Q12543 wrote:Abe, the problem though is one of volume. While Rondo is a lot more efficient than Rubio inside the arc, it doesn't make a ton of difference because he just doesn't attempt that many more shots.
Here are their stats, comparing Rondo from last season to Rubio of this season:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&p1=rondora01&y1=2013&p2=rubiori01&y2=2014
Not a ton of difference. Rubio gets more steals, turns it over less, shoots better from beyond the arc and at the free throw line. Rondo gets more assists (mostly because he is the focal point of that offense; they don't have Love-style forward facilitating from the high post) and yes, he is a lot more efficient on his 2-point shots.
He's just not that much better.
To be fair, I'm simply pointing out that Rondo isn't quite the poor shooter so many people in this thread assumed.
And, yes... Rubio has Love. But Rondo had Garnett (still a legit passer) and Paul Pierce. Doesn't that even things out at least? Rubio has Pekovic, Martin and Brewer as the other starters. They are not near the level of passers that Garnett, Pierce and even Terry were.
Q12543 wrote:Abe, the problem though is one of volume. While Rondo is a lot more efficient than Rubio inside the arc, it doesn't make a ton of difference because he just doesn't attempt that many more shots.
Here are their stats, comparing Rondo from last season to Rubio of this season:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&p1=rondora01&y1=2013&p2=rubiori01&y2=2014
Not a ton of difference. Rubio gets more steals, turns it over less, shoots better from beyond the arc and at the free throw line. Rondo gets more assists (mostly because he is the focal point of that offense; they don't have Love-style forward facilitating from the high post) and yes, he is a lot more efficient on his 2-point shots.
He's just not that much better.
Funny how you discredit Rondo's FG efficiency while crediting Rubio's FT and 3P percentages. If you're gonna talk about volume, or lack thereof, you should do it on all facets. Ricky's converting 37% of this threes, but he's making less than one a game (0.6) and trying less than two a game (1.7). Wait, I wouldn't want to forget about the two FTs made per game. 85% at the line is fantastic and meaningful IF you're getting there a whole hell of a lot more.
Q12543 wrote:Cam, While I agree that Rondo is currently the better player than Rubio, there are some mitigating factors here. First, he's older and has reached his ceiling for all intents and purposes. And while Rubio isn't exactly a spring chicken anymore, I still think there is some runway for improvement. Second, Rondo is owed another $13M in salary next season. I don't think he's worth that much. And lastly, probably what this team needs more than better finishers are better long-range shooters. Rondo does nothing to help us in this area whereas Rubio has at least shown some potential as a set shooter. We can build off of that. I just don't see Rondo's current level of play outweighing these other factors.
Q, to me its kind of the chicken or egg theory. Do the wolves not have guys that can hit outside shots or are they never open cuz the threat of the dribble drive and score just isnt there. Defenses dont collapse when Ricky drives to the hoop. Imagine if perimeter players had that extra split second to catch and shoot. I'm not saying they're world beaters but I know its alot easier to get a good look when the defender roams a lil bit.
Porkchop, This stuff can be factually verified. Martin, Love, and Brewer are hitting right at or around their career 3PT% rate and all three have spent a good portion of their career not playing with Rubio. So we can verify that Rubio is not detracting from their ability to hit 3 pointers. Brewer has always been a poor shooter. Who his PG is doesn't make a lick of difference. Martin and Love have always been good 3-point shooters. And both are at or above their career % this season, so Rubio certainly hasn't hurt them.
Q12543 wrote:Abe, the problem though is one of volume. While Rondo is a lot more efficient than Rubio inside the arc, it doesn't make a ton of difference because he just doesn't attempt that many more shots.
Here are their stats, comparing Rondo from last season to Rubio of this season:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&p1=rondora01&y1=2013&p2=rubiori01&y2=2014
Not a ton of difference. Rubio gets more steals, turns it over less, shoots better from beyond the arc and at the free throw line. Rondo gets more assists (mostly because he is the focal point of that offense; they don't have Love-style forward facilitating from the high post) and yes, he is a lot more efficient on his 2-point shots.
He's just not that much better.
Funny how you discredit Rondo's FG efficiency while crediting Rubio's FT and 3P percentages. If you're gonna talk about volume, or lack thereof, you should do it on all facets. Ricky's converting 37% of this threes, but he's making less than one a game (0.6) and trying less than two a game (1.7). Wait, I wouldn't want to forget about the two FTs made per game. 85% at the line is fantastic and meaningful IF you're getting there a whole hell of a lot more.
I agree. The point is that both of these guys are low volume shooters, so whatever efficiency gap that exists between the two of them doesn't make a big difference. Again, I'm not arguing that Rubio is flat out better than Rondo. I don't think he is. My argument is that the difference isn't that big between the two and the other factors we mentioned before - age, contract size, etc. - tip the scales in Rubio's favor IMHO.
PorkChop wrote:Good debate so far. If Gasol had gone back to Memphis as had been rumored I wouldve liked to seen a Conley/Rubio trade.
Why would Memphis do that?
If anything, I think Conley is more valuable than ever. They asked him to take on more responsibility this season, and he's shown he's capable of doing it when needed.
