CelticsStrong
Celtics Basketball => Celtics Talk => Topic started by: csfansince60s on February 28, 2013, 12:00:19 PM
-
Heard part of a Scal real insightful interview on 98.5 this a.m. on the way to work.
http://boston.cbslocal.com/2013/02/27/scalabrine-on-toucher-rich-is-rondo-the-smartest-guy-in-the-room/
Rondo very smart. Doesn't suffer fools well. Doesn't bring it every night like DRose does.
On the rift between Rondo and Judas, Scal explains it this way:
Rondo, PP, KG all about the team winning. Judas isn't dumb, that isn't the cause of the rift. Judas focus wasn't always on the Cs winning.
If they had a team meeting, specifically about the team winning and losing KG/Rondo/PP were about "how do we get the team to win". Judas was all about "what do I need to do?". Scal made the "we" vs "I" distinction pretty clear.
Either Dan Roach or Toucher or Rich (one was not there)then immediately asked, "So Rondo doesn't like selfish players?", obviously specifically referring to Judas. Scal immediately, without hesitation answered "yes".
Yah, Judas wil "always be a Celtic". BS on that.
Check out the whole interview. Well worth the listen.
-
Rondo, PP, KG all about the team winning. Judas isn't dumb, that isn't the cause of the rift. Judas focus wasn't always on the Cs winning.
If they had a team meeting, specifically about the team winning and losing KG/Rondo/PP were about "how do we get the team to win". Judas was all about "what do I need to do?". Scal made the "we" vs "I" distinction pretty clear.
In fairness, Scal said, from his perspective, most players in the NBA talk about what they individually need to do to make the same win, and that every player on the Celtics outside of KG, Pierce, and Rondo were that way.
-
Rondo very smart. Doesn't suffer fools well. Doesn't bring it every night like DRose does.
In my opinion that's the biggest issue right there. Both incredibly talented players. Elite talent. But I guess that is the difference between a MVP and an All-Star.
-
Rondo, PP, KG all about the team winning. Judas isn't dumb, that isn't the cause of the rift. Judas focus wasn't always on the Cs winning.
If they had a team meeting, specifically about the team winning and losing KG/Rondo/PP were about "how do we get the team to win". Judas was all about "what do I need to do?". Scal made the "we" vs "I" distinction pretty clear.
In fairness, Scal said, from his perspective, most players in the NBA talk about what they individually need to do to make the same win, and that every player on the Celtics outside of KG, Pierce, and Rondo were that way.
Scal clearly Said, 3 players on the Celtics (PP,KG,RR) were about what we can do as a team to win, while Ray was like..what can I do ...how the team can set him up to win or something of that nature...
Glad hes gone..never liked him.
-
Rondo, PP, KG all about the team winning. Judas isn't dumb, that isn't the cause of the rift. Judas focus wasn't always on the Cs winning.
If they had a team meeting, specifically about the team winning and losing KG/Rondo/PP were about "how do we get the team to win". Judas was all about "what do I need to do?". Scal made the "we" vs "I" distinction pretty clear.
In fairness, Scal said, from his perspective, most players in the NBA talk about what they individually need to do to make the same win, and that every player on the Celtics outside of KG, Pierce, and Rondo were that way.
Scal clearly Said, 3 players on the Celtics (PP,KG,RR) were about what we can do as a team to win, while Ray was like..what can I do ...how the team can set him up to win or something of that nature...
Glad hes gone..never liked him.
Right. Like I said, every player on the Celtics other than Pierce, Rondo, and KG had the perspective "how can I individually help the team win", as opposed to the perspective of those three, which was "what do we all need to do better?"
-
Rondo, PP, KG all about the team winning. Judas isn't dumb, that isn't the cause of the rift. Judas focus wasn't always on the Cs winning.
If they had a team meeting, specifically about the team winning and losing KG/Rondo/PP were about "how do we get the team to win". Judas was all about "what do I need to do?". Scal made the "we" vs "I" distinction pretty clear.
In fairness, Scal said, from his perspective, most players in the NBA talk about what they individually need to do to make the same win, and that every player on the Celtics outside of KG, Pierce, and Rondo were that way.
Scal clearly Said, 3 players on the Celtics (PP,KG,RR) were about what we can do as a team to win, while Ray was like..what can I do ...how the team can set him up to win or something of that nature...
