With the scrutiny (and hate) surrounding Rajon Rondo at an all-time high, I wanted to take some time to interject some of my own thoughts on the situation. Here are three things I’ve been mulling around in my head both before and after last night’s debacle in Game 2 at the Houston Rockets.

“Stars Versus Depth”

Whether or not Rondo was ever a true ‘star’, this was the question lurking behind the deal when Dallas made it. Early in the season, the Mavericks were rolling offensively with a group of wings that had different skill sets but could more or less put pressure on defenses with our without the ball. On top of that, Brandon Wright and Tyson Chandler gave the Mavericks two pick-and-roll finishers that defenses had to account for at every turn. Wright and Jameer Nelson, who was also shipped out in the Rondo deal, may not have been franchise altering players, but they certainly fit their roles.

While their glut of guards has certainly made losing Nelson a forgettable aspect of the Rondo deal, Wright’s absence has been very evident. The Mavs have went through about 17 replacements (okay, it’s really more like five) before finally settling on Amar’e Stoudamire once he cleared waivers. None of these players has come close to approximating Wright’s impact.

The idea would be that ramped up minutes for Chandler in the playoffs would make a reserve center almost a non-issue. But anyone watching Dallas’ first two games against Houston would beg to differ. Even if Chandler averaged nearly 40 minutes a night (which would be insane for a variety of reasons), the lack of a capable big man behind him for the eight he doesn’t play could still cost the Mavs games. Every little thing counts in these playoffs, including four or five minute stretches where an opponent blasts a lineup featuring an overmatched reserve.

The argument in this ‘debate’ could simply be Dallas underrating Wright’s value or the issues with Rondo’s ‘star’ status, but I think there is a lesson in here for teams around the league. Particularly when it comes to navigating the grueling regular season, depth matters. The NBA has increasingly become a war of attrition and a willingly sacrificing integral parts of a rotation, especially ones that fit within a team’s overarching philosophy, for a singular, elite talent may not be the no-brainer decision it’s been made out to be.

Is Rondo a relic?

Part of the reason I had a more optimistic take on the Rondo trade when it happened, is because I value ball-dominant guys that ‘hog’ the ball in an effort to make plays for their teammates. This is probably because two of my favorite players to watch -- the recently retired Steve Nash and Chris Paul -- operate(d) in a similar fashion. But today’s NBA offenses are moving more toward the Spursian type systems where the ball zings around the perimeter with multiple players running through multiple actions instead of one player, like Rondo, manipulating the defense then the passing out.

The former is what Rick Carlisle had in place before Rondo came. Monta Ellis, Chandler Parson, the aforementioned Nelson, J.J. Barea and Devin Harris all handled in pick-and-rolls or attacked in closeouts upon kickouts. The Mavericks offense was designed for the ball to play with pace and for any perimeter on the court to run random pick-and-rolls or come off screens at any point during a set or free-flowing motion.

Rondo’s at his best when doing the exact opposite of all these things. Instead of trying to operate amidst the chaos of early offense, Rondo is a chess master, slowing things down in the halfcourt and moving the defensive pieces across the board in a manner he sees fit. And taking the ball out of his hands in the way Carlisle prefers, is like telling someone to make the two opening moves in a game of chess then handing off the rest of the opening to someone else. Rondo needs time, freedom and, most importantly, the ball to understand how defenses are playing him and his teammates in order to make sure he can put his team a position to be successful.

I'm sure that's part of the reason why Rondo clashed with Carlisle. When a point guard like Rondo brings the ball up and wants to get into pick-and-rolls in order to figure out the best way to exploit a defense and his head coach calls a "power" set for Ellis that asks Rondo to stand idly by in the corner, it is probably somewhat infuriating. When you add in how successful Carlisle has been at creating efficient team offense and the incredible way Rondo sees the game, it’s not a shock to expect such friction. That isn’t meant excuse Rondo’s (presumed) behavior or to paint Carlisle as inflexible, it’s just acknowledging that their relationship was perhaps destined to be like watching Congress attempt to pass legislation (though they just did that!).

And that begs the question, does a flawed, ball dominant playmaker like Rondo (or Andre Miller, Ricky Rubio, etc) still have value in today’s NBA? If you want your team to play like the Spurs, Hawks, Jazz, pre-Rondo Mavs or a few other teams, that answer is most certainly no. These players will probably only work when a team caters to their skill set (and then the question becomes, what is the ceiling for that squad?), which Dallas has not done with Rondo.

It’s Not Your Fault

This is probably the biggest thing to keep in mind during all this Rondo-bashing. Not only did Rondo not trade himself to Dallas, but he didn’t assemble the roster around him either. No matter how poorly you think Rondo has played, it’s not his fault that Dirk Nowitzki has turned into a massive liability on defense. Or that Dallas lacks reliable outside threats (that actually play extended minutes) besides the big German and the currently injured Parsons on their roster. And perhaps more importantly, it’s not Rondo’s fault he was paired with another ball-dominant guard that struggles shooting from the perimeter in Ellis.

While certain things Rondo has struggled with were in his control, a lot of his problems stem from what’s around him. Fit matters in the NBA more than it probably gets credit for. The mercurial Rondo is just the latest victim of finding a poor one.