. Nash has career averages of 16.6 pts/36 on .605 TS%, and when Amare went down for Phoenix, he upped his scoring average from 15.5 PPG in 34.5 mpg to 18.8 and 18.6 pts in 35 mpg the next two seasons. He previously had 17.9 ppg (18.6/36) and 17.7 ppg (19.3/36) seasons in Dallas too.

From 04-05 to 09-10, his playoff averages for Phoenix were 20.0 pts in 38 MPG (18.9 pts/36) on .604 TS% to go along with his 10.7 APG (10.2 assists/36). His playoff high was 23.9 pts (21.1 per 36) and .604 TS% over 15 games.

Just some examples of guys for comparison. Nash certainly isn't behind these guys by any means when it comes to scoring.

Rondo and Kidd on the other hand, though mainly Rondo aren't anywhere close to that volume (or efficiency) generally, and when Kidd was, he was not anywhere close to that efficiency. Kidd peaked at 18.7 ppg (18.0 pts/36) in 02-03 on .526 TS%, and his highest outside of that was 16.6 ppg (16 pts/36) on .468 TS% in 95-96 while he was still a Maverick. His highest playoff averages were close to or at 20's, true, 19.6 pts (17.5/36) and 20.1 pts (17.0/36) with .492 and .514 TS%. So even Kidd comes a little close, but Nash can't be put in the same category as Kidd, and definitely not Rondo when it comes to scoring.

I've always been puzzled how people watched Nash and came to the conclusion that he was not a good scorer. The guy is such a good shooter, has a variety of moves, and can get baskets when he needs to do so. Just because he's primarily a playmaker doesn't mean he's a mediocre scorer.

Post #85 » by **tsherkin** » Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:09 pm

UGA Hayes wrote:The offense is now ranked 8th almost entirely due to us becoming a good FT attempts/makes

Hmmm. FT% remains 5th in the league, same as it was last year. The big difference in draw rate is coming from Pierce, but also from Bass and Garnett.

Name / 2012 / 2013 (FTA/FGA)

Pierce / .387 / .444
Garnett / .243 / .317
Bass / .258 / .325

I don't know that this is going to last, particularly Pierce's. Those are some notable shifts that are probably related to SSS to at least some extent.

and 3 pt % teams and becoming the 2nd best turnover team ( almost entiely due to replacing RAy Allen it seems).

Hmm. Ray missing 20 games last season definitely hurt team 3P%, as I mentioned earlier, but team 3P% isn't THAT much different. 36.7% in 2012, 37.1% so far this season. Not a huge difference. A little more depth in that regard, though, with Lee, Barbosa, Terry replacing Allen (and hopefully staying healthy), Jeff Green, etc, etc. Also, Ray Allen had the 5th-lowest TOV% on the Celtics last season, so involving him in the turnover discussion is somewhat misleading. Rondo and Pierce were responsible for a lot more turnovers than Ray, who was managing 1.5 rpg (11.2% TOV) in 2012. Rondo, 22.8%, 3.6 tpg... but understandable given assist volume. Pierce, 14.2%, 2.8 tpg.

Ray was not the turnover issue, especially missing a third of the season. Avery Bradley was more of an issue, TOV wise. I could go on; Dooling, Stiesma, so many guys were more of an issue in terms of coughing up the ball.

In fact if we weren't the worse offensive rebounding team ever and didn't take so few 3 point attempts we would probably be the best or near best offense in the league.

They'd look better, that's for sure. Dunno about best in the league, but they'd certainly look better. There are, of course, diminishing returns to your ORTG as ORB% rises while FG% maintains an elite level, because you're just not missing enough to produce all those OREBs, of course, but it's still nice to have better offensive rebounding, and yeah, it's harming the overall rating.

Joao Saraiva · Post #86 » by **Joao Saraiva** » Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:36 pm

Rondo is hard to rate... I guess we'll have to see the Celtics after KG and Paul Pierce are done so we can see how good Rondo is.

If I had to bet I'd say he's really good.

Post #87 » by **UGA Hayes** » Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:41 pm

I agree that the other stuff could regress to a mean but disagree on the RA turnovers, at least I think part is attributable to how we used him on offense. I actually feels that turnovers as measured by the current stats similar to team defense and assists can be largely misleading. One of the things that I have always felt that were missed about Nash is that he was a turnover sink, basically able to absorb turnovers maybe raising his own TO numbers but able to bring the team numbers down without a cost in efficiency and I feel Rondo is similar in that respect.

