Rondo vs NBA's best in "Wins Produced"

[sully00]

There is too much money available next summer for someone not to take the 3rd best player available

Okay

[Wolves2011]

There is too much money available next summer for someone not to take the 3rd best player available

Okay

11 more days for Ainge to sign Rondo.

or he goes to free agency.

He'd be the 3rd best player available after lebron and wade.

[GuyClinch]

Restricted free agency is "free" in namely only. Its nothing to worry about. No team is going to match more then 8 million..

We had this same debate with BBD and people thinking he could make big money. But he didn't.. As a guy who didn't love BBD I have to say I was more impressed with his play then Rondo's in the Orlando playoff series..

[Wolves2011]

Restricted free agency is "free" in namely only. Its nothing to worry about. No team is going to match more then 8 million..

We had this same debate with BBD and people thinking he could make big money. But he didn't.. As a guy who didn't love BBD I have to say I was more impressed with his play then Rondo's in the Orlando playoff series..

According to Adrian Wojnarowski from yahoo, Rondo is worth a "near" max contract.
And it wasn't clear if he meant, $12.5 which is his estimated max for next season or $13.5, which is max for someone with his years of experience now.

On ESPN: Marc Stein:

"The reality, though, is that Rondo -- barring a slip in production that roughly no one in the NBA expects -- is headed for a substantial payday if he winds up as a member of the 2010 free-agent class.

Rondo would be part of that class as a restricted free agent, true, but at worst that means he’d likely be forced to sign an offer sheet with one of the many teams that have positioned themselves to have significant salary-cap space next July and then return to the Celtics if the offer sheet is matched. Some team out there will inevitably test Boston's resolve if it gets that far.

“It’s not the worst situation,” one Rondo confidante insists. “He will get paid. It won’t affect him if he has to wait. He is fearless.” "

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_ ... y-fearless

Per Ford ESPN:

Extensions for class of 2003 - 16
Extensions for class of 2004 - 10
Extensions for class of 2005 - 7
Extensions for class of 2006 - 3 [Bargagni, Roy, Aldridge]

Quote from Ford: "The Celtics' Rajon Rondo has become a potential All-Star after just three years in the league. However, head coach Doc Rivers and GM Danny Ainge have been pretty harsh toward Rondo over the course of the summer. The Celtics actually attempted to trade Rondo before the draft.

While there's still a chance that the two sides agree to an extension, a source close to the process told me it's unlikely. Rondo wants All-Star money and the Celtics aren't convinced he'll handle a five-year guaranteed deal well. It’s a classic maturity-vs.-talent battle that the Celtics may ultimately lose. "

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_ ... lass-of-06


Posted on Green Street Blog...

Basketball Prospectus’ Kevin Pelton makes an interesting point. If the big stars of the 2010 free agent class decide to stay with their respective teams, what’s to stop one of those teams hoarding cap space from making a strong run at Rondo, even if he’s restricted? Say, the Knicks, who have a crying need for a run and gun point guard to handle Mike D’Antoni’s system. True, the Celtics could match but that would probably at an inflated price.

Of the members of the 2006 draft class who have signed extensions, only Roy got a so-called “max” deal. Yahoo’s Adrian Wojnowksi reported that Aldridge signed a deal in the $65-70 million range. Bargani got a few million less than that annually.

Whether Rondo signs an extension or not may come down to a question of value. Using the two Portland deals as a barometer is Rondo a “max” player that you build your franchise around like Roy, or an Aldridge player; i.e. a second star?

************************************************************************************8

Ainge is negotiating now because he fears all of these guys and "I" am right.......

if he waits it will cost more because it only take one team to make Rondo a Max or near Max player.....

I agree with Pelton that the Knicks are the most likely......

[Wolves2011]

Ainge has a couple of more days to get a deal done.

Lets hope he shows the same good judgement he showed when he refused to include Rondo in the KG deal. Ainge was willing to not get KG if it meant giving up Rondo. [And that was after Rondo's first season when he had shown nothing statistically.] McHale made Rondo a "must have" in that deal and Ainge said, NO!

[Hemingway]

Does anyone else think that what ever Ainge does in regards to resigning Rondo WILL be the right move. I feel like he knows more than we do and is privy to more information than a few articles posted a million times on a message board. He has shown great judgment so far so I see no reason to get into a panic.

[GuyClinch]

^^^Not really. Ainge did resign Blount. So clearly he has made bad moves before. Truth is though this isn't a question that can be settled. Once he resigns him we will never know what would have happened as an RFA. Likewise we would never know if he could have been bundled with Ray to fetch a Wade or Joe Johnson.. and so on and so forth. Its really just speculation unless its a clear blunder (Mark Blount).

