Multiple superstars needed to win an NBA championship (article Elrod Enchilada)

[chambers]

The other thing is that Elrod's article doesn't address how these teams acquired their franchise superstars.  I'd guess that the vast majority got them through the draft, and almost all of the remainder acquired them by trading lottery-level talents that they acquired in the draft.  Still, the fantasy that the Celtics could sign a free agent or duplicate the Kevin Garnett trade, without a top pick in hand, will persist.

  The "fantasy" exists because, by my rough count, close to half of the players in the "top players" lists since 2000 are outside of your "vast majority".

Yet still the vast majority that weren't acquired in the draft were acquired by trading draft assets.

Lakers --> I don't think the Celtics can hope to emulate the Lakers, due to a variety of factors.
Spurs --> Duncan
Pistons --> You have to get very lucky to assemble a collection of talent like that and have the more-talented teams run into bad luck / implode; I also think the new CBA militates against collecting multiple stars like that Pistons team did.
Celtics --> Pierce; Allen was acquired w/ the #5 pick; Garnett never agrees to the trade if not for Pierce + Allen.
Mavs --> Dirk
Heat --> LeBron + Bosh never come to Miami if Dwyane Wade isn't there already.


That's just the championship teams, of course.

Lakers --> Lakers won initial titles with Kobe as a key ingredient, however that's pretty much irrelevant because they never would have won those titles without Shaq, who (IIRC) was signed in free agency.  The second run of titles wasn't achived until Gasol, Odom, Artest were added.

Spurs --> Duncan is one valid (and very rare) example of a team that won a title shortly after drafting a top prospect.  It is the exception rather than the rule.

Pistons -->  Bad luck?  The Piston's were one of the elite teams in the league all season long and were one of the best defensive teams in recent history.  Today's equivalent of their roster would be something like John Wall,  JR Smith, Nicholas Batum, Lemarcus Aldridge, Omar Asik.  Not a single superstar, but a couple of fringe All-Stars.  They knocked off the Lakers Super-team which was about today's equivalent of the new-look Nets or Heat.  Luck had nothing to do with it, that was a great team.

Celtics --> Pierce was drafted by Boston...about 10 years prior!  The Celtics went through years of mediocrity with Pierce (their superstar draft pick) on the roster, and it wasn't until Ray and KG came along (via trades) that Boston became a serious contender.  Ray's draft status is irrelevant...he had been though 2 or 3 teams before coming to Boston and his value was well known.

Mavs --> Dirk came to Dallas via the draft yes...but (as with Pierce in Boston) he was in Dallas for about a decade before they win that title.  Once other guys (like JJ, Chandler, Terry, Kidd) were added it put them over the edge.

Heat --> Wade was drafted in Miami, the heat were garbage unti they managed to get Shaq, who was still in the last year or two of his prime dominance.  Wade was the #2 player on that team, and after Shaq left they again fell back to mediocrity until they managed to pull Lebron and Bosh in (both via free agency, not by trading picks).

Truth is, there is really only one single case I can think of in the past decade where a team has drafted an elite player and won a title within a couple of years withing adding any other elite players - that was San Antonio with Duncan.

The Thunder are the next closest as they have made the finals through draft success, but it took them several consecutive successful drafts (and a LOT of luck with health, etc) to achieve that, and they still have no title.

Take a look at the teams who drafted in the top three for the past 10 years:

2012
1. New Orleans Hornets (Anthony Davis)
2. Charlotte Bobcats (Michael Kidd-Gilchrist)
3. Washington Wizards (Bradley Beal)
 
2011
1. Cleveland Cavaliers (Kyrie Irving)
2. Minnesota Timberwolves (Derrick Williams)
3. Utah Jazz (Enes Kanter)
 
2010
1. Washington Wizards (John Wall)
2. Philadelphia 76ers (Evan Turner)
3. New Jersey Nets (Derrick Favors)
 
2009
1. Los Angeles Clippers (Blake Griffin)
2. Memphis Grizzlies (Hasheem Thabeet)
3. Oklahoma City Thunder (James Harden)
 
2008
1. Chicago Bulls (Derrick Rose)
2. Miami Heat (Michael Beasley)
3. Minnesota Timberwolves (O.J. Mayo)
 
2007
1. Portland Trail Blazers (Greg Oden)
2. Seattle Supersonics (Kevin Durant)
3. Atlanta Hawks (Al Horford)
 
2006
1. Toronto Raptors (Andrea Bargnani)
2. Chicago Bulls (LaMarcus Aldridge)
3. Charlotte Bobcats (Adam Morrison)
 
2005
1. Milwaukee Bucks (Andrew Bogut)
2. Atlanta Hawks (Marvin Williams)
3. Utah Jazz (Deron Williams)
 
2004
1. Orlando Magic (Dwight Howard)
2. Charlotte Bobcats (Emeka Okafor)
3. Chicago Bulls (Ben Gordon)
 
2003
1. Cleveland Cavaliers (LeBron James)
2. Detroit Pistons (Darko Milicic)
3. Denver Nuggets (Carmelo Anthony)

Out of the past 10 years there have been 20 different teams which have drafted in the top 3:

Charlotte Bobcats (three times)
Chicago Bulls (three times)
Washington Wizards (two times)
Cleveland Cavaliers (two times)
Minnesota Timberwolves (two times)
Oklahoma City Thunder (Two times including Seattle/Durant)
Utah Jazz (two times)
Atlanta Hawks (two times)
New Orleans Hornets
Philadelphia 76ers
New Jersey Nets
Los Angeles Clippers
Memphis Grizzlies
Miami Heat
Portland Trail Blazers
Toronto Raptors
Milwaukee Bucks
Orlando Magic
Detroit Pistons
Denver Nuggets

Facts:
* Only 1/20 teams has won a championhip (Miami)

* Only 2/20 teams have made the NBA Finals (Miami, OKC)

* Only 4/20 teams made it past the first round of the playoffs last season (Miami, Chicago, Seattle/OKC, Memphis)

* Only 9/20 teams made the playoffs at all last season

This history suggests to me that if this year's Celtics are bad enough to get a top 3 lottery pick, we probably will not have a serious playoff team for at least the next 5 (maybe 10) years.

Our future first round picks from Brooklyn, LAC and ourselves already have value.  Worst-case scenario (from a draft perspective) we end up a fringe playoff team and choosing at around 12-20 n the draft.  That gives us the potential to draft players like Kylly Olynyk, Jared Sullinger and Avery Bradley - guys who all have pretty solid trade value right now, epecially as part of a package.  If we can draft 3 or 4 guys of that calibre over the next few seasons then that potentially gives us 6-7 young, talented players who we could either:

1. Use to fill holes on our team
2, Package in a sign-and-trade for a star player entering free agency
3. Package in a trade for a high lottery pick
4. Package in return for cap relief that could be used to sign star players

All of those options are IMO better than gambling everything on a lottery pick, and one of them requires having to endure the unplesant nature of being a losing team.

But we don't have a star player already in place like your list above.
All the teams you listed such as Lakers, Dirk, Celtics etc had a top 10 NBA player on their squads already.
We don't have a top 10 player. We have a player who might be in the top 25-30 players in the NBA- and he isn't a scorer.
How do we acquire the guy that Shaq wants to go play with?
Tell us?
Your list shows how hard it is to win a championship in the NBA- it highlights how easy it is to be mediocre even with a top 10 NBA player.
We don't even have a top 20 NBA player. You say 'don't gamble everything on a draft pick that has a slim chance of working out'.
All roads to a championship have a slim chance of working out. You seem to think the odds of signing the pieces to make us a true contender like a combo of Aldridge and Carmelo Anthony are better than drafting Andrew Wiggins or Jabari Parker or Julius Randle.

What are the real odds of us signing two guys that are good enough to take us past the Heat, Bulls, Nets, Pacers, OKC, Memphis, Houston etc in the next 2 seasons while Rondo is on the Celtics and locked in?

Are they higher than 10 percent?
We have some nice assets and young guys but our best player is a 27 year old point guard that can't shoot, coming off major ACL surgery. We need a BOATLOAD of help.
We need at least two more All Star Caliber players to pair with Rondo.

Again, look at your list of teams above who won championships and other than the Pistons-which one doesn't have a top 10 pick they drafted themselves? Who was then joined by another top 10 player or All Star Level wing or big man?
Second question is where do you think the next NBA superstar is coming from?
The next platinum/gold level player in the NBA to reach the Hall of Fame and win multiple championships?
Where do you think the next gold level guy like Howard, Wade in his prime or Paul Pierce in his prime is coming from?
He's coming from a top 5-10 pick in the NBA draft.
Whoever drafts him still needs to help him with smart roster decisions but if they do it right they should be contending for 10 seasons.

You're argument is completely ironic because you want to trade for an NBA superstar(which no teams will give up), and when you can't trade for him you want to sign him as a free agent.
Yet to attempt to draft one is completely out of the question and the odds of that happening are just not realistic. You think the odds of pulling the crap that the Rockets pulled with Howard are better- They'll still have a hard time contending in the West. Howard already took the Magic to the finals once- they just never put enough pieces around him so he eventually left. Same with Lebron. All superstars need help in some form, but to get that help you first need a legitimate superstar which the Boston Celtics currently do not have and will not get until they acquire such a star through the NBA draft.

This upcoming draft appears to be the best opportunity in the last 10 years to acquire such a player and build a true title contender with a franchise changer.

