Rondo is the new captain

[MyDaughterLovesTomGordon]

Disappointing game tonight. Kelly looked good. Rondo looked eh. 
 
But the big news - at least to me - is that they've made Rondo the captain. Is it just because he's the most tenured player at this point and SOMEONE has to be the captain? 
 
Or is Rondo really the captain of this team, like Paul Pierce was before him?
 
Pierce held the title for 10 years, the longest since Havlicek it from '67 to '78. 
 
Yes, there have been some underwhelming captains over the years (like Rick Fox, but also none from 1980 to 1983), but I think it's a pretty big deal. 
 
Also, watching Stevens now, and it was a surprise to Rondo on the floor when it was announced. Crazy. 

 

[The_Powa_of_Seiji_Ozawa]

Disappointing game tonight. Kelly looked good. Rondo looked eh. 
 
But the big news - at least to me - is that they've made Rondo the captain. Is it just because he's the most tenured player at this point and SOMEONE has to be the captain? 
 
Or is Rondo really the captain of this team, like Paul Pierce was before him?
 
Pierce held the title for 10 years, the longest since Havlicek it from '67 to '78. 
 
Yes, there have been some underwhelming captains over the years (like Rick Fox, but also none from 1980 to 1983), but I think it's a pretty big deal. 
 
Also, watching Stevens now, and it was a surprise to Rondo on the floor when it was announced. Crazy. 

 
So does this mean he will soon be traded to New York?

 

[leetinsley38]

Gerald Wallace's run sure was shortlived. Here's a list of Celtics captains through history, a few of these names seem like they don't quite belong:

Celtics Captains

Captain(s)	Year(s)
Bob Cousy	1950-63
Bill Russell	1963-69
John Havlicek	1969-78
Dave Cowens	1978-80
Larry Bird	1980-92
Reggie Lewis	1992-93
Robert Parish	1993-94
Dee Brown & Dominique Wilkins	1994-95
Dee Brown	1995-96
Rick Fox	1996-97
Dee Brown, Pervis Ellison & Antoine Walker	1997-98
Antoine Walker	1998-99
Antoine Walker & Dana Barros	1999-00
Antoine Walker & Paul Pierce	2000-03
Paul Pierce	2003-13
Rajon Rondo	2014-Present

 

[Pxer]

Reggie may he RIP.

 

[Eddie Jurak]

Pervis Ellison.

 

[Montana Fan]

This fits my theory that Stevens/Rondo are gonna click. Rondo is gonna be the on court coach/PG. Cerebral coach /cerebral player. Rondo isn't going anywhere.

 

[wutang112878]

I can see a few reasons Rondo became captain.  This group of misfits needs a leader.  By almost default Rondo is the best option, there isnt a longer tenured player or a player the team has made more of a commitment too, unless you consider Jeff Green because he has a player option for 15/16.  And finally, Danny and Stevens might be worried about how Rondo might react if he wasnt made captain.  What if he walked into Danny's office last week and told him 'I am coming back and I want to lead this team and get us going in the right direction', Danny is sort of painted into a corner in that situation

 

[Devizier]

Perhaps this is Brad Stevens' way of politely asking Danny not to trade his best player?

 

[Mystic Merlin]

Perhaps this is Brad Stevens' way of politely asking Danny not to trade his best player?

 
I feel safe in assuming that Danny Ainge was at least aware of this development beforehand.

 

[Manramsclan]

Pervis Ellison.

I once ran into Pervis Ellison on the streets of Seattle in the early aughts. I told him I was from Boston, and asked him if he had smoked all of the Celtic green. He looked at me sideways for a moment and then we both laughed. 
 
Rondo has to become the leader of this team if it's going anywhere, official or no.  I agree that making him the captain has really no downside. If he takes to it and begins to set the tone for the team then perhaps he is the guy that can be the most important player on the next good C's team. 

 

[The Social Chair]

Rondo is the best.
 

Kobe on Rondo: "From what I understand he’s an asshole, like me."
 

