CelticsStrong
Celtics Basketball => Celtics Talk => Topic started by: KG Living Legend on November 07, 2012, 09:27:57 PM
-
I used to think that Rondo was going to be better than Super Jason Kidd in those years with the Nets where Kidd was really something to watch. Now I just don't know. I don't think he get there.
Will Rondo ever be a top five player in the game.
-
Let me check my tea leaves.
-
Here you go:
(http://www2.macleans.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/MAC10_TEA_LEAVES01_wide.jpg)
-
That's a yes. Nice.
-
That's a yes. Nice.
Oh carp, it's a mirrored image.
Here's the correct one!
(http://www.ditdoetdirk.nl/crap/flippered.jpg)
-
His jumper is looking good this year. I dont know if he'll ever be a top 5 player in the league but who cares, he is improving each year.
-
As long as he is a specialist at passing, I'll take it. Shot needs work, but it is getting better.
I think once Pierce and KG are gone, his true colors will come out.
And by true colors, we will really see what he is about. He will have to step it up a little more. Not saying true colors in the terms of, "he won't be s**t."
-
In what universe is he not pretty much already there? Passing, rebounding, and defense are all easily comparable. Equally streaky shooters. Kidd might have had a slight advantage at posting up and getting to the line, but overall Rondo is a much more efficient scorer.
It's not like he needs this giant leap or anything.
-
In what universe is he not pretty much already there? Passing, rebounding, and defense are all easily comparable. Equally streaky shooters. Kidd might have had a slight advantage at posting up and getting to the line, but overall Rondo is a much more efficient scorer.
It's not like he needs this giant leap or anything.
Yeah, I'd say he's pretty close already. I think he is missing one thing.
Magic Johnson constantly talks about, as a point guard, feeding guys at the appropriate times for a variety of reasons (maybe to build their confidence, maybe to get them to work harder on defense, etc...) and also the skill in finding the right guy with the right pass - some guys are better at catching different passes and like the ball in different spots.
Rondo has some of this skill, but not to the level of Kidd. Look at how much money Kidd made for Kenyon Martin, Richard Jefferson, and even Mikki Moore due to his ability to feed them with the right pass in the right place at the right time. He made Mikki Moore look so good he got an $18 million contract with the Kings! Rondo would've never made Mikki look good enough to get $18 million.
It is hard to describe exactly, because it is so innate, immeasurable, and intangible, but I'd say Rondo is very close but is a bit lower on the "floor general", let's call it, scale than Kidd.
-
In what universe is he not pretty much already there? Passing, rebounding, and defense are all easily comparable. Equally streaky shooters. Kidd might have had a slight advantage at posting up and getting to the line, but overall Rondo is a much more efficient scorer.
It's not like he needs this giant leap or anything.
Yeah, I'd say he's pretty close already. I think he is missing one thing.
Magic Johnson constantly talks about, as a point guard, feeding guys at the appropriate times for a variety of reasons (maybe to build their confidence, maybe to get them to work harder on defense, etc...) and also the skill in finding the right guy with the right pass - some guys are better at catching different passes and like the ball in different spots.
Rondo has some of this skill, but not to the level of Kidd. Look at how much money Kidd made for Kenyon Martin, Richard Jefferson, and even Mikki Moore due to his ability to feed them with the right pass in the right place at the right time. He made Mikki Moore look so good he got an $18 million contract with the Kings! Rondo would've never made Mikki look good enough to get $18 million.
It is hard to describe exactly, because it is so innate, immeasurable, and intangible, but I'd say Rondo is very close but is a bit lower on the "floor general", let's call it, scale than Kidd.
TP. Great analysis.
I'd ask this question again once Pierce and KG are gone. We'll see what Rondo can do without future HOF'ers. After one or two seasons, I think it'd be fair to compare the two. Right now, it isn't, because if you look at who Rondo's playing with and who Kidd played with, there's a huge gap in talent.
-
In what universe is he not pretty much already there? Passing, rebounding, and defense are all easily comparable. Equally streaky shooters. Kidd might have had a slight advantage at posting up and getting to the line, but overall Rondo is a much more efficient scorer.
It's not like he needs this giant leap or anything.
Yeah, I'd say he's pretty close already. I think he is missing one thing.
Magic Johnson constantly talks about, as a point guard, feeding guys at the appropriate times for a variety of reasons (maybe to build their confidence, maybe to get them to work harder on defense, etc...) and also the skill in finding the right guy with the right pass - some guys are better at catching different passes and like the ball in different spots.
Rondo has some of this skill, but not to the level of Kidd. Look at how much money Kidd made for Kenyon Martin, Richard Jefferson, and even Mikki Moore due to his ability to feed them with the right pass in the right place at the right time. He made Mikki Moore look so good he got an $18 million contract with the Kings! Rondo would've never made Mikki look good enough to get $18 million.
It is hard to describe exactly, because it is so innate, immeasurable, and intangible, but I'd say Rondo is very close but is a bit lower on the "floor general", let's call it, scale than Kidd.
I disagree. He made Hollins look like a good player last year and made Quis look pretty good as well. Those are just end of the bench guys. Obviously he makes everyone better.
IMO, hes already at the same level and even better when the playoffs come around.
-
Rondo is great and he's definitely like a poor man's version of Jason Kidd in his prime. I don't think he'll ever be a legimate "top 5 player" in the game, though. He's definitely a top 5 point guard right now, though.
-
In what universe is he not pretty much already there? Passing, rebounding, and defense are all easily comparable. Equally streaky shooters. Kidd might have had a slight advantage at posting up and getting to the line, but overall Rondo is a much more efficient scorer.
It's not like he needs this giant leap or anything.
Yeah, I'd say he's pretty close already. I think he is missing one thing.
Magic Johnson constantly talks about, as a point guard, feeding guys at the appropriate times for a variety of reasons (maybe to build their confidence, maybe to get them to work harder on defense, etc...) and also the skill in finding the right guy with the right pass - some guys are better at catching different passes and like the ball in different spots.
Rondo has some of this skill, but not to the level of Kidd. Look at how much money Kidd made for Kenyon Martin, Richard Jefferson, and even Mikki Moore due to his ability to feed them with the right pass in the right place at the right time. He made Mikki Moore look so good he got an $18 million contract with the Kings! Rondo would've never made Mikki look good enough to get $18 million.
It is hard to describe exactly, because it is so innate, immeasurable, and intangible, but I'd say Rondo is very close but is a bit lower on the "floor general", let's call it, scale than Kidd.
Aside from the fact that I'd say that Rondo is a somewhat better passer and floor general than Kidd was, you have to consider a few things. First of all Martin was a pretty good player and there wasn't any dropoff of note to his game when he went to Denver, the dropoff happened after he had a serious knee injury. More importantly, Rondo's still a few years younger than Kidd was when he joined the Nets and 6-7 years younger than Kidd was when he got Moore that contract. I'm sure that the experience between now and then will improve his passing.
If you compare Rondo and Kidd up through the age Rondo was last year, the numbers were pretty comparable, in fact Rondo's were probably a little better.
http://bkref.com/tiny/BAGLI
-
Rondo is great and he's definitely like a poor man's version of Jason Kidd in his prime. I don't think he'll ever be a legimate "top 5 player" in the game, though. He's definitely a top 5 point guard right now, though.
Not during the regular season, definitely top 5 in the playoffs when healthy. I can live with that.
-
I used to think that Rondo was going to be better than Super Jason Kidd in those years with the Nets where Kidd was really something to watch. Now I just don't know. I don't think he get there.
Will Rondo ever be a top five player in the game.
He's got a very good shot to be a top five player, if he's not already there. He finished eighth in MVP voting last year, got better in the playoffs, he's off to close to a top five start this season (and he hasn't really had any monster games yet), he's well in the lead for ECF All-Star starter, and he's only 26.
Yeah, I think that by season's end Rondo will be considered a top five player. He's probably about 7th or 8th right now, but rising.
-
Maybe.
Biggest thing Rondo could do that Kidd did, become a respectable 3 point shooter.
He will never be able to post up other PGs.
He will not be able to defend SG later in his career once he slows down.
-
Maybe.
Biggest thing Rondo could do that Kidd did, become a respectable 3 point shooter.
He will never be able to post up other PGs.
He will not be able to defend SG later in his career once he slows down.
I don't agree with that last part. Even in his early to mid thirties, Rondo is going to be quick enough to stay with any guard. As far as getting posted up, teams try it now, but, despite his thin frame, he's pretty wiry strong, and he knows how to fight down there.
No, he'll never be as big and strong as Kidd, but Kidd was never as fast and quick as Rondo. Sure, he'll slow down at some point, but he's going to be one of the fastest players in the NBA for at least another six or seven years.
Look at Tony Parker. Is he getting slow?
-
Maybe.
Biggest thing Rondo could do that Kidd did, become a respectable 3 point shooter.
He will never be able to post up other PGs.
He will not be able to defend SG later in his career once he slows down.
I don't agree with that last part. Even in his early to mid thirties, Rondo is going to be quick enough to stay with any guard. As far as getting posted up, teams try it now, but, despite his thin frame, he's pretty wiry strong, and he knows how to fight down there.
No, he'll never be as big and strong as Kidd, but Kidd was never as fast and quick as Rondo. Sure, he'll slow down at some point, but he's going to be one of the fastest players in the NBA for at least another six or seven years.
Look at Tony Parker. Is he getting slow?
I didn't put a time frame on it, but everyone will eventually slow down. I think he will have a harder time holding onto a large role as that happens vs. Kidd because his game is completely dependent on speed at this moment.
This is not a terrible thing. Eventually all players retire.
When comparing two player as who will be better, longevity is just another piece to look at.
-
In what universe is he not pretty much already there? Passing, rebounding, and defense are all easily comparable. Equally streaky shooters. Kidd might have had a slight advantage at posting up and getting to the line, but overall Rondo is a much more efficient scorer.
It's not like he needs this giant leap or anything.
Yeah, I'd say he's pretty close already. I think he is missing one thing.
Magic Johnson constantly talks about, as a point guard, feeding guys at the appropriate times for a variety of reasons (maybe to build their confidence, maybe to get them to work harder on defense, etc...) and also the skill in finding the right guy with the right pass - some guys are better at catching different passes and like the ball in different spots.
Rondo has some of this skill, but not to the level of Kidd. Look at how much money Kidd made for Kenyon Martin, Richard Jefferson, and even Mikki Moore due to his ability to feed them with the right pass in the right place at the right time. He made Mikki Moore look so good he got an $18 million contract with the Kings! Rondo would've never made Mikki look good enough to get $18 million.
It is hard to describe exactly, because it is so innate, immeasurable, and intangible, but I'd say Rondo is very close but is a bit lower on the "floor general", let's call it, scale than Kidd.
I disagree. He made Hollins look like a good player last year and made Quis look pretty good as well. Those are just end of the bench guys. Obviously he makes everyone better.
IMO, hes already at the same level and even better when the playoffs come around.
Aside from this being completely untrue as they both looked like horrible players last year, you're saying he made two league minimum, end of bench players look like two league minimum, end of bench players. Hollins and Marquis both signed league minimum, end of bench contracts. Marquis in particular just had the worst year of his entire career. I'm not blaming Rondo for that, but Hollins and Marquis don't help his case. At all. You can certainly find a better comparison than that.
-
In what universe is he not pretty much already there? Passing, rebounding, and defense are all easily comparable. Equally streaky shooters. Kidd might have had a slight advantage at posting up and getting to the line, but overall Rondo is a much more efficient scorer.
It's not like he needs this giant leap or anything.
Yeah, I'd say he's pretty close already. I think he is missing one thing.
Magic Johnson constantly talks about, as a point guard, feeding guys at the appropriate times for a variety of reasons (maybe to build their confidence, maybe to get them to work harder on defense, etc...) and also the skill in finding the right guy with the right pass - some guys are better at catching different passes and like the ball in different spots.
Rondo has some of this skill, but not to the level of Kidd. Look at how much money Kidd made for Kenyon Martin, Richard Jefferson, and even Mikki Moore due to his ability to feed them with the right pass in the right place at the right time. He made Mikki Moore look so good he got an $18 million contract with the Kings! Rondo would've never made Mikki look good enough to get $18 million.
