|
Post by Atlanta Hawks on Sept 27, 2009 14:49:00 GMT
Calderson is already one the top PGs in the league...He plays aggressive and great, unselfish basketball... Good defense... Great legs... Pretty athletic... Good distributor (9 assists pre game!)... Doesn't turn the ball over... Very good getting layups... Makes no mistake from the charity stripe (98%)... Has really improved his outside shot (41%)...
even much better stats than Baron Davis (rated 88)
As a true elite PG, he deserves a rating at least 82 - 85
|
|
|
Post by Boston Celtics on Sept 27, 2009 21:55:10 GMT
We've got Rondo and Jameer Nelson at 78/79, you think they're as good as Calderon? cos I do personally. Question is, should they be higher or Calderon be lower? ;D
useless fact: NBA 2k10 rates Rondo as the ninth highest rated player in the NBA, hahah
|
|
|
Post by Atlanta Hawks on Sept 28, 2009 10:27:30 GMT
We've got Rondo and Jameer Nelson at 78/79, you think they're as good as Calderon? cos I do personally. Question is, should they be higher or Calderon be lower? ;D useless fact: NBA 2k10 rates Rondo as the ninth highest rated player in the NBA, hahah Nelson is fine at 79...but Calderon almost makes twice as many assists than him!!! Rondo is a great defender and rebounder, althogh Calderson makes also more assits and is a much better shooter Rondo might be slighty better overall... Rondo: 81 - 83 ovr (better ratings in defending, stls and rebs) Calderon: 80 - 82 ovr (great shooter, 98%FT, sensational passing, solid D) Nelson: 79 ovr (good scorer)
|
|
|
Post by New Jersey Nets on Sept 28, 2009 15:09:20 GMT
my opinion:
Nelson- 82 Rondo- 82 Calderon- 78
You can look at stats all you want, but at the end of the day, if you have Calderon, Marion, and Bosh on a team with solid roleplayers and the team cant even get close to .500, then the players arent as good as we think. Calderon is an above average PG, but I think Rondo and Nelson are on a different level with regards to what they do for their team and how they help their teams win games. I just don't think Calderon has done anything to warrant a jump into the 80s yet
|
|
|
Post by San Antonio Spurs on Sept 28, 2009 15:35:00 GMT
We've got Rondo and Jameer Nelson at 78/79, you think they're as good as Calderon? cos I do personally. Question is, should they be higher or Calderon be lower? ;D useless fact: NBA 2k10 rates Rondo as the ninth highest rated player in the NBA, hahah Nelson is fine at 79...but Calderon almost makes twice as many assists than him!!! Rondo is a great defender and rebounder, althogh Calderson makes also more assits and is a much better shooter Rondo might be slighty better overall... Rondo: 81 - 83 ovr (better ratings in defending, stls and rebs) Calderon: 80 - 82 ovr (great shooter, 98%FT, sensational passing, solid D) Nelson: 79 ovr (good scorer) Calderon is a terrible defender, this coming from a Raptors fan.
|
|
|
Post by Atlanta Hawks on Sept 28, 2009 18:12:22 GMT
Nelson is fine at 79...but Calderon almost makes twice as many assists than him!!! Rondo is a great defender and rebounder, althogh Calderson makes also more assits and is a much better shooter Rondo might be slighty better overall... Rondo: 81 - 83 ovr (better ratings in defending, stls and rebs) Calderon: 80 - 82 ovr (great shooter, 98%FT, sensational passing, solid D) Nelson: 79 ovr (good scorer) Calderon is a terrible defender, this coming from a Raptors fan. Calderon is an offensive superstar...defense just solid. thats true...but a PG who makes 50% FG over 40% 3 pt and 98% FT and 9 assists/game deserves at least a 80 rating...he has quick feet, great ballhandling, good durability... imo Nelson is slightly weak...just a personal opinion...Nelson is a better scorer, but thats it pretty much...still nelson deserves a 79/80...rondo as said is the best out of the 3... but look at other ratings...Baron Davis 88, Vince Carter 89, Richard Jefferson 85...imo the mentioned PGs have more value than those players...
|
|
|
Post by New Jersey Nets on Sept 28, 2009 19:48:59 GMT
I think Jameer Nelson is a shooting version of Rondo. They are both a top 5 defensive point guards, but Nelson scores more with a shot than a drive. Still, he shoots over 50% FG.