Glad hes gone..never liked him.
Right. Like I said, every player on the Celtics other than Pierce, Rondo, and KG had the perspective "how can I individually help the team win", as opposed to the perspective of those three, which was "what do we all need to do better?"
But he pointed out Ray in particular,he didnt have to do that but he did, Ray wasnt a role player on the Celtics but a key piece for 5 years. When a Guy is "all about me" thats the ugliest thing in team sports.
-
Rondo, PP, KG all about the team winning. Judas isn't dumb, that isn't the cause of the rift. Judas focus wasn't always on the Cs winning.
If they had a team meeting, specifically about the team winning and losing KG/Rondo/PP were about "how do we get the team to win". Judas was all about "what do I need to do?". Scal made the "we" vs "I" distinction pretty clear.
In fairness, Scal said, from his perspective, most players in the NBA talk about what they individually need to do to make the same win, and that every player on the Celtics outside of KG, Pierce, and Rondo were that way.
Scal clearly Said, 3 players on the Celtics (PP,KG,RR) were about what we can do as a team to win, while Ray was like..what can I do ...how the team can set him up to win or something of that nature...
Glad hes gone..never liked him.
Right. Like I said, every player on the Celtics other than Pierce, Rondo, and KG had the perspective "how can I individually help the team win", as opposed to the perspective of those three, which was "what do we all need to do better?"
But he pointed out Ray in particular,he didnt have to do that but he did
The question asked was specifically about Ray and his relationship with Rondo.
-
I have always had a lot of respect for Scal. I appreciate his point of view. Thanks for posting the interview.
-
I understand that the OP hates Ray, but this is just semantics. If someone told a story about how KG, PP, RR, or any star player showed up to a meeting and said "Alright, how can I help this team win?" or "How I can best use my abilities to help the team?" or "What can I do to help?" we would all consider them to be very unselfish and there would be numerous threads about how awesome they are.
But because Ray didn't say "In the interest of mutual sacrifice for the better of the team, I understand that we all will have to share in the responsibility to make the team better and, as such, I am fully prepared to plan how everyone, potentially even (but not explicitly) including me, can help the team by understanding their roles and doing what they do best" he is somehow selfish?
-
I, too, am kind of confused.
What else is he supposed to say?
Ok...we want the team to win...what must I do to help the team win? why is this selfish?
Wouldn't it be more their fault for not saying, hey, take a back seat you're no longer option #3 and won't be. ever.
Idk...just playing devils advocate. Because I'm not sure what else Ray was supposed to say in that circumstance. Maybe I should listen.
I could understand better if it was KG/PP/RR wanted the team to win and Ray was asking 'ok so how do I get my 15 points a game then?'
-
sounds like Scal was calling him selfish but to Roy's point, it might have been more along the lines of being egocentric or even narcissistic - meaning he wanted to help the team win, but he was only concerned with how HE could help the team
if Rondo could help the team win by taking no shots, he would do it - that doesn't compute to Ray
-
Also, I get the general idea of the comment. I think Ray wasn't comfortable being option #4 and didn't like being pigeon holed in the offense as a corner 3-pt specialist, so he probably was more selfish than the others.
My previous post was more about having double standards of players' comments. Just because you don't like a player doesn't mean every public uttering has to be twisted around to make them sound like they are public enemy #1.
(Unless it's Kobe)
-
I've always liked PP/KG/RR much more than Judas.
-
Having just listened to that part (starting around the 8:45 mark), Scal said that Ray Allen was a typical player who thought from a perspective of "the team needs to do more of what I'm good at". RR/KG/PP are very atypical in thinking on a higher level.
I don't think it's a bad or selfish thing. It's more of a limitation and inability to see the big picture. Not to get political, but it's the difference between a voter who thinks that what is good for the country is more of whatever improves his own personal position vs a voter who votes for what he thinks is good for the country, even if it is not in his personal financial best interest.
-
Also, I get the general idea of the comment. I think Ray wasn't comfortable being option #4 and didn't like being pigeon holed in the offense as a corner 3-pt specialist, so he probably was more selfish than the others.
My previous post was more about having double standards of players' comments. Just because you don't like a player doesn't mean every public uttering has to be twisted around to make them sound like they are public enemy #1.
(Unless it's Kobe)
I was a dedicated Kobe hater, but now I find him very respectable compared to Judas.