It is hard to describe exactly, because it is so innate, immeasurable, and intangible, but I'd say Rondo is very close but is a bit lower on the "floor general", let's call it, scale than Kidd.
Aside from the fact that I'd say that Rondo is a somewhat better passer and floor general than Kidd was, you have to consider a few things. First of all Martin was a pretty good player and there wasn't any dropoff of note to his game when he went to Denver, the dropoff happened after he had a serious knee injury. More importantly, Rondo's still a few years younger than Kidd was when he joined the Nets and 6-7 years younger than Kidd was when he got Moore that contract. I'm sure that the experience between now and then will improve his passing.
If you compare Rondo and Kidd up through the age Rondo was last year, the numbers were pretty comparable, in fact Rondo's were probably a little better.
http://bkref.com/tiny/BAGLI
Sure, but Rondo's numbers should be better. The NBA game is now much more wide open in Rondo's prime than it was in Kidd's prime. This is evidenced by the fact that there are a bunch of players playing similarly to Rondo at his position (Westbrook, Parker, Rose, CP3, DeRon) while Kidd was pretty far ahead of the pack when he played.
Basketball in the year 1999 and in the year 2012 are different animals that favor the PG. Much easier to be a penetrator like Rondo when there is no size in the middle. The current NBA champions played a power forward at center and a small forward at power forward. The 1999 NBA champions played two 7 footers.
Do the same comparison for Tony Parker. Parker's numbers are substantially better. Are you saying Parker is also better than Kidd? Heck, Kyle Lowry's numbers are even comparable. How many current PGs have a chance to be better than Kidd in his prime using a simple statistics argument? Dozens? I mean, geez, Kyle Lowry is comparable by the stats you are considering.
I'd say that a comparison of where they ranked during their careers or who outperformed them during their own era would be a better comparison. Otherwise, a 2012 point guard outperforming a 1999 point guard should be no surprise to anyone.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&p1=kiddja01&y1=1999&p2=rondora01&y2=2012&p3=parketo01&y3=2008&p4=lowryky01&y4=2012
-
One thing about Kidd in New Jersey was how he changed the culture. It was similar to KG and his effect on Boston. I am unsure whether that is in Rondo's DNA. As far as stats go, I believe Rondo compares very well.
One thing Rondo has never had that Kidd always seemed to have was an elite athlete - yet still all-star caliber player - who can run on the break with him. If Rondo could play with a guy like that then I think he could impact the game consistently in a top 5 player way because of the ways he could play off a guy like that.
In his prime Kidd was very special when he played with McDyess, Marion, Martin, Jefferson, and even Vince Carter to a degree.
It's honestly why I have always been intrigued with a guy like Josh Smith or Rudy Gay. I feel that kind of athletic talent could only help Rondo showcase his talent even more.
-
No not as good as Kidd in his prime and not in top NBA ten but in top 5 in Point Guards.
-
I doubt it. I don't think that's in any way a negative toward Rondo, though; Kidd in his prime was amazing. I doubt we'll see Rondo put up a 17/7/11 season.
I do think there's an argument that Rondo is a better passer than Kidd was.
-
I dont know, I could see it happening especially if KG and Pierce continue to slow down at a huge rate. When Kidd was Rondo's age he has a 17 points, 7 rebounds, and 11 assists per game season. But Kidd averaged 3 more shots per game while shooting basically the same percentage as Rondo. Also averaged 2 more free throws per game.
If Rondo was more aggressive going to the basket I dont see why he couldnt average 16 to 17 a game but he is often very passive. I feel like Rondo could use his speed to get to the basket everytime down the floor, it doesnt make sense why he doesnt do it more often.
To see Rondo average 16 points, 6 boards, and 12 assists wouldnt surprise me in the least and those numbers are comparable to Kidd's bests statistical season.
-
In what universe is he not pretty much already there? Passing, rebounding, and defense are all easily comparable. Equally streaky shooters. Kidd might have had a slight advantage at posting up and getting to the line, but overall Rondo is a much more efficient scorer.
It's not like he needs this giant leap or anything.
Yeah, I'd say he's pretty close already. I think he is missing one thing.
Magic Johnson constantly talks about, as a point guard, feeding guys at the appropriate times for a variety of reasons (maybe to build their confidence, maybe to get them to work harder on defense, etc...) and also the skill in finding the right guy with the right pass - some guys are better at catching different passes and like the ball in different spots.
Rondo has some of this skill, but not to the level of Kidd. Look at how much money Kidd made for Kenyon Martin, Richard Jefferson, and even Mikki Moore due to his ability to feed them with the right pass in the right place at the right time. He made Mikki Moore look so good he got an $18 million contract with the Kings! Rondo would've never made Mikki look good enough to get $18 million.
It is hard to describe exactly, because it is so innate, immeasurable, and intangible, but I'd say Rondo is very close but is a bit lower on the "floor general", let's call it, scale than Kidd.
Aside from the fact that I'd say that Rondo is a somewhat better passer and floor general than Kidd was, you have to consider a few things. First of all Martin was a pretty good player and there wasn't any dropoff of note to his game when he went to Denver, the dropoff happened after he had a serious knee injury. More importantly, Rondo's still a few years younger than Kidd was when he joined the Nets and 6-7 years younger than Kidd was when he got Moore that contract. I'm sure that the experience between now and then will improve his passing.
If you compare Rondo and Kidd up through the age Rondo was last year, the numbers were pretty comparable, in fact Rondo's were probably a little better.
http://bkref.com/tiny/BAGLI
Sure, but Rondo's numbers should be better. The NBA game is now much more wide open in Rondo's prime than it was in Kidd's prime. This is evidenced by the fact that there are a bunch of players playing similarly to Rondo at his position (Westbrook, Parker, Rose, CP3, DeRon) while Kidd was pretty far ahead of the pack when he played.
Basketball in the year 1999 and in the year 2012 are different animals that favor the PG. Much easier to be a penetrator like Rondo when there is no size in the middle. The current NBA champions played a power forward at center and a small forward at power forward. The 1999 NBA champions played two 7 footers.
Do the same comparison for Tony Parker. Parker's numbers are substantially better. Are you saying Parker is also better than Kidd? Heck, Kyle Lowry's numbers are even comparable. How many current PGs are better than Kidd in his prime? Dozens? I'd say that a comparison of where they ranked during their careers or who outperformed them during their own era would be a better comparison. Otherwise, a 2012 point guard outperforming a 1999 point guard should be no surprise to anyone.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&p1=kiddja01&y1=1999&p2=rondora01&y2=2012&p3=parketo01&y3=2008&p4=lowryky01&y4=2012
First of all, the nba isn't that much more wide open now than it was in 1999, and the fact that the Spurs had Robinson and Duncan doesn't mean that there aren't any 7 footers in the league now. The difference for point guards is more the changes to the hand-check rule, and that favors higher scoring point guards than Kidd or Rondo. Lowry and Parker fall way short of Rondo and Kidd in just about any point guard skill other than scoring so I don't think they're better than Rondo or Kidd.
But the main point of my post is that you're comparing Kidd to Rondo, but you're comparing Rondo now to Kidd at the height of his career. While I don't agree that Kidd was a better passer than Rondo, you're talking about Kidd;s feel for the game being slightly better than Rondo's is now when Kidd had 4-5 more years of experience than Rondo has.
-
In what universe is he not pretty much already there? Passing, rebounding, and defense are all easily comparable. Equally streaky shooters. Kidd might have had a slight advantage at posting up and getting to the line, but overall Rondo is a much more efficient scorer.
It's not like he needs this giant leap or anything.
Yeah, I'd say he's pretty close already. I think he is missing one thing.
Magic Johnson constantly talks about, as a point guard, feeding guys at the appropriate times for a variety of reasons (maybe to build their confidence, maybe to get them to work harder on defense, etc...) and also the skill in finding the right guy with the right pass - some guys are better at catching different passes and like the ball in different spots.
Rondo has some of this skill, but not to the level of Kidd. Look at how much money Kidd made for Kenyon Martin, Richard Jefferson, and even Mikki Moore due to his ability to feed them with the right pass in the right place at the right time. He made Mikki Moore look so good he got an $18 million contract with the Kings! Rondo would've never made Mikki look good enough to get $18 million.
It is hard to describe exactly, because it is so innate, immeasurable, and intangible, but I'd say Rondo is very close but is a bit lower on the "floor general", let's call it, scale than Kidd.
Aside from the fact that I'd say that Rondo is a somewhat better passer and floor general than Kidd was, you have to consider a few things. First of all Martin was a pretty good player and there wasn't any dropoff of note to his game when he went to Denver, the dropoff happened after he had a serious knee injury. More importantly, Rondo's still a few years younger than Kidd was when he joined the Nets and 6-7 years younger than Kidd was when he got Moore that contract. I'm sure that the experience between now and then will improve his passing.
If you compare Rondo and Kidd up through the age Rondo was last year, the numbers were pretty comparable, in fact Rondo's were probably a little better.
http://bkref.com/tiny/BAGLI
Sure, but Rondo's numbers should be better. The NBA game is now much more wide open in Rondo's prime than it was in Kidd's prime. This is evidenced by the fact that there are a bunch of players playing similarly to Rondo at his position (Westbrook, Parker, Rose, CP3, DeRon) while Kidd was pretty far ahead of the pack when he played.
Basketball in the year 1999 and in the year 2012 are different animals that favor the PG. Much easier to be a penetrator like Rondo when there is no size in the middle. The current NBA champions played a power forward at center and a small forward at power forward. The 1999 NBA champions played two 7 footers.
Do the same comparison for Tony Parker. Parker's numbers are substantially better. Are you saying Parker is also better than Kidd? Heck, Kyle Lowry's numbers are even comparable. How many current PGs are better than Kidd in his prime? Dozens? I'd say that a comparison of where they ranked during their careers or who outperformed them during their own era would be a better comparison. Otherwise, a 2012 point guard outperforming a 1999 point guard should be no surprise to anyone.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&p1=kiddja01&y1=1999&p2=rondora01&y2=2012&p3=parketo01&y3=2008&p4=lowryky01&y4=2012
First of all, the nba isn't that much more wide open now than it was in 1999, and the fact that the Spurs had Robinson and Duncan doesn't mean that there aren't any 7 footers in the league now. The difference for point guards is more the changes to the hand-check rule, and that favors higher scoring point guards than Kidd or Rondo. Lowry and Parker fall way short of Rondo and Kidd in just about any point guard skill other than scoring so I don't think they're better than Rondo or Kidd.
But the main point of my post is that you're comparing Kidd to Rondo, but you're comparing Rondo now to Kidd at the height of his career. While I don't agree that Kidd was a better passer than Rondo, you're talking about Kidd;s feel for the game being slightly better than Rondo's is now when Kidd had 4-5 more years of experience than Rondo has.
So when Rondo penetrates in the lane against Miami in a playoff series, and the only resistance there is Chris Bosh, you don't think that matters? Or that the NBA just eliminated the Center position from All-Star ballots?
Of course there are 7 footers in the league now. They're just overall less talented and have a lesser impact on the game. The NBA title used to be decided by who has the best big men (aside from MJ, arguably the best player in NBA history) but is now decided largely by perimeter players.
Watch any of the NBA Finals? How much did Joel Anthony and Kendrick Perkins matter? Please don't be blind to the changes in the NBA. Doc certainly isn't, evidenced by him playing Jeff Green at Center for stretches of the Celtics-HEAT game.
-
From a individual stats standpoint, Rondo should be as good, if not better.
What I'm looking for is for Rondo's playmaking impact to reach that level, and it's simply not there yet, at least it's inconsistent. He needs to impose his will better on the offensive side, attack picks and screens more aggressively, and limit his nonchalant ways. Else, we'll keep seeing these offensive lulls that are mind-boggling at the moment.
-
Certainly not outside the realm of possbility but he's not there now. Top ten? Sure. He's definitely in the discussion there.
I have doubts he'll be top 5. Look at some of the guys in the league now & going forward but if improves on some facets of his game, then it can happen although I err on the side that says he won't get there.
In regards to the Kidd question, sure he can. He has that potential. Will he? Well, he needs to work on some things but you can see the gifts he has and where it can lead.
-
In what universe is he not pretty much already there? Passing, rebounding, and defense are all easily comparable. Equally streaky shooters. Kidd might have had a slight advantage at posting up and getting to the line, but overall Rondo is a much more efficient scorer.
