(Merged) Celtics better with/without Rondo debate

[Boston Garden Leprechaun]

Stats are great but have to be taken in context.

1. Rondo has hardly played with the best defensive player in the league this year. When Avery Bradley was added to last year's starting team, they became the best defensive team since the 2007-08 Celtics. Bradley was not playing with Rondo for most of that pre-injury record. Bradley might be playing his best ball as a Celtic right now.

2. People mention movement when they mention the difference in the offense pre- and post Rondo's injury. Think about that for a moment. If players were getting off on fast breaks with Rondo and moving around more in the half court when Rondo was around, do you think the Celtics record would have been what it was prior to his injury?

3. The Celtics have had starts of seasons when they are unbeatable and they have had starts when they sputtered along until something clicked in they play great. With Pierce and Terry fighting through nagging injuries, with no Bradley, with Green and Wilcox overcoming heart surgery operations and with Lee, Green, Terry, Barbosa, Wilcox, Darko, and the rookies all trying to figure out their roles, this wasn't going to be a year where they started off unbeatable.

Yes, I think a definite line of demarcation can be drawn around the time Rondo got injured(though I think around Bradley's return would be better) where this team's performance changed and several players suddenly saw the quality of their effort, their performance, and their knowledge of what they were doing increase and make the team as a whole play like the contender everyone thought it was going to be before the season started.

Unfortunately regular season wins and winning 4 games out of seven games to the same team as they game plan your players much more individually are two different things. We couldn't beat Miami without Bradley last year, We certainly aren't beating them without Rondo, Sully and Barbosa.

I recall a number of early games in the season where someone would run out on a break and Rondo wouldn't get them ball but would rather bring it up himself.  A player only runs out so many times before he determines it is a wasted effort and doesn't do it.  when Rondo was on the team there wasn't nearly the ball movement.  It was about Rondo dribbling around till someone got open and Rondo could get a pass in an assist situation.  Without Rondo, the ball just moves around a lot more and when someone is open the shot comes.  I certainly think Rondo could fit fine in that type of system, but he just hasn't play that way.  If he can't adapt he needs to be traded.

And seriously what does it say that the team can lose its best player and add its 5th best player and get better on both ends of the floor.  That is much more a knock on Rondo than a positive to Bradley.

But our offense isn't much different.  You say it's better but it's basically the same.

Individual players are just shooting better or in Green's case especially, playing better.

The defense has improved but that is a credit to Avery Bradley.

I contend they are shooting better because of the ball movement.  They are getting better shots in situations that are more suited for their skill sets.

And again, how can you lose your best player a guy who is a multiple time all league defender and improve your defense.  That shouldn't happen and is a huge knock on Rondo.

please, no facts sir!

[Boston Garden Leprechaun]

Rondo is a talented star, rather see his talents traded for quality impact big to help KG.  And then split the guard duties between Lee , AB, JET, exc

If Rondo continues his lazy ways of walking the ball up court next year , I'll lose my mind , so to keep my sanity , I would just rather let some other team pull their hair out watching Rondo pound the ball wasting time and playing patsy defense .

it maybe time to say good bye to Rondo.

been sayin'

if people cannot see rondo holds the ball until the shot clock is almost gone forcing us to take crap shots then i cannot help them. it is what it is.

[CelticConcourse]

Ain't it too late to trade for this season? Yes.

No guarantees on KG returning.

[Celtics4ever]

Want to bet, I bet we more more championships with Rondo with this group than without him?   Put up or shut up!  You think we are so good without him.   How about $100?   I bet we don't win the title this year.

[Lightskinsmurf]

Want to bet, I bet we more more championships with Rondo with this group than without him?   Put up or shut up!  You think we are so good without him.   How about $100?   I bet we don't win the title this year.

I didn't think we'd win a title this year with rondo and I still don't think we will.

[BballTim]

How can you lose a 1st team league defender and not get worse, though?  I mean seriously if it doesn't matter if Rondo plays on either end of the floor, then why shouldn't Boston trade him?  The stats show he has absolutely no positive impact on Boston's offense or its defense.  Clearly that shows we should just trade him and move on.

