Rondo vs NBA Best PG in 2008-2009

[GreenDreamer]

Funny stuff!!

But Rondo's performance in 29 NBA games against the best players in the NBA is best news for Celtics fans. .

If you are curioius to see how Rondo did when compared to the best PG in the NBA, see the first posting, in this string.

Hint: He dominated about half of them and outplayed most of the rest.

Honestly, Wolves, you evn get on my nerves a little with your rants, but your heart is in the right place. You should explore some other ways to express Rondo's sability and talents, though.

Case in point:

Rondo is supposedly the product of playing with such wonderful teammates in a system which is somehow "perfect" for him. If that were actually the case, then

1. Why does he so regularly and routinely outperform these teammates? I mean, I know that great players can make lesser players look better than they normally would, but I have yet to hear of great players make lesser players look better than they great players do themselves. Evidently that is what is happening in Boston, though. Garnett went down with an injury, and Rondo basically took over... so what you remove the guy who was Rondo's biggest oncourt ally, and somehow his statistical improvement was actually because Paul and Ray are so wonderful... and not Rondo.

I don't know. Maybe I'm just not all that bright, but how exactly does removing KG allow Paul and Ray to make Rondo look better than them, when the idea is that Rondo is actually the product of the great players around him.

2. Currently Rondo is 3rd in the league in winshare and, surprisngly, is even 4th in fanatsy rating. Not at his position.... in the league. Winshare is qualitative. fantasy is just selected statsitical impact. The kid isn't playing big minutes, which would ONLY HELP him in this regard, yet there you have it. He is still a little monster.... yet that is because of the others.Not really because of him.

3. In the playoffs he led the team in every qualitative system, and was the clear "best player" on the team. They played their best with him out there, and played their worst with him out. He led theteam in minutes, so it wasn't as if he could ride ANYONE"s coattails.

So if he was actually being made to look better by his great teammates, then why did they suck so badly when he was out? I mean, if Rondo is just a so-so player, then why did the team implode without him? Why didn't they just make somebody else look wonderful.... ya know, like how Rondo made the guys who out there look great against the Nets and Cleveland in the pre-season.... without Paul, Ray and KG on the court. Rondo and our bench (sometimes the END of our bench) vs the starters from the other team. Did we suffer? Uhhhh.... no. Why was that. Are Paul, Ray and KG so wonderful that they can actually make Rondo look good from the bench? I guess they space the floor better from there, being guarded when they aren't even physically on the court.

You see, some basic logic can figure a whole bunch of things out. Not just the stats. I LOVE the stats you use, and have used them for years myself. I just think that it is a mistake to chain yourself to any one thing.

[hard work]

I love wolves.

[Wolves2011]

Funny stuff!!

But Rondo's performance in 29 NBA games against the best players in the NBA is best news for Celtics fans. .

If you are curioius to see how Rondo did when compared to the best PG in the NBA, see the first posting, in this string.

Hint: He dominated about half of them and outplayed most of the rest.

Honestly, Wolves, you evn get on my nerves a little with your rants, but your heart is in the right place. You should explore some other ways to express Rondo's sability and talents, though.

Case in point:

Rondo is supposedly the product of playing with such wonderful teammates in a system which is somehow "perfect" for him. If that were actually the case, then

1. Why does he so regularly and routinely outperform these teammates? I mean, I know that great players can make lesser players look better than they normally would, but I have yet to hear of great players make lesser players look better than they great players do themselves. Evidently that is what is happening in Boston, though. Garnett went down with an injury, and Rondo basically took over... so what you remove the guy who was Rondo's biggest oncourt ally, and somehow his statistical improvement was actually because Paul and Ray are so wonderful... and not Rondo.

I don't know. Maybe I'm just not all that bright, but how exactly does removing KG allow Paul and Ray to make Rondo look better than them, when the idea is that Rondo is actually the product of the great players around him.