It's not like he needs this giant leap or anything.
Yeah, I'd say he's pretty close already. I think he is missing one thing.
Magic Johnson constantly talks about, as a point guard, feeding guys at the appropriate times for a variety of reasons (maybe to build their confidence, maybe to get them to work harder on defense, etc...) and also the skill in finding the right guy with the right pass - some guys are better at catching different passes and like the ball in different spots.
Rondo has some of this skill, but not to the level of Kidd. Look at how much money Kidd made for Kenyon Martin, Richard Jefferson, and even Mikki Moore due to his ability to feed them with the right pass in the right place at the right time. He made Mikki Moore look so good he got an $18 million contract with the Kings! Rondo would've never made Mikki look good enough to get $18 million.
It is hard to describe exactly, because it is so innate, immeasurable, and intangible, but I'd say Rondo is very close but is a bit lower on the "floor general", let's call it, scale than Kidd.
Aside from the fact that I'd say that Rondo is a somewhat better passer and floor general than Kidd was, you have to consider a few things. First of all Martin was a pretty good player and there wasn't any dropoff of note to his game when he went to Denver, the dropoff happened after he had a serious knee injury. More importantly, Rondo's still a few years younger than Kidd was when he joined the Nets and 6-7 years younger than Kidd was when he got Moore that contract. I'm sure that the experience between now and then will improve his passing.
If you compare Rondo and Kidd up through the age Rondo was last year, the numbers were pretty comparable, in fact Rondo's were probably a little better.
http://bkref.com/tiny/BAGLI
In 1999, Jason Kidd led all point guards in win shares. In 2012, Chris Paul (not Rajon Rondo) led all point guards in win shares.
Kidd was clearly the best NBA point guard while in his prime (and probably even before his prime).
Rondo is one of many (CP3, Rose, Parker, DeRon, Westbrook). And as Rondo ages, other guys like Kyrie will enter that equation. Will Rondo ever be head and shoulders above the pack like Kidd was? I doubt it.
-
Kidd's 2-guard size and strength made him such a beast defensively and on the boards. But he never had anything like Rondo's speed.
-
Biggest thing Rondo could do that Kidd did, become a respectable free throw shooter.
Here, fixed that for you :)
-
In what universe is he not pretty much already there? Passing, rebounding, and defense are all easily comparable. Equally streaky shooters. Kidd might have had a slight advantage at posting up and getting to the line, but overall Rondo is a much more efficient scorer.
It's not like he needs this giant leap or anything.
Yeah, I'd say he's pretty close already. I think he is missing one thing.
Magic Johnson constantly talks about, as a point guard, feeding guys at the appropriate times for a variety of reasons (maybe to build their confidence, maybe to get them to work harder on defense, etc...) and also the skill in finding the right guy with the right pass - some guys are better at catching different passes and like the ball in different spots.
Rondo has some of this skill, but not to the level of Kidd. Look at how much money Kidd made for Kenyon Martin, Richard Jefferson, and even Mikki Moore due to his ability to feed them with the right pass in the right place at the right time. He made Mikki Moore look so good he got an $18 million contract with the Kings! Rondo would've never made Mikki look good enough to get $18 million.
It is hard to describe exactly, because it is so innate, immeasurable, and intangible, but I'd say Rondo is very close but is a bit lower on the "floor general", let's call it, scale than Kidd.
Aside from the fact that I'd say that Rondo is a somewhat better passer and floor general than Kidd was, you have to consider a few things. First of all Martin was a pretty good player and there wasn't any dropoff of note to his game when he went to Denver, the dropoff happened after he had a serious knee injury. More importantly, Rondo's still a few years younger than Kidd was when he joined the Nets and 6-7 years younger than Kidd was when he got Moore that contract. I'm sure that the experience between now and then will improve his passing.
If you compare Rondo and Kidd up through the age Rondo was last year, the numbers were pretty comparable, in fact Rondo's were probably a little better.
http://bkref.com/tiny/BAGLI
In 1999, Jason Kidd led all point guards in win shares. In 2012, Chris Paul (not Rajon Rondo) led all point guards in win shares.
Kidd was clearly the best NBA point guard while in his prime (and probably even before his prime).
Rondo is one of many (CP3, Rose, Parker, DeRon, Westbrook). And as Rondo ages, other guys like Kyrie will enter that equation. Will Rondo ever be head and shoulders above the pack like Kidd was? I doubt it.
Stick Chris Paul back in 1999 and he'd still lead the league in win shares, it's silly to think otherwise. Which point guards besides Kidd do you think were at the level of Paul/Williams/Rose in the 4-5 year period when he was seen as the best pg in the league?
-
In what universe is he not pretty much already there? Passing, rebounding, and defense are all easily comparable. Equally streaky shooters. Kidd might have had a slight advantage at posting up and getting to the line, but overall Rondo is a much more efficient scorer.
It's not like he needs this giant leap or anything.
Yeah, I'd say he's pretty close already. I think he is missing one thing.
Magic Johnson constantly talks about, as a point guard, feeding guys at the appropriate times for a variety of reasons (maybe to build their confidence, maybe to get them to work harder on defense, etc...) and also the skill in finding the right guy with the right pass - some guys are better at catching different passes and like the ball in different spots.
Rondo has some of this skill, but not to the level of Kidd. Look at how much money Kidd made for Kenyon Martin, Richard Jefferson, and even Mikki Moore due to his ability to feed them with the right pass in the right place at the right time. He made Mikki Moore look so good he got an $18 million contract with the Kings! Rondo would've never made Mikki look good enough to get $18 million.
It is hard to describe exactly, because it is so innate, immeasurable, and intangible, but I'd say Rondo is very close but is a bit lower on the "floor general", let's call it, scale than Kidd.
Aside from the fact that I'd say that Rondo is a somewhat better passer and floor general than Kidd was, you have to consider a few things. First of all Martin was a pretty good player and there wasn't any dropoff of note to his game when he went to Denver, the dropoff happened after he had a serious knee injury. More importantly, Rondo's still a few years younger than Kidd was when he joined the Nets and 6-7 years younger than Kidd was when he got Moore that contract. I'm sure that the experience between now and then will improve his passing.
If you compare Rondo and Kidd up through the age Rondo was last year, the numbers were pretty comparable, in fact Rondo's were probably a little better.
http://bkref.com/tiny/BAGLI
In 1999, Jason Kidd led all point guards in win shares. In 2012, Chris Paul (not Rajon Rondo) led all point guards in win shares.
Kidd was clearly the best NBA point guard while in his prime (and probably even before his prime).
Rondo is one of many (CP3, Rose, Parker, DeRon, Westbrook). And as Rondo ages, other guys like Kyrie will enter that equation. Will Rondo ever be head and shoulders above the pack like Kidd was? I doubt it.
Stick Chris Paul back in 1999 and he'd still lead the league in win shares, it's silly to think otherwise. Which point guards besides Kidd do you think were at the level of Paul/Williams/Rose in the 4-5 year period when he was seen as the best pg in the league?
Payton
Stockton
Tim Hardaway
-
In what universe is he not pretty much already there? Passing, rebounding, and defense are all easily comparable. Equally streaky shooters. Kidd might have had a slight advantage at posting up and getting to the line, but overall Rondo is a much more efficient scorer.
It's not like he needs this giant leap or anything.
Yeah, I'd say he's pretty close already. I think he is missing one thing.
Magic Johnson constantly talks about, as a point guard, feeding guys at the appropriate times for a variety of reasons (maybe to build their confidence, maybe to get them to work harder on defense, etc...) and also the skill in finding the right guy with the right pass - some guys are better at catching different passes and like the ball in different spots.
Rondo has some of this skill, but not to the level of Kidd. Look at how much money Kidd made for Kenyon Martin, Richard Jefferson, and even Mikki Moore due to his ability to feed them with the right pass in the right place at the right time. He made Mikki Moore look so good he got an $18 million contract with the Kings! Rondo would've never made Mikki look good enough to get $18 million.
It is hard to describe exactly, because it is so innate, immeasurable, and intangible, but I'd say Rondo is very close but is a bit lower on the "floor general", let's call it, scale than Kidd.
Aside from the fact that I'd say that Rondo is a somewhat better passer and floor general than Kidd was, you have to consider a few things. First of all Martin was a pretty good player and there wasn't any dropoff of note to his game when he went to Denver, the dropoff happened after he had a serious knee injury. More importantly, Rondo's still a few years younger than Kidd was when he joined the Nets and 6-7 years younger than Kidd was when he got Moore that contract. I'm sure that the experience between now and then will improve his passing.
If you compare Rondo and Kidd up through the age Rondo was last year, the numbers were pretty comparable, in fact Rondo's were probably a little better.
http://bkref.com/tiny/BAGLI
In 1999, Jason Kidd led all point guards in win shares. In 2012, Chris Paul (not Rajon Rondo) led all point guards in win shares.
Kidd was clearly the best NBA point guard while in his prime (and probably even before his prime).
Rondo is one of many (CP3, Rose, Parker, DeRon, Westbrook). And as Rondo ages, other guys like Kyrie will enter that equation. Will Rondo ever be head and shoulders above the pack like Kidd was? I doubt it.
Stick Chris Paul back in 1999 and he'd still lead the league in win shares, it's silly to think otherwise. Which point guards besides Kidd do you think were at the level of Paul/Williams/Rose in the 4-5 year period when he was seen as the best pg in the league?
Payton
Stockton
Tim Hardaway
Kevin Johnson was pretty good too at that time.
-
In what universe is he not pretty much already there? Passing, rebounding, and defense are all easily comparable. Equally streaky shooters. Kidd might have had a slight advantage at posting up and getting to the line, but overall Rondo is a much more efficient scorer.
It's not like he needs this giant leap or anything.
Yeah, I'd say he's pretty close already. I think he is missing one thing.
Magic Johnson constantly talks about, as a point guard, feeding guys at the appropriate times for a variety of reasons (maybe to build their confidence, maybe to get them to work harder on defense, etc...) and also the skill in finding the right guy with the right pass - some guys are better at catching different passes and like the ball in different spots.
Rondo has some of this skill, but not to the level of Kidd. Look at how much money Kidd made for Kenyon Martin, Richard Jefferson, and even Mikki Moore due to his ability to feed them with the right pass in the right place at the right time. He made Mikki Moore look so good he got an $18 million contract with the Kings! Rondo would've never made Mikki look good enough to get $18 million.
It is hard to describe exactly, because it is so innate, immeasurable, and intangible, but I'd say Rondo is very close but is a bit lower on the "floor general", let's call it, scale than Kidd.
Aside from the fact that I'd say that Rondo is a somewhat better passer and floor general than Kidd was, you have to consider a few things. First of all Martin was a pretty good player and there wasn't any dropoff of note to his game when he went to Denver, the dropoff happened after he had a serious knee injury. More importantly, Rondo's still a few years younger than Kidd was when he joined the Nets and 6-7 years younger than Kidd was when he got Moore that contract. I'm sure that the experience between now and then will improve his passing.
If you compare Rondo and Kidd up through the age Rondo was last year, the numbers were pretty comparable, in fact Rondo's were probably a little better.
http://bkref.com/tiny/BAGLI
In 1999, Jason Kidd led all point guards in win shares. In 2012, Chris Paul (not Rajon Rondo) led all point guards in win shares.
Kidd was clearly the best NBA point guard while in his prime (and probably even before his prime).
Rondo is one of many (CP3, Rose, Parker, DeRon, Westbrook). And as Rondo ages, other guys like Kyrie will enter that equation. Will Rondo ever be head and shoulders above the pack like Kidd was? I doubt it.
Stick Chris Paul back in 1999 and he'd still lead the league in win shares, it's silly to think otherwise. Which point guards besides Kidd do you think were at the level of Paul/Williams/Rose in the 4-5 year period when he was seen as the best pg in the league?
Payton
Stockton
Tim Hardaway
Payton, yes. Stockton in his late 30s? No. Hardaway at that point in his career? No.
-
In what universe is he not pretty much already there? Passing, rebounding, and defense are all easily comparable. Equally streaky shooters. Kidd might have had a slight advantage at posting up and getting to the line, but overall Rondo is a much more efficient scorer.