 

Rondo, on being called an asshole by Kobe: "That's a great compliment, coming from Kobe. I feel the same way about him."
 

 

 

[Beomoose]

Rondo is the best.
 
 
 

Damn, now i like something Kobe said

 

[Nick Kaufman]

I am surprised that given all the shit Rondo has gotten for his shooting no one has posted this:
 
 

 
 

 

 
 
Rondo was actually one of the best elbow shooters in the league last season. Out of 141 NBA players who attempted at least 100 shots from the elbows, Rondo ranked fourth in field goal percentage in that zone — trailing only Jason Smith, Steve Nash, and Jose Calderon. Those are pretty good numbers for a guy who can’t shoot. Per Synergy Sports, he also earned a “very good” rating for shots off the dribble, and an “excellent” rating for long 2-point jumpers.

The NBA remains a pick-and-roll league, and Rondo has become a pick-and-roll demigod in part because he has worked to develop that reliable midrange jumper. But as of last year, lots of defenders were still sagging off him, or going under the picks, and as a result many of those elbow shots were uncontested. So, while he has put up really efficient numbers, they are arguably inflated. Unlike many of his “elite” point guard peers, some opponents still dare Rondo to shoot — nobody dares to dare Tony Parker or Chris Paul to shoot. Moreover, last season the Celtics were still decorating the perimeter with dangerous shooters including Kevin Garnett and Paul Pierce, and it remains to be seen if defenders will be as spatially generous with Rondo in the absence of those guys.

Still, in a league full of bad shooting point guards, I think it’s time to take Rondo off our “can’t shoot” list, and maybe redirect our brick-laying scorn toward the point guards in Charlotte, Minneapolis, or Oklahoma City. Rondo has limited range, but as Parker has demonstrated, you don’t need to shoot 3s to dominate at the point guard position.
 

 
 
http://grantland.com/the-triangle/courtvision-everything-you-think-you-know-about-rondos-shooting-is-wrong/

 

[wutang112878]

The problem is this a little bit of cherry picking.  Here is Rondos 2pt FG% from his rookie year to last year:  30.9, 40.8, 34, 36.1, 36.2, 35.8, 40.1  He was putrid as a rookie, effective year 2, declined for the next 4 seasons then was effective again last year for 38 games.  If historically he was showing continual improvement from the 30.9 to the 40.1 last year, then their narrative would make more sense. 
 
But if we dig a little deeper and look at his splits by month last year from Nov to Jan we see a FG% of 49.3%, 48.5% and 46.3%  So it looks like he came out white hot and then started to come back to reality.
 
 
If you look at his FG% by month:
11/12: 54%, 50%, 43%, 40%, 44%
10/11: (ignoring 3 games in Oct): 54%, 58%, 50%, 48%, 41%, 53%
09/10 (ignored 3 games in Oct): 53%, 50%, 54%, 48%, 48%, 48%
 
We can only guess, but if history is any indication with a full years worth of data their fancy chart might look a little different.  Or if they expanded their analysis and looked at say the last 3 years, I really doubt Rondo would have been that high in their rankings.
 

 

[crystalline]

Goldsberry breaks it down by distance. You broke it down by year, averaging over distance. My guess is one would need to do both to get the fullest picture from these data.

 

[Grin&MartyBarret]

The more recent complaint re: Rondo and his shooting isn't necessarily that he's bad at it, but rather that he only shoots jump shots when he's wide open. Obviously, you don't want to fault a guy for taking open shots, but last season he still shot jumpers as a last resort. To get a true picture of where he stacks up, I think you'd have to look at numbers for open vs. guarded and compare him to the rest of the league that way. I suspect there are a lot of NBA players who can shoot 51% from the elbow if the shots they are taking are unguarded. To fully remove the bad shooter label, Rondo's going to have to increase his volume and show more of a willingness to be a scorer while maintaining his improved percentages.

 

[wutang112878]

Goldsberry breaks it down by distance. You broke it down by year, averaging over distance. My guess is one would need to do both to get the fullest picture from these data.

