Mavs lose at home to hawks

[mgent]

Bad loss to Phx now also. 
Rondo turning over 5 times, while the guy he was guarding messed around & got a triple double.    That's 1-2 now in the Rondo era, not good.

Before the Rondo trade, the Mavs lost to Phoenix by 12 points in their previous meeting.  Their win against the Spurs bench was their 1st against any top West conference team this year.  Despite their record, the Mavs are a very flawed team which shows when they face the better teams in the league.   

The Mavs might be "very flawed" but they were a much better offensive team without Rondo. I'm glad we got rid of him as he isn't the guy he used to be. The guy we once loved. 

i believe the mavs were more enamored with rondo's possible contribution to defense than offense. defense was their weakness, and rondo potentially would improve their defense and NOT diminish their offense....or so the plan went i believe.

Or, and stay with me on this, they thought Rondo would be an upgrade both offensively and defensively over Jameer Nelson.

[ronaldo943]

Bad loss to Phx now also. 
Rondo turning over 5 times, while the guy he was guarding messed around & got a triple double.    That's 1-2 now in the Rondo era, not good.

Before the Rondo trade, the Mavs lost to Phoenix by 12 points in their previous meeting.  Their win against the Spurs bench was their 1st against any top West conference team this year.  Despite their record, the Mavs are a very flawed team which shows when they face the better teams in the league.   

The Mavs might be "very flawed" but they were a much better offensive team without Rondo. I'm glad we got rid of him as he isn't the guy he used to be. The guy we once loved. 

I don't think they were that good of an offensive team. I think their vaunted offensive numbers were mostly from beating up on the worst teams in the league. Overall they were averaging 110 ppg but in the five games against the top West conference they only averaged 96 ppg and their shooting percentages dropped dramatically.  That pretty mediocre offensive performance added to their poor defense wasn't going to get them far in the playoffs.  With the addition of Rondo, I think they have a slightly better chance in the playoffs but they are still a decided underdog. 

By the way before their victory against the Spurs bench, the Mavs had lost 10 straight games to the Spurs.

That doesn't change anything. That really is just an excuse. They were still the top team and watching them play now there really isn't as much ball movement as there used to be because Rondo needs the ball in his hand to be effective. Being from Texas, I get to watch a lot of Dallas games and they looked like a contender to me before the Rondo trade.

The fact that they have played dramatically worse offensively against the best West conference teams is an excuse?  My explanation is that they are a fools gold offense that becomes decidedly average against the top teams with the top defenses.  That seems reasonable but maybe I'm wrong.  What is your explanation for their dramatic offensive decline against the best teams?

Woah calm down buddy, it's Christmas for goodness sake. Your explanation is based on a five game sample. Also the year they won with Tyson Chandler they were also struggling against the top teams, but just by seeing them play when they wanted to you could tell that they would be a force to reckon with. And I understand you're a Rondo fan, but those are really just excuses. They are flat out worse on offense with Rondo and it's something that I stand by right now and something I will stand by at the end of the season. The only reason they got Rondo was because they hope he can show some glimpses of "Playoff Rondo" come playoff time.

[ronaldo943]

Bad loss to Phx now also. 
Rondo turning over 5 times, while the guy he was guarding messed around & got a triple double.    That's 1-2 now in the Rondo era, not good.

Before the Rondo trade, the Mavs lost to Phoenix by 12 points in their previous meeting.  Their win against the Spurs bench was their 1st against any top West conference team this year.  Despite their record, the Mavs are a very flawed team which shows when they face the better teams in the league.   

The Mavs might be "very flawed" but they were a much better offensive team without Rondo. I'm glad we got rid of him as he isn't the guy he used to be. The guy we once loved. 

i believe the mavs were more enamored with rondo's possible contribution to defense than offense. defense was their weakness, and rondo potentially would improve their defense and NOT diminish their offense....or so the plan went i believe.

Or, and stay with me on this, they thought Rondo would be an upgrade both offensively and defensively over Jameer Nelson.

Rondo is ten times the player Jameer Nelson is. With that being Jameer is a better fit for the Mavericks considering that they already have a lot of star power in Ellis, Parsons, and Dirk. Jameer was a great complementary piece who could play off the ball and hit a three every now and then.

[sed522002]

Bad loss to Phx now also. 
Rondo turning over 5 times, while the guy he was guarding messed around & got a triple double.    That's 1-2 now in the Rondo era, not good.