Calderon is probably the least gifted on both offense and defense out of the three. He gets a lot of assists, but you cant really rely on him to actually score or create his own shot. That being said, I think he clearly gets the least rating of the three.
|
|
|
Post by Boston Celtics on Sept 28, 2009 22:01:44 GMT
I'd just like to note that in the last playoffs, the place where true talent proves itself, Rajon Rondo all but averaged a triple double.
16.9ppg, 9.7rpg, 9.8apg... and add to that 2.5steals per game too. 9.5 rebounds per game as a 6-1 guard against the Bulls and Magic in two 7-game series.
I have to say I'm with New Jersey. I think Calderon merits a high 70s, Nelson slightly higher, but Rondo really takes the cake in this analysis, imho.
And yes, Rajon is my favorite Celtic... but I like to think I don't have homer-vision.
|
|
|
Post by San Antonio Spurs on Sept 29, 2009 2:06:50 GMT
Calderon is a terrible defender, this coming from a Raptors fan. Calderon is an offensive superstar...defense just solid. thats true...but a PG who makes 50% FG over 40% 3 pt and 98% FT and 9 assists/game deserves at least a 80 rating...he has quick feet, great ballhandling, good durability... imo Nelson is slightly weak...just a personal opinion...Nelson is a better scorer, but thats it pretty much...still nelson deserves a 79/80...rondo as said is the best out of the 3... but look at other ratings...Baron Davis 88, Vince Carter 89, Richard Jefferson 85...imo the mentioned PGs have more value than those players... Calderon is one of my favourite Raps but he's not offensive superstar, he can create for other's but not for himself and was a defensive liability last season.
|
|
|
Post by Atlanta Hawks on Sept 29, 2009 6:08:19 GMT
Calderon is an offensive superstar...defense just solid. thats true...but a PG who makes 50% FG over 40% 3 pt and 98% FT and 9 assists/game deserves at least a 80 rating...he has quick feet, great ballhandling, good durability... imo Nelson is slightly weak...just a personal opinion...Nelson is a better scorer, but thats it pretty much...still nelson deserves a 79/80...rondo as said is the best out of the 3... but look at other ratings...Baron Davis 88, Vince Carter 89, Richard Jefferson 85...imo the mentioned PGs have more value than those players... Calderon is one of my favourite Raps but he's not offensive superstar, he can create for other's but not for himself and was a defensive liability last season. ya we're not speaking about a 90+ superstar..still 50%FG , 40% 3pt, 98% ad 9 assists along with a great BB IQ are amazing...76 is way too low!
|
|
|
Post by jlawdrummer - GSW on Sept 29, 2009 13:00:32 GMT
I agree with Hawks here, at least generally, that 76 is too low. I don't know why we've chosen to compare him to Rondo and Jameer...but I would probably have them like this.
Rondo - 82 Calderon - 80 Nelson - 79/80
His passing has to be in the 90's, his FG shooting is great, his 3pt shooting is one of the best int he league, his FT% was THE BEST in the league...his defense is poor, and he's not uber athletic...but that's why he's not a 90+ rating. The things he does well, he does really well, and they give him about an 80 rating IMO.
|
|
|
Post by Erik Lassen on Sept 30, 2009 18:52:51 GMT
Yeah Calderon is slightly better than Nelson I agree. Rondo is better than both of them, but Calderon is better in pretty much every offensive category with the exception of scoring. His defence is what stops him from being a top 5 PG.
|
|
|
Post by Boston Celtics on Oct 1, 2009 9:20:46 GMT
I'm thinking: Rondo 82 Nelson 80 Calderon 80
What do you guys think?
|
|
|
Post by Atlanta Hawks on Oct 1, 2009 9:56:03 GMT
I'm thinking: Rondo 82 Nelson 80 Calderon 80 What do you guys think? hoped for more but its ok!
|
|
|
Post by Denver Nuggets on Oct 1, 2009 10:09:17 GMT
Maybe Calderon should be rated at least one higher than Nelson though...
|
|
|
Post by Atlanta Hawks on Oct 1, 2009 12:53:10 GMT
Maybe Calderon should be rated at least one higher than Nelson though... yo thx...81 would be fine imo
|
|
|
Post by Boston Celtics on Oct 1, 2009 13:03:49 GMT
Rondo 82 Calderon 81 Nelson 80 Any objections?
