Just in case anyone around here forgot how good he was

[BballTim]

Rondo isn't better than Curry.  Just not true.  He's a fine PG... statistically Rondo in his prime could be a Top 5 PG this year.  But there are a couple guys who outclass him right now.  17 other guys who are basically interchangeable with him.

  I think this is really the crux of the discussion. Does the fact that there are (apparently) 17 other PGs with "similar" efficiency ratings mean that there are 17 players that are basically interchangeable with him? Are there skills that point guards rely on that aren't measured by that stat? Can those skills vary greatly from pg to pg and can they have much of an impact on the game?

  From your list, 17 players are probably within 5 on efficiency rating from Rondo's from last year. If that's "interchangeable", does that apply to other positions too? Does that mean players like Dirk, Pau, Amare and Webber are interchangeable with Duncan because their career efficiencies are close to his? I'd guess that Popovich would take issue with that.

  Also, just out of curiosity, why, in your scenario, would a player with an efficiency rating about 4 points higher than Rondo's outclass him, yet players with ratings 5 points lower than him be basically interchangeable with him?

Tiers. 

  So, in other words, nothing more than your desire to make Rondo sound like he's a dime a dozen. 25.1-21.4? That's a significant difference. 21.4-16.5? Close enough that they're interchangeable. Gotcha.

I think Rondo is great.  I love the guy.  But I don't think he'd impact the game on the level of Stephen Curry right now.  That guy is an effective defender and completely carries his offense.  You could build a contender around Curry's efficient offense.  Dude is like Ray in his prime mixed with upper-level playmaking skills (nearly averaging 10 assists).  Rondo does a lot of things really well, but I don't think he could be the best player on a champion.

  He doesn't really have upper level playmaking skills, his assist/turnover ration isn't that high, neither is his assist/bad pass ratio. He also has more ballhandling turnovers than Rondo fwiw. He is a good scorer though, whether you can build a contender around him remains to be seen. Rondo's been the best player on teams that went to the finals and conference finals before (you can verify that with your rating system) so it's likely he could be the best player on a champion. Notice the raising of the bar, though? Contender for one, champion for the other?

Also, earlier you mentioned how KG, Paul and ray were more efficient "because of Rondo".  That's like arguing that LeBron, Wade and Bosh are more efficient on Miami, "because of Chalmers".

  At least it would be if Chalmers controlled Miami's offense as much as Rondo did the Celts. The thing is, you really don't see a difference between the two cases. Also, if you look at PP/RA, their most efficient scoring came not when the big three was assembled but when Rondo was more in control of the offense.

[BballTim]

Also, earlier you mentioned how KG, Paul and ray were more efficient "because of Rondo".  That's like arguing that LeBron, Wade and Bosh are more efficient on Miami, "because of Chalmers".

Hold on there. 

Mario Chalmers is a mediocre PG in almost every respect, and his only real above average skills are his ability to hit open threes and his ability to play solid defense.  He's basically Derek Fisher 2.0, but without the clutch.  The only reason he is the starting PG in Miami is because they are about a gazillion dollars over the salary cap (due to said big three) and they cannot afford an upgrade at the point- anybody they could get for the mini-midlevel exception would be more of a sideways step rather than an upgrade.  The guy is a chump and would be a backup PG on 70% of teams out there.  Miami sucks at only two positions, and PG happens to be one of them...hence he gets to start.

Rajon Rondo on the other hand is arguably the greatest playmaking PG in the entire league for the last 2-3 years running.  Aside from Chris Paul and Steven Nash there has not been a single PG in the league with the court vision, IQ and passing skills anywhere near that of Rondo since Jason Kidd and John Stockton were in their primes.  No, even in his prime Deron was never on that level.

I think it's pretty difficult to deny the intangible impact that Jason Kidd had on the teams he played on.  He was never a great scoring PG, but he could still score 10-14 points per night.  His ability to combine that with exceptional defense, the best rebounding from his position, and the best playmaking skills in the league all combined to make him without question the best PG of his era.  Not only that, but he is a guarantee for the Hall of Fame and will go down in history as one of the greatest PG's to ever play.

Guys like Richard Jefferson and Kenyon Martin practically owe their careers to Jason Kidd, since he made both of those guys look like they were twice as good offensively as they really were.

Ray Allen, Paul Pierce and Kevin Garnett all signed with Boston as they had just reached the plateu of their careers, and after 2008 they all started a slow (but sure) decline.  Despite this, all three of those guys displayed career high scoring percentages while playing with Rondo:

1) In 2009-2010 Paul Pierce shot 47.2% from the field and 41.4% from three.  Both career highs.  In 2010-2010 he upped his FG% to 49.7%, which was a new career high.

