Rank the Point guards

[Killakobe81]

I'll admit I have been a pretty staunch supporter of Dwill as the best PG in the NBA. After Paul's injury, I figured Dwill had pretty much made it a closed argument. But this year, Paul with less explosion, has been running an extremely efficient half-court offense, which in some ways is even MORE impressive than his MVP campaign a few years back.

Now many are saying Rose has surpassed them both
Parker is on pace for a career high in assists and is scoring as usual
Westbrook has made huge strides
Rondo has put up crazy assist totals

So I ask, who is the best PG RIGHT now in the NBA? You can use whatever criteria you want, but please at least include WHY and rank your top 5.

[Phillip]

Parker is not in the top 5.

CP3
DWill
Rose
Westbrook
Rondo

[lefty]

Rose
Dwill
CP3
Westbrook
Rondo Nash
George hill
Chris Quinn

[Phillip]

wait fuck me

CP3
DWill
Nash
Rose
Westbrook

[Killakobe81]

Things to consider, If it helps, when scouting/evaluating HS PG's, here is the criteria I look at:


Half-court efficency: Who gets their team the best shots in half-court?
Fast break: Who is the best at making sure their TEAM gets a good score in transition?
Post entry passing: Who feeds the bigs the best?
Pentration: Who can get to the basket with the least amount of screening?
Clutch FT shooting: who makes them when they count? My biggest pet peeve is PG's that cant hit FT's
Shooting: Who is best at the 3 point and mid range shooting?
Post play (ofense/Defense): who punishes smaller defenders and who can hold their own inside when overmatched.
On ball defense: who is best at staying in front of their man, who needs the least amount of "help"?
Help defense: getting steals, playing passing lanes, deflections and double teaming
Isolation play: when needed who can get their own shot?

[lefty]

Half-court efficency: Who gets their team the best shots in half-court? Rondo, Nash, Paul, Kidd

Fast break: Who is the best at making sure their TEAM gets a good score in transition? Nash, Paul, Kidd

Post entry passing: Who feeds the bigs the best?
Pentration: Who can get to the basket with the least amount of screening? Rose, , Parker, Westbrook
Clutch FT shooting: who makes them when they count? My biggest pet peeve is PG's that cant hit FT's; Nash
Shooting: Who is best at the 3 point and mid range shooting? Nash, D-Will
Post play (ofense/Defense): who punishes smaller defenders and who can hold their own inside when overmatched. Billups, D-Will, Kidd

On ball defense: who is best at staying in front of their man, who needs the least amount of "help"? Rondo, Hill, Parker this season
Help defense: getting steals, playing passing lanes, deflections and double teaming. Rondo, Paul
Isolation play: Rose, DWill, Westbrook, Paul, Parker, Nash

[LnGrrrR]

Lots of good PG's out there right now.

I'll go...

CP3
D-Will
Rose
Rondo
Nash

With Parker and Westbrook right there.


Given your pet peeve, Rondo must really piss you off. :lol

[Mugen]

1a. Jason Kidd
1b. JJ Barrea

[Killakobe81]

Half-court efficency:

1. Rondo
2. Paul
3. Nash
4. Dwill
5. Parker

Tough to choose here and I almost went Paul ...but celts have the best FG% with all of the injuries and despite Rondo's shooting woes. they rarely take bad shots with him in the game.

[ElNono]

Rose is top right now IMO.
He's simply unguardable, he has an effective jumper, he can get to the basket at will, he's rugged, he's a willing passer, his athleticism let's him help on the boards and he doesn't make many mistakes. He also looks like a fairly level headed guy.

My top 5 right now:

1) Rose
2) Rondo
3) Paulina
4) DWill
5) Open to debate (Westbrook/Parker/Brooks could all make a case)

[LnGrrrR]

Help defense: getting steals, playing passing lanes, deflections and double teaming. Rose, Paul

Rondo is pretty good at that too.

[lefty]

Rondo is pretty good at that too.
Mistype

I was thinking Rondo, not Rose :lol

[Killakobe81]

On the break: (man this is tough)
I'll skip for now ...penetrtion:

1. Rose
2. Parker
3. Westbrook
4. Rondo
5. Paul

[ALVAREZ6]

1. CP3
1. Deron Williams
3. Rondo
3. Rose
5. Nash

I always bounce back and forth between Dwill and CP3 for my best PG, I think the differences are minimal in terms of who is the best overall point guard. They both bring A LOT to the table.

I'm also torn with Rondo and Rose, however I do think my tiers are somewhat accurate. I think CP/DW are on another level, then Rondo/Rose are on a separate level behind them. Then everyone else is below, but that's not to say there isn't many more really good PGs in the league. In fact I'm almost inclined to even have Nash in this 2nd tier, and it would surprise a lot of people because no one ever talks about Nash anymore because the Suns are not irrelevant, they don't have Amare, Nash is older, etc. but he is still a great PG. Anyway, the reason why Rose isn't at the top is because IMO he is not as much of a PG as the other guys, even though he's averaging 8 assists or so. I view Rose very much so like a better version of Westbrook, and his skill is simply enough to have him that high. Rondo to me is also not as high as the others mainly because I think his assists numbers are inflated by bullshit. This bullshit I speak of consists of many things: 1. with all the dudes on his team and him never really looking to shoot himself very often, he's got all game to pass to wide open Pierces, Allens, Garnetts, O'neals (even literally multiple O'Neal)..he's just got a lot of talent and easy assists options around him for many MPG. He looks like he's simply out there for assists at times, running around dribbling looking for people to pass to 2. Well hey, didn't we just hear about scorers table giving him free assists??? lol

And Nash is still a damn good PG, and has been for most of his time in the league. He's still averaging 17 points, 11 assists, without Amare, shooting 53.2% from the field. On top of what I already know of Nash from observation, these numbers are great for his age and his current team.

[Mugen]

Rose is top right now IMO.
He's simply unguardable, he has an effective jumper, he can get to the basket at will, he's rugged, he's a willing passer, his athleticism let's him help on the boards and he doesn't make many mistakes. He also looks like a fairly level headed guy.

My top 5 right now:

1) Rose
2) Rondo
3) Paulina
4) DWill
5) Open to debate (Westbrook/Parker/Brooks could all make a case)

Hellnono.

[ALVAREZ6]

1. CP3
1. Deron Williams
3. Rondo
3. Rose
5. Nash

I always bounce back and forth between Dwill and CP3 for my best PG, I think the differences are minimal in terms of who is the best overall point guard. They both bring A LOT to the table.

I'm also torn with Rondo and Rose, however I do think my tiers are somewhat accurate. I think CP/DW are on another level, then Rondo/Rose are on a separate level behind them. Then everyone else is below, but that's not to say there isn't many more really good PGs in the league. In fact I'm almost inclined to even have Nash in this 2nd tier, and it would surprise a lot of people because no one ever talks about Nash anymore because the Suns are now irrelevant, they don't have Amare, Nash is older, etc. but he is still a great PG. Anyway, the reason why Rose isn't at the top is because IMO he is not as much of a PG as the other guys, even though he's averaging 8 assists or so. I view Rose very much so like a better version of Westbrook, and his skill is simply enough to have him that high. Rondo to me is also not as high as the others mainly because I think his assists numbers are inflated by bullshit. This bullshit I speak of consists of many things: 1. with all the dudes on his team and him never really looking to shoot himself very often, he's got all game to pass to wide open Pierces, Allens, Garnetts, O'neals (even literally multiple O'Neal)..he's just got a lot of talent and easy assists options around him for many MPG. He looks like he's simply out there for assists at times, running around dribbling looking for people to pass to 2. Well hey, didn't we just hear about scorers table giving him free assists??? lol

And Nash is still a damn good PG, and has been for most of his time in the league. He's still averaging 17 points, 11 assists, without Amare, shooting 53.2% from the field. On top of what I already know of Nash from observation, these numbers are great for his age and his current team.

[Killakobe81]

Clutch FT shooting: (not by numbers but who i trust late ...)
1. Nash
2. Billups
3. Paul
4. Dwill
5. Parker

18. Rose
20. Kidd
28. rondo

[JamStone]

1. Deron Williams
2. Chris Paul
3. Derrick Rose
4. Rajon Rondo
5. Tony Parker



Rose is top right now IMO.
He's simply unguardable, he has an effective jumper, he can get to the basket at will, he's rugged, he's a willing passer, his athleticism let's him help on the boards and he doesn't make many mistakes. He also looks like a fairly level headed guy.

My top 5 right now:

1) Rose
2) Rondo
3) Paulina
4) DWill
5) Open to debate (Westbrook/Parker/Brooks could all make a case)

Serious comment? How does Brooks make a case for being the fifth best PG?

[Killakobe81]

Lots of good PG's out there right now.

I'll go...

CP3
D-Will
Rose
Rondo
Nash

With Parker and Westbrook right there.


Given your pet peeve, Rondo must really piss you off. :lol

he is not the only one cant stand Farmar for that reason ...but he is no where near this list ...

[ElNono]

Hellnono.

If we can talk about Nash when Phoenix is ranked below Houston, I don't see why Brooks would be out of the question. I just really see a fairly significant drop in the position after the first four I mentioned. I think any of those guys, along with Nash can make a case for the 5th spot.

[ElNono]

Serious comment? How does Brooks make a case for being the fifth best PG?

He has pretty much the same qualities of Parker with a better 3 point shot, and maybe worse defense. He's simply a good player in a bad team right now.

[Killakobe81]

Fast break:

1. Nash
2. kidd
3. Paul
4. rondo
5. not sure? ...will put Dwill for now ...but felton and others come to mind ...

[Mugen]

He has pretty much the same qualities of Parker with a better 3 point shot, and maybe worse defense. He's simply a good player in a bad team right now.