 
In a way thats cherry picking though, unless just shooting from the elbow is all Rondo needs to do.  But if Rondo is really going to be a top 2 player for a winning team, I think he would have to be effective at jump shooting overall.  Its ok to have some holes in your game, but his inability to shoot 3s is already a big one so he cant really have another black hole on the court.

 

[Nick Kaufman]

.  Here is Rondos 2pt FG% from his rookie year to last year:  30.9, 40.8, 34, 36.1, 36.2, 35.8, 40.1  He was putrid as a rookie, effective year 2, declined for the next 4 seasons then was effective again last year for 38 games
 

 
Where are you getting those numbers? They don't make sense.
do they include FG inside the paint? Probably not.

But even so, if his vast majority of long jumpers come from the elbow where he's shooting 50%, I can't see how his overall FG is only 40%.
For the record his overall FG% hovers at the high 40s.
 
I also think that Rondo doesn't need to hit contested jumpers or let me put it differently. The first time I heard of the criticism that Rondo isn't a good shooter was from nighthob. The line of argument was that because he wasn't hitting his jumpers when he was open, this afforded defenses the ability to double team other more dangerous opponents.
 
So, if Rondo is found to be shooting 50% from the elbows when open, that line of argument is completely shot down. Rondo is keeping them honest. If they want to let him shoot open jumpers, let them. If they start closing down on him, that's fine too. Another player can take the shot.
 
Saying that Rondo should be a primary scorer by hitting jumpers is effectively moving the goalposts out of a player who's role shouldn't be to be a primary scorer.

 

[Devizier]

Rondo will never be a high volume scorer. He lacks the range and isn't a good enough free throw shooter to go the Parker route. However, he has done a good job improving his shotmaking when open, and that has value. Unfortunately for the current Celtics, that has a lot more value on a team with good scorers around him, which this team is not.

 

[wutang112878]

 
Where are you getting those numbers? They don't make sense.
do they include FG inside the paint? Probably not.

But even so, if his vast majority of long jumpers come from the elbow where he's shooting 50%, I can't see how his overall FG is only 40%.
For the record his overall FG% hovers at the high 40s.
 
I also think that Rondo doesn't need to hit contested jumpers or let me put it differently. The first time I heard of the criticism that Rondo isn't a good shooter was from nighthob. The line of argument was that because he wasn't hitting his jumpers when he was open, this afforded defenses the ability to double team other more dangerous opponents.
 
So, if Rondo is found to be shooting 50% from the elbows when open, that line of argument is completely shot down. Rondo is keeping them honest. If they want to let him shoot open jumpers, let them. If they start closing down on him, that's fine too. Another player can take the shot.
 
Saying that Rondo should be a primary scorer by hitting jumpers is effectively moving the goalposts out of a player who's role shouldn't be to be a primary scorer.

 
Sorry that was his JumpShot FG% according to basketball reference, and I dont know how they distinguish between a jumpshot and layup and dunk.
 
As for the bolded, the opponent still might be losing the battle but winning the war.  They might be sagging so much off Rondo that he gets elbow jumpers where he is so open that he hits them at a high rate, but thats still less efficient offense that allowing him to drive and either take a layup or get an assist.  Its very similar to what Bill did during the Broncos game, stay in nickel and dare them to run even though you are letting them do it well because it still better than letting them pass. 

 

[nighthob]

Until opponents actually start contesting Rondo jumpers it's actually not possible to know if he can really shoot. Essentially those elbow jumpers for him are glorified free throws because they produce below NBA average in terms of points.

 

[mt8thsw9th]

That article reads like the author wanted to be a contrarian and found the numbers to back himself up. I'm curious how Rondo will shoot when he doesn't have Pierce and Garnett and teams challenge him a bit more (or being hacking him when he drives to the hoop). I don't know how "good" he'll be without any actual good scoring options on the court.

 

[crystalline]

 
In a way thats cherry picking though, unless just shooting from the elbow is all Rondo needs to do.  But if Rondo is really going to be a top 2 player for a winning team, I think he would have to be effective at jump shooting overall.  Its ok to have some holes in your game, but his inability to shoot 3s is already a big one so he cant really have another black hole on the court.

