Author Topic: Kyrie > Rondo  (Read 54521 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Kyrie > Rondo
« Reply #285 on: February 21, 2013, 10:33:09 AM »

Offline Eddie20

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8497
  • Tommy Points: 975
There's no doubt Irving is better than Rondo.

I am not even sure it's close.

  Of course there is, unless your method of comparing players consists entirely of how much they score.

How I wish your Rondo obsession would be shared by at least one rival GM. To think of what we could land...

  OTOH, put most of the people here in charge of a team and we'd be perennial bottom feeders. The consensus opinion in the forums has been wrong often enough that I don't find being in the minority to be particularly distressing.

I'd prefer a player who doesn't have such a glaring weakness (shooting) and who doesn't need the ball in his hands 90% of the time because that weakness could be exploited if he's off the ball. Rondo has improved his shooting, but teams will still dare him to beat them, and if he's spotting up shooting jumpers then that's a major win for the opposition. Try that strategy on Irving. Another thing is the FT shooting. Rondo is at 65%, which is the equivalent of Shaq for a PG, while Irving is at 85%. Then when you factor in the ages (Rondo soon to be 27, Irving 20) and it truly is a no-brainer.

Re: Kyrie > Rondo
« Reply #286 on: February 21, 2013, 10:34:06 AM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58540
  • Tommy Points: -25636
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
Stop the bickering and personal jabs now, please.  Totally unacceptable by all involved.


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: Kyrie > Rondo
« Reply #287 on: February 21, 2013, 10:43:36 AM »

Offline BballTim

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23724
  • Tommy Points: 1123
There's no doubt Irving is better than Rondo.

I am not even sure it's close.

  Of course there is, unless your method of comparing players consists entirely of how much they score.

How I wish your Rondo obsession would be shared by at least one rival GM. To think of what we could land...

  OTOH, put most of the people here in charge of a team and we'd be perennial bottom feeders. The consensus opinion in the forums has been wrong often enough that I don't find being in the minority to be particularly distressing.

I'd prefer a player who doesn't have such a glaring weakness (shooting) and who doesn't need the ball in his hands 90% of the time because that weakness could be exploited if he's off the ball. Rondo has improved his shooting, but teams will still dare him to beat them, and if he's spotting up shooting jumpers then that's a major win for the opposition. Try that strategy on Irving. Another thing is the FT shooting. Rondo is at 65%, which is the equivalent of Shaq for a PG, while Irving is at 85%. Then when you factor in the ages (Rondo soon to be 27, Irving 20) and it truly is a no-brainer.

  Sure, Irving's a better shooter, better ft shooter and younger. He doesn't have a glaring weakness, but there are also a number of areas where Rondo's clearly better than him. But I'd say that if Rondo were anywhere near the liability on offense you think he is then the Celts wouldn't have anywhere near the success that they have with him and you wouldn't spend most playoff series hearing opposing coaches talking about what they're going to try to change to try and limit Rondo's effectiveness. It's easy to explain how Rondo's "glaring weakness" makes it easy to defend the Celts. The explanations just don't generally match up with what happens on the court.

Re: Kyrie > Rondo
« Reply #288 on: February 21, 2013, 10:51:05 AM »

Offline celtsfan84

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1182
  • Tommy Points: 80
There's no doubt Irving is better than Rondo.

I am not even sure it's close.

  Of course there is, unless your method of comparing players consists entirely of how much they score.

How I wish your Rondo obsession would be shared by at least one rival GM. To think of what we could land...

  OTOH, put most of the people here in charge of a team and we'd be perennial bottom feeders. The consensus opinion in the forums has been wrong often enough that I don't find being in the minority to be particularly distressing.

I'd prefer a player who doesn't have such a glaring weakness (shooting) and who doesn't need the ball in his hands 90% of the time because that weakness could be exploited if he's off the ball. Rondo has improved his shooting, but teams will still dare him to beat them, and if he's spotting up shooting jumpers then that's a major win for the opposition. Try that strategy on Irving. Another thing is the FT shooting. Rondo is at 65%, which is the equivalent of Shaq for a PG, while Irving is at 85%. Then when you factor in the ages (Rondo soon to be 27, Irving 20) and it truly is a no-brainer.

  Sure, Irving's a better shooter, better ft shooter and younger. He doesn't have a glaring weakness, but there are also a number of areas where Rondo's clearly better than him. But I'd say that if Rondo were anywhere near the liability on offense you think he is then the Celts wouldn't have anywhere near the success that they have with him and you wouldn't spend most playoff series hearing opposing coaches talking about what they're going to try to change to try and limit Rondo's effectiveness. It's easy to explain how Rondo's "glaring weakness" makes it easy to defend the Celts. The explanations just don't generally match up with what happens on the court.

