No rush to anoint Rondo

There is flash and there is substance, and somewhere is between rests the elusive Rajon Rondo. Someday, he could he could be great. At the moment, he isn’t nearly as good as many make him out to be.

Trade Rondo? You bet I would, assuming the Celtics got fair value in return. Admittedly, fair is a highly subjective term. But if you were even remotely surprised by Danny Ainge’s recent admission that nobody is untouchable, you have not been paying attention to the world of professional sports, in general, or to the case of Rondo, in particular. And lest anyone think this is all some sort of commentary on Rondo’s off-court issues, as we have come to learn them.

Let’s keep the argument strictly on the parquet floor.

At the moment, Rondo doesn’t shoot well enough. There are still too many nights when he seems to vanish. While many were caught up in those triple-doubles during the postseason, Rondo was making some questionable decisions at the end of games and, on occasion, unnecessarily pulling rebounds away from bigger teammates. There were occasions, it seemed, when it was more about him than it was about them.

At the time, it seemed a little too contrived to say those things because the Celtics were grinding their way through the playoffs with commendable gusto in the absence of Kevin Garnett.

Obviously, we all love Rondo’s potential, but this isn’t about that. It’s about the now. Moments before Ray Allen hit his game-winning 3-pointer against the Chicago Bulls in Game 2 of the Celtics’ first-round playoff series, few seem to remember that Rondo took a very debatable jumper; only Allen’s ability to keep alive an offensive rebound preserved possession for the Celtics. Had that failed to happen, we all might have asked why Rondo was shooting in the first place given the other options on the floor.

In any game, after all, the job of the point guard is to make everyone else better. Distribute the ball. Put teammates in a position to succeed. At the end of the day, for every player, the numbers are nothing more than eye candy that follows the main course, in this case winning.

Let’s use Garnett as an example. For all of the praise Garnett has received for his abilities as a defensive player, his offensive skills are every bit as valuable to the Celtics and they are just as considerable, too. (Don’t confuse offense with scoring.) Garnett could probably average a triple-double if he wanted to -- he is that good of a passer, too -- but he long ago recognized that the best way to win is as a team, with a calculated division of labor that makes everyone more effective.

With a guy like Garnett, it has never been about triple-doubles, points, rebounds or assists. It has been about Ws, plain and simple, and that is meant as a compliment of the highest order. If Garnett ever has been frustrated, we’re willing to bet those times have come when others around him have failed to recognize that.

In the wake of Ainge’s public, honest and entirely accurate assessment of Rondo’s development as a player and person, Rondo’s agent, Bill Duffy, was predictably tweaked. This is now the age we live in. Vehicles like ESPN have prematurely turned young people into superstars -- this is a reality that goes well beyond the sports world -- and nobody wants to work for anything anymore. Young people, in particular, want to be handed their diplomas, step off the platform and become CEOs by 25, and they actually believe they are capable of doing it. They are smarter and more competent than you, and they are all too willing to let you know it. Maybe that manifests itself in how they play or work. Maybe that manifests itself when they have inadequate regard for team rules or the people who came before them.

Without question, Ainge and Celtics coach Doc Rivers are extremely smart men who generally shoot straight and pull no punches. That is a big reason each is widely respected by most everyone. The trade rumors and criticisms of Rondo probably were not an accident -- the criticisms certainly were not -- because Ainge and Rivers know how this sort of thing usually plays out. And while there is certainly the possibility (or probability) that the Celtics already are posturing with regard to talks on a contract extension for Rondo, Ainge delivered a message in recent days that was spot on.

Rondo has a chance to be something very special. Garnett himself said as much during the Celtics’ drive to the championship in 2007-08. If Rondo is not eventually one of the very best guards in the league, Garnett suggested, then that will be the fault of no one but Rondo himself.

Couldn’t it be that Ainge’s recent remarks were about helping Rondo rather hurting him?

As fans and onlookers, we are all guilty of falling in love with some players more than others. The ones with certain panache are all the more appealing. Guys like Rondo and Jacoby Ellsbury have the athleticism to make spectacular plays, but those kind of demonstrations are the sports world’s answer to wrapping paper. Ultimately, it does not matter what the outside of the box looks like. What matters is what is inside the box, which speaks to a player’s ability to contribute to wins.

With Rondo, do we really know if he is a winning player at this point? Or is he just a young guy who was along for the ride in June 2008? No matter how you really slice it, the only indispensable players on the Celtics at the moment are Garnett and Paul Pierce, either of whose absence would deal a major blow to championship hopes in 2009-10. The Celtics can without Ray Allen and they can win without Rondo, and the existence of economic factors (with or without a salary) means that all teams eventually must make hard decisions on good players.

Rondo? He’s good. But let’s not go calling him great just yet.