2) In 2010-2011 Ray Allen shot 49.1% from the field and 44.4% from three.  Both career highs.  In 2012-2013 he shot 45.3% from three, which was a new career high.

3) Kevin Garnett shot over 52% from the field for four consecutive seasons after coming to Boston - 53.9% in 2007-2008, 53.1% in 2008-2009, 52.1% in 2009-2010 and 52.8% in 2010-2011.  Before coming to Boston he only shot over 52% one time (2005-2006) and his next best after that was 50.2% (2002-2003, 2004-2005). 

4) Since the big 3 era began Kendrick Perkins never shot below 54% from the field.  He shot 61.5% in 2007-2008, 57.7% in 2008-2009, 60.2% in 2009-2010 and 54.2% as a Celtic in 2010-2011.  Since being traded to OKC he has never shot above 50% from the field (his best was 49.3% as a member of the Thunder in 2010-2011). 

Despite the fact that Pierce, Ray and KG were all starting to decline when they came together in the 2007-2008 season, all three of thse guys (and Perk) all scored with career high efficiency while in Boston, playing alongside Rondo.

Yes, you can argue that in the early years some of those numbers (like KG's career high efficiency in 2007-2008) came before Rondo developed into the elite playmaker he is, and yes you could argue some of that had to do with the fact that three hall of famers (who were previously the best player on their team) had now combined and hence had two other hall of famers to distract defenders.  That doesn't explain how Perkin's shooting numbers dropped as soon as he moved to OKC, playing alongside guys like Durant, Westbrook, Ibaka and Harden. 

I've no doubts you can tweak those stas to tell you a different story if you want to, but I assure you those career high shooting percentages you saw from KG, Pierce, Ray and Perk while in Boston had a lot to do with Rondo's ability to constantly get them the ball in exactly the right place, at exactly the right time.  Pierce probably benefited least from this as he's good at creating his own shot.  Ray, Kevin and Kendrick however were all guys who without a doubt scored a LOT of points off Rajon Rondo assists.

I find it very hard to believe that those guys would have put up career high scorign efficiency numbers at that age if they had today's Mario Chalmers as their PG.  I imagine Pierce would have never shot over 46%, KG would have stayed up around 51% and Ray would have been down around 45%-45% at best.

Now, if somebody asks you whether Jason Kidd made his teammates better - would you say yes?  How about Steve Nash?  How about Chris Paul and John Stockton?  I think most people would agree that every one of those guys made everybody around them better.  Yes Paul, Nash and Stockton were also great shooters. Kidd was not.  Point Guards with elite playmaking ability are incredibly valuable in this league, and also incredibly rare.  Hell even all-star calibre big men are more common in the NBA then PG's with the playmaking ability of a Chris Paul or Rajon Rondo. 

If Rondo was a complete non-factor offensively (i.e. his offensive impact was on par with Gerald Wallace in his current state) then I would say yes, that offsets the valueof his passing skills.  That's not the case though, and Rondo has still been a double figure scorer every season since his sophomore year, and in that time has only ever once shot below 47.5% from the field.  If you can score at least 10 PPG and do so while shooting at least 47% from the field, as a pass-first PG, then you are not an offensive liability.

  That's quite a post. To get back to my "crux of the argument" post, there's a difference between comparing Rondo to other point guards in these terms or "it doesn't really matter whether your point guard is Rondo or Lowry because they have similar efficiency ratings". Which approach you take to comparing point guards will have a large impact on your relative opinion of Rondo.

  I've brought this up in the past, but a couple of years ago a Wizards fan wanted to prove that Wall was just as good a passer as Rondo, the Wizards just didn't shoot as well as the Celts. What he found was the opposite of what he expected. The Celts increase in scoring efficiency was much greater off of passes from Rondo than the increase in efficiency the Wizards saw with passes from Wall. Where do things like that factor into the stat-based rankings?

[obnoxiousmime]

Kidd improved as a shooter, I don't see that happening with Rondo. At least Kidd could shoot 35% at 3 throughout his career, while Rondo has no real 3 range to speak of. And Kidd wasn't a huge FT liability, shooting a respectable .785 for his career. Rondo still plays like he's afraid to get fouled.

Rondo's positives are legitimate, but his unique negatives make him a difficult player to build around. There's no urgency to trade him now as he's taking his time coming back and still has a year remaining on his deal, but I wouldn't make him untouchable.

The main point is, the future star of this team is not on the roster yet. For all his brilliance, teams with Kidd as the best player never seriously contended for a title (see also Nash, Steve) and he was the best PG of his generation.

If/when the Celtics are able to acquire the next franchise cornerstone then the question is does Rondo fit in with that player skillwise and agewise, not the other way around.

[Clench123]

Also, earlier you mentioned how KG, Paul and ray were more efficient "because of Rondo".  That's like arguing that LeBron, Wade and Bosh are more efficient on Miami, "because of Chalmers".