-
Again? :)
Big Baby is out - never like this guy, fat, bad jump shot, bad attitude.
Ray is out - Judas, "that guy", betrayed us.
Rondo is out for season - team is better without him, selfish, made everybody else worse
It is so simple to live in a Celtics fan's black&white world. ;D
-
Coincidentally, it was Ray who sacrificed the most out of the Big 3. So I'll take this perspective with a grain of salt. Sure, he had a different kind of mindset on approaching the game, but at the end of the day it was him who sacrificed the most, the one who got the less touches. At the end of the day, we're squabbling over semantics. So being in Allen's position, you know you're the one who's sacrificing the most, why wouldn't his mindset be about what more he can do to help this team? What is wrong with that all told?
All that said, Judas can go burn in hell for all I care, but these gripes people have over how Ray Allen's mindset with our team, lack of consideration about how hurt he sometimes played for us, sacrificed his body, pretty much giving us day in and day out everything he had to the limits of his physical ability, and lack of appreciation for that is in my view dumb.
But as I said, Ray Allen can go rot in hell.
-
Having just listened to that part (starting around the 8:45 mark), Scal said that Ray Allen was a typical player who thought from a perspective of "the team needs to do more of what I'm good at". RR/KG/PP are very atypical in thinking on a higher level.
I don't think it's a bad or selfish thing. It's more of a limitation and inability to see the big picture. Not to get political, but it's the difference between a voter who thinks that what is good for the country is more of whatever improves his own personal position vs a voter who votes for what he thinks is good for the country, even if it is not in his personal financial best interest.
this makes much more sense.
thank you
-
sounds like Scal was calling him selfish but to Roy's point, it might have been more along the lines of being egocentric or even narcissistic - meaning he wanted to help the team win, but he was only concerned with how HE could help the team
if Rondo could help the team win by taking no shots, he would do it - that doesn't compute to Ray
Exactly, and that speaks volumes as to the character of each of those individuals.
I think these particularly salient points by Scal are especially [dang]ing and worth noting regarding Judas:
1. "Ray's focus and intent was not always on the Celtics winning."
2.Judas' point of view and interest being: "What do we need to do to get me more shots?"
True Celtic forever. ::)
-
It is just a difference between team leader and team player.
Team leader question - "How can our team win?"
Team player - "How can I do my best for team's win?"
And team just cannot have all it's players as leaders.
-
It is just a difference between team leader and team player.
Team leader question - "How can our team win?"
Team player - "How can I do my best for team's win?"
And team just cannot have all it's players as leaders.
... and the other interesting thing is that Scal indicates that Rondo doesn't give 100% effort all the time.
I think that's interesting. A team leader who tells other players what the team needs to do better to win, but doesn't give full effort. It's just an interesting dichotomy.
-
It is just a difference between team leader and team player.
Team leader question - "How can our team win?"
Team player - "How can I do my best for team's win?"
And team just cannot have all it's players as leaders.
... and the other interesting thing is that Scal indicates that Rondo doesn't give 100% effort all the time.
I think that's interesting. A team leader who tells other players what the team needs to do better to win, but doesn't give full effort. It's just an interesting dichotomy.
It was in full display early this year when he called out the team's effort, just to put up one of the worst efforts I've ever seen from him in the next game (don'r recall against who).
As they say, you have to walk the walk... it's what's maddening more than anything about Rondo.
-
Also, I get the general idea of the comment. I think Ray wasn't comfortable being option #4 and didn't like being pigeon holed in the offense as a corner 3-pt specialist, so he probably was more selfish than the others.
My previous post was more about having double standards of players' comments. Just because you don't like a player doesn't mean every public uttering has to be twisted around to make them sound like they are public enemy #1.
(Unless it's Kobe)
I was a dedicated Kobe hater, but now I find him very respectable compared to Judas.
I always liked Ray, even after he left, and even with the circumstances he left in. I am finding myself admiring Kobe's game, in a Wilt Chamberlain sort of way. Dang, he is good...I hate to admit how good he is; but I (foolishly, perhaps) still don't like him, or his game. (If that makes any sense...)
-
Coincidentally, it was Ray who sacrificed the most out of the Big 3.
Sorry bro, but I call BS on that. How did he sacrificed more than KG who all of a sudden had to play center position but thrived in it regardless and didn't complain, who took way less money to come back this season than he should've just for the greater good of the team?