His defense is significantly worse than Parkers and his playmaking for other teammates arent even Top 10 PG worthy imo.

Hes only a top 8 PG when he plays the Lakers, tbh.

[Killakobe81]

Post play:
1. Dwill
2. kidd
3. Billups
4. Baron (hate that guy but he is good at it)
5. Rose

[Killakobe81]

shooting:
1. Nash
2. Curry
3. Dwill
4. Paul
5. Billups

[ElNono]

Hes only a top 8 PG when he plays the Lakers, tbh.

Probably what gave me the wrong impression... :tu

[jjktkk]

I wouldn't put Nash in the top 5, regardless of stats, just for the fact his team is not winning. IMO the most important stat when discussing top pgs, is their W & L record. Is said pg making his team better, or just filling out the boxscore?

[Killakobe81]

Help defense
1. Rondo
2. Kidd
3. Paul
4. Westbrook
5. Not sure it's close ...

[hater]

Roddy b #1

[Killakobe81]

So far before I check out ...I will come back later to rate the categories I missed and see if we have any new thoughts ...

Overall:
1. Dwill
2. Paul I'm leaning towards flipping him back to #1
3. Rose
4. Rondo
5. close between Parker, Westbrook, Nash etc.

I think Rose is the best star or "player" but looking at the criteria it is hard for me to NOT choose Dwill and Cp3 as my top 2 PG's ...

Parker is really good at pentration, running the spurs system, and as 1 man fastbreak.His jumper has improved immensely (something rondo needs to be top 2)People do not give him enough credit .... but don't think he is better than the top 4 guys here.

[Mugen]

seriously tho...

1. DWill
2. Rose
3. CP3
4. Westbrook
5. Parker
6. Rondo

i know its homerish, but i think if the spurs trade TP for Rondo, they get worse.

as soon as Rondo gets a consistent jumper, he's top 3 no question. but i just cant put a guy in the Top 5 when teams gameplan to make him the scorer.

[Rummpd]

Top tier Williams and Paul
2nd tier but still damm good - Rose, Parker (by far the most accomplished with highest winning percentage, a finals MVP, and also has several seasons with near historical FG shooting percentage number, and Rondo
3rd tier but still damm good -Nash, Kidd, and Westbrooke

it is funny how Parker often outplays so many of those ranked above him the one exception being Williams who is just so strong. http://dimemag.com/2009/09/whos-better-chris-paul-or-tony-parker/

Another one:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/19851-tony-parker-the-nbas-most-underrated-point-guard

Just one of many articles that get that Parker is undoubtedly the most under-recognized great PGs - if he had 3 titles with the LAL or Celtics he would be all over the news daily.

Here is another one a couple of years back that had Tony Parker above other noted PGs in critical areas:

http://www.82games.com/comm5.htm

[Killakobe81]

Top tier Williams and Paul
2nd tier but still damm good - Rose, Parker (by far the most accomplished with highest winning percentage, a finals MVP, and also has several seasons with near historical FG shooting percentage number, and Rondo
3rd tier but still damm good -Nash, Kidd, and Westbrooke

it is funny how Parker often outplays so many of those ranked above him the one exception being Williams who is just so strong. http://dimemag.com/2009/09/whos-better-chris-paul-or-tony-parker/

Another one:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/19851-tony-parker-the-nbas-most-underrated-point-guard

Just one of many articles that get that Parker is undoubtedly the most under-recognized great PGs - if he had 3 titles with the LAL or Celtics he would be all over the news daily.

LOL see above ...

[ALVAREZ6]

I wouldn't put Nash in the top 5, regardless of stats, just for the fact his team is not winning. IMO the most important stat when discussing top pgs, is their W & L record. Is said pg making his team better, or just filling out the boxscore?

Rondo must be MILES better than Nash



OR, Rondo is surrounded by an all-star team (at least at one point in all of their careers)

[ALVAREZ6]

What separates Rondo from the elite is his shooting. That dude needs to develop a jumper fast, I just don't know how he hasn't already after so much basketball.

[jjktkk]

Rondo must be MILES better than Nash



OR, Rondo is surrounded by an all-star team (at least at one point in all of their careers)

Nash is still a great pg, but i can't put him in the top 5 because of his teams record.

[ElNono]

So far before I check out ...I will come back later to rate the categories I missed and see if we have any new thoughts ...

Overall:
1. Dwill
2. Paul I'm leaning towards flipping him back to #1
3. Rose
4. Rondo
5. close between Parker, Westbrook, Nash etc.

I think Rose is the best star or "player" but looking at the criteria it is hard for me to NOT choose Dwill and Cp3 as my top 2 PG's ...

Parker is really good at pentration, running the spurs system, and as 1 man fastbreak.His jumper has improved immensely (something rondo needs to be top 2)People do not give him enough credit .... but don't think he is better than the top 4 guys here.

I agree the top 4 are on a different tier... I have no problem how you sort them out, they all are exceptional. After that, a lot of the rest are pretty good too within that second tier.

[Rummpd]

LOL see above ...

Yeh say that next time Parker goes through the trees against LAL with impunity.
If he was on LAL you would drool over him.

[ALVAREZ6]

Nash is still a great pg, but i can't put him in the top 5 because of his teams record.

This isn't a power ranking, it's a ranking of the 5 best point guards in the league. Much like the top 5 teams in power rankings are not the top 5 teams in the NBA.


Steve Nash and the Phoenix Suns are not synonyms for the record. Nash is shooting 52% scoring 17points and 11 assists per game, without Amare! I used to think half of his assists were via Nash-Stoudemire pick and roll, but the dude hasn't stopped producing even though it's a much changed team. Other than the obvious CP3, Dwill, Rondo/Rose, who else is better than Nash?? Parker I'd say is pretty close to equivalent in terms of all around players, but if we're debating who the top point guards are, I don't think there are many more better than Nash.

[#41 Shoot Em Up]

1. D- Will
2. C. Paul
3. Rondo
4. D. Rose
5. Westbrook

Nobody else is in the conversation

[Phillip]

I wouldn't put Nash in the top 5, regardless of stats, just for the fact his team is not winning. IMO the most important stat when discussing top pgs, is their W & L record. Is said pg making his team better, or just filling out the boxscore?

this must be a joke

without nash, the suns are a dleague team

recall when they went from a 20 win team to a 60 win team instantly with his signing? dude most definitely has a huge effect on his teams success. and they have consistently been good despite losing key guys like Marion, Raja Bell, Joe Johnson, Boris Diaw, etc...

[urunobili]

Overall:

1) Paul
2) Rose
3) Rondo
4) D Will
5) Parker

[Phillip]

nash just does not get the respect he deserves. i put CP3 and DWill ahead of him, but not by much. i still think that a good argument can be made for nash still being the best PG in the NBA. no PG has the heart or clutch ability that he has. he is the most complete offensive PG the NBA perhaps has ever had. may not be a great defender, but fact is, most PGs arent good defenders. there are very few truly good defensive PGs, and most of them arent anywhere near Nash's league in terms of leadership and what he provides on offense.

[ALVAREZ6]

Overall:

1) Paul
2) Rose
3) Rondo
4) D Will
5) Parker

Rondo over D Will overall?

[The Reckoning]

brooks blows. hes getting upstaged by lowry. awwww my ankle makes me shoot .200 and have no assists.

[Phillip]

This isn't a power ranking, it's a ranking of the 5 best point guards in the league. Much like the top 5 teams in power rankings are not the top 5 teams in the NBA.


Steve Nash and the Phoenix Suns are not synonyms for the record. Nash is shooting 52% scoring 17points and 11 assists per game, without Amare! I used to think half of his assists were via Nash-Stoudemire pick and roll, but the dude hasn't stopped producing even though it's a much changed team. Other than the obvious CP3, Dwill, Rondo/Rose, who else is better than Nash?? Parker I'd say is pretty close to equivalent in terms of all around players, but if we're debating who the top point guards are, I don't think there are many more better than Nash.

id pretty much agree with this, except for Rondo. after the way he was exploited so badly last year in the finals, i think that proved that against elite teams in a playoff series, until he improves his shooting ability, he will never truly be a deadly weapon on the level of a guy like CP3, D-Will, or Nash.

[Phillip]

nash is getting massively underrated

rondo is getting massively overrated

[JamStone]

It's hard to really answer the question, but if you put Tony Parker on the Jazz, Hornets, or Bulls, does he put up the same numbers and are the teams as good or better than they are now?

I think the answer would probably be yes if you put him on the Celtics because the balance and depth of talent is so good that the different things the Celtics would lose from Rondo can be made up for by the other players on the team. Pierce and Garnett can take on the role of playmaking more. And the team defense would have to step up a little more, especially interior defense on guard penetration.

But could Tony Parker replace Deron or CP3 or Rose and still be in the conversation of top 5 PGs? Tough to answer.

[Rummpd]

http://offthedribble.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/02/keeping-score-who-is-the-n-b-a-s-best-point-guard/

Eliminating Rose, Westbrook, Kidd and Nash leaves us with four candidates: Tony Parker, Chris Paul, Rajon Rondo and Deron Williams.

Using advanced stats these were this author's "best of the best" with Paul by far best of all. He eliminates Rose due to his lack of a body of work by the way which may or not be fair and does the same to Westbrooke.

[Phillip]

http://offthedribble.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/02/keeping-score-who-is-the-n-b-a-s-best-point-guard/

Eliminating Rose, Westbrook, Kidd and Nash leaves us with four candidates: Tony Parker, Chris Paul, Rajon Rondo and Deron Williams.