Hold on there. 

Mario Chalmers is a mediocre PG in almost every respect, and his only real above average skills are his ability to hit open threes and his ability to play solid defense.  He's basically Derek Fisher 2.0, but without the clutch.  The only reason he is the starting PG in Miami is because they are about a gazillion dollars over the salary cap (due to said big three) and they cannot afford an upgrade at the point- anybody they could get for the mini-midlevel exception would be more of a sideways step rather than an upgrade.  The guy is a chump and would be a backup PG on 70% of teams out there.  Miami sucks at only two positions, and PG happens to be one of them...hence he gets to start.

Rajon Rondo on the other hand is arguably the greatest playmaking PG in the entire league for the last 2-3 years running.  Aside from Chris Paul and Steven Nash there has not been a single PG in the league with the court vision, IQ and passing skills anywhere near that of Rondo since Jason Kidd and John Stockton were in their primes.  No, even in his prime Deron was never on that level.

I think it's pretty difficult to deny the intangible impact that Jason Kidd had on the teams he played on.  He was never a great scoring PG, but he could still score 10-14 points per night.  His ability to combine that with exceptional defense, the best rebounding from his position, and the best playmaking skills in the league all combined to make him without question the best PG of his era.  Not only that, but he is a guarantee for the Hall of Fame and will go down in history as one of the greatest PG's to ever play.

Guys like Richard Jefferson and Kenyon Martin practically owe their careers to Jason Kidd, since he made both of those guys look like they were twice as good offensively as they really were.

Ray Allen, Paul Pierce and Kevin Garnett all signed with Boston as they had just reached the plateu of their careers, and after 2008 they all started a slow (but sure) decline.  Despite this, all three of those guys displayed career high scoring percentages while playing with Rondo:

1) In 2009-2010 Paul Pierce shot 47.2% from the field and 41.4% from three.  Both career highs.  In 2010-2010 he upped his FG% to 49.7%, which was a new career high.

2) In 2010-2011 Ray Allen shot 49.1% from the field and 44.4% from three.  Both career highs.  In 2012-2013 he shot 45.3% from three, which was a new career high.

3) Kevin Garnett shot over 52% from the field for four consecutive seasons after coming to Boston - 53.9% in 2007-2008, 53.1% in 2008-2009, 52.1% in 2009-2010 and 52.8% in 2010-2011.  Before coming to Boston he only shot over 52% one time (2005-2006) and his next best after that was 50.2% (2002-2003, 2004-2005). 

4) Since the big 3 era began Kendrick Perkins never shot below 54% from the field.  He shot 61.5% in 2007-2008, 57.7% in 2008-2009, 60.2% in 2009-2010 and 54.2% as a Celtic in 2010-2011.  Since being traded to OKC he has never shot above 50% from the field (his best was 49.3% as a member of the Thunder in 2010-2011). 

Despite the fact that Pierce, Ray and KG were all starting to decline when they came together in the 2007-2008 season, all three of thse guys (and Perk) all scored with career high efficiency while in Boston, playing alongside Rondo.

Yes, you can argue that in the early years some of those numbers (like KG's career high efficiency in 2007-2008) came before Rondo developed into the elite playmaker he is, and yes you could argue some of that had to do with the fact that three hall of famers (who were previously the best player on their team) had now combined and hence had two other hall of famers to distract defenders.  That doesn't explain how Perkin's shooting numbers dropped as soon as he moved to OKC, playing alongside guys like Durant, Westbrook, Ibaka and Harden. 

I've no doubts you can tweak those stas to tell you a different story if you want to, but I assure you those career high shooting percentages you saw from KG, Pierce, Ray and Perk while in Boston had a lot to do with Rondo's ability to constantly get them the ball in exactly the right place, at exactly the right time.  Pierce probably benefited least from this as he's good at creating his own shot.  Ray, Kevin and Kendrick however were all guys who without a doubt scored a LOT of points off Rajon Rondo assists.

I find it very hard to believe that those guys would have put up career high scorign efficiency numbers at that age if they had today's Mario Chalmers as their PG.  I imagine Pierce would have never shot over 46%, KG would have stayed up around 51% and Ray would have been down around 45%-45% at best.

Now, if somebody asks you whether Jason Kidd made his teammates better - would you say yes?  How about Steve Nash?  How about Chris Paul and John Stockton?  I think most people would agree that every one of those guys made everybody around them better.  Yes Paul, Nash and Stockton were also great shooters. Kidd was not.  Point Guards with elite playmaking ability are incredibly valuable in this league, and also incredibly rare.  Hell even all-star calibre big men are more common in the NBA then PG's with the playmaking ability of a Chris Paul or Rajon Rondo. 