|
|
|
Post by New Jersey Nets on Oct 1, 2009 13:09:13 GMT
Rondo 82 Calderon 81 Nelson 80 Any objections? I object... Jameer Nelson is the only one of these three players to make the all-star team last season, and I think he has a better combined skill when you look at both offense and defense than the other two. NBA 2k10 has something like Rondo 87, Nelson 79, Calderon 75... I think Rondo's is a bit extreme considering he really wasn't known as that good of a player until the playoffs last season, and we all saw how a good playoff player in Rodney Stuckey ended up not being consistent. I am fine with Rondo being slightly ahead of Nelson, but I still think Calderon isnt anywhere close to those two. Assists can only get you so far in ratings, I think we are disregarding his lack of scoring offense and his lack of defense and just focusing in on his assists and his free throw percentage (which is almost irrelevant in ratings). Rondo: 82 Nelson: 81 Calderon: 78
|
|
|
Post by Atlanta Hawks on Oct 1, 2009 13:19:09 GMT
Denver, Chicago, Golden State and me see Calderon better than Nelson! and you can never ever compare NBA2k10 ratings with NBA live imo all 3 deserve at least a 80 rating... Rondo 82 Calderon 81 Nelson 80 is fine with me...
|
|
|
Post by Miami Heat on Oct 1, 2009 15:28:25 GMT
Rondo 82 Calderon 81 Nelson 80 Any objections? I object... Jameer Nelson is the only one of these three players to make the all-star team last season, and I think he has a better combined skill when you look at both offense and defense than the other two. NBA 2k10 has something like Rondo 87, Nelson 79, Calderon 75... I think Rondo's is a bit extreme considering he really wasn't known as that good of a player until the playoffs last season, and we all saw how a good playoff player in Rodney Stuckey ended up not being consistent. I am fine with Rondo being slightly ahead of Nelson, but I still think Calderon isnt anywhere close to those two. Assists can only get you so far in ratings, I think we are disregarding his lack of scoring offense and his lack of defense and just focusing in on his assists and his free throw percentage (which is almost irrelevant in ratings). Rondo: 82 Nelson: 81 Calderon: 78 I have to agree with this, Calderon isn't up with Nelson's and Rondo's level.
|
|
|
Post by Atlanta Hawks on Oct 1, 2009 15:56:30 GMT
i wouldnt mind if we give Nelson also 81, when Rondo is 82 and Calderon 81...still Nelson wont reach Calderon's 9 assists per game, nor does he shot 50%Fg and 98% FT - thats amazing and enough to get 80+ at least...
Baron Davis as mentioned in the other thread had a tough year...imo 80 or 81 is ok...he still is a great player and if he has a better year for the clipps you might can upgrade him...
|
|
|
Post by New Jersey Nets on Oct 1, 2009 15:59:59 GMT
i wouldnt mind if we give Nelson also 81, when Rondo is 82 and Calderon 81...still Nelson wont reach Calderon's 9 assists per game, nor does he shot 50%Fg and 98% FT - thats amazing and enough to get 80+ at least... Baron Davis as mentioned in the other thread had a tough year...imo 80 or 81 is ok...he still is a great player and if he has a better year for the clipps you might can upgrade him... Jameer shot .503 from the field last season. Calderon shot .497
|
|
|
Post by Atlanta Hawks on Oct 1, 2009 16:54:35 GMT
i wouldnt mind if we give Nelson also 81, when Rondo is 82 and Calderon 81...still Nelson wont reach Calderon's 9 assists per game, nor does he shot 50%Fg and 98% FT - thats amazing and enough to get 80+ at least... Baron Davis as mentioned in the other thread had a tough year...imo 80 or 81 is ok...he still is a great player and if he has a better year for the clipps you might can upgrade him... Jameer shot .503 from the field last season. Calderon shot .497 true...thats why i said: Rondo 82 Nelson 81 Calderon 81
|
|
|
Post by Miami Heat on Oct 1, 2009 19:04:14 GMT
Baron Davis as mentioned in the other thread had a tough year...imo 80 or 81 is ok...he still is a great player and if he has a better year for the clipps you might can upgrade him... So Calderon deserves to be 81 and Baron 80? You seriously think that Calderon is better player than Baron Davis? Honestly said, that's just bullshit, I understand you want to get your players better ratings(deserved ratings), but that's just too much in my opinion. 79 would be enough for Calderon.
|
|
|
Post by Atlanta Hawks on Oct 1, 2009 22:19:26 GMT
Just want the normal respect a great player like Calderon deserves... -- he ranks #4 in the NBA in Assists Per Game(9/game) -- Calderon ranks #1 in the NBA in Assists Per Turnover(4.24) -- he also ranks #35 in the NBA in Efficiency Ranking (18.9)
|
|
|
Post by Los Angeles Lakers on Oct 2, 2009 3:30:46 GMT
I think Rondo deserves to be 90! ;D LOL... j/k 82+ is fine with me. As a Lakers fan, I have come to respect his abilities.