Using advanced stats these were this author's "best of the best" with Paul by far best of all. He eliminates Rose due to his lack of a body of work by the way which may or not be fair and does the same to Westbrooke.

goddammit stop posting stupid shit

[jjktkk]

this must be a joke

without nash, the suns are a dleague team

recall when they went from a 20 win team to a 60 win team instantly with his signing? dude most definitely has a huge effect on his teams success. and they have consistently been good despite losing key guys like Marion, Raja Bell, Joe Johnson, Boris Diaw, etc...

Agree to disagree. Nash is still a great pg, but in my top 5 ranking, wins and losses is part of my evaluation.

[buttsR4rebounding]

Nash is an incredible offensive force, but his complete lack of effectiveness on the defensive side of the ball should eliminate him from a discussion of who is the best point guard.

1. DWill
2. Rose
3. Rondo
4. CP3
5. Parker

[poop]

Dwill is the best. he plays on a team of total scrubs. can you imagine if he had the options Rondont has??

[ALVAREZ6]

Agree to disagree. Nash is still a great pg, but in my top 5 ranking, wins and losses is part of my evaluation.

Wins and losses is a great metric for an individual's playing capability. Blake Griffin is pretty damn terrible tbh, he's on one of the worst teams in the entire league!

By contrast, Derek Fisher is one of the elite point guards. Everywhere he goes, he plays on teams with very solid winning records.


For the first half of his career (actually majority), Kevin Garnett was a fuckin scrub! He did nothing. But now...well damn look at how much better Kevin Garnett is today than he was 5 years ago. He's a HOF now.


:rolleyes:rolleyes:rolleyes:rolleyes:rolleyes

[Phillip]

Agree to disagree. Nash is still a great pg, but in my top 5 ranking, wins and losses is part of my evaluation.

thats great, except your top 5 ranking is fucking retarded to be based off of that, considering his history of doing so, even up to this year. he has a ridiculously awful team (that would be fortunate to win 20 games without him) still somehow in contention of making a low playoff seed.

[Phillip]

Wins and losses is a great metric for an individual's playing capability. Blake Griffin is pretty damn terrible tbh, he's on one of the worst teams in the entire league!

By contrast, Derek Fisher is one of the elite point guards. Everywhere he goes, he plays on teams with very solid winning records.


For the first half of his career (actually majority), Kevin Garnett was a fuckin scrub! He did nothing. But now...well damn look at how much better Kevin Garnett is today than he was 5 years ago. He's a HOF now.


:rolleyes:rolleyes:rolleyes:rolleyes:rolleyes:roll eyes

:tu

good post for an argie

[Killakobe81]

Other criteria:

Ball handling: Who has the best handles, cross-over, behind the back etc.
Finisher: Now Westbrook, rose, rondo and dwill are the best dunkers (espcially first two) but Nash and parker are great great finishers because of their "touch"

[Rummpd]

Nash should still be in the discussion his PER is in the top 2-3 PGs and is nighty filling up the stats. The only thing is he is and never has been a great defender and his team sucks but he still seems to play with passion.

About the only thing all of us can agree on is that Paul and Williams are still in the mix for the very best and Rose right there and there a handful of other very good to excellent PGs that on any given night can put up a show. It truly is the most stacked position in the NBA right now. For myself I would take Deron Williams anytime for my team as the top one.

[jjktkk]

Wins and losses is a great metric for an individual's playing capability. Blake Griffin is pretty damn terrible tbh, he's on one of the worst teams in the entire league!

By contrast, Derek Fisher is one of the elite point guards. Everywhere he goes, he plays on teams with very solid winning records.

Derek Fisher elite? I never thought Fisher was elite. Big game performer, but he never was a elite pg. Fisher couldn't break an opponent down or finish at rim or dish, make a great pass. Fisher was/is a tough competitor. Which brings us to the point on a pg's surrounding cast. Fisher has always had a great supporting cast. Put Fisher on a bad team, say the Cavs, and it woulnd't be pretty imo.

[Killakobe81]

Nash should still be in the discussion his PER is in the top 2-3 PGs and is nighty filling up the stats. The only thing is he is and never has been a great defender and his team sucks but he still seems to play with passion.

About the only thing all of us can agree on is that Paul and Williams are still in the mix for the very best and Rose right there and there a handful of other very good to excellent PGs that on any given night can put up a show. It truly is the most stacked position in the NBA right now. For myself I would take Deron Williams anytime for my team as the top one.

Great post. dont disagree but PF is pretty stacked too: Dirk, aldridge, pau, Blake, amare, Love, randolph, KG, Horford ...and duncan if you still consider him a PF ...

PF is deeper though maybe not as "top heavy" TBH ...

[ALVAREZ6]

Derek Fisher elite? I never thought Fisher was elite. Big game performer, but he never was a elite pg. Fisher couldn't break an opponent down or finish at rim or dish, make a great pass. Fisher was/is a tough competitor. Which brings us to the point on a pg's surrounding cast. Fisher has always had a great supporting cast. Put Fisher on a bad team, say the Cavs, and it woulnd't be pretty imo.

Since that very obvious sarcasm went right over your head, I can now say I understand why you think W/Ls are a good measure of any individual player's skill.

[TIMMYtoZO]

Funny how Rondo gets so much love. Mario Chalmers is now starting. He is already better than Rondo at D and shooting. Rondo is better at slashing and passing for now. Chalmers will be a top 10 pg very soon. Now that he is starting, he will keep getting better and better. This kid has some serious untapped potential which will be developed with Bron and Wade.

[Phillip]

Derek Fisher elite? I never thought Fisher was elite. Big game performer, but he never was a elite pg. Fisher couldn't break an opponent down or finish at rim or dish, make a great pass. Fisher was/is a tough competitor. Which brings us to the point on a pg's surrounding cast. Fisher has always had a great supporting cast. Put Fisher on a bad team, say the Cavs, and it woulnd't be pretty imo.

*shaking head*

:bang

[Brazil]

Nash is still an elite PG but he isn't in the top 5 conversation, nothing related to wins or losses but he is a damn awful defender.

I'd go with:

1. Rose - he is so explosive right now, he added a quite reliable 3 pointer, he is good defender

2. CP3 - I'd give the edge to CP3 over DWill

3. DWill

4/5. TP/Rondo, Rondo is tough on D, he is perfect at feeding his squad but his FT% and his lack of JS is hurting him a bit. In parallel TP Defense is much better than last year, he has a carreer high on steals without gambling too much, he is stable in FG% and increased his assists. More important he is playing like a vet doing what his team needs at the right moment. Still capable to take over a game by himself.

6. Westbrook is having a great season but dude must improve his shot selection, sometimes he is capable of taking 3 / 4 bad shoots in a row, his FG% is sometimes awful, 43% on the season. I prefer TP 18 ppg at 50% rather than 22 pts at 43%

[Brazil]

Funny how Rondo gets so much love. Mario Chalmers is now starting. He is already better than Rondo at D and shooting. Rondo is better at slashing and passing for now. Chalmers will be a top 10 pg very soon. Now that he is starting, he will keep getting better and better. This kid has some serious untapped potential which will be developed with Bron and Wade.

Chalmers ? lol well if it's happen it's a long long shot

[TIMMYtoZO]

Chalmers ? lol well if it's happen it's a long long shot


Dude Chalmers is already better than Rondo at everything except slashing and passing. Chalmers will improve on his passing as he progresses. His slashing isn't a necessity with this team. Give me Chalmers over Rondo anyday of the week.

[Brazil]

Dude Chalmers is already better than Rondo at everything except slashing and passing. Chalmers will improve on his passing as he progresses. His slashing isn't a necessity with this team. Give me Chalmers over Rondo anyday of the week.

not sure if serious

[DMC]

Parker is a scoring PG, so that needs to be considered when measuring him against others. I think Parker is in the top 3 in the league. Rose plays more like a shooting guard. Rondo is pretty much a passer 1st, and his teammates can finish at a very high clip. Parker doesn't see the floor nearly as good as Nash (who does?) or Rondo, but he attacks multiple defenders on the break with a very high rate of success.

[Rummpd]

Great post. dont disagree but PF is pretty stacked too: Dirk, aldridge, pau, Blake, amare, Love, randolph, KG, Horford ...and duncan if you still consider him a PF ...

PF is deeper though maybe not as "top heavy" TBH ...

fair enough PF is also very stacked with great players and it is interesting the two rookies will be drawing raves for year are Wall and Griffin adding to the respective mixes.

[Phillip]

Nash is still an elite PG but he isn't in the top 5 conversation, nothing related to wins or losses but he is a damn awful defender.

I'd go with:

1. Rose - he is so explosive right now, he added a quite reliable 3 pointer, he is good defender

2. CP3 - I'd give the edge to CP3 over DWill

3. DWill

4/5. TP/Rondo, Rondo is tough on D, he is perfect at feeding his squad but his FT% and his lack of JS is hurting him a bit. In parallel TP Defense is much better than last year, he has a carreer high on steals without gambling too much, he is stable in FG% and increased his assists. More important he is playing like a vet doing what his team needs at the right moment. Still capable to take over a game by himself.

6. Westbrook is having a great season but dude must improve his shot selection, sometimes he is capable of taking 3 / 4 bad shoots in a row, his FG% is sometimes awful, 43% on the season. I prefer TP 18 ppg at 50% rather than 22 pts at 43%

rondo is about the only truly good defender on that list. pretty much everyone else either just goes for steals, or tries to play physically but still gets burnt. TP has no business being ranked ahead of nash, if your only knock on nash is his defense, because parker is every bit as bad defensively.

[DPG21920]

Parker is def top 5.

[Phillip]

Parker is def top 5.

incorrect, shortstack

[LnGrrrR]

What separates Rondo from the elite is his shooting. That dude needs to develop a jumper fast, I just don't know how he hasn't already after so much basketball.