Or how did he sacrificed more than Paul, who has been the Celtic right from day one but still was on the trading block just like everyone else (including Ray)?
Ray didn't have to sacrifice much if at all. His nagging injuries and diminishing talent dictated how he was supposed to be used.
-
It is just a difference between team leader and team player.
Team leader question - "How can our team win?"
Team player - "How can I do my best for team's win?"
And team just cannot have all it's players as leaders.
... and the other interesting thing is that Scal indicates that Rondo doesn't give 100% effort all the time.
I think that's interesting. A team leader who tells other players what the team needs to do better to win, but doesn't give full effort. It's just an interesting dichotomy.
So he had days when he didn't perform like he's suppose to. Every player in the league have those days. You can't bring it every game, you'll burn out fast. Not even Rose brought it EVERY game. Ironically though, Rondo was the most consistent player on the team before his season ending injury when you think of effort
-
Coincidentally, it was Ray who sacrificed the most out of the Big 3.
Sorry bro, but I call BS on that. How did he sacrificed more than KG who all of a sudden had to play center position but thrived in it regardless and didn't complain, who took way less money to come back this season than he should've just for the greater good of the team?
Or how did he sacrificed more than Paul, who has been the Celtic right from day one but still was on the trading block just like everyone else (including Ray)?
Ray didn't have to sacrifice much if at all. His nagging injuries and diminishing talent dictated how he was supposed to be used.
Yeah, I never was for that "Ray sacrificed the most" BS. Personally, I think Pierce sacrificed the most. He was the alpha dog of the Celtics and had to share the ball with 2 other players who were just as capable. Paul was used to being "everything" to the Celtics for a period of time until Ray and KG came along and he was very willing to share.
Remember when people thought Paul was a selfish player? :-\
-
Coincidentally, it was Ray who sacrificed the most out of the Big 3.
Sorry bro, but I call BS on that. How did he sacrificed more than KG who all of a sudden had to play center position but thrived in it regardless and didn't complain, who took way less money to come back this season than he should've just for the greater good of the team?
Or how did he sacrificed more than Paul, who has been the Celtic right from day one but still was on the trading block just like everyone else (including Ray)?
Ray didn't have to sacrifice much if at all. His nagging injuries and diminishing talent dictated how he was supposed to be used.
All of it irrelevant at the matter at hand, we're talking about the games here, not crap outside of the court.
KG played center? Well, Ray Allen played SF and at times played a bit of PG when needed.
-
Coincidentally, it was Ray who sacrificed the most out of the Big 3.
Sorry bro, but I call BS on that. How did he sacrificed more than KG who all of a sudden had to play center position but thrived in it regardless and didn't complain, who took way less money to come back this season than he should've just for the greater good of the team?
Or how did he sacrificed more than Paul, who has been the Celtic right from day one but still was on the trading block just like everyone else (including Ray)?
Ray didn't have to sacrifice much if at all. His nagging injuries and diminishing talent dictated how he was supposed to be used.
All of it irrelevant at the matter at hand, we're talking about the games here, not crap outside of the court.
KG played center? Well, Ray Allen played SF and at times played a bit of PG when needed.
Paul did too (still doing it). So...your point is...?
-
Coincidentally, it was Ray who sacrificed the most out of the Big 3.
Sorry bro, but I call BS on that. How did he sacrificed more than KG who all of a sudden had to play center position but thrived in it regardless and didn't complain, who took way less money to come back this season than he should've just for the greater good of the team?
Or how did he sacrificed more than Paul, who has been the Celtic right from day one but still was on the trading block just like everyone else (including Ray)?
Ray didn't have to sacrifice much if at all. His nagging injuries and diminishing talent dictated how he was supposed to be used.
All of it irrelevant at the matter at hand, we're talking about the games here, not crap outside of the court.
KG played center? Well, Ray Allen played SF and at times played a bit of PG when needed.
Paul did too (still doing it). So...your point is...?
From a team perspective, they were all used to being the alpha dog. Now Pierce was the alpha on Offense, Garnett was the alpha on defense, and Ray was the alpha on shooting technicals?
In their first year in Boston, Ray got 36% less shot attempts, to Pierce's 24% decrease and Garnett's 21% decrease. Ray's FGA continued to drop every year, while Pierce and Garnett's kind of plateaued (and they actually saw some increases in FGA in years 4 and 5, something Ray never got).