 
No - the break-even shooting percentage is different for different locations.  Therefore if you average over different locations, differences where you shoot from can change your overall FG% in a way that doesn't predict your effect on the team winning.
This is the useful part of Goldsberry's plots.  You're not saying anything much more complicated, you're just asking Goldsberry to break it down by year.  And I'm saying that's a reasonable idea, but you do need to keep elbow shooting percentage separate from close-in and beyond-the-arc.

 

[wutang112878]

I think I am suggesting 2 things, to look at the trend per year but also isolating skill vs what the defense gives you.
 
As an example, according to basketball reference:
In 11/12 Rondo took 447 jumpers and hit 36% of them, and he took 404 layups and hit 56.4% of them, for a ratio of 1.1 jumpers to layups
In 12/13 Rondo took 282 jumpers and hit 40% of them, and he took 177 layups and hit 60% of them, for a ratio of 1.6 jumpers to layups
 
This leads me to believe, to some degree, the defense was baiting him into taking jumpers because his shot (jumper vs layup) distribution changed.  And to take that one step forward, if they are baiting him into taking more jumpers then you would assume he would have more space to take them making them easier shots and you would expect him to hit more.
 
What would be really, really interesting is to take this to the next level using the SportsVU data.  First calculate the points per shot when Rondo takes and elbow jumper.  Then look at the teams points per shot when Rondo gets into the paint.  For example, last year his eFG% taking jumpers was 42.2% while the teams overall eFG% was 50.3%, so every jumper he took was a win for the defense.  I dont have the data to back it up, but I am going to assume between 3pt kickouts and Rondos nifty assists that the teams eFG% when he gets into the lane is greater than the 50.3%  This is probably a different question than 'Is Rondo a good shooter' but it kind of provides some context to the article.

 

[Cellar-Door]

I think I am suggesting 2 things, to look at the trend per year but also isolating skill vs what the defense gives you.
 
As an example, according to basketball reference:
In 11/12 Rondo took 447 jumpers and hit 36% of them, and he took 404 layups and hit 56.4% of them, for a ratio of 1.1 jumpers to layups
In 12/13 Rondo took 282 jumpers and hit 40% of them, and he took 177 layups and hit 60% of them, for a ratio of 1.6 jumpers to layups
 
This leads me to believe, to some degree, the defense was baiting him into taking jumpers because his shot (jumper vs layup) distribution changed.  And to take that one step forward, if they are baiting him into taking more jumpers then you would assume he would have more space to take them making them easier shots and you would expect him to hit more.
 
What would be really, really interesting is to take this to the next level using the SportsVU data.  First calculate the points per shot when Rondo takes and elbow jumper.  Then look at the teams points per shot when Rondo gets into the paint.  For example, last year his eFG% taking jumpers was 42.2% while the teams overall eFG% was 50.3%, so every jumper he took was a win for the defense.  I dont have the data to back it up, but I am going to assume between 3pt kickouts and Rondos nifty assists that the teams eFG% when he gets into the lane is greater than the 50.3%  This is probably a different question than 'Is Rondo a good shooter' but it kind of provides some context to the article.

Well from watching the games it was obvious that teams play WAY under the pick on pick and roll situations against Rondo. Likely this is because of his speed getting to the hoop, and his rep as a bad/reluctant jump shooter. As his career has moved on he has become more confident in that shot, and taken it. As he makes more it will force teams to adjust and play higher on the PnR, which opens up both drives and the screener rolling to the hoop. Being able to make the elbow jumper as a PG is an essential part of NBA offensive sets, Goldsberry is pointing out that Rondo has become very good at it, and accordingly teams should be changing how they play him.
 
Every PG is going to be forced to take jumpers since almost any team scores more when their PG gets to the paint, however the key with the best PGs is they can make the elbow jumper with enough consistency to force the defense to contest, which opens up the paint more.