Rajon Rondo is the kind of guy you need to support legitimate triple threat NBA stars on their way to a championship. He is the kind of guy that supports the Kevin Garnetts and Paul Pierces. He's like Ray Allen in that he's an extremely talented star with an extremely valuable skill set for any contending team- but you do not build a team around a point guard that can't shoot- you do whatever you can to get your hands on the player or prospect with the best chance to carry you towards and NBA title.
We don't know if Wiggins or Parker or Randle will be even 25% of their hype, but in the small chance they do reach or exceed their hype and their teams give them the right support cast, they'll be leading their teams through the playoffs  as legitimate contenders for years to come.

[Celtics18]

But we don't have a star player already in place like your list above.
All the teams you listed such as Lakers, Dirk, Celtics etc had a top 10 NBA player on their squads already.
We don't have a top 10 player. We have a player who might be in the top 25-30 players in the NBA- and he isn't a scorer.
How do we acquire the guy that Shaq wants to go play with?
Tell us?
Your list shows how hard it is to win a championship in the NBA- it highlights how easy it is to be mediocre even with a top 10 NBA player.
We don't even have a top 20 NBA player. You say 'don't gamble everything on a draft pick that has a slim chance of working out'.
All roads to a championship have a slim chance of working out. You seem to think the odds of signing the pieces to make us a true contender like a combo of Aldridge and Carmelo Anthony are better than drafting Andrew Wiggins or Jabari Parker or Julius Randle.



Rajon Rondo is the kind of guy you need to support legitimate triple threat NBA stars on their way to a championship. He is the kind of guy that supports the Kevin Garnetts and Paul Pierces. He's like Ray Allen in that he's an extremely talented star with an extremely valuable skill set for any contending team- but you do not build a team around a point guard that can't shoot- you do whatever you can to get your hands on the player or prospect with the best chance to carry you towards and NBA title.
We don't know if Wiggins or Parker or Randle will be even 25% of their hype, but in the small chance they do reach or exceed their hype and their teams give them the right support cast, they'll be leading their teams through the playoffs  as legitimate contenders for years to come.

According to Enchilada's list Rajon Rondo is ranked 14th among current active NBA players.  He's seventh among current players who are still in their twenties. 

By my count that's well above being in the 25 to 30 range of current NBA players.  The fact that we already have a star player in place puts us closer to contention than a vast majority of current non-contenders out there.  I'm guessing that both you and Enchilada would agree with that point. 

I'll just add that Kevin Durant is the only active player currently on Enchilada's gold or platinum list who is younger than Rajon Rondo.

I guess that it's possible that Wiggins, Parker, and Randle could all turn out to be platinum or gold level superstars, but as great as this draft is touted as being, that still seems highly unlikely to me.  Consider the fact that the 2003 draft (the draft almost unanimously thought of as the most star studded draft of all-time) has yielded only one player who currently sits in one of those top two tiers of all-time players. 

I would say that the chances of there being three (or more) in this coming draft are incredibly slim. 

[chambers]

But we don't have a star player already in place like your list above.
All the teams you listed such as Lakers, Dirk, Celtics etc had a top 10 NBA player on their squads already.
We don't have a top 10 player. We have a player who might be in the top 25-30 players in the NBA- and he isn't a scorer.
How do we acquire the guy that Shaq wants to go play with?
Tell us?
Your list shows how hard it is to win a championship in the NBA- it highlights how easy it is to be mediocre even with a top 10 NBA player.
We don't even have a top 20 NBA player. You say 'don't gamble everything on a draft pick that has a slim chance of working out'.
All roads to a championship have a slim chance of working out. You seem to think the odds of signing the pieces to make us a true contender like a combo of Aldridge and Carmelo Anthony are better than drafting Andrew Wiggins or Jabari Parker or Julius Randle.



Rajon Rondo is the kind of guy you need to support legitimate triple threat NBA stars on their way to a championship. He is the kind of guy that supports the Kevin Garnetts and Paul Pierces. He's like Ray Allen in that he's an extremely talented star with an extremely valuable skill set for any contending team- but you do not build a team around a point guard that can't shoot- you do whatever you can to get your hands on the player or prospect with the best chance to carry you towards and NBA title.
We don't know if Wiggins or Parker or Randle will be even 25% of their hype, but in the small chance they do reach or exceed their hype and their teams give them the right support cast, they'll be leading their teams through the playoffs  as legitimate contenders for years to come.

According to Enchilada's list Rajon Rondo is ranked 14th among current active NBA players.  He's seventh among current players who are still in their twenties. 

By my count that's well above being in the 25 to 30 range of current NBA players.  The fact that we already have a star player in place puts us closer to contention than a vast majority of current non-contenders out there.  I'm guessing that both you and Enchilada would agree with that point. 

I'll just add that Kevin Durant is the only active player currently on Enchilada's gold or platinum list who is younger than Rajon Rondo.

I guess that it's possible that Wiggins, Parker, and Randle could all turn out to be platinum or gold level superstars, but as great as this draft is touted as being, that still seems highly unlikely to me.  Consider the fact that the 2003 draft (the draft almost unanimously thought of as the most star studded draft of all-time) has yielded only one player who currently sits in one of those top two tiers of all-time players. 

I would say that the chances of there being three (or more) in this coming draft are incredibly slim. 

Elrod's list is great, and it's hard to find statistics to back up a theory like this because certain sections are always going to be weighted towards one category too much- you cannot avoid it because it's the only information we've been given and things like MVP voting and ALL NBA voting are subjective. The best players don't always make those lists and thus that would hurt them in a ranking like this.
I'd agree that you need a star player in place but I don't believe that Rondo can be considered that kind of star like the guys on that list. I certainly don't think Rondo has earned the right to be labelled in the top 60 and above players like Kevin McHale. I mean look at the next 5 guys below him.

Carmelo Anthony,Clyde Drexler,Chris Webber,Pete Maravich

To yours, mine and most NBA fans analysis, Rondo is not better than those players but because of his unique situation of being basically thrown onto a contender in his second year like the Celtics, he's benefited immensely.

Can you imagine if Chris Paul started his career with team mates like Rondo did instead of with New Orleans- or if he was playing Marc Gasol and Zac Randolph instead of Blake Griffin and DeAndre Jordan?

 He needs to lead a team through serious adversity and/or improve his shooting drastically because I don't think he's had a tough situation in the NBA like CP3 or Durant or Lebron or Carmelo. All the best players bar Tim Duncan seem to have played on teams that completely stink and have had to grow and improve their game as time went by.
They've also remained at the top of these lists even while their teams stink, and I don't Rondo has ever had that problem because he's had All Star team mates to nail his jumpshots and the perfect passes he delivers.

In his prime and in a prime situation with team mates like he's had for most of his career, I think Rondo is a top 15- 20 NBA player, coming off ACL surgery and losing KG, Pierce and Ray Allen as team mates is going to hurt his assist totals and overall game but I hope he stays in the top 30.
I think if he could develop a reliable three point shot to 40% and free throw to 75% he could be in the talk for a top 5 current NBA player. Unfortunately I just don't think he's consistent enough.
Perhaps you agree too that he's not the number one option on a contender because of his flaws?

I just don't think Rondo has proven himself yet and the only way he will prove himself is by leading the C's through a situation like the one he faces now where he is the main event and he must put the entire team on his back like Chris Paul, Derrick Rose, Nash, Iverson have done so.
Not just during 3 or 4 games during the playoffs, but for a full 82 game season.

[Fan from VT]

But we don't have a star player already in place like your list above.
All the teams you listed such as Lakers, Dirk, Celtics etc had a top 10 NBA player on their squads already.
We don't have a top 10 player. We have a player who might be in the top 25-30 players in the NBA- and he isn't a scorer.
How do we acquire the guy that Shaq wants to go play with?
Tell us?
Your list shows how hard it is to win a championship in the NBA- it highlights how easy it is to be mediocre even with a top 10 NBA player.
We don't even have a top 20 NBA player. You say 'don't gamble everything on a draft pick that has a slim chance of working out'.
All roads to a championship have a slim chance of working out. You seem to think the odds of signing the pieces to make us a true contender like a combo of Aldridge and Carmelo Anthony are better than drafting Andrew Wiggins or Jabari Parker or Julius Randle.



Rajon Rondo is the kind of guy you need to support legitimate triple threat NBA stars on their way to a championship. He is the kind of guy that supports the Kevin Garnetts and Paul Pierces. He's like Ray Allen in that he's an extremely talented star with an extremely valuable skill set for any contending team- but you do not build a team around a point guard that can't shoot- you do whatever you can to get your hands on the player or prospect with the best chance to carry you towards and NBA title.
We don't know if Wiggins or Parker or Randle will be even 25% of their hype, but in the small chance they do reach or exceed their hype and their teams give them the right support cast, they'll be leading their teams through the playoffs  as legitimate contenders for years to come.

According to Enchilada's list Rajon Rondo is ranked 14th among current active NBA players.  He's seventh among current players who are still in their twenties. 

By my count that's well above being in the 25 to 30 range of current NBA players.  The fact that we already have a star player in place puts us closer to contention than a vast majority of current non-contenders out there.  I'm guessing that both you and Enchilada would agree with that point. 

I'll just add that Kevin Durant is the only active player currently on Enchilada's gold or platinum list who is younger than Rajon Rondo.

I guess that it's possible that Wiggins, Parker, and Randle could all turn out to be platinum or gold level superstars, but as great as this draft is touted as being, that still seems highly unlikely to me.  Consider the fact that the 2003 draft (the draft almost unanimously thought of as the most star studded draft of all-time) has yielded only one player who currently sits in one of those top two tiers of all-time players. 