Similarly, Ray scored 34% fewer points that first year, while Pierce decreased 22%, and Garnett decreased 17%.
Ray Allen got 24% less assists, while Pierce got 10% more, and Garnett decreased by 17%.
From a Usage perspective, Ray saw a decrease of 27%, while Pierce and Garnett only decreased 19% each.
I'm sure there's a stat somewhere for touches or how long you have the ball in your hands, I just don't know where to find it. But I imagined Ray decreased the most.
Sure, I think Ray Allen was the worst of the Big 3 too, and also his game fell off the most during his time in Boston, but I definitely understand the argument of Ray sacrificed the most. He saw the biggest decrease in touches, shots, points, and plays where he created for others of the Big 3 while in Boston. (Though not saying I don't see justification for the decreases).
He took the biggest decrease in production and got the least amount of credit. That's a sound argument for "sacrificing the most" I think. Though I guess you could argue that it wasn't a "sacrifice" it was just his natural decline, but then I'd fell like we're just talking semantics.
-
Coincidentally, it was Ray who sacrificed the most out of the Big 3.
Sorry bro, but I call BS on that. How did he sacrificed more than KG who all of a sudden had to play center position but thrived in it regardless and didn't complain, who took way less money to come back this season than he should've just for the greater good of the team?
Or how did he sacrificed more than Paul, who has been the Celtic right from day one but still was on the trading block just like everyone else (including Ray)?
Ray didn't have to sacrifice much if at all. His nagging injuries and diminishing talent dictated how he was supposed to be used.
All of it irrelevant at the matter at hand, we're talking about the games here, not crap outside of the court.
KG played center? Well, Ray Allen played SF and at times played a bit of PG when needed.
Paul did too (still doing it). So...your point is...?
My point is exactly that. KG playing center doesn't add much to that "sacrifice" aspect, particularly seeing how effective he's been there, and one can argue played better there.
Be aware that prior to coming to Boston, Ray Allen shot 21 shots a game in Seattle, the most between the Big 3. So yes, he's the one who sacrificed his offense the most between them. Not only that, it was quite evident that he was the 3rd or 4th choice in our offense most of the time, to the point that at times we had to go out of our way to give him some touches.
I don't know why that's even in dispute, and that being the case, his mindset of "what more I can do for this team" shouldn't be as vilified as you guys want to, on a hearsay of Scalabrine on top of it and his opinion, perspective, assumption.
-
Rondo very smart. Doesn't suffer fools well. Doesn't bring it every night like DRose does.
In my opinion that's the biggest issue right there. Both incredibly talented players. Elite talent. But I guess that is the difference between a MVP and an All-Star.
Agree very much with you, Kane. Rondo would be a strong MVP candidate if he brought his top game every night.
-
Coincidentally, it was Ray who sacrificed the most out of the Big 3.
Sorry bro, but I call BS on that. How did he sacrificed more than KG who all of a sudden had to play center position but thrived in it regardless and didn't complain, who took way less money to come back this season than he should've just for the greater good of the team?
Or how did he sacrificed more than Paul, who has been the Celtic right from day one but still was on the trading block just like everyone else (including Ray)?
Ray didn't have to sacrifice much if at all. His nagging injuries and diminishing talent dictated how he was supposed to be used.
Yeah, I never was for that "Ray sacrificed the most" BS. Personally, I think Pierce sacrificed the most. He was the alpha dog of the Celtics and had to share the ball with 2 other players who were just as capable. Paul was used to being "everything" to the Celtics for a period of time until Ray and KG came along and he was very willing to share.
Remember when people thought Paul was a selfish player? :-\
Paul Pierce, 2008 NBA Finals MVP. Nuff said!
-
sounds like Scal was calling him selfish but to Roy's point, it might have been more along the lines of being egocentric or even narcissistic - meaning he wanted to help the team win, but he was only concerned with how HE could help the team
if Rondo could help the team win by taking no shots, he would do it - that doesn't compute to Ray
Come on, let's be serious. Of course that doesn't compute to Ray, how could him taking no shots ever help the team? Even while hurt he was still our most efficient scorer by a large margin. The team was getting killed on the boards, something he couldn't really do anything about, nor could he give us another productive player over 6'8".
