Author Topic: The effect of a good team. (Rondo/draft picks Dicussion)  (Read 5715 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

The effect of a good team. (Rondo/draft picks Dicussion)
« on: April 19, 2014, 04:43:26 AM »

Offline sunnyd656

  • The Green Kornet
  • Posts: 88
  • Tommy Points: 21
While no one will 100% agree with each other with Rondo, because we're Celtics fans, what do you guys think about the late rounders who become pretty [filter censored] good.

AKA Would Rondo be Rondo if the Celtics didn't make the trade to get Allen and KG or would he be just another player in the NBA.

This applies to a lot of people in late draft pick(s) situations, such as Stephenson, Ginobli, etc etc.
As Ginobli is a clear HoF'er, will use him. If he got picked to go to the Raptors, is he the same player?
  Every year there are 6-7 teams with a lower winning percentage than our current record. I think we've gotten so used to ignoring the bottom feeders since 2008 that we've forgotten how bad some teams are.

Re: The effect of a good team. (Rondo/draft picks Dicussion)
« Reply #1 on: April 19, 2014, 07:25:05 AM »

Offline celticsfan8591

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 528
  • Tommy Points: 38
You raise an interesting point, I think the team a player goes to has a much bigger effect on how his career turns out than most people acknowledge.  People knock teams like the Wolves for drafting badly, but I think the careers of guys like Wesley Johnson, Jonny Flynn, Derrick Williams, etc. might have been different if they had gone to a better, more stable organization.  It's still the Wolves' fault their careers didn't turn out well of course, but I don't think their scouting/drafting is entirely at fault and at least some of the blame has to go to the coaching staff.  Similarly, to use your example I don't think Ginobili's career turns out the same way if he goes to the Raptors instead of the Spurs.  I don't think the team's record matters as much as the organization's culture and track record of player development (though obviously there's a correlation between those two) though .  For instance, even though the Knicks have been better than the Celtics these past 2 years, I think a player is more likely to develop into a star on the Celtics. 

Re: The effect of a good team. (Rondo/draft picks Dicussion)
« Reply #2 on: April 19, 2014, 10:34:46 AM »

Offline BballTim

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23724
  • Tommy Points: 1123
While no one will 100% agree with each other with Rondo, because we're Celtics fans, what do you guys think about the late rounders who become pretty [filter censored] good.

AKA Would Rondo be Rondo if the Celtics didn't make the trade to get Allen and KG or would he be just another player in the NBA.


  One would have to assume he'd be seen as a better player by the bulk of his detractors. He'd have been more the focal point of his offense all along so' he'd likely have scored somewhat more. Not to mention he'd have been much earlier in his career when he'd averaged a lot of assists on a bad shooting team so people wouldn't have had to wait half his career to figure out that his high assist totals we due mainly to his point guard skills and not because he was lucky enough to be on the court with great offensive players.

Re: The effect of a good team. (Rondo/draft picks Dicussion)
« Reply #3 on: April 19, 2014, 11:18:03 AM »

Offline LilRip

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6857
  • Tommy Points: 391
interesting topic. All we have to go on is our own judgement but i would think that it would've take him longer to mature, both in terms of skills and attitude.

FWIW, i think there are a lot of talented PG's out there, on less heralded teams. Kyle Lowry has really come into his own. Goran Dragic is another amazing talent. If Rondo was on a random team, I think he would've joined these group of guys who will regularly be underrated by fans of other teams.
- LilRip

Re: The effect of a good team. (Rondo/draft picks Dicussion)
« Reply #4 on: April 19, 2014, 11:51:43 AM »

Offline BballTim

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23724
  • Tommy Points: 1123
interesting topic. All we have to go on is our own judgement but i would think that it would've take him longer to mature, both in terms of skills and attitude.

FWIW, i think there are a lot of talented PG's out there, on less heralded teams. Kyle Lowry has really come into his own. Goran Dragic is another amazing talent. If Rondo was on a random team, I think he would've joined these group of guys who will regularly be underrated by fans of other teams.