Before the Rondo trade, the Mavs lost to Phoenix by 12 points in their previous meeting.  Their win against the Spurs bench was their 1st against any top West conference team this year.  Despite their record, the Mavs are a very flawed team which shows when they face the better teams in the league.   

The Mavs might be "very flawed" but they were a much better offensive team without Rondo. I'm glad we got rid of him as he isn't the guy he used to be. The guy we once loved. 

I don't think they were that good of an offensive team. I think their vaunted offensive numbers were mostly from beating up on the worst teams in the league. Overall they were averaging 110 ppg but in the five games against the top West conference they only averaged 96 ppg and their shooting percentages dropped dramatically.  That pretty mediocre offensive performance added to their poor defense wasn't going to get them far in the playoffs.  With the addition of Rondo, I think they have a slightly better chance in the playoffs but they are still a decided underdog. 

By the way before their victory against the Spurs bench, the Mavs had lost 10 straight games to the Spurs.

That doesn't change anything. That really is just an excuse. They were still the top team and watching them play now there really isn't as much ball movement as there used to be because Rondo needs the ball in his hand to be effective. Being from Texas, I get to watch a lot of Dallas games and they looked like a contender to me before the Rondo trade.

The fact that they have played dramatically worse offensively against the best West conference teams is an excuse?  My explanation is that they are a fools gold offense that becomes decidedly average against the top teams with the top defenses.  That seems reasonable but maybe I'm wrong.  What is your explanation for their dramatic offensive decline against the best teams?

Woah calm down buddy, it's Christmas for goodness sake. Your explanation is based on a five game sample. Also the year they won with Tyson Chandler they were also struggling against the top teams, but just by seeing them play when they wanted to you could tell that they would be a force to reckon with. And I understand you're a Rondo fan, but those are really just excuses. They are flat out worse on offense with Rondo and it's something that I stand by right now and something I will stand by at the end of the season. The only reason they got Rondo was because they hope he can show some glimpses of "Playoff Rondo" come playoff time.

What's the difference between his 5 game sample of their offense and your 3 game sample of Rondo? Seems like you already have your mind made up how they will be, considering it's nowhere near the end of season and they only had ONE full practice. Also it doesn't help that their bread and butter (Dirk) isn't having a kind December.

Let's reconvene after All-Star break and have a better analysis of his effect on the team. Because right now, we really don't know anything.

[mgent]

Bad loss to Phx now also. 
Rondo turning over 5 times, while the guy he was guarding messed around & got a triple double.    That's 1-2 now in the Rondo era, not good.

Before the Rondo trade, the Mavs lost to Phoenix by 12 points in their previous meeting.  Their win against the Spurs bench was their 1st against any top West conference team this year.  Despite their record, the Mavs are a very flawed team which shows when they face the better teams in the league.   

The Mavs might be "very flawed" but they were a much better offensive team without Rondo. I'm glad we got rid of him as he isn't the guy he used to be. The guy we once loved. 

i believe the mavs were more enamored with rondo's possible contribution to defense than offense. defense was their weakness, and rondo potentially would improve their defense and NOT diminish their offense....or so the plan went i believe.

Or, and stay with me on this, they thought Rondo would be an upgrade both offensively and defensively over Jameer Nelson.

Rondo is ten times the player Jameer Nelson is. With that being Jameer is a better fit for the Mavericks considering that they already have a lot of star power in Ellis, Parsons, and Dirk. Jameer was a great complementary piece who could play off the ball and hit a three every now and then.

Agree to disagree.

In fact, the biggest complaint about Rondo is that he needs star power around him.

I guess 2008 was a fluke?  We would have been better with just Eddie House hitting a three every now and then?

[tazzmaniac]

Bad loss to Phx now also. 
Rondo turning over 5 times, while the guy he was guarding messed around & got a triple double.    That's 1-2 now in the Rondo era, not good.

Before the Rondo trade, the Mavs lost to Phoenix by 12 points in their previous meeting.  Their win against the Spurs bench was their 1st against any top West conference team this year.  Despite their record, the Mavs are a very flawed team which shows when they face the better teams in the league.   

The Mavs might be "very flawed" but they were a much better offensive team without Rondo. I'm glad we got rid of him as he isn't the guy he used to be. The guy we once loved. 

I don't think they were that good of an offensive team. I think their vaunted offensive numbers were mostly from beating up on the worst teams in the league. Overall they were averaging 110 ppg but in the five games against the top West conference they only averaged 96 ppg and their shooting percentages dropped dramatically.  That pretty mediocre offensive performance added to their poor defense wasn't going to get them far in the playoffs.  With the addition of Rondo, I think they have a slightly better chance in the playoffs but they are still a decided underdog. 

