Poll: Irving and Hayward, or KG and Ray

[Vermont Green]

I don't understand how anyone who watched KG play could even question this.  He is a tier or two above any of these other guys.  Doesn't mean that Irving and Hayward are not good, just not KG good.

[Moranis]

I guarantee Hayward and can Irving win two rings together.

I would take that bet.

He didn't guarantee anything.  He only guaranteed that they CAN win two rings together.  Of course they CAN win two rings together, the better question is WILL they win two rings together.

[Moranis]

Garnett never played more than 71 games in Boston (he did that twice) and he never played more than 32.8 mpg.  He suffered a major injury in year 2 and while he was still a good player, he was never great again after that injury which probably cost Boston a title or two. 

Ray Allen had a healthier stint in Boston, but his prior injuries took a lot of his speed and athleticism away, such that he wasn't much more than a spot up shooter for much of his time in Boston. 

When you look at it in that context, it isn't overly difficult to conclude that Irving and Hayward have far more potential to be great for far longer while members of the Celtics.  And while Irving and Hayward won't ever have the overall impact and career standing as Garnett, both could eclipse Allen's overall career. 

Thus, I think the correct answer is Irving and Hayward assuming they both stay with Boston for 6+ years.  There is just a difference between two players not quite in their prime who stay for their prime, to two players at the tail end (KG until the injury put him out of it) or past their prime (Allen) when they joined the team.

[gouki88]

Garnett never played more than 71 games in Boston (he did that twice) and he never played more than 32.8 mpg.  He suffered a major injury in year 2 and while he was still a good player, he was never great again after that injury which probably cost Boston a title or two. 

Ray Allen had a healthier stint in Boston, but his prior injuries took a lot of his speed and athleticism away, such that he wasn't much more than a spot up shooter for much of his time in Boston. 

When you look at it in that context, it isn't overly difficult to conclude that Irving and Hayward have far more potential to be great for far longer while members of the Celtics.  And while Irving and Hayward won't ever have the overall impact and career standing as Garnett, both could eclipse Allen's overall career. 

Thus, I think the correct answer is Irving and Hayward assuming they both stay with Boston for 6+ years.  There is just a difference between two players not quite in their prime who stay for their prime, to two players at the tail end (KG until the injury put him out of it) or past their prime (Allen) when they joined the team.

Basically how I see it.

[dmopower]

Come on man.  One of the best shooters ever and maybe the best PF of all time and a defensive stud with his own man and on help D.  I love our additions but the only thing better about the new core is they have a much larger window than the last time Danny bought fireworks.

[jakeopp]

KG and Ray, not even close. Ray was the best shooter in league history before Steph. KG is in the conversation for best PF of all time.

[jambr380]

Is that the right comp?

Shouldn't it be Irving and Hayward vs. Pierce and Allen?  I think that's about even, but I like Irving and Hayward better. Pierce over Hayward by a bit, but Irving should be a lot better than Ray. About the same shooting, but on another planet creating his own shot.

(If you really want to daydream, add Anthony Davis and KG to the comparison  ).

This was my take, as well.

Current Kyrie and Hayward equate (at least) to the Big 3 years of Pierce and Allen.

The difference comes with Horford vs Garnett. While Horford provides many of the things that KG was able to, I would say it just doesn't have quite the same impact.

And the huge, major, unbelievable difference is there was not GSW back then. I would feel much more comfortable going up against those Lakers teams than GSW and we might have a different perception.

[KG Living Legend]

Garnett never played more than 71 games in Boston (he did that twice) and he never played more than 32.8 mpg.  He suffered a major injury in year 2 and while he was still a good player, he was never great again after that injury which probably cost Boston a title or two. 

Ray Allen had a healthier stint in Boston, but his prior injuries took a lot of his speed and athleticism away, such that he wasn't much more than a spot up shooter for much of his time in Boston. 

When you look at it in that context, it isn't overly difficult to conclude that Irving and Hayward have far more potential to be great for far longer while members of the Celtics.  And while Irving and Hayward won't ever have the overall impact and career standing as Garnett, both could eclipse Allen's overall career. 

Thus, I think the correct answer is Irving and Hayward assuming they both stay with Boston for 6+ years.  There is just a difference between two players not quite in their prime who stay for their prime, to two players at the tail end (KG until the injury put him out of it) or past their prime (Allen) when they joined the team.

 Moranis. I'd give you a 100 Tps if be I could. Most people simply won't listen to the totality of the point I'm trying to make.

 Everybody wants to talk about how great Garnett was, which of course he was, but the point is from Danny ainge's perspective is getting stars in their Prime which he failed to do the first time around.

 It was still worth it but it's much harder to get a 25 and a 27 year old in their Prime then a couple of 30-somethings.

[action781]

I don't understand how anyone who watched KG play could even question this.  He is a tier or two above any of these other guys.  Doesn't mean that Irving and Hayward are not good, just not KG good.

I agree with this, but I'm going with the longevity of Kyrie + Hayward. 

That "tier or two above these other guys" that KG had really only lasted for three seasons, one of which he was injured.  In seasons 4 and 5, he was at Kyrie/Hayward level.  Ray Allen was pretty much at the same level as Kyrie/Hayward for 4 seasons until he dropped off as well.  In total, they delivered two finals appearances and 1 championship.

I expect Kyrie to maintain or slightly improve his current level of play for ~7 seasons and Gordon to maintain his for ~6 seasons.  I expect more than two finals appearances from them in the next seven years.  No guarantees at a ring, but I'm hopeful.

[Casperian]

The real question is: Irving and Hayward or Harden and Paul?

Are we really better than the Rockets?

[Celtics4ever]

Harden and Paul?

Only one of thing can have the ball at once and both are ball dominant players

[GreenFaith1819]

I voted KG and Ray, but Kyrie and The Haymaker have a VERY unique opportunity.

It's shocking to know that this team has turned over SO MUCH in just the last few months..

Prior to KG and Ray joining PP34 we were a bottom feeder.

We now have what? FOUR players left from last year? A 53 win ECF team. And NOW we're talking about at LEAST ECF AGAIN, and perhaps MORE...

Kyrie and GH have an opportunity not often presented like this in all of sports. And I'm certain they're BOTH hungry...

GH has "Unfinished Business" with Coach Stevens. Kyrie is trying to come from under the shadow of LeBron.

Fortune favors the bold and it doesn't get much bolder than this Celtics Team.

How many teams in sports PERIOD goes this deep into the playoffs, turns over this much and is looking to go even farther next year?

Danny (and Brad) don't get enough credit. If they were in Hollywood they'd be on Jimmy Kimmel every night.