Questions for Bluedove

[sleepy]

On your theory that a one eyed one legged man could make those passes in Boston I will assume this.  Rondo only has the stats in the assist column because of the greatness around him? If that is the case let's look at the most talented teams in the league and according to your theory we will find two more below average passers who look good only because the guys around them.  Obviously the most "talented" teams in the league are arguable between the Lakers and the Heat with the Celtics following a close third.  The Miami Heat have two point guards that play the majority of the teams minutes at PG.  Carlos Arroyo and Mario Chalmers.  They combine to average 37 minutes per game, 9.6 points per game, and 5 assists per game.  Then you look over at the Lakers who have Derek Fisher and Steve Blake who average a combined 46 minutes per game, 13 points per game, and 5 assists per game.  Rajan Rondo is averaging 4 more assists per game than all four of those combined so that is double the amount of PT as well. I will tell you that your theory that having the best talent does not automatically produce Rondo's assist numbers and a "one eyed one legged guy" can't make those passes in Boston. I will also argue that if Rondo were a "below average passer" that he would not be in the league due to all of the other (according to you) insufficiencies in his game.

[stevenash]

I am going to guess that it is now time for the declining career vs upswing career strategy although Mario Chalmers is younger than Rondo.  If not, it will CERTAINLY be time for you to re-evaluate your outlook on basketball.

[BLUEDOVE3]

Correct me if wrong but I was thinking this thread was more about the kids and their skill level in high school as a spot up shooter vs one who can create off the dribble. And who is more valuable to the team. The pros have several players who can play the game. High schools may have 2 players. Most spot up shooters I have seen at the high school level are less athletic, aren't great ball handlers and foot speed is slow. Give me an athletic kid who is quick and I'll show that kid how to wear the shooter's jockey straps.

[Aces_Full]

When you all are talking about "spot up" shooters, these are the same guys that coaches call plays for, run off multiple screens, bust zones, and set up inbounds plays for correct?  There are many ways to get open and be effective, besides being able to "create your own shot", or better said taking someone off the dribble.  Labeling some players as just "spot up" shooters is devaluing what they can do.  JJ Reddick did a heck of a lot more at Duke than just stand in the corner and wait for one of his teammates to drive and kick. 

[stevenash]

[quote name="Aces_Full" post="926688" timestamp="1291564040"]
When you all are talking about "spot up" shooters, these are the same guys that coaches call plays for, run off multiple screens, bust zones, and set up inbounds plays for correct?  There are many ways to get open and be effective, besides being able to "create your own shot", or better said taking someone off the dribble.  Labeling some players as just "spot up" shooters is devaluing what they can do.  JJ Reddick did a heck of a lot more at Duke than just stand in the corner and wait for one of his teammates to drive and kick. 
[/quote]

I salute you sir, for your common sense and logic.

[AggiesAreWe]

Nothing wrong with being a "spot up shooter". I want at least one on my team, for sure. But, I don't want a team full of them though. ;) ;D

[ballin4life]

[quote name="AggiesAreWe" post="926713" timestamp="1291567084"]
Nothing wrong with being a "spot up shooter". I want at least one on my team, for sure. But, I don't want a team full of them though. ;) ;D
[/quote]

i agree with that.

[ballin4life]

rondo did not play on the usa team, hes not better than nash, and is not a top 8 pg  in my opinion. hes surrounded by HOF'ers, is that his fault no but the stats dont always tell the whole story.

[stevenash]

[quote name="ballin4life" post="926720" timestamp="1291567714"]
rondo did not play on the usa team, hes not better than nash, and is not a top 8 pg  in my opinion. hes surrounded by HOF'ers, is that his fault no but the stats dont always tell the whole story.
[/quote]

As stated earlier, take the stats of the starting AND backup point guards for the Heat and the Lakers.  Rondo outproduces the combined stats of either by a large margin.  So the HOFers theory does not work.  You dont make the ALL NBA FIRST DEFENSIVE TEAM and make the NBA ALL STAR TEAM by being less than a top 8 guard.  I still submit that the people making those decisions know a heck of a lot more about basketball than any of us do.  Its kind of like me saying that Apple Computer stock, which is trading around $318 per share is only worth $50 per share because that is what I think.  The market place knows quite a bit more than I do and has placed the appropriate value on the stock.   It might look a little silly for me to "declare" than LeBron or Kobe are not that good.