2. Currently Rondo is 3rd in the league in winshare and, surprisngly, is even 4th in fanatsy rating. Not at his position.... in the league. Winshare is qualitative. fantasy is just selected statsitical impact. The kid isn't playing big minutes, which would ONLY HELP him in this regard, yet there you have it. He is still a little monster.... yet that is because of the others.Not really because of him.

3. In the playoffs he led the team in every qualitative system, and was the clear "best player" on the team. They played their best with him out there, and played their worst with him out. He led theteam in minutes, so it wasn't as if he could ride ANYONE"s coattails.

So if he was actually being made to look better by his great teammates, then why did they suck so badly when he was out? I mean, if Rondo is just a so-so player, then why did the team implode without him? Why didn't they just make somebody else look wonderful.... ya know, like how Rondo made the guys who out there look great against the Nets and Cleveland in the pre-season.... without Paul, Ray and KG on the court. Rondo and our bench (sometimes the END of our bench) vs the starters from the other team. Did we suffer? Uhhhh.... no. Why was that. Are Paul, Ray and KG so wonderful that they can actually make Rondo look good from the bench? I guess they space the floor better from there, being guarded when they aren't even physically on the court.

You see, some basic logic can figure a whole bunch of things out. Not just the stats. I LOVE the stats you use, and have used them for years myself. I just think that it is a mistake to chain yourself to any one thing.

I like your post.

I didn't want to use any esoteric stats, like wins share, plus minus etc. Just wanted to use the "stuff" from the box score which everyone has seen for years.

People don't say, the stats are wrong in any way. They just say funny things to distract from the truth. Rondo is easily one of the best PG in the NBA. Chris Paul is probably still better, but NO other point guard is better. Rondo has outplayed them all.

Now we'll hear about R's or milk or tatoo's or something else funny but irrelevant again........

The humor is just a way to distract. If they don't refute, why should I have tell tell it in another way.

As I said, I like your post, but the clear truth is also in the first post. Rondo dominated almost half of the best PG in the NBA and outplayed most of the rest.

I don't think many of the "jokers" on this site realized that....

[GregB]

Funny stuff!!

But Rondo's performance in 29 NBA games against the best players in the NBA is best news for Celtics fans. .

If you are curioius to see how Rondo did when compared to the best PG in the NBA, see the first posting, in this string.

Hint: He dominated about half of them and outplayed most of the rest.

Honestly, Wolves, you evn get on my nerves a little with your rants, but your heart is in the right place. You should explore some other ways to express Rondo's sability and talents, though.

Case in point:

Rondo is supposedly the product of playing with such wonderful teammates in a system which is somehow "perfect" for him. If that were actually the case, then

1. Why does he so regularly and routinely outperform these teammates? I mean, I know that great players can make lesser players look better than they normally would, but I have yet to hear of great players make lesser players look better than they great players do themselves. Evidently that is what is happening in Boston, though. Garnett went down with an injury, and Rondo basically took over... so what you remove the guy who was Rondo's biggest oncourt ally, and somehow his statistical improvement was actually because Paul and Ray are so wonderful... and not Rondo.

I don't know. Maybe I'm just not all that bright, but how exactly does removing KG allow Paul and Ray to make Rondo look better than them, when the idea is that Rondo is actually the product of the great players around him.

2. Currently Rondo is 3rd in the league in winshare and, surprisngly, is even 4th in fanatsy rating. Not at his position.... in the league. Winshare is qualitative. fantasy is just selected statsitical impact. The kid isn't playing big minutes, which would ONLY HELP him in this regard, yet there you have it. He is still a little monster.... yet that is because of the others.Not really because of him.

3. In the playoffs he led the team in every qualitative system, and was the clear "best player" on the team. They played their best with him out there, and played their worst with him out. He led theteam in minutes, so it wasn't as if he could ride ANYONE"s coattails.