It's not like he needs this giant leap or anything.
Yeah, I'd say he's pretty close already. I think he is missing one thing.
Magic Johnson constantly talks about, as a point guard, feeding guys at the appropriate times for a variety of reasons (maybe to build their confidence, maybe to get them to work harder on defense, etc...) and also the skill in finding the right guy with the right pass - some guys are better at catching different passes and like the ball in different spots.
Rondo has some of this skill, but not to the level of Kidd. Look at how much money Kidd made for Kenyon Martin, Richard Jefferson, and even Mikki Moore due to his ability to feed them with the right pass in the right place at the right time. He made Mikki Moore look so good he got an $18 million contract with the Kings! Rondo would've never made Mikki look good enough to get $18 million.
It is hard to describe exactly, because it is so innate, immeasurable, and intangible, but I'd say Rondo is very close but is a bit lower on the "floor general", let's call it, scale than Kidd.
Aside from the fact that I'd say that Rondo is a somewhat better passer and floor general than Kidd was, you have to consider a few things. First of all Martin was a pretty good player and there wasn't any dropoff of note to his game when he went to Denver, the dropoff happened after he had a serious knee injury. More importantly, Rondo's still a few years younger than Kidd was when he joined the Nets and 6-7 years younger than Kidd was when he got Moore that contract. I'm sure that the experience between now and then will improve his passing.
If you compare Rondo and Kidd up through the age Rondo was last year, the numbers were pretty comparable, in fact Rondo's were probably a little better.
http://bkref.com/tiny/BAGLI
In 1999, Jason Kidd led all point guards in win shares. In 2012, Chris Paul (not Rajon Rondo) led all point guards in win shares.
Kidd was clearly the best NBA point guard while in his prime (and probably even before his prime).
Rondo is one of many (CP3, Rose, Parker, DeRon, Westbrook). And as Rondo ages, other guys like Kyrie will enter that equation. Will Rondo ever be head and shoulders above the pack like Kidd was? I doubt it.
Stick Chris Paul back in 1999 and he'd still lead the league in win shares, it's silly to think otherwise. Which point guards besides Kidd do you think were at the level of Paul/Williams/Rose in the 4-5 year period when he was seen as the best pg in the league?
Payton
Stockton
Tim Hardaway
Kevin Johnson was pretty good too at that time.
No, he was done by then.
-
Maybe.
Biggest thing Rondo could do that Kidd did, become a respectable 3 point shooter.
He will never be able to post up other PGs.
He will not be able to defend SG later in his career once he slows down.
I don't agree with that last part. Even in his early to mid thirties, Rondo is going to be quick enough to stay with any guard. As far as getting posted up, teams try it now, but, despite his thin frame, he's pretty wiry strong, and he knows how to fight down there.
No, he'll never be as big and strong as Kidd, but Kidd was never as fast and quick as Rondo. Sure, he'll slow down at some point, but he's going to be one of the fastest players in the NBA for at least another six or seven years.
Look at Tony Parker. Is he getting slow?
Parker isn't even in his 30s yet. Players that rely on speed have not lasted as long as players that rely on size since the beginning of the league. That's why centers nearing 40 are much more common than perimeter players. PGs that make it into the league for other reasons (strength, passing, defense, shooting) simply have a better shot at lasting, look at the current oldest: Nash, Kidd, Miller, Fisher, Billups. They all had skill unrelated to speed unlike say, AI.
It's why Chris Paul went from MVP contender to firmly behind Deron Williams when coming back from injury. When he and Deron start getting old we'll once again see Deron as clearly better.
-
Yeah I honestly do. I think looking at when Kidd took his turn into becoming the top PG in the NBA his numbers look a lot like JKidd's did at this time. Obviously Rondo's percentages need to improve to put him in that category but he's certainly on his way. Terrible as this sounds I think Rondo's numbers will look a lot more like Kidd's when Pierce retires. Kidd had a lot more responsibilities on his teams at 7 years in than Rondo does now, although that is changing slowly but surely.
Payton
Stockton
Tim Hardaway
I don't think Tim was ever there. All-time though I would even argue that Gary Payton isn't in the top 10 although I think he's somewhere between 10-20. Stockton is top 3 for me after Johnson and either before or after Robertson depending on what you think of the competitive nature of 1960s organized basketball.
-
Insulting question.... j Kidd was traded several times before his peak years in. which he was in the weakest conference possibly ever and he was always overrated and got to much credit. When the conference became a little more legit he dissappeared and was eventually done and traded....so yes and hes already there but rondo wont be in his prime without lebron James in his conference and a bunch of weak competition
-
Maybe.
Biggest thing Rondo could do that Kidd did, become a respectable 3 point shooter.
He will never be able to post up other PGs.
He will not be able to defend SG later in his career once he slows down.
I don't agree with that last part. Even in his early to mid thirties, Rondo is going to be quick enough to stay with any guard. As far as getting posted up, teams try it now, but, despite his thin frame, he's pretty wiry strong, and he knows how to fight down there.
No, he'll never be as big and strong as Kidd, but Kidd was never as fast and quick as Rondo. Sure, he'll slow down at some point, but he's going to be one of the fastest players in the NBA for at least another six or seven years.
Look at Tony Parker. Is he getting slow?
Parker isn't even in his 30s yet. Players that rely on speed have not lasted as long as players that rely on size since the beginning of the league. That's why centers nearing 40 are much more common than perimeter players. PGs that make it into the league for other reasons (strength, passing, defense, shooting) simply have a better shot at lasting, look at the current oldest: Nash, Kidd, Miller, Fisher, Billups. They all had skill unrelated to speed unlike say, AI.
It's why Chris Paul went from MVP contender to firmly behind Deron Williams when coming back from injury. When he and Deron start getting old we'll once again see Deron as clearly better.
Parker turned 30 in May.
I think Chris Paul will probably always be better than Deron Williams. He's clearly slowed down athletically since coming back from injury, but his strength is a much underrated aspect of his game. Of course, he's also one heck of a skilled, tough, smart basketball player.
And, the adjectives that I used to describe Paul also apply to Rondo. This is why I believe he has a very good chance to be a very good player well into his mid-thirties. His speed is clearly a factor, but it's not solely what makes him a special player.
-
I doubt it. I don't think that's in any way a negative toward Rondo, though; Kidd in his prime was amazing. I doubt we'll see Rondo put up a 17/7/11 season.
I do think there's an argument that Rondo is a better passer than Kidd was.
Maybe not, but here's something to chew on; Over the last 4 playoffs combined, Rondo has played a total of 66 games, in which he's averaged 16.2/6.7/10.2.
I realize it's more difficult to pull those kinds of numbers off over a full regular season, but I must note that Kidd put the numbers you gave up in a lock out shortened 50 game regular season.
Right now, only four games in, Rondo's at 16/5/12.5. That might be hard to sustain; I'm hoping he doesn't play 40+ minutes a night all season. On the other hand, he's gotten those numbers with seeming ease, meaning he hasn't really had one of those games were he's really gone off yet.
I guess all I'm saying is, if he's not there yet, he's pretty dang close. And, yeah, that's definitely amazing.
-
In what universe is he not pretty much already there? Passing, rebounding, and defense are all easily comparable. Equally streaky shooters. Kidd might have had a slight advantage at posting up and getting to the line, but overall Rondo is a much more efficient scorer.
It's not like he needs this giant leap or anything.
Yeah, I'd say he's pretty close already. I think he is missing one thing.
Magic Johnson constantly talks about, as a point guard, feeding guys at the appropriate times for a variety of reasons (maybe to build their confidence, maybe to get them to work harder on defense, etc...) and also the skill in finding the right guy with the right pass - some guys are better at catching different passes and like the ball in different spots.
Rondo has some of this skill, but not to the level of Kidd. Look at how much money Kidd made for Kenyon Martin, Richard Jefferson, and even Mikki Moore due to his ability to feed them with the right pass in the right place at the right time. He made Mikki Moore look so good he got an $18 million contract with the Kings! Rondo would've never made Mikki look good enough to get $18 million.
It is hard to describe exactly, because it is so innate, immeasurable, and intangible, but I'd say Rondo is very close but is a bit lower on the "floor general", let's call it, scale than Kidd.
Aside from the fact that I'd say that Rondo is a somewhat better passer and floor general than Kidd was, you have to consider a few things. First of all Martin was a pretty good player and there wasn't any dropoff of note to his game when he went to Denver, the dropoff happened after he had a serious knee injury. More importantly, Rondo's still a few years younger than Kidd was when he joined the Nets and 6-7 years younger than Kidd was when he got Moore that contract. I'm sure that the experience between now and then will improve his passing.
If you compare Rondo and Kidd up through the age Rondo was last year, the numbers were pretty comparable, in fact Rondo's were probably a little better.
http://bkref.com/tiny/BAGLI
In 1999, Jason Kidd led all point guards in win shares. In 2012, Chris Paul (not Rajon Rondo) led all point guards in win shares.
Kidd was clearly the best NBA point guard while in his prime (and probably even before his prime).
Rondo is one of many (CP3, Rose, Parker, DeRon, Westbrook). And as Rondo ages, other guys like Kyrie will enter that equation. Will Rondo ever be head and shoulders above the pack like Kidd was? I doubt it.
Stick Chris Paul back in 1999 and he'd still lead the league in win shares, it's silly to think otherwise. Which point guards besides Kidd do you think were at the level of Paul/Williams/Rose in the 4-5 year period when he was seen as the best pg in the league?
Payton
Stockton
Tim Hardaway
Payton, yes. Stockton in his late 30s? No. Hardaway at that point in his career? No.
Stockton still averaged 12 and 8 or something like that
-
Maybe.
Biggest thing Rondo could do that Kidd did, become a respectable 3 point shooter.
He will never be able to post up other PGs.
He will not be able to defend SG later in his career once he slows down.
I don't agree with that last part. Even in his early to mid thirties, Rondo is going to be quick enough to stay with any guard. As far as getting posted up, teams try it now, but, despite his thin frame, he's pretty wiry strong, and he knows how to fight down there.
No, he'll never be as big and strong as Kidd, but Kidd was never as fast and quick as Rondo. Sure, he'll slow down at some point, but he's going to be one of the fastest players in the NBA for at least another six or seven years.
Look at Tony Parker. Is he getting slow?
Parker isn't even in his 30s yet. Players that rely on speed have not lasted as long as players that rely on size since the beginning of the league. That's why centers nearing 40 are much more common than perimeter players. PGs that make it into the league for other reasons (strength, passing, defense, shooting) simply have a better shot at lasting, look at the current oldest: Nash, Kidd, Miller, Fisher, Billups. They all had skill unrelated to speed unlike say, AI.
It's why Chris Paul went from MVP contender to firmly behind Deron Williams when coming back from injury. When he and Deron start getting old we'll once again see Deron as clearly better.
Parker turned 30 in May.
I think Chris Paul will probably always be better than Deron Williams. He's clearly slowed down athletically since coming back from injury, but his strength is a much underrated aspect of his game. Of course, he's also one heck of a skilled, tough, smart basketball player.
And, the adjectives that I used to describe Paul also apply to Rondo. This is why I believe he has a very good chance to be a very good player well into his mid-thirties. His speed is clearly a factor, but it's not solely what makes him a special player.
Well I assumed you were talking about the Tony Parker that emerged as arguably the Spurs best player in his late 20s, not the one that has only played 3 games since turning 30. Neither one is old. Actually, he's still in his prime (most often referred to as 26-30).
Also there have been arguments for 3-4 years that Williams is the better point guard. He's been able to put up the same numbers on a team with absolutely nobody, while Paul has always had multiple guys he can just lob it up to. Now in Brooklyn we can see them on a little more even playing field. As for arguments that Williams is at least as good as Paul, those have been around since the draft (not as cut and dry as you think).
Finally, I hate to break it to you but tough and smart only get you so far in basketball. As for skill, the whole point here is that Paul and Rondo are so highly skilled BECAUSE of their speed. That's what they use to get themselves and their teammates good shots. On the other hand, Nash has always gotten people good shots with his hesitation dribble and herky-jerky style. Also creating a good shot for himself isn't nearly as crucial because he excels at making any type of shot at any distance no matter how contested it is. Thus, as his body diminished, his skills in passing and scoring did not, the way a player who relies on his body/athleticism inevitably would.