If Rondo was a complete non-factor offensively (i.e. his offensive impact was on par with Gerald Wallace in his current state) then I would say yes, that offsets the valueof his passing skills.  That's not the case though, and Rondo has still been a double figure scorer every season since his sophomore year, and in that time has only ever once shot below 47.5% from the field.  If you can score at least 10 PPG and do so while shooting at least 47% from the field, as a pass-first PG, then you are not an offensive liability.

Wow, what a post.  You put it way better than I would've ever been able to.  Thanks.

[LatterDayCelticsfan]

Nice post.

[crimson_stallion]

Kidd improved as a shooter, I don't see that happening with Rondo. At least Kidd could shoot 35% at 3 throughout his career, while Rondo has no real 3 range to speak of. And Kidd wasn't a huge FT liability, shooting a respectable .785 for his career. Rondo still plays like he's afraid to get fouled.

Rondo's positives are legitimate, but his unique negatives make him a difficult player to build around. There's no urgency to trade him now as he's taking his time coming back and still has a year remaining on his deal, but I wouldn't make him untouchable.

The main point is, the future star of this team is not on the roster yet. For all his brilliance, teams with Kidd as the best player never seriously contended for a title (see also Nash, Steve) and he was the best PG of his generation.

If/when the Celtics are able to acquire the next franchise cornerstone then the question is does Rondo fit in with that player skillwise and agewise, not the other way around.

First of all Rondo had zero jumpshot when he first came in the league.  Last year he (from memory) ranked top 10 in the league in FG% on midrange shots.  I think that classifies as improving as a shooter.

Rondo also improved a little last year as a three point shooter.  The eye test told me that he seemed to be taking more threes than ever, and he also seemed to be making them more often.  Not enough to make him dangerous from three, but enough that he could actually punish teams for playing off him.

The statistics back up that theory.  His 1.3 3PA per game was the highest number of his career and yet his 3PT% of 24% was the second highest of his career. 

The only season in which he shot a higher percentage was 2008-2009, in which he shot 31% on threes...but took less than half the number of attempts.

The only season in which he averaged close to as many threes was 2009-2010, in which he averaged 1.0 3PA per game but shot only 21%.

For Rondo to push his 3PA up to 1.3 per game and still shoot around 24% was definately an improvement over previous years.

To put this in to perspective Dwyane Wade attempted 1.0 3PA per game last season, and he shot only 26%.  That's 30% less attempts than Rondo, and yet only 2% more accurate.

Did his free throw shooting improve?  Not dramatically, but a little.  He shot 64.5% from the FT line, which was the best result since his rookie season (64.7%). 

Now when you combine Rondo's much improved midrange shot (which was actually very good) with his much improved three point shot (which people now had to consider defending) with his career best FT percentage...I think it's safe to say that he did improve as a shooter.

Did these changes make him an elite scorer?  Of course not.  But as above Dwyane Wade's three point shooting was not that far above Rondo's last year.  His FT% was also only 72% - only 7 percentage points better than Rondo.  Yes 7% is a significant difference, and yes he takes a LOT more attempts than Rondo.  Still, you are talking about a guy who has been one of the leagues elite scorers for the past 10 years despite having no three point ahot and rarely being more than 'decent' from the line.  Rondo will never, ever be a scorer on a level anywhere near that of Wade, but the difference is that Wade's primary selling point is his scoring ability.  Rondo's scoring ability is the least of his skills. 

I do understand where you are coming from, but do I believe Rondo can he get by as an elite pass-first PG while shooting 50% from midrange, 24% from three and 65% fom the foul line?  Yes, absolutely.

Last season Rondo played in 38 games.  He scored 30+ points once, 20+ points 5 times, 15+ points 10 times.  He did this as a fourth scoring option (behind Pierce, KG, Green) with pass-first intentions.

The guys is not an offensive liability.  He's actually a very good shooter from midrange and an exceptionally good finisher around the basket(his shooting percentage at the rim is actually better than Derek Rose).  He is a below average shooter from three and from the foul line, but he can still score from  both places on occasion.

People make it out like Rondo is a horrendous offensive player - he is not.  I have no trouble beleiving that he could average around 16+ PPG if called upon to handle a larger scoring load, in the past he's just never had to.  If he were on the roster this season, I would hazard a guess that he (not Green) would probably be the Celtics leading scorer right now.

Kidd was never the leading scorer on the playoff teams he was a part of, but he still the best player on a Nets team that made it to the NBA Finals...so he was the best player on a championship contender despite not being a top scorer. 