So if he was actually being made to look better by his great teammates, then why did they suck so badly when he was out? I mean, if Rondo is just a so-so player, then why did the team implode without him? Why didn't they just make somebody else look wonderful.... ya know, like how Rondo made the guys who out there look great against the Nets and Cleveland in the pre-season.... without Paul, Ray and KG on the court. Rondo and our bench (sometimes the END of our bench) vs the starters from the other team. Did we suffer? Uhhhh.... no. Why was that. Are Paul, Ray and KG so wonderful that they can actually make Rondo look good from the bench? I guess they space the floor better from there, being guarded when they aren't even physically on the court.

You see, some basic logic can figure a whole bunch of things out. Not just the stats. I LOVE the stats you use, and have used them for years myself. I just think that it is a mistake to chain yourself to any one thing.

I like your post.

I didn't want to use any esoteric stats, like wins share, plus minus etc. Just wanted to use the "stuff" from the box score which everyone has seen for years.

People don't say, the stats are wrong in any way. They just say funny things to distract from the truth. Rondo is easily one of the best PG in the NBA. Chris Paul is probably still better, but NO other point guard is better. Rondo has outplayed them all.

Now we'll hear about R's or milk or tatoo's or something else funny but irrelevant again........

The humor is just a way to distract. If they don't refute, why should I have tell tell it in another way.

As I said, I like your post, but the clear truth is also in the first post. Rondo dominated almost half of the best PG in the NBA and outplayed most of the rest.

I don't think many of the "jokers" on this site realized that....

Yes, But Stats don't always tell the whole story. Everyone on here would agree Rondo is a very good PG. But, It's a lot easier to shut down your competition when you play on the best defensive team in the league. Rondo is a great defender in his own right. But, It certainly benefits him to have guy like KG, Perk and Sheed behind him when his man blows by. You keep quoting stats, Why don't you try watching the game?

Also, Please don't try and act like some stat guru here. You didn't know the difference between an assist and a rebound when you started posting on this board. Now you quote stats like you made them up.

[Wolves2011]

Yes, But Stats don't always tell the whole story. Everyone on here would agree Rondo is a very good PG. But, It's a lot easier to shut down your competition when you play on the best defensive team in the league. Rondo is a great defender in his own right. But, It certainly benefits him to have guy like KG, Perk and Sheed behind him when his man blows by. You keep quoting stats, Why don't you try watching the game?

Most of those PG's Rondo dominated or outplayed, were on very good teams themselves.

Just out of curiosity what would Rondo have to do, to be considered a great PG in your eyes? My guess, is scoring 20 pts per game. But his coach, wants him to set up other players not focus on scoring himself.

Is additional scoring the only thing that would impress you.

[And don't tell me something stupid like Foul shooting. If he shot 80% it would add half a point per game. His assists add much more than that....]

[SichtingLives]

Just out of curiosity what would Rondo have to do, to be considered a great PG in your eyes? My guess, is scoring 20 pts per game. But his coach, wants him to set up other players not focus on scoring himself.

Is additional scoring the only thing that would impress you.

[And don't tell me something stupid like Foul shooting. If he shot 80% it would add half a point per game. His assists add much more than that....]

Define "great point guard". The word "great" itself is probably the most overused and falsely applied descriptor of players that there is, I mean where do you want to draw the line on "greatness"? Greatness, to me at least, is something that can only truly be measured after a player and all his contemporaries are retired and you have the ability to look back at their whole career, AND where they stood in relation to all the other players of their generation. He's still a young kid in the infancy of his career, and so are many of the other players we're comparing him to. Let them mature and their careers unfold before we start applying that kind of label to anyone.

Although Rajon tends to be active in a lot of statistical categories, he's one of the players in the league who's overall game, impact, positives and negatives are weighed more through his impact on the team than his personal statistics. When he's playing well, he sets the tone for the Celtics on offense and defense. It doesn't really matter what statistical categories he's filling or not filling. It's about the pressure he causes on D, and the pace he establishes on offense. I don't care if he scores 20 points or 5, 12 assists or 3, 10 boards or 2. Is he playing active D, disrupting passing lanes, pushing the ball up the court? Is he coming up with loose balls, harassing guys on both ends and running circles around everyone else? Is he making the offense run smoothly? That's all that matters to me. He has a very unique skillset. He can have more of a positive impact on a game scoring 2 points than some players will scoring 25. Of course when he plays well his stats will tend to reflect it, as with anyone else. But his biggest challenge as a player is to be able to have that positive impact on the game every time out, which is something he still struggles with. When Rondo does Rondo at least 90% of the time, I'll feel comfortable putting him with those Top 5 PG's. He's not quite consistent enough yet. But he also isn't very behind any of those guys either.