Pete

[elrod enchilada]

The first three games of this season demonstrated my point about Rondo. He still isn't much of a shooter. He hasn't been to the free throw line once. By the logic of all the Rondo-bashers he is deeply flawed and therefore hardly an all-star. Give me a pretty boy jump shooter any day of the week. One basher claimed Lester Hudson could lead the Cs to a 65 win season.

Yet when one watched the games he is the ultimate maestro. I watched a few other NBA games this weekend and then you really appreciate what Rondo brings to the table. He is simply a genius point guard. Phenomenal handle, vision, passing and nose for the ball. It is why nearly every statistical system hinged to winning games always has Rondo near the top of the list, way ahead of all the pretty boy jump shooters.

As Bob Ryan put it, Rondo is sui generis. There is no one in NBA history he can be compared to because his style is so unique. It makes it hard for the conventional wisdom to address. The bashers are right, his flaws would be fatal for any other point guard. But Rondo is not any other point guard.

And my point holds here, too: you take this Rondo, give him a consistent pull-up jumper, make him a 35 percent 3 point shooter and an 80 percent free throw shooter, have him finish with his left-hand, and get him to the line 8-10 times per game, and you have one of the three best players in the game, if not the very best. That Rondo, the one the critics are demanding, ranks with Russell and Bird.

He may get there, or closer to there than he is right now. But what we have right now right here is very special. I for one, am delighted I get to watch him play for the Cs. He is going nowhere. All that is happening now is just negotiating the pricetag.

PS-- I still marvel at the pass Rondo made in the Bobcats game. He fires a cross-court quasi-no-look bullet bullseye pass to an open Pierce who drained a three-pointer. Only afterward did the announcers notice that Rondo threw this fastball with his left hand...and he is right-handed. I have never seen anything like that before. Rondo is a guy who makes me write that last sentence more than anyone else in the game today.

[Wolves2011]

^^^Not really. Ainge did resign Blount. So clearly he has made bad moves before. Truth is though this isn't a question that can be settled. Once he resigns him we will never know what would have happened as an RFA. Likewise we would never know if he could have been bundled with Ray to fetch a Wade or Joe Johnson.. and so on and so forth. Its really just speculation unless its a clear blunder (Mark Blount).

Pete

The Blount resigning from what I read in the press during and after the signing was driven by ownership. They were worried about filling seats. Ainge DIDN'T want to do that deal. After that fiasco, ownership pulled back and mostly stayed out of personnel decisions.

In the big deals since, its been all Ainge. He was the one who said "figuratively", I'd rather not have KG than give up Rondo to get him. I'm hoping that Ainge who valued Rondo so highly is the one negotiating this weekend the Duffy.

[GuyClinch]

Yet when one watched the games he is the ultimate maestro. I watched a few other NBA games this weekend and then you really appreciate what Rondo brings to the table. He is simply a genius point guard. Phenomenal handle, vision, passing and nose for the ball. It is why nearly every statistical system hinged to winning games always has Rondo near the top of the list, way ahead of all the pretty boy jump shooters.

This kind of thinking is just wrong. Basketball is a fundamentally OFFENSIVE game. You don't get points for making good passes or being "unselfish." You don't even get points for playing good defense. Someone HAS to score the basketball. Teams that have been able to make Rondo try to do that have done well against him.

No one doubts his positive characteristics. But ignoring a very serious negative is just silly. Rondo needs this team of shooters. We saw what he did rookie year without the shooters - and well that team didn't win alot of games.

Will we every seen this happen again? Not if Doc Rivers can help it. He never puts Rondo on the floor without a few shooters.

Pete

[pac213up]

^^^Not really. Ainge did resign Blount. So clearly he has made bad moves before. Truth is though this isn't a question that can be settled. Once he resigns him we will never know what would have happened as an RFA. Likewise we would never know if he could have been bundled with Ray to fetch a Wade or Joe Johnson.. and so on and so forth. Its really just speculation unless its a clear blunder (Mark Blount).

Pete

The Blount resigning from what I read in the press during and after the signing was driven by ownership. They were worried about filling seats. Ainge DIDN'T want to do that deal. After that fiasco, ownership pulled back and mostly stayed out of personnel decisions.

In the big deals since, its been all Ainge. He was the one who said "figuratively", I'd rather not have KG than give up Rondo to get him. I'm hoping that Ainge who valued Rondo so highly is the one negotiating this weekend the Duffy.

Wolves you really don't need to waste your time. This board was loaded with people that used to bash Pierce on a regular basis as well - look at how that turned out. Some people on here actually thought Rondo would only get $7m - 9m.

[pac213up]

Yet when one watched the games he is the ultimate maestro. I watched a few other NBA games this weekend and then you really appreciate what Rondo brings to the table. He is simply a genius point guard. Phenomenal handle, vision, passing and nose for the ball. It is why nearly every statistical system hinged to winning games always has Rondo near the top of the list, way ahead of all the pretty boy jump shooters.