In fact I like this quote from Wikipedia:
---
"The 2001-02 season saw Kidd lead the Nets to a surprising 52-30 finish, and marked one of his best all-around seasons as he finished second to the Spurs' Tim Duncan in MVP voting. Many have argued that Kidd deserved to win the award because of his impact in New Jersey—transforming the Nets from perennial league doormats into championship contenders seemingly in the space of a single training camp. His contribution to the Nets during his first season in New Jersey was huge, and resulted in one of the greatest turnarounds in NBA history."
---

I'd like to note that Kidd led New Jersey to the finals before VC came along, and before Richard Jefferson developed into a major talent.  The other starters on that team were Todd MacCullock, Kenyon Martin, Keith Van Horn and Kerry Kittles.  This was the roster that Jason Kidd (a pass-first PG with limited scoring talent) led to an Eastern Conference title and an NBA Finals appearance.

Don't underestimate the impact a great leader can have on a team.  If you think it's just Chris Paul's scoring that turned the Clippers from a joke into a borderline contender think again.  It's his abliity as a leader and his ability to orchestrate an offense that led to that transformation.

[PhoSita]

Haven't forgotten how good he was.

Here's what's more important than how good he was, though --

How good will Rondo be after his knee injury?

How good will Rondo be two, three, four, or five years from now?

[crimson_stallion]

Haven't forgotten how good he was.

Here's what's more important than how good he was, though --

How good will Rondo be after his knee injury?

How good will Rondo be two, three, four, or five years from now?

We will have the answer to the first question by the end of this season.

The answer to the second question will likely depend largely on the answer to the first question.

5 years from now Rondo will be 32 years old.

When Steve Nash was 32 he averaged 18.6 PPG, 11.6 APG, 3.5 RPG.

When Jason Kidd was 32 he averaged 13.3 PPG, 8.4 APG, 7.3 RPG, 1.9 SPG. 

When John Stockton was 32 he averaged 14.7 PPG, 12.3 APG, 3.1 RPG, 2.4 SPG.

When Andre Miller was 32 he averaged 16.2 PPG, 6.5 APG, 4.5 RPG, 1.3 SPg.

When Isiah Thomas was 32 he averaged 14.8 PPG, 6.9 APG, 2.7 RPG, 1.2 SPG

When Magic Johnson returned to the NBA at age 36 he averaged 14.6 PPG, 6.9 APG, 5.7 RPG, 0.8 SPG.

Highly skilled playmakers with high BBIQ tend to age well in this league, and 32 years of age really is not that old.  Even if we did pick up an great draft pick after this season who turned out being a future superstar...by the time he is approaching his peak around 5 years time, chances are Rondo will still be a pretty good starting PG in this league.

Don't get me wrong I'm not a Rondo bandwagon fan or anything - last year before he got injured I was one of the first people in the "trade Rondo" team because I'm well aware of his flaws.  That however was just because I was looking at things from an emotional perspective, and reacting to the fact that the team was underperforming...and Rondo (as the best player on the team) was always going to be the one to take the blame for that. 

Looking at it now though I can see how rare a talent Rondo is.  I can see so many times when we play how much better things would be if he were out there - all those times I see Crawford throwing up horrible shorts, or Bradley throwing that bad pass, or Bass fumbling another entry pass that was a bit off target.  The most elite players in the league - guys like Lebron and Kobe - praise Rondo as much as anybody in the league.  You need to be a special player to get praise from guys like that.  He's a special player, make no mistake about it.  If you  build around him then yes, you do need an elite scoer next to him...just as you do with Dwight.  But Rondo is the best there is at what he does, and he's an elite PG.

[obnoxiousmime]

Kidd improved as a shooter, I don't see that happening with Rondo. At least Kidd could shoot 35% at 3 throughout his career, while Rondo has no real 3 range to speak of. And Kidd wasn't a huge FT liability, shooting a respectable .785 for his career. Rondo still plays like he's afraid to get fouled.

Rondo's positives are legitimate, but his unique negatives make him a difficult player to build around. There's no urgency to trade him now as he's taking his time coming back and still has a year remaining on his deal, but I wouldn't make him untouchable.

The main point is, the future star of this team is not on the roster yet. For all his brilliance, teams with Kidd as the best player never seriously contended for a title (see also Nash, Steve) and he was the best PG of his generation.

If/when the Celtics are able to acquire the next franchise cornerstone then the question is does Rondo fit in with that player skillwise and agewise, not the other way around.

First of all Rondo had zero jumpshot when he first came in the league.  Last year he (from memory) ranked top 10 in the league in FG% on midrange shots.  I think that classifies as improving as a shooter.

Rondo also improved a little last year as a three point shooter.  The eye test told me that he seemed to be taking more threes than ever, and he also seemed to be making them more often.  Not enough to make him dangerous from three, but enough that he could actually punish teams for playing off him.

The statistics back up that theory.  His 1.3 3PA per game was the highest number of his career and yet his 3PT% of 24% was the second highest of his career. 

The only season in which he shot a higher percentage was 2008-2009, in which he shot 31% on threes...but took less than half the number of attempts.