It could be his freakishly large hands. *shrug* Probably the same reason he's not a good FT shooter.

[LnGrrrR]

nash is getting massively underrated

rondo is getting massively overrated

Rondo is getting elevated because he plays decent D, which Nash doesn't.

[LnGrrrR]

Dude Chalmers is already better than Rondo at everything except slashing and passing. Chalmers will improve on his passing as he progresses. His slashing isn't a necessity with this team. Give me Chalmers over Rondo anyday of the week.

Kind of important for a point guard, isn't it?

That's like saying that one C is better at everything, except rebounding.

[jestersmash]

Some food for thought. Top point guards according to the all important estimated wins added (EWA) advanced statistic -

1. Chris Paul (11.9)
2. Russell Westbrook (10.4)
3. Derrick Rose (10.0)
4. Deron Williams (10.0)
5. Steve Nash (8.6)
6. Tony Parker (7.4)

...
...

10. Rajon Rondo (5.1)

Top point guards according to PER

1. Chris Paul (25.81)
2. Steve Nash (24.37)
3. Russell Westbrook (23.80)
4. Deron Williams (23.15)
5. Derrick Rose (22.97)
6. Tony Parker (21.02)
7. Stephen Curry (20.05)
8. Rajon Rondo (19.29)


Subjectively, I don't think Tony Parker is a top 5 point guard, but I find it laughable that certain people are so quick to at least consider Rondo on the "bubble" for top 5 but find it to be just ludicrous that Tony Parker might even be in the discussion for that 5 spot.

I'd say among the most underrated facets of Tony Parker's game are the fact that he shoots 52.3% from the field and he has a virtually unguardable floater if he can get into the paint. It's actually not the most ludicrous, homer-ish (for a spurs fan), asinine thing to at least say "Tony Parker might be in the discussion for the 5 spot" when Rondo is given that luxury.

Now, advanced statistics notwithstanding, I actually do favor Rondo over Parker for that 5 spot because Rondo is far superior at passing. That said, it's laughable that some people make it sound like Tony Parker is barely on the cusp for top 15 point guards in this league.

As for my list -

1. Deron Williams
2. Chris Paul
3. Russell Westbrook
4. Derrick Rose
5. Steve Nash
6. Rondo

[JamStone]

It could be his freakishly large hands. *shrug* Probably the same reason he's not a good FT shooter.

I've heard that argument made before.

Michael Jordan had freakishly large hands.

Unless Rondo's hands are bigger than Jordan's hands to the point that the basketball is like a softball to normal sized hands, I don't get it.

[Giuseppe]

Parker follows. It's his nature. And he does it well.

Rondo leads. It's his nature. And he does it well.

[Mugen]

Has Rondo ever acknowledged his shooting as a weakness?

correct me if i'm wrong LnGrrR, but it always seemed that he got annoyed when people questioned his jumpshooting and has kinda been stubborn about working on improving it.

i know when TP couldnt hit shit his first couple of years, he acknowledged it and made it a point of emphasis to make it a strength.

[Mugen]

Parker follows. It's his nature. And he does it well.

Rondo leads. It's his nature. And he does it well.

so does that make you TP and luva is Rondo, cubbz?

[jjktkk]

I would take Rondo on my team anyday.

[hsxvvd]

Only 2 can be considered the total package
1. Paul
2. Williams

Big drop from top 2.
3. Rondo (Shooting)
4. Nash (Defense)

5 is very close, all have their faults.
Westbrook and Rose are chuckers at this point of their careers.
Kidd and Felton both have shooting limitations.

But I'll give the 5 to Parker but probably more so because the system his plays in makes the most of his limited shooting ability, and his defence is supported by his team mates. This put him over the others in that the system gets the most out of his talents.

[Greg Oden]

:lmao 5 to Parker over Rose and Westbrook

[jjktkk]

:lmao 5 to Parker over Rose and Westbrook

I would, not for talent, but for the expierence factor. That could change as soon as this years playoffs though. Rose and Westbrook are great young pgs.

[LnGrrrR]

I've heard that argument made before.

Michael Jordan had freakishly large hands.

Unless Rondo's hands are bigger than Jordan's hands to the point that the basketball is like a softball to normal sized hands, I don't get it.

Are you talking about bigger overall? Or compared to their length?

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_big_are_Rajon_Rondo's_hands




Rajon Rondo, guard for the Boston Celtics, is not tall in NBA standards -- only 6 feet 1 inch. But his wingspan is a whopping 6 feet 9 inches! ESPN's Sport Science (linked below) reported that Rondo's hands measure 9.5 inches long and 10 inches wide. Those measurements are proportionate to a player taller than Yao Ming!




http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Michael_jordan_hand_size



From the heel of his palm to the tip of his middle finger is 12.25 inches (31.12 cm).


But this article seems to contradict that...

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/2148331/hes_so_looooooong_the_jay_bilas_basketball.html?ca t=14


Elton Brand, the Chicago Bulls (http://www.associatedcontent.com/topic/42249/chicago_bulls.html) former No. 1 overall selection in 1999, was chosen not only for his dominating scoring and rebounding ability, but for his wingspan and hand size. Seen as somewhat undersized as a 6'8" forward/center, Brand's wingspan far surpassed being seven feet wide (normal wingspans usually measure out to be the same about of inches as one's height), giving him a great advantage against players who are taller than him. His hands were also talked about much, as the tip of his middle finger to the bottom of the palm of his hand was measured at a whopping nine inches, which rivals Michael Jordan's hand size as the largest set of hands that have palmed a Spalding leather NBA (http://www.associatedcontent.com/theme/1194/nba.html) basketball.


So, if this article is right, Jordan was somewhat under nine inches. Rondo would be 9.5, at a much smaller height. Interestingly enough, the article goes on to mention Rondo's wingspan, but makes no mention of his hand size.


Another article lists Jordan at 9 3/4 inches.

http://ask.metafilter.com/161910/NBA-players-with-big-hands


Michael Jordan - 9 3/4 inches "palm to middle finger".

--The Knoxville News-Sentinel, March 12, 1999.


So most likely, Jordan was somewhere between 9 and 10 inches, comparable to Rondo. Of course, Jordan was much taller.

[jestersmash]

Only 2 can be considered the total package
1. Paul
2. Williams

Big drop from top 2.
3. Rondo (Shooting)
4. Nash (Defense)

5 is very close, all have their faults.
Westbrook and Rose are chuckers at this point of their careers.
Kidd and Felton both have shooting limitations.

But I'll give the 5 to Parker but probably more so because the system his plays in makes the most of his limited shooting ability, and his defence is supported by his team mates. This put him over the others in that the system gets the most out of his talents.

This is THE dumbest fucking thing I have read on this site in probably the past 2 years.

Holy fuck how fucking misinformed are you? Do you watch any games that don't involve the San Antonio Spurs?

Holy shit :lmao

[LnGrrrR]

And really, comparisons to Jordan aren't very fair. :lol

[LnGrrrR]

Has Rondo ever acknowledged his shooting as a weakness?

I don't know if he's acknowledged it publicly, I think he's too proud for that. But there have been Boston media articles that talk about him in the gym working on it.

[TDMVPDPOY]

why u guys penalize rondo cause he cant shoot?

his not a shoot first pg, and his all round defensive game and looking out for open man is what a pgs duties is

[jjktkk]

I can't remember which TV guy said it, but he said Rondo was the most important player on the Celtics. I agree somewhat, but more like he shares that distinction with KG.

[Pelicans78]

I put CP3 over Nash, Rondo, and Parker. He's just simply better than those three. Its hard to compare him to the bigger PGs like Westbrook, D-Will, and Rose.

Rose is having such a great season right now, it's hard not to have him number one.

I think CP3 does pretty much everything well. He's a good finisher as well because of his touch. He routinely shoots a high FG%. He's not 100% yet so I go with Rose number one.

1. Rose
2. CP3

Nash and Parker are underrated, especially Nash. However neither play good defense. D-Will is in the same boat. He's strong offensively, but not good defensively, especially against the quicker PGs. Rondo is clearly the best defensive PG. No debate. But, offense for him is lacking.

Right now, I have D-Will number 3.

4. Nash
5. Parker
6. Westbrook
7. Rondo

[Killakobe81]

LOL I like Chalmers but don't know how he got anywhere near this discussion.

As for rondo he is paradox for me. I love his hustle, rebounding, unselfishness and toughness those are all traits i had as a player. But like me, he sucks at FT's (i actually could get on good streaks but did airball one in HS) is not a great outside shooter and people play off him for the drive ...

all that being said he runs the team well, and brings so many intangibles to the table.

No i dont think he can be considered the best (with his flaws) but to ignore what he does for a consistent winner is asinine.
As for Parker you could say the same about his offense. he brings so much to the table by scoring in transition or getting on to the paint and break a defense down.
Overall Dwiil had the better game (last night) but when the Spurs went on their big run early, Parker was the driving force. He used screens and his speed to destroy Utah ...

[JamStone]

Are you talking about bigger overall? Or compared to their length?

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_big_are_Rajon_Rondo's_hands





http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Michael_jordan_hand_size




But this article seems to contradict that...

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/2148331/hes_so_looooooong_the_jay_bilas_basketball.html?ca t=14



So, if this article is right, Jordan was somewhat under nine inches. Rondo would be 9.5, at a much smaller height. Interestingly enough, the article goes on to mention Rondo's wingspan, but makes no mention of his hand size.


Another article lists Jordan at 9 3/4 inches.

http://ask.metafilter.com/161910/NBA-players-with-big-hands



So most likely, Jordan was somewhere between 9 and 10 inches, comparable to Rondo. Of course, Jordan was much taller.