[Wolves2011]

The question should be directed at those who say, Rondo is "only mediocre", not in top 5 in NBA, 10 other PG in the NBA could have won with the Big 3, ... etc... etc.....

Let me define greatness for his generation, as in top 3 for his position. What would it take for those who question rondo's ability, and status in the league, to say he is in the top 3 PG in the NBA?

Is it scoring more?

More assists?
[they are up?]

better defense?
[he was the best "guard" defender in the NBA last year as ranked by defensive win share and top 3/4 as ranked by NBA all defense (he was on the 2nd team).]

What precisely would it take, for those who question Rondo, to say, he is the "real deal", one of the best in the NBA.

My hypothesis, is they focus mostly on scoring. If a player or PG doesn't score they can't really be great. But I'm trying to understand. Maybe I'm wrong. [Wonder what they would have said about Russell who was a career 15 ppg guy and never the "go to" guy on offense.]

So, for those who question Rondo, what would it take for you to say, he is definitely top 3 in the NBA.

[SichtingLives]

Well most fans outside of the Celtics would never give him Top 3 recognition whether he deserves it or not (imo at this point he doesn't), simply because they don't like him.

I had thought coming into this season that Rondo does need to increase his scoring to elevate his game and status around the league. But I'm starting to think that's it's not so much a drastic improvement to his weaknesses as a player that are going to solidify his status, but further refinement of his strengths. He's never going to shoot like Chris Paul or Steve Nash, but he can be the best defender out of all the point guards. He has the potential to be the best perimeter defending guard in the league due of his length, sticky hands and quickness. He can become the best rebounding point guard in the league. He can be the best floor general in the league. He's already close to or at the top of these categories already, and he still has room for improvement in all of them. These are the things that he really needs to excel at during his career to gain recognition. I'm not saying that he should just forget about his shooting or scoring capabilities, but whether he improves his shot or not will not be the ultimate factor in deciding where he stands amongst his peers.

Look at it this way (and no, I'm not getting into a player vs. player comparison here). When people think back to the past 15 years, are they going to have Jason Kidd right at the top of the list of best point guards in the league during his career? If they know the game, it's a no brainer. People might note that he's never been a good shooter, but nobody is going to make the claim that his impact or ability was overrated because of that fact. They might bring it up or suggest it, but over the course of his career, you have to respect all the other things he brought to the table.

Rajon still needs to improve his game and his consistency to be on that level. But it will never be his scoring that defines him as a player, it will be how well he does just about everything else. The shooting will just be the cherry on top if he improves it. 98% of the players in the league have some sort of deficiency to their game, but how much of a detriment the weaknesses are to the team vs. what they provide in spite of those weaknesses is a pretty good measure of a player.

[GregB]

Yes, But Stats don't always tell the whole story. Everyone on here would agree Rondo is a very good PG. But, It's a lot easier to shut down your competition when you play on the best defensive team in the league. Rondo is a great defender in his own right. But, It certainly benefits him to have guy like KG, Perk and Sheed behind him when his man blows by. You keep quoting stats, Why don't you try watching the game?

Most of those PG's Rondo dominated or outplayed, were on very good teams themselves.

Just out of curiosity what would Rondo have to do, to be considered a great PG in your eyes? My guess, is scoring 20 pts per game. But his coach, wants him to set up other players not focus on scoring himself.

Is additional scoring the only thing that would impress you.

[And don't tell me something stupid like Foul shooting. If he shot 80% it would add half a point per game. His assists add much more than that....]