[east texas bb]

Ballin4life, I agree with most all you said.  I want a spot up shooter but only one maybe two and not on the court at the same time.  You cant go to sleep and church on here without people posting like crazy.  When do yall sleep or spend time with family?
Back to topic, Rondo didnt play on the weakest Team USA in while because he had no place.  The other two guards were so much better than him.  Rondo is good where he is at, you put him on another team and he will not flourish.  Give credit to the Celtics Gm.  If Nate Robinson was in a different place he would be flourishing, but he dosent get the chance because the Celtics need someone just like Rondo.  Someone who can pass to their All-Stars.  They dont need Nate because he can score and will take points and opportuity away from the Big 3 which are better than him and need to be taking the shot.  JJ Reddick was a playmaker in college, in the NBA the speed has caught up to him.  SteveNash, no one on here gets as angry as you, they can post their posts without being beligerent. 
The Celtics have done a great job of creating a team, that is why they have Nate and Rondo.  If the two played on different teams you would see different results but the Celtics know what they are doing and recruit the best players to play around their 3.  The Celtics dont need a playmaker at PG, because they have 3 already.  That is why Rondo plays.  Rondo has been a very lucky person, to get signed with the Celtics.  Any other team, you would not here his name.  ANd then you bring up Mario Chalmers playing 37 minutes.  How much of that time is the ball in his hands?  Come on.  Make a statement that has credibility.  People who know basketball will see right through that argument.  And alot of people are assuming that a playmaker has to be a PG, I never said that.  I said, and reapeat, and am still waiting on someone to tell the truth that a playmaker, AKA, Michael Jordan is better than a spot up shooter.

[east texas bb]

And I am not saying I know even anywhere close to what the Celtics coaches or Gm knows.  I have alot of respect for them all including their assistant Kevin Eastman.  My point on Nate Robinson and Rondo was that if you put them on different teams they would be very close to each other or Nate has the edge.  On the Celtics, Rondo gets the nod because he is EXACTLY what they need.  And understand I am comparing a very average guard to Rondo.  Guys, Rondo is good for his team, but do you really think he would be good on another team in the league. 

THIS IS WHAT STARTED THE TOPIC:  IS A "PLAYMAKER": someone who can create shots for himeself, someone who can create shots for others, someone who can hit the spot up jumper more valuable or less valuable than a SPOT UP SHOOTER: one that can hit the open shot when it is passed to him in an open situation? 

You dont have to say you need them both, I know that. I just want to know which is more valuable.  On dont say the Celtics, because they have 2-3 very good playmakers.  But on 99% of any team in America and 99% of coaches will tell you, they will take the player who creates.  If you can admit that then you are terribly stubborn or do not know the game.  I believe it is the former not the latter.  I believe you know the game stevenash, but for some reason you are having trouble admitting this.

[east texas bb]

I have been watching your threads for awhile now without posting and have notcied that you do exactly what you have done in this thread.  Take a simple topic about who is better a playmaker or a spot up shooter and turned it in to the Celtics (greatest franchise ever) against me.  You are very good at twisting words.  Again, you should be a politician. 

It looks like we are not going to agree on this topic, so lets let it go and agree to disagree and talk about something else later.  Have a good Sunday with the family to all.

[Aces_Full]

You can take all the "playmakers."  I will take 5 "shotmakers" any day.  When you have 5 guys on the court who can all shoot, nothing is harder to defend. 

[stevenash]

[quote name="east texas bb" post="926764" timestamp="1291573317"]
I have been watching your threads for awhile now without posting and have notcied that you do exactly what you have done in this thread.  Take a simple topic about who is better a playmaker or a spot up shooter and turned it in to the Celtics (greatest franchise ever) against me.  You are very good at twisting words.  Again, you should be a politician. 