He's also signed to 2015/2016 to a cheaper contract and isn't coming off of a torn ACL.

The previous poster also didn't call Rondo an overall liability, he said that Rondo has a weakness that can be exploited.  Game 6 and Game 7 against the Lakers are key example, games in which our offense couldn't score and we lost the NBA Finals by 4 points.  Kobe left Rondo open for the bulk of the games, on his way to collecting 11 and 15 rebounds.  It's pretty rare to see someone guarding a point guard out on the perimeter and still get 26 rebounds over a two game stretch.  That mught have hurt our chances to win the NBA Finals. 

And of course opposing coaches gameplan to try to limit Rondo, they'd do the same against Kyrie or any other top-level point guard.  That should be obvious.
« Last Edit: February 21, 2013, 11:02:46 AM by celtsfan84 »

Re: Kyrie > Rondo
« Reply #289 on: February 21, 2013, 10:51:18 AM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • NCE
  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17914
  • Tommy Points: 1294
It's easy to explain how Rondo's "glaring weakness" makes it easy to defend the Celts. The explanations just don't generally match up with what happens on the court.
Wait, you mean Rondo's defender doesn't play "free safety"? Or Rondo beats teams all the time when they give him open jumpers.

Sorry, can't agree with you there.
"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."

Re: Kyrie > Rondo
« Reply #290 on: February 21, 2013, 10:52:58 AM »

Offline celtsfan84

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1182
  • Tommy Points: 80
It's easy to explain how Rondo's "glaring weakness" makes it easy to defend the Celts. The explanations just don't generally match up with what happens on the court.
Wait, you mean Rondo's defender doesn't play "free safety"? Or Rondo beats teams all the time when they give him open jumpers.

Sorry, can't agree with you there.

I second this post.

Re: Kyrie > Rondo
« Reply #291 on: February 21, 2013, 11:01:58 AM »

Offline BballTim

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23724
  • Tommy Points: 1123
It's easy to explain how Rondo's "glaring weakness" makes it easy to defend the Celts. The explanations just don't generally match up with what happens on the court.
Wait, you mean Rondo's defender doesn't play "free safety"? Or Rondo beats teams all the time when they give him open jumpers.

Sorry, can't agree with you there.

  No, I mean the way that we're generally among the better teams in the league in terms of things like fg%, efg% and ts% because what Rondo contributes to the offense more than offsets his shooting. You might not think this matters but Rondo beating teams by getting his teammates open shots counts.

Re: Kyrie > Rondo
« Reply #292 on: February 21, 2013, 11:03:13 AM »

Offline Celtics18

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11688
  • Tommy Points: 1469
It's easy to explain how Rondo's "glaring weakness" makes it easy to defend the Celts. The explanations just don't generally match up with what happens on the court.
Wait, you mean Rondo's defender doesn't play "free safety"? Or Rondo beats teams all the time when they give him open jumpers.

Sorry, can't agree with you there.

I would actually say that both of your statements are true to a large extent.  As has been pointed out many times, Rondo hits his mid range jumpers at a higher rate than a vast majority of NBA point guards. 

And, no, defenders don't really play free safety defense against him.  They may go under picks and back off him, playing him more as a driver than a shooter, but they aren't generally not guarding him. 
DKC Seventy-Sixers:

PG: G. Hill/D. Schroder
SG: C. Lee/B. Hield/T. Luwawu
SF:  Giannis/J. Lamb/M. Kuzminskas
PF:  E. Ilyasova/J. Jerebko/R. Christmas
C:    N. Vucevic/K. Olynyk/E. Davis/C. Jefferson

Re: Kyrie > Rondo
« Reply #293 on: February 21, 2013, 11:05:26 AM »

Offline celtsfan84

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1182
  • Tommy Points: 80
It's easy to explain how Rondo's "glaring weakness" makes it easy to defend the Celts. The explanations just don't generally match up with what happens on the court.
Wait, you mean Rondo's defender doesn't play "free safety"? Or Rondo beats teams all the time when they give him open jumpers.

Sorry, can't agree with you there.

  No, I mean the way that we're generally among the better teams in the league in terms of things like fg%, efg% and ts% because what Rondo contributes to the offense more than offsets his shooting. You might not think this matters but Rondo beating teams by getting his teammates open shots counts.

So I guess the false claims that Rondo is a great shooter have finally been given up, otherwise there'd be nothing to "offset".