I would say that the chances of there being three (or more) in this coming draft are incredibly slim. 

Elrod's list is great, and it's hard to find statistics to back up a theory like this because certain sections are always going to be weighted towards one category too much- you cannot avoid it because it's the only information we've been given and things like MVP voting and ALL NBA voting are subjective. The best players don't always make those lists and thus that would hurt them in a ranking like this.
I'd agree that you need a star player in place but I don't believe that Rondo can be considered that kind of star like the guys on that list. I certainly don't think Rondo has earned the right to be labelled in the top 60 and above players like Kevin McHale. I mean look at the next 5 guys below him.

Carmelo Anthony,Clyde Drexler,Chris Webber,Pete Maravich

To yours, mine and most NBA fans analysis, Rondo is not better than those players but because of his unique situation of being basically thrown onto a contender in his second year like the Celtics, he's benefited immensely.

Can you imagine if Chris Paul started his career with team mates like Rondo did instead of with New Orleans- or if he was playing Marc Gasol and Zac Randolph instead of Blake Griffin and DeAndre Jordan?

 He needs to lead a team through serious adversity and/or improve his shooting drastically because I don't think he's had a tough situation in the NBA like CP3 or Durant or Lebron or Carmelo. All the best players bar Tim Duncan seem to have played on teams that completely stink and have had to grow and improve their game as time went by.
They've also remained at the top of these lists even while their teams stink, and I don't Rondo has ever had that problem because he's had All Star team mates to nail his jumpshots and the perfect passes he delivers.

In his prime and in a prime situation with team mates like he's had for most of his career, I think Rondo is a top 15- 20 NBA player, coming off ACL surgery and losing KG, Pierce and Ray Allen as team mates is going to hurt his assist totals and overall game but I hope he stays in the top 30.
I think if he could develop a reliable three point shot to 40% and free throw to 75% he could be in the talk for a top 5 current NBA player. Unfortunately I just don't think he's consistent enough.
Perhaps you agree too that he's not the number one option on a contender because of his flaws?

I just don't think Rondo has proven himself yet and the only way he will prove himself is by leading the C's through a situation like the one he faces now where he is the main event and he must put the entire team on his back like Chris Paul, Derrick Rose, Nash, Iverson have done so.
Not just during 3 or 4 games during the playoffs, but for a full 82 game season.

I agree that Elrod's list is very great work, but it's likely not perfect. It still relies on subjective criteria, and subjective criteria are subject to exposure biases. Rondo benefits from all-defense recognition, which likely doesn't happen as early as it does unless he's the pesky defender allowed to exert himself on defense and rest on offense because of his teammates (and KG patrolling the baseline) AND getting the exposure because of TV time earned mostly by his teammates at that time. If he's doing that stuff on sacramento, no way he gets the all-defense points. Of course also add that players in the East are not better than the West, but if you play in the East it's easier to make it onto the all-star team. Really good players are left off the west roster; if Rondo played int he west he might have a couple fewer appearances. Remember how long it took D-Will and Tony Parker to make all star games? That's the west, and it's pure chance, not objective.

[Celtics18]

But we don't have a star player already in place like your list above.
All the teams you listed such as Lakers, Dirk, Celtics etc had a top 10 NBA player on their squads already.
We don't have a top 10 player. We have a player who might be in the top 25-30 players in the NBA- and he isn't a scorer.
How do we acquire the guy that Shaq wants to go play with?
Tell us?
Your list shows how hard it is to win a championship in the NBA- it highlights how easy it is to be mediocre even with a top 10 NBA player.
We don't even have a top 20 NBA player. You say 'don't gamble everything on a draft pick that has a slim chance of working out'.
All roads to a championship have a slim chance of working out. You seem to think the odds of signing the pieces to make us a true contender like a combo of Aldridge and Carmelo Anthony are better than drafting Andrew Wiggins or Jabari Parker or Julius Randle.



Rajon Rondo is the kind of guy you need to support legitimate triple threat NBA stars on their way to a championship. He is the kind of guy that supports the Kevin Garnetts and Paul Pierces. He's like Ray Allen in that he's an extremely talented star with an extremely valuable skill set for any contending team- but you do not build a team around a point guard that can't shoot- you do whatever you can to get your hands on the player or prospect with the best chance to carry you towards and NBA title.
We don't know if Wiggins or Parker or Randle will be even 25% of their hype, but in the small chance they do reach or exceed their hype and their teams give them the right support cast, they'll be leading their teams through the playoffs  as legitimate contenders for years to come.

According to Enchilada's list Rajon Rondo is ranked 14th among current active NBA players.  He's seventh among current players who are still in their twenties. 

By my count that's well above being in the 25 to 30 range of current NBA players.  The fact that we already have a star player in place puts us closer to contention than a vast majority of current non-contenders out there.  I'm guessing that both you and Enchilada would agree with that point. 

I'll just add that Kevin Durant is the only active player currently on Enchilada's gold or platinum list who is younger than Rajon Rondo.

I guess that it's possible that Wiggins, Parker, and Randle could all turn out to be platinum or gold level superstars, but as great as this draft is touted as being, that still seems highly unlikely to me.  Consider the fact that the 2003 draft (the draft almost unanimously thought of as the most star studded draft of all-time) has yielded only one player who currently sits in one of those top two tiers of all-time players. 

I would say that the chances of there being three (or more) in this coming draft are incredibly slim. 

Elrod's list is great, and it's hard to find statistics to back up a theory like this because certain sections are always going to be weighted towards one category too much- you cannot avoid it because it's the only information we've been given and things like MVP voting and ALL NBA voting are subjective. The best players don't always make those lists and thus that would hurt them in a ranking like this.
I'd agree that you need a star player in place but I don't believe that Rondo can be considered that kind of star like the guys on that list. I certainly don't think Rondo has earned the right to be labelled in the top 60 and above players like Kevin McHale. I mean look at the next 5 guys below him.

Carmelo Anthony,Clyde Drexler,Chris Webber,Pete Maravich

To yours, mine and most NBA fans analysis, Rondo is not better than those players but because of his unique situation of being basically thrown onto a contender in his second year like the Celtics, he's benefited immensely.

Can you imagine if Chris Paul started his career with team mates like Rondo did instead of with New Orleans- or if he was playing Marc Gasol and Zac Randolph instead of Blake Griffin and DeAndre Jordan?

 He needs to lead a team through serious adversity and/or improve his shooting drastically because I don't think he's had a tough situation in the NBA like CP3 or Durant or Lebron or Carmelo. All the best players bar Tim Duncan seem to have played on teams that completely stink and have had to grow and improve their game as time went by.
They've also remained at the top of these lists even while their teams stink, and I don't Rondo has ever had that problem because he's had All Star team mates to nail his jumpshots and the perfect passes he delivers.

In his prime and in a prime situation with team mates like he's had for most of his career, I think Rondo is a top 15- 20 NBA player, coming off ACL surgery and losing KG, Pierce and Ray Allen as team mates is going to hurt his assist totals and overall game but I hope he stays in the top 30.
I think if he could develop a reliable three point shot to 40% and free throw to 75% he could be in the talk for a top 5 current NBA player. Unfortunately I just don't think he's consistent enough.
Perhaps you agree too that he's not the number one option on a contender because of his flaws?

I just don't think Rondo has proven himself yet and the only way he will prove himself is by leading the C's through a situation like the one he faces now where he is the main event and he must put the entire team on his back like Chris Paul, Derrick Rose, Nash, Iverson have done so.
Not just during 3 or 4 games during the playoffs, but for a full 82 game season.

I don't actually have a problem with Rondo's placement on Elrod's list.  I also happen to think that Rondo's numbers might actually have been better to date if he had started his career on a crappy team and been the main weapon for the first seven years of his career. 

I'm glad he got to start his career in the situation he did, though.  I think ultimately having played on this Celtics team with Kevin Garnett and Paul Pierce for the early part of his career will serve him well as he enters the next phase. 

Tony Parker springs to mind as another example of an elite point guard who got thrown into a situation where he was expected to help lead his team to championship contention at a very early age. 

[BballTim]

But we don't have a star player already in place like your list above.
All the teams you listed such as Lakers, Dirk, Celtics etc had a top 10 NBA player on their squads already.
We don't have a top 10 player. We have a player who might be in the top 25-30 players in the NBA- and he isn't a scorer.
How do we acquire the guy that Shaq wants to go play with?
Tell us?
Your list shows how hard it is to win a championship in the NBA- it highlights how easy it is to be mediocre even with a top 10 NBA player.
We don't even have a top 20 NBA player. You say 'don't gamble everything on a draft pick that has a slim chance of working out'.
All roads to a championship have a slim chance of working out. You seem to think the odds of signing the pieces to make us a true contender like a combo of Aldridge and Carmelo Anthony are better than drafting Andrew Wiggins or Jabari Parker or Julius Randle.



Rajon Rondo is the kind of guy you need to support legitimate triple threat NBA stars on their way to a championship. He is the kind of guy that supports the Kevin Garnetts and Paul Pierces. He's like Ray Allen in that he's an extremely talented star with an extremely valuable skill set for any contending team- but you do not build a team around a point guard that can't shoot- you do whatever you can to get your hands on the player or prospect with the best chance to carry you towards and NBA title.
We don't know if Wiggins or Parker or Randle will be even 25% of their hype, but in the small chance they do reach or exceed their hype and their teams give them the right support cast, they'll be leading their teams through the playoffs  as legitimate contenders for years to come.