   Sure, by all the people who can't differentiate between someone who's a 4 time all-star, been on 4 all-defense teams and has been on or on the fringes of multiple all-nba teams from players his own age who have never even been all-stars. Sadly, there are plenty of those people out there. It's true those two are coming into their own, but they're doing it 4-5 years older than Rondo did.

Re: The effect of a good team. (Rondo/draft picks Dicussion)
« Reply #5 on: April 19, 2014, 08:50:29 PM »

Offline crimson_stallion

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5964
  • Tommy Points: 875
I guess the way I think about it is this.

Imagine you are a young kid who just came out of school / college / university, and you are looking for a career job for the first time in whatever career area you want to work in - lets use IT/Computing as an example, because that's the industry I work in.

So imagine you finish your study, and you get your first job as an intern at a big company that has a good team of guys, great management and good structure.  As you come in they spend the first few weeks just giving you formal training, because they already have a strong team so they don't have to force you in to the job - they can afford to take the time to train you properly.

Imagine your team leader is a guy who has 10 years of experience in the field, and started off in the same entry level job you started in now, so he knows all about how it was when he started out, and what he did to get to where he is now.  He's happy to share all of that knowledge with you to help you develop your skiils (both job skills as well as teaching you the right mentality and life skills).  He pretty much takes you under his wing and tells you that if you ever have questions about anything, you can come to him any time. 

When it comes to formal training, the company believes in their young staff as the future of their organisation, so they will pay whatever that have to in order to get your all of the training and certifications you need to make you in to the employee they need.

After two or three years with the company you know all of the tricks of the trade, you have all the certifications you need, you have learned how to act in a professional/corporate environment, etc.

Now think of another scenario. 

Same kid just finished study, gets a job with a small company that's not been around very long.  It's a small team of 3 guys plus the manager.  Because of lack of staff, as soon as you start with the company they expect you to get to work right away.  They don't give you more than a day training, then they throw you in the deep end and expect you to learn on the fly.  The manager has to manage the entire business operations as well as your little team, so he is way too busy and has his hands full - has no time to train you, to mentor you, to sit down with you and spend time with you.  Because of this, the guys in your team (who are in the same role you are in) end up your mentors. 

These guys in your team certainly have more experience than you (as you have none) but they still don't have a lot.  None of them have been working in the industry for more than maybe 2 or 3 years.  They send you on site to fix issues you have never dealt with before, and when you call them for help they are too busy, so they just say "you'll just have to figure it out". 

It's a small company so they cannot afford to train or certify you - you need to pay for this out of your own pocket and do your study in your own time after hours.  That leaves you pulling late night study sessions and coming in to work tired. 

The way I see it there are two types of people.  The first type is the person who is self motivated, high on confidence, hard working.  In the second scenario that person will take up the challenge - he'll do his own research, he'll find solutions for problems, he'll do his own extra study, and he'll get by just fine.  He might even do better in scenario #2 because by doing all of this himself he has the potential to learn more and to grow to become self-sufficient and a leader, skills that might help him a lot in his next venture.  In the first job he will still do well, but he might be held back somewhat by being in a very pidgeonholed role where he is limited what he can do, and has to spend so much time being spoonfed all of his training when he just wants to get out there and work.

The second type of person is the one who is maybe a bit immature or a bit low on confidence.  This person in scenario #1  should excel because they get to ease in to the situation - they get all the training they need, they get that nice mentor to help them through uncertain times, and they don't need to rush in to the deep end until they are ready.  Once they are ready their new found set of skills and abilties might give them a big boost in confidence, and then in a year or so they are just as good as anybody out there.  In the second scenario they probably wont fare so well. They'll get thrown in to the deep end right away, and they will probably make a mistake at some point.  Then they might get really down on themselves, fear going back out there and making another mistake.  Try to train themselves but don't know where to start, and due to a lack of guidance that training just never happens.  They don't know how to carry themselves in a corporate evironment so they just get confused and overwhelmed.  In the end it all becomes too much for them and they just implode mentally...never end up developing the skills or confidence they need to be the type of employee they could be.