By the way before their victory against the Spurs bench, the Mavs had lost 10 straight games to the Spurs.

That doesn't change anything. That really is just an excuse. They were still the top team and watching them play now there really isn't as much ball movement as there used to be because Rondo needs the ball in his hand to be effective. Being from Texas, I get to watch a lot of Dallas games and they looked like a contender to me before the Rondo trade.

The fact that they have played dramatically worse offensively against the best West conference teams is an excuse?  My explanation is that they are a fools gold offense that becomes decidedly average against the top teams with the top defenses.  That seems reasonable but maybe I'm wrong.  What is your explanation for their dramatic offensive decline against the best teams?

Woah calm down buddy, it's Christmas for goodness sake. Your explanation is based on a five game sample. Also the year they won with Tyson Chandler they were also struggling against the top teams, but just by seeing them play when they wanted to you could tell that they would be a force to reckon with. And I understand you're a Rondo fan, but those are really just excuses. They are flat out worse on offense with Rondo and it's something that I stand by right now and something I will stand by at the end of the season. The only reason they got Rondo was because they hope he can show some glimpses of "Playoff Rondo" come playoff time.

Calm down???  I was just presenting my reasoned argument of why I think their offense is overrated at least so far this season.  They've only played three games so far with Rondo so any assessment (pro or con) of where they will be at the end of the season is premature.  As I said before I think Rondo gives them a slightly better chance in the playoffs but I think they are still a decided underdog.  Obviously the Mavs brain trust thought there were serious enough issues as being a true playoff contender that they made the deal for Rondo with all the risks it entails.  Personally, I don't think the Mavs are the best fit for Rondo nor that Rondo is the best fit for the Mavs.  If there had been a really good 3 and D guard available, I probably would have gone with him over Rondo for the Mavs.   It is going to be interesting to watch the offensive and defensive adjustments that Carlisle makes to incorporate Rondo into the team.  Now if playoff Rondo does show up the Mavs would have clearly made a hell of trade. 

[sed522002]

The Mavs wanted pre-ACL Rondo (circa 2010-12ish) and you can tell that he's really trying to make an emphasis on the defensive side.. Who can really defend on that team right now? That's going to be their problem heading into the playoffs. If they're not shooting you off the floor it's going to be a rough night.

[Vermont Green]

Most players are a lot more flawed than Rondo ....

Really?  Most players shoot 34% FT%.?  Most player are sagged off and dared to shoot?

  I'd say the number of players that are sagged off to the extent Rondo is would surprise you. I'd also say you probably don't consider not being able to rebound/pass/run an offense like Rondo or having his court vision or BBIQ to be real flaws.

From the Dallas Morning News:

Question: How do you see this working out with Rondo? On one hand, I love his passing ability and the way he rebounds for a guard, but it is frustrating watching an opponent just dare him to shoot knowing he can't make open shots consistently.

Eddie Sefko: Yep. Gonna be interesting to see how the system gets tweaked to accommodate Rondo. But remember back earlier in Jason Kidd's career. He couldn't hit a bull in the butt with a banjo for the longest time. He developed a better shot by the time he got to Dallas the second time. But he survived just fine for a lot of years with a suspect shot. It can be done. Just takes some creativity with the offense

Tim, really, the statement was that most players are more flawed than Rondo.  Rondo is very flawed and the Mavs fans are starting to understand this better.  In Rondo's case, the flaws are perplexing because they are contrasted by such ability in other areas.  I am pretty sure you know Rondo has flaws.  Your posts indicate that you do watch the games and that you know something about basketball, albeit kind of stat focused; but you do your homework.

I also watch basketball, have played for years, and consider myself "knowledgeable" (although I recognize what I consider myself doesn't matter).  There are very few players that get left open to the degree that Rondo does, and exactly zero other point guards.  They even cover Pressey tighter than they do Rondo.

[Ogaju]

Can you explain why it seems that Kobe wants to play with Rondo given that Kobe knows Rondo's weakness and has indeed exploited it himself?

LOL, I was halfway through that question when the answer dawned on me. LOL

With Kobe a Rondo is actually a win-win situation because Kobe thinks that he can just garble all of Rondo's share of shots. What Kobe fails to consider is that the opponents will double team off Rondo, but since when did double teams stop Kobe from jacking up shots.