According to Enchilada's list Rajon Rondo is ranked 14th among current active NBA players.  He's seventh among current players who are still in their twenties. 

By my count that's well above being in the 25 to 30 range of current NBA players.  The fact that we already have a star player in place puts us closer to contention than a vast majority of current non-contenders out there.  I'm guessing that both you and Enchilada would agree with that point. 

I'll just add that Kevin Durant is the only active player currently on Enchilada's gold or platinum list who is younger than Rajon Rondo.

I guess that it's possible that Wiggins, Parker, and Randle could all turn out to be platinum or gold level superstars, but as great as this draft is touted as being, that still seems highly unlikely to me.  Consider the fact that the 2003 draft (the draft almost unanimously thought of as the most star studded draft of all-time) has yielded only one player who currently sits in one of those top two tiers of all-time players. 

I would say that the chances of there being three (or more) in this coming draft are incredibly slim. 

Elrod's list is great, and it's hard to find statistics to back up a theory like this because certain sections are always going to be weighted towards one category too much- you cannot avoid it because it's the only information we've been given and things like MVP voting and ALL NBA voting are subjective. The best players don't always make those lists and thus that would hurt them in a ranking like this.
I'd agree that you need a star player in place but I don't believe that Rondo can be considered that kind of star like the guys on that list. I certainly don't think Rondo has earned the right to be labelled in the top 60 and above players like Kevin McHale. I mean look at the next 5 guys below him.

Carmelo Anthony,Clyde Drexler,Chris Webber,Pete Maravich

To yours, mine and most NBA fans analysis, Rondo is not better than those players but because of his unique situation of being basically thrown onto a contender in his second year like the Celtics, he's benefited immensely.

Can you imagine if Chris Paul started his career with team mates like Rondo did instead of with New Orleans- or if he was playing Marc Gasol and Zac Randolph instead of Blake Griffin and DeAndre Jordan?

 He needs to lead a team through serious adversity and/or improve his shooting drastically because I don't think he's had a tough situation in the NBA like CP3 or Durant or Lebron or Carmelo. All the best players bar Tim Duncan seem to have played on teams that completely stink and have had to grow and improve their game as time went by.
They've also remained at the top of these lists even while their teams stink, and I don't Rondo has ever had that problem because he's had All Star team mates to nail his jumpshots and the perfect passes he delivers.

In his prime and in a prime situation with team mates like he's had for most of his career, I think Rondo is a top 15- 20 NBA player, coming off ACL surgery and losing KG, Pierce and Ray Allen as team mates is going to hurt his assist totals and overall game but I hope he stays in the top 30.
I think if he could develop a reliable three point shot to 40% and free throw to 75% he could be in the talk for a top 5 current NBA player. Unfortunately I just don't think he's consistent enough.
Perhaps you agree too that he's not the number one option on a contender because of his flaws?

I just don't think Rondo has proven himself yet and the only way he will prove himself is by leading the C's through a situation like the one he faces now where he is the main event and he must put the entire team on his back like Chris Paul, Derrick Rose, Nash, Iverson have done so.
Not just during 3 or 4 games during the playoffs, but for a full 82 game season.

I agree that Elrod's list is very great work, but it's likely not perfect. It still relies on subjective criteria, and subjective criteria are subject to exposure biases. Rondo benefits from all-defense recognition, which likely doesn't happen as early as it does unless he's the pesky defender allowed to exert himself on defense and rest on offense because of his teammates (and KG patrolling the baseline) AND getting the exposure because of TV time earned mostly by his teammates at that time. If he's doing that stuff on sacramento, no way he gets the all-defense points. Of course also add that players in the East are not better than the West, but if you play in the East it's easier to make it onto the all-star team. Really good players are left off the west roster; if Rondo played int he west he might have a couple fewer appearances. Remember how long it took D-Will and Tony Parker to make all star games? That's the west, and it's pure chance, not objective.

  On the flip side, put Rondo on a worse team and he'd be putting up bigger numbers over the earlier parts of his career. Rondo's benefited from playing with the big three in terms of team success but he's sacrificed his stats in the process, just like the rest of them.

[chambers]

But we don't have a star player already in place like your list above.
All the teams you listed such as Lakers, Dirk, Celtics etc had a top 10 NBA player on their squads already.
We don't have a top 10 player. We have a player who might be in the top 25-30 players in the NBA- and he isn't a scorer.
How do we acquire the guy that Shaq wants to go play with?
Tell us?
Your list shows how hard it is to win a championship in the NBA- it highlights how easy it is to be mediocre even with a top 10 NBA player.
We don't even have a top 20 NBA player. You say 'don't gamble everything on a draft pick that has a slim chance of working out'.
All roads to a championship have a slim chance of working out. You seem to think the odds of signing the pieces to make us a true contender like a combo of Aldridge and Carmelo Anthony are better than drafting Andrew Wiggins or Jabari Parker or Julius Randle.



Rajon Rondo is the kind of guy you need to support legitimate triple threat NBA stars on their way to a championship. He is the kind of guy that supports the Kevin Garnetts and Paul Pierces. He's like Ray Allen in that he's an extremely talented star with an extremely valuable skill set for any contending team- but you do not build a team around a point guard that can't shoot- you do whatever you can to get your hands on the player or prospect with the best chance to carry you towards and NBA title.
We don't know if Wiggins or Parker or Randle will be even 25% of their hype, but in the small chance they do reach or exceed their hype and their teams give them the right support cast, they'll be leading their teams through the playoffs  as legitimate contenders for years to come.

According to Enchilada's list Rajon Rondo is ranked 14th among current active NBA players.  He's seventh among current players who are still in their twenties. 

By my count that's well above being in the 25 to 30 range of current NBA players.  The fact that we already have a star player in place puts us closer to contention than a vast majority of current non-contenders out there.  I'm guessing that both you and Enchilada would agree with that point. 

I'll just add that Kevin Durant is the only active player currently on Enchilada's gold or platinum list who is younger than Rajon Rondo.

I guess that it's possible that Wiggins, Parker, and Randle could all turn out to be platinum or gold level superstars, but as great as this draft is touted as being, that still seems highly unlikely to me.  Consider the fact that the 2003 draft (the draft almost unanimously thought of as the most star studded draft of all-time) has yielded only one player who currently sits in one of those top two tiers of all-time players. 

I would say that the chances of there being three (or more) in this coming draft are incredibly slim. 

Elrod's list is great, and it's hard to find statistics to back up a theory like this because certain sections are always going to be weighted towards one category too much- you cannot avoid it because it's the only information we've been given and things like MVP voting and ALL NBA voting are subjective. The best players don't always make those lists and thus that would hurt them in a ranking like this.
I'd agree that you need a star player in place but I don't believe that Rondo can be considered that kind of star like the guys on that list. I certainly don't think Rondo has earned the right to be labelled in the top 60 and above players like Kevin McHale. I mean look at the next 5 guys below him.

Carmelo Anthony,Clyde Drexler,Chris Webber,Pete Maravich

To yours, mine and most NBA fans analysis, Rondo is not better than those players but because of his unique situation of being basically thrown onto a contender in his second year like the Celtics, he's benefited immensely.

Can you imagine if Chris Paul started his career with team mates like Rondo did instead of with New Orleans- or if he was playing Marc Gasol and Zac Randolph instead of Blake Griffin and DeAndre Jordan?

 He needs to lead a team through serious adversity and/or improve his shooting drastically because I don't think he's had a tough situation in the NBA like CP3 or Durant or Lebron or Carmelo. All the best players bar Tim Duncan seem to have played on teams that completely stink and have had to grow and improve their game as time went by.
They've also remained at the top of these lists even while their teams stink, and I don't Rondo has ever had that problem because he's had All Star team mates to nail his jumpshots and the perfect passes he delivers.

In his prime and in a prime situation with team mates like he's had for most of his career, I think Rondo is a top 15- 20 NBA player, coming off ACL surgery and losing KG, Pierce and Ray Allen as team mates is going to hurt his assist totals and overall game but I hope he stays in the top 30.
I think if he could develop a reliable three point shot to 40% and free throw to 75% he could be in the talk for a top 5 current NBA player. Unfortunately I just don't think he's consistent enough.
Perhaps you agree too that he's not the number one option on a contender because of his flaws?

I just don't think Rondo has proven himself yet and the only way he will prove himself is by leading the C's through a situation like the one he faces now where he is the main event and he must put the entire team on his back like Chris Paul, Derrick Rose, Nash, Iverson have done so.
Not just during 3 or 4 games during the playoffs, but for a full 82 game season.

I don't actually have a problem with Rondo's placement on Elrod's list.  I also happen to think that Rondo's numbers might actually have been better to date if he had started his career on a crappy team and been the main weapon for the first seven years of his career. 

I'm glad he got to start his career in the situation he did, though.  I think ultimately having played on this Celtics team with Kevin Garnett and Paul Pierce for the early part of his career will serve him well as he enters the next phase. 

Tony Parker springs to mind as another example of an elite point guard who got thrown into a situation where he was expected to help lead his team to championship contention at a very early age.