I think basketball is much the same deal because what you need to remember is that we think of basketball as sport and entertainment...for these guys it's a job.  It's what brings home the money, puts food on the table, puts a roof over their heads.

Every year there are a ton of young guys in the draft.  Some are so called 'NBA ready' players from the start.  They have NBA ready bodies, they have great maturity, they have high levels of natural talent and endless potential.  These are usually the type of guys who can (and probably will) excel no matter what team they end up on.  Guys like KG, Tim Duncan, Michael Jordan, etc.

Then you have the guys who might have great natural talent, but they aren't so mature.  Maybe they have confidence issues, or they are still quite raw and need to develop alot, or maybe they have maturity issues or personality issues - selfishness, arrogance, etc.  If guys like this end up going to a bad organisation, then I think more often than not it holds their careers back dramatically.  Guys like Andre Blatche, Jordan Crawford, Josh Smith, Demarcus Cousins, etc.  All the guys on their team are young like they are and their coaching staff and management are questionable, so they never really have that guy who can take them under the wing and mentor them...show them the ropes.  Show them the right way to act, the right attitude to have, etc.  Usually these teams are bad teams also, so they need to come in and play big minutes right away - thrown in the deep end so to speak.  They pick up bad habits (i.e. becoming selfish chuckers) and there is no great mentor there to guide them away from that and teach them the importance of team play, etc...so these bad habits stick.  After 3 or 4 years in that team their reputation is already soiled - everybody knows about their bad habits and bad attitudes.  Nobody wants them.  Their confidence goes low.  They get used to losing, they get frustrated.  Their careers basically implode under them.

Look at the transition Jordan Crawford made going from Washington to Boston.  He still showed signs of those 'bad habits' but he played the best basketball of his career as a Celtic. Got traded away, now he's back to his old self again.  Dame deal with Blatche in Brooklyn.

How much better has Demarcus Cousins with better management around him?

Imagine how good those three guys could have been if they went to a team like Boston, San Antonio or Chicago on draft night?

I think Rondo is one of those guys too.  He had a lot of weaknesses in his game when he came out as a rookie.  Had the arrogance, the selfishness, the 'immaturity' you could say.  He came to Boston and apparently none of the big 3 got along with him that well, until he started to change his attitude somewhat to earn their respect.  Those guys largely became his mentors, and he grew into one of he best PG's in the league.  If Rondo started off being drafted to Washington or Sacramento...what kinda of player would he be today? I think he'd be half the player he is now.  I think his own arrogance would have eaten him alive, and he'd be one of those guys no GM would touch.

So in short yes, I think the team that young guys get drafted to makes a huge difference to the vast majority of young guys out there.  I think theres really only a handful of guys in each draft who can end up on a crappy team with crappy management, and still become a great player.

Re: The effect of a good team. (Rondo/draft picks Dicussion)
« Reply #6 on: April 19, 2014, 10:52:50 PM »

Offline BballTim

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23724
  • Tommy Points: 1123
I guess the way I think about it is this.

Imagine you are a young kid who just came out of school / college / university, and you are looking for a career job for the first time in whatever career area you want to work in - lets use IT/Computing as an example, because that's the industry I work in.

So imagine you finish your study, and you get your first job as an intern at a big company that has a good team of guys, great management and good structure.  As you come in they spend the first few weeks just giving you formal training, because they already have a strong team so they don't have to force you in to the job - they can afford to take the time to train you properly.

Imagine your team leader is a guy who has 10 years of experience in the field, and started off in the same entry level job you started in now, so he knows all about how it was when he started out, and what he did to get to where he is now.  He's happy to share all of that knowledge with you to help you develop your skiils (both job skills as well as teaching you the right mentality and life skills).  He pretty much takes you under his wing and tells you that if you ever have questions about anything, you can come to him any time. 