 

[nighthob]

Well from watching the games it was obvious that teams play WAY under the pick on pick and roll situations against Rondo. Likely this is because of his speed getting to the hoop, and his rep as a bad/reluctant jump shooter. As his career has moved on he has become more confident in that shot, and taken it. As he makes more it will force teams to adjust and play higher on the PnR, which opens up both drives and the screener rolling to the hoop. Being able to make the elbow jumper as a PG is an essential part of NBA offensive sets, Goldsberry is pointing out that Rondo has become very good at it, and accordingly teams should be changing how they play him.
 
Every PG is going to be forced to take jumpers since almost any team scores more when their PG gets to the paint, however the key with the best PGs is they can make the elbow jumper with enough consistency to force the defense to contest, which opens up the paint more.

If you can't score them at a higher efficiency than NBA average teams aren't going to aggressively defend them. In Rondo's case those percentages are high specifically because he's shooting set shots from 14'-18'. Ain't many players that defenses allow to do that.

 

[Sprowl]

In the last game, Rondo showed off a few catch-and-shoot jumpers, usually coming off picks on the left baseline and curling around toward the left elbow. His form was pretty good, and the shot would give defenders some motivation to keep an eye on him, even if not enough to keep up with him.

 

[Cellar-Door]

If you can't score them at a higher efficiency than NBA average teams aren't going to aggressively defend them. In Rondo's case those percentages are high specifically because he's shooting set shots from 14'-18'. Ain't many players that defenses allow to do that.

that is the point, if he continues to shoot 50% from the elbows teams will have to defend the PnR differently.

 

[nighthob]

The break even point is around 53%. So someone shooting mid-range jumpers at a lower clip than that, especially as a wide open shot, just isn't going to draw aggressive defense.

 

[Don Buddin's GS]

Charles Pierece writing for Grantland has a great piece on the deterioration of the Lakers/Celtics rivalry, focusing on the return of The Captain:

http://grantland.com/features/the-way-we-were/

 

[TroyOLeary]

The break even point is around 53%. So someone shooting mid-range jumpers at a lower clip than that, especially as a wide open shot, just isn't going to draw aggressive defense.

 
Are you just pulling that number out of the air or is it based on some sort of analysis?
 
Because according to nba.com, every single player in the league who attempted more than 50 15-19 ft shots in 2012-13 shot less than 53% (Ridnour was first at 52.2%).
 
If you sort by their "Mid-range" zone and up the minimum attempts to 75, Ibaka was best at 50.8%.

 

[wutang112878]

Its based on the NBA average offensive rating.  The Ortg represents, based on the teams offensive 4 factors, the number of points the team would produce per 100 possessions.  The league average Ortg this year is 105.5, last year it was 105.9  Put different, last year on average teams generated 1.06 points per possession.  So if you have the ball on the elbow and shoot 53% (because no one ever gets fouled there) thats an average NBA shot in terms of efficiency because it produces 1.06 points per possession (53% x 2).  If you shoot 55% then you are generating 1.1 points per possession which is better than average which would attract more defensive attention.

 

[JakeRae]

Charles Pierece writing for Grantland has a great piece on the deterioration of the Lakers/Celtics rivalry, focusing on the return of The Captain:

http://grantland.com/features/the-way-we-were/

That piece was awful. For example, he opens a paragraph by writing:
 

 
 
He is the only real link left in Boston to the last time the Celtics and Lakers could put a charge in the dead middle of the NBA season, and it was not all that long ago.

 
Followed, in the very next sentence, by writing:

 
 
It was 2007-08, to be precise. Rajon Rondo was a young Celtics point guard with a sackful of swagger on a team full of veterans, and they beat the Lakers and Bryant over six games for Boston’s 17th championship.

 
The next sentence was about the 2009/10 playoffs. At no point is there a reference to a regular season game that the rivalry "put a charge" into. And, while this is just one paragraph, it is illustrative of the overall quality of the writing. 

