IRISH COFFEE: DICHOTOMY OF RAJON RONDO, PAUL PIERCE

By Ben Rohrbach


Rajon Rondo couldn’t be hotter, averaging 28.0 points, 9.7 assists and 7.3 boards in the past three games.
Paul Pierce couldn’t be colder, averaging 11.3 points, 3.8 assists and 1.3 rebounds in his past four games.

And the Celtics are 1-4 in their past five games. So goes the 2011-12 NBA season for the aging champions.

Whether it’s the result of Rondo’s wrist injury coming on the heels of Pierce’s heel injury to start the season, compounded by whatever Pierce is going through the past handful of games (Charles Barkley credited age during Thursday night’s TNT broadcast), the C’s two best players haven’t been on the same page all season. Hence the team’s 15-14 record, which only stands to get worse if the trend continues in Dallas and Oklahoma City.

Just how poorly have Rondo and Pierce meshed on the court? Besides the fact that the two have yet to both exceed 15 points in the same game this season, take a look at their overall numbers with and without each other.

Rondo sans Pierce (3 games): 22.0 PPG, 16.0 FGA (54.8%), 9.0 FTA, 10.3 APG, 5.0 RPG
Rondo with Pierce (18 games): 14.1 PPG, 11.9 FGA (48.1%), 4.3 FTA, 9.4 APG, 5.0 RPG

Pierce sans Rondo (8 games): 21.5 PPG, 13.9 FGA (52.3%), 6.6 FTA, 7.5 APG, 6.0 RPG
Pierce with Rondo (18 games): 15.4 PPG, 13.7 FGA (36.2%), 4.7 FTA, 4.5 APG, 4.7 RPG

Obviously, Pierce becomes the primary ball-handler in Rondo’s absence, so naturally his assist numbers rise, but why does his field goal percentage climb almost 20 percentage points without Rondo in the lineup? Doesn’t a should-be All-Star point guard create easier shots for Pierce? Likewise, shouldn’t a Hall of Fame swingman open the floor up for Rondo to get to the basket? But neither is happening when the two share the floor together.

There’s a clear correlation between one having a great game and the other having an off night.

Rondo when Pierce >15 points (8 games): 8.5 PPG, 9.0 FGA (44.4%), 2.3 FTA, 10.6 APG, 3.9 RPG
Rondo when Pierce <15 points (13 games): 19.4 PPG, 14.2 FGA (51.1%), 6.5 FTA, 8.9 APG, 5.7 RPG

Pierce when Rondo >15 points (6 games): 9.5 PPG, 10.0 FGA (33.3%), 3.2 FTA, 3.8 APG, 3.2 RPG
Pierce when Rondo <15 points (20 games): 19.7 PPG, 14.9 FGA (42.8%), 6.0 FTA, 5.9 APG, 5.7 RPG


Paul Pierce

It appears as though if one is in attack/create mode, the other falls into sit-back-and-watch mode. In the eight games Rondo missed, Pierce attempted 30 percent more shots at the rim. In the six games Rondo has exceeded 15 points, the Celtics point guard has attempted 93 percent more shots at the rim.
It’s important to note the Celtics are 0-3 without Pierce and 6-2 in Rondo’s absence. Is that to say the Celtics are better without Rondo? Absolutely not. They just haven’t figured out how to maximize the impact of one player entering his prime and another entering the so-called twilight of his career. When one’s been hot, the other’s not.

Is it possible for both to be in attack/create mode at the same time? Take back-to-back victories against the Bobcats (easy) and Grizzlies (not so easy) for example. Those two occasions mark the only times Rondo has reached double-digit assists and Pierce has recorded at least six dimes in the same game, and they happened to come when the Celtics were playing their best basketball.

In those two wins, Pierce and Rondo totaled 19 shots within 10 feet of the basket (making 11 of them) and 20 of their 43 combined assists directly led to buckets from inside of 10 feet — only three of which were completed to each other. The Celtics shot 77-of-154 (exactly 50%) in those two games, and 69 percent of the 47 field goals were created by either Rondo or Pierce’s playmaking — including 36 percent within 10 feet of the hoop.

Can the two coexist at their best? Absolutely. Whether they can consistently this season remains to be seen.