When it comes to formal training, the company believes in their young staff as the future of their organisation, so they will pay whatever that have to in order to get your all of the training and certifications you need to make you in to the employee they need.

After two or three years with the company you know all of the tricks of the trade, you have all the certifications you need, you have learned how to act in a professional/corporate environment, etc.


  That was quite a post. You'd have to assume, though, that Baby (and others) received similar mentoring, it's not like that mentoring magically transformed people. Also consider that there was a pretty big rift between the big three and the younger players during that time, so you'd have to wonder how much those guys really took the younger guys under their wings. Not to mention he spent his first season as a starting pg with three stars who frequently complained to him that they didn't see enough of the ball, not exactly the idyllic career start to a career that you were describing.

Re: The effect of a good team. (Rondo/draft picks Dicussion)
« Reply #7 on: April 19, 2014, 11:08:04 PM »

Offline droopdog7

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6970
  • Tommy Points: 466
Franchise players (eg, lebron, kd, cp3) make their situation better and would thrive anywhere.  Everyone else is going to be driven a good deal by the situation they are in.  Rondo is a good example.  He can't carry a team (not even close) so without good players, he isn't going to make much of a difference.

Re: The effect of a good team. (Rondo/draft picks Dicussion)
« Reply #8 on: April 19, 2014, 11:26:30 PM »

Offline Rondo9

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5379
  • Tommy Points: 277
Franchise players (eg, lebron, kd, cp3) make their situation better and would thrive anywhere.  Everyone else is going to be driven a good deal by the situation they are in.  Rondo is a good example.  He can't carry a team (not even close) so without good players, he isn't going to make much of a difference.

Rondo is not Lebron or Durant, but that doesn't mean he can't be a huge influence on a team.

Re: The effect of a good team. (Rondo/draft picks Dicussion)
« Reply #9 on: April 20, 2014, 01:28:19 AM »

Offline LilRip

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6857
  • Tommy Points: 391
interesting topic. All we have to go on is our own judgement but i would think that it would've take him longer to mature, both in terms of skills and attitude.

FWIW, i think there are a lot of talented PG's out there, on less heralded teams. Kyle Lowry has really come into his own. Goran Dragic is another amazing talent. If Rondo was on a random team, I think he would've joined these group of guys who will regularly be underrated by fans of other teams.

   Sure, by all the people who can't differentiate between someone who's a 4 time all-star, been on 4 all-defense teams and has been on or on the fringes of multiple all-nba teams from players his own age who have never even been all-stars. Sadly, there are plenty of those people out there. It's true those two are coming into their own, but they're doing it 4-5 years older than Rondo did.

the difference in where we're coming from is that I dont think Rondo would've been a 4-time all star, and all-defense as quickly. Eventually, most likely yes, because the talent is there. But as I said, I think it would've taken longer for his skills and attitude to mature.

- LilRip

Re: The effect of a good team. (Rondo/draft picks Dicussion)
« Reply #10 on: April 20, 2014, 01:37:36 AM »

Offline LilRip

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6857
  • Tommy Points: 391
I guess the way I think about it is this.

Imagine you are a young kid who just came out of school / college / university, and you are looking for a career job for the first time in whatever career area you want to work in - lets use IT/Computing as an example, because that's the industry I work in.

So imagine you finish your study, and you get your first job as an intern at a big company that has a good team of guys, great management and good structure.  As you come in they spend the first few weeks just giving you formal training, because they already have a strong team so they don't have to force you in to the job - they can afford to take the time to train you properly.

Imagine your team leader is a guy who has 10 years of experience in the field, and started off in the same entry level job you started in now, so he knows all about how it was when he started out, and what he did to get to where he is now.  He's happy to share all of that knowledge with you to help you develop your skiils (both job skills as well as teaching you the right mentality and life skills).  He pretty much takes you under his wing and tells you that if you ever have questions about anything, you can come to him any time. 

