All that shyt you just wrote, could be a blanket statement for another x-franchise PG. He runs their offense but that doesn't negate him from having
no impact and putting up empty stats. A player can still break between the two. And no I don't mean he has ZERO impact, I'm saying his box score's are not indicative of his actual impact. Lets' just take this season for example -
52% FG, 30% 3PT, 55% FT, 5.1 RPG, 13 ASPG, 2.3 SPG, 15.4 PPG.
The only stat that is a true telling of his impact/ability is his free-throw percentage and a case can be made for his 3-point percentage plus his points per game. The rest aren't. Should his FG% be used as an argument to say he's a better shooter than D-Will (46%) this season? Should his FG% as a PG be used as an argument to push an MVP case or push his case against other PGs (who have similar stats in other areas) but have lower FG%?
Should his RPG be used as an argument to say he's the best rebounding PG in the game? Why because he capitalises of being the ONLY player near rebounding-opportunities due to Doc's game-plan of getting back on D rather than x-rebound? Should his RPG be used as evidence as to why he's a better PG than x-player - when he benefits by playing in one of the worst rebounding teams in the league (for seasons that extend through the majority of his career) and hasn't played with a double-digit rebounder since he became the Celtics starting PG?
Should his ASPG be used as evidence to say he's the best PG (or amongst them) in the league when he orchestrated one of the worst-efficient offenses in the league for the last few seasons? Should his ASPG be used as evidence when the Celtics are JS-heavy team and he benefits from instantaneous shots from passes? Should his ASPG be used as evidence when he's the second-to-last player to touch the ball in swing-ball opportunities? Should his ASPG be used as evidence when that's his primarily job and is a
#3 scoring option? Why do the Celtics have constant droughts on the offense-end (this season and immediate past seasons)?
When I say his box scores aren't indicative of his true playing ability/impact, I say it because they aren't. He's NEVER EVER EVER had to handle an offense-load like Rose, Paul, D-Will, Parker and even Westbrook and had an impact of those players because he's never been the
#1 option on the regular. He's benefited from being the
#3 /#4 option guy the majority of his career and no it shouldn't be used to slight him, just like it shouldn't be used as evidence to say he's better than the aforementioned players. Simply because he's NEVER been in the opportunity on the regular to have that impact.
A future-case on the contrary is Harden - and his stats from last season to this season. He went from being
#3 to the
#1 option and look at how it's affected his impact and efficiency. Yes it's only a sample size (+ growing pains) but it's a telling that his impact last season is not all as it seems. You couldn't properly gauge his ability until he was put into this situation; a situation of having to do everything himself. He's having to deal with 1st units and
#1 defenders as opposed to what he was accustomed to last season. His flaws are on full display - flaws that were covered by his situation in OKC.
This is why this all dates back to Rondo being in the discussion of being one of the best PGs or in this thread's case an MVP-candidate and his statistical readings being used as evidence, when he's not in the struggle that other x-MVP candidates and x-PGs are. I can't take his stats seriously until he's in that predicament.
Bosh is not the Heat's second best player and fukk the Bulls talk. It didn't happen, let's talk about what did. Nobody expected them to compete and they did largely because of Rondo. My point stands.
at adding me to the lineup, but our defense would be trash but.. the offense 