It looks like we are not going to agree on this topic, so lets let it go and agree to disagree and talk about something else later.  Have a good Sunday with the family to all.
[/quote]

And who, prey tell,other than Pierce is a shot generator extraodinaire?  No doubt in my mind JOrdan is the greatest ever.  I also know you have to have a good outside shooter to  compete in the league.  If you are particularly proficient at one aspect, such as shooting, chances are you are not particulary proficient at some other skill such as dribbling.  Say what you want, LeBron is, relatively speaking, a poor outside shooter but wonderful playmaker. You say I am stubborn or dont know the game?  translation- I have to be that way if I disagree with you.  And my belief about how this conversation began is your comment about the Bosha kid at HJ in another thread.  This thread began with  my question to Bluedove and you decided to enter the conversation.  Why not go back and see if that is the case or am I "just twisting words" again?  I would still like to know how such an average guard got on the All STar TEAM.  And you TELL ME  I avoid questions?  Very interesting.  REgarding the Celtics and their "three very good playmakers".  How do they compare to Miamis three very good playmakers.  Why is one team at 13-4 and the other slightly above 500?  ANd the baloney about putting Nate and Rondo on different teams is simply your opinion which is STILL just one opinion and possibly not as relevant as you would like to believe it is.  Gotta go- am pulling out my old videos and watch all of the great shots generated by Magic Johnson.  If your theory wasnt "bought" on the coaches board last year, why expect it to fly here?

[CThoops]

[quote name="Aces_Full" post="926779" timestamp="1291575100"]
You can take all the "playmakers."  I will take 5 "shotmakers" any day.  When you have 5 guys on the court who can all shoot, nothing is harder to defend. 
[/quote]

Every coach wants "Shotmakers"  ;) ;D

Shotmakers are different from spot-up shooters..

[east texas bb]

What are you talking about if your theory was not "bought" on the coaches board last year why would it on here?  I dont understand.  Please enlighten me.  You have me curious. Do you think you know me, I will private message you and tell you what my name is. And not everyone is diagreeing with me.  It looks like about 1/2 and 1/2.
Garnett is a shot creator or playmaker.  And I didnt see your question about Miami is why I didnt answer it but I will.  The Heat have 2 good playmakers.  Bosh is very average and that is not just my opinion.  No doubt that the Celtics are better than the Heat.  They have a better TEAM.  Do I think the Heat will be good by seasons end?  Yes, they will be trouble in the playoffs if Wade and Lebron can learn to play with each other.  The Celtics are "hands down" better than 2 playmakers from the Heat vs. a seasoned Celtics team, including 2 playmakers, a great spot up shooter and good post play.  What it takes to make a team.

[east texas bb]

And I wish the best for the Bosha kid, either if he is a spot up shooter or a playmaker.  He will still make an impact either way. 
Regarding Rondo, that is why I said we could agree to disagree.  You can believe as you choose and I will.  That is what is great about America, we all get an opinion. 
But dont come on this board and act as if you know me, you do not know me and I dont know you.  Just like your posts you are assuming from something.  I will gladly tell anyone what my name is if they want to know, I am not going to hide behind a screen name.  That is how it is set up but I will post message anyone and tell them. 

And I gather since you can get on a coaches board you must be a coach.

[AggiesAreWe]

[quote name="east texas bb" post="926798" timestamp="1291576681"]
And I wish the best for the Bosha kid, either if he is a spot up shooter or a playmaker.  He will still make an impact either way. 
Regarding Rondo, that is why I said we could agree to disagree.  You can believe as you choose and I will.  That is what is great about America, we all get an opinion. 
But dont come on this board and act as if you know me, you do not know me and I dont know you.  Just like your posts you are assuming from something.  I will gladly tell anyone what my name is if they want to know, I am not going to hide behind a screen name.  That is how it is set up but I will post message anyone and tell them. 

[b]And I gather since you can get on a coaches board you must be a coach[/b].
[/quote]



Close, but no cigar. Relative.

[stevenash]

[quote name="east texas bb" post="926798" timestamp="1291576681"]
And I wish the best for the Bosha kid, either if he is a spot up shooter or a playmaker.  He will still make an impact either way. 
Regarding Rondo, that is why I said we could agree to disagree.  You can believe as you choose and I will.  That is what is great about America, we all get an opinion. 
But dont come on this board and act as if you know me, you do not know me and I dont know you.  Just like your posts you are assuming from something.  I will gladly tell anyone what my name is if they want to know, I am not going to hide behind a screen name.  That is how it is set up but I will post message anyone and tell them. 