Of course his creating open shots for teammates counts.  Even with that taken into consideration, some will prefer Kyrie. This thread is about comparing Rondo to Kyrie Irving, not to Kevin Ollie.  No one is stating that Rondo has no impact on the game or calling him an overall liability.  Some people just prefer the package of skills of a different top-level point guard.

Re: Kyrie > Rondo
« Reply #294 on: February 21, 2013, 11:09:19 AM »

Offline BballTim

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23724
  • Tommy Points: 1123
There's no doubt Irving is better than Rondo.

I am not even sure it's close.

  Of course there is, unless your method of comparing players consists entirely of how much they score.

How I wish your Rondo obsession would be shared by at least one rival GM. To think of what we could land...

  OTOH, put most of the people here in charge of a team and we'd be perennial bottom feeders. The consensus opinion in the forums has been wrong often enough that I don't find being in the minority to be particularly distressing.

I'd prefer a player who doesn't have such a glaring weakness (shooting) and who doesn't need the ball in his hands 90% of the time because that weakness could be exploited if he's off the ball. Rondo has improved his shooting, but teams will still dare him to beat them, and if he's spotting up shooting jumpers then that's a major win for the opposition. Try that strategy on Irving. Another thing is the FT shooting. Rondo is at 65%, which is the equivalent of Shaq for a PG, while Irving is at 85%. Then when you factor in the ages (Rondo soon to be 27, Irving 20) and it truly is a no-brainer.

  Sure, Irving's a better shooter, better ft shooter and younger. He doesn't have a glaring weakness, but there are also a number of areas where Rondo's clearly better than him. But I'd say that if Rondo were anywhere near the liability on offense you think he is then the Celts wouldn't have anywhere near the success that they have with him and you wouldn't spend most playoff series hearing opposing coaches talking about what they're going to try to change to try and limit Rondo's effectiveness. It's easy to explain how Rondo's "glaring weakness" makes it easy to defend the Celts. The explanations just don't generally match up with what happens on the court.

He's also signed to 2015/2016 to a cheaper contract and isn't coming off of a torn ACL.

  So? Was anyone disputing those things?

The previous poster also didn't call Rondo an overall liability, he said that Rondo has a weakness that can be exploited.  Game 7 against the Lakers is a key example, a game in which our offense couldn't score and we lost the NBA Finals by 4 points.  Kobe left Rondo open for the bulk of the game, on his way to collecting 15 rebounds. 

  The main reasons the "Kobe" on Rondo strategy was somewhat successful were Rondo not being his healthiest in that series and (more importantly) Ray getting kneed in the thigh by Artest. Ray was having a field day vs Fisher while the Lakers were putting their better defender on Rondo.

Re: Kyrie > Rondo
« Reply #295 on: February 21, 2013, 11:11:59 AM »

Offline celtsfan84

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1182
  • Tommy Points: 80
There's no doubt Irving is better than Rondo.

I am not even sure it's close.

  Of course there is, unless your method of comparing players consists entirely of how much they score.

How I wish your Rondo obsession would be shared by at least one rival GM. To think of what we could land...

  OTOH, put most of the people here in charge of a team and we'd be perennial bottom feeders. The consensus opinion in the forums has been wrong often enough that I don't find being in the minority to be particularly distressing.

I'd prefer a player who doesn't have such a glaring weakness (shooting) and who doesn't need the ball in his hands 90% of the time because that weakness could be exploited if he's off the ball. Rondo has improved his shooting, but teams will still dare him to beat them, and if he's spotting up shooting jumpers then that's a major win for the opposition. Try that strategy on Irving. Another thing is the FT shooting. Rondo is at 65%, which is the equivalent of Shaq for a PG, while Irving is at 85%. Then when you factor in the ages (Rondo soon to be 27, Irving 20) and it truly is a no-brainer.

  Sure, Irving's a better shooter, better ft shooter and younger. He doesn't have a glaring weakness, but there are also a number of areas where Rondo's clearly better than him. But I'd say that if Rondo were anywhere near the liability on offense you think he is then the Celts wouldn't have anywhere near the success that they have with him and you wouldn't spend most playoff series hearing opposing coaches talking about what they're going to try to change to try and limit Rondo's effectiveness. It's easy to explain how Rondo's "glaring weakness" makes it easy to defend the Celts. The explanations just don't generally match up with what happens on the court.

He's also signed to 2015/2016 to a cheaper contract and isn't coming off of a torn ACL.

  So? Was anyone disputing those things?

The previous poster also didn't call Rondo an overall liability, he said that Rondo has a weakness that can be exploited.  Game 7 against the Lakers is a key example, a game in which our offense couldn't score and we lost the NBA Finals by 4 points.  Kobe left Rondo open for the bulk of the game, on his way to collecting 15 rebounds. 