-
Maybe in terms of perceived skill/numbers (though still unlikely in that it's unlikely any given player will be as good as a first ballot hall of famer in his prime), but not in terms of relativity.
I think people really underestimate how much the rule changes have helped PGs like Rondo. But because they've helped rondo, they've helped a lot of others (CP, Lowry, Lawson, Irving, Parker, Nash, Westbrook, etc.), so the entire field of comparison has shifted upwards. Kidd, no matter what era, was always going to stand out because he had in his prime the same speed as today's guards but was so uniquely gifted in his size and strength. CP is probably talented enough that he would have still stood out in the handcheck era, but I bet D-Will would have been considered at least as good as CP3 if both hit their primes healthy a few years ago. Unfortunately, Rondo's production relative to his position is just, at this point, not enough superior to enter the Kidd-Prime stratosphere. I hope it gets there, though.
-
In what universe is he not pretty much already there? Passing, rebounding, and defense are all easily comparable. Equally streaky shooters. Kidd might have had a slight advantage at posting up and getting to the line, but overall Rondo is a much more efficient scorer.
It's not like he needs this giant leap or anything.
Yeah, I'd say he's pretty close already. I think he is missing one thing.
Magic Johnson constantly talks about, as a point guard, feeding guys at the appropriate times for a variety of reasons (maybe to build their confidence, maybe to get them to work harder on defense, etc...) and also the skill in finding the right guy with the right pass - some guys are better at catching different passes and like the ball in different spots.
Rondo has some of this skill, but not to the level of Kidd. Look at how much money Kidd made for Kenyon Martin, Richard Jefferson, and even Mikki Moore due to his ability to feed them with the right pass in the right place at the right time. He made Mikki Moore look so good he got an $18 million contract with the Kings! Rondo would've never made Mikki look good enough to get $18 million.
It is hard to describe exactly, because it is so innate, immeasurable, and intangible, but I'd say Rondo is very close but is a bit lower on the "floor general", let's call it, scale than Kidd.
Aside from the fact that I'd say that Rondo is a somewhat better passer and floor general than Kidd was, you have to consider a few things. First of all Martin was a pretty good player and there wasn't any dropoff of note to his game when he went to Denver, the dropoff happened after he had a serious knee injury. More importantly, Rondo's still a few years younger than Kidd was when he joined the Nets and 6-7 years younger than Kidd was when he got Moore that contract. I'm sure that the experience between now and then will improve his passing.
If you compare Rondo and Kidd up through the age Rondo was last year, the numbers were pretty comparable, in fact Rondo's were probably a little better.
http://bkref.com/tiny/BAGLI
In 1999, Jason Kidd led all point guards in win shares. In 2012, Chris Paul (not Rajon Rondo) led all point guards in win shares.
Kidd was clearly the best NBA point guard while in his prime (and probably even before his prime).
Rondo is one of many (CP3, Rose, Parker, DeRon, Westbrook). And as Rondo ages, other guys like Kyrie will enter that equation. Will Rondo ever be head and shoulders above the pack like Kidd was? I doubt it.
We live in the era of the point guard. Kidd never had anything like the competition Rondo now has at the position because Chris Paul is also arguably as good as Kidd was.
-
In what universe is he not pretty much already there? Passing, rebounding, and defense are all easily comparable. Equally streaky shooters. Kidd might have had a slight advantage at posting up and getting to the line, but overall Rondo is a much more efficient scorer.
It's not like he needs this giant leap or anything.
Yeah, I'd say he's pretty close already. I think he is missing one thing.
Magic Johnson constantly talks about, as a point guard, feeding guys at the appropriate times for a variety of reasons (maybe to build their confidence, maybe to get them to work harder on defense, etc...) and also the skill in finding the right guy with the right pass - some guys are better at catching different passes and like the ball in different spots.
Rondo has some of this skill, but not to the level of Kidd. Look at how much money Kidd made for Kenyon Martin, Richard Jefferson, and even Mikki Moore due to his ability to feed them with the right pass in the right place at the right time. He made Mikki Moore look so good he got an $18 million contract with the Kings! Rondo would've never made Mikki look good enough to get $18 million.
It is hard to describe exactly, because it is so innate, immeasurable, and intangible, but I'd say Rondo is very close but is a bit lower on the "floor general", let's call it, scale than Kidd.
Aside from the fact that I'd say that Rondo is a somewhat better passer and floor general than Kidd was, you have to consider a few things. First of all Martin was a pretty good player and there wasn't any dropoff of note to his game when he went to Denver, the dropoff happened after he had a serious knee injury. More importantly, Rondo's still a few years younger than Kidd was when he joined the Nets and 6-7 years younger than Kidd was when he got Moore that contract. I'm sure that the experience between now and then will improve his passing.
If you compare Rondo and Kidd up through the age Rondo was last year, the numbers were pretty comparable, in fact Rondo's were probably a little better.
http://bkref.com/tiny/BAGLI
In 1999, Jason Kidd led all point guards in win shares. In 2012, Chris Paul (not Rajon Rondo) led all point guards in win shares.
Kidd was clearly the best NBA point guard while in his prime (and probably even before his prime).
Rondo is one of many (CP3, Rose, Parker, DeRon, Westbrook). And as Rondo ages, other guys like Kyrie will enter that equation. Will Rondo ever be head and shoulders above the pack like Kidd was? I doubt it.
We live in the era of the point guard. Kidd never had anything like the competition Rondo now has at the position because Chris Paul is also arguably as good as Kidd was.
Chris Paul is arguably as good as Isiah Thomas was. Actually, Chris Paul is arguably BETTER than Isiah Thomas was if you compare the stats (clearly Isiah had better teams/more playoff success). I don't think there is any doubt that Chris Paul is better than Kidd was. I think we're overrating Kidd a bit. If we are looking at Kidd's era, I think Gary Payton was a better point guard than him. I'm pretty sure Bill Simmons has a lengthy bit on this in his "Book of Basketball". He had Kidd ranked #42 and Payton ranked #40. Kidd had that two year window where the East was utter garbage (Walker/Pierce in the ECF, for example... Allen Iverson in the Finals, for another example) and were nothing but fodder for the Spurs and Lakers (and Kings had they ever made the finals)...
As mentioned, Rondo is a top 5 point guard right now with the likes of Chris Paul, Deron, Rose, Parker, Westbrook... and I'd say Kyrie Irving is probably already there as well. Could see additional players crack the discussion like Steph Curry (if healthy), Ricky Rubio... heck... even John Wall (still only 22) and Brandon Jennings (still only 23) can enter this discussion. We're in the middle of a point guard boom. That doesn't take anything away from Rondo's huge stats in the 2009 and 2012 playoffs, but if we're looking at his regular season output... you're going to get rational pushback if you declare him anything more than a "Top 5 Point Guard". Last year his efficiency rating was 5th behind Paul, Westbrook, Rose and Deron. The year prior he was 7th behind Rose, Paul, Deron, Westbrook, Nash and Curry. For what it's worth... so far this year (after 4 games) he is actually 1st ahead of Kyle Lowrie, Chris Paul and Brandon Jennings... but he's doing so by averaging 10 more minutes per game (42.3... highest in the entire league) and it's clearly way too early to put too much thought into those early stats.
-
Chris Paul is also arguably as good as Kidd was.
It's not arguable. Paul is a better PG than Kidd was hands down and he's had it since day one. I'm super in the tank for Rondo, my second favorite player after KG but Paul is the best PG in the NBA and has been for at least the past 5 years.
-
If Rondo just stopped consistently passing up open looks I think he would have his best season.
-
I like how big of a deal people make out of the hand check rule, but are there any players that really had their games/careers changed drastically when it happened? I mean it's fun to wonder about freaks like Jordan, "what if you couldn't at least touch him?" but some people act like it would've released all PGs from shackles back then, while if it were removed today it could hold a lot of current players dead in their tracks.
Again, freaks like LeBron would probably be somewhat less freakish, but the majority? Rondo would probably pay to have guys put a hand on him rather than stand 5 feet in front of him.
-
Maybe in terms of perceived skill/numbers (though still unlikely in that it's unlikely any given player will be as good as a first ballot hall of famer in his prime), but not in terms of relativity.
I think people really underestimate how much the rule changes have helped PGs like Rondo.
How much have the rule changes helped Rondo? Are the defenders who give him a cushion overly worried about whether they're allowed to hand-check him? He'd probably be even more effective if his defender was that close to him.
-
Maybe in terms of perceived skill/numbers (though still unlikely in that it's unlikely any given player will be as good as a first ballot hall of famer in his prime), but not in terms of relativity.
I think people really underestimate how much the rule changes have helped PGs like Rondo.
How much have the rule changes helped Rondo? Are the defenders who give him a cushion overly worried about whether they're allowed to hand-check him? He'd probably be even more effective if his defender was that close to him.
It's a domino effect that impacts more than an individual player on an individual play. It increased overall league scoring, for instance, and led teams to have to play smaller and more athletic lineups with less size and intimidation. With smaller, quicker PGs overall allowed more leeway, teams have to build rosters with quicker big men to react to them off of penetration and in the pick and roll.
Thus, overall, smaller PGs take less of a pounding from big men when they drive into the paint. The floor is also spread a lot better as immobile 7 footers are often replaced by athletic wings or athletic bigs. A guy like Rasho Nesterovic has no place on an elite contender nowadays. The game itself is also quicker, which allows more scoring opportunities and fast break opportunities. Rondo is certainly helped by this domino effect, whether teams play off of him or not.
It changes the entire lineup and the game itself. It changes the guys he passes to, his opportunities, the guys that defend the rim, etc....
This is all not to mention the defensive three second rule and the rule changes involving screeners. The game itself was different. Kidd was elite at his game, Rondo is in a clump of 5 or so at his. No shame in being roughly equivalent to CP3, Rose, Deron, Westbrook, Parker.
-
I like how big of a deal people make out of the hand check rule, but are there any players that really had their games/careers changed drastically when it happened? I mean it's fun to wonder about freaks like Jordan, "what if you couldn't at least touch him?" but some people act like it would've released all PGs from shackles back then, while if it were removed today it could hold a lot of current players dead in their tracks.
Again, freaks like LeBron would probably be somewhat less freakish, but the majority? Rondo would probably pay to have guys put a hand on him rather than stand 5 feet in front of him.
As someone else mentioned, it's less individual and more population. With the hand check stuff, it's really released scuttlebutt, previously undersized but fast PG's to be more effective, so there's a population boom there. Basically, it's been PG inflation.
Someone like Lebron might see their numbers go down slightly, but not as much as weaker SF's numbers (essentially every other SF), so I bet he'd be, relatively speaking, even better in a tougher game.
-
This is all not to mention the defensive three second rule and the rule changes involving screeners. The game itself was different. Kidd was elite at his game, Rondo is in a clump of 5 or so at his. No shame in being roughly equivalent to CP3, Rose, Deron, Westbrook, Parker.
Again, if you look at the point guards beyond Kidd (and possibly Payton) there was a dearth of top pgs in their prime when Kidd was elite. That doesn't make him a better player.
-
Maybe in terms of perceived skill/numbers (though still unlikely in that it's unlikely any given player will be as good as a first ballot hall of famer in his prime), but not in terms of relativity.
I think people really underestimate how much the rule changes have helped PGs like Rondo.
How much have the rule changes helped Rondo? Are the defenders who give him a cushion overly worried about whether they're allowed to hand-check him? He'd probably be even more effective if his defender was that close to him.
It's a domino effect that impacts more than an individual player on an individual play. It increased overall league scoring, for instance, and led teams to have to play smaller and more athletic lineups with less size and intimidation. With smaller, quicker PGs overall allowed more leeway, teams have to build rosters with quicker big men to react to them off of penetration and in the pick and roll.
Thus, overall, smaller PGs take less of a pounding from big men when they drive into the paint. The floor is also spread a lot better as immobile 7 footers are often replaced by athletic wings or athletic bigs. A guy like Rasho Nesterovic has no place on an elite contender nowadays. The game itself is also quicker, which allows more scoring opportunities and fast break opportunities. Rondo is certainly helped by this domino effect, whether teams play off of him or not.