Those guy you mentioned didn't play much, so their TOV% doesn't really reflect the raw TO . Where does Ray fit into this. We ran a ton of offense for Ray, a lot of it using up the clock and alot often resulting in a team -type-turnover, plus few of our posessions ended up in FT (27th in attempts last year) . Those possessions have been redistributed with a decrease in turnovers, and I suspect a lot of those possessions are actually ending up as FT now (5th), so it it doesn't matter that our % is the same if we are taking 5 more FT a game. Is it a result of Rondo-no I don't think so, and thats why I think it can be erroneous to directly correlate a teams offensive performance to the performance of the PG. There are just too many variables that go into it

Post #88 » by **tsherkin** » Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:59 pm

UGA Hayes wrote:Those guy you mentioned didn't play much, so their TOV% doesn't really reflect the raw TO .

True, but again, 1.5 tpg for Ray, and missing 20 games. The team turnover issues extended well beyond his impact. Rondo, Pierce and Garnett were all producing more turnovers per game than Allen. Ray was 12th on the team in turnovers per minute, too, including 4 guys who played 1,000+ minutes (notably including Garnett, Pierce, Rondo and Avery Bradley).

I don't think that you're accurately depicting the turnover situation. I agree that when Ray was on-ball, it wasn't good for Boston. That's something that he does best in a tertiary capacity, mainly swinging the ball from the pocket or the wing to the point, or dumping it into KG or Pierce on the block or at the elbow. He's not a fantastic PnR player or dribble penetrator, certainly not compared to what he once was in his earlier days.

But in terms of running the set offense? Nah, him running around screens wasn't causing turnover issues and there were too many guys with way more notably turnover issues for this to be a huge deal. We'll see what happens as the season shakes out, but Boston's offense isn't looking THAT much different than it did last year, apart from a couple of the guys drawing fouls more effectively in mostly the same sets they ran last season.

JoseRizal · Post #89 » by **JoseRizal** » Mon Nov 19, 2012 12:03 am

sirdeadcat wrote:As good as prime Kidd or better IMO.

You're pushing it...

Post #90 » by **UGA Hayes** » Mon Nov 19, 2012 12:16 am

tsherkin wrote:
UGA Hayes wrote:Those guy you mentioned didn't play much, so their TOV% doesn't really reflect the raw TO .

True, but again, 1.5 tpg for Ray, and missing 20 games. The team turnover issues extended well beyond his impact. Rondo, Pierce and Garnett were all producing more turnovers per game than Allen. Ray was 12th on the team in turnovers per minute, too, including 4 guys who played 1,000+ minutes (notably including Garnett, Pierce, Rondo and Avery Bradley).

I don't think that you're accurately depicting the turnover situation. I agree that when Ray was on-ball, it wasn't good for Boston. That's something that he does best in a tertiary capacity, mainly swinging the ball from the pocket or the wing to the point, or dumping it into KG or Pierce on the block or at the elbow. He's not a fantastic PnR player or dribble penetrator, certainly not compared to what he once was in his earlier days.

But in terms of running the set offense? Nah, him running around screens wasn't causing turnover issues and there were too many guys with way more notably turnover issues for this to be a huge deal. We'll see what happens as the season shakes out, but Boston's offense isn't looking THAT much different than it did last year, apart from a couple of the guys drawing fouls more effectively in mostly the same sets they ran last season.

I disagree. Obviously Boston fans can't answer this impartially anymore since Ray left but I guarrantee you if you asked the fans on our board last year while RAy was still on our team who was most responsible for our turnovers it would 95% Ray Allen and 5% everyone else. Despite being the same team pace wise this year our offense looks very different without running Ray on screens. Hell even the TO of guys like Stiemsa are indirectly related to our picking up moving screen turnovers to run a thousand picks.

LoneyROY · Post #91 » by **LoneyROY** » Mon Nov 19, 2012 12:25 am

Rajon Hondo.

Bertrob · Post #92 » by **Bertrob** » Mon Nov 19, 2012 12:30 am

tsherkin wrote:
Top 15 player, top 15 player...

Who would you take over Rondo right now? I'm thinking Rose and Dirk (when healthy), Pierce (until he shows me otherwise, which will happen soon), Steph Curry, Chris Paul, Dwight, Nash, Kobe, Lebron, Deron, Melo and Tony Parker. I'm strong considering adding Kyrie Irving and James Harden to that list.