Does Rondo play with a basketball smaller than the basketball Jordan played with?

The height of the player or how long a player is shouldn't be a factor. If the size of the hand is going to be at issue, it's only at issue in comparison to the size of the basketball. As far as I know, the size of the basketball the NBA uses hasn't changed since Jordan played.

[TIMMYtoZO]

LOL I like Chalmers but don't know how he got anywhere near this discussion.


Chalmers is a much better defender/shooter/ft shooter than Rondo. Chalmers will be a better passer than Rondo in 2-4 years. He finally got back into the starting lineup, and this is only his 3rd year. Chalmers doesn't need to be a slasher since he has Wade/Bron. The guy has some serious upside. He will be a top 10 pg. The kid is a flat out stud.

Oh and he will shut down Rondo with ease in the ECF. Rondo is scared of Chalmers.

[JamStone]

Chalmers isn't a bad player at all. I think he should have started from the beginning of the season.

But, seriously, stop.

[jjktkk]

Chalmers is a much better defender/shooter/ft shooter than Rondo. Chalmers will be a better passer than Rondo in 2-4 years. He finally got back into the starting lineup, and this is only his 3rd year. Chalmers doesn't need to be a slasher since he has Wade/Bron. The guy has some serious upside. He will be a top 10 pg. The kid is a flat out stud.

Oh and he will shut down Rondo with ease in the ECF. Rondo is scared of Chalmers.

:wow April 1st came early this year.

[ALVAREZ6]

I've heard that argument made before.

Michael Jordan had freakishly large hands.

Unless Rondo's hands are bigger than Jordan's hands to the point that the basketball is like a softball to normal sized hands, I don't get it.

Yup.

I doubt Rondo's hands are much larger than Manu's, Bron's, Kobe's, Tmac's, etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc


It's not like the dude has Shaq hands. Or maybe he really does, I have no idea.


Edit: Just kidding.

[ALVAREZ6]

Has Rondo ever acknowledged his shooting as a weakness?

correct me if i'm wrong LnGrrR, but it always seemed that he got annoyed when people questioned his jumpshooting and has kinda been stubborn about working on improving it.

i know when TP couldnt hit shit his first couple of years, he acknowledged it and made it a point of emphasis to make it a strength.

Pretty stupid of him to be so stubborn about it, why else does he think most defenders guard him from 5 feet away when Rondo's got the ball up top?

[TIMMYtoZO]

Chalmers isn't a bad player at all. I think he should have started from the beginning of the season.

But, seriously, stop.


Stop what?

This is his 3rd year. He is a better defender than Rondo. His shooting in general and at the charity stripe are miles ahead of Rondo's. Fine maybe his passing won't be as good as Rondo's. Time will tell though. It all hinges on if he wants to be a top 10 pg within the next few years. He clearly has the talent to do so. I didn't say he'd be the best pg in the game. I doubt he ever gets that good.

[TIMMYtoZO]

:wow April 1st came early this year.


Nope. This isn't a joke. I am dead serious. Chalmers can shut down Rondo and is a better shooter/defender than him. IF he plays to his best abilities, he will be a better overall pg than Rondo in a few years.

[Mugen]

Chalmers might be in the discussion if we were talking WNBA.

[DPG21920]

incorrect, shortstack

Correct. When you take into account winning, ability, efficiency, passing & leadership there is no question TP is top 5. None. Just because you don't respect him doesn't make it true.

He is definitely a top 5 PG. He is also a very underrated defender, better than almost all other PG's you might have in the top 5. That combined with his offense puts him top 5.

CP3
Williams
Rondo
Rose
Parker

[HarlemHeat37]

Nash is definitely in the top 5 IMO.. 1 on 1 D from the PG position is so overrated..Nash is a decent team defender, that's all that really matters..teams "exploiting" Nash on the defensive end is so overplayed, it's annoying..when has Nash EVER had a decent defensive supporting cast around him?..if you stick him on the Lakers, Celtics, Magic or a few other teams, it wouldn't even be talked about..

In all honesty, the only top PGs that are very good defenders are Rondo and Paul..all the others are either just decent, or bad, just as bad as Nash, tbh..Parker is good team defender that has experience on elite defensive teams, Rose is currently on an elite defensive team, but neither guy is great defensively..

I have Paul, Williams and Rose as the top 3, I don't have any doubts at all that I would put them on their own tier..picking between them is a matter of preference..Williams and Rose both have great size, and they're both more likely to take shots in clutch time, unlike Paul, who defers too often..however, Paul is a much better defender than either of them..he's one of the most underrated defenders in the NBA..people love to talk about Paul's lack of size and how it could be exploited on the defensive end, but as I've pointed out before, only 4% of opponents play calls were against Paul in the post, it's not something that a team can continuously run without disrupting the rest of their offense..his ability as a team and help defender is a major reason for the Hornets' elite defense..

As for #4, I'd go with Nash..while Rondo's advantage on D makes this close, Nash has no exploitable flaws on offense..he can fit in as an off-ball player, due to his elite shooting..he can obviously run both half court and transition based offenses..there's nothing a defense can really do to take him out of a game..

Rondo's inability to shoot often hurts the Celtics, which was evident vs. the Lakers..he loses confidence in his already shaky jump shot, which leads to stalling in the Celtics' offense, often putting them in a position to take bad shots at the end of the shot clock..while he's still a top 5 or so PG IMO, this is a clear flaw vs. other elite defensive teams..

I was high on Westbrook to start the year, but his weaknesses have been exploited, to an extent..his defense has been horrible this year..he has trouble attacking complex defenses, sophisticated zones in particular..his ability to run an offense is relatively limited when the opposing team can shut down the lane and limit transition opportunities..

Parker is still underrated..one of the best playoff performers of the bunch..he has even improved his 3-point shot..he has a killer instinct that most of these guys haven't shown during the playoffs..his team D has been solid for most of this season..

#1. Chris Paul
#2. Deron Williams
#3. Derrick Rose
#4. Steve Nash
#5. Rajon Rondo

[ALVAREZ6]

Nope. This isn't a joke. I am dead serious. Chalmers can shut down Rondo and is a better shooter/defender than him. IF he plays to his best abilities, he will be a better overall pg than Rondo in a few years.
I don't know much about Chalmer's defense, but I can't imagine it being much better than Rondo's. Also, he's shot about 40% for his career.


Nevermind I'm not ever going to continue to respond to this because I feel stupid.


lolz @ Chalmers

[DPG21920]

Actually, in thinking about it, I would put it like this:

CP3
Williams
Rose
Nash
Parker

Rondo/Westbrook

[ALVAREZ6]

Correct. When you take into account winning, ability, efficiency, passing & leadership there is no question TP is top 5. None. Just because you don't respect him doesn't make it true.

He is definitely a top 5 PG. He is also a very underrated defender, better than almost all other PG's you might have in the top 5. That combined with his offense puts him top 5.

CP3
Williams
Rondo
Rose
Parker
Well, just stop right there and re-read some of my posts from earlier. Then see why you/we/anyone should not take TEAM wins into account.

[DPG21920]

Well, just stop right there and re-read some of my posts from earlier. Then see why you/we/anyone should not take TEAM wins into account.

:lol I read your post. Why some points are valid and winning is not the end all be all, to ignore it altogether it is flat out stupidity.

[ALVAREZ6]

:lol I read your post. Why some points are valid and winning is not the end all be all, to ignore it altogether it is flat out stupidity.
And I hear the point you are making.


But think about it: when valuing big men..a dominant PF/C is gonna get his no matter which team. If you're truly one of the best big men in the league, any team you're on you're gonna be rebounding and putting in work down low. Maybe it'll effect your shooting percentages negatively due to more double teams, defense focusing more on you than your team.

But a point guard? Look at Rondo.

He comes onto the court to start a game along with Ray Allen, Paul Pierce, Kevin Garnett, and Shaquille O'Neal. Some solid ass players off the bench too. Basically the whole offense can create their own offense, individually, if they want. Look at the people he's passing too, the defenses crumbling and not being able to contain so many great players, having one man chase Ray Allen's ass and around all of his screens on the floor, getting open, easy passes.


Whatever, you see Rondo's situation. Nash is averaging 11 assists with his current team, and it's been changed dramatically earlier as we all know. And neither periods did it involve Amare Stoudemire. Nash's team isn't doing too well win-wise compared to Rondo's, is it??

Other cases:
Tony Parker plays on the Spurs, of course his winning %-age is high. He has 2 other All-Stars on his team. The fact that he/they (Rondo too) are winning takes nothing away from the same exact guy who is doing the exact same things, except on a bad team. At least it shouldn't, yet some are allowing it to.

To see it another way, KG was the same player in Minnesota as he is/was in Boston. Except younger and better due to the former. Can we agree on this? Because if we can, then really the only difference is the Celtics compared to the Wolves. He didn't get any better when he came to Boston.


I think wins/losses shouldn't have much weight at all.

[ALVAREZ6]

To elaborate on my Rondo point: I, literally, could average 6 assists per game on that team. So could Adam Morrison, Derek Fisher, or Gary Neal. Just by virtue of the players on that offense, and the offense itself.




So, no maybe we shouldn't ignore wins/losses completely...not entirely..but we should come pretty close to doing so.

[LnGrrrR]

Does Rondo play with a basketball smaller than the basketball Jordan played with?

The height of the player or how long a player is shouldn't be a factor. If the size of the hand is going to be at issue, it's only at issue in comparison to the size of the basketball. As far as I know, the size of the basketball the NBA uses hasn't changed since Jordan played.

I'm assuming it's the same size basketball. Jordan is a bit of an outlier though, both in skill and hand size.