It changes the entire lineup and the game itself. It changes the guys he passes to, his opportunities, the guys that defend the rim, etc....
This is all not to mention the defensive three second rule and the rule changes involving screeners. The game itself was different. Kidd was elite at his game, Rondo is in a clump of 5 or so at his. No shame in being roughly equivalent to CP3, Rose, Deron, Westbrook, Parker.
Well which is it? Rondo is "helped" because there aren't as many strong 7 footers in the league now, but he's not hurt by all the quicker, more athletic bigs that were supposedly brought into the league specifically to counteract all the weak quick guards like Rondo? The ones more suited to "react to [him] off of penetration and in the pick and roll."
-
Maybe in terms of perceived skill/numbers (though still unlikely in that it's unlikely any given player will be as good as a first ballot hall of famer in his prime), but not in terms of relativity.
I think people really underestimate how much the rule changes have helped PGs like Rondo.
How much have the rule changes helped Rondo? Are the defenders who give him a cushion overly worried about whether they're allowed to hand-check him? He'd probably be even more effective if his defender was that close to him.
It's a domino effect that impacts more than an individual player on an individual play. It increased overall league scoring, for instance, and led teams to have to play smaller and more athletic lineups with less size and intimidation. With smaller, quicker PGs overall allowed more leeway, teams have to build rosters with quicker big men to react to them off of penetration and in the pick and roll.
Thus, overall, smaller PGs take less of a pounding from big men when they drive into the paint. The floor is also spread a lot better as immobile 7 footers are often replaced by athletic wings or athletic bigs. A guy like Rasho Nesterovic has no place on an elite contender nowadays. The game itself is also quicker, which allows more scoring opportunities and fast break opportunities. Rondo is certainly helped by this domino effect, whether teams play off of him or not.
It changes the entire lineup and the game itself. It changes the guys he passes to, his opportunities, the guys that defend the rim, etc....
This is all not to mention the defensive three second rule and the rule changes involving screeners. The game itself was different. Kidd was elite at his game, Rondo is in a clump of 5 or so at his. No shame in being roughly equivalent to CP3, Rose, Deron, Westbrook, Parker.
Well which is it? Rondo is "helped" because there aren't as many strong 7 footers in the league now, but he's not hurt by all the quicker, more athletic bigs that were supposedly brought into the league specifically to counteract all the weak quick guards like Rondo? The ones more suited to "react to [him] off of penetration and in the pick and roll."
Easy, he is helped by the new rules. The slower, stronger players have been phased out and the brand of basketball is quicker, with more scoring, more possessions, and an emphasis on speed, which he has.
-
Better.
-
This is all not to mention the defensive three second rule and the rule changes involving screeners. The game itself was different. Kidd was elite at his game, Rondo is in a clump of 5 or so at his. No shame in being roughly equivalent to CP3, Rose, Deron, Westbrook, Parker.
Again, if you look at the point guards beyond Kidd (and possibly Payton) there was a dearth of top pgs in their prime when Kidd was elite. That doesn't make him a better player.
And why are there more elite PGs now? Is it pure coincidence or are the rules and game itself more favorable to creating elite PGs? Is it also pure coincidence that the two guys you listed (Kidd and Payton) are both 6-4 and well built?
Regardless of the true answer, comparing stats from 99 to stats over a decade apart to conclude Rondo can top Kidd or to conclude anything else is a bit silly.
-
Maybe.
Biggest thing Rondo could do that Kidd did, become a respectable 3 point shooter.
He will never be able to post up other PGs.
He will not be able to defend SG later in his career once he slows down.
I don't agree with that last part. Even in his early to mid thirties, Rondo is going to be quick enough to stay with any guard. As far as getting posted up, teams try it now, but, despite his thin frame, he's pretty wiry strong, and he knows how to fight down there.
No, he'll never be as big and strong as Kidd, but Kidd was never as fast and quick as Rondo. Sure, he'll slow down at some point, but he's going to be one of the fastest players in the NBA for at least another six or seven years.
Look at Tony Parker. Is he getting slow?
Parker isn't even in his 30s yet. Players that rely on speed have not lasted as long as players that rely on size since the beginning of the league. That's why centers nearing 40 are much more common than perimeter players. PGs that make it into the league for other reasons (strength, passing, defense, shooting) simply have a better shot at lasting, look at the current oldest: Nash, Kidd, Miller, Fisher, Billups. They all had skill unrelated to speed unlike say, AI.
It's why Chris Paul went from MVP contender to firmly behind Deron Williams when coming back from injury. When he and Deron start getting old we'll once again see Deron as clearly better.
Parker turned 30 in May.
I think Chris Paul will probably always be better than Deron Williams. He's clearly slowed down athletically since coming back from injury, but his strength is a much underrated aspect of his game. Of course, he's also one heck of a skilled, tough, smart basketball player.
And, the adjectives that I used to describe Paul also apply to Rondo. This is why I believe he has a very good chance to be a very good player well into his mid-thirties. His speed is clearly a factor, but it's not solely what makes him a special player.
Well I assumed you were talking about the Tony Parker that emerged as arguably the Spurs best player in his late 20s, not the one that has only played 3 games since turning 30. Neither one is old. Actually, he's still in his prime (most often referred to as 26-30).
Also there have been arguments for 3-4 years that Williams is the better point guard. He's been able to put up the same numbers on a team with absolutely nobody, while Paul has always had multiple guys he can just lob it up to. Now in Brooklyn we can see them on a little more even playing field. As for arguments that Williams is at least as good as Paul, those have been around since the draft (not as cut and dry as you think).
Finally, I hate to break it to you but tough and smart only get you so far in basketball. As for skill, the whole point here is that Paul and Rondo are so highly skilled BECAUSE of their speed. That's what they use to get themselves and their teammates good shots. On the other hand, Nash has always gotten people good shots with his hesitation dribble and herky-jerky style. Also creating a good shot for himself isn't nearly as crucial because he excels at making any type of shot at any distance no matter how contested it is. Thus, as his body diminished, his skills in passing and scoring did not, the way a player who relies on his body/athleticism inevitably would.
I think you are wrong about Paul. If you've watched him since his knee surgery you'll see that he's no speedster compared to the likes of Rajon Rondo, Tony Parker, John Wall, Ty Lawson and other super fast point guards in today's NBA. Paul doesn't beat you with speed. He beats you with incredibly handles, crafty moves, and that strong, fullback body of his that throws at defenders to get them off balance.
Also, it's been a while since Deron Williams was in the discussion with Chris Paul as the best point guard in the league. The guy's been slipping since he got the the New York Metropolitan area. I guess he had an excuse last year, but he's off to a pretty poor start again this season. It's early so he could still turn it around, but so far it's not promising.
When Rondo gets the nod for Eastern Conference starting All Star point guard, maybe that will motivate him to start amping it up again.
-
And why are there more elite PGs now?
Because the best all around athletes in the world who are between 5'7" and 6'4" are deciding to play basketball and play PG rather than play any other position in any other sport.
That's it.
-
And why are there more elite PGs now?
because the best all around athletes in the world who are between 5'7" and 6'4" are deciding to play basketball and play PG rather than play any other position in any other sport.
That's it.
That seems highly unlikely. Basketball wasn't exactly a niche sport airing on VS back in 1999. Athletes between 5'7 and 6'4 had the very same choices back in the halcyon days of 1999.
Why would decisions shift so dramatically where we have 2 elite point guards in 1999 and three times as many (maybe more) in 2012?
-
And why are there more elite PGs now?
because the best all around athletes in the world who are between 5'7" and 6'4" are deciding to play basketball and play PG rather than play any other position in any other sport.
That's it.
That seems highly unlikely. Basketball wasn't exactly a niche sport airing on VS back in 1999. Athletes between 5'7 and 6'4 had the very same choices back in the halycon days of 1999.
Why would decisions shift so dramatically where we have 2 elite point guards in 1999 and three times as many (maybe more) in 2012?
And yet the NBA was on a massive turn down in popularity, football running backs and WRs still ruled, and MLB was at the end of a huge upswing.
About the time the under 30 PGs of today were deciding what sport they most wanted to play they were watching the end of Michael Jordan and little guy Allen Iverson light up the NBA on a nightly basis. They were the heroes of that generation for the best athletes of that time. And so we have today's multi-faceted PGs.
-
And why are there more elite PGs now?
because the best all around athletes in the world who are between 5'7" and 6'4" are deciding to play basketball and play PG rather than play any other position in any other sport.
That's it.
That seems highly unlikely. Basketball wasn't exactly a niche sport airing on VS back in 1999. Athletes between 5'7 and 6'4 had the very same choices back in the halycon days of 1999.
Why would decisions shift so dramatically where we have 2 elite point guards in 1999 and three times as many (maybe more) in 2012?
And yet the NBA was on a massive turn down in popularity, football running backs and WRs still ruled, and MLB was at the end of a huge upswing.
About the time the under 30 PGs of today were deciding what sport they most wanted to play they were watching the end of Michael Jordan and little guy Allen Iverson light up the NBA on a nightly basis. They were the heroes of that generation for the best athletes of that time. And so we have today's multi-faceted PGs.
When was the NBA in a massive downturn in popularity? What timeframe are we talking about here? How was Jordan's run (which ended in 98) a downturn in popularity?
-
And why are there more elite PGs now?
because the best all around athletes in the world who are between 5'7" and 6'4" are deciding to play basketball and play PG rather than play any other position in any other sport.
That's it.
That seems highly unlikely. Basketball wasn't exactly a niche sport airing on VS back in 1999. Athletes between 5'7 and 6'4 had the very same choices back in the halycon days of 1999.
Why would decisions shift so dramatically where we have 2 elite point guards in 1999 and three times as many (maybe more) in 2012?
And yet the NBA was on a massive turn down in popularity, football running backs and WRs still ruled, and MLB was at the end of a huge upswing.
About the time the under 30 PGs of today were deciding what sport they most wanted to play they were watching the end of Michael Jordan and little guy Allen Iverson light up the NBA on a nightly basis. They were the heroes of that generation for the best athletes of that time. And so we have today's multi-faceted PGs.
When was the NBA in a massive downturn in popularity? What timeframe are we talking about here? How was Jordan's run (which ended in 98) a downturn in popularity?
Check the merchandising and television ratings of the very late 90's and early 2000's. The NBA was in the beginning of a massive loss of popularity. It didn't start to rebound until 2007-08 with the revival of the Celtics-Lakers rivalry. Why do you think owners were claiming massive losses for a decade before last years's lockout?
-
As mentioned, Rondo is a top 5 point guard right now with the likes of Chris Paul, Deron, Rose, Parker, Westbrook... and I'd say Kyrie Irving is probably already there as well. Could see additional players crack the discussion like Steph Curry (if healthy), Ricky Rubio... heck... even John Wall (still only 22) and Brandon Jennings (still only 23) can enter this discussion. We're in the middle of a point guard boom. That doesn't take anything away from Rondo's huge stats in the 2009 and 2012 playoffs, but if we're looking at his regular season output... you're going to get rational pushback if you declare him anything more than a "Top 5 Point Guard". Last year his efficiency rating was 5th behind Paul, Westbrook, Rose and Deron. The year prior he was 7th behind Rose, Paul, Deron, Westbrook, Nash and Curry. For what it's worth... so far this year (after 4 games) he is actually 1st ahead of Kyle Lowrie, Chris Paul and Brandon Jennings... but he's doing so by averaging 10 more minutes per game (42.3... highest in the entire league) and it's clearly way too early to put too much thought into those early stats.
Why wouldn't you consider playoff stats when you are trying to determine who the best players are?
According to this;
http://www.hoopsstats.com/basketball/fantasy/nba/playerstats/12/2/eff/1-1
Rondo was behind only Chris Paul in efficiency among point guards last year when taking into account both regular season and playoff numbers.
If I were going to rate production in the regular season vs. production in the playoffs, I'd rank performing at a high level in the playoffs higher. It seems to me that the stakes are a little higher when the elimination games come around. Luckily, our guy has proven to excel when the high stakes games are played.
-
And why are there more elite PGs now?
Because the best all around athletes in the world who are between 5'7" and 6'4" are deciding to play basketball and play PG rather than play any other position in any other sport.
That's it.
Because AI was a SG
Marbury is Marbury.
Davis and Nash were a couple seasons away.