And I gather since you can get on a coaches board you must be a coach.
[/quote]
Perhaps this will interest you.  Please accept my calculations as the great bulk of my lliving is of a statistical nature.  On your thoughts that Nate is far superior
1.  Rondo plays 39.3 minutes per game  Nate plays 19  so the ratio is roughly 2to1
2.  Rondo gets 14.1 assist per game versus 2.2 for Nate

3.  Rondo gets 4.6 rebounds per game versus 2.7 for Nate
4. Rondo gets .19 blocks per game versus 0 for Nate
5. Rondo gest 2.25 steals per game versus .11 for Nate
6.  Rondo scores 11.4  points per game versus 7 for nate.
Adjust this down for minutes played and show me the compelling case for Nate being the better player.  As for the coaches board comment, I had heard about a guy on a coaches board last year who made nearly identical statements to yours so I thought it might be you.  They paid Bosh a lot of money for just being average, didn't they?  IF it looks lilke it is 1/2 and 1/2 then the case is also not that compelling that I should "change my outlook", is it?  STILL STRUGGLING to understand why Rondo was granted ALL STAR STATUS.  Celtilcs a better t eam?  I agree completely but I believe it is due to the right combination of player styles without total devotion to shot creators.

[east texas bb]

By the stats you posted they would be the same in all catagories except points and assists.  Rondo would lead in assists and Nate in points. And any coach knows stats only tell so much. There are too many intangibles in basketball.  But that brings us to what the Celtics need, because they already have plenty of playmakers.  They dont need another one out there it would only take away from the better players.  The way the Celtics have there team organized is the best for them to win, that is why Rondo plays more and Nate dosent.  Nate plays the perfect backup role on this team, he can come in with high energy when they need it and produce points quickly if they are in a slump.  If you were coaching the Celtics wouldnt you do the same. 
Well it sounds like the other guy on the other board, you heard about because Nate and Rondo come up in casual converation so much, and me would agree.  You are exactly right, they DID pay Bosh alot of money for being average, and regretting it, and if you read alot you will hear other people are saying the same thing. And the 1/2 and 1/2, that is why I said everyone has an opinion, I wasnt saying you couldnt have yours. That is awesome that Rondo got All Star status. That makes him in the eyes of the people of America one of the top guards in the league and I will add it didnt hurt that he had high assists stats because of the team he is on.  But anyway, he made it, so I wont argue that.  And your last statement is the premise to our entire conversation, I am not argueing that the Celtics have a great combination and that is what makes them good.  I am saying for hopefully the last time, that a person who makes plays is more valuable than a spot up shooter.  Yes you need both, not argueing, but which makes the team "go".  Since you are from HJ, was the Ryan Donahue or Kenyon Spears playmakers or spot up shooters.  The best 2 players to come through that program in the last 10-20 years.

[east texas bb]

Aces Full, how would you get the ball down the court with 5 spot up shooters?  And who would get the ball to them if they got in the halfcourt?
I love shooters, I was a shooter when I played, but I think you are misunderstanding (or maybe it was defined clearly enough) the definition of a playmaker.  To me a playmaker is a player who can shoot, create his own shot, and create shots for others.  A spot up shooter to me has to rely on someone to get them their shot whereas a playmaker is a player who can do it all.  Michael Jordan is the best example I can give. 

[stevenash]