It just seems that players with bigger hand size sometimes have issues with FTs (going by centers mostly, like Dwight, Duncan, Shaq, etc). I would assume most centers have larger hand sizes on average than guards/forwards, and seemingly shoot a lower percentage on FTs. Why that is, I don't know.

[LnGrrrR]

To elaborate on my Rondo point: I, literally, could average 6 assists per game on that team. So could Adam Morrison, Derek Fisher, or Gary Neal. Just by virtue of the players on that offense, and the offense itself.

So Rondo is worth about +7 more assists per game than your average PG? Sounds about right.

[LnGrrrR]

Chalmers is a much better defender/shooter/ft shooter than Rondo. Chalmers will be a better passer than Rondo in 2-4 years. He finally got back into the starting lineup, and this is only his 3rd year. Chalmers doesn't need to be a slasher since he has Wade/Bron. The guy has some serious upside. He will be a top 10 pg. The kid is a flat out stud.

Oh and he will shut down Rondo with ease in the ECF. Rondo is scared of Chalmers.

Who is this clown? :lol

[JamStone]

I'm assuming it's the same size basketball. Jordan is a bit of an outlier though, both in skill and hand size.

It just seems that players with bigger hand size sometimes have issues with FTs (going by centers mostly, like Dwight, Duncan, Shaq, etc). I would assume most centers have larger hand sizes on average than guards/forwards, and seemingly shoot a lower percentage on FTs. Why that is, I don't know.

Be that as it may, it shouldn't matter how big a player's hands are compared to his height, length, and overall size. It's only an issue as it relates to the size of the basketball. There have been other guards/perimeter players with exceptionally big hands. Dr. J, Connie Hawkins come to mind. Forwards and centers with very good touch outside with big hands. Chris Webber has enormous hands and developed himself into a good shooter. Jack Sikma likewise, although I'm only assuming he had big hands. Arvydas and Vlade. I bet Yao Ming has enormous hands as well. Players with big hands can be good shooters.

Point is, hand size is an excuse, not a reason, to be a poor shooter. If we're talking about Rondo having hands the size of a 32 inch flat screen TV, that's one thing. But if "freakishly" large means 9-10 inches in length, it's just a poor excuse. I watched him in that 3 point contest with Kevin Durant in that horse contest. He's fully capable of hitting jumpers if he works at it.

[ALVAREZ6]

I'm assuming it's the same size basketball. Jordan is a bit of an outlier though, both in skill and hand size.

It just seems that players with bigger hand size sometimes have issues with FTs (going by centers mostly, like Dwight, Duncan, Shaq, etc). I would assume most centers have larger hand sizes on average than guards/forwards, and seemingly shoot a lower percentage on FTs. Why that is, I don't know.
It's interesting to think about basketball in these ways, factoring all of this differences of the different body types and how they translate to the game.

I've though about this one on different occasions. Perhaps it's not solely the actual hand size, as opposed to other parts being out of proportion as well for the taller players = worse FT %. It could be that players having long arms also makes it harder to have a good, reliable jumper down. Perhaps if your forearms are too long (as a taller player), it has the same effect as bigger hands, or maybe forearm size is the real variable and therefore it gets meshed with the larger hands idea. Perhaps since having a longer forearm, you can imagine the ball is traveling a larger distance, maybe it affects the control you have in the release, whereas you may have more control naturally with more regular sized arms :lol

really who knows, the point is I think it'd be cool to eventually have some organized list in a few years that explains each and every crucial part of the body for basketball and which proportions of different parts have which effects on certain different parts of the game.

Not very followable, probably shouldn't try


rambling is fun

[LnGrrrR]

Fair enough Jam. I don't think his hand size means he can't get a consistent jumper. Was just wondering if larger hand size meant, on average, less consistency when it came to FTs. I don't think there's enough data though to come up with any solid conclusion.

[ALVAREZ6]

So Rondo is worth about +7 more assists per game than your average PG? Sounds about right.

No, I'm not saying this.

I actually have Rondo high on my list (tied for 3rd w/ Rose), I know he's a great player. I'm simply stating why we can't take away from PGs on terrible teams simply because they aren't winning.

I'm not saying that Rondo is not a good PG because his team is awesome.

[JamStone]

To me, Rondo solidified himself as a top PG in the 2009 playoffs when KG was out and Ray Allen was playing largely inconsistently. Rondo goes on to unquestionably being the best player on the team, and nearly averages a triple-double for the entire playoffs.

I don't see why he's getting knocked so hard for his inability to shoot though. He shoots over 50% from the field, so even if he's a poor shooter, he knows his limitations enough so that it's not a detriment to the team. It's similar to what some have brought up about Tony Parker early in his career. He wasn't a great outside shooter, but no one could stay in front of him and he was such a great finisher at the rim. Rondo scores efficiently and he's steadily improving his outside jumper. Of course, he needs to get better and continue to improve his stroke. But it shouldn't preclude him from being a top 5 PG, especially considering it doesn't affect his FG%. It's just like Jason Kidd for much of his career not being a very good shooter, but he was still widely considered a top 5, even top 3 PG, even when he couldn't shoot at all.

[LnGrrrR]

No, I'm not saying this.

I actually have Rondo high on my list (tied for 3rd w/ Rose), I know he's a great player. I'm simply stating why we can't take away from PGs on terrible teams simply because they aren't winning.

I'm not saying that Rondo is not a good PG because his team is awesome.

I know, I'm agreeing with you. I agree that an avg PG would probably be able to avg 5 or 6 assists with the Celtics. That would mean that Rondo is worth about 7 more assists per game than an "average" PG (he's currently avg 12.9 rebounds per game.)

Also, I put Nash at number 5 in my rankings.

[ALVAREZ6]

To me, Rondo solidified himself as a top PG in the 2009 playoffs when KG was out and Ray Allen was playing largely inconsistently. Rondo goes on to unquestionably being the best player on the team, and nearly averages a triple-double for the entire playoffs.

I don't see why he's getting knocked so hard for his inability to shoot though. He shoots over 50% from the field, so even if he's a poor shooter, he knows his limitations enough so that it's not a detriment to the team. It's similar to what some have brought up about Tony Parker early in his career. He wasn't a great outside shooter, but no one could stay in front of him and he was such a great finisher at the rim. Rondo scores efficiently and he's steadily improving his outside jumper. Of course, he needs to get better and continue to improve his stroke. But it shouldn't preclude him from being a top 5 PG, especially considering it doesn't affect his FG%. It's just like Jason Kidd for much of his career not being a very good shooter, but he was still widely considered a top 5, even top 3 PG, even when he couldn't shoot at all.

Everything about this post is correct. Rondo most certainly should not get knocked out of anyone's top 5 simply because of his shooting. His shooting is largely what separates Rondo from CP3 + Deron Williams.

What separates Rose is that he isn't exactly the PG those guys are. He could develop into a CP3, but he doesn't have the vision that guys like Steve Nash do..guys that simply exude pointguard.

[Chieflion]

1. Chris Paul
2. Derrick Rose
3. Deron Williams
4. Steve Nash
5. Rajon Rondo

[ALVAREZ6]

I know, I'm agreeing with you. I agree that an avg PG would probably be able to avg 5 or 6 assists with the Celtics. That would mean that Rondo is worth about 7 more assists per game than an "average" PG (he's currently avg 12.9 rebounds per game.)

Also, I put Nash at number 5 in my rankings.

Oh ok, now I see the aim of your other post. Well, just because of those numbers, I don't think it's fair to say he's worth more than 7 more assists. The players I mentioned, along the likes of Adam Morrison and myself, are NOT average PGs. Below average is conservative, lol. Your average PG in the NBA better be able to average 6 a game on the Cs, otherwise they aren't an average PG.

But I also consider another factor that inflates Rondo's averages, and I kind of touched on it in my initial post but barely.

Rondo 2009/10: 13.7 points, 9.8 assists, and 11.2 FGA per game

Rondo 2010/11: 10.5 points, 12.9 assists, and 9.2 FGA per game

Clearly, he's been playing a different way, and prior to even looking for these stats I already had this idea in my head because it's so damn apparent when I watch the Celtics play. Whenever I watch, it seems like Rondo is out there running around looking for assists, instead of them naturally happening. I mean, if it works it works, I'm not taking anything away, but he's playing a different way for sure. His drop in FGA per game is pretty significant from one year to the next on a team with little changes to its makeup, it's core players. I think he's simply taking less shots per game knowing he's not gonna make those outside jumpers anyway, and he's really putting an emphasis on assists.

Honestly, this is what I believe, or some combination of those different possibilities. I'm sure the dude would want to be considered amongst the elite PGs of the league, it shows in his interviews and really there's nothing wrong about that, it's human. I'd definitely want the same. But I really think he's specifically trying to get his assists averages up this year, more so than only doing it naturally; he's running around almost forcing assists, but hey it's working.

When you speak about Rondo being 7 assists average better than the average PG, I have to disagree due to the above. How else can you explain such a drastic jump in his assist averages on a team that is virtually very similar to last year. Both year very very solid ass teams, same core starters. It's his 5th season by now, how did he jump an average of 3 whole assists per game from his 4th to his 5th season? -->my opinion is that he's searching for it, specifically.

I think his 9.8 assist average of last season is more reflective of his true PGing skills :lol . Really though, he made the larger jumps of young player improvement earlier. Sure he could improve more than once, but that drastically?

07/08: 5.1
08/09: 8.2 Here is where Rajon made that jump.
09/10: 9.8

Come on now, he ain't any more pointguard than CP and DW.