This kind of thinking is just wrong. Basketball is a fundamentally OFFENSIVE game. You don't get points for making good passes or being "unselfish." You don't even get points for playing good defense. Someone HAS to score the basketball. Teams that have been able to make Rondo try to do that have done well against him.

No one doubts his positive characteristics. But ignoring a very serious negative is just silly. Rondo needs this team of shooters. We saw what he did rookie year without the shooters - and well that team didn't win alot of games.

Will we every seen this happen again? Not if Doc Rivers can help it. He never puts Rondo on the floor without a few shooters.

Pete

Defense is what wins games. Offense is the easy part of basketball. Some interesting points in an article on the subject.

*Eight of the 10 teams to make the Finals in the last five years were top-five defensive teams (points allowed per possession) in the regular season. Only four of the 10 were top-five offensive teams.

* In the last five seasons, four of the 25 teams that have finished in the top five of offensive efficiency in the regular season missed the Playoffs, and the 25 have won an average of 1.28 series in the postseason. Every one of the 25 teams that finished in the top five defensively made the Playoffs and they won an average of 1.64 series.

* In the last three postseasons, the home team has won 34 of the 45 series, the better offensive team has won 27, and the better defensive team has won 36.

[GuyClinch]

Defense is what wins games. Offense is the easy part of basketball. Some interesting points in an article on the subject.

*Eight of the 10 teams to make the Finals in the last five years were top-five defensive teams (points allowed per possession) in the regular season. Only four of the 10 were top-five offensive teams.

Actually I could post similiar statistics about how almost all the recent champions were good offensive teams as well. The Lakers actually won a championship in the Shaq/Kobe era only having a top 15 defense.

But such an argument doesn't touch on my point. Basketball is fundamentally an offensive game.. Its built into the game at such an important level that nearly EVERYONE in the NBA is a very good scorer and usually a decent shooter.

The trite and obvious argument is actually that basketball is all about defense. Its actually not - its about getting guys who are very good scorers to play defense. And its about getting guys who are great to excellent scorers and respectable defenders to play on the same team.

You see guys who can't score don't even get on the court to PLAY defense. Scorers are pre-selected by the coaches going back to colleges, HS and even gradeschool. That's how important offense is to basketballl. Because you can't score with a pure defensive play (as in say tennis) basketball is a fundamentally offensive game.

This is why championship are won by getting good offensive players to PLAY defense. No one in particular though Pierce and Ray Allen were unbelievable defenders and thus we should get them. Truthfully if you take the dirty refs out of it a non-scorer like Oriene Green or Tony Allen is better at defense then either of them. And even both of those guys are fabulous scorers compared to some athletes who simply never played basketball. But because they can't score like RA and PP so they will never get to play in the first place.

None of this means the offensive side of basketball is "easy" its absolutely not. You can find good athletes who have never even played basketball and teach them to play defense in a relatively short period of time (assuming they are willing to hustle). You just won't see such guys on the court in the NBA.

You could put together a team of "nobody" good defenders and you would lose every single game. Defense is not some amazing rare skill. Its about effort, teamwork and athletic ability. You can find players who have these characteristics and are without offensive basketball skills. But these in general are not good players - except for sometimes at the center position.

Again like our GM said - you can usually teach good offensive players to be decent defenders. But you sure the heck can't teach good defenders to become good scorers - at least not in any reasonable out amout of time.

Eddie House is a prime exampe of this phenomenon. The entire secondary of the NE Patriots would be better defenders then House at basketball (with a good six months of training). But none of them could play because they don't have the offensive basketball skills needed to see NBA court time. Some of these guys would likely defend better then Rondo as well. But again Rondo despite being a good defender of course has vast more offensive skills then guys who can't play basketball.

He put up 55 points on Sergio in HS .. guys like Oriene Green did similiar damage back in their HS. That's just how it goes. Basketball is a fundamentally offensive game. The reason that good offense doesn't beat good defense isn't so much that defense wins but the "defensive" team is chock full of pretty darn good scorers as well. Sure they may not all be the best scorers in the NBA (though in the Celtics case they are) but just being in the NBA means you score very well - outside of a few odd centers.

In short - sure defense "wins" in the NBA but that's because both teams tend to have sufficent scorers as otherwise those guys wouldn't have made the NBA in the first place. This fact doesn't encourage ANY coach to play a guy without offensive skills at the PG slot. PGs first have to bring a host of offensive skills to the court before they can even play.

The commentator who says basketball is all about defense is oversimplifying for the fan. Yeah its all about defense - among groups of highly skilled offensive players. Because that defense becomes the differentiating factor. That doesn't mean coaches should actually LISTEN to these commenators and stack teams with guys who can't score. They would lose every damn game.

Pete