  One would hope that the people making the decisions have seen Rondo play quite a bit over the last few years and aren't going to dump him based on a knee-jerk reaction to a *team* that was playing poorly for a stretch in the middle of the year. There's no way to draw reasonable opinions about players on a team that's tremendously inconsistent when the numbers are only over a short period of time.

  I think when Rondo went out his +/- was -50 or so. If you look at the Kings game around new years when Rondo played most of the game even though he was hobbled by a hip injury, he was -25 in that game. That 1 game was about *half* of his overall +/- for the 40 or so games that he played in. That should give you a little indication of how noisy those numbers are. If he'd have missed that game and the score had been the same he'd be 25 points better on the court and the team would be 25 points worse with him off the court, a 50 point swing.

  As for his +/- on defense, it was around -0.7 when he stopped playing. It's getting worse over time because he played such a high percentage of his minutes early in the year when the defense was awful. But it's also important to note that the player on the team that makes the biggest impact on the defense is KG and Rondo played over 40% of his minutes with KG on the bench. Those horrible Bass/Sully minutes that were killing the team early this year? Rondo was generally on the court for those. If you consider what the numbers for Rondo's minutes would have looked like just accounting for KG's effect on the defense it would have been just over -1, so the -0.7 wasn't bad.

[BballTim]

Rondo is a talented star, rather see his talents traded for quality impact big to help KG.  And then split the guard duties between Lee , AB, JET, exc

If Rondo continues his lazy ways of walking the ball up court next year , I'll lose my mind , so to keep my sanity , I would just rather let some other team pull their hair out watching Rondo pound the ball wasting time and playing patsy defense .

it maybe time to say good bye to Rondo.

been sayin'

if people cannot see rondo holds the ball until the shot clock is almost gone forcing us to take crap shots then i cannot help them. it is what it is.

  Most teams take more shots late in the shot clock than we did with Rondo playing. We haven't improved in that area at all without him, in fact last I checked our shot clock violations were up about 50% without him. It is what it is.

[connor]

Stats are great but have to be taken in context.

1. Rondo has hardly played with the best defensive player in the league this year. When Avery Bradley was added to last year's starting team, they became the best defensive team since the 2007-08 Celtics. Bradley was not playing with Rondo for most of that pre-injury record. Bradley might be playing his best ball as a Celtic right now.

2. People mention movement when they mention the difference in the offense pre- and post Rondo's injury. Think about that for a moment. If players were getting off on fast breaks with Rondo and moving around more in the half court when Rondo was around, do you think the Celtics record would have been what it was prior to his injury?

3. The Celtics have had starts of seasons when they are unbeatable and they have had starts when they sputtered along until something clicked in they play great. With Pierce and Terry fighting through nagging injuries, with no Bradley, with Green and Wilcox overcoming heart surgery operations and with Lee, Green, Terry, Barbosa, Wilcox, Darko, and the rookies all trying to figure out their roles, this wasn't going to be a year where they started off unbeatable.

Yes, I think a definite line of demarcation can be drawn around the time Rondo got injured(though I think around Bradley's return would be better) where this team's performance changed and several players suddenly saw the quality of their effort, their performance, and their knowledge of what they were doing increase and make the team as a whole play like the contender everyone thought it was going to be before the season started.

Unfortunately regular season wins and winning 4 games out of seven games to the same team as they game plan your players much more individually are two different things. We couldn't beat Miami without Bradley last year, We certainly aren't beating them without Rondo, Sully and Barbosa.

I recall a number of early games in the season where someone would run out on a break and Rondo wouldn't get them ball but would rather bring it up himself.  A player only runs out so many times before he determines it is a wasted effort and doesn't do it.  when Rondo was on the team there wasn't nearly the ball movement.  It was about Rondo dribbling around till someone got open and Rondo could get a pass in an assist situation.  Without Rondo, the ball just moves around a lot more and when someone is open the shot comes.  I certainly think Rondo could fit fine in that type of system, but he just hasn't play that way.  If he can't adapt he needs to be traded.

And seriously what does it say that the team can lose its best player and add its 5th best player and get better on both ends of the floor.  That is much more a knock on Rondo than a positive to Bradley.

But our offense isn't much different.  You say it's better but it's basically the same.