 

[TroyOLeary]

Its based on the NBA average offensive rating.  The Ortg represents, based on the teams offensive 4 factors, the number of points the team would produce per 100 possessions.  The league average Ortg this year is 105.5, last year it was 105.9  Put different, last year on average teams generated 1.06 points per possession.  So if you have the ball on the elbow and shoot 53% (because no one ever gets fouled there) thats an average NBA shot in terms of efficiency because it produces 1.06 points per possession (53% x 2).  If you shoot 55% then you are generating 1.1 points per possession which is better than average which would attract more defensive attention.

 
This seems a little simplistic.
 
The median number of fast break points per 100 possessions was 13.5 last year.  I don't think anybody would argue Rondo (or anybody) pulling up for an 18 footer on a fastbreak would be a good shot.
 
Adjusting for points per possession out of the half-court would greatly affect that number.  You'd probably want to further adjust for when the shot was taken, as I don't particularly recall Rondo jacking up a lot of jumpers with 15 seconds left on the shot clock.

 

[nighthob]

This seems a little simplistic.
 
The median number of fast break points per 100 possessions was 13.5 last year.  I don't think anybody would argue Rondo (or anybody) pulling up for an 18 footer on a fastbreak would be a good shot.
 
Adjusting for points per possession out of the half-court would greatly affect that number.  You'd probably want to further adjust for when the shot was taken, as I don't particularly recall Rondo jacking up a lot of jumpers with 15 seconds left on the shot clock.

I think everyone here just assumes that every NBA defensive assistant is an idiot and doesn't understand simple numbers. Keep in mind that Rondo was shooting set shots from the elbow the last two years. When do you ever see other shooters get the time and space to set two feet before launching a mid range shot? (Just recall how many double and triple screens that Boston used to run Allen through to get him enough space for a shot.) Rondo was shooting glorified free throws, and was hitting them at about the same clip as his normal free throws. If you're an NBA defensive coordinator, if you have to choose between drives to the rim, Pierce shooting, Garnett shooting, or Rondo shooting free throws, what do you hope the defense gives up?

You can't stop every shot, and defenses always have to pick their poison, the shot they want to give up are mid range jumpers because it's a horrifically inefficient shot. Even the best shooters rarely shoot them well enough to scare you. Because to frighten you they would need to go in at above average efficiency. This year the efficiency break even point is around .528, so if someone shoots them at under that rate without aggressive defense, why would you bother creating extra court space for someone else? In this case we have a blogger claiming that Rondo's shooting percentages on uncontested 2s prove that he's a good shooter and that teams will aggressively defend those shots. I'd say "only if they're idiots". But they're not. This has been de rigueur in the NBA for nigh on a decade. If Rondo wants to be challenged as a shooter he needs to be able to shoot threes and shoot them well.

 

[wutang112878]

 
This seems a little simplistic.
 
The median number of fast break points per 100 possessions was 13.5 last year.  I don't think anybody would argue Rondo (or anybody) pulling up for an 18 footer on a fastbreak would be a good shot.
 
Adjusting for points per possession out of the half-court would greatly affect that number.  You'd probably want to further adjust for when the shot was taken, as I don't particularly recall Rondo jacking up a lot of jumpers with 15 seconds left on the shot clock.

 
Thats really a solid point, a half court shot is very different than a fast break shot, so the break even barometer is certainly different.  That said, as I mentioned upthread I think the bigger driver of the reason Rondo is given the shots is the eFG% of plays where he is able to drive is because the defense preferred to sag rather than allow him to drive.
 
