Celtics are better with Nate at the point

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from puddinpuddin. Show puddinpuddin's posts

    Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point

    Considering that in the past, we have trotted out Sam Cassell, Starbury and Eddie House to sub for RR when he lost his aggressiveness or became an offensive liability late in close games, we certainly need to see what Nate can do under pressure with games on the line.

    And of course the same goes for giving DWest a shot at the PG spot late in games if/when he gets back from his wrist injury.

    We have nothing to lose and everything to gain at this point. That's exactly why we added Nate and Delonte to the mix, at least in part. To spread the floor and give us more desperately needed scoring options.

    Pud
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from greenkillme. Show greenkillme's posts

    Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point

    In Response to Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point : you must watch too much olbermann, where any critical thinking is equivocated to hate crimes and such. i have been a critique of rondo because i want the most out of him.  we have not gotten it yet.  so far this year people are swooning over his increased assist numbers while his scoring (important to have a scoring threat of a point guard or jacque vaghuan might have been a legend?!) is in the toilet, complete with a career worst free throw percentage. i don't have low expectations when it comes to rondo.  if you've ever read my posts before, then you read how i have 20, 50 times or more stated that I BELIEVE rondo COULD BE the best point guard in the game hands down- by a country mile. however, he can never be that until he masters the jumper.  i know it's a dead horse.  but, numbnuts, the current discussion centers around WHICH POINT GUARD is BETTER ON THE FLOOR FOR THE TEAM in the fourth quarter if the game becomes slow down.  the answer is that NATE must be given a try to see if he offers anything more than the evasive-to-ball-handling-duties and meek-to-shoot 4th quarter rondo has in the past. we need to get the double downs and sag defense off of our aging vets if we want to win it all.  can't you see that?  the SECOND that rondo becomes a consistent shooting threat and competent free throw shooter, then he is my fourth quarter man for this team, not to mention BEST GUARD IN THE LEAGUE.  until that point, we have to explore all options as far as what's best for the team. if you interpret that as hate then you are a modern day thought police lackey, duly formed by the quack pinko public education and university system where any dissent at all is hatred.  you can say it all you want but it doesn't make it true. 
    Posted by aciemvp[/QUOTE]


    As Winston Churchill said when they resort to insults... you know that they know you have said the truth.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from greenkillme. Show greenkillme's posts

    Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point

    In Response to Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point : you must watch too much olbermann, where any critical thinking is equivocated to hate crimes and such. i have been a critique of rondo because i want the most out of him.  we have not gotten it yet.  so far this year people are swooning over his increased assist numbers while his scoring (important to have a scoring threat of a point guard or jacque vaghuan might have been a legend?!) is in the toilet, complete with a career worst free throw percentage. i don't have low expectations when it comes to rondo.  if you've ever read my posts before, then you read how i have 20, 50 times or more stated that I BELIEVE rondo COULD BE the best point guard in the game hands down- by a country mile. however, he can never be that until he masters the jumper.  i know it's a dead horse.  but, numbnuts, the current discussion centers around WHICH POINT GUARD is BETTER ON THE FLOOR FOR THE TEAM in the fourth quarter if the game becomes slow down.  the answer is that NATE must be given a try to see if he offers anything more than the evasive-to-ball-handling-duties and meek-to-shoot 4th quarter rondo has in the past. we need to get the double downs and sag defense off of our aging vets if we want to win it all.  can't you see that?  the SECOND that rondo becomes a consistent shooting threat and competent free throw shooter, then he is my fourth quarter man for this team, not to mention BEST GUARD IN THE LEAGUE.  until that point, we have to explore all options as far as what's best for the team. if you interpret that as hate then you are a modern day thought police lackey, duly formed by the quack pinko public education and university system where any dissent at all is hatred.  you can say it all you want but it doesn't make it true. 
    Posted by aciemvp[/QUOTE]


    "Then you have Davis who has the anti-Rondo credo from Doc: I'm not going to play you consistent minutes nor minutes according to how well you play. This is the world of Doc Rivers. He has a crack cocaine grade addiction to tinkering with things and no sense of how to deal with young talent. He should be coaching an over 40 league somewhere in the Catskills where everyone is old and should know what to do. "