-
Somehow when he arrived, Ray had this great rep from the people of New England of being a team player. His rep in Seattle was of a guy who never defended and complained when he didn't get his shots. I've posted a link or two before. There is no question he was also thought of as a good guy and a professional and hard worker.
Its not easy balancing out that whole perspective, it seems inconsistent, but I think its right: good man, hard worker, methodical, but wants as much glory or credit as he can get.
Getting a handle on Rondo is as difficult: puts winning above all else but doesn't bring it every night.
-
Coincidentally, it was Ray who sacrificed the most out of the Big 3.
Sorry bro, but I call BS on that. How did he sacrificed more than KG who all of a sudden had to play center position but thrived in it regardless and didn't complain, who took way less money to come back this season than he should've just for the greater good of the team?
Or how did he sacrificed more than Paul, who has been the Celtic right from day one but still was on the trading block just like everyone else (including Ray)?
Ray didn't have to sacrifice much if at all. His nagging injuries and diminishing talent dictated how he was supposed to be used.
Yeah, I never was for that "Ray sacrificed the most" BS. Personally, I think Pierce sacrificed the most. He was the alpha dog of the Celtics and had to share the ball with 2 other players who were just as capable. Paul was used to being "everything" to the Celtics for a period of time until Ray and KG came along and he was very willing to share.
Remember when people thought Paul was a selfish player? :-\
Let's not forget the spot that Ray was in when he got here.
He was an allstar who was traded involuntarily to a rebuilding team, walking in on two surgically repaired ankles as-yet untested, to a team that already had a franchise star in Pierce, who happened to do many of the same things (shoot, curl, penetrate off screens, etc.).
Ray became relevant again when KG was traded here, too, but at the price of rightfully going from top to third banana.
It doesn't really seem like he necessarily signed up for Boston; he didn't have much of a choice.
-
To me the Ray/Rondo rift made a certain amount of sense.
At that late point if I'm Ray there's only so much I can respect a player that can't hit a free throw.
If I'm Rondo there's only so much I can respect a guy who loses his spot due to the fact that the 20 year old plays infinitely better defense.
Two guys that think they're better than they are
-
It is just a difference between team leader and team player.
Team leader question - "How can our team win?"
Team player - "How can I do my best for team's win?"
And team just cannot have all it's players as leaders.
... and the other interesting thing is that Scal indicates that Rondo doesn't give 100% effort all the time.
I think that's interesting. A team leader who tells other players what the team needs to do better to win, but doesn't give full effort. It's just an interesting dichotomy.
I don't think that's exactly what he meant. He also said that when he was Rondo's teammate Rondo "brought it" every night and played hard.
What I thought was the most interesting part was when Scal was talking about how you could surround him with players that fit his style and compete for titles even if his teammates aren't the most talented players around.
-
Can we finally at least stop attributing the Rondo "pound the ball to the ground" offense to Rondo's supposed absurd egotism now?
-
It is just a difference between team leader and team player.
Team leader question - "How can our team win?"
Team player - "How can I do my best for team's win?"
And team just cannot have all it's players as leaders.
... and the other interesting thing is that Scal indicates that Rondo doesn't give 100% effort all the time.
I think that's interesting. A team leader who tells other players what the team needs to do better to win, but doesn't give full effort. It's just an interesting dichotomy.
I don't think that's exactly what he meant. He also said that when he was Rondo's teammate Rondo "brought it" every night and played hard.
What I thought was the most interesting part was when Scal was talking about how you could surround him with players that fit his style and compete for titles even if his teammates aren't the most talented players around.
Well, that's pretty obvious, as Rondo is the kind of player that makes everyone better with his ability to get everyone involved. However, I'm not sure they could ALL be "not the most talented," because I think Rondo needs at least another star to compete. Hopefully, Green, Bradley, or Sully can become that, but if not, we need to find someone who can fill that star role if we want to contend again.
-
Ray seemed to take things with Rondo a little to personally. Like he wasnt giving him the ball on purpose and holding a grudge.
I remember pierce walking off at half time cause he was calling for the ball but he didnt think Rondo was passing him the ball then Rondo looked for him and his back was turned watching him walk away
I remember feeling a lot of tension there but clearly Pierce can look past little things like that (even though pierce was in the wrong). Ive seen other times that Pierce seems annoyed with Rondo for not passing to him but clearly it doesnt affect Pierce or his relationship with Rondo as it did with Ray
-
Rondo very smart. Doesn't suffer fools well. Doesn't bring it every night like DRose does.