112288

As the season's midpoint arrives, the Celtics look like they need a trip to Italy. There has to be as much passion in the locker room as they're showing out on the floor. At first, it seemed to be anger: maybe not; maybe it really is passion, the desire to win and the inability to accept losing.

Rondo and Pierce have been negotiating the terms of their ubuntu from the moment of Rondo's arrival. They know that they need each other to succeed: they'll work it out.

Knowing Rondo as we do now, can there be any doubt that he wanted to take control of the team from his first day? Since Pierce was the captain, that meant Rondo had to bide his time. When the time finally came, after number 17 was in the rafters, Rondo showed that he and Pierce could coexist and overcome obstacles together.

A few years back, Pierce announced that he was trying to give the game what it needed, - whatever that was, defense, scoring, rebounding, Paul has the all-around game to do it. That approach isn't possible this year. With so many guys floating in and out of the lineup, no one can get a handle on what is needed in any particular game, because every game is so different, and because a different team shows up each night wearing Celtic green.

Then there's the age factor. Pierce can't go 40 minutes, game in and game out. If he tried, by the end of the season he's going to be a physical mess. The legs need to recuperate and the older you get, the more they make their needs known. That means he has to pick his spots and that's a tough thing to learn, even for an old dog.

If you ask me, Pierce and Rondo aren't the problem. Partly, it's the negativity engendered by losing, and, partly it's the discontinuity of too many injuries and too many new people. It's also the lack of a beast in the middle, the soft underbelly of the team.

Ben Rorbach did a decent job but he didn't go far enough. He should have showed what the Rondo/Pierce numbers were like in other years. The one thing you can count on sportswriters to be is wrong. The same guys who predicted the Patriots would win the super bowl, who were saying last year's Red Sox team was the best ever, those same folks are now predicting the Celtics demise. It's comforting.

Rick,

I am going out on a limb to say that either or both Garnett and Pierce will be traded to an LA team. Both make LA their permanent home during the off season and will once retired.

As far as Pierce, it make more sense for Pierce as he has passed Larry Bird to achieve Boston sports immortality. For him to catch Hondo would be a stretch. So what is he going to do just grow old and frustrated. He would have a chance to win a possible championship or 2 and glide into retirement while being at home. I say he goes to the Clippers who can use a veteran with a ring on his fingers to elevate the club to the next level.

112288

112288,

Very interesting perspectives. As many know, I've had very strong suspicions (skepticism might be more apt) about the synergy (or lack of it) between Pierce and Rondo for a long time. The fact that one scores less when the other scores more doesn't prove anything to me; that's largely a matter of constant sum mathematics. Simplistically put, they're splitting the same sized pie between two guys rather than keeping it all for themselves.

But some disturbing stuff does filter through the author's stats. The precipitous drop in Paul's FG % when Rondo plays is one example. I talk a lot about the importance of putting teammates in a position to succeed. We saw a great example of this last night—unfortunately as demonstrated by the wrong team. However much of a team player Paul Pierce has become, I think his initial instinct—especially when the team's struggling—is to create. He feels most comfortable with given the ball while teammates either set picks or just get out of the way.

And I believe that creativity is Rondo's most native instinct as well. In fact, he often tries to be so creative that he has a tendency to turn the ball over far too much.

I hate to mention history for fear of being jumped upon for...well...mentioning history. Gee, I guess I've already started, so I think I'll just forge ahead on the premise that—here's a revolutionary thought—we might actually learn something from history.

Throughout the Celtics' history, they've basically had two models when it comes to the matter of creativity:

• During roughly the first half of the Russell, the team had one creative offensive catalyst. There can be no question that Cousy was the creative catalyst on those teams, and teammates both deferred to him in that regard and benefited mightily from it.

• After Cousy's departure, the team functioned without a creative catalyst right through the Cowens years. The later Russell years and the entire Cowens years could well have involved the most egalitarian offenses in Celtics history. Playmaking duties were largely shared, and the Celtics continued to operate on tried and true Auerbachian principles that didn't leave room for a whole lot of creativy.

• Then came the 80s, and the Celtics offense once again had a great creator. This time it was a point forward (although frankly that description unfairly understates the scope of Larry's game). Larry's innovativeness helped to change the nature of NBA offense as Cousy had done two decades + earlier.