    Remeber when you posted that Acie....I guess this answers my question about whether you think you are smarter than Doc Rivers with respect to whether Rondo should be playing in the 4th quarter or not. You think you are smarter.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from greenkillme. Show greenkillme's posts

    Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point

    'doc rivers is a terrible coach.� i always doubted his in game coaching abilities.� now we all see that he has NONE.� doc is such a moron that he has YET to make one in game strategical coaching move.� many have been begging to be made.pierce and garnett are obviously overrated "

    And more from Acie in May 2008
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from NYCelt. Show NYCelt's posts

    Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point

    Nate Robinson over Rajon Rondo?

    Sorry; I can't justify spending any time on this.  A ridiculous argument at best.

    Robinson is a very good combo guard off the bench, however.

    Regards
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from greenkillme. Show greenkillme's posts

    Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point

    I for one think Rondo is celebrated as a premier point guard because the pundits and Doc do know something. That a lot of posters want to put round Rondo into their own image of a square point guard. That Nate got traded to the Celtics because he is a work in progress and will perhaps under Doc's guidance actually become a good NBA point guard. And I think Doc has proven he knows quite a bit about training and playing a talented NBA point guard.

    With Nate in the game and the game on the line I think we  would see a lot of  PP Iso's. Now who really wants to go back to that?
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from aciemvp. Show aciemvp's posts

    Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point

    In Response to Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point : "Then you have Davis who has the anti-Rondo credo from Doc: I'm not going to play you consistent minutes nor minutes according to how well you play. This is the world of Doc Rivers. He has a crack cocaine grade addiction to tinkering with things and no sense of how to deal with young talent. He should be coaching an over 40 league somewhere in the Catskills where everyone is old and should know what to do. " Remeber when you posted that Acie....I guess this answers my question about whether you think you are smarter than Doc Rivers with respect to whether Rondo should be playing in the 4th quarter or not. You think you are smarter.
    Posted by greenkillme[/QUOTE]

    yep, i remember that green shill weed.  and i stand by it as it pertains to the development of rondo vs. how davis has been treated by this club up until this year.  rondo was handed a starting job before ever earning it.  he had no fundamentals to this game.  ainge was complicit in that.  it's really old news. 

    then you take how doc treated davis in his early days right up AND THROUGH last year.  he treated davis like crap, all the while sheed is coasting through games and never gets yanked for the type of loafing around that made wicks and rowe look like hustle players.

    it's a hypocrisy.  it's doc.  he'd do it again with the right vets on this team.  lucky for the fans, we have divested from one aging big to two and they fit in better and are more functional than sheed was last year.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from aciemvp. Show aciemvp's posts

    Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point

    In Response to Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point:
    [QUOTE]'doc rivers is a terrible coach.� i always doubted his in game coaching abilities.� now we all see that he has NONE.� doc is such a moron that he has YET to make one in game strategical coaching move.� many have been begging to be made.pierce and garnett are obviously overrated " And more from Acie in May 2008
    Posted by greenkillme[/QUOTE]

    yep, at the time, lots of people were disappointed with doc.  frankly, he got lucky that these three stars gelled and doc had an assistant who did a lot of the dirty work setting up a defense- thibodeau. 

    as of may 2008, i don't think anyone was arguing that doc was a masterful in game coach.  he never has been. 

    so what's your point greenie?
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from aciemvp. Show aciemvp's posts

    Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point

    In Response to Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point:
    [QUOTE]With Nate in the game and the game on the line I think we  would see a lot of  PP Iso's. Now who really wants to go back to that?
    Posted by greenkillme[/QUOTE]

    you are as perceptive as a pet rock. 

    with anyone in the game they are going to try to do pierce iso's and see what develops off of it.  the problem with rondo being in the game is that HIS MAN is always inside of pierce's shirt and/or clogging the passing lanes making the pierce iso or KG post up play very very difficult, each second that goes by more difficult due to age concerns.

    so if we can play an honest 5 on 5 in a slow down format, it benefits us. 

    is this really that complicated that you can't understand it? 

