In the debate of best PG in the league, too much attention and weight is put on Rondo's shooting. Yes he is the worst shooter of the bunch. However, not near enough attention and weight is put on his size and athleticism that allows him to be a phenomenal rebounder and defender. This should greatly, greatly overshadow his lack of shooting in your eyes, and if it doesn't, you are making a mistake.

last time they were in the finals Rondo basically made the celtics play 4vs5 on offense by not being able to take a wide open medium range shot, that's pretty bad for someone that is being mentioned in the same sentence as "best pg in the league"

The last time they were in the finals the won an NBA championship.

Again, shooting is nice but the ability to defend and rebound is much more important.

For the record I do not think he is the best point guard in the league, but the people that have him at like 5th in their lists are way off and are way off because of their overreaction to lack of shooting and their underestimation of rebounding and defense.

cp3, deron and nash are better imo. i dont think its crazy for ppl to prefer rose either.

cliff notes: raaaaaaaangz

CP3, Deron and Nash are >>>>>>> Rondo, so having him at 5th can't be that big of a snub

def lol rangzzz argument.

but is unfair to judge rondo on his weaker performance 2 yrs ago. he is a much better player now.

agreed on that point

if this were true rondo would be better than the guys ranked ahead of him

You do realize I brought that up because you brought up the finals as if his shooting was problematic in some way, which it wasn't.

I think it is kind of hard to actually make a list because of a lot of the value these point guards bring to a roster depends on the cast that is around them. For example, Boston is a poor rebounding but has sufficient outside shooting. Rondo is needed to rebound but doesn't really need to hit a lot of outside shots for the team to successful. I would not trade him away for someone like CP3 who may be a lot better shooter and a little bit better passer but can't rebound at all or defend as well as Rondo, although CP3 may be the better choice on many rosters.

If you don't think that statement is true then you really don't know basketball. I'm sorry.

he's had some absurd playoff rebound games, it is amusing that Chris Paul gets the most in the regular season despite being the smallest of the top pgs

faulty logic going on

no PG has as much potential as rondo, a jumpshot can be learned, hell develop it with time. my main gripe with rondo is that he is easily the best PG when he wants to be, but playing vs weaker teams, he just doesnt bring his best game. in big games, hes always going to show up and dominate (which means hell always be the best PG to have in the playoffs), but in regular season games vs bad teams its like hes not even there most of the time.


loved on sportscenter where they asked him after the game yesterday,

"what are your thoughts on your stat line, 29pts, 18rebounds, 13 assists"

" 'bout time"

apparently he has a Monta Ellis-like ego and thinks his shot is just fine, which is pretty much my only reason to dislike him

He knows more basketball than you.

I'm sorry.

See how this works?

so you think rondo is better than paul/nash/deron?


edit: obv there are other aspects besides shooting, defending, and rebounding but of these four players rondo is the best at these two things (and by a decent margin at that). i can see how you can take this position about the relative value of shooting and rebounding and say he is still worse than paul since paul is also good at both in addition to being a much better shooter, but for deron/nash?

Explain this to me.

You talk about Rondo's shooting being problematic in the last finals in which they participated.

I say it was not that problematic because they won.

How is that faulty?

homer hyperbole itt

hmm, is this a trick question? It's pretty much the definition of faulty logic.

When it comes to overall production or value, it is very debatable... meaning if you were to add up the value of each players ability to shoot/pass/drive/IQ/etc. There are specific things that each player does specifically well, and as basketball is a five-person game, it would depend on who else was playing for me to really choose whom I would want.

it's not actually that debatable, Celtics with Nash/Deron/CP3 are huge favorites to win the title

so the answer is yes. ok then

also, even under your criteria paul is still better than rondo

They are in the conversation as favorites with the current roster (if everyone is 100% healthy). I think you are confusing Rondo being on the roster instead of one of those three players with the injuries the C's had this year. Substituting one of those three for Rondo this year without changing any of the injuries doesn't do a whole lot of change for this season.

And I'll refer to a couple of posts ago in which I stated I don't believe Rondo is the best in the league and that I just think it is a mistake to not have him in the top couple. I do think CP3 is a better PG.

nash and deron are also quite obv better than rondo; situation matters, but using it to suggest he's better than those two is just homering up. that's all good though b/c rondo's very good. much better than i ever thought he would be