RealGM

Has anyone read this article from a few days ago? I did... Interesting arguments from both sides for either young point guard.

These two excerpts standout the most to me. The first speaks for Rondo, the second for Rose.

From a physical standpoint, Rondo once again has the edge. Both players possess awesome explosiveness, with Rose being the better leaper of the two. However Rondo’s incredible wingspan and large hands allow him to play much bigger than his size. Because of this, the difference in sheer athleticism between the two isn’t as far apart as one would be inclined to think. Specifically, Rondo is a terrific perimeter defender and rebounder thanks in large part to his 6-foot-10-inch wingspan. Moreover, his ability to finish at the rim is aided by his freakishly large hands (reportedly the largest hands the Celtics current training staff has ever measured), which enable him to palm the ball off the dribble, absorb contact, and maintain ball control while elevating to the cup.

In sum, Rondo’s talents cover the entire scope and possibilities of the game. He can do almost everything at the highest level — rebound, pass, dribble, and shut anyone down on defense. I’ll concede that Rose will likely become a better scorer. However let’s not lose sight of the fact that Rondo and Rose are point guards. Teams rarely win championships when their go-to scorers are under 6-foot-6.

Though quiet at this stage in his career and naturally shy, Rose brings a quiet confidence and calm to the floor, with the full trust of his teammates. He doesn’t have any of the same extroverted characteristics as a Magic Johnson or Gary Payton, but has the reserved likability of a Kidd. From the minute Rose stepped onto the floor of the Berto Center, the Bulls have been his team and all plans revolve chiefly around him.

Rondo has been and continues to be the little brother of a team of All-Stars. He seems to be more tolerated than well-liked by his teammates and by the time KG, Pierce and Allen are gone, Rondo will be an untested leader at the age of 25 or 26.

http://www.realgm.com/src_feature_piece ... nt_guards/



Tough. It's easy to view Rose as a potential franchise point guard, a player you build around. Whereas, you tend to view Rondo as that "perfect" complement to Pierce, Garnett and Ray. He's the ideal fit for what the team needs from his position. Seldom would one think of Rondo as a star as oppose to an obvious All-Star. There's a difference... Rondo's a star on the Celtics, but I tend to believe stars are also decided by how everyone views you outside of your home fan base. It isn't enough to simply have it.

Personally, I think it's unfair to judge Rondo unfavorably when you consider players such as Rose and those mentioned in the article were prominent fixtures in the starting lineup early on. Rondo had to work harder to get where he's today as a starter.

Who would I begin a team with? I've to say Rose. Because a lot more is expected from your point guard today than in yesteryears. In a league that is popularized by scoring, I begrudgingly have to agree. If you can become a dominant scorer or "take over" when need be. You'll be thought of as an important player on your team. Point guards such as Paul, D. Williams, Arenas, Billups, D. Harris, Rose and T. Parker come to mind. Conversely, I don't see this natural inclination in Rondo. He's capable of trying to do so whenever the team is in dire need of him to or for anyone to step up if the All-Star veterans are struggling. But due to his selflessness as a point guard, he isn't apt to initiate that second level instantaneously. I like Rondo for the player he is. But I can't help but to wonder if he's capable of silencing his critics if he were the top option on a young roster or what have you.

I don't know if Rose is a franchise PG like CP3 yet and don't know if he'll ever be. But he's gonna be a good pg that's for sure.

Rose is a better finisher than Rondo, who specifically looks to avoid contract when finishing because he can't shoot his FT's. The go to perimeter scorer stuff makes no sense either, I guess he eliminates Kobe and Pierce by saying 6'6" but Wade, Billups, Parker, c'mon Derrick Rose is the prototype of the primary perimeter scorer in the modern NBA. More concerning is that nobody seems to win with a "true pg" as their star player.

In the end Rondo is a great pg on a stacked squad, though he would probably benefit more from a more uptempo offense, but that hasn't really proven to win a championship in recent years, granted nobody has built an uptempo offense that actually plays defense.

Rose is the type of player that will be able to play with anyone and he may or may not be the type of pg that elevates his teammates but you can always just find him great teammates. That is the question between good and great for Rondo, he looks like a wizard surrounded by HOF's. What happens when the talent level around is quite what it is now, we won't likely find that out for another few years.

These Rondo discussions are funny prior to the '07 season I talked a lot about how this team reminded me a lot of the '83 Sixers and how Rondo as a player reminds me a lot of Mo Cheeks. Per usual many thought I was crazy to compare him to Cheeks and others thought he was so much better. 4 time All Star 5 time All NBA defender but always a 3rd or 4th option in an offense.

SonicYouth34 wrote:I don't know if Rose is a franchise PG like CP3 yet and don't know if he'll ever be. But he's gonna be a good pg that's for sure.

