Rondo's Impact on C's Motion Offense
Re: Rondo's Impact on C's Motion Offense
The article asserts that the Celtics are doing better with Rondo because their rate of inside shot attempts and overall offensive efficiency are higher with than without Rondo. But left unsaid is that the Celtics' rate of inside shot attempts with Rondo is probably about average at best (based on a check of team rate of shots within 5 feet from nba.com) and the offensive efficiency with Rondo would rank 10th worst compared to the 30 team efficiencies. Should Rondo and the Celtics' offense with Rondo get any praise or even a pass for playing at the 10th worst efficiency? For how long? Another season, two? When does accountability start? When does re-evaluation and change start? Management seems like they want or are fine with a tank this season so I won't go totally crazy about how poor they are doing this season but what do they need to do in season 2 or 3 to be called acceptable or not acceptable? How much progress do they need to make? The offensive efficiency for Feb. / Mach is about 5 pts better than before that but they were so bad in the beginning and still bad now and the rate of change from Feb. to March was pretty modest (+0.6). 27th for the season and still at a lousy level in March should be cause more for dissatisfaction and rigorous efforts to change IMO than optimism and staying the current course. Until they get at least a decent amount above average, I'd say they haven't done anything commendable.
They are 20th in 3pt shot rate and 28th in 3pt FG%. 3 pt shots and good 3 pt shots are supposed to be a major benefit of the motion offense. Not there so far. But it should be noted that the Celtics have been bottom 7 on 3 pt shot rate since 2009-10. That trend has to be at least partly on management. When will that change? Is that more likely to change with or without Rondo? His frequency of 3pt shot assists seems typical, nothing special based on a quick check of other PGs at 82games.
They are 20th in 3pt shot rate and 28th in 3pt FG%. 3 pt shots and good 3 pt shots are supposed to be a major benefit of the motion offense. Not there so far. But it should be noted that the Celtics have been bottom 7 on 3 pt shot rate since 2009-10. That trend has to be at least partly on management. When will that change? Is that more likely to change with or without Rondo? His frequency of 3pt shot assists seems typical, nothing special based on a quick check of other PGs at 82games.
-
JimiHendrix
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 8:27 am
Re: Rondo's Impact on C's Motion Offense
This is more a personnel problem than a Rondo problem. This is similar to Tyler Ennis' situation in Syracuse. His three-point assist rate was low. Why? Because he had no three-point shooters besides Trevor Cooney. With Boston, who does Rondo have? The streaky Green, the mid-range Bradley, the underdeveloped Sullinger and Olynyk. The only two reliable three-point shooters he has are Chris Johnson and Jerryd Bayless, and even they are inconsistent.Crow wrote: They are 20th in 3pt shot rate and 28th in 3pt FG%. 3 pt shots and good 3 pt shots are supposed to be a major benefit of the motion offense. Not there so far. But it should be noted that the Celtics have been bottom 7 on 3 pt shot rate since 2009-10. That trend has to be at least partly on management. When will that change? Is that more likely to change with or without Rondo? His frequency of 3pt shot assists seems typical, nothing special based on a quick check of other PGs at 82games.
What sticks out most to me from the article is Rajon Rondo's time of possession. That is an enormous rate compared to other point guards, and it goes against what the motion offense preaches. I think Rondo is the point guard of the future for the Celtics, but as the article says, him and Brad Stevens must meet in the middle for it to work perfectly.