Individual players are just shooting better or in Green's case especially, playing better.

The defense has improved but that is a credit to Avery Bradley.

I contend they are shooting better because of the ball movement.  They are getting better shots in situations that are more suited for their skill sets.

And again, how can you lose your best player a guy who is a multiple time all league defender and improve your defense.  That shouldn't happen and is a huge knock on Rondo.

It's been pointed out to you a few times already, but your second paragraph is absolutely false.  Our defense improved with the return of Avery Bradley, but it has not improved more since Rondo got injured. 

According to the numbers at Basketball reference, our Defensive Rating (estimated points per 100 possessions) is at 102.2 for the season. 

In the twelve games that Rondo and Bradley started together, the team's Defensive Rating was 100.0

In the sixteen games since Rondo has been injured, the team's Defensive Rating has been at 100.0

Based on those numbers, it would appear that our defensive improvement is absolutely a positive statement on Avery Bradley's defense and not a knock on Rondo's.

How can you lose a 1st team league defender and not get worse, though?  I mean seriously if it doesn't matter if Rondo plays on either end of the floor, then why shouldn't Boston trade him?  The stats show he has absolutely no positive impact on Boston's offense or its defense.  Clearly that shows we should just trade him and move on.

If Rondo is such a non factor on either end of the floor, how are we supposed to get any sort of quality return for him? Especially coming off of knee injury. What GM worth his salt would give up anything of value in either picks, young assets, or quality size for a guard coming off an injury who apparently has no impact on his team's success? And if thats the case he is well overpaid for what he produces.

You can't have it both ways saying that Rondo doesn't add significant value to this team and at the same time say we should to move him for valuable assets. It's one or the other.

[CoachBo]

There's a huge difference between adding significant value to this collection of Celtics, and adding huge value to someone else's team.

Again, the issue isn't whether Rondo is a quality point guard. He is.

The issue is that the evidence is mounting that he is a poor fit with this current collection of Celtics. For those of you who focus on individuals rather than the Celtic franchise, be mad at Ainge. He's the one who assembled this group.

Rondo needs to be surrounded by big-time scorers to be at his most effective. Imagine him running the Heat.

He isn't surrounded by anything like that in Boston, like he once was. As Pierce, Garnett and Allen declined, so did Rondo's value to this franchise.

The evidence is growing: Rondo is no longer a good fit in Boston. Doesn't mean he has no value elsewhere; in fact, it means there's conceivably a match with another team in search of his kind of game.

Ainge can and should aggressively market him in the off-season. It's the best thing for Rondo, and the best thing for the Celtics.

[CoachBo]

Want to bet, I bet we more more championships with Rondo with this group than without him?   Put up or shut up!  You think we are so good without him.   How about $100?   I bet we don't win the title this year.

In the words of the great, late songwriter Billy Preston, "Nuthin' from nuthin' leaves nuthin'"

[BballTim]

Stats are great but have to be taken in context.

1. Rondo has hardly played with the best defensive player in the league this year. When Avery Bradley was added to last year's starting team, they became the best defensive team since the 2007-08 Celtics. Bradley was not playing with Rondo for most of that pre-injury record. Bradley might be playing his best ball as a Celtic right now.

2. People mention movement when they mention the difference in the offense pre- and post Rondo's injury. Think about that for a moment. If players were getting off on fast breaks with Rondo and moving around more in the half court when Rondo was around, do you think the Celtics record would have been what it was prior to his injury?

3. The Celtics have had starts of seasons when they are unbeatable and they have had starts when they sputtered along until something clicked in they play great. With Pierce and Terry fighting through nagging injuries, with no Bradley, with Green and Wilcox overcoming heart surgery operations and with Lee, Green, Terry, Barbosa, Wilcox, Darko, and the rookies all trying to figure out their roles, this wasn't going to be a year where they started off unbeatable.

Yes, I think a definite line of demarcation can be drawn around the time Rondo got injured(though I think around Bradley's return would be better) where this team's performance changed and several players suddenly saw the quality of their effort, their performance, and their knowledge of what they were doing increase and make the team as a whole play like the contender everyone thought it was going to be before the season started.