.

Would you really take Steph Curry over Rondo? And Pierce over Rondo but not Garnett?

hugolizard · Post #93 » by **hugolizard** » Mon Nov 19, 2012 12:30 am

I don't rate him that high, maybe around 10th among PGs in the NBA. Honestly I don't care if he can't make his jumpers as long as he can somehow shoots 4X% from the field. His biggest problem is his FT%. You're just not as big of a threat driving in the lane trying to break down the defense when everyone knows you can't make your FTs.

NashtyNas · Post #94 » by **NashtyNas** » Mon Nov 19, 2012 12:39 am

og15 wrote:....

Where did I say Nash wasn't a good scorer? I'm probably the biggest Nash fan you will find on this board, don't need to tell me how much better he was offensively than Rondo (scoring/shooting wise); but it would be ignorant of me to say Rondo isn't as good as Nash as a point guard. The role of a point guard (in my humble opinion) is to primarily set up his team mates and run the team, and Rondo does that as well as anyone.

I don't know how you got 'Nash isn't a good scorer' or 'Rondo and Nash are comparable scorers' from what I said, but nonetheless, that definitely not what I said nor meant. They are comparable in terms of being floor generals, and Rondo gets the nod because of his defense. When you can run the offense like they can and get others freebie, open shots, you don't NEED to score as much; that's why Nash was never a prolific scorer, not because he couldn't be, because he'd rather set up his team mates.

Post #95 » by **tsherkin** » Mon Nov 19, 2012 12:52 am

UGA Hayes wrote:I disagree. Obviously Boston fans can't answer this impartially anymore since Ray left but I guarrantee you if you asked the fans on our board last year while RAy was still on our team who was most responsible for our turnovers it would 95% Ray Allen and 5% everyone else.

Yeah, but that would be empirically inaccurate, so that opinion wouldn't really matter. It's functionally clear that in 2012, the player most singly responsible for turnovers was Rondo. He had a really, really high turnover rate. Now, that's not a negative, because he matched it with a very high assist rate and those commonly go together. Nash and Magic are recent examples. Kidd, too. So that's to be expected from basically everyone that's not Chris Paul.

In 2012, the Celtics used spot-up possessions 20.6% of the time, and off-screen plays 8.1% of the time.

So far this season? 21.5% and 9.3%.

Basically the same ratios.

The Celtics have been doing a little more pass, pass, pass around the perimeter, then waiting for the guy coming around the down screen to hit the elbow in motion and getting the ball going to the rim that way, that's been a little different. They're playing a little faster this season, so far.

They're still running a lot of screens for Terry, same as they did for Ray. It's important to remember, though, that the offense never flowed through Ray. When they weren't in transition or in the secondary, the Celtics actually ran the ball through Pierce and KG more often than Ray. Just from a shooting volume perspective, Allen got as many shots per game as Bass. Obviously, they changed their approach with him not playing for a third of the season and shooting volume doesn't describe time of sets and stuff, but post-ups for KG and Pierce, as well as Pierce 3s, represented the majority of their primary offense last year, with Pietrus spot-up threes being a big part of things for the 2/3s of the season HE was healthy.

This year, Terry's involved in the offense less than was Ray, but they're still playing some methodical ball. It's not EXACTLY the same, but they're still running the same basic double-downs, the same basic half-court breakouts... the offense is still the same, they're just using more of it and spreading things around a little more. Is it a surprise? No. Terry isn't as good as was Ray, it made more sense to run the ball to Allen more often, he's arguably the best 3pt shooter in the history of the game in terms of major scorers instead of just roleplayers. It's basically him and Reggie and Nash. Terry, less so. Far streakier, lower ceiling, etc. So it's a natural adjustment.

Again, though, you're still talking about a team in the bottom third in pace running a great deal of set offense. You're still talking about a player who, last season as usual, didn't commit a ton of turnovers (quite a few less than many others on the team). Yeah, Boston ran a ton of screens and KG was the king of illegal picks and they picked up some fouls and turnovers from that... that's part of their identity. Boston hasn't radically reshaped their offense in Ray's absence. They've moved a few pieces around, changed a little here and there, tweaked this and that, but it's still effectively the same thing. Methodical offense, post-ups for Pierce and Garnett, lots of double pin-down action for wing touches (either for the catch-and-shoot or a dive into the key), lots of point-to-wing-to-point passes looking for a seem... It's just classic half-court stuff. Not very different.