  The main reasons the "Kobe" on Rondo strategy was somewhat successful were Rondo not being his healthiest in that series and (more importantly) Ray getting kneed in the thigh by Artest. Ray was having a field day vs Fisher while the Lakers were putting their better defender on Rondo.

Nobody was disputing that Kyrie is younger, but you decided to make that the beginning of your post.  I see plenty in your post that nobody is disputing.  Geez, calm down a bit, chief.

And yes, that is why the strategy was effective.  Nobody is disputing that either.  If Rondo were a better shooter, like Kyrie, that strategy wouldn't have worked.

Re: Kyrie > Rondo
« Reply #296 on: February 21, 2013, 11:18:54 AM »

Offline BballTim

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23724
  • Tommy Points: 1123
It's easy to explain how Rondo's "glaring weakness" makes it easy to defend the Celts. The explanations just don't generally match up with what happens on the court.
Wait, you mean Rondo's defender doesn't play "free safety"? Or Rondo beats teams all the time when they give him open jumpers.

Sorry, can't agree with you there.

  No, I mean the way that we're generally among the better teams in the league in terms of things like fg%, efg% and ts% because what Rondo contributes to the offense more than offsets his shooting. You might not think this matters but Rondo beating teams by getting his teammates open shots counts.

So I guess the false claims that Rondo is a great shooter have finally been given up, otherwise there'd be nothing to "offset".

  The "false claims that Rondo is a great shooter" probably occurred in your head, not on the blog. Allow me to clarify, I was talking about how defenders give Rondo space to shoot because his shooting, while not as bad as many claim, is a weaker part of his game than penetration or passing.

  However, since you brought it up, Rondo's long jump shooting (16-23 feet) was above average this year, which is clearly an encouraging sign.

Of course his creating open shots for teammates counts.  Even with that taken into consideration, some will prefer Kyrie. This thread is about comparing Rondo to Kyrie Irving, not to Kevin Ollie.  No one is stating that Rondo has no impact on the game or calling him an overall liability.  Some people just prefer the package of skills of a different top-level point guard.

   Yes, that pretty much sums up what we're discussing.

Re: Kyrie > Rondo
« Reply #297 on: February 21, 2013, 11:25:53 AM »

Offline celtsfan84

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1182
  • Tommy Points: 80
It's easy to explain how Rondo's "glaring weakness" makes it easy to defend the Celts. The explanations just don't generally match up with what happens on the court.
Wait, you mean Rondo's defender doesn't play "free safety"? Or Rondo beats teams all the time when they give him open jumpers.

Sorry, can't agree with you there.

  No, I mean the way that we're generally among the better teams in the league in terms of things like fg%, efg% and ts% because what Rondo contributes to the offense more than offsets his shooting. You might not think this matters but Rondo beating teams by getting his teammates open shots counts.

So I guess the false claims that Rondo is a great shooter have finally been given up, otherwise there'd be nothing to "offset".

  The "false claims that Rondo is a great shooter" probably occurred in your head, not on the blog. Allow me to clarify, I was talking about how defenders give Rondo space to shoot because his shooting, while not as bad as many claim, is a weaker part of his game than penetration or passing.

  However, since you brought it up, Rondo's long jump shooting (16-23 feet) was above average this year, which is clearly an encouraging sign.

Of course his creating open shots for teammates counts.  Even with that taken into consideration, some will prefer Kyrie. This thread is about comparing Rondo to Kyrie Irving, not to Kevin Ollie.  No one is stating that Rondo has no impact on the game or calling him an overall liability.  Some people just prefer the package of skills of a different top-level point guard.

   Yes, that pretty much sums up what we're discussing.

There have definitely been posts on this forum that Rondo is a great shooter (this is the forum part of the CelticsBlog website, not the blog part, by the way, someone with over 16,000 forum posts should be able to tell the difference).

Rondo's long jump shooting is above average because he is often left open.  Plus, the sample size there is pretty small anyway.

You choose to ignore the fact that his long jump shooting is "above average" this year, but his free throw shooting is well below average.  Care to guess why?  Probably because everyone is left open on free throws, not just Rondo.

Re: Kyrie > Rondo
« Reply #298 on: February 21, 2013, 11:30:04 AM »

Offline BballTim

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23724
  • Tommy Points: 1123
There's no doubt Irving is better than Rondo.

I am not even sure it's close.

  Of course there is, unless your method of comparing players consists entirely of how much they score.

How I wish your Rondo obsession would be shared by at least one rival GM. To think of what we could land...

  OTOH, put most of the people here in charge of a team and we'd be perennial bottom feeders. The consensus opinion in the forums has been wrong often enough that I don't find being in the minority to be particularly distressing.