Strickland and Brandon were two very good PGs.
Kidd was one of the top players in the game then. Along with Shaq, Duncan, Kobe, Webber, AI, Malone, Alonzo, Grant Hill, Payton, KG
And for those who said Hardaway wasn't that good at that point, all nba 2nd team in the 98-99 season.
-
Chris Paul is also arguably as good as Kidd was.
It's not arguable. Paul is a better PG than Kidd was hands down and he's had it since day one. I'm super in the tank for Rondo, my second favorite player after KG but Paul is the best PG in the NBA and has been for at least the past 5 years.
This...
Chris Paul is far and away the best PG in the league right now - it's not even close. There is no argument.
Look at Chris Paul's game and find me a single key weakness?
Leadership
Paul has been an elite leader (and one of the best clutch shooters/scorers) in the NBA throughout his career. He ranks among the elite in terms of points scored and shooting percentages in the clutch. His ability to turn the Clippers into a quality playoff team last season (as opposed to a pretty garbage team the year before) says all you need to know about his ability to impact a team.
Scoring
He's averaged 15+ PPG ever since he entered the league, while consistently being among league leaders in FG%, 3PT% and FT%.
Rebounding
While Paul has never been an Elite rebounder on Kidd's level, his career average of 4.5 RPG is exceptional for a PG, and even more impressive when you consider that he is barely 6 feet tall.
Passing and ball handling
He has consistently been top 3-4 in the NBA in assists since he entered the league, and he's an exceptional ball handler - his Assist:TO ratio is off the charts.
Defense
Paul has been considered an 'All-Defense' calibre player pretty much since he entered the league, and he's been among league leaders in steals every year.
-
Chris Paul is also arguably as good as Kidd was.
It's not arguable. Paul is a better PG than Kidd was hands down and he's had it since day one. I'm super in the tank for Rondo, my second favorite player after KG but Paul is the best PG in the NBA and has been for at least the past 5 years.
This...
Chris Paul is far and away the best PG in the league right now - it's not even close. There is no argument.
Look at Chris Paul's game and find me a single key weakness?
Leadership
Paul has been an elite leader (and one of the best clutch shooters/scorers) in the NBA throughout his career. He ranks among the elite in terms of points scored and shooting percentages in the clutch. His ability to turn the Clippers into a quality playoff team last season (as opposed to a pretty garbage team the year before) says all you need to know about his ability to impact a team.
Scoring
He's averaged 15+ PPG ever since he entered the league, while consistently being among league leaders in FG%, 3PT% and FT%.
Rebounding
While Paul has never been an Elite rebounder on Kidd's level, his career average of 4.5 RPG is exceptional for a PG, and even more impressive when you consider that he is barely 6 feet tall.
Passing and ball handling
He has consistently been top 3-4 in the NBA in assists since he entered the league, and he's an exceptional ball handler - his Assist:TO ratio is off the charts.
Defense
Paul has been considered an 'All-Defense' calibre player pretty much since he entered the league, and he's been among league leaders in steals every year.
I agree that Chris Paul is the best PG in the league, but I disagree that "it's not even close." The only one of this categories that you listed where he has an edge of Rondo is "scoring." On the other hand, Rondo has the edge in defense and rebounding.
It's close, but, yeah, Paul is still slightly better.
-
This is all not to mention the defensive three second rule and the rule changes involving screeners. The game itself was different. Kidd was elite at his game, Rondo is in a clump of 5 or so at his. No shame in being roughly equivalent to CP3, Rose, Deron, Westbrook, Parker.
Again, if you look at the point guards beyond Kidd (and possibly Payton) there was a dearth of top pgs in their prime when Kidd was elite. That doesn't make him a better player.
And why are there more elite PGs now? Is it pure coincidence or are the rules and game itself more favorable to creating elite PGs? Is it also pure coincidence that the two guys you listed (Kidd and Payton) are both 6-4 and well built?
So you're claiming that players like Williams and Paul wouldn't be elite pgs 10 years ago? I disagree.
Regardless of the true answer, comparing stats from 99 to stats over a decade apart to conclude Rondo can top Kidd or to conclude anything else is a bit silly.
What's silly is what you were doing, comparing Kidd at the height of his career to Rondo at the age of 25 or so. It's true Kidd at his best was better than Rondo is now, but it's also true that his best was better than his play at the age of 25.
-
This is all not to mention the defensive three second rule and the rule changes involving screeners. The game itself was different. Kidd was elite at his game, Rondo is in a clump of 5 or so at his. No shame in being roughly equivalent to CP3, Rose, Deron, Westbrook, Parker.
Again, if you look at the point guards beyond Kidd (and possibly Payton) there was a dearth of top pgs in their prime when Kidd was elite. That doesn't make him a better player.
And why are there more elite PGs now? Is it pure coincidence or are the rules and game itself more favorable to creating elite PGs? Is it also pure coincidence that the two guys you listed (Kidd and Payton) are both 6-4 and well built?
So you're claiming that players like Williams and Paul wouldn't be elite pgs 10 years ago? I disagree.
Regardless of the true answer, comparing stats from 99 to stats over a decade apart to conclude Rondo can top Kidd or to conclude anything else is a bit silly.
What's silly is what you were doing, comparing Kidd at the height of his career to Rondo at the age of 25 or so. It's true Kidd at his best was better than Rondo is now, but it's also true that his best was better than his play at the age of 25.
I merely stated what I thought separates Kidd's prime (which was the topic at hand) from Rondo at present. That is the only logical way to begin to address whether Rondo can be as good as Kidd in his prime. First we must ask what Kidd's prime was, then we must ask where Rondo is now to see if he can ever get there. Whether Rondo gets there during his prime remains to be seen. I doubt he does.
Comparing Kidd's prime to Rondo's present is the only way to begin to broach the topic itself to see if Rondo can find whatever is missing. Calling that silly is, in effect, calling the thread silly, isn't it? If you think the thread is silly, it begs the question of why you continue to participate in it. Plenty of great threads on this forum, some enlightening, interesting, and not silly at all.
-
And why are there more elite PGs now?
because the best all around athletes in the world who are between 5'7" and 6'4" are deciding to play basketball and play PG rather than play any other position in any other sport.
That's it.
That seems highly unlikely. Basketball wasn't exactly a niche sport airing on VS back in 1999. Athletes between 5'7 and 6'4 had the very same choices back in the halycon days of 1999.
Why would decisions shift so dramatically where we have 2 elite point guards in 1999 and three times as many (maybe more) in 2012?
And yet the NBA was on a massive turn down in popularity, football running backs and WRs still ruled, and MLB was at the end of a huge upswing.
About the time the under 30 PGs of today were deciding what sport they most wanted to play they were watching the end of Michael Jordan and little guy Allen Iverson light up the NBA on a nightly basis. They were the heroes of that generation for the best athletes of that time. And so we have today's multi-faceted PGs.
When was the NBA in a massive downturn in popularity? What timeframe are we talking about here? How was Jordan's run (which ended in 98) a downturn in popularity?
Check the merchandising and television ratings of the very late 90's and early 2000's. The NBA was in the beginning of a massive loss of popularity. It didn't start to rebound until 2007-08 with the revival of the Celtics-Lakers rivalry. Why do you think owners were claiming massive losses for a decade before last years's lockout?
But wouldn't the 5'7 to 6'4 athletes entering their prime around 1999-2000 who are making the decision to play basketball have made that decision long before this downturn? They should actually be already in the NBA if they entered their prime with Kidd. Kidd himself entered the NBA in 1994, at a time of great prosperity in the NBA. By your argument, there should have been plenty of elite point guards entering their prime with him. He entered at an upturn, not at a downturn.
-
Most of today's great PGs are between the ages of 20 and 30. That means back 12- 15 years ago they were 8-15 years old. Most great athletes chose which sport they will proceed forward in in high school, when they are 14-16 years old. A lot of these guys could have played other sports. Rondo was an unbelievable QB talent.
But as kids they were influenced by Iverson and MJ and decided to become basketball players rather than football or baseball players. Thats my theory why there is so many great PGs today. Because the best of the best athletes loved MJ and AI and wanted to be like them.
-
I disagree that "it's not even close." The only one of this categories that you listed where he has an edge of Rondo is "scoring." On the other hand, Rondo has the edge in defense and rebounding.
It's close, but, yeah, Paul is still slightly better.
It really isn't close...
Chris Paul plays far less 'risky' basketball. He doesn't cheat on defense for a quick steal (often opening up offensive opportunities for the other team) and he rarely turns the ball over.
Rondo plays more 'flashy' then Paul, but Paul is more fundamentally sound.
Rondo's decision making is also not as good as Paul. Rondo is still inconsistent - sometimes he makes great decisions, sometimes he makes very questionable ones. This includes shot selection as well.
Rondo is a little bit better than Paul (over their careers) as a rebounder. Both average around 4.5 per game over their careers.
As for scoring, it's not by a small amount...Paul is so much better a scorer than Rondo it's not even funny. He has one of the best midrange jump shots of any PG not named Steve Nash, he's an excellent 3 point shooter, he's a near perfect free throw shooter, and he's excellent at scoring off the dribble. Rondo is only really good at the latter...though when he improves at the other areas (which he already is) the discussion will be much closer.
D-Will is the only other PG you can really throw in the agument, and IMHO he's no longer on the level of those two guys.
Derek Rose (as a pure PG) is not even close, likewise Westbrook.
-
There definate is one big thing Rondo has over Paul though, and that's health. Paul has quite an injury history. Rondo has missed games here ans there, but his mostly been pretty durable.
If I had to choose a second best PG I'd probably have to say Rondo. I think he's definately above Deron.
-
I disagree that "it's not even close." The only one of this categories that you listed where he has an edge of Rondo is "scoring." On the other hand, Rondo has the edge in defense and rebounding.
It's close, but, yeah, Paul is still slightly better.
It really isn't close...
Chris Paul plays far less 'risky' basketball. He doesn't cheat on defense for a quick steal (often opening up offensive opportunities for the other team) and he rarely turns the ball over.
Rondo plays more 'flashy' then Paul, but Paul is more fundamentally sound.
Rondo's decision making is also not as good as Paul. Rondo is still inconsistent - sometimes he makes great decisions, sometimes he makes very questionable ones. This includes shot selection as well.
Rondo is a little bit better than Paul (over their careers) as a rebounder. Both average around 4.5 per game over their careers.
As for scoring, it's not by a small amount...Paul is so much better a scorer than Rondo it's not even funny. He has one of the best midrange jump shots of any PG not named Steve Nash, he's an excellent 3 point shooter, he's a near perfect free throw shooter, and he's excellent at scoring off the dribble. Rondo is only really good at the latter...though when he improves at the other areas (which he already is) the discussion will be much closer.
D-Will is the only other PG you can really throw in the agument, and IMHO he's no longer on the level of those two guys.
Derek Rose (as a pure PG) is not even close, likewise Westbrook.
I'd say that Rondo is a better defender than Paul. Rondo's a better 1v1 defender but they have different styles (or roles). Paul sticks closer to his man while Rondo roams more and is more disruptive to the opposing offense as a whole. He's also a better rebounder, which shows up more in the playoffs.
I'd also say that Rondo's a better passer than Paul although it's true that he make some riskier (or flashier) passes than Paul so he turns the ball over a little more, so I can see why people would prefer Paul. Paul's clearly a better scorer (I'd say Rondo's better at getting to the rim, everything else favors Paul) although if Rondo keeps playing like he is now and did during the playoffs the scoring gap would narrow quite a bit.
I think that Rondo's somewhat better than Paul at running an offense, directing players around, playing the angles and finding/creating mismatches, although it's possible that CP3 doesn't have to do all of that because his teammates are more capable of creating their own shots than Rondo's teammates have been over the last few years. Lastly, I think that Rondo has (for lack of a better term) better court vision than Paul. What I mean is he's more able to make the pass that other people didn't think was available, in part because he reads what's happening on the floor quicker than other players do.
-
I disagree that "it's not even close." The only one of this categories that you listed where he has an edge of Rondo is "scoring." On the other hand, Rondo has the edge in defense and rebounding.
It's close, but, yeah, Paul is still slightly better.
It really isn't close...
Chris Paul plays far less 'risky' basketball. He doesn't cheat on defense for a quick steal (often opening up offensive opportunities for the other team) and he rarely turns the ball over.