No, But when you can't trust your PG to hit a FT or a jumpshot at the end of the game. Then that is a problem. You expect your PG to handle the ball at the end of a game. Don't you see how that could be a major issue? See that's what happens when you just look at the stats and don't apply simple common sense. Rondo is an elite play maker and defender. But, This is what seperates him from a guy like Chris Paul and why he isn't a max player. Rondo is in the perfect situation playing on the Celts because they have guys like Pierce who can control the ball when needed.

You are just too funny though. You make it sound like I don't like Rondo. I think Rondo is top 5-7 PG in the NBA. That's whats so annoying about you. Most people on this board feel Rondo is one of the top PGs in the NBA. You just feel the need to make it sound like everyone is dogging Rondo so you can be right. When in reality the difference between what you think of Rondo and what many think of Rondo is pretty minimal.

But, Their really isn't a point in talking to a wall, i mean you. You get to be the first member of my foe/ignore list. Congrats.

[GuyClinch]

No, But when you can't trust your PG to hit a FT or a jumpshot at the end of the game. Then that is a problem. You expect your PG to handle the ball at the end of a game. Don't you see how that could be a major issue? See that's what happens when you just look at the stats and don't apply simple common sense. Rondo is an elite play maker and defender. But, This is what seperates him from a guy like Chris Paul and why he isn't a max player. Rondo is in the perfect situation playing on the Celts because they have guys like Pierce who can control the ball when needed.

Great post man. You said it better then I could.. it's a lost cause though the wolves guy is like Rondo's agent or something..

Pete

[Wolves2011]

No, But when you can't trust your PG to hit a FT or a jumpshot at the end of the game. Then that is a problem. You expect your PG to handle the ball at the end of a game. Don't you see how that could be a major issue? See that's what happens when you just look at the stats and don't apply simple common sense. Rondo is an elite play maker and defender. But, This is what seperates him from a guy like Chris Paul and why he isn't a max player. Rondo is in the perfect situation playing on the Celts because they have guys like Pierce who can control the ball when needed.

You are just too funny though. You make it sound like I don't like Rondo. I think Rondo is top 5-7 PG in the NBA. That's whats so annoying about you. Most people on this board feel Rondo is one of the top PGs in the NBA. You just feel the need to make it sound like everyone is dogging Rondo so you can be right. When in reality the difference between what you think of Rondo and what many think of Rondo is pretty minimal.

But, Their really isn't a point in talking to a wall, i mean you. You get to be the first member of my foe/ignore list. Congrats.

Sorry, really didn't mean to pick you out specifically. It was just a general question, for those who questioned Rondo.

[Wolves2011]

Well most fans outside of the Celtics would never give him Top 3 recognition whether he deserves it or not (imo at this point he doesn't), simply because they don't like him.

I had thought coming into this season that Rondo does need to increase his scoring to elevate his game and status around the league. But I'm starting to think that's it's not so much a drastic improvement to his weaknesses as a player that are going to solidify his status, but further refinement of his strengths. He's never going to shoot like Chris Paul or Steve Nash, but he can be the best defender out of all the point guards. He has the potential to be the best perimeter defending guard in the league due of his length, sticky hands and quickness. He can become the best rebounding point guard in the league. He can be the best floor general in the league. He's already close to or at the top of these categories already, and he still has room for improvement in all of them. These are the things that he really needs to excel at during his career to gain recognition. I'm not saying that he should just forget about his shooting or scoring capabilities, but whether he improves his shot or not will not be the ultimate factor in deciding where he stands amongst his peers.

I'm identifying the things you said Rondo needed to do to be one of the top 3.

1) Best defender of all PG

2) Best perimeter defending guard

3) Best rebounding guard in the league

4) Best floor general in the league

You mention he is close to the top in these categories. How would you rank him in these categories?
and who is better?

[Wolves2011]

The question should be directed at those who say, Rondo is "only mediocre", not in top 5 in NBA, 10 other PG in the NBA could have won with the Big 3, ... etc... etc.....

Let me define greatness for his generation, as in top 3 for his position. What would it take for those who question rondo's ability, and status in the league, to say he is in the top 3 PG in the NBA?