|
|
|
Post by Miami Heat on Oct 2, 2009 10:25:26 GMT
-- he also ranks #35 in the NBA in Efficiency Ranking (18.9) But that's the thing, usually when the Efficiency Rankings are calculated, defense isn't part of it. He should have high ratings, at what he's good at: Passing, 3-pt shooting, free throws, speed + some other semi-good ratings. But that's the thing that he probably has very good ratings at these. But just to increase the overall rating you got to increase the ratings in which he ain't good at all(read defense, rebounding etc.). He should have some very good ratings, I agree with that. But in my opinion we shouldn't improve the other factors that he's not as good as JUST to improve overall rating. But one big factor has been forgotten, when comparing Nelson, Rondo and Calderon. Rondo and Nelson both are in very good teams, elite teams, while Calderon is part of mediocre at best team, thus his stats are better in Toronto than he would have in Boston or Orlando. Just an example, statistically you could say Kevin Martin is better player than Paul Pierce(24.6pp to 20.5 ppg), when comparing the stats, but is Kevin really a better player than Paul?
|
|
|
Post by Atlanta Hawks on Oct 2, 2009 11:54:25 GMT
-- he also ranks #35 in the NBA in Efficiency Ranking (18.9) But that's the thing, usually when the Efficiency Rankings are calculated, defense isn't part of it. He should have high ratings, at what he's good at: Passing, 3-pt shooting, free throws, speed + some other semi-good ratings. But that's the thing that he probably has very good ratings at these. But just to increase the overall rating you got to increase the ratings in which he ain't good at all(read defense, rebounding etc.). He should have some very good ratings, I agree with that. But in my opinion we shouldn't improve the other factors that he's not as good as JUST to improve overall rating. But one big factor has been forgotten, when comparing Nelson, Rondo and Calderon. Rondo and Nelson both are in very good teams, elite teams, while Calderon is part of mediocre at best team, thus his stats are better in Toronto than he would have in Boston or Orlando. Just an example, statistically you could say Kevin Martin is better player than Paul Pierce(24.6pp to 20.5 ppg), when comparing the stats, but is Kevin really a better player than Paul? well isnt it harder to have a high FG and low turnovers when you are in a weak team??? Isnt it easier to get an assist if you throw it to Dwight Howard down low for the dunk or kick it out to ray allen for the wide open 3??? Calderon makes 9 assists...nelson only slightly more than 5...its definitly harder to get a high FG percentage and 3pt FG in a weak team
|
|
|
Post by Miami Heat on Oct 2, 2009 12:19:48 GMT
But that's the thing, usually when the Efficiency Rankings are calculated, defense isn't part of it. He should have high ratings, at what he's good at: Passing, 3-pt shooting, free throws, speed + some other semi-good ratings. But that's the thing that he probably has very good ratings at these. But just to increase the overall rating you got to increase the ratings in which he ain't good at all(read defense, rebounding etc.). He should have some very good ratings, I agree with that. But in my opinion we shouldn't improve the other factors that he's not as good as JUST to improve overall rating. But one big factor has been forgotten, when comparing Nelson, Rondo and Calderon. Rondo and Nelson both are in very good teams, elite teams, while Calderon is part of mediocre at best team, thus his stats are better in Toronto than he would have in Boston or Orlando. Just an example, statistically you could say Kevin Martin is better player than Paul Pierce(24.6pp to 20.5 ppg), when comparing the stats, but is Kevin really a better player than Paul? well isnt it harder to have a high FG and low turnovers when you are in a weak team??? Isnt it easier to get an assist if you throw it to Dwight Howard down low for the dunk or kick it out to ray allen for the wide open 3??? Calderon makes 9 assists...nelson only slightly more than 5...its definitly harder to get a high FG percentage and 3pt FG in a weak team Yes and no. Turnovers don't have anything to the team you play for. Calderon would probably have about the same turnover rate in Boston as he has now. But you missed my point, I didn't say that Nelson is a better passer than Calderon, I tryed to say that he is a better player. I already said that Calderon should have rather high passing and FG ratings in the game, which he probably already have.
|
|
|
Post by Denver Nuggets on Oct 3, 2009 6:44:06 GMT
Haha I appreciate you guys not bringing Baron Davis into the question here. Honestly he's probably still a better player than all three PGs listed here AT THE MOMENT.
|
|