Steph paid like a homeless really broke the NBA

I hope he does something stupid this summer

Is Utah the team he'd add the most value to? I think so.

Steph Curry to the Knicks would be immensely entertaining.

Melo, a Unicorn, and the Triangle.

They might win 48 games!

I'll put this here over TZ since this thread is more active lately.

Rondo was ______ good in his prime. All star, really good player, propped up by situation?

Feels like there has never been a definitive answer to this. Maybe there isn't one.

Was he much worse on the Kings last year than with the Celts and the situation was just worse? Did the game just change too fast on him? Is he a headcase who could be kept under wraps by veterans?

Considering current rosters

1. Bucks
2. Utah
3. Spurs
4. Pels
5. Nuggets

Steph to bucks is also gamebreaker. In Utah they are probably just a slight favorite to ring.

Rondo was def an all star in his prime, he had some sick playoff performances as well. Obviously he also was in a great situation on the celts.

He's simply older, had a torn acl, and headcase in a bad situation re: Kings.

yeah, league changing to teams bombing more 3's definitely hurt his value as well. He couldn't get in on the boom because he can't shoot.

If he wasn't on an elite defensive team during '09-12 we might perceive him a lot differently though. Tough to say.

It's like would we say he is just Ricky Rubio who got to be on good teams? He had way too many monster playoff games to say something like that. But bulk stats are obviously not thought to be what they were then as well. Since analytics was in it's infancy stages still.

Rubio is actually a fair comparison imo, Rondo had some monster games in playoffs but also some very forgettable games - except for slightly more scoring, his averages for playoffs are pretty much in line with regular season

I'm sure Rubio playing with 3 All-stars would put up a few 15+ast nights as well

going forward it's obv Rubio ainec

Agree that the big 3 were all really good catch and shoot guys which made them assist friendly players but it is easy for people to just say "3 HOFers" or "3 all stars".

KG on the defensive end was still great after the '09 injury, but offensively he wasn't an AS caliber player. Ray's game would come and go. Pierce was the most consistent.

After Rondo failed in his post-big 3 career, that did kinda become a bit of a meme though.

One thing I will say is the 2012 ECF, which was the peak of his career, going toe to toe with LeBron was also a bit of a talking point as well. Bosh had the abdominal injury and missed the first 4 games, didn't play starter minutes until game 7 and the Heat 3rd and 4th best players were Chalmers and Battier. They were a thin team at this point. Not to say it wasn't impressive what Rondo did but if you look at the two teams it wasn't quite as impressive as it sounds as the Heat weren't really the Heat w/o Bosh.

Then obviously another reason his career is tough to evaluate is because the game changed so much from his '09-12 prime to '13-present. Like some of the Celts offensive output in some of these playoff games is just awful but 89-84 games were much more common even just 5 years ago.

Checking shooting #s, Rondo was a much better finisher around the rim than Rubio. Rubio is truly pathetic there. Rondo also way better at midrangers. Overall efficiency is similar though, helped by Rubio getting to the line more and shooting a way better %. Rondo's career eFG% is 48% to Rubio's 41.5%.

Rubio's actually really good at defense. Rondo was never good.

That's a pretty hot take.

Rondo being bad at defense is canonical.

This is a pretty ridiculous take. Draymond is great, and he's a perfect fit for this team, but his entire offensive game is predicated on being surrounded by great shooters. That's why he gets so many wide open threes, even though he only shoots in the low 30s, and that's why he gets to distribute so often in what are effectively 4 on 3 situations.

Draymond would be elite defensively on any team in the league, and quite valuable for that reason alone, but he would be average offensively on a team like the Thunder. Curry and Durant, on the other hand, would be elite offensive players for any team in the league.

Best player is ambiguous, but it's definitely a good chance that a Dray injury decreases Woyas title chances more than any other player on the team.

As a stand alone player on another team, Durant and curry have more value, yes.

If I could do the "go back in time to kill Hitler" thing but for the NBA, I would go to 2009 and make Donnie Walsh give up absolutely anything to move up and draft Curry. Everyone benefits except Steph and evil Bay Area people: destroy or at least delay Steph's career, Knicks shake out almost exactly the same as now, another team possibly gets decent if Steph somehow develops and they sign him or PJax trades him, and the league of today is saved.

Dray missing would certainly hurt more than Durant, probably not as much as Curry. Based on the extremely scientific method of the eye test.

Losing Curry definitely would hurt the most. I remember seeing an analysis of the impact of Curry's absence on the efficiency of each teammate as compared to the impact of each of those teammate's absence on his efficiency, and the former far exceeded the latter.

Dantoni and the Knicks did try very hard to trade up for him...

I like your style.

They should have tried to trade up with Minny then. LOL KAHN

grunch:

Billups said that wouldn't fly with him.

DD continuing his quest for the worst playoff performance of all time

it's incredible how people just bounce off Lebron and he's never injured