Is it scoring more?

More assists?
[they are up?]

better defense?
[he was the best "guard" defender in the NBA last year as ranked by defensive win share and top 3/4 as ranked by NBA all defense (he was on the 2nd team).]

What precisely would it take, for those who question Rondo, to say, he is the "real deal", one of the best in the NBA.

My hypothesis, is they focus mostly on scoring. If a player or PG doesn't score they can't really be great. But I'm trying to understand. Maybe I'm wrong. [Wonder what they would have said about Russell who was a career 15 ppg guy and never the "go to" guy on offense.]

So, for those who question Rondo, what would it take for you to say, he is definitely top 3 in the NBA.

see question above for all those who "question" Rondo as a top 5 point guard.

What would it take for him to be a top 3 point guard in your opinion?

[CharlesBradleyLikesToDunk]

Dearest Wolves2011:

When are you going to be done? Just curious so I can know how to plan my year. We get that you love Rondo. We also get that you love to talk down to people, beat your chest when you are "right", and most of all love to spout the same things over and over.

I also noticed that you conveniently ignored GregB's paragraph from above:

"...when you can't trust your PG to hit a FT or a jumpshot at the end of the game. Then that is a problem. You expect your PG to handle the ball at the end of a game. Don't you see how that could be a major issue? See that's what happens when you just look at the stats and don't apply simple common sense. Rondo is an elite play maker and defender. But, This is what seperates him from a guy like Chris Paul and why he isn't a max player. Rondo is in the perfect situation playing on the Celts because they have guys like Pierce who can control the ball when needed."

Interesting you didn't touch on that, you just started talking about defense and rebounding (again).

Wolves, at some point you'll realize that you are arguing against people who for the most part like Rondo. I'm one of those people. I see what he brings to the table but also see where his lack of a consistent jump shot hurts him (Bob Ryan for one loves to point out how unstoppable Rondo would be if he developed a foul line pull-up). While he is a good defensive player (in this day and age no point guard can be a great defender -- rules won't allow it), a swell rebounder, an excellent playmaker (especially when he sets the tempo), his simple lack of a jumpshot keeps him from being a potential great...and there's no saying he can't develop it. And man, if he could hit his free throws, I would say go to the hole 24-7 young man!

Instead of taking 3 hours to look up stats (did it take you that long? really? what do you have a Commodore 64?) and talking down to people and spouting off about how you were right all along about Rondo being signed (and please don't talk about "experts" agreeing with you again! I tap out for the love of all that is beautiful in the world), why don't you take some time and watch some actual basketball.

Rondo is a very good young point guard who could be great if he fixes that one flaw (and it is a big flaw). No matter what your wages of wins, head-to-head stats say, it's kind of important for a guard to be able to shoot.

As for other point guards, Rondo is certainly among the finest.

He is a notch below Paul and Williams for sure (and please also stop with your head-to-head stats..they give me a headache. Look at their overall bodies of work. I know Rondo has a title. I'm pretty sure Paul and Williams would too if they were qbing that team 2 years ago).

I'd still rather have Nash (yes he is old, yes he doesn't play good D, but he is so good offensively that I'd rather have him right now at least) and maybe Billups (but I'm perfectly content with having Rondo instead of him too). But they are at least debatable in my eyes.

Derrick Rose should be better down the road (no way guaranteed) and maybe Russell Westbrook will be too (I don't know about that). Only time will tell.

Tony Parker and Devin Harris are in the mix too. I'd rather have Rondo, but they are pretty good.

To answer your question about what Rondo being considered great: Rondo is very good. I happen to think only Paul and Deron Williams are great right now as far as point guards go. Again, I may be old fashioned, but I like for my guards to be able to shoot a little bit (and just as important -- not be afraid to shoot when they are left open). Paul and Williams do that and a whole lot more.

In conclusion, what I'm saying in long-winded fashion is most of us like Rondo quite a bit. Some of us may think he got overpaid a little bit (hey that's pro sports). Some of us think he could be great. Most everyone agrees he needs to develop that jumper and work on his free throw shooting.