It's more like he's in a good position to become Chicago's (or another team's) franchise player. Whether or not he proves to be a franchise player is up for debate at this point in his career. But I like his ceiling if he keep maturing as a leader, and continues to feel comfortable as the face of the Bulls. Still, enough of this progression will rest on his head coach and the talent level of who's playing around him. Every star player has to answer to someone, their head coach. Also, something has to be said for you having the support of your teammates. It really helps to speed up your maturation. A head coach is only as good as the players he or she coaches. Likewise, a point guard is only as good as the players who are his teammates. A lot can be decided just based on what you've to work with.

Sometimes I think: Is Rondo a player who's so talented and knows he's very talented, but let's his ego get the better of him. Or is he a player who is very talented but is too independent. That is, it takes a lot for him to admit that his way isn't the right way to go about it. Again, is that to do with his ego or maturity. If it's maturity, then I think he's learning to let others in and take it as a learning process.

The one question I've to ask when we're talking about Rondo and Rose. Do they help to make their teammates better players? It isn't enough for you to be a great player, you've to help along your teammates as well. For example, is West an All-Star without Paul as his teammate? I've a hard time believing he is under different circumstances. Conversely, I believe Stoudemire could still be an All-Star if Nash weren't his teammate.

In Rondo's case, it's the little things that he does that works. He learns the tendencies of his teammates and gets them the ball in a timely fashion which makes their jobs on offense somewhat easier. And it helps to have teammates who generally have good hands.

Its amazing that we can actually compare a 1st pick overall and a 20th pick in their respective drafts. Props to Danny for buying Rondo from the Suns!

The only issue I have with Rondo is that he can't shoot free throws. Maybe his huge ET like hands and gorilla like wingspan fail him in that regard, but he needs to become more consistent in his form, teams will exploit that and soon we will be talking about Hack-a-Rondo!

Actually, Rondo was selected with the twenty-first pick.

I can remember when Beasley was considered the favored to be the first selection in the 2008 draft. But Rose has proven he was worth the top pick for Chicago.

Rondo's inability to convert free throws on a more consistent basis is frustrating. Heck, it's always frustrating whenever a player makes a basket and is fouled but fails to complete the three-point play. Or he misses the shot and (conveniently) misses both free throw shots. During the playoffs, that's killer... Rondo must get better at making his free throws. Even if he often only gets one of two, that's better than missing them both. From him, I'll take that...

obviously Rose is a better player. 30 out of 30 GMs would take Rose over Rondo anyday. but Rose was #1 overall, of course he should be better. that's not to say Rondo is bad. he is very good, and fits well on our team. as usual, the rondo supporter neglects to accoutn for the fact that teams rarely pay any attention to rondo on the offensive side. it's great that rondo is more efficient, but hell if nobody's guarding you it's actually a bit embarrasing that rondo can't score more than he does. i honestly believe lester hudson would score more, and more efficiently, than rondo if teams played him the same way. the good thing is rondo can get layups off steals and things like that to boost his stats. that's definitely valuable. and although rondo is a bit inconsistent on D he is still way better than Rose.

i'm glad we have rondo, given the team we have. not sure Rose would have as much value on our squad. but there really isn't much doubt who is the better player, last year's playoffs notwithstanding.

Rose has more physical talent. The author of that article is off his rocker. Not only is he more explosive but he is far stronger. Rose plays very big too - bigger then Rondo with regards to finishing around the hoop.

As far as Rondo comparions Mo Cheeks isn't a bad comparison. Also Mookie Blaylock is another guy that comes to mind.. Those are two really great players though.

GuyClinch wrote:Rose has more physical talent. The author of that article is off his rocker. Not only is he more explosive but he is far stronger. Rose plays very big too - bigger then Rondo with regards to finishing around the hoop.

As far as Rondo comparions Mo Cheeks isn't a bad comparison. Also Mookie Blaylock is another guy that comes to mind.. Those are two really great players though.

Rose, IMO, is a far superior talent to Rondo. He's much bigger, probably just as fast and athletic with scoring ability. But his D is atrocious. He should be better, given his physical abilities, but I don't think it's in his mindset to be a good defender because he really doesn't try to fight through screens, body-up, etc. Rondo, on the other hand, takes way too many chances for my liking, but he's feisty and wants to defend, which goes a long way.

Mookie Blaylock is a great comparison for Rondo. And I think that's the kind of player Rondo should become. Mookie, when he was in his prime, was a big time defender. Rondo's still too inconsistent on defensive end to be considered a superior defender, but he has all the tools and the mentality to be a good one.

I enjoyed the articles until I read something along the lines of one the authors saying people hit their primes at 22-23 (Rondo's age)

is he serious? Prime is WAY later on in one's career than that.

Brandon Hoffman is clearly much smarter than Christopher Reina

Read the article if you want to know what I mean.