By the stats you posted they would be the same in all catagories except points and assists.  Rondo would lead in assists and Nate in points. And any coach knows stats only tell so much. There are too many intangibles in basketball.  But that brings us to what the Celtics need, because they already have plenty of playmakers.  They dont need another one out there it would only take away from the better players.  The way the Celtics have there team organized is the best for them to win, that is why Rondo plays more and Nate dosent.  Nate plays the perfect backup role on this team, he can come in with high energy when they need it and produce points quickly if they are in a slump.  If you were coaching the Celtics wouldnt you do the same. 
Well it sounds like the other guy on the other board, you heard about because Nate and Rondo come up in casual converation so much, and me would agree.  You are exactly right, they DID pay Bosh alot of money for being average, and regretting it, and if you read alot you will hear other people are saying the same thing. And the 1/2 and 1/2, that is why I said everyone has an opinion, I wasnt saying you couldnt have yours. That is awesome that Rondo got All Star status. That makes him in the eyes of the people of America one of the top guards in the league and I will add it didnt hurt that he had high assists stats because of the team he is on.  But anyway, he made it, so I wont argue that.  And your last statement is the premise to our entire conversation, I am not argueing that the Celtics have a great combination and that is what makes them good.  I am saying for hopefully the last time, that a person who makes plays is more valuable than a spot up shooter.  Yes you need both, not argueing, but which makes the team "go".  Since you are from HJ, was the Ryan Donahue or Kenyon Spears playmakers or spot up shooters.  The best 2 players to come through that program in the last 10-20 years.

They were much more of the playmaking calibre and not very good outside shooters.  Ryan Donahoe was 3-a player of the year.  After Donahoe, the next HJ 3-a player of the year was Jarvis Benard who, in my opinion, was VERY MUCH a spot up shooter.)(why didnt you mention him?)  And, on the "Nate thing"  The Celtics were in the final three years ago without Nate and last year with Nate, so I dont think Nate is as meaningful or as good, under any circumstances.  I would also suggest to you that the stats are not nearly as close as you just suggested.

[CThoops]

[quote name="east texas bb" post="926834" timestamp="1291580568"]
Aces Full, how would you get the ball down the court with 5 spot up shooters?  And who would get the ball to them if they got in the halfcourt?
I love shooters, I was a shooter when I played, but I think you are misunderstanding (or maybe it was defined clearly enough) the definition of a playmaker.  To me a playmaker is a player who can shoot, create his own shot, and create shots for others.  A spot up shooter to me has to rely on someone to get them their shot whereas a playmaker is a player who can do it all.  Michael Jordan is the best example I can give. 
[/quote]

I think you missed the quotations around AcesFull's "shotmakers".. No one can argue against him on that point. Sorry  ;D

[stevenash]

[quote name="dogs1218" post="926837" timestamp="1291581058"]
[quote author=east texas bb link=topic=77007.msg926834#msg926834 date=1291580568]
Aces Full, how would you get the ball down the court with 5 spot up shooters?  And who would get the ball to them if they got in the halfcourt?
I love shooters, I was a shooter when I played, but I think you are misunderstanding (or maybe it was defined clearly enough) the definition of a playmaker.  To me a playmaker is a player who can shoot, create his own shot, and create shots for others.   A spot up shooter to me has to rely on someone to get them their shot whereas a playmaker is a player who can do it all.  Michael Jordan is the best example I can give. 
[/quote]

I think you missed the quotations around AcesFull's "shotmakers".. No one can argue against him on that point. Sorry  ;D
[/quote]  It is also a poor assumption that just because you are a good spot up shooter that you dont have the ability to dribble the ball or make a good pass (which moves more quickly that ANY player).  Many of the "good shooters" are considerably more cerebral than the playmakers and make up for some of their athletic shortcomings with superior basketball intellect.

[east texas bb]

I must have misunderstood what AcesFull was saying.  I thought he meant he would rather have 5 spot up shooters to 5 players that can do it all.  My bad.  I misunderstood him. Most playmakers are more cerebral, because they can see the entire game happening.  I am tired of typing, serously, i could argue all day but this is a moot point.  Yall take spot up shooters.  I will take 3 playmakers, a spot up shooter and a good low post. 
ANd I left The Jarvis Bernard kid off because I never heard of him.  It was not on purpose, I honestly had not heard of him. And I know that if Ryan Donahue(offered to play at SFA) and Kenyon Spears(Lamar), who played with a very good friend of mine, Marlon Jackson, can shoot the ball from out side or they would not have played or been offered to play at the next level.  They were the only two I KNOW OF , from HJ to play at the D1 level. 
ANd Rondo is better than Nate.  He is the best PG in the league, I looked on Yahoo.  My bad.  Had a brain fart, yall will have to excuse me.
Good day to East Texas.  Enjoy your families.