You just keep coming on here and spouting the same stuff over and over all the while talking down to people. Even when responses don't come your way you keep it going. You are like the Don Quixote of RealGM. I hardly post here anymore and only do when so inspired, so I guess you did do something right.

Can we just leave it at that and call it a day? I realize I don't speak for everyone, but man, your act is getting tired. We get it, ok, dude/man/guy/pal?

[Cyclical]

I realize I don't speak for everyone, but man, your act is getting tired. We get it, ok, dude/man/guy/pal?

No, you do speak for everyone! Thanks for saving us the typing.

[Wolves2011]

Dearest Wolves2011:

"...when you can't trust your PG to hit a FT or a jumpshot at the end of the game. Then that is a problem. You expect your PG to handle the ball at the end of a game. Don't you see how that could be a major issue? See that's what happens when you just look at the stats and don't apply simple common sense. Rondo is an elite play maker and defender. But, This is what seperates him from a guy like Chris Paul and why he isn't a max player. Rondo is in the perfect situation playing on the Celts because they have guys like Pierce who can control the ball when needed."

Interesting you didn't touch on that, you just started talking about defense and rebounding (again).

Wolves, at some point you'll realize that you are arguing against people who for the most part like Rondo. I'm one of those people. I see what he brings to the table but also see where his lack of a consistent jump shot hurts him (Bob Ryan for one loves to point out how unstoppable Rondo would be if he developed a foul line pull-up). While he is a good defensive player (in this day and age no point guard can be a great defender -- rules won't allow it), a swell rebounder, an excellent playmaker (especially when he sets the tempo), his simple lack of a jumpshot keeps him from being a potential great...and there's no saying he can't develop it. And man, if he could hit his free throws, I would say go to the hole 24-7 young man!

Rondo is a very good young point guard who could be great if he fixes that one flaw (and it is a big flaw). No matter what your wages of wins, head-to-head stats say, it's kind of important for a guard to be able to shoot.

As for other point guards, Rondo is certainly among the finest.

He is a notch below Paul and Williams for sure (and please also stop with your head-to-head stats..they give me a headache. Look at their overall bodies of work. I know Rondo has a title. I'm pretty sure Paul and Williams would too if they were qbing that team 2 years ago).

I'd still rather have Nash (yes he is old, yes he doesn't play good D, but he is so good offensively that I'd rather have him right now at least) and maybe Billups (but I'm perfectly content with having Rondo instead of him too). But they are at least debatable in my eyes.

Derrick Rose should be better down the road (no way guaranteed) and maybe Russell Westbrook will be too (I don't know about that). Only time will tell.

Tony Parker and Devin Harris are in the mix too. I'd rather have Rondo, but they are pretty good.

To answer your question about what Rondo being considered great: Rondo is very good. I happen to think only Paul and Deron Williams are great right now as far as point guards go. Again, I may be old fashioned, but I like for my guards to be able to shoot a little bit (and just as important -- not be afraid to shoot when they are left open). Paul and Williams do that and a whole lot more.

In conclusion, what I'm saying in long-winded fashion is most of us like Rondo quite a bit. Some of us may think he got overpaid a little bit (hey that's pro sports). Some of us think he could be great. Most everyone agrees he needs to develop that jumper and work on his free throw shooting.

If you are saying Rondo is the 3rd best PG and the NBA and most on this site agree, my work is done. It broke my heart that we had one of the best PG in the NBA and most people, for years, didn't see it. They attributed all of our success to the Big 3.

I've listened to people say here and elsewhere say Rondo only looked good because he played with the big 3, when Rondo has probably helped them more than the Big 3 have helped him statistically. I'd like to see him shoot better as well. I think his jumper now looks better mechanically. He now needs repetition in game situations.