Unfortunately regular season wins and winning 4 games out of seven games to the same team as they game plan your players much more individually are two different things. We couldn't beat Miami without Bradley last year, We certainly aren't beating them without Rondo, Sully and Barbosa.

I recall a number of early games in the season where someone would run out on a break and Rondo wouldn't get them ball but would rather bring it up himself.  A player only runs out so many times before he determines it is a wasted effort and doesn't do it.  when Rondo was on the team there wasn't nearly the ball movement.  It was about Rondo dribbling around till someone got open and Rondo could get a pass in an assist situation.  Without Rondo, the ball just moves around a lot more and when someone is open the shot comes.  I certainly think Rondo could fit fine in that type of system, but he just hasn't play that way.  If he can't adapt he needs to be traded.

And seriously what does it say that the team can lose its best player and add its 5th best player and get better on both ends of the floor.  That is much more a knock on Rondo than a positive to Bradley.

But our offense isn't much different.  You say it's better but it's basically the same.

Individual players are just shooting better or in Green's case especially, playing better.

The defense has improved but that is a credit to Avery Bradley.

I contend they are shooting better because of the ball movement.  They are getting better shots in situations that are more suited for their skill sets.

  Our highest fg% came in November, not February. That was when Rondo was controlling our offense. In fact our best stretch of shooting all year probably came during his assist streak. Why do you contend they were shooting better then than they are with Rondo out?

  If you look at PP/KG/Terry they combined to shoot 48% in November, 43% in January and 45.5% in February. Those 3 players combine to take 44% of the team's shots, so that 5% drop from November to January had a significant effect on the teams overall shooting percentage. Why do you contend that their best shooting month was in November when Rondo was controlling the ball? How does that fit into your "better shots from better ball movement" theory?

  The fact of the matter is there are various reasons that the team went through a slump, just like they have almost every year since KG arrived. Trying to blame it on Rondo is silly. None of the explanations about why the offense is so great without Rondo go far in explaining why it was only bad with Rondo some of the time or why we played some of our best (probably our very best) offense of the year with Rondo controlling the team. When someone comes up with a theory that *does* explain this it's probably worth listening to, until then not so much.

[BballTim]

There's a huge difference between adding significant value to this collection of Celtics, and adding huge value to someone else's team.

Again, the issue isn't whether Rondo is a quality point guard. He is.

The issue is that the evidence is mounting that he is a poor fit with this current collection of Celtics. For those of you who focus on individuals rather than the Celtic franchise, be mad at Ainge. He's the one who assembled this group.

Rondo needs to be surrounded by big-time scorers to be at his most effective. Imagine him running the Heat.

He isn't surrounded by anything like that in Boston, like he once was. As Pierce, Garnett and Allen declined, so did Rondo's value to this franchise.

  You should have seen the team in the playoffs last year. KG, Allen and PP not only declined but two of them were playing through injuries and Rondo got us to within a game of the finals. One can only hope that he gives the team more of those "valueless" years. Also Rondo's assist streak went about a month into this season. The team was a top 10 offensive team during that time, clearly an example of how Rondo doesn't fit in with the current team. There's plenty of evidence, it points to why it would be a mistake to get rid of a player that fits in so poorly with this team.

[Moranis]

Stats are great but have to be taken in context.

1. Rondo has hardly played with the best defensive player in the league this year. When Avery Bradley was added to last year's starting team, they became the best defensive team since the 2007-08 Celtics. Bradley was not playing with Rondo for most of that pre-injury record. Bradley might be playing his best ball as a Celtic right now.

2. People mention movement when they mention the difference in the offense pre- and post Rondo's injury. Think about that for a moment. If players were getting off on fast breaks with Rondo and moving around more in the half court when Rondo was around, do you think the Celtics record would have been what it was prior to his injury?

3. The Celtics have had starts of seasons when they are unbeatable and they have had starts when they sputtered along until something clicked in they play great. With Pierce and Terry fighting through nagging injuries, with no Bradley, with Green and Wilcox overcoming heart surgery operations and with Lee, Green, Terry, Barbosa, Wilcox, Darko, and the rookies all trying to figure out their roles, this wasn't going to be a year where they started off unbeatable.