In my opinion that's the biggest issue right there. Both incredibly talented players. Elite talent. But I guess that is the difference between a MVP and an All-Star.
Agree very much with you, Kane. Rondo would be a strong MVP candidate if he brought his top game every night.
Yeah it's really a waste when you think about it. Not on the scale of a Vince carter or t Mac in regards to say Kobe but its still a little disappointing.
-
Rondo, PP, KG all about the team winning. Judas isn't dumb, that isn't the cause of the rift. Judas focus wasn't always on the Cs winning.
If they had a team meeting, specifically about the team winning and losing KG/Rondo/PP were about "how do we get the team to win". Judas was all about "what do I need to do?". Scal made the "we" vs "I" distinction pretty clear.
In fairness, Scal said, from his perspective, most players in the NBA talk about what they individually need to do to make the same win, and that every player on the Celtics outside of KG, Pierce, and Rondo were that way.
Scal clearly Said, 3 players on the Celtics (PP,KG,RR) were about what we can do as a team to win, while Ray was like..what can I do ...how the team can set him up to win or something of that nature...
Glad hes gone..never liked him.
Right. Like I said, every player on the Celtics other than Pierce, Rondo, and KG had the perspective "how can I individually help the team win", as opposed to the perspective of those three, which was "what do we all need to do better?"
Scal definitely gave an interesting perspective to the approach that RR and KG take compared to the other 99% of the league. Most players seem to take the approach that if the team's style of play suits them better, they'll be more successful and their increased success will lead to more success for the team.
KG and Rondo look at it from a different perspective. Instead of trying to figure out what the team can do to make them more productive individually, they look at how the team can get the highest aggregate contribution from all of the players. It's kind of a "chess vs checkers" approach to the puzzle. I think it's also why, to differing degrees, the main knock on both players throughout their careers has been that they haven't been assertive enough in terms of taking over games or "selfishly" demanded the ball/shot often enough.
They aren't trying to win games by being as individually productive as possible, they're trying to do whatever they think will raise the overall level of the team the most. For Rondo that might mean looking to get his teammates easy shots instead of looking to score, for KG it might mean setting picks to get people open instead of trying to get a good scoring opportunity for himself.
I think this is likely the main reason Rondo's seen as inconsistent. Most top players are trying to maximize their individual production in an effort to help the team win, Rondo's trying to wring as much productivity from the offense as a whole as he can. When the team's playing poorly Chris Paul (for example) will try and do what he can to carry the team, Rondo will try and do what he thinks will get the team back on track. The unique thing about Rondo is that he's less deferential in bigger games.
Not that I'm comparing Rondo (or KG for that matter) to him, but Bird also took the "team not player" approach to the game. I can remember a lot of games where he'd spend the early part of games trying to get his teammates going instead of scoring himself because they'd play better during the game if they got off to a good start whereas Bird would play well regardless.
-
Ray Allen couldn't accept that his overall game had diminished. The bear before he arrived in Boston, only 47% of his baskets were assisted. He was the man there and he was allowed to freewheel and get his. He made "only" 40% of his jumpers, and his eFG was 51%.
His first year in Boston, 65% of his hoops were assisted, and he hit 40% of his jumpers, buy his eFG was 54%, The next year, 69% of his hoops were assisted, and he hit 44% of his jumpers, with an eFG of 57%. And those number trended up over the years, with Allen's final year in Boston he was helped on 78% of his hoops with an eFG of 57%.
Allen can't argue that his use in Boston resulted in him being one of the most efficient scorer in the league. Should he have been used more? That's a matter to be debated, I guess, but the Cs had a ton of success using him the way they did.
In Miami, he still needs to be set up to score, with 74% of his hoops assisted, and he's still efficient, with an eFG of 56%. In Boston, Allen didn't want to accept that Father Time got to him, and that he became a one trick pony - a spot up shooter than needs someone to get him the ball to score. Paradoxically, he's embraced that role in Miami, even though he's getting less touches and is the 4th or 5th option there.