The last thing the Celtics need to do is focus more of the scoring, against specific opponents around Rondo. Last night is the perfect example. Yesterday against the Suns the Celtics ran their "regular" offense. What Doc should have done is let Rondo drive to the hoop every time down the floor. Nash can't cover Rondo. Either Rondo gets a layup or someone helps Nash. If someone helps Nash Rondo finds his man for an easy shot. We score consistently and easily and probably keep Nash off the floor with fouls. Thats basically what we did against specific opponents like the Suns, last spring when KG was out. But with all of the big 3 back and wallace here, Doc is worried more about keep everyone happy with touches rather than winning.

That will be the final step in the development of respect for Rondo. Against specific opponents and match ups, Pierce or Ray or KG becomes the focus of the offense. We should do the same with Rondo, not only when members of the Big 3 are injured but always. Rondo is a weapon and we should use him.

[hard work]

Dearest Wolves2011:

"...when you can't trust your PG to hit a FT or a jumpshot at the end of the game. Then that is a problem. You expect your PG to handle the ball at the end of a game. Don't you see how that could be a major issue? See that's what happens when you just look at the stats and don't apply simple common sense. Rondo is an elite play maker and defender. But, This is what seperates him from a guy like Chris Paul and why he isn't a max player. Rondo is in the perfect situation playing on the Celts because they have guys like Pierce who can control the ball when needed."

Interesting you didn't touch on that, you just started talking about defense and rebounding (again).

Wolves, at some point you'll realize that you are arguing against people who for the most part like Rondo. I'm one of those people. I see what he brings to the table but also see where his lack of a consistent jump shot hurts him (Bob Ryan for one loves to point out how unstoppable Rondo would be if he developed a foul line pull-up). While he is a good defensive player (in this day and age no point guard can be a great defender -- rules won't allow it), a swell rebounder, an excellent playmaker (especially when he sets the tempo), his simple lack of a jumpshot keeps him from being a potential great...and there's no saying he can't develop it. And man, if he could hit his free throws, I would say go to the hole 24-7 young man!

Rondo is a very good young point guard who could be great if he fixes that one flaw (and it is a big flaw). No matter what your wages of wins, head-to-head stats say, it's kind of important for a guard to be able to shoot.

As for other point guards, Rondo is certainly among the finest.

He is a notch below Paul and Williams for sure (and please also stop with your head-to-head stats..they give me a headache. Look at their overall bodies of work. I know Rondo has a title. I'm pretty sure Paul and Williams would too if they were qbing that team 2 years ago).

I'd still rather have Nash (yes he is old, yes he doesn't play good D, but he is so good offensively that I'd rather have him right now at least) and maybe Billups (but I'm perfectly content with having Rondo instead of him too). But they are at least debatable in my eyes.

Derrick Rose should be better down the road (no way guaranteed) and maybe Russell Westbrook will be too (I don't know about that). Only time will tell.

Tony Parker and Devin Harris are in the mix too. I'd rather have Rondo, but they are pretty good.

To answer your question about what Rondo being considered great: Rondo is very good. I happen to think only Paul and Deron Williams are great right now as far as point guards go. Again, I may be old fashioned, but I like for my guards to be able to shoot a little bit (and just as important -- not be afraid to shoot when they are left open). Paul and Williams do that and a whole lot more.

In conclusion, what I'm saying in long-winded fashion is most of us like Rondo quite a bit. Some of us may think he got overpaid a little bit (hey that's pro sports). Some of us think he could be great. Most everyone agrees he needs to develop that jumper and work on his free throw shooting.

If you are saying Rondo is the 3rd best PG and the NBA and most on this site agree, my work is done.

I'm pretty sure he didn't say that.

[Wolves2011]

If you are saying Rondo is the 3rd best PG and the NBA and most on this site agree, my work is done.

I'm pretty sure he didn't say that.

Then my work isn't done. ....lol...anyway its getting late and I'm getting tired....

[CharlesBradleyLikesToDunk]

Wolves2011,

Where I rank Rondo among point guards wasn't the purpose of my post. Again, I don't like to speak for everyone, but I think a vast majority of us are just tired of your constant Rondo posts. We get it, dude. Everyone has their own opinions, and we know yours.