Yes, I think a definite line of demarcation can be drawn around the time Rondo got injured(though I think around Bradley's return would be better) where this team's performance changed and several players suddenly saw the quality of their effort, their performance, and their knowledge of what they were doing increase and make the team as a whole play like the contender everyone thought it was going to be before the season started.

Unfortunately regular season wins and winning 4 games out of seven games to the same team as they game plan your players much more individually are two different things. We couldn't beat Miami without Bradley last year, We certainly aren't beating them without Rondo, Sully and Barbosa.

I recall a number of early games in the season where someone would run out on a break and Rondo wouldn't get them ball but would rather bring it up himself.  A player only runs out so many times before he determines it is a wasted effort and doesn't do it.  when Rondo was on the team there wasn't nearly the ball movement.  It was about Rondo dribbling around till someone got open and Rondo could get a pass in an assist situation.  Without Rondo, the ball just moves around a lot more and when someone is open the shot comes.  I certainly think Rondo could fit fine in that type of system, but he just hasn't play that way.  If he can't adapt he needs to be traded.

And seriously what does it say that the team can lose its best player and add its 5th best player and get better on both ends of the floor.  That is much more a knock on Rondo than a positive to Bradley.

But our offense isn't much different.  You say it's better but it's basically the same.

Individual players are just shooting better or in Green's case especially, playing better.

The defense has improved but that is a credit to Avery Bradley.

I contend they are shooting better because of the ball movement.  They are getting better shots in situations that are more suited for their skill sets.

And again, how can you lose your best player a guy who is a multiple time all league defender and improve your defense.  That shouldn't happen and is a huge knock on Rondo.

It's been pointed out to you a few times already, but your second paragraph is absolutely false.  Our defense improved with the return of Avery Bradley, but it has not improved more since Rondo got injured. 

According to the numbers at Basketball reference, our Defensive Rating (estimated points per 100 possessions) is at 102.2 for the season. 

In the twelve games that Rondo and Bradley started together, the team's Defensive Rating was 100.0

In the sixteen games since Rondo has been injured, the team's Defensive Rating has been at 100.0

Based on those numbers, it would appear that our defensive improvement is absolutely a positive statement on Avery Bradley's defense and not a knock on Rondo's.

How can you lose a 1st team league defender and not get worse, though?  I mean seriously if it doesn't matter if Rondo plays on either end of the floor, then why shouldn't Boston trade him?  The stats show he has absolutely no positive impact on Boston's offense or its defense.  Clearly that shows we should just trade him and move on.

If Rondo is such a non factor on either end of the floor, how are we supposed to get any sort of quality return for him? Especially coming off of knee injury. What GM worth his salt would give up anything of value in either picks, young assets, or quality size for a guard coming off an injury who apparently has no impact on his team's success? And if thats the case he is well overpaid for what he produces.

You can't have it both ways saying that Rondo doesn't add significant value to this team and at the same time say we should to move him for valuable assets. It's one or the other.

See coachbo's post below yours for my explanation as to why trading Rondo would make sense and why a trade where Boston gets good return would be feasible.

I think there were a number of trades at the deadline involving the Hawks that would have made sense for Rondo.  Lou Williams and Jeff Teague straight up would have made a lot of sense if Atlanta wanted to keep Smith that would have been a good way to help entice him to stay.  A 3-way trade with Phoenix, Atlanta, and Boston where Boston essentially traded rondo, lee, terry, and bass for lou williams, teague, dudley, and beasley would have made a lot of sense for the 3 teams involved (dragic, gortat, and smith were also in the trade). 

I think this summer there will be options out there where Boston trades Rondo to a team for a lottery pick in the draft and some other pieces if there is someone Ainge really likes.  Orlando and New Orleans seem like places that might want a guy like Rondo to run their teams and they all have the salaries to make a draft day trade work, plus at least one lottery pick and/or recent lottery picks to trade.  Charlotte has Kemba Walker and 2 lottery picks, not to mention Gordon's salary.  I think a reasonable trade would be Gordon, Walker, and the Blazers pick for Rondo and Sullinger (or something like that). 

It is just too bad the Thunder don't have a need for Rondo as they have a lot of draft picks coming their way as a result of the Harden trade.