Well Tony Parker is a good example of all of the above that we've been talking about. One of the best point guards in the league, and has been for a long time- comparable with Rondo but a better shooter and scorer because of his jumpshot. Overall a slightly better player because of his shooting. (I think this is the general consensus right?)
He gets drafted in 2001 and Time Duncan(in this case, the already home drafted Spurs superstar) has already been playing for 4 seasons in the NBA.
Parker comes in and works his way to full time starter and an instant contributor.
He was thrust onto that Spurs team and asked to be a contender contributor- quite similarly to Rondo- but he was never in the conversation for 'the main event' of the Spurs until 2006-07 . You could argue that his importance was as equal as Timmy D's in their 3rd championship run in 2007( He was MVP of finals I think) and onwards - aswell as their recent playoff success.

Anyway, the point I'm trying to make is he joined a team with a superstar there already and both Duncan and Ginobli were the two best players when the Spurs won their title in 2005.
I mean he came onto a team with a top 15 all time player and an All Star role player in Manu Ginobli.

I seriously doubt Rondo is a better player than Tony Parker and that the majority of NBA fans would cite Parker as the better player. So why is Parker below Rondo on the list?
Because Rondo has only played since 2006 and Parker's had 5 more years to let the averages work their way into the equation.

I mean look at Parker's list of achievements-it's like a rich man's version of Rondo's and yet he's still only considered as the 74th ranked guy on the list (behind Rondo!)
3× NBA champion (2003, 2005, 2007)
NBA Finals MVP (2007)
5× NBA All-Star (2006–2007, 2009, 2012–2013)
2× All-NBA Second Team (2012–2013)
All-NBA Third Team (2009)
NBA All-Rookie First Team (2002)
NBA Skills Challenge champion (2012)
NBA Shooting Stars champion (2006)


I agree that playing with Pierce and KG and Ray has made him a hell of a better player because of the locker room environment and their greatness.
But I can't see how playing on a terrible team with no shooters and very weak interior defense is going to get his stats better.
He will take more shots, he will try and score at the rim- but he won't have KG, Pierce, Terry or Ray Allen to dish to on those same drives.
Because those guys aren't there it's also going to hurt the Celtics spacing and Rondo's assists on jumpshots tremendously. All defenses will collapse on him and make his time getting to the rim much harder to create that space.
Seriously who is going to hit the open jumpshots on this team other than Jeff Green and Courtney Lee. Hopefully Sully and Olynyk can hold their own but it's a different class of cattle without any of KG, Pierce Ray and Terry.
Same principal applies to Jeff Green and his driving- defenders are going to swarm the paint and force us to shoot long.
Rondo's the best passer in the NBA, but don't forget how good the shooters are who he's been passing to since 2007- some of the best of all time and that's no exaggeration. In the course of losing Ray, losing KG and Pierce and Terry we've essentially gone to one of the best jump shooting teams in the NBA to one of the bottom 5.
It's going to mean Rondo has to score more himself. Unfortunately for Rondo, every NBA coach knows this and they're going to make his life getting to the rim a complete hell.
One of my biggest concerns is his rough and tumble playing style without that same spacing- his injury risk is going to increase a lot. He's also gonna have to bring his A game for 82 games and not just for national TV.
Can't see this ending well unless he shoots 1 million jumpshots and three pointers this off season.

[LilRip]

Read the article. There's quite a bit in it about postseason success. ...blahblah-rantrant... You're going on and on about silver and gold and bronze. That's not the point. "Best or 2nd best player on a team that's gone deep into the playoffs" is *clearly* more relevant.

well let's see, the article talks about 1) these are the stars of the league, and 2) you need multiple stars to have any kind of success.

now let's see, your point was about Rondo specifically, and how him having success in the playoffs when he's below 27 years old is important. and furthermore, how truncating the careers of others to 27 years old is supposed to be relevant as well.

i'd say him having success at all is what's relevant and proves he's a star in this league. the rest about him doing it at 27 is just fluff and so is the part about truncating other people's careers.

To give a counterexample, take a look at KG. Guy was nothing but a first round exit by age 27. He finally got himself a proper team the following year and it took injuries to those guys to eliminate him. If you truncate KG's career at age 27, does that seriously mean anything? I mean, would you take 2012 Rondo instead of 2003 KG because Rondo has had more postseason success?

The fact that Rondo has been one of the top postseason performers in multiple playoffs is a big reason he's had the postseason success that he has and the fact that he's shown the ability to play at that level does impact the future. The future postseason success of Rondo's teams will be dependent on both the quality of his teammates *and* on his level play.

We're not talking about Rondo's postseason numbers. We're talking about how him having postseason success on a loaded team is worth even pointing out. In the future, obviously it will be dependent on Rondo's level of play but that comes with territory given that he's a star. I mean, stars who find themselves on a loaded team are expected to do well in the playoffs. That's pretty much the norm rather than the exception.

That's why when stacked teams implode (like the Lakers last year), it makes the news. On the other hand, notice how nobody is going "it's worth noting that the Miami Heat did well when Lebron, Wade and Bosh became teammates".

Again, with the KG example, he had no postseason success prior to making the WCF, but there was zero reason to believe that he wouldn't perform when he finally had a better team. And because KG was a star on that team, his team's postseason success heavily depended on his level of play as well.

  Part of Rondo's success is due to his being on a good team, but much of it is due to his being able to dominate in the postseason. Your attempts to blatantly downplay his contribution to the team's success is in poor taste IMO.

I haven't downplayed his contribution at all. If you read carefully, you'll see that I've been saying he's a star. What i've been downplaying is your need to point out that Rondo has had postseason success. And why do i downplay this? because of the next quote:

To reiterate myself:

His playoff successes were achieved on a team with multiple stars, which pretty much backs up the point the writeup was driving home. Now, if Rondo had achieved that much success with Green and Sully [instead of PP and KG] who are decidedly lesser players, only then would it would be worth mentioning, specifically because it bucks the trend that the article presented.

  Yawn

you can yawn all you want but that's the only time something would have been worth noting. Otherwise, he's achieved exactly what you would've expected from a star on a team with multiple stars, and you've repeated something that the article has already gone great lengths to show. The only thing you've done is put it in a celtics context by referencing Rondo, but i highly doubt that was your intention anyway.

The only thing surprising is that Rondo was picked so late but blossomed into a star. But if we immediately accept that he's a star, then he's pretty much just as special as the next star.

[BballTim]

Read the article. There's quite a bit in it about postseason success. ...blahblah-rantrant... You're going on and on about silver and gold and bronze. That's not the point. "Best or 2nd best player on a team that's gone deep into the playoffs" is *clearly* more relevant.

well let's see, the article talks about 1) these are the stars of the league, and 2) you need multiple stars to have any kind of success.

now let's see, your point was about Rondo specifically, and how him having success in the playoffs when he's below 27 years old is important. and furthermore, how truncating the careers of others to 27 years old is supposed to be relevant as well.

i'd say him having success at all is what's relevant and proves he's a star in this league. the rest about him doing it at 27 is just fluff and so is the part about truncating other people's careers.

To give a counterexample, take a look at KG. Guy was nothing but a first round exit by age 27. He finally got himself a proper team the following year and it took injuries to those guys to eliminate him. If you truncate KG's career at age 27, does that seriously mean anything? I mean, would you take 2012 Rondo instead of 2003 KG because Rondo has had more postseason success?

The fact that Rondo has been one of the top postseason performers in multiple playoffs is a big reason he's had the postseason success that he has and the fact that he's shown the ability to play at that level does impact the future. The future postseason success of Rondo's teams will be dependent on both the quality of his teammates *and* on his level play.

We're not talking about Rondo's postseason numbers. We're talking about how him having postseason success on a loaded team is worth even pointing out. In the future, obviously it will be dependent on Rondo's level of play but that comes with territory given that he's a star. I mean, stars who find themselves on a loaded team are expected to do well in the playoffs. That's pretty much the norm rather than the exception.

That's why when stacked teams implode (like the Lakers last year), it makes the news. On the other hand, notice how nobody is going "it's worth noting that the Miami Heat did well when Lebron, Wade and Bosh became teammates".

Again, with the KG example, he had no postseason success prior to making the WCF, but there was zero reason to believe that he wouldn't perform when he finally had a better team. And because KG was a star on that team, his team's postseason success heavily depended on his level of play as well.

  Part of Rondo's success is due to his being on a good team, but much of it is due to his being able to dominate in the postseason. Your attempts to blatantly downplay his contribution to the team's success is in poor taste IMO.

I haven't downplayed his contribution at all. If you read carefully, you'll see that I've been saying he's a star. What i've been downplaying is your need to point out that Rondo has had postseason success. And why do i downplay this? because of the next quote:

To reiterate myself:

His playoff successes were achieved on a team with multiple stars, which pretty much backs up the point the writeup was driving home. Now, if Rondo had achieved that much success with Green and Sully [instead of PP and KG] who are decidedly lesser players, only then would it would be worth mentioning, specifically because it bucks the trend that the article presented.

  Yawn

you can yawn all you want but that's the only time something would have been worth noting.

  Finally, a little progress. You realize that something's worth mentioning if it "bucks the trend". Rondo having the kind of success that he did at a young age "bucks the trend". It's true that the joined the league on a "loaded team". The team that he carried to the ECF last year? Not so loaded. If you didn't figure that out before the Knicks series this year, you should have then. The part about truncating people's careers at 27 is to illustrate that few of them had the same amount of success by his age. The fact that he's accomplished what most of the list hadn't by his age makes that accomplishment noteworthy.