Kobe probably thinks a pass happy PG like Rondo adds another five years to his career and he can chase down KAJ's scoring record.

[wahz]

This loss had less to do with Rondo and more to do with the Hawks being absolutely on fire. They are 13-1 in their last 14 including a four game win streak against all playoff teams (Chicago, Cleveland, Houston and Dallas).

I am going to say I was a little put off when Rondo took four charges in his first game, because he hasn't tried that hard on defense this year. But that type of effort can't be maintained every night if he is to stay healthy.

Did Rondo take a charge for us once this year? I am sure he did but I don't recall one. That right there tells you you was not committed to defend while here, even in end of game situations, which I find to be outrageous.

[Celtics18]

Most players are a lot more flawed than Rondo ....

Really?  Most players shoot 34% FT%.?  Most player are sagged off and dared to shoot?

  I'd say the number of players that are sagged off to the extent Rondo is would surprise you. I'd also say you probably don't consider not being able to rebound/pass/run an offense like Rondo or having his court vision or BBIQ to be real flaws.

From the Dallas Morning News:

Question: How do you see this working out with Rondo? On one hand, I love his passing ability and the way he rebounds for a guard, but it is frustrating watching an opponent just dare him to shoot knowing he can't make open shots consistently.

Eddie Sefko: Yep. Gonna be interesting to see how the system gets tweaked to accommodate Rondo. But remember back earlier in Jason Kidd's career. He couldn't hit a bull in the butt with a banjo for the longest time. He developed a better shot by the time he got to Dallas the second time. But he survived just fine for a lot of years with a suspect shot. It can be done. Just takes some creativity with the offense

Tim, really, the statement was that most players are more flawed than Rondo.  Rondo is very flawed and the Mavs fans are starting to understand this better.  In Rondo's case, the flaws are perplexing because they are contrasted by such ability in other areas.  I am pretty sure you know Rondo has flaws.  Your posts indicate that you do watch the games and that you know something about basketball, albeit kind of stat focused; but you do your homework.

I also watch basketball, have played for years, and consider myself "knowledgeable" (although I recognize what I consider myself doesn't matter).  There are very few players that get left open to the degree that Rondo does, and exactly zero other point guards.  They even cover Pressey tighter than they do Rondo.

John Wall is a player who is often given a lot of space to take the outside jumper.  I would say the same for Russell Westbrook.  Dwayne Wade fits the bill.  I'll add Tony Parker, Lebron James, Tyreke Evans and Derrick Rose. 

Of course, I've seen defensive strategies vary on all of these guys (including Rondo) depending on how well the jumper is falling and how much space is considered necessary to stop them from getting in the lane.   

 

[TheFlex]

Most players are a lot more flawed than Rondo ....

Really?  Most players shoot 34% FT%.?  Most player are sagged off and dared to shoot?

  I'd say the number of players that are sagged off to the extent Rondo is would surprise you. I'd also say you probably don't consider not being able to rebound/pass/run an offense like Rondo or having his court vision or BBIQ to be real flaws.

From the Dallas Morning News:

Question: How do you see this working out with Rondo? On one hand, I love his passing ability and the way he rebounds for a guard, but it is frustrating watching an opponent just dare him to shoot knowing he can't make open shots consistently.

Eddie Sefko: Yep. Gonna be interesting to see how the system gets tweaked to accommodate Rondo. But remember back earlier in Jason Kidd's career. He couldn't hit a bull in the butt with a banjo for the longest time. He developed a better shot by the time he got to Dallas the second time. But he survived just fine for a lot of years with a suspect shot. It can be done. Just takes some creativity with the offense

Tim, really, the statement was that most players are more flawed than Rondo.  Rondo is very flawed and the Mavs fans are starting to understand this better.  In Rondo's case, the flaws are perplexing because they are contrasted by such ability in other areas.  I am pretty sure you know Rondo has flaws.  Your posts indicate that you do watch the games and that you know something about basketball, albeit kind of stat focused; but you do your homework.

I also watch basketball, have played for years, and consider myself "knowledgeable" (although I recognize what I consider myself doesn't matter).  There are very few players that get left open to the degree that Rondo does, and exactly zero other point guards.  They even cover Pressey tighter than they do Rondo.

John Wall is a player who is often given a lot of space to take the outside jumper.  I would say the same for Russell Westbrook.  Dwayne Wade fits the bill.  I'll add Tony Parker, Lebron James, Tyreke Evans and Derrick Rose. 

Of course, I've seen defensive strategies vary on all of these guys (including Rondo) depending on how well the jumper is falling and how much space is considered necessary to stop them from getting in the lane.