When it comes to formal training, the company believes in their young staff as the future of their organisation, so they will pay whatever that have to in order to get your all of the training and certifications you need to make you in to the employee they need.

After two or three years with the company you know all of the tricks of the trade, you have all the certifications you need, you have learned how to act in a professional/corporate environment, etc.


  That was quite a post. You'd have to assume, though, that Baby (and others) received similar mentoring, it's not like that mentoring magically transformed people. Also consider that there was a pretty big rift between the big three and the younger players during that time, so you'd have to wonder how much those guys really took the younger guys under their wings. Not to mention he spent his first season as a starting pg with three stars who frequently complained to him that they didn't see enough of the ball, not exactly the idyllic career start to a career that you were describing.

I don't think it would be crazy for me to assume that those vets took the young guys under their wings.

And the mentoring did transform those people. It's just that the difference between Rondo and BBD in terms of talent is apparent. But I actually think that BBD wouldn't have been in the league this long (likely due to worse weight issues and poorer work ethic) if he weren't on that Celtics squad under KG. Imagine if BBD or Rondo started off on a team where the best players featured were OJ Mayo and Larry Sanders, I think they would've been much worse off.

On the flipside, if we had Jennings on the 2008 squad (a tremendous talent, IMO), I think it would've done wonders for his career, as opposed to the career 39% chucker he is now. You might not think so, but to me it sounds like a reasonable assumption.

- LilRip

Re: The effect of a good team. (Rondo/draft picks Dicussion)
« Reply #11 on: April 20, 2014, 04:46:56 AM »

Offline BballTim

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23724
  • Tommy Points: 1123
interesting topic. All we have to go on is our own judgement but i would think that it would've take him longer to mature, both in terms of skills and attitude.

FWIW, i think there are a lot of talented PG's out there, on less heralded teams. Kyle Lowry has really come into his own. Goran Dragic is another amazing talent. If Rondo was on a random team, I think he would've joined these group of guys who will regularly be underrated by fans of other teams.

   Sure, by all the people who can't differentiate between someone who's a 4 time all-star, been on 4 all-defense teams and has been on or on the fringes of multiple all-nba teams from players his own age who have never even been all-stars. Sadly, there are plenty of those people out there. It's true those two are coming into their own, but they're doing it 4-5 years older than Rondo did.

the difference in where we're coming from is that I dont think Rondo would've been a 4-time all star, and all-defense as quickly. Eventually, most likely yes, because the talent is there. But as I said, I think it would've taken longer for his skills and attitude to mature.

  Rondo would have taken on a bigger role on offense earlier and have been putting up bigger stats when he was younger, plus you wouldn't have seen all the ridiculous claims that his success was due to playing with the big three. There were people here who noticed Rondo's skills (and the possibility that he'd become the player he did) during his first few rookie exhibition games. It's very unlikely that giving him a bigger role earlier in his career would have slowed his development.

Re: The effect of a good team. (Rondo/draft picks Dicussion)
« Reply #12 on: April 20, 2014, 05:10:54 AM »

Offline BballTim

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23724
  • Tommy Points: 1123
I guess the way I think about it is this.

Imagine you are a young kid who just came out of school / college / university, and you are looking for a career job for the first time in whatever career area you want to work in - lets use IT/Computing as an example, because that's the industry I work in.

So imagine you finish your study, and you get your first job as an intern at a big company that has a good team of guys, great management and good structure.  As you come in they spend the first few weeks just giving you formal training, because they already have a strong team so they don't have to force you in to the job - they can afford to take the time to train you properly.

Imagine your team leader is a guy who has 10 years of experience in the field, and started off in the same entry level job you started in now, so he knows all about how it was when he started out, and what he did to get to where he is now.  He's happy to share all of that knowledge with you to help you develop your skiils (both job skills as well as teaching you the right mentality and life skills).  He pretty much takes you under his wing and tells you that if you ever have questions about anything, you can come to him any time. 

