I always stated Rondo was a Great Player but not a Great Fit.
Then you get the players and coach to fit around Rondo, not get rid of your best player.
My problem with this is Rondo isn't a great enough player where you build your franchise around him.
How many players in the whole frickin' league are then "great" enough to build a franchise around them if Rondo isn't?
LeBron. Howard. Durant. Probably Derrick Rose and Chris Paul. After that? Can we really put Carmello in that category? Isn't it too early to put Kyrie Irving in that class? Steph Curry clearly isn't that kind of player. Heck, Tim Duncan is no longer that kind of player. Neither was KG, Pierce or Ray when Ainge put them all together.
Rondo's the best player on the team. Either you build around him...or what? Build around aging veterans who are going to retire in a year or two? Deliberately try and suck as bad as you can in the hope that you get lucky in the draft and get someone better than Rondo? Clear out cap space in the hope you can get a free agent better than Rondo? How many teams have spent YEARS in the lottery without ever getting someone better than Rondo? Look where the whole "let's just get cap space" approach got Dallas, from championship and likely contender for several more years to terrible with nothing to show for it.
You have to deal with what is. Not some fantasy of what you want to be.
That's the problem.
We've got a VERY talented player in Rondo, no question. Is he a superstar and a franchise player? In my opinion, no. Can he get there? Of course, if he puts in the work.
If we build around Rondo, we'll never be contenders unless he steps up his game. We aren't going to build around KG and Pierce; they're on the tail end of their careers. We aren't building around anyone else on the roster because none of them have superstar potential.
That's our problem. We are stuck with a talented guy in Rondo as our franchise player, and unfortunately, we won't be able to win a chip with him as our best player.
If Danny feels the same as I do, he will blow it up, try to nab a stud in the draft, and see how he pans out. He might even trade Rondo in the next year or two. If the rook doesn't pan out, it's rinse and repeat. That's how rebuilding works. Sometimes it takes five years, ten years, heck, even 22 years.
I have to try and tackle the illogic of this post, as I have before when this argument is presented. The problem is the use of the term "build around". It's a mis-used term.
Do you think Oklahoma City went out and got Russell Westbrook because they wanted a PG who would shoot a lower percentage than Durant and yet continue to shoot more than him despite it? No. They picked up Westbrook because he was a stud basketball player. Is that "building around" Durant? Or is it just adding as much talent as possible. The answer is the latter.
NBA team building is about collecting as much talent as possible at each position, period. Of course you can tweak things like defense, rebounding, and pure shooting abiilty, but you don't tweak it at the expense of overall talent.
If you look closely, what you and many others are saying is that Rondo sucks at being best. Trust me, if he sucks that bad at being best we can find better. And if a team like the Boston Celtics can't find better than Rondo, then it's time to give the guy props. But the bottom line is that keeping Rondo is not going to prevent the Celtics from re-loading at other positions, especially at his current contract.
So, if you don't like Rondo as a PG, that's fine. Get rid of him. But don't argue that you can't build around him. He'd have 3 rings without injuries to Garnett and Perk. He's going to the hall of fame if he can get healthy. Of course you can build around that.
What's wrong with saying, "Rondo sucks at being best"? I gave Rondo props; he's very talented, but he's not a franchise player.
Sure, you can reload at other positions with players that have skill-sets which compliment Rondo's game. I have no problem with that. You just have to hope that one of those guys is better than Rondo.
I love Rondo. I don't understand why people here think, "Oh, this guy criticizes Rondo, therefore he doesn't like Rondo." And, yes, Rondo would have three rings if it weren't for injuries. Was he the best player on those three teams? In my opinion, no. Is he going to the HOF? Yeah, if he can stay healthy. Could you build around that? I'm not as sure as you are.