[BballTim]

But we don't have a star player already in place like your list above.
All the teams you listed such as Lakers, Dirk, Celtics etc had a top 10 NBA player on their squads already.
We don't have a top 10 player. We have a player who might be in the top 25-30 players in the NBA- and he isn't a scorer.
How do we acquire the guy that Shaq wants to go play with?
Tell us?
Your list shows how hard it is to win a championship in the NBA- it highlights how easy it is to be mediocre even with a top 10 NBA player.
We don't even have a top 20 NBA player. You say 'don't gamble everything on a draft pick that has a slim chance of working out'.
All roads to a championship have a slim chance of working out. You seem to think the odds of signing the pieces to make us a true contender like a combo of Aldridge and Carmelo Anthony are better than drafting Andrew Wiggins or Jabari Parker or Julius Randle.



Rajon Rondo is the kind of guy you need to support legitimate triple threat NBA stars on their way to a championship. He is the kind of guy that supports the Kevin Garnetts and Paul Pierces. He's like Ray Allen in that he's an extremely talented star with an extremely valuable skill set for any contending team- but you do not build a team around a point guard that can't shoot- you do whatever you can to get your hands on the player or prospect with the best chance to carry you towards and NBA title.
We don't know if Wiggins or Parker or Randle will be even 25% of their hype, but in the small chance they do reach or exceed their hype and their teams give them the right support cast, they'll be leading their teams through the playoffs  as legitimate contenders for years to come.

According to Enchilada's list Rajon Rondo is ranked 14th among current active NBA players.  He's seventh among current players who are still in their twenties. 

By my count that's well above being in the 25 to 30 range of current NBA players.  The fact that we already have a star player in place puts us closer to contention than a vast majority of current non-contenders out there.  I'm guessing that both you and Enchilada would agree with that point. 

I'll just add that Kevin Durant is the only active player currently on Enchilada's gold or platinum list who is younger than Rajon Rondo.

I guess that it's possible that Wiggins, Parker, and Randle could all turn out to be platinum or gold level superstars, but as great as this draft is touted as being, that still seems highly unlikely to me.  Consider the fact that the 2003 draft (the draft almost unanimously thought of as the most star studded draft of all-time) has yielded only one player who currently sits in one of those top two tiers of all-time players. 

I would say that the chances of there being three (or more) in this coming draft are incredibly slim. 

Elrod's list is great, and it's hard to find statistics to back up a theory like this because certain sections are always going to be weighted towards one category too much- you cannot avoid it because it's the only information we've been given and things like MVP voting and ALL NBA voting are subjective. The best players don't always make those lists and thus that would hurt them in a ranking like this.
I'd agree that you need a star player in place but I don't believe that Rondo can be considered that kind of star like the guys on that list. I certainly don't think Rondo has earned the right to be labelled in the top 60 and above players like Kevin McHale. I mean look at the next 5 guys below him.

Carmelo Anthony,Clyde Drexler,Chris Webber,Pete Maravich

To yours, mine and most NBA fans analysis, Rondo is not better than those players but because of his unique situation of being basically thrown onto a contender in his second year like the Celtics, he's benefited immensely.

Can you imagine if Chris Paul started his career with team mates like Rondo did instead of with New Orleans- or if he was playing Marc Gasol and Zac Randolph instead of Blake Griffin and DeAndre Jordan?

 He needs to lead a team through serious adversity and/or improve his shooting drastically because I don't think he's had a tough situation in the NBA like CP3 or Durant or Lebron or Carmelo. All the best players bar Tim Duncan seem to have played on teams that completely stink and have had to grow and improve their game as time went by.
They've also remained at the top of these lists even while their teams stink, and I don't Rondo has ever had that problem because he's had All Star team mates to nail his jumpshots and the perfect passes he delivers.

In his prime and in a prime situation with team mates like he's had for most of his career, I think Rondo is a top 15- 20 NBA player, coming off ACL surgery and losing KG, Pierce and Ray Allen as team mates is going to hurt his assist totals and overall game but I hope he stays in the top 30.
I think if he could develop a reliable three point shot to 40% and free throw to 75% he could be in the talk for a top 5 current NBA player. Unfortunately I just don't think he's consistent enough.
Perhaps you agree too that he's not the number one option on a contender because of his flaws?

I just don't think Rondo has proven himself yet and the only way he will prove himself is by leading the C's through a situation like the one he faces now where he is the main event and he must put the entire team on his back like Chris Paul, Derrick Rose, Nash, Iverson have done so.
Not just during 3 or 4 games during the playoffs, but for a full 82 game season.

I don't actually have a problem with Rondo's placement on Elrod's list.  I also happen to think that Rondo's numbers might actually have been better to date if he had started his career on a crappy team and been the main weapon for the first seven years of his career. 

I'm glad he got to start his career in the situation he did, though.  I think ultimately having played on this Celtics team with Kevin Garnett and Paul Pierce for the early part of his career will serve him well as he enters the next phase. 

Tony Parker springs to mind as another example of an elite point guard who got thrown into a situation where he was expected to help lead his team to championship contention at a very early age.

Well Tony Parker is a good example of all of the above that we've been talking about. One of the best point guards in the league, and has been for a long time- comparable with Rondo but a better shooter and scorer because of his jumpshot. Overall a slightly better player because of his shooting. (I think this is the general consensus right?)
He gets drafted in 2001 and Time Duncan(in this case, the already home drafted Spurs superstar) has already been playing for 4 seasons in the NBA.
Parker comes in and works his way to full time starter and an instant contributor.
He was thrust onto that Spurs team and asked to be a contender contributor- quite similarly to Rondo- but he was never in the conversation for 'the main event' of the Spurs until 2006-07 . You could argue that his importance was as equal as Timmy D's in their 3rd championship run in 2007( He was MVP of finals I think) and onwards - aswell as their recent playoff success.

Anyway, the point I'm trying to make is he joined a team with a superstar there already and both Duncan and Ginobli were the two best players when the Spurs won their title in 2005.
I mean he came onto a team with a top 15 all time player and an All Star role player in Manu Ginobli.

I seriously doubt Rondo is a better player than Tony Parker and that the majority of NBA fans would cite Parker as the better player.

  I'd say Rondo's a better player than Parker. The majority of fans might disagree, but fans generally prefer scoring and don't acknowledge (or don't notice) things that aren't easily quantifiable in statistics. Considering the large portion of fans here who thought the team would do fine in the playoffs without Rondo, it's hard to expect better from people who see the team less. I'd say that if you took Rondo's last 3 healthy playoffs (2009, 2010 and 2012) and swapped him and Parker the Celts would have done worse and the Spurs would have likely done better. If Rondo was healthy this season you could say it again.

[Celtics18]

But we don't have a star player already in place like your list above.
All the teams you listed such as Lakers, Dirk, Celtics etc had a top 10 NBA player on their squads already.
We don't have a top 10 player. We have a player who might be in the top 25-30 players in the NBA- and he isn't a scorer.
How do we acquire the guy that Shaq wants to go play with?
Tell us?
Your list shows how hard it is to win a championship in the NBA- it highlights how easy it is to be mediocre even with a top 10 NBA player.
We don't even have a top 20 NBA player. You say 'don't gamble everything on a draft pick that has a slim chance of working out'.
All roads to a championship have a slim chance of working out. You seem to think the odds of signing the pieces to make us a true contender like a combo of Aldridge and Carmelo Anthony are better than drafting Andrew Wiggins or Jabari Parker or Julius Randle.



Rajon Rondo is the kind of guy you need to support legitimate triple threat NBA stars on their way to a championship. He is the kind of guy that supports the Kevin Garnetts and Paul Pierces. He's like Ray Allen in that he's an extremely talented star with an extremely valuable skill set for any contending team- but you do not build a team around a point guard that can't shoot- you do whatever you can to get your hands on the player or prospect with the best chance to carry you towards and NBA title.
We don't know if Wiggins or Parker or Randle will be even 25% of their hype, but in the small chance they do reach or exceed their hype and their teams give them the right support cast, they'll be leading their teams through the playoffs  as legitimate contenders for years to come.

According to Enchilada's list Rajon Rondo is ranked 14th among current active NBA players.  He's seventh among current players who are still in their twenties. 

By my count that's well above being in the 25 to 30 range of current NBA players.  The fact that we already have a star player in place puts us closer to contention than a vast majority of current non-contenders out there.  I'm guessing that both you and Enchilada would agree with that point. 

I'll just add that Kevin Durant is the only active player currently on Enchilada's gold or platinum list who is younger than Rajon Rondo.

I guess that it's possible that Wiggins, Parker, and Randle could all turn out to be platinum or gold level superstars, but as great as this draft is touted as being, that still seems highly unlikely to me.  Consider the fact that the 2003 draft (the draft almost unanimously thought of as the most star studded draft of all-time) has yielded only one player who currently sits in one of those top two tiers of all-time players. 

I would say that the chances of there being three (or more) in this coming draft are incredibly slim. 

Elrod's list is great, and it's hard to find statistics to back up a theory like this because certain sections are always going to be weighted towards one category too much- you cannot avoid it because it's the only information we've been given and things like MVP voting and ALL NBA voting are subjective. The best players don't always make those lists and thus that would hurt them in a ranking like this.
I'd agree that you need a star player in place but I don't believe that Rondo can be considered that kind of star like the guys on that list. I certainly don't think Rondo has earned the right to be labelled in the top 60 and above players like Kevin McHale. I mean look at the next 5 guys below him.