Here's some math to back that up:
This year here is the FG% by distance according to NBA.com:
5 to 9 feet 58.4%
10 to 14 feet 38.4%
15 to 19 feet 39.4%
20 to 24 feet 40%
 
Ignoring turnovers, typically a Rondo drive to the lane ends in 3 ways: a 3 point kickout, a layup for Rondo or a layup for a teammate.  The FG% for the later 2 would be ~58.4% which is much greater than Rondos 53% and with a layup you are much more likely to get a foul called which will only increase your points per shot and make the elbow jumper an even less efficient shot.  For the 3 point kickout the Celts shot 3sat an 34.2% clip last year, for an eFG% of 51.3%  So actually, I'm surprised by this, the winning shot for the defense is to force the kickout 3, but considering the distribution between of possibilities when Rondo has the ball at the elbow (elbow jumper, kickout 3 and 2 layup possibilities) you still want to avoid the drive because the eFG% of the layups make the eFG% of the drives higher than the eFG% of the elbow jumper

 

[jmm57]

Rich Shertenlieb

Danny Ainge just told Toucher & Rich that the Celtics offered Rondo an extension, and stated that Rondo would be paid star money.


From Rich's Facebook

 

[wutang112878]

It will be interesting to see what that money is.  During the last negotiation Danny went on EEI and stated that Rondo wasnt a max player, it seemed the intent of the interview was for him to say that publicly.  Obviously a lot has changed since then but I really wonder if Danny thinks Rondo is a max worthy PG.  Its a very significant investment not solely in the money to Rondo but what giving a max deal to a non-max impacting player does to your cap and reduces other resources that are available.

 

[Brickowski]

If they can sign Rondo to a reasonable extension his trade value goes up. "Star money" does not necessarily mean the max.

 

[Jer]

http://espn.go.com/boston/nba/story/_/id/10339016/danny-ainge-rajon-rondo-boston-celtics-talked-possible-contract-extension
 
Danny quote...

 
 
In the collective bargaining agreement, there are limits on what can and can't be done. Really, it's not that Rondo doesn't want to accept an extension, as much as it's just not financially smart for him to accept it right now. We didn't think he would [sign], but we did try.

 
This is an indication to me that they're thinking max or near-max for him. I assume the CBA limits he's referring to are max salary and years. If Rondo waits til next summer, the max will have gone up and it'll be on more years (rather than extension years).

 

[Grin&MartyBarret]

http://espn.go.com/boston/nba/story/_/id/10339016/danny-ainge-rajon-rondo-boston-celtics-talked-possible-contract-extension
 
Danny quote...
 
This is an indication to me that they're thinking max or near-max for him. I assume the CBA limits he's referring to are max salary and years. If Rondo waits til next summer, the max will have gone up and it'll be on more years (rather than extension years).

 
It's really more of an indication that Rondo is thinking about a max deal. The limitations in the CBA actually sort of make the best proposal the Celtics could offer a bit laughable. Since he has a year left on his deal, they could extend him a maximum of 3 years, and could offer a 7.5% raise. Basically, they asked him to sign a deal that would require him to give up a year of guaranteed money, take about 3 million less in year one, and to accept 7.5% annual raises instead of the 10.5% he'll get each year as a max contract player with 7-9 years in the league. In other words, it sounds an awful lot like the Celtics asked him to take a hometown discount and he said no. 

 

[nighthob]

If they can sign Rondo to a reasonable extension his trade value goes up. "Star money" does not necessarily mean the max.

He turned down the max that Boston could offer him on an extension of his current deal. Which would be normal max money. Yes, the max is coming, he isn't signing for less to toil his prime for a rebuilding team.

 

[nighthob]

http://espn.go.com/boston/nba/story/_/id/10339016/danny-ainge-rajon-rondo-boston-celtics-talked-possible-contract-extension
 
Danny quote...
 
This is an indication to me that they're thinking max or near-max for him. I assume the CBA limits he's referring to are max salary and years. If Rondo waits til next summer, the max will have gone up and it'll be on more years (rather than extension years).

Well, not quite. The max he could receive as an extension is the normal max money for a player with the service time in the year that it kicks in. If he goes the UFA route he gets to sign one of those second max deals that would average around $19-$20 million /year. Boston can add a signing bonus to any extension which brings the value to around $17 million, so if he's turning down the extension it's because he's looking for more than that.

 

[wutang112878]

Hypothetical.  Imagine we dumped Green's contract for an expiring, so next year his $9M was off the books and consequently we were ~$11M under the cap.  Also, imagine Rondo would take whatever deal we could offer him in the offseason.  Could we use the free cap space to apply it to Rondos deal so that his cap cost in future years is reduced?  Kind of similar to what the Thunder did with Nick Collison but on a larger scale.