I'd prefer a player who doesn't have such a glaring weakness (shooting) and who doesn't need the ball in his hands 90% of the time because that weakness could be exploited if he's off the ball. Rondo has improved his shooting, but teams will still dare him to beat them, and if he's spotting up shooting jumpers then that's a major win for the opposition. Try that strategy on Irving. Another thing is the FT shooting. Rondo is at 65%, which is the equivalent of Shaq for a PG, while Irving is at 85%. Then when you factor in the ages (Rondo soon to be 27, Irving 20) and it truly is a no-brainer.

  Sure, Irving's a better shooter, better ft shooter and younger. He doesn't have a glaring weakness, but there are also a number of areas where Rondo's clearly better than him. But I'd say that if Rondo were anywhere near the liability on offense you think he is then the Celts wouldn't have anywhere near the success that they have with him and you wouldn't spend most playoff series hearing opposing coaches talking about what they're going to try to change to try and limit Rondo's effectiveness. It's easy to explain how Rondo's "glaring weakness" makes it easy to defend the Celts. The explanations just don't generally match up with what happens on the court.

He's also signed to 2015/2016 to a cheaper contract and isn't coming off of a torn ACL.

  So? Was anyone disputing those things?

The previous poster also didn't call Rondo an overall liability, he said that Rondo has a weakness that can be exploited.  Game 7 against the Lakers is a key example, a game in which our offense couldn't score and we lost the NBA Finals by 4 points.  Kobe left Rondo open for the bulk of the game, on his way to collecting 15 rebounds. 

  The main reasons the "Kobe" on Rondo strategy was somewhat successful were Rondo not being his healthiest in that series and (more importantly) Ray getting kneed in the thigh by Artest. Ray was having a field day vs Fisher while the Lakers were putting their better defender on Rondo.

Nobody was disputing that Kyrie is younger, but you decided to make that the beginning of your post.  I see plenty in your post that nobody is disputing.  Geez, calm down a bit, chief.

And yes, that is why the strategy was effective.  Nobody is disputing that either.  If Rondo were a better shooter, like Kyrie, that strategy wouldn't have worked.

  And if Rondo hadn't almost single-handedly dismantled the best team in the league the Celts wouldn't have gotten to the finals. Would Irving have matched the 21/6/12 put up against the Cavs? Would he have controlled the pace and tempo of the games as well as Rondo did? We'll never know, but it's far from a sure thing that he would have.

Re: Kyrie > Rondo
« Reply #299 on: February 21, 2013, 11:33:23 AM »

Offline BballTim

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23724
  • Tommy Points: 1123
It's easy to explain how Rondo's "glaring weakness" makes it easy to defend the Celts. The explanations just don't generally match up with what happens on the court.
Wait, you mean Rondo's defender doesn't play "free safety"? Or Rondo beats teams all the time when they give him open jumpers.

Sorry, can't agree with you there.

  No, I mean the way that we're generally among the better teams in the league in terms of things like fg%, efg% and ts% because what Rondo contributes to the offense more than offsets his shooting. You might not think this matters but Rondo beating teams by getting his teammates open shots counts.

So I guess the false claims that Rondo is a great shooter have finally been given up, otherwise there'd be nothing to "offset".

  The "false claims that Rondo is a great shooter" probably occurred in your head, not on the blog. Allow me to clarify, I was talking about how defenders give Rondo space to shoot because his shooting, while not as bad as many claim, is a weaker part of his game than penetration or passing.

  However, since you brought it up, Rondo's long jump shooting (16-23 feet) was above average this year, which is clearly an encouraging sign.

Of course his creating open shots for teammates counts.  Even with that taken into consideration, some will prefer Kyrie. This thread is about comparing Rondo to Kyrie Irving, not to Kevin Ollie.  No one is stating that Rondo has no impact on the game or calling him an overall liability.  Some people just prefer the package of skills of a different top-level point guard.

   Yes, that pretty much sums up what we're discussing.

There have definitely been posts on this forum that Rondo is a great shooter (this is the forum part of the CelticsBlog website, not the blog part, by the way, someone with over 16,000 forum posts should be able to tell the difference).

Rondo's long jump shooting is above average because he is often left open.  Plus, the sample size there is pretty small anyway.

You choose to ignore the fact that his long jump shooting is "above average" this year, but his free throw shooting is well below average.  Care to guess why?  Probably because everyone is left open on free throws, not just Rondo.

  I didn't say anything about his free throw shooting in that post because that's not what we were discussing. And I'll go out on a limb and claim that you don't have any idea how much better players shoot when they're open compared to when they're covered.