Carmelo Anthony,Clyde Drexler,Chris Webber,Pete Maravich

To yours, mine and most NBA fans analysis, Rondo is not better than those players but because of his unique situation of being basically thrown onto a contender in his second year like the Celtics, he's benefited immensely.

Can you imagine if Chris Paul started his career with team mates like Rondo did instead of with New Orleans- or if he was playing Marc Gasol and Zac Randolph instead of Blake Griffin and DeAndre Jordan?

 He needs to lead a team through serious adversity and/or improve his shooting drastically because I don't think he's had a tough situation in the NBA like CP3 or Durant or Lebron or Carmelo. All the best players bar Tim Duncan seem to have played on teams that completely stink and have had to grow and improve their game as time went by.
They've also remained at the top of these lists even while their teams stink, and I don't Rondo has ever had that problem because he's had All Star team mates to nail his jumpshots and the perfect passes he delivers.

In his prime and in a prime situation with team mates like he's had for most of his career, I think Rondo is a top 15- 20 NBA player, coming off ACL surgery and losing KG, Pierce and Ray Allen as team mates is going to hurt his assist totals and overall game but I hope he stays in the top 30.
I think if he could develop a reliable three point shot to 40% and free throw to 75% he could be in the talk for a top 5 current NBA player. Unfortunately I just don't think he's consistent enough.
Perhaps you agree too that he's not the number one option on a contender because of his flaws?

I just don't think Rondo has proven himself yet and the only way he will prove himself is by leading the C's through a situation like the one he faces now where he is the main event and he must put the entire team on his back like Chris Paul, Derrick Rose, Nash, Iverson have done so.
Not just during 3 or 4 games during the playoffs, but for a full 82 game season.

I don't actually have a problem with Rondo's placement on Elrod's list.  I also happen to think that Rondo's numbers might actually have been better to date if he had started his career on a crappy team and been the main weapon for the first seven years of his career. 

I'm glad he got to start his career in the situation he did, though.  I think ultimately having played on this Celtics team with Kevin Garnett and Paul Pierce for the early part of his career will serve him well as he enters the next phase. 

Tony Parker springs to mind as another example of an elite point guard who got thrown into a situation where he was expected to help lead his team to championship contention at a very early age.

Well Tony Parker is a good example of all of the above that we've been talking about. One of the best point guards in the league, and has been for a long time- comparable with Rondo but a better shooter and scorer because of his jumpshot. Overall a slightly better player because of his shooting. (I think this is the general consensus right?)
He gets drafted in 2001 and Time Duncan(in this case, the already home drafted Spurs superstar) has already been playing for 4 seasons in the NBA.
Parker comes in and works his way to full time starter and an instant contributor.
He was thrust onto that Spurs team and asked to be a contender contributor- quite similarly to Rondo- but he was never in the conversation for 'the main event' of the Spurs until 2006-07 . You could argue that his importance was as equal as Timmy D's in their 3rd championship run in 2007( He was MVP of finals I think) and onwards - aswell as their recent playoff success.

Anyway, the point I'm trying to make is he joined a team with a superstar there already and both Duncan and Ginobli were the two best players when the Spurs won their title in 2005.
I mean he came onto a team with a top 15 all time player and an All Star role player in Manu Ginobli.

I seriously doubt Rondo is a better player than Tony Parker and that the majority of NBA fans would cite Parker as the better player. So why is Parker below Rondo on the list?
Because Rondo has only played since 2006 and Parker's had 5 more years to let the averages work their way into the equation.

I mean look at Parker's list of achievements-it's like a rich man's version of Rondo's and yet he's still only considered as the 74th ranked guy on the list (behind Rondo!)
3× NBA champion (2003, 2005, 2007)
NBA Finals MVP (2007)
5× NBA All-Star (2006–2007, 2009, 2012–2013)
2× All-NBA Second Team (2012–2013)
All-NBA Third Team (2009)
NBA All-Rookie First Team (2002)
NBA Skills Challenge champion (2012)
NBA Shooting Stars champion (2006)


I agree that playing with Pierce and KG and Ray has made him a hell of a better player because of the locker room environment and their greatness.
But I can't see how playing on a terrible team with no shooters and very weak interior defense is going to get his stats better.
He will take more shots, he will try and score at the rim- but he won't have KG, Pierce, Terry or Ray Allen to dish to on those same drives.
Because those guys aren't there it's also going to hurt the Celtics spacing and Rondo's assists on jumpshots tremendously. All defenses will collapse on him and make his time getting to the rim much harder to create that space.
Seriously who is going to hit the open jumpshots on this team other than Jeff Green and Courtney Lee. Hopefully Sully and Olynyk can hold their own but it's a different class of cattle without any of KG, Pierce Ray and Terry.
Same principal applies to Jeff Green and his driving- defenders are going to swarm the paint and force us to shoot long.
Rondo's the best passer in the NBA, but don't forget how good the shooters are who he's been passing to since 2007- some of the best of all time and that's no exaggeration. In the course of losing Ray, losing KG and Pierce and Terry we've essentially gone to one of the best jump shooting teams in the NBA to one of the bottom 5.
It's going to mean Rondo has to score more himself. Unfortunately for Rondo, every NBA coach knows this and they're going to make his life getting to the rim a complete hell.
One of my biggest concerns is his rough and tumble playing style without that same spacing- his injury risk is going to increase a lot. He's also gonna have to bring his A game for 82 games and not just for national TV.
Can't see this ending well unless he shoots 1 million jumpshots and three pointers this off season.

NBA coaches have spent the last five years making the primary goal of the defense to stop Rajon Rondo from getting to the rim.  They haven't been able to do it, though.  Rajon Rondo is going to get in the lane and get to the rim.  It's what he does well, and it's one of the things that makes him a great player who is on the list of the greatest players to ever play the game.

I don't expect teams to be able to all of a sudden stop Rajon Rondo from being effective at what he does. 

I guess we'll find out soon enough. 

[LilRip]

Finally, a little progress. You realize that something's worth mentioning if it "bucks the trend". Rondo having the kind of success that he did at a young age "bucks the trend". It's true that the joined the league on a "loaded team". The team that he carried to the ECF last year? Not so loaded. If you didn't figure that out before the Knicks series this year, you should have then. The part about truncating people's careers at 27 is to illustrate that few of them had the same amount of success by his age. The fact that he's accomplished what most of the list hadn't by his age makes that accomplishment noteworthy.

i'd say you're about 3 replies too late on your "finally". lol. i've been saying that bucks the trend line for a while now. how about you actually read a post first before replying to it? just a tip 

and sadly no, last year, the Celtics got eliminated in the 1st round so what i'm assuming is you meant the 2012 playoffs. And sadly, the Celtics didn't "buck the trend" in the 2012 playoffs either.

The team was already beginning to decline from "contender" status, sure, but we were still pretty much loaded in 2012. Let's also not forget that our playoff chances GREATLY improved after the #1 seeded bulls lost Derrick Rose to injury and fell to the 8th seeded Sixers in the first round. I mean, honestly, which of these scenarios would have been the most remarkable:

a) 8th seeded Sixers, with Iggy as their best player, making it to the ECF
b) 1st seeded Bulls, despite losing their best player on the first game of the playoffs, making it to the ECF
c) Celtics at full strength with Rondo, PP, KG and RA making it to the ECF

I'd say the sixers making it would have been the most remarkable thing and us making it the least remarkable.

And furthermore, you'd be greatly marginalizing PP and KG's contributions in the 2012 playoffs if you think they played only a small part in bringing the team to the 2012 ECF. Rondo played well, yes, but so did they. I highly urge you to look back at that Hawks series if you think otherwise. Do you think the C's would have made it to the ECF if they gave Green (assuming healthy) and Bass the minutes given to PP and KG? i doubt we would have even made the playoffs, let alone make it to the ECF.

[BballTim]

Finally, a little progress. You realize that something's worth mentioning if it "bucks the trend". Rondo having the kind of success that he did at a young age "bucks the trend". It's true that the joined the league on a "loaded team". The team that he carried to the ECF last year? Not so loaded. If you didn't figure that out before the Knicks series this year, you should have then. The part about truncating people's careers at 27 is to illustrate that few of them had the same amount of success by his age. The fact that he's accomplished what most of the list hadn't by his age makes that accomplishment noteworthy.

i'd say you're about 3 replies too late on your "finally". lol. i've been saying that bucks the trend line for a while now. how about you actually read a post first before replying to it? just a tip 

  I commented enough on those posts. It's not my fault this didn't make it close enough to the top of the issues I saw.

and sadly no, last year, the Celtics got eliminated in the 1st round so what i'm assuming is you meant the 2012 playoffs. And sadly, the Celtics didn't "buck the trend" in the 2012 playoffs either.

  No, I'm talking about the right years. If Rondo was out in 2012 that team wouldn't have gone far because it wasn't "loaded".

The team was already beginning to decline from "contender" status, sure, but we were still pretty much loaded in 2012. Let's also not forget that our playoff chances GREATLY improved after the #1 seeded bulls lost Derrick Rose to injury and fell to the 8th seeded Sixers in the first round. I mean, honestly, which of these scenarios would have been the most remarkable:

a) 8th seeded Sixers, with Iggy as their best player, making it to the ECF
b) 1st seeded Bulls, despite losing their best player on the first game of the playoffs, making it to the ECF
c) Celtics at full strength with Rondo, PP, KG and RA making it to the ECF

  The Celtics weren't at "full strength". Green was out, Wilcox was out, Steimsma was playing through foot problems, Bradley's shoulders were popping out of socket a couple of times a series, Ray was gimping around on a bad ankle, PP was dealing with a sprained MCL. The only regulars besides Rondo that were healthy were KG and Bass.

