Which Celtics players are you biased against? Who can do no wrong?

[ManUp]

Binky:

Pierce - He's just such a beast, and I some times feel like I'm the only one that knows it. Seriously...

PIERCE IS A BEAST!!!!

almost made the list: Rondo - I just hate when he is hesitant and indecisive, but hey it's only his 3rd year.

Bugger:

Scal - I wouldn't make it in the d-leauge so how is he here?

almost made the list:
House - He's too one dimensional, and watching him try to play the point is frustrating.

[wdleehi]

Binky

KG

Perkins


   I like interior defense setting the tone.

Rondo

   I like defense that makes it hard for the other offense to get in their sets.

Pierce

  Got to have an offensive leader.


Buggers

Ray

   When he deferrers to the bench players instead of being the go to guy he is.  (though I am not looking to see him replaced.  Just be more aggressive at times)

TA

   Over hyped, inconsistent SG that is a terrible fit for the starters.  Want to see him replaced with a better fit

Davis

   Just not getting in shape to be able to compete for the spot Powe has on this team.  To short to be the C.  (just a bad fit for the 2nd big man off the bench)
TA

[housecall]

Binky

KG

Perkins


   I like interior defense setting the tone.

Rondo

   I like defense that makes it hard for the other offense to get in their sets.

Pierce

  Got to have an offensive leader.


Buggers

Ray

   When he deferrers to the bench players instead of being the go to guy he is.  (though I am not looking to see him replaced.  Just be more aggressive at times)

TA

   Over hyped, inconsistent SG that is a terrible fit for the starters.  Want to see him replaced with a better fit

Davis

   Just not getting in shape to be able to compete for the spot Powe has on this team.  To short to be the C.  (just a bad fit for the 2nd big man off the bench)
TA

I totally agree with you in TA's case.He would probably run or fit well with the Knicks.They are a wide-open style of team and when mistakes are made they are not as noticable on a team like theres.When you have halfcourt play going on 3/4 of the time as the C's does almost each play is planned or crucial to make it(plays) work... you need as many mistake-free type players running them in order to be successful.Thats just 1 of many problems i see in TA's game.

[drza44]

OK, I'm going to be the one to put my foot in it.  Should I?  Hmmm, well, why not?

When I read the OP, the first thing that I immediately thought of have been the series of Paul Pierce vs. Kevin Garnett threads that have been going around.  I'd say I first noticed them at the end of last season, and they picked up intensity after Pierce's Finals MVP and his statement about being the best in the league.  So, full disclosure:

Binky: Kevin Garnett.  He is simply my favorite athlete of all time.  I have followed his ups and downs, living and dying with him for the past decade.  I have seen him criticized for perceived weaknesses more than any great player in any sport that I've ever seen, with the possible exception of ARod.  But whereas ARod actually earns his reputation for shrinking on the big stage, KG has consistently been at his best in his biggest games but his reputation sticks to him no matter how much good he does.  When the Cs won the title, seeing KG FINALLY reach the mountaintop was the greatest sports moment of my life that I wasn't personally involved in.  All of my friends knew it, and I got congratulations calls/e-mails/texts like it was my son or brother that had won the title.

Buggers: (Here's where I step in it) Paul Pierce.  It's not that he bugs me himself, as in fact I've always thought he was underrated and I appreciate his greatness.  It's more that, because he's the native son here, it seems that KG gets slighted among many Cs fans in the effort to elevate their Captain.  I definitely understand the notion...back when Minnesota was talking about trading for Iverson, I was irrationally semi-against the idea (despite the fact I felt it a guaranteed title) because I knew if he came in and the Wolves won Iverson would get the credit.  And since we're being candid in this thread, I can admit that as a KG fan that would have bugged me.  So I can see why long-time Cs fans would be irked that so many in the national media credit KG with the turnaround instead of giving Pierce more shine.  But as a KG fan, I must admit that this attitude irks me in return and I find myself irritated when Pierce makes his "I'm the best" statements, especially since Garnett and Allen have both gone so far out of their ways to deflect any personal shine and have always made it about the team.

[no kidding]

I'm a hard-core contrarian taken to ridiculous lengths.  My binky is typically some long-gone free agent or low round draft pick (before the NBA went to only two rounds) who barely made the Celtics' roster, but got little if any real playing time: clingers. Guys like Brandon Wallace, Orien Greene, and Rick Carlisle.  I've had so many over the years that they seem to blend together.  Just some guy who had tried to live the dream, and had pretended not to notice when people were telling him that the party was over.

My bugger would be anyone who made a ton of money, considered it his due, had been peddled to us from some other team, and did nothing to contribute to the Celtics.  Guys like Vin Baker, Theo Ratliff...

[FatjohnReturns]