The only season in which he averaged close to as many threes was 2009-2010, in which he averaged 1.0 3PA per game but shot only 21%.

For Rondo to push his 3PA up to 1.3 per game and still shoot around 24% was definately an improvement over previous years.

To put this in to perspective Dwyane Wade attempted 1.0 3PA per game last season, and he shot only 26%.  That's 30% less attempts than Rondo, and yet only 2% more accurate.

Did his free throw shooting improve?  Not dramatically, but a little.  He shot 64.5% from the FT line, which was the best result since his rookie season (64.7%). 

Now when you combine Rondo's much improved midrange shot (which was actually very good) with his much improved three point shot (which people now had to consider defending) with his career best FT percentage...I think it's safe to say that he did improve as a shooter.

I guess this depends on your definition of "improvement." In most shooting statistics Rondo has not improved a significant amount.

He did have more 3 attempts, but he's never attempted enough 3s for his %s to have much meaning.

For example, he only made 12 of 50 3s last year. If he had missed just 1 of those 12 and finished at 11/50, the % drops to 22%! Then all of a sudden his 3pt. % would be close to his career lows (20.7, 21.3, 23.3).
 
Needless to say, even at a career high of 0.3 attempts/game Rondo simply isn't a 3 point shooter and when he does take one the opposing defense considers that a "win."

Oh, and why would you compare him to Dwyane Wade? Nobody considers Wade to be a good 3 pt. shooter.

His FT% did improve the last 3 years, but only because it took a drop since his rookie and third seasons:

64.7, 61.1, 64.2, 62.1, 56.8, 59.7, 64.5

So actually his FT% hasn't really improved at all. Also, his attempts last season (2.4) were the same as his rookie year, and on the low end considering he's been able to reach 3.4-3.5 FTA three times in his career (09, 10, 12).

I will grant you that his midrange % improved markedly last season with 48% on 1.7/3.6 shooting from 16-23 feet. Here are his M/A/% by year:

0.3/1.1/27%
1.2/2.7/43%
0.8/1.9/40%
0.7/2.3/33%
1.3/3.3/41%
1.1/2.9/39%
1.7/3.6/48%

I guess time will tell if those 38 games he played last season were an anomaly or a trend as far as midrange shooting goes. On 3s and FTs he's still basically the same guy except he slightly upped his 3pt attempts.

I do think he will see a lot less wide open jumpers now that the team around him is less talented. Teams used to goad Rondo into taking shots because they knew they couldn't beat the Celtics if Rondo got his teammates going. They were willing to sacrifice Rondo hitting a few jumpers because the alternative was much more damaging.

[crimson_stallion]

Kidd improved as a shooter, I don't see that happening with Rondo. At least Kidd could shoot 35% at 3 throughout his career, while Rondo has no real 3 range to speak of. And Kidd wasn't a huge FT liability, shooting a respectable .785 for his career. Rondo still plays like he's afraid to get fouled.

Rondo's positives are legitimate, but his unique negatives make him a difficult player to build around. There's no urgency to trade him now as he's taking his time coming back and still has a year remaining on his deal, but I wouldn't make him untouchable.

The main point is, the future star of this team is not on the roster yet. For all his brilliance, teams with Kidd as the best player never seriously contended for a title (see also Nash, Steve) and he was the best PG of his generation.

If/when the Celtics are able to acquire the next franchise cornerstone then the question is does Rondo fit in with that player skillwise and agewise, not the other way around.

First of all Rondo had zero jumpshot when he first came in the league.  Last year he (from memory) ranked top 10 in the league in FG% on midrange shots.  I think that classifies as improving as a shooter.

Rondo also improved a little last year as a three point shooter.  The eye test told me that he seemed to be taking more threes than ever, and he also seemed to be making them more often.  Not enough to make him dangerous from three, but enough that he could actually punish teams for playing off him.

The statistics back up that theory.  His 1.3 3PA per game was the highest number of his career and yet his 3PT% of 24% was the second highest of his career. 

The only season in which he shot a higher percentage was 2008-2009, in which he shot 31% on threes...but took less than half the number of attempts.

The only season in which he averaged close to as many threes was 2009-2010, in which he averaged 1.0 3PA per game but shot only 21%.

For Rondo to push his 3PA up to 1.3 per game and still shoot around 24% was definately an improvement over previous years.

To put this in to perspective Dwyane Wade attempted 1.0 3PA per game last season, and he shot only 26%.  That's 30% less attempts than Rondo, and yet only 2% more accurate.

Did his free throw shooting improve?  Not dramatically, but a little.  He shot 64.5% from the FT line, which was the best result since his rookie season (64.7%). 