Rondo plays more 'flashy' then Paul, but Paul is more fundamentally sound.
Rondo's decision making is also not as good as Paul. Rondo is still inconsistent - sometimes he makes great decisions, sometimes he makes very questionable ones. This includes shot selection as well.
Rondo is a little bit better than Paul (over their careers) as a rebounder. Both average around 4.5 per game over their careers.
As for scoring, it's not by a small amount...Paul is so much better a scorer than Rondo it's not even funny. He has one of the best midrange jump shots of any PG not named Steve Nash, he's an excellent 3 point shooter, he's a near perfect free throw shooter, and he's excellent at scoring off the dribble. Rondo is only really good at the latter...though when he improves at the other areas (which he already is) the discussion will be much closer.
D-Will is the only other PG you can really throw in the agument, and IMHO he's no longer on the level of those two guys.
Derek Rose (as a pure PG) is not even close, likewise Westbrook.
I won't claim to watch a ton of Chris Paul games, but I don't believe you about the defense. Chris Paul doesn't average two steals per game by never "cheating." Of course, he cheats. That's part of the job description for high turnover producing, defensively disruptive PGs.
Otherwise, I guess we agree. We both have Paul and Rondo ranked one and two respectively among NBA point guards. How "close" it is ends up being a fairly subjective and arbitrary thing so I don't think there's much point in arguing that point further.
-
Most of today's great PGs are between the ages of 20 and 30. That means back 12- 15 years ago they were 8-15 years old. Most great athletes chose which sport they will proceed forward in in high school, when they are 14-16 years old. A lot of these guys could have played other sports. Rondo was an unbelievable QB talent.
But as kids they were influenced by Iverson and MJ and decided to become basketball players rather than football or baseball players. Thats my theory why there is so many great PGs today. Because the best of the best athletes loved MJ and AI and wanted to be like them.
I think it has a lot more to do with rule changes than anything else. PG's handle the ball for the majority on offense, the game is so geared to offense right now that you legitimately can't play very hard defense without getting in foul trouble.
I think it has a lot more yo do with that than these athletes just "deciding" to play in the NBA rather than the NFL.
-
Rondo is a better player in the clutch, in my mind, particularly in terms of creating his own offense. In the last two years he has become a decent outside shooter capable of taking and making a shot from anywhere when it really matters.
I'd also rank Rondo as better in terms of generally stepping up his game in the playoffs. Rondo already has 10 playoff triple-doubles, and Kidd has 11, and Kidd has been playing since roughly 1957.
-
As mentioned, Rondo is a top 5 point guard right now with the likes of Chris Paul, Deron, Rose, Parker, Westbrook... and I'd say Kyrie Irving is probably already there as well. Could see additional players crack the discussion like Steph Curry (if healthy), Ricky Rubio... heck... even John Wall (still only 22) and Brandon Jennings (still only 23) can enter this discussion. We're in the middle of a point guard boom. That doesn't take anything away from Rondo's huge stats in the 2009 and 2012 playoffs, but if we're looking at his regular season output... you're going to get rational pushback if you declare him anything more than a "Top 5 Point Guard". Last year his efficiency rating was 5th behind Paul, Westbrook, Rose and Deron. The year prior he was 7th behind Rose, Paul, Deron, Westbrook, Nash and Curry. For what it's worth... so far this year (after 4 games) he is actually 1st ahead of Kyle Lowrie, Chris Paul and Brandon Jennings... but he's doing so by averaging 10 more minutes per game (42.3... highest in the entire league) and it's clearly way too early to put too much thought into those early stats.
Why wouldn't you consider playoff stats when you are trying to determine who the best players are?
According to this;
http://www.hoopsstats.com/basketball/fantasy/nba/playerstats/12/2/eff/1-1
Rondo was behind only Chris Paul in efficiency among point guards last year when taking into account both regular season and playoff numbers.
If I were going to rate production in the regular season vs. production in the playoffs, I'd rank performing at a high level in the playoffs higher. It seems to me that the stakes are a little higher when the elimination games come around. Luckily, our guy has proven to excel when the high stakes games are played.
His numbers in the 2009 and 2012 playoffs were fantastic. Obviously his team went deeper in the playoffs than any point guard other than Westbrook. Rose and Williams didn't even play. Chris Paul was injured... etc. There's a lot of reasons why you can't read too much into playoff performance... for instance... playing 20 game against Jrue Holiday, Jeff Teague and Mario Chalmers definitely factors into into his performances. The fact he averaged 43 minutes during those games also factors into his huge stats. You have to take it with a grain of salt. Comparing a full season of regular season games against more-or-less the same competition is a lot different than comparing Rondo's performance against lowly Atlanta/Philly with Chris Paul's injured performances against Memphis/San Antonio or Westbrook's performances against Dallas, Lakers and Spurs. It's tough to make comparisons there. It's kind of like comparing a regular-season game where the Suns blew out the Bobcats with a regular-season game where the Spurs beat the Thunder by 2... and saying, "Well clearly the Suns are better than the Spurs". It doesn't work that way.
-
As mentioned, Rondo is a top 5 point guard right now with the likes of Chris Paul, Deron, Rose, Parker, Westbrook... and I'd say Kyrie Irving is probably already there as well. Could see additional players crack the discussion like Steph Curry (if healthy), Ricky Rubio... heck... even John Wall (still only 22) and Brandon Jennings (still only 23) can enter this discussion. We're in the middle of a point guard boom. That doesn't take anything away from Rondo's huge stats in the 2009 and 2012 playoffs, but if we're looking at his regular season output... you're going to get rational pushback if you declare him anything more than a "Top 5 Point Guard". Last year his efficiency rating was 5th behind Paul, Westbrook, Rose and Deron. The year prior he was 7th behind Rose, Paul, Deron, Westbrook, Nash and Curry. For what it's worth... so far this year (after 4 games) he is actually 1st ahead of Kyle Lowrie, Chris Paul and Brandon Jennings... but he's doing so by averaging 10 more minutes per game (42.3... highest in the entire league) and it's clearly way too early to put too much thought into those early stats.
Why wouldn't you consider playoff stats when you are trying to determine who the best players are?
According to this;
http://www.hoopsstats.com/basketball/fantasy/nba/playerstats/12/2/eff/1-1
Rondo was behind only Chris Paul in efficiency among point guards last year when taking into account both regular season and playoff numbers.
If I were going to rate production in the regular season vs. production in the playoffs, I'd rank performing at a high level in the playoffs higher. It seems to me that the stakes are a little higher when the elimination games come around. Luckily, our guy has proven to excel when the high stakes games are played.
His numbers in the 2009 and 2012 playoffs were fantastic. Obviously his team went deeper in the playoffs than any point guard other than Westbrook. Rose and Williams didn't even play. Chris Paul was injured... etc. There's a lot of reasons why you can't read too much into playoff performance... for instance... playing 20 game against Jrue Holiday, Jeff Teague and Mario Chalmers definitely factors into into his performances. The fact he averaged 43 minutes during those games also factors into his huge stats. You have to take it with a grain of salt. Comparing a full season of regular season games against more-or-less the same competition is a lot different than comparing Rondo's performance against lowly Atlanta/Philly with Chris Paul's injured performances against Memphis/San Antonio or Westbrook's performances against Dallas, Lakers and Spurs. It's tough to make comparisons there. It's kind of like comparing a regular-season game where the Suns blew out the Bobcats with a regular-season game where the Spurs beat the Thunder by 2... and saying, "Well clearly the Suns are better than the Spurs". It doesn't work that way.
It's not like that at all. I posted the numbers for efficiency ratings among point guards in playoffs and regular season combined. My point is not to solely base these players' rankings on how they perform in the playoffs. Rather, it is to not leave playoff performance completely out of the equation as you have done.
Rondo was the best point guard in the league last year based solely on playoff performance. I'm not claiming that he was the best point guard in the league overall. I still give that title to Chris Paul. But, the full body of work shows that he was the second best point guard.
Also, lowly Atlanta/Philly (and Miami) had a much better combined defensive rating than did the Spurs or the Grizzlies.
-
There's a lot of reasons why you can't read too much into playoff performance... for instance... playing 20 game against Jrue Holiday, Jeff Teague and Mario Chalmers definitely factors into into his performances. The fact he averaged 43 minutes during those games also factors into his huge stats. You have to take it with a grain of salt. Comparing a full season of regular season games against more-or-less the same competition is a lot different than comparing Rondo's performance against lowly Atlanta/Philly with Chris Paul's injured performances against Memphis/San Antonio or Westbrook's performances against Dallas, Lakers and Spurs. It's tough to make comparisons there.
While you're right that you need to take things with a grain of salt, the premise of your post is completely off base. You throw out names like Holiday, Teague and Chalmers and act like Rondo had a cakewalk. He faced 3 of the top 6 defenses in the league in the playoffs. Every team that you listed (Dallas, Memphis, LA, SA) that Paul or Westbrook faced was a worse defensive team than any team Rondo faced. If you check opponent's production on 82games you'll see that the teams Rondo faced combined to hold opposing point guards to a much lower average production than the groups that Paul or Westbrook faced. The competition that Rondo faced made his performance more impressive, not less.
-
And how many top PGs are known for their monster 'post game'? CP3? Isaiah Thomas? Bob Cousy?
My response is so what. It's not Rondo's job to post up. It's his job to run the team, find the open man, and 'create' scoring opportunities whenever possible whether it be with his feet or with the 'dime'.
IMO Rondo looks like a top 3 PG in the NBA right now. Whether or not he becomes a legit MVP candidate. Who knows. But he has top notch talent, athleticism, and vision. He really needs to develop his jumper. I'd like it if he could hit free throws better. But his strengths are his strengths. Add to that a pesky defense and a top notch ability to cause turnovers and disrupt passing lanes and you have one of the best overall packages in the NBA.
Would he be even better if he were a couple of inches taller? Well ANY player would be better with a couple of inches more height in the NBA.
Maybe.
Biggest thing Rondo could do that Kidd did, become a respectable 3 point shooter.
He will never be able to post up other PGs.
He will not be able to defend SG later in his career once he slows down.
-
And how many top PGs are known for their monster 'post game'? CP3? Isaiah Thomas? Bob Cousy?
My response is so what. It's not Rondo's job to post up. It's his job to run the team, find the open man, and 'create' scoring opportunities whenever possible whether it be with his feet or with the 'dime'.
IMO Rondo looks like a top 3 PG in the NBA right now. Whether or not he becomes a legit MVP candidate. Who knows. But he has top notch talent, athleticism, and vision. He really needs to develop his jumper. I'd like it if he could hit free throws better. But his strengths are his strengths. Add to that a pesky defense and a top notch ability to cause turnovers and disrupt passing lanes and you have one of the best overall packages in the NBA.
Would he be even better if he were a couple of inches taller? Well ANY player would be better with a couple of inches more height in the NBA.
Maybe.
Biggest thing Rondo could do that Kidd did, become a respectable 3 point shooter.
He will never be able to post up other PGs.
He will not be able to defend SG later in his career once he slows down.
Kidd and Rondo have some different strengths.
When comparing them and what Rondo could do to be better, there is nothing wrong pointing out that these skills Kidd had Rondo does not have the gifts to do, but these other skills Kidd developed, if Rondo could as well, he would be better.
And besides Kidd, Magic and Mark Jackson would run offenses while posting up smaller PGs.
-
so far this very early season he's getting beat by opposition point guards.
-
so far this very early season he's getting beat by opposition point guards.
I wouldn't say beat. I think point guards are looking better against the Celtics team as a whole. pick and roll and defensive lapses being key. that being said rondo isn't going 100 during defense because he knows he can't sit down the way the team is playing right now. he is averaging over 40 minutes a game, there is no way he is going 100 on the defensive or offensive end.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y0asSRMGLfw&feature=plcp
I say yes, if he stays healthy. Scal summed it up well. Rondo's probably already just as good a player in terms of on the court ability and production, but he's not the leader that Kidd was/is.
-
i actually think Rondo looks alot better/more confident with his shot this year...hes not afraid to take it. and he seems(at least to my eyes) to be making them at an effective rate.
he's even not really hesitating to take 3 point shots when he has them and so far has hit them at a solid clip