Unfortunately, Ray Allen wasn't man enough to accept his role here in Boston. I regret that Ainge didn't pull the trigger on that deadline deal last season so the Cs could nave gotten something for Allen, and I hope he fails miserably in the playoffs in Miami. However, there's no denying the positive impact he's had on that team's offense and on their roster, as a $6m a year player taking a 50% discount to ring chase.
-
Rondo, PP, KG all about the team winning. Judas isn't dumb, that isn't the cause of the rift. Judas focus wasn't always on the Cs winning.
If they had a team meeting, specifically about the team winning and losing KG/Rondo/PP were about "how do we get the team to win". Judas was all about "what do I need to do?". Scal made the "we" vs "I" distinction pretty clear.
In fairness, Scal said, from his perspective, most players in the NBA talk about what they individually need to do to make the same win, and that every player on the Celtics outside of KG, Pierce, and Rondo were that way.
Scal clearly Said, 3 players on the Celtics (PP,KG,RR) were about what we can do as a team to win, while Ray was like..what can I do ...how the team can set him up to win or something of that nature...
Glad hes gone..never liked him.
Right. Like I said, every player on the Celtics other than Pierce, Rondo, and KG had the perspective "how can I individually help the team win", as opposed to the perspective of those three, which was "what do we all need to do better?"
Scal definitely gave an interesting perspective to the approach that RR and KG take compared to the other 99% of the league. Most players seem to take the approach that if the team's style of play suits them better, they'll be more successful and their increased success will lead to more success for the team.
KG and Rondo look at it from a different perspective. Instead of trying to figure out what the team can do to make them more productive individually, they look at how the team can get the highest aggregate contribution from all of the players. It's kind of a "chess vs checkers" approach to the puzzle. I think it's also why, to differing degrees, the main knock on both players throughout their careers has been that they haven't been assertive enough in terms of taking over games or "selfishly" demanded the ball/shot often enough.
They aren't trying to win games by being as individually productive as possible, they're trying to do whatever they think will raise the overall level of the team the most. For Rondo that might mean looking to get his teammates easy shots instead of looking to score, for KG it might mean setting picks to get people open instead of trying to get a good scoring opportunity for himself.
I think this is likely the main reason Rondo's seen as inconsistent. Most top players are trying to maximize their individual production in an effort to help the team win, Rondo's trying to wring as much productivity from the offense as a whole as he can. When the team's playing poorly Chris Paul (for example) will try and do what he can to carry the team, Rondo will try and do what he thinks will get the team back on track. The unique thing about Rondo is that he's less deferential in bigger games.
Not that I'm comparing Rondo (or KG for that matter) to him, but Bird also took the "team not player" approach to the game. I can remember a lot of games where he'd spend the early part of games trying to get his teammates going instead of scoring himself because they'd play better during the game if they got off to a good start whereas Bird would play well regardless.
Man...you nailed it...right on the head
-
Well, in any event - after reading through the thread a bit, I can see semantics at work, and how we interpret it.
It's been determined that Rajon Rondo didn't give 100% every game, too...I hope he comes back more mature next season.
For me, I'll always respect what Ray Allen did for BOS, and I hope we are ready to deal with him between now and Apr-May June(?).
I think the ONLY way we can put Ray Allen behind us is beating him in a series....and that will be TOUGH, with a capital T.
-
Rondo, PP, KG all about the team winning. Judas isn't dumb, that isn't the cause of the rift. Judas focus wasn't always on the Cs winning.
If they had a team meeting, specifically about the team winning and losing KG/Rondo/PP were about "how do we get the team to win". Judas was all about "what do I need to do?". Scal made the "we" vs "I" distinction pretty clear.
In fairness, Scal said, from his perspective, most players in the NBA talk about what they individually need to do to make the same win, and that every player on the Celtics outside of KG, Pierce, and Rondo were that way.
Scal clearly Said, 3 players on the Celtics (PP,KG,RR) were about what we can do as a team to win, while Ray was like..what can I do ...how the team can set him up to win or something of that nature...
Glad hes gone..never liked him.
Right. Like I said, every player on the Celtics other than Pierce, Rondo, and KG had the perspective "how can I individually help the team win", as opposed to the perspective of those three, which was "what do we all need to do better?"
I think that a very important upshot to RR taking a larger view of what was best for the team in general was his coming to the inescapable conclusion that we were better with Bradley starting over Ray and sharing that conclusion with Doc. That had to be the biggest part of the rift between Rondo and Allen.