There will be plenty of trades out there that make sense for the acquiring team and where Boston still gets solid value back.  It won't be Rondo the player value, but it won't be chump change either.

[nickagneta]

The funny thing is that Danny Ainge just comes out and laughs when he sees people saying the Celtics are better without Rondo than with him. Its Ainge that states the better overall team play has to do more with certain players getting acclimated and healthy and out of slumps and into their roles than it does Rondo not being there.

[ssspence]

Stats are great but have to be taken in context.

1. Rondo has hardly played with the best defensive player in the league this year. When Avery Bradley was added to last year's starting team, they became the best defensive team since the 2007-08 Celtics. Bradley was not playing with Rondo for most of that pre-injury record. Bradley might be playing his best ball as a Celtic right now.

2. People mention movement when they mention the difference in the offense pre- and post Rondo's injury. Think about that for a moment. If players were getting off on fast breaks with Rondo and moving around more in the half court when Rondo was around, do you think the Celtics record would have been what it was prior to his injury?

3. The Celtics have had starts of seasons when they are unbeatable and they have had starts when they sputtered along until something clicked in they play great. With Pierce and Terry fighting through nagging injuries, with no Bradley, with Green and Wilcox overcoming heart surgery operations and with Lee, Green, Terry, Barbosa, Wilcox, Darko, and the rookies all trying to figure out their roles, this wasn't going to be a year where they started off unbeatable.

Yes, I think a definite line of demarcation can be drawn around the time Rondo got injured(though I think around Bradley's return would be better) where this team's performance changed and several players suddenly saw the quality of their effort, their performance, and their knowledge of what they were doing increase and make the team as a whole play like the contender everyone thought it was going to be before the season started.

Unfortunately regular season wins and winning 4 games out of seven games to the same team as they game plan your players much more individually are two different things. We couldn't beat Miami without Bradley last year, We certainly aren't beating them without Rondo, Sully and Barbosa.

I recall a number of early games in the season where someone would run out on a break and Rondo wouldn't get them ball but would rather bring it up himself.  A player only runs out so many times before he determines it is a wasted effort and doesn't do it.  when Rondo was on the team there wasn't nearly the ball movement.  It was about Rondo dribbling around till someone got open and Rondo could get a pass in an assist situation.  Without Rondo, the ball just moves around a lot more and when someone is open the shot comes.  I certainly think Rondo could fit fine in that type of system, but he just hasn't play that way.  If he can't adapt he needs to be traded.

And seriously what does it say that the team can lose its best player and add its 5th best player and get better on both ends of the floor.  That is much more a knock on Rondo than a positive to Bradley.

But our offense isn't much different.  You say it's better but it's basically the same.

Individual players are just shooting better or in Green's case especially, playing better.

The defense has improved but that is a credit to Avery Bradley.

I contend they are shooting better because of the ball movement.  They are getting better shots in situations that are more suited for their skill sets.

  Our highest fg% came in November, not February. That was when Rondo was controlling our offense. In fact our best stretch of shooting all year probably came during his assist streak. Why do you contend they were shooting better then than they are with Rondo out?

  If you look at PP/KG/Terry they combined to shoot 48% in November, 43% in January and 45.5% in February. Those 3 players combine to take 44% of the team's shots, so that 5% drop from November to January had a significant effect on the teams overall shooting percentage. Why do you contend that their best shooting month was in November when Rondo was controlling the ball? How does that fit into your "better shots from better ball movement" theory?

  The fact of the matter is there are various reasons that the team went through a slump, just like they have almost every year since KG arrived. Trying to blame it on Rondo is silly. None of the explanations about why the offense is so great without Rondo go far in explaining why it was only bad with Rondo some of the time or why we played some of our best (probably our very best) offense of the year with Rondo controlling the team. When someone comes up with a theory that *does* explain this it's probably worth listening to, until then not so much.

So why does the Cs offense show no ill effects, and actually some improvement, since he left the line up? How do they miss him? What has the team lacked without him?

You use the phrase "fact of the matter" in your post. The fact is they haven't missed him statistically, and his absence obviously hasn't hurt their ability to win (or not lose) games.

So can you offer some basic, factual explanation of how the Celtics have been in any way adversely effected by his injury?

Just point to a high level area or catagory. Anything.