Now when you combine Rondo's much improved midrange shot (which was actually very good) with his much improved three point shot (which people now had to consider defending) with his career best FT percentage...I think it's safe to say that he did improve as a shooter.

I guess this depends on your definition of "improvement." In most shooting statistics Rondo has not improved a significant amount.

He did have more 3 attempts, but he's never attempted enough 3s for his %s to have much meaning.

For example, he only made 12 of 50 3s last year. If he had missed just 1 of those 12 and finished at 11/50, the % drops to 22%! Then all of a sudden his 3pt. % would be close to his career lows (20.7, 21.3, 23.3).
 
Needless to say, even at a career high of 0.3 attempts/game Rondo simply isn't a 3 point shooter and when he does take one the opposing defense considers that a "win."

Oh, and why would you compare him to Dwyane Wade? Nobody considers Wade to be a good 3 pt. shooter.

His FT% did improve the last 3 years, but only because it took a drop since his rookie and third seasons:

64.7, 61.1, 64.2, 62.1, 56.8, 59.7, 64.5

So actually his FT% hasn't really improved at all. Also, his attempts last season (2.4) were the same as his rookie year, and on the low end considering he's been able to reach 3.4-3.5 FTA three times in his career (09, 10, 12).

I will grant you that his midrange % improved markedly last season with 48% on 1.7/3.6 shooting from 16-23 feet. Here are his M/A/% by year:

0.3/1.1/27%
1.2/2.7/43%
0.8/1.9/40%
0.7/2.3/33%
1.3/3.3/41%
1.1/2.9/39%
1.7/3.6/48%

I guess time will tell if those 38 games he played last season were an anomaly or a trend as far as midrange shooting goes. On 3s and FTs he's still basically the same guy except he slightly upped his 3pt attempts.

I do think he will see a lot less wide open jumpers now that the team around him is less talented. Teams used to goad Rondo into taking shots because they knew they couldn't beat the Celtics if Rondo got his teammates going. They were willing to sacrifice Rondo hitting a few jumpers because the alternative was much more damaging.

The big difference I saw last year was the nature of threes that he was taking and making.

In the past he would only shoot a three if everybody else was defended, the shot clock was winding down and the defense was giving him about 10 feet of space.  Even then when he took the shot it looked forced and uncomfortable - like he was taking it because he had to, not because he wanted to.

Last year I he looked far more confident shooting the three.  He seemed to take a lot more of those threes with a defender running at him, or in the flow of the offense.  He wasn't hessitating on the shots as he did in the past - he would shoot without reservation, and he made a lot more contested threes than he ever did before.

I don't know if there are any statistics to indicate this, but that's what I noticed from the 'eye test'.  There were so many times when he shot a three and I thought "oh no!", and then it just went in.  But it didn't look like an accident - the shot looked like it was going to fall the whole way.  He never looked like that in the past.

Personally I started noticing a lot of this improvement after his big 40 point explosion against Miami.  It's as if that game just gave him a huge confidence boost, because every since then he just looked more comfortable shooting (and making) jumpers.

He seemed to be getting better and better at it as the season went on as well, was just a shame that he went down when he did.  I felt like he was on target for a career year. 

[2short]

i haven't forgotten
rondo makes everyone on the court a better player
like garnett, like bird

[BballTim]

Kidd improved as a shooter, I don't see that happening with Rondo. At least Kidd could shoot 35% at 3 throughout his career, while Rondo has no real 3 range to speak of. And Kidd wasn't a huge FT liability, shooting a respectable .785 for his career. Rondo still plays like he's afraid to get fouled.

Rondo's positives are legitimate, but his unique negatives make him a difficult player to build around. There's no urgency to trade him now as he's taking his time coming back and still has a year remaining on his deal, but I wouldn't make him untouchable.

The main point is, the future star of this team is not on the roster yet. For all his brilliance, teams with Kidd as the best player never seriously contended for a title (see also Nash, Steve) and he was the best PG of his generation.

If/when the Celtics are able to acquire the next franchise cornerstone then the question is does Rondo fit in with that player skillwise and agewise, not the other way around.

  You need to consider that Kidd was Rondo's current age (give or take) before he ever won a playoff series. If you compare Kidd up to the age Rondo was last season  (http://bkref.com/tiny/pGkYF) you see that statistically they're fairly similar, with Kidd probably having a slight advantage in the regular season and Rondo having a somewhat larger advantage in the playoffs. Also note that, while Kidd was the better ft and 3p shooter he was a less efficient scorer than Rondo, both in the regular season and the playoffs. Also note that he got to the line less often than Rondo, both in the regular season and playoffs.

  Also, take a look at Kidd's overall career (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/k/kiddja01.html). If you look at his playoff stats, his two (arguably) best statistical years came when he was older than Rondo is and led to trips to the finals. He averaged roughly 20/8/9 with a TS% of about .503 over those two years. In Rondo's last playoffs he averaged 17/7/12 with a TS% of .505.