    THAT is the argument for giving nate a shot when the game slows down and rondo's nerve runs out.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from aciemvp. Show aciemvp's posts

    Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point

    you can also go pick and roll with rondo/pierce or nate/pierce.  pick and roll with rondo doesn't work because rondo's man sticks to pierce.  pick and pop or roll with nate works as nate can pop or make havoc in the lane with runners with more accuracy than rondo and is not scared of getting fouled.

    now you can go back to olbermann, green thinker
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from puddinpuddin. Show puddinpuddin's posts

    Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point

    In Response to Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point:
    [QUOTE]you can also go pick and roll with rondo/pierce or nate/pierce.  pick and roll with rondo doesn't work because rondo's man sticks to pierce.  pick and pop or roll with nate works as nate can pop or make havoc in the lane with runners with more accuracy than rondo and is not scared of getting fouled. now you can go back to olbermann, green thinker
    Posted by aciemvp[/QUOTE]

    What.... Rondo scared????

    Is that what we are watching when the game is on the line? When he consistently turns down wide open 12 to 15 foot jumpers or fails to take it to the rim so he can score or shoot FTs, I don't know what else you might call it. 

    If it isn't fear, for God sake, what is it?

    And what happened to all that giddy-up and swagger that Rondo started the game with?

    Pud
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from greenkillme. Show greenkillme's posts

    Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point

    In Response to Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point:
    [QUOTE]you can also go pick and roll with rondo/pierce or nate/pierce.  pick and roll with rondo doesn't work because rondo's man sticks to pierce.  pick and pop or roll with nate works as nate can pop or make havoc in the lane with runners with more accuracy than rondo and is not scared of getting fouled. now you can go back to olbermann, green thinker
    Posted by aciemvp[/QUOTE]

    Who is Olbermann and why is he relevant? Run a pick and roll with Rondo and you get a wide open Rondo who can attack the hoop, get the rebound  or, because he has plenty of room, can make the lob to Shaq or KG. They shouldn' t leave Rondo open any more than they leave Nate because Rondo shreds them with an assist.

    Why are you so focused on the jump shot as a better weapon when Rondo does have it and so much more?

    How do you think the other players like pass first Rondo vs shoot first pass second Nate.  If I was any other player on the team I'd want Rondo in more than Nate. Nate's job is with the second unit.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from DaPrince77. Show DaPrince77's posts

    Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point

    The Celtics should try to get Scalabrine back, then start him instead of KG. If they do this, Banner 18 will not be denied. (LOL)
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from greenkillme. Show greenkillme's posts

    Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point

    In Response to Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point : you are as perceptive as a pet rock.  with anyone in the game they are going to try to do pierce iso's and see what develops off of it.  the problem with rondo being in the game is that HIS MAN is always inside of pierce's shirt and/or clogging the passing lanes making the pierce iso or KG post up play very very difficult, each second that goes by more difficult due to age concerns. so if we can play an honest 5 on 5 in a slow down format, it benefits us.  is this really that complicated that you can't understand it?  THAT is the argument for giving nate a shot when the game slows down and rondo's nerve runs out.
    Posted by aciemvp[/QUOTE]

    Well we had the opportunity in the Toronto loss to see Nate in the game and the affect on PP iso's ...not that great a result.

    Hey you've got your pet peeves and you've had them for years so why should I bother arguing with you. You are smarter than Doc. Often wrong but never in doubt. It is hard to argue with someone who has no self doubt about his opinions even when the evidence over time has stacked up against him.


    As for me...I saw the outstanding athleticism of Rondo in the first preseason game of his rookie year and on this board said he was the best pure point since Cousy. It excited me so much that I watched over 50 games that disastrous rookie year when Pierce was hurt. So I have been a non stop defender of Rondo and until his play changes for the worse I will not believe that his deficiencies are enough to put him on the bench. He does so much more than Nate that it isn't even close. I don't care that he doesn't shoot the jump shot.