[LnGrrrR]

Clearly, he's been playing a different way, and prior to even looking for these stats I already had this idea in my head because it's so damn apparent when I watch the Celtics play. Whenever I watch, it seems like Rondo is out there running around looking for assists, instead of them naturally happening. I mean, if it works it works, I'm not taking anything away, but he's playing a different way for sure. His drop in FGA per game is pretty significant from one year to the next on a team with little changes to its makeup, it's core players. I think he's simply taking less shots per game knowing he's not gonna make those outside jumpers anyway, and he's really putting an emphasis on assists.


I'd say that's a fair assessment. I don't know if it's more or less successful; the Celtics are shooting better this year, and their record is pretty good. Maybe he is looking to inflate his assists stat, but if it's helping the team then I'm not too concerned.

[TD 21]

I'll rank the top seven, because there are seven elite PG's . . .

1. Paul
2. Williams
3. Rose
4. Parker
5. Rondo
6. Nash
7. Westbrook

Curry and Wall are next in line to join the elite.

[JamStone]

I think Rondo has actively tried to look for more assists, but I don't think it's solely to selfishly pad his assists total. There is a difference between this Celtics team and last year's team. The emergence of Glen Davis as a key scorer off the bench and the addition of Shaq. Those two guys are more scoring threats than Perkins/Rasheed last year, not only in shot attempts but in terms of getting touches and getting to the line. Secondly, having Nate Robinson since day 1. He has never been shy when it comes to taking shots. That's where I think Rondo loses some of his shot attempts and gains in the assist column.

Now I do think he tries from time to time to just go assist hunting. But I don't think it's that bad a thing, especially considering how well they've played for much of the season. When the Celtics are healthy, they should prefer Rondo focus on getting assists instead of looking for his own scoring opportunities. They have plenty of other guys that can make baskets.

[ALVAREZ6]

I think Rondo has actively tried to look for more assists, but I don't think it's solely to selfishly pad his assists total. There is a difference between this Celtics team and last year's team. The emergence of Glen Davis as a key scorer off the bench and the addition of Shaq. Those two guys are more scoring threats than Perkins/Rasheed last year, not only in shot attempts but in terms of getting touches and getting to the line. Secondly, having Nate Robinson since day 1. He has never been shy when it comes to taking shots. That's where I think Rondo loses some of his shot attempts and gains in the assist column.

Now I do think he tries from time to time to just go assist hunting. But I don't think it's that bad a thing, especially considering how well they've played for much of the season. When the Celtics are healthy, they should prefer Rondo focus on getting assists instead of looking for his own scoring opportunities. They have plenty of other guys that can make baskets.
Another good post, but both of you guys are not concentrating on the context we're discussing here. The argument I made was for comparing Rondo to the other elite point guards. If CP3, D-Will, Nash all wanted to average 13 assists a game via assist-hunting, they definitely could. They could probably do it on teams not as good as the Celtics as well.


I only brought it up under the context that his 13 a game is somewhat inflated, and shouldn't be viewed as superior to Nash's 11 a game, for example.

[LnGrrrR]

I only brought it up under the context that his 13 a game is somewhat inflated, and shouldn't be viewed as superior to Nash's 11 a game, for example.

Yeah I'll buy into that. I've said in other threads that if Rondo was on a different team with less options, he'd probably put up 9 to 10 APG.

[DesignatedT]

1.DWill
2.Rose
3.CP3
4.Rondo
5.Tony
6.Nash

[JamStone]

Using Nash's assist totals as a gauge is somewhat skewed as well since his assist totals are also inflated due to the pace the Suns have played at since Nash's second tour in Phoenix. Nash was playing just about the same number of minutes in Dallas the 4 seasons before going back to Phoenix and he wasn't putting up 10-11 APG. He was putting up 7-8 APG.

I'd say Rondo's 13 APG is more impressive or superior than Nash's 11 APG because the Celtics play at a much slower pace.

[J_Paco]

My list would go something like this:

1. Chris Paul - The most complete point guard in the NBA. Does everything well, although his one-on-one defense can be inconsistent at times. Is a tremendous rebounder for a guy that stands just 6' tall. Is an extremely efficient scorer and passer.

2. Deron Williams - Is slightly below the level of Paul, but can dominate more scoring wise than Paul (IMO). His strength is only matched by a handful of point guards and he uses his strength to both score through, over and passed his defender. His passing can be erratic at times and he does have trouble guarding quicker guards.

3. Derrick Rose - Rose is the most athletic and explosive point guard in the NBA. His improved shooting stroke has helped make him the the best "scoring" point guard in the L. Is an equally impressive rebounder and play-maker at this point in his career. Rose is a solid team defender, but his one-on-one ability leaves a lot to be desired.

4. Rajon Rondo - Is only challenged by Nash as the best passer in the NBA. Understands how to set-up his teammates, and in the favorite spots, better than any other point guard. His defensive skills are also the best amongst all points guards. Rondo ability to rebound at a high level should also be mentioned. His erratic shooting is the only thing holding him back from becoming the best of the bunch.

5. Parker - Is the deadliest point guard in the open-court. Has tremendous touch and skill scoring around the basket. Has the best shot-selection and is underrated as defender. Plays extremely well within the team system and the limited minutes he is given. His perimeter shooting is his greatest weakness and his assist numbers could be better.

Honorable Mention: Steve Nash, Russell Westbrook and Stephen Curry

[ALVAREZ6]

Using Nash's assist totals as a gauge is somewhat skewed as well since his assist totals are also inflated due to the pace the Suns have played at since Nash's second tour in Phoenix. Nash was playing just about the same number of minutes in Dallas the 4 seasons before going back to Phoenix and he wasn't putting up 10-11 APG. He was putting up 7-8 APG.

I'd say Rondo's 13 APG is more impressive or superior than Nash's 11 APG because the Celtics play at a much slower pace.

:lol Alright, alright, I used Nash for no reason, off the top of my head because he is a great PG.

Substitute Williams for Nash. I'm just saying, Rondo averaging 13 is not putting in the same work that DWill and CP3 have to.

[LnGrrrR]

:lol Alright, alright, I used Nash for no reason, off the top of my head because he is a great PG.

Substitute Williams for Nash. I'm just saying, Rondo averaging 13 is not putting in the same work that DWill and CP3 have to.

I could buy that argument if Rondo wasn't averaging 4+ more assists per game. I'd say Rondo/Rose/DWill/CP3 all put in the same work. It may be harder for them to get their assists totals up, sure. But I don't think you can discount 4+ more assists per game due to his teammates being good offensively.

Otherwise, Parker and Rose should be averaging 10+ APG at least, and Fisher + Chalmers/Arroyo should be averaging 5+ APG with the talent on their respective teams.

[LnGrrrR]

Another point Alvarez: Boston is averaging the lowest amount of FGs per game, yet averaging the highest assist rate AND highest shooting percentage.

http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/team/_/stat/offense-per-game/sort/avgFieldGoalsAttempted

http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/team/_/stat/miscellaneous-per-game

http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/team/_/stat/offense-per-game/sort/fieldGoalPct

So, if you're talking about the PG running an efficient offense, Rondo is definitely up there with the best.

[ALVAREZ6]

Another point Alvarez: Boston is averaging the lowest amount of FGs per game, yet averaging the highest assist rate AND highest shooting percentage.

http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/team/_/stat/offense-per-game/sort/avgFieldGoalsAttempted

http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/team/_/stat/miscellaneous-per-game

http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/team/_/stat/offense-per-game/sort/fieldGoalPct

So, if you're talking about the PG running an efficient offense, Rondo is definitely up there with the best.

Definitely. The C's are very efficient. They're playing style is parallel to the Spurs this past decade, minus this year and probably another year as well.

They just execute really really well as a team, and Rondo gets a lot of assists despite Boston not playing a very fast paced game. Not all of that is on Rondo of course, I'd say Doc's offense in combination with the talent in combination with the experience of said talent also all play huge roles in the efficiency of that offense, Rondo only a part.

[ALVAREZ6]

I could buy that argument if Rondo wasn't averaging 4+ more assists per game. I'd say Rondo/Rose/DWill/CP3 all put in the same work. It may be harder for them to get their assists totals up, sure. But I don't think you can discount 4+ more assists per game due to his teammates being good offensively.

Otherwise, Parker and Rose should be averaging 10+ APG at least, and Fisher + Chalmers/Arroyo should be averaging 5+ APG with the talent on their respective teams.
I am a Spur fan, but I will never make a case for Tony being of the elite among true point guards. So yes, if Parker were the PG that Rondo is, and if he played Rondo's minutes, yeah his averages should also be sky high.

Rose scores 25 points a game...I can't expect him to also average Rondo's assists. But yes, despite this, he is not the PG that the other elite PGs are. He's probably better than most of them as a player, but not quite so as a PG.

Fisher...Chalmers..Arroyo...I'm not going to address this.

[jestersmash]

In defense of Rondo's poor free throw shooting, it's important to acknowledge that he only attempts 1.5 per game. It's not uncommon to see him go 1-1, 0-1, 1-2, 1-2, so on and so forth. You have to wonder if lack of attempts is preventing him from getting into a good "rhythm" from the free throw line.

For example, he went 12-15 from the line during a preseason game which is more than respectable.

[ALVAREZ6]

In defense of Rondo's poor free throw shooting, it's important to acknowledge that he only attempts 1.5 per game. It's not uncommon to see him go 1-1, 0-1, 1-2, 1-2, so on and so forth. You have to wonder if lack of attempts is preventing him from getting into a good "rhythm" from the free throw line.

For example, he went 12-15 from the line during a preseason game which is more than respectable.
Definitely a good point, # of attempts is a big factor. His % is obviously a combination of both things going on though, he's not a great FT shooter.

You can't find a guard that's good at perimeter shooting but bad a FTs. Rondo simply can't jump shoot.