Wolves2011 wrote:Brandon Hoffman is clearly much smarter than Christopher Reina

Read the article if you want to know what I mean.

You take that discussion to a personal level, which is... not good They're just taking stance.

As a Celtic fan, it's always tough to compare your player with that of a player at the same position on another team.

I chose Rose from an offensive standpoint. The face of the franchise tends to be the best or one of the top two offensive threats. Rose can be that, or he is already. Rondo would've to be Robin to whoever Ainge can sign or draft to play the role of Batman. I'm fine with that. And I don't believe your starting point guard should be your team's best scorer or rebounder. He already has a lot of other responsibilities to begin with. Personally, I don't necessarily believe that one is better than the other. It depends on your role on your team. It depends on how best that team utilizes your talents.

I mean imagine Rondo leading a running team.

Rondo's in an ideal position with Boston primarily because they can mask some of his weaknesses better than other teams given Boston's roster. Whereas, Rose is expected to assume the role of leader, the best player on the team. Hence, he isn't afforded much leeway to struggle in any one area as a point guard. He's the quarterback and a high profiled name at the position. Hey, that's the weight you endure being the draft's top selection. Conversely, Rondo was selected in the middle of the draft. Less pressure, less expected of you initially.

Where my curiosity grows is when I wonder not whether or not Rondo can assume the role as the team's best player. But who'll join him in that role post Big Three. Boston must have a scorer to go with Rondo and Perkins. Ideally, you'll want to have another Pierce.

Mahoney_jr wrote:

Wolves2011 wrote:Brandon Hoffman is clearly much smarter than Christopher Reina

Read the article if you want to know what I mean.

You take that discussion to a personal level, which is... not good They're just taking stance.

And you are taking my comment entirely too seriously. It was being facetious. I just picked the one who supported my guy - Rondo.

Yeah, I read you as you'd intended... But I think both writers supported their arguments well.

Where my curiosity grows is when I wonder not whether or not Rondo can assume the role as the team's best player. But who'll join him in that role post Big Three. Boston must have a scorer to go with Rondo and Perkins. Ideally, you'll want to have another Pierce.

People spend way too much time worrying about this. It's far more likely post big 3 we have several down years and the roster is purged. This is rare team we have assembled - we shoud enjoy it because it might not happen again for a bit. We would be lucky if we have another great team with 10 years after this one ends. After all it took around 20 for this one to materalize..

GuyClinch wrote:

Where my curiosity grows is when I wonder not whether or not Rondo can assume the role as the team's best player. But who'll join him in that role post Big Three. Boston must have a scorer to go with Rondo and Perkins. Ideally, you'll want to have another Pierce.

People spend way too much time worrying about this. It's far more likely post big 3 we have several down years and the roster is purged. This is rare team we have assembled - we shoud enjoy it because it might not happen again for a bit. We would be lucky if we have another great team with 10 years after this one ends. After all it took around 20 for this one to materalize..

That's one view--another one says that Red failed to keep that team stocked, and that subsequent GMs and owners failed to make good decisions. Currently, we have about the best GM and ownership group we could hope for and that alone makes our chances of continuing the good times MUCH MUCH HIGHER. IMO we'll be playoffs good for at least another 8 seasons...barring major injuries.

Actually while Red made some mistakes along the way Len Bias and Reggie Lewis probably would have hung another banner in the Garden and ironically would have been what was needed to stand toe to toe with Jordan and Pippen. It took a lot of bad decisions and bad luck for Boston to end up in the situation it ended up in.

I think Danny likes what he is doing and will stay with it for a while and has learned from his own mistakes. Winning a championship is really hard everything has to come together for that to happen but being good enough to contend for a championship isn't especially in the Eastern Conference. As much as I love this team and Allen, Pierce, and Garnett Ainge has shown you can win a championship without one of the 5 best players in the game. To me as long as that Garden stays banged out then I believe he can do it again.

sully00 wrote:Actually while Red made some mistakes along the way Len Bias and Reggie Lewis probably would have hung another banner in the Garden and ironically would have been what was needed to stand toe to toe with Jordan and Pippen. It took a lot of bad decisions and bad luck for Boston to end up in the situation it ended up in.

I think Danny likes what he is doing and will stay with it for a while and has learned from his own mistakes. Winning a championship is really hard everything has to come together for that to happen but being good enough to contend for a championship isn't especially in the Eastern Conference. As much as I love this team and Allen, Pierce, and Garnett Ainge has shown you can win a championship without one of the 5 best players in the game. To me as long as that Garden stays banged out then I believe he can do it again.

Don't forget being uniquely singled out by Stern and the NBA to be screwed by carrying the cap numbers and not being compensated for either death...the only team EVER to have that happen to them, and twice no less...