When it comes to formal training, the company believes in their young staff as the future of their organisation, so they will pay whatever that have to in order to get your all of the training and certifications you need to make you in to the employee they need.

After two or three years with the company you know all of the tricks of the trade, you have all the certifications you need, you have learned how to act in a professional/corporate environment, etc.


  That was quite a post. You'd have to assume, though, that Baby (and others) received similar mentoring, it's not like that mentoring magically transformed people. Also consider that there was a pretty big rift between the big three and the younger players during that time, so you'd have to wonder how much those guys really took the younger guys under their wings. Not to mention he spent his first season as a starting pg with three stars who frequently complained to him that they didn't see enough of the ball, not exactly the idyllic career start to a career that you were describing.

I don't think it would be crazy for me to assume that those vets took the young guys under their wings.

And the mentoring did transform those people. It's just that the difference between Rondo and BBD in terms of talent is apparent. But I actually think that BBD wouldn't have been in the league this long (likely due to worse weight issues and poorer work ethic) if he weren't on that Celtics squad under KG. Imagine if BBD or Rondo started off on a team where the best players featured were OJ Mayo and Larry Sanders, I think they would've been much worse off.

On the flipside, if we had Jennings on the 2008 squad (a tremendous talent, IMO), I think it would've done wonders for his career, as opposed to the career 39% chucker he is now. You might not think so, but to me it sounds like a reasonable assumption.

  Big Baby's a pretty skilled player who's never really matured and didn't develop the way he could have. Again, if you're using him as an example of the effect the big three had on the maturity level and game development of the young players then you're not going to have a very convincing argument. I guess the hope for Jennings is that he'd be another Mario Chalmers, a more efficient spot-up shooter who doesn't run the offense. But he doesn't seem like the kind of player who'd be happy with that role. Also, he wouldn't magically develop the skills Rondo has.

Re: The effect of a good team. (Rondo/draft picks Dicussion)
« Reply #13 on: April 20, 2014, 08:29:34 AM »

Offline Mr October

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6129
  • Tommy Points: 247
I think environment is definitely a factor. The great players will probably make it work wherever and drag a misfit team to the conference finals or beyond.

I think rondo benefited from being on the celtics during the Doc and new big 3 era. Rondo was super talented, yet a handful to deal with. I think it helped that he was forced to respect the leaders on the team, and grew because of it. Rondo would have still been good regardless. But i think the environment helped him reach his potential earlier than expected.

Demarcus Cousins is someone who needs a better environment. Who does he really respect as a leader on that Sacramento team?

Antoine Walker probably has a better career if he became a Celtic when Bird or Lewis was still playing. Pierce probably reaches his potential sooner if he has those teammates early on.

How good does Taj Gibson become if he is a Buck instead of a Bull playing with Noah under Thibs?

Part of the spurs fantastic success is that when you join that team the leadership of Pop, Duncan and Parker are a rock of consistency and unity.

The talented players who are determined to win get to their star apex eventually, but i think environment helps them get there sooner.

Re: The effect of a good team. (Rondo/draft picks Dicussion)
« Reply #14 on: April 20, 2014, 09:10:57 AM »

Offline Celtics4ever

  • NCE
  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20000
  • Tommy Points: 1323
Quote
Big Baby's a pretty skilled player who's never really matured and didn't develop the way he could have

Some of it is maturity but get real his problems are :

1)   he thinks he is better than what he is,

2) he is a tweener and not tall at all

3) pushing himself away from the table has always been hard for Glenn

That being said, leadership didn't help him.   He is still a serviceable player.  Some guys fall for the leadership stuff and some are wild horses and don't.   These guys have tremendous egos and are used to being the man or alpha dog.   Baby has a physicality to him that might have insulated him from some of the leadership ( you don't yell at guys who can knock you out as hard as guys who present little threat).