And furthermore, you'd be greatly marginalizing PP and KG's contributions in the 2012 playoffs if you think they played only a small part in bringing the team to the 2012 ECF. Rondo played well, yes, but so did they. I highly urge you to look back at that Hawks series if you think otherwise. Do you think the C's would have made it to the ECF if they gave Green (assuming healthy) and Bass the minutes given to PP and KG? i doubt we would have even made the playoffs, let alone make it to the ECF.

  KG and PP were the 2nd and 3rd best players on those teams. I've been giving them the credit they deserve all along.

[LarBrd33]

Finally, a little progress. You realize that something's worth mentioning if it "bucks the trend". Rondo having the kind of success that he did at a young age "bucks the trend". It's true that the joined the league on a "loaded team". The team that he carried to the ECF last year? Not so loaded. If you didn't figure that out before the Knicks series this year, you should have then. The part about truncating people's careers at 27 is to illustrate that few of them had the same amount of success by his age. The fact that he's accomplished what most of the list hadn't by his age makes that accomplishment noteworthy.

i'd say you're about 3 replies too late on your "finally". lol. i've been saying that bucks the trend line for a while now. how about you actually read a post first before replying to it? just a tip 

  I commented enough on those posts. It's not my fault this didn't make it close enough to the top of the issues I saw.

and sadly no, last year, the Celtics got eliminated in the 1st round so what i'm assuming is you meant the 2012 playoffs. And sadly, the Celtics didn't "buck the trend" in the 2012 playoffs either.

  No, I'm talking about the right years. If Rondo was out in 2012 that team wouldn't have gone far because it wasn't "loaded".

The team was already beginning to decline from "contender" status, sure, but we were still pretty much loaded in 2012. Let's also not forget that our playoff chances GREATLY improved after the #1 seeded bulls lost Derrick Rose to injury and fell to the 8th seeded Sixers in the first round. I mean, honestly, which of these scenarios would have been the most remarkable:

a) 8th seeded Sixers, with Iggy as their best player, making it to the ECF
b) 1st seeded Bulls, despite losing their best player on the first game of the playoffs, making it to the ECF
c) Celtics at full strength with Rondo, PP, KG and RA making it to the ECF

  The Celtics weren't at "full strength". Green was out, Wilcox was out, Steimsma was playing through foot problems, Bradley's shoulders were popping out of socket a couple of times a series, Ray was gimping around on a bad ankle, PP was dealing with a sprained MCL. The only regulars besides Rondo that were healthy were KG and Bass.

And furthermore, you'd be greatly marginalizing PP and KG's contributions in the 2012 playoffs if you think they played only a small part in bringing the team to the 2012 ECF. Rondo played well, yes, but so did they. I highly urge you to look back at that Hawks series if you think otherwise. Do you think the C's would have made it to the ECF if they gave Green (assuming healthy) and Bass the minutes given to PP and KG? i doubt we would have even made the playoffs, let alone make it to the ECF.

  KG and PP were the 2nd and 3rd best players on those teams. I've been giving them the credit they deserve all along.

Tim is right that in 2012, Rondo was arguably the best player on a vastly overachieving Celtic team.  They had the 5th best record in the Eastern Conference that year.  6 teams in the Western Conference outperformed them.   We faced off against Atlanta in round 1... who struggled for most of the series without their best player.  We got handed a "gimme" in the 2nd round with Philly (who didn't even make the playoffs a year later).

You gotta put that into context.  Rondo being the 1st or 2nd best player on that team was ok. (I'd argue KG was more impactful in the playoffs... he was a complete beast and the focal-point of our defense... our defense being the foundation for any success we've had since 2007) ...

How impressive was that?  Well... within context, not that impressive.  I'd put it on a par with Antoine Walker or Paul Pierce in 2002.   In 2002, Boston had a better win percentage.  The Eastern conference was a complete joke.  We made it to the ECF vs the Nets.  We were up 2-1 in that series.   

Was that scrappy 49 win Boston team a legitimate contender in 2002?  Oh HECK NO.  Had that team lucked into the Finals, there was around 6 teams in the Western Conference that would have eaten them alive in the Finals.

So Rondo (arguably) leading the 11th best team in the league to a ECF appearance in 2012 is just about as impressive as Antoine Walker (arguably) leading the 8th best team in the league to an ECF appearance a decade earlier.  Just because 'Toine lead us to the 3rd round of the playoffs didn't mean he was on a par with Shaq, Kobe, Duncan and the real superstars of the NBA.  And even if you're saying it was Pierce who took that team to the ECF in 2002... big deal.  He didn't get anything accomplished until a legitimate superstar (Kevin Garnett) came to Boston and lead this team to a title. 

So the point stands... You aren't winning a title without multiple superstars.  And even if you consider Rondo a star, it's highly unlikely we'll win a title with him as the best player.  According to this article, there's only ONE instance of a "bronze level" star like Rondo leading a team to a title (the 1979 Sonics) and they had more than one. 

[Celtics18]

Finally, a little progress. You realize that something's worth mentioning if it "bucks the trend". Rondo having the kind of success that he did at a young age "bucks the trend". It's true that the joined the league on a "loaded team". The team that he carried to the ECF last year? Not so loaded. If you didn't figure that out before the Knicks series this year, you should have then. The part about truncating people's careers at 27 is to illustrate that few of them had the same amount of success by his age. The fact that he's accomplished what most of the list hadn't by his age makes that accomplishment noteworthy.

i'd say you're about 3 replies too late on your "finally". lol. i've been saying that bucks the trend line for a while now. how about you actually read a post first before replying to it? just a tip 

  I commented enough on those posts. It's not my fault this didn't make it close enough to the top of the issues I saw.

and sadly no, last year, the Celtics got eliminated in the 1st round so what i'm assuming is you meant the 2012 playoffs. And sadly, the Celtics didn't "buck the trend" in the 2012 playoffs either.

  No, I'm talking about the right years. If Rondo was out in 2012 that team wouldn't have gone far because it wasn't "loaded".

The team was already beginning to decline from "contender" status, sure, but we were still pretty much loaded in 2012. Let's also not forget that our playoff chances GREATLY improved after the #1 seeded bulls lost Derrick Rose to injury and fell to the 8th seeded Sixers in the first round. I mean, honestly, which of these scenarios would have been the most remarkable:

a) 8th seeded Sixers, with Iggy as their best player, making it to the ECF
b) 1st seeded Bulls, despite losing their best player on the first game of the playoffs, making it to the ECF
c) Celtics at full strength with Rondo, PP, KG and RA making it to the ECF

  The Celtics weren't at "full strength". Green was out, Wilcox was out, Steimsma was playing through foot problems, Bradley's shoulders were popping out of socket a couple of times a series, Ray was gimping around on a bad ankle, PP was dealing with a sprained MCL. The only regulars besides Rondo that were healthy were KG and Bass.

And furthermore, you'd be greatly marginalizing PP and KG's contributions in the 2012 playoffs if you think they played only a small part in bringing the team to the 2012 ECF. Rondo played well, yes, but so did they. I highly urge you to look back at that Hawks series if you think otherwise. Do you think the C's would have made it to the ECF if they gave Green (assuming healthy) and Bass the minutes given to PP and KG? i doubt we would have even made the playoffs, let alone make it to the ECF.

  KG and PP were the 2nd and 3rd best players on those teams. I've been giving them the credit they deserve all along.

Tim is right that in 2012, Rondo was arguably the best player on a vastly overachieving Celtic team.  They had the 5th best record in the Eastern Conference that year.  6 teams in the Western Conference outperformed them.   We faced off against Atlanta in round 1... who struggled for most of the series without their best player.  We got handed a "gimme" in the 2nd round with Philly (who didn't even make the playoffs a year later).

You gotta put that into context.  Rondo being the 1st or 2nd best player on that team was ok. (I'd argue KG was more impactful in the playoffs... he was a complete beast and the focal-point of our defense... our defense being the foundation for any success we've had since 2007) ...

How impressive was that?  Well... within context, not that impressive.  I'd put it on a par with Antoine Walker or Paul Pierce in 2002.   In 2002, Boston had a better win percentage.  The Eastern conference was a complete joke.  We made it to the ECF vs the Nets.  We were up 2-1 in that series.   

Was that scrappy 49 win Boston team a legitimate contender in 2002?  Oh HECK NO.  Had that team lucked into the Finals, there was around 6 teams in the Western Conference that would have eaten them alive in the Finals.

So Rondo (arguably) leading the 11th best team in the league to a ECF appearance in 2012 is just about as impressive as Antoine Walker (arguably) leading the 8th best team in the league to an ECF appearance a decade earlier.  Just because 'Toine lead us to the 3rd round of the playoffs didn't mean he was on a par with Shaq, Kobe, Duncan and the real superstars of the NBA.  And even if you're saying it was Pierce who took that team to the ECF in 2002... big deal.  He didn't get anything accomplished until a legitimate superstar (Kevin Garnett) came to Boston and lead this team to a title. 

So the point stands... You aren't winning a title without multiple superstars.  And even if you consider Rondo a star, it's highly unlikely we'll win a title with him as the best player.  According to this article, there's only ONE instance of a "bronze level" star like Rondo leading a team to a title (the 1979 Sonics) and they had more than one.

I don't think anybody is saying that we don't want to get Rondo some help to be a contender again.