 

[Jer]

Hypothetical.  Imagine we dumped Green's contract for an expiring, so next year his $9M was off the books and consequently we were ~$11M under the cap.  Also, imagine Rondo would take whatever deal we could offer him in the offseason.  Could we use the free cap space to apply it to Rondos deal so that his cap cost in future years is reduced?  Kind of similar to what the Thunder did with Nick Collison but on a larger scale.

I had to lookup the Collison deal to understand what you're talking about.
 
It sure seems like it'd be possible. Are signing bonuses subject to max salary restrictions? If not, is it possible to give him such a huge bonus that it'd offset most of the losses Rondo would have signing early?
 
Getting Rondo locked in for 5 years and below the max for the last 4 years would be spectacular. More flexibility to sign max guys and he's more of an asset to trade later on.

 

[nighthob]

They couldn't make a deal like that until he hit free agency. Extensions are always based on the value of the last year of the existing deal. But, he's obviously looking for north of the $17 million + he'd average in an extension since he already declined one.

 

[TroyOLeary]

Actually, it seems they can only make a deal like that if it accompanies an extension.
 
The Collison contract was actually a renegotation of the last year of his deal to give him a 10.5% raise for that year (which can only be done after the third anniversary of a 4+ year deal, which fits Rondo's situation) combined with a signing bonus on his extended deal.
 
From Larry Coon's CBA FAQ:
 
 
 

A renegotiated contract can be extended simultaneously (see question number 59). If a player's contract is extended and renegotiated simultaneously in this manner, his salary may not decrease by more than 40% from the last season before the extension (after it is renegotiated) to the first season of the extension. For example, if the salary in the last season of a contract is renegotiated to $10 million and the contract is simultaneously extended, the salary in the first season of the extension cannot be less than $6 million.
Other rules for renegotiations:

• A signing bonus cannot accompany a renegotiation unless the contract is extended simultaneously (see question number 59).
• A rookie scale contract (see question number 49) cannot be renegotiated.
• A contract cannot be renegotiated in conjunction with a trade.

Also of note is that the signing bonus on the extension can't be more than 15% of the total extension compensation (this is down from 20% under the old CBA, which is when the Collison deal was made).

 

[TroyOLeary]

Combine that 15% number with the fact that a renegotation couldn't take him above the max, the fact that they could only offer up to the cap (and it's not like they have are going to have a huge amount of cap room next year) and there's basically no way that the signing bonus would be substantial enough to offset anything less than the max in subsequent years.

 

[Jer]

I've tried to piece together the scenarios. This what I put together...

[tablegrid Rondo Scenarios] Existing Extension Extension+Bonus Resign FA ($60M Cap) 2014 $11,954,545 $11,954,545 $11,954,545 $11,954,545 2015 $12,909,091 $12,909,091 $12,909,091 $12,909,091 $8,610,818 2016 $13,877,273 $13,877,273 $16,800,000 2017 $14,825,455 $14,825,455 $18,060,000 2018 $15,793,637 $15,793,637 $19,320,000 2019 $20,580,000 2020 $21,840,000 $24,863,636 $69,360,001 $77,970,819 $121,463,636 [/tablegrid]

Notes
- TroyOLeary is right. The max of the bonus is 15%. I used that figure
- Although the extension+bonus is for 2 less years, the total difference through 2018 is only $1 million and Rondo would be getting more cash upfront, so it's mostly a wash.

Please let me know if anything is screwed up.

 

[Jer]

Combine that 15% number with the fact that a renegotation couldn't take him above the max, the fact that they could only offer up to the cap (and it's not like they have are going to have a huge amount of cap room next year) and there's basically no way that the signing bonus would be substantial enough to offset anything less than the max in subsequent years.

 
So my Extension+Bonus scenario doesn't work because his total compensation would be $21.5 and his max would be closer to $16?