Re: Pop & Parker vs Doc & Rondo
posted at 6/8/2013 9:48 PM EDT
In response to puddinpuddin's comment:
In response to Celtsfan4life's comment:
My point is that the student has more to do with their learning than the teacher. Parker works harder and grew over time while Rondo is stubborn and hard headed. Ever see Parker do the dumb things Rondo does? One is a good student and one is not!
I like Rondo but I've ALWAYS said Parker never gets enough credit when he ought to be compared favorably to Rondo, Williams, Rose, Westbrook, and Paul. It has something to do with coaching, but Parker's success has more to do with Parker, himself, than people want to acknowledge.
On the one hand, you describe R9R as stubborn and hard-headed and imply that he is a poor student of the game who does dumb things... and then you insist that Parker should be compared favorably (among others) with Rondo, a player you claim to like.
Dunno how you like a player you describe in such negative terms, terms I certainly agree with BTW... but then I don't claim to like Rondo as a player.
You might want to think this thru a bit more. And try climbing off the fence, one side or the other.
Guess you are a black and white kind of guy, huh? I'm not. I like Rondo but I am honest about his weaknesses. He's stubborn, can't shoot well (or at least not with enough confidence), and tempermental. But, he's a great passer and an intense player in the playoffs. On balance, I like him, but I recognize his weaknesses.
I loved Bird, but I recognized his weaknesses (slow and hurt too early in his career). I didn't like Lebron early in his career - couldn't shoot the jumper and was a one man show - but I did recognize greatness when I saw it.
So, try not to be so black and white. One can like a player but acknowledge the downside of that player (and visa versa).