    I'll leave others to decide who was right and who was wrong.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from greenkillme. Show greenkillme's posts

    Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point

    Wow I can't believe how posters on here after 3 years of watching one of the best points in the league who is just flat out fun to watch are still posting about his shooting. Get over it the guy is a facilitator and scorer. The last thing his teammates want is for him to come down and look for his own shot. We have, if he continues the way he has, a hall of fame guard. Cousy, Heinsohn and I love him. Stop the lame posts about his shooting and focus on how lucky you are that he is on your team. Think about it. We could have someone like Aroyo.

    My post last Spring.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point

    I don't comment on basketball as much anymore but I had to add just how inane this thread has become, if you wanted to say you prefer Nate with a minute left in the 4th than say that, but Rondo is more often than not (like the Heat announcers said earlier in the year after a sound beating) the best player on the floor for either team.

    He starts with the most efficient assist performance the league has ever seen statistically to start any NBA season in history, than gets hurt and he's no longer good enough..?  Talk about narrow thinking...

    He is the best game manager and defender at point guard in the league... period.

    Puddin is Dudder, Dudder has been crushed so many times on this board that he had to change his moniker, in the past he has created other profiles to bolster his own wild, anti-Celtic rhetoric, Dudder is a Knicks fan and a troll, if you buy his BS than you're a bigger fool than he is.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from TheDUDDER. Show TheDUDDER's posts

    Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point

    In Response to Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point:
    [QUOTE]You are kicking it but Nate does create problems for the opposition.  Just that Rondo creates even more.
    Posted by concord27[/QUOTE]

    Rondo creates huge problems for other teams - "who should we double team while ignoring Rondo?" - "while the half is running down, how do we go to the bench sooner to listen our coach while Rondo is throwing a brick from 12 feet?" - "how do we defend 3 against 5 when Rondo brings the ball into the front court and then hides in the corner hoping the ball never cycles back to him for a shot?" - "how do we watch Rondo pound the ball into the floor on every possession until he has assured himself an assist?"

    Rondo's return results in a game where his opposite number has one more assist than he does, as well as a dozen more points.

    All of the green glasses guys love the 14 assists per game but none can take a step back and understand that there are a dozen if not more point guards in the league that can average 14 assists with the guys Rondo is playing with.

    Posters love to talk about how there are two types of point guards - pass first and scoring point guards......  in Boston point guards that can score don't count because they are not "true" point guards.

    What I love to read about is "so and so is perfect for this team"....  didn't we stop believing in brainwashing a long time ago?......

    "so and so is perfect for this team" is a qualifier - it is a qualifier in which the poster / fan says that basically says we have an incomplete player at a certain position and that somehow his weaknesses (which are fundamental to the position he plays) can be overlooked because he does other things that other players don't do - ummmmmmm, other players don't do it because they don't have #5, #20, and #34 to make up for their weaknesses.

    Perk is perfect for this team.... well unless of course you want an athletic, intelligent, good player....i..e Shaq and J O....

    Rondo is perfect for this team.... well unless of course you want a player that can both run the offense and also participate in the offense.... Paul, Williams, Westbrook, Curry, Collison, Wall, Parker, Kidd, Nash, Nelson, Harris, Calderon (Rondo returns with 14 assists, Caleron has 15), Tyreke Evans... blah, blah, blah.........

    There are the fans that think that the hype is the player and then of course there are the fans that understand the game and Rondo is a gigantic detriment to his team's offense.

    There are a dozen other point guards who if were flip-flopped from their respective rosters - the Celtics would certainly be no worse off and in many cases be better...

    Please take the glasses off and try to make a rational and objective assessment.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Icon11. Show Icon11's posts

    Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point

    Did you guys just start watching the NBA this season?  Nate has a career average of 2.7 assists a game and has started 64 games over his entire 6 year career.  There isn't a coach in the NBA that would start Nate over Rondo.  Fun to talk about though huh?
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Icon11. Show Icon11's posts

    Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point

    In Response to Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point : Rondo creates huge problems for other teams - "who should we double team while ignoring Rondo?" - "while the half is running down, how do we go to the bench sooner to listen our coach while Rondo is throwing a brick from 12 feet?" - "how do we defend 3 against 5 when Rondo brings the ball into the front court and then hides in the corner hoping the ball never cycles back to him for a shot?" - "how do we watch Rondo pound the ball into the floor on every possession until he has assured himself an assist?" Rondo's return results in a game where his opposite number has one more assist than he does, as well as a dozen more points. All of the green glasses guys love the 14 assists per game but none can take a step back and understand that there are a dozen if not more point guards in the league that can average 14 assists with the guys Rondo is playing with. Posters love to talk about how there are two types of point guards - pass first and scoring point guards......  in Boston point guards that can score don't count because they are not "true" point guards. What I love to read about is "so and so is perfect for this team"....  didn't we stop believing in brainwashing a long time ago?...... "so and so is perfect for this team" is a qualifier - it is a qualifier in which the poster / fan says that basically says we have an incomplete player at a certain position and that somehow his weaknesses (which are fundamental to the position he plays) can be overlooked because he does other things that other players don't do - ummmmmmm, other players don't do it because they don't have #5, #20, and #34 to make up for their weaknesses. Perk is perfect for this team.... well unless of course you want an athletic, intelligent, good player....i..e Shaq and J O.... Rondo is perfect for this team.... well unless of course you want a player that can both run the offense and also participate in the offense.... Paul, Williams, Westbrook, Curry, Collison, Wall, Parker, Kidd, Nash, Nelson, Harris, Calderon (Rondo returns with 14 assists, Caleron has 15), Tyreke Evans... blah, blah, blah......... There are the fans that think that the hype is the player and then of course there are the fans that understand the game and Rondo is a gigantic detriment to his team's offense. There are a dozen other point guards who if were flip-flopped from their respective rosters - the Celtics would certainly be no worse off and in many cases be better... Please take the glasses off and try to make a rational and objective assessment.
    Posted by TheDUDDER[/QUOTE]


    Do you rewrite these posts or do you just cut and paste the same thing you have been writing for 5 years? 
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point

    In Response to Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point : Rondo creates huge problems for other teams - "who should we double team while ignoring Rondo?" - "while the half is running down, how do we go to the bench sooner to listen our coach while Rondo is throwing a brick from 12 feet?" - "how do we defend 3 against 5 when Rondo brings the ball into the front court and then hides in the corner hoping the ball never cycles back to him for a shot?" - "how do we watch Rondo pound the ball into the floor on every possession until he has assured himself an assist?" Rondo's return results in a game where his opposite number has one more assist than he does, as well as a dozen more points. All of the green glasses guys love the 14 assists per game but none can take a step back and understand that there are a dozen if not more point guards in the league that can average 14 assists with the guys Rondo is playing with. Posters love to talk about how there are two types of point guards - pass first and scoring point guards......  in Boston point guards that can score don't count because they are not "true" point guards. What I love to read about is "so and so is perfect for this team"....  didn't we stop believing in brainwashing a long time ago?...... "so and so is perfect for this team" is a qualifier - it is a qualifier in which the poster / fan says that basically says we have an incomplete player at a certain position and that somehow his weaknesses (which are fundamental to the position he plays) can be overlooked because he does other things that other players don't do - ummmmmmm, other players don't do it because they don't have #5, #20, and #34 to make up for their weaknesses. Perk is perfect for this team.... well unless of course you want an athletic, intelligent, good player....i..e Shaq and J O.... Rondo is perfect for this team.... well unless of course you want a player that can both run the offense and also participate in the offense.... Paul, Williams, Westbrook, Curry, Collison, Wall, Parker, Kidd, Nash, Nelson, Harris, Calderon (Rondo returns with 14 assists, Caleron has 15), Tyreke Evans... blah, blah, blah......... There are the fans that think that the hype is the player and then of course there are the fans that understand the game and Rondo is a gigantic detriment to his team's offense. There are a dozen other point guards who if were flip-flopped from their respective rosters - the Celtics would certainly be no worse off and in many cases be better... Please take the glasses off and try to make a rational and objective assessment.
    Posted by TheDUDDER[/QUOTE]

    WRONG

    as always:-)

    the board jester returns to spew vomit

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from aciemvp. Show aciemvp's posts

    Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point

    In Response to Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point : Who is Olbermann and why is he relevant? Run a pick and roll with Rondo and you get a wide open Rondo who can attack the hoop, get the rebound  or, because he has plenty of room, can make the lob to Shaq or KG. Posted by greenkillme[/QUOTE]

    that's a laugher.  i have watched rondo NOT attack anything in most fourth quarter slow down situations for three plus years now.  pick and roll doesn't work when the sagging is so bad that nobody is open and it especially doesn't work with a zero of an outside shot threat.  it just doesn't. 
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from rayallen1. Show rayallen1's posts

    Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point

    Celtic are at their best with both ROndo and Nate.   But I think in a perfect world, where egos don't exist, Rondo should start the game, but Nate should finish the game, atleast on the offensive end, and Rondo on the defensive end.  Because towards the end of games, the ball is not in Rondo hands anymore, and when the ball is not in his hands, Rondo can't keep the floor spread because of his shooting issues.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from OneOnOne. Show OneOnOne's posts

    Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point

    In Response to Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point : Exactly. Rondo is a good player, but our offense bogs down in the fourth quarter repeatedly.
    Posted by Kirk6[/QUOTE]

    Usually everyone blames PP for the offense bogging down.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from OneOnOne. Show OneOnOne's posts

    Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point

    In Response to Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point:
    [QUOTE]Wow I can't believe how posters on here after 3 years of watching one of the best points in the league who is just flat out fun to watch are still posting about his shooting. Get over it the guy is a facilitator and scorer. The last thing his teammates want is for him to come down and look for his own shot. We have, if he continues the way he has, a hall of fame guard. Cousy, Heinsohn and I love him. Stop the lame posts about his shooting and focus on how lucky you are that he is on your team. Think about it. We could have someone like Aroyo. My post last Spring.
    Posted by greenkillme[/QUOTE]

    This is a rather stupid thread isn't it?  At one time Kirk was just as high on Rondo as everyone else.  What a change.  I remember certain posters compaining the Robinson didn't "defend". 
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from OneOnOne. Show OneOnOne's posts

    Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point

    In Response to Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Celtics are better with Nate at the point : Rondo creates huge problems for other teams - "who should we double team while ignoring Rondo?" - "while the half is running down, how do we go to the bench sooner to listen our coach while Rondo is throwing a brick from 12 feet?" - "how do we defend 3 against 5 when Rondo brings the ball into the front court and then hides in the corner hoping the ball never cycles back to him for a shot?" - "how do we watch Rondo pound the ball into the floor on every possession until he has assured himself an assist?" Rondo's return results in a game where his opposite number has one more assist than he does, as well as a dozen more points. All of the green glasses guys love the 14 assists per game but none can take a step back and understand that there are a dozen if not more point guards in the league that can average 14 assists with the guys Rondo is playing with. Posters love to talk about how there are two types of point guards - pass first and scoring point guards......  in Boston point guards that can score don't count because they are not "true" point guards. What I love to read about is "so and so is perfect for this team"....  didn't we stop believing in brainwashing a long time ago?...... "so and so is perfect for this team" is a qualifier - it is a qualifier in which the poster / fan says that basically says we have an incomplete player at a certain position and that somehow his weaknesses (which are fundamental to the position he plays) can be overlooked because he does other things that other players don't do - ummmmmmm, other players don't do it because they don't have #5, #20, and #34 to make up for their weaknesses. Perk is perfect for this team.... well unless of course you want an athletic, intelligent, good player....i..e Shaq and J O.... Rondo is perfect for this team.... well unless of course you want a player that can both run the offense and also participate in the offense.... Paul, Williams, Westbrook, Curry, Collison, Wall, Parker, Kidd, Nash, Nelson, Harris, Calderon (Rondo returns with 14 assists, Caleron has 15), Tyreke Evans... blah, blah, blah......... There are the fans that think that the hype is the player and then of course there are the fans that understand the game and Rondo is a gigantic detriment to his team's offense. There are a dozen other point guards who if were flip-flopped from their respective rosters - the Celtics would certainly be no worse off and in many cases be better... Please take the glasses off and try to make a rational and objective assessment.
    Posted by TheDUDDER[/QUOTE]

    As i saw in a movie the other day.  "Dudder you are the most stupid, smart person I have ever seen."
     

Share