[Killakobe81]

To me, Rondo solidified himself as a top PG in the 2009 playoffs when KG was out and Ray Allen was playing largely inconsistently. Rondo goes on to unquestionably being the best player on the team, and nearly averages a triple-double for the entire playoffs.

I don't see why he's getting knocked so hard for his inability to shoot though. He shoots over 50% from the field, so even if he's a poor shooter, he knows his limitations enough so that it's not a detriment to the team. It's similar to what some have brought up about Tony Parker early in his career. He wasn't a great outside shooter, but no one could stay in front of him and he was such a great finisher at the rim. Rondo scores efficiently and he's steadily improving his outside jumper. Of course, he needs to get better and continue to improve his stroke. But it shouldn't preclude him from being a top 5 PG, especially considering it doesn't affect his FG%. It's just like Jason Kidd for much of his career not being a very good shooter, but he was still widely considered a top 5, even top 3 PG, even when he couldn't shoot at all.

I agree with this AND Alvarez's reply: Rondo does enough to be in the discussion but he wont be at the top without improving his shooting. He does have a ring though and that matters too ...

Didnt bring that up here. Because I wanted everyone's opinion without going by that, but of course that matters.

[HarlemHeat37]

Not really..Rondo got a ring before he established himself as a star player..he was a role player during that title run..

[redzero]

:lol at people bringing up Rondo's ring as a role player.

[ALVAREZ6]

I agree with this AND Alvarez's reply: Rondo does enough to be in the discussion but he wont be at the top without improving his shooting. He does have a ring though and that matters too ...

Didnt bring that up here. Because I wanted everyone's opinion without going by that, but of course that matters.

Ehh...sure it matters, but it says little.

With all of the other variables, you could probably compare them from player to player and they'd be relevant. But rings, very much compared to wins/losses, is a team comparison dude.

Rondo wouldn't win a ring with Paul's or Williams's team either. When we compare player side by side like this:

Rings
Rondo: 1
Paul: 0

All we can say is that Rondo has a ring, and Paul does not.
Rondo plays for the Celtics, Paul does not.

What exactly does Rondo's championship add to this argument???

Are you trying to imply that Rondo has an edge over Nash, Paul, Williams, Jason Kidd prime, and John Stockton because none of those won a championship?

Where do you put Stockton and Kidd, all time PGs? I would hope not top 10 all time for either, since they didn't win one single damn ring, when many other players on these lists have won multiple.

Where do you put Patrick Ewing and Karl Malone among their positions???

I personally would put both very high, others however may not be adhering to their own standards if they include them high.




Everybody fuck off with wins/losses, champions, and any other team metrics.

[Killakobe81]

he was but he won regardless ...
And genius I said it should not matter here, but it DOES matter to me ...

[Killakobe81]

Everyone has their citeria for me it matters. Ewing and Stockton are great but not at the top of my all-time list BECAUSE they are ringless ...

But I created the topic, and I said who was the BEST right now ...

This was not about all-time rankings or titles ...

[ALVAREZ6]

he was but he won regardless ...
And genius I said it should not matter here, but it DOES matter to me ...

Sorry I misinterpreted your post.


I thought you were explaining that you did not bring it up initially because you wanted to hear what people had to say without talking about rings (for once, because everyone loves the championship arguments), and then by saying "but of course that matters", I thought you meant that yes, indeed, rings do matter. (in this discussion)

Sorry, but I just like to keep everything in context. You brought up rings in an argument where they don't matter.

[ALVAREZ6]

Everyone has their citeria for me it matters. Ewing and Stockton are great but not at the top of my all-time list BECAUSE they are ringless ...

But I created the topic, and I said who was the BEST right now ...

This was not about all-time rankings or titles ...

Listen, even if Stockton DID win a ring, I still wouldn't put him with Magic.



The point is as basketball fans we have more ways of judging players, using observation, etc. We don't need championships to tell us who the greatest players are. We don't read the paper in June and find out who ended up as the best bball team.

Let's think of it this way:

If KG never wins his only ring, how weaker of a career did he have, in terms or production and play? How much less of a player is he had he never won that championship? (assuming he doesn't win another)


How about if the Lakers lost game 7 last year...and the Celts come out on top. That means the Lakers were very damn close, but not quite there. 0.003% off. Yet 100% effect on legacy, what stupid people remember.

The rings argument is a simple way of dismissing other factors.

[Killakobe81]

Sorry I misinterpreted your post.


I thought you were explaining that you did not bring it up initially because you wanted to hear what people had to say without talking about rings (for once, because everyone loves the championship arguments), and then by saying "but of course that matters", I thought you meant that yes, indeed, rings do matter. (in this discussion)

Sorry, but I just like to keep everything in context. You brought up rings in an argument where they don't matter.

No prob. wasnt pulling it here here I really wanted everyone else's opinion I have mine ...

But rings or no I would still vote the way I did ...without rings Parker drops in my own personal rankings ...

Just like some people here love Duncan, and Robinson because they are good guys, good sports. It has NOTHING to do with ball ...but for those fans it matters. Nothing wrong with that ...Those guys are great players and top it off by being great guys.

[ALVAREZ6]

No prob. wasnt pulling it here here I really wanted everyone else's opinion I have mine ...

But rings or no I would still vote the way I did ...without rings Parker drops in my own personal rankings ...

Just like some people here love Duncan, and Robinson because they are good guys, good sports. It has NOTHING to do with ball ...but for those fans it matters. Nothing wrong with that ...Those guys are great players and top it off by being great guys.
Well then, here you are indirectly admitting your ranking is not 100% objective.

[Killakobe81]

Listen, even if Stockton DID win a ring, I still wouldn't put him with Magic.



The point is as basketball fans we have more ways of judging players, using observation, etc. We don't need championships to tell us who the greatest players are. We don't read the paper in June and find out who ended up as the best bball team.

Let's think of it this way:

If KG never wins his only ring, how weaker of a career did he have, in terms or production and play? How much less of a player is he had he never won that championship? (assuming he doesn't win another)


How about if the Lakers lost game 7 last year...and the Celts come out on top. That means the Lakers were very damn close, but not quite there. 0.003% off. Yet 100% effect on legacy, what stupid people remember.

The rings argument is a simple way of dismissing other factors.


Obviously diffrent argument. But if the goal of a team sport is to win a championship shouldnt the players that HELP lead their team to a title get a boost for that?

David was great player and had a great career BEFORE Tim. But did not win until Tim got there ...does that make him less great? No. But when compared to Duncan and Hakeem who led their team to titles he comes up short.

[Killakobe81]

Well then, here you are indirectly admitting your ranking is not 100% objective.

No, follow me. I posted this thread because I had som e doubts about who is the best PG right NOW. I listed the criteria I used for evaluating HS PG's (I used to coach girls and boys team at fairly high level). And i ranked the PG's by that criteria.

Where i am biased is in my personal rankings my list I used was based on the factors i listed today.

[Killakobe81]

Check my posts I always said Dwill but Rose and and Paul's resurgence had me re-thinking my stance.

[ALVAREZ6]

Obviously diffrent argument. But if the goal of a team sport is to win a championship shouldnt the players that HELP lead their team to a title get a boost for that?

Davis was great player and had agreat career BEFORE Tim. But did not win until Tim got there ...does that make him less great? No. But when compared to Duncan and Hakeem who led their team to titles he comes up short.
Well the way you make that Tim/David comparison, rings are relevant.



But in this discussion, we're having Paul vs. DWill vs. Rondo vs. Rose vs. Nash etc etc

The fact that Rondo won, does not boost him against another player like Paul, for example. If we remove Rondo and put CP3 on that team, does he win a championship? A resonating YES. what about Dwill? YES.

Does it give him points against the Rose argument? NO. Rose was not on that fully developed 2008 Celtics team.


Conclusion: Nothing.

That championship says nothing in this discussion.

[Killakobe81]

Well the way you make that Tim/David comparison, rings are relevant.



But in this discussion, we're having Paul vs. DWill vs. Rondo vs. Rose vs. Nash etc etc

The fact that Rondo won, does not boost him against another player like Paul, for example. If we remove Rondo and put CP3 on that team, does he win a championship? A resonating YES. what about Dwill? YES.

Does it give him points against the Rose argument? NO. Rose was not on that fully developed 2008 Celtics team.


Conclusion: Nothing.

That championship says nothing in this discussion.

Yep I agree. No argument. I have a personal ranking and one I am trying to decide here in this thread, by being objective as possible.
Again that is why I never brought up rings ...iniatially.
But for me it matters personally but Im trying to come to a more impersonal conclusion.
Read the first post again.

[Zelophehad]

Top 10:

CP3
Deron
Rose
Nash
Westbrook
Rondo
Parker
Billups
Curry
Felton/Andre Miller

[Pauleta14]

Did anybody looked at Westbrook's % shooting and TO????

He's great, no question, great upside... but right now? as a PG?

He's not in the top five...

1- CP3
2- DWill
3- Rose
4- Nash
5- Parker
6- Rondo
7- Westbrook

[buttsR4rebounding]

Did anybody looked at Westbrook's % shooting and TO????

He's great, no question, great upside... but right now? as a PG?

He's not in the top five...

1- CP3
2- DWill
3- Rose
4- Nash
5- Parker
6- Rondo
7- Westbrook

After watching Westbrook play over the weekend I would drop him down. He has been told by his coach to work on his lay ups. Judging from the Heat game he has a long way to go. Unless he got a dunk he just plain couldn't finish at the rim. In addition, he missed numerous open players for easy shots. There is no way he is a better point guard than Parker. He shoots almost 10% less from the field. His higher averages in points and assists are primarily from 2 reasons: 1. He plays more than 4 minutes a game more and 2 there are many times that Manu acts as point for the Spurs even when Parker is in the game. Westbrook has poor shot selection and court awareness.