As for the 90s and the first two-thirds of the last decade, I don't know what the hell they were doing out there, but the only creativity I saw was Antoine's wiggle. Excuse me for a moment.......Okay, I'm back for an up-close-and-personal moment with the porcelain bus. Toine can always be counted on to make me lost weight in a hurry.

If you wonder where all this is going, here's the answer. I seriously doubt that it's healthy for the Celtics offense to be dominated by two strong personalities that both want to be creators and, frankly, aren't all that great at it.

Paul's offensive creativity used to be strongly skewed toward the art of penetration. Lately, his efforts at penetration have been spotty at best. In fact, those efforts sometimes make me think Paul's mixing up basketball with one of the definitions of rape: "Any penetration, however slight, is sufficient....."

I believe that Rondo could be an exceptional creator if he were able to confine those efforts to the transition game. In the halfcourt, his creativity is expended primarily in executing his own shots. In terms of setting up mates in the halfcourt, he's frequently limited mainly to inside-out passes. He's all too often given to trying low-percentage passes, which have a particularly poor chance of success when the intended recipients aren't all that familiar with him.

Now here's where I hope all of this starts to come together. Because neither Rondo nor Pierce seems all that willing to relax his penchant for trying to be creative, there's only one offensive avenue that seems comfortable for both of them...the inside-out pass from Rondo to Pierce. (God forbid it should be the other way around). This coincides with the reigning Three-Point Champion's readiness to settle for perimeter shots. Perimeter shots are lower percentage than shots in the paint. Do the math.

So nowadays, other teams can simply focus on playing stifling perimeter defense and let Rondo, Bass, KG, JO, Wilcox or whoever get their points. I call it the "Wilt Chamberlain Defense." Let Wilt get his 45 and hold his teammates to single digits.

By suffocating the Celtics on the perimeter, opponents effectively limit the effectiveness of both of the Celtics' premier scoring threats (Paul and Ray) while also conveniently being handy to passing lanes, where Celtics players persist in throwing passes that are easy to pick off. And which two players lead the team in turnovers per 36 minutes? Bingo! Rajon Rondo (who has a major responsibility of keeping the club under some semblance of control) and Paul Pierce (who sometimes even tries behind-the-back dribbles when an opponent is stationed behind his back).

I'm not trying to rag on the Celtics. There are enough people doing that. I'm still very much in their corner and still looking for glimmers in every single game. And I will never ever change in that regard. But I am trying to be realistic, especially in looking toward next season and beyond. With the strong possibility that Rondo and Paul will be even more prominent team leaders, will the dynamic between them point the way for whoever joins them to compete for contention? Perhaps a more constructive way to put it is, "What will be the most effective way to harness the dynamic between them to point the way for whoever joins them to compete for contention?"

Sam

Nice addition Sam!

112288

Sam,

After rereading your post after the game I think you nailed it! Very astute commentary on your part. You know chemistry goes a long way to creating a winning team ball. Perhaps in time the mixture in the chemistry beaker has gone bad and a new potion by Danny needs to be mixed!

112288

PS Your observation good or bad is not dumping on the Celtics as it is making all of us more astute basketball aficionado's!

112288,

Actually, I'm hoping I'm wrong on this one because the combination of Rondo and Paul would seem to be the most convenient way to a new direction for the Celtics. But, as Paul's skills slowly erode, I certainly don't see him acclimating to more of an uptempo Celtics system of play, which is the only way I foresee a Celtics evolution that's in keeping with the way the league seems headed.

Moreover, I sense the league becoming (unfortunately in my mind) progressively more distanced from the concept of long-term player relationships with the same team and more divorced from the notion of team chemistry predicated upon inter-player familiarity. The likelihood is that teams will increasingly embrace uptempo basketball as a short cut to a functional form of team chemistry that doesn't depend so greatly on intricate half court synergy.

I'm definitely not denying that the Celtics wouldn't have come close to sniffing a championship had not Paul Pierce put the team on his back in the first Garnett-era championship finals. But things are changing, in terms of Pierce's skill set, Rondo's inexorable assumption of team leadership, and (as mentioned above) the operational direction in which the league seems headed.