I think you jumped in a time machine or something. That statement may or may not have been true in 2010. Now it's definitely false. All of those players have more range than Rondo does -- except maybe Tyreke Evans, who isn't in the class of any of these players being discussed -- and most have greater accuracy.

To suggest that LeBron is an offensive liability to the degree that Rondo is is a little ridiculous. LBJ averages 25+ year after year with ease and it's not like all of his buckets are dunks. Rondo can't even crack 10 ppg.

Edit: I don't know why I always catch myself after I've been sucked into a Rondo debate. I've said everything I've had to say about the guy 10,000 different ways. Oh well, I can't even pretend like most of the debates don't turn out interesting.

[Celtics18]

Most players are a lot more flawed than Rondo ....

Really?  Most players shoot 34% FT%.?  Most player are sagged off and dared to shoot?

  I'd say the number of players that are sagged off to the extent Rondo is would surprise you. I'd also say you probably don't consider not being able to rebound/pass/run an offense like Rondo or having his court vision or BBIQ to be real flaws.

From the Dallas Morning News:

Question: How do you see this working out with Rondo? On one hand, I love his passing ability and the way he rebounds for a guard, but it is frustrating watching an opponent just dare him to shoot knowing he can't make open shots consistently.

Eddie Sefko: Yep. Gonna be interesting to see how the system gets tweaked to accommodate Rondo. But remember back earlier in Jason Kidd's career. He couldn't hit a bull in the butt with a banjo for the longest time. He developed a better shot by the time he got to Dallas the second time. But he survived just fine for a lot of years with a suspect shot. It can be done. Just takes some creativity with the offense

Tim, really, the statement was that most players are more flawed than Rondo.  Rondo is very flawed and the Mavs fans are starting to understand this better.  In Rondo's case, the flaws are perplexing because they are contrasted by such ability in other areas.  I am pretty sure you know Rondo has flaws.  Your posts indicate that you do watch the games and that you know something about basketball, albeit kind of stat focused; but you do your homework.

I also watch basketball, have played for years, and consider myself "knowledgeable" (although I recognize what I consider myself doesn't matter).  There are very few players that get left open to the degree that Rondo does, and exactly zero other point guards.  They even cover Pressey tighter than they do Rondo.

John Wall is a player who is often given a lot of space to take the outside jumper.  I would say the same for Russell Westbrook.  Dwayne Wade fits the bill.  I'll add Tony Parker, Lebron James, Tyreke Evans and Derrick Rose. 

Of course, I've seen defensive strategies vary on all of these guys (including Rondo) depending on how well the jumper is falling and how much space is considered necessary to stop them from getting in the lane.

I think you jumped in a time machine or something. That statement may or may not have been true in 2010. Now it's definitely false. All of those players have more range than Rondo does -- except maybe Tyreke Evans, who isn't in the class of any of these players being discussed -- and most have greater accuracy.

To suggest that LeBron is an offensive liability to the degree that Rondo is is a little ridiculous. LBJ averages 25+ year after year with ease and it's not like all of his buckets are dunks. Rondo can't even crack 10 ppg.

Edit: I don't know why I always catch myself after I've been sucked into a Rondo debate. I've said everything I've had to say about the guy 10,000 different ways. Oh well, I can't even pretend like most of the debates don't turn out interesting.

I don't think you are understanding what I'm saying.  I'm not talking about what level of scorer Rondo is compared to other players, I'm simply talking about how he is defended by the opposition relative to how other players around the league are guarded.

Bottom line is that plenty of very good players are guarded to give up the outside jumper as opposed to letting them drive into the paint.  Rondo is not as special a case in this regard as many would have us believe. 

[Jonny CC]

How is 1-2 not good? On a brand new team with not much practice time with them under his belt? If after 20 games the number isn't in his favor I could see bringing it up. But less the 5 games in?

It's below .500...it's a losing record...by definition it is NOT GOOD.

its 3 games...its a silly sized small sample...by definition it is MEANINGLESS.

For 3 games, 1-2 is NOT GOOD.  There's no arguing that...it's a fact..but I agree that it's a small sample size. 

[Jonny CC]

The Mavs wanted pre-ACL Rondo (circa 2010-12ish) and you can tell that he's really trying to make an emphasis on the defensive side.. Who can really defend on that team right now? That's going to be their problem heading into the playoffs. If they're not shooting you off the floor it's going to be a rough night.

Tyson Chandler??