Are you still going to claim that Irving's better?
I think Rondo's ability to "run an offense" has become vastly over-rated. I wonder how much better our team would be if we had more people moving the ball.
And I'd say it's underrated by people who think we don't need it because we won a title with 3 primary scoring options (all in their primes) in the starting lineup in 2008.
Don't know if you saw this or not, but last spring someone was trying to show that John Wall lost a lot of assists because his teammates couldn't shoot. He looked at all the Wizards "scoring opportunities" from Wall passes and compared that to all the other scoring opportunities. He found that Wall's passes led to scores about 9% more often than all other opportunities. For comparison, he did the same with Rondo and saw that the jump in scoring from Rondo's passes was over twice as much, just over 20%.
Considering the amount of assists Rondo gets that's a very significant difference in efficiency.
I'm not seeing the conclusions you are. Maybe it's in the spreadsheet that isn't loading for me?
Here's the conclusion I'm reading:
Rondo's missed assists per game number is 7.6, which is far lower than Wall's 9.8 by a wide margin. If you add Rondo's assists with his missed assists (9.6 + 7.6 = 17.2) it's almost exactly the same number of assist opportunities as John Wall (7.6 + 9.8 = 17.4). Rondo's Boston teammates convert 55.9 percent of his assist chances into actual assists, while Wall's Wizards convert only 43.9 percent of his chances.
That data can be read in two ways:
1. Wall's teammates suck compared to Rondo's; or
2. Rondo gets his guys in better position to convert shots
The answer is probably somewhere in between. However, a study that shows that in a perfect world, John Wall would have more assists than Rajon Rondo doesn't strike me as all that meaningful, or particularly complimentary of Rondo.
I can't load the spreadsheet either but they had the info summed up in one of the posts:
Total makes by Boston so far this year: 1166 Total Makes: 2564 Total turnovers: 500
Total non-Rondo assisted makes: 1166-231 = 935
Total non-Rondo assisted “opportunities” (attempts + turnovers): 3063 – 413 = 2650
Celts non-Rondo assisted makes/opportunities: 935/2650 = 35.3%
Celts Rondo-assisted makes/opportunities: 231/413 = 55.9%
For Wall this number is 9.2%.
“Total opportunities: 3244. Wall assisted opportunities: 572. Non-Wall-assisted: 3244 – 572 = 2672.
Total makes: 1178. Wall assisted makes: 251. Non-wall-assisted makes: 1178-251 = 927.
Non-wall-assisted "opportunities" : 927/2672 = 34.7.
Wall-assisted: 251/572 = 43.9%.
It’s interesting that the Celtic’s non-Rondo assisted makes figure is 35.3%, only a little bit more than the Wizards non-Wall assisted make % of 34.7.
So the Celts and the Wizards (no assist attempt from Rondo or Wall) were fairly identical but the Celts had a pretty large jump in efficiency off of passes from Rondo.