If a continued Rondo/Pierce pairing were deemed counterproductive to the best medium-term prospects for Celtics success, would it make sense for them to move more in the direction of retaining (1) a relatively short-term leader whose skills are eroding and whose strengths may run counter to the direction in which the league seems headed OR (2) a potential team leader who should be around much longer, whose strengths are right in the epi-center of the stylistic direction in which the league seems to be headed, but who sometimes seems to have a petulant streak that too frequently renders him inconsistent?

A related question (and not a simple one) is when the market for Paul Pierce will be maximized—now, when his remaining skills would presumably be most helpful to a potential contender, or two years down the road, when we would hope his then-remaining skills would still be sufficiently attractive and he'd have an expiring contract to boot. And what would be the likely ramifications on the team's short-term performance and long-term potential if they string along with a Rondo/Pierce duo as a major part of the nucleus for another couple of years?

An intriguing question in my mind would be whether the three teams in question would bite for the following trade:

Pierce, JuJuan Johnson and first round picks in 2012 and 2014 from Boston to the Clippers
Jordan from the Clippers and Bradley from Boston to Orlando
Howard to Boston

The salaries work according to RealGM Trade Checker. While I personally doubt that the Clips would part with Jordan in this scenario, perhaps another third team could be substituted to get a center value to Orlando. I'm far from the best in thinking trades, and I really don't enjoy the exercise all that much.

As the Celtics struggle along and repeated injury cycles seem to be an increasing deterrent to the development of continuity and chemistry in this abbreviated, practice-deprived season, I wonder what Danny and Doc think in private. Perhaps more important, I wonder what the thinking is among the free agents who could theoretically qualify as potential impact players for the Celtics beginning next season.

Sam

Sam,

You are getting creative. Interesting trade for all teams involved.

As far as Pierce/Rondo playing. Another year older for Pierce, I am not too sure how much Pierce will start if he remains given the overhaul of the team this summer with young rabbits.

112288

112288,

I am not sure how much Pierce would be willing to come off the bench, and it's difficult for me to fathom how Danny could justify Paul's salary for a bench player.

The only reason I suggested the remote possibility that the Clips would be willing to trade Jordan was on the off-chance that they'd consider shifting Blake to center in return for an all-star veteran presence and a #1. Frankly, it was a "reach" on my part, and I'm mainly hoping the general concept of including Pierce in a trade might stimulate other posters to think up more realistic possibilities. I'm quite convinced that a simple Pierce for Howard trade (which also works financially) would never be considered by Orlando, which would almost certainly need a good big in return for letting Howard go.

And, despite some of my longer posts in recent memory on the subject of considering a shakeup sooner rather than later, I still hold out hope that this team, as currently constituted and once healthy, can get it together and be very competitive in the playoffs. It's just frustrating that the health thing almost seems like a contagious disease, with two guys going down for each one who recovers.

Sam

With the trade of Kaman to NO, I don't think the Clips would give up Jordan.

On another note, a little schadenfreuden. We are not alone, misery loves company. At least our front office isn't completely dysfunctional...

Kobe Bryant took his frustrations with the Pau Gasol trade rumors public on Sunday.

"When Kobe speaks up, it means things are getting bad," said a person with ties to Bryant. "It means nobody's telling him anything."

The front office of the Lakers is believed to be on less than solid footing, as Jim Buss takes a bigger role and Mitch Kupchak battles to keep his staff.

Kupchak is "on an island by himself," said a person familiar with the situation.

"He doesn't know who to trust anymore," said another.

"The other GMs know what's going on," said one of the people familiar with the situation. "Jim has no relationships with other GMs, and they also know they're going to be able to swoop in there and do things [in trades]. This is a real critical time. The chances of Dwight Howard coming in there are slim and none at this point."
Via Ken Berger/CBS Sports


bob

.

Bob,

I agree that it's highly unlikely the Clips would deal Jordan. Now I'm wondering whether New Orleans could be included in a deal that would wind up with Kaman in Orlando.

Given the fact that both conferences are pretty tightly bunched, I won't be surprised if there's some meaningful trading action before the deadline.

As for the Lakers' front office, does it seem to you that a lot of the wheeling-dealing spirit went out of Mitch when he felt he had Chris Paul only to lose him? I believe I'm one of many who thought the Lakers got a raw deal on that one, although I have to say I don't recall shedding any tears.

Sam