  So if you compare Rondo to Kidd Rondo's at least on par (statistically) to Kidd at the same point in their careers and he's played as well (statistically) as Kidd's best playoff series (which came when he was older than Rondo is).

[BballTim]

Kidd improved as a shooter, I don't see that happening with Rondo. At least Kidd could shoot 35% at 3 throughout his career, while Rondo has no real 3 range to speak of. And Kidd wasn't a huge FT liability, shooting a respectable .785 for his career. Rondo still plays like he's afraid to get fouled.

Rondo's positives are legitimate, but his unique negatives make him a difficult player to build around. There's no urgency to trade him now as he's taking his time coming back and still has a year remaining on his deal, but I wouldn't make him untouchable.

The main point is, the future star of this team is not on the roster yet. For all his brilliance, teams with Kidd as the best player never seriously contended for a title (see also Nash, Steve) and he was the best PG of his generation.

If/when the Celtics are able to acquire the next franchise cornerstone then the question is does Rondo fit in with that player skillwise and agewise, not the other way around.

First of all Rondo had zero jumpshot when he first came in the league.  Last year he (from memory) ranked top 10 in the league in FG% on midrange shots.  I think that classifies as improving as a shooter.

Rondo also improved a little last year as a three point shooter.  The eye test told me that he seemed to be taking more threes than ever, and he also seemed to be making them more often.  Not enough to make him dangerous from three, but enough that he could actually punish teams for playing off him.

The statistics back up that theory.  His 1.3 3PA per game was the highest number of his career and yet his 3PT% of 24% was the second highest of his career. 

The only season in which he shot a higher percentage was 2008-2009, in which he shot 31% on threes...but took less than half the number of attempts.

The only season in which he averaged close to as many threes was 2009-2010, in which he averaged 1.0 3PA per game but shot only 21%.

For Rondo to push his 3PA up to 1.3 per game and still shoot around 24% was definately an improvement over previous years.

To put this in to perspective Dwyane Wade attempted 1.0 3PA per game last season, and he shot only 26%.  That's 30% less attempts than Rondo, and yet only 2% more accurate.

Did his free throw shooting improve?  Not dramatically, but a little.  He shot 64.5% from the FT line, which was the best result since his rookie season (64.7%). 

Now when you combine Rondo's much improved midrange shot (which was actually very good) with his much improved three point shot (which people now had to consider defending) with his career best FT percentage...I think it's safe to say that he did improve as a shooter.

I guess this depends on your definition of "improvement." In most shooting statistics Rondo has not improved a significant amount.

He did have more 3 attempts, but he's never attempted enough 3s for his %s to have much meaning.

  I think Rondo's a better 3 shooter than his numbers indicate. His averages get trashed because he takes so few of them that last second heaves are a big part of his average. Whether he takes more of them or not remains to be seen.

I do think he will see a lot less wide open jumpers now that the team around him is less talented. Teams used to goad Rondo into taking shots because they knew they couldn't beat the Celtics if Rondo got his teammates going. They were willing to sacrifice Rondo hitting a few jumpers because the alternative was much more damaging.

  Teams also goad Rondo into shooting because that's preferable to other things he does, namely drive or pass. I don't think that dynamic will change much, or that he'll be unable to take advantage of the situation if it does.

[D.o.s.]

Haven't forgotten how good he was.

Here's what's more important than how good he was, though --

How good will Rondo be after his knee injury?

How good will Rondo be two, three, four, or five years from now?

I agree. It's fast closing on a year since RR played in an NBA game. While I don't expect the injury to have many long term effects on his game, which is based on athleticism but not just on it, He's definitely going to come back rusty, and there's a possibility he'll be playing fairly tentatively until March-ish, although it looks like he's doing the Rose thing and waiting until he's 100% comfortable before he comes back to the hardwood.


However good RR was, though, doesn't have much of a place in the real discussion, which will be about how good he will be/is, and we can't talk about that until he's back on the court.

[BballTim]

Haven't forgotten how good he was.

Here's what's more important than how good he was, though --

How good will Rondo be after his knee injury?

How good will Rondo be two, three, four, or five years from now?

I agree. It's fast closing on a year since RR played in an NBA game. While I don't expect the injury to have many long term effects on his game, which is based on athleticism but not just on it, He's definitely going to come back rusty, and there's a possibility he'll be playing fairly tentatively until March-ish, although it looks like he's doing the Rose thing and waiting until he's 100% comfortable before he comes back to the hardwood.


However good RR was, though, doesn't have much of a place in the real discussion, which will be about how good he will be/is, and we can't talk about that until he's back on the court.

  If you don't expect his injury to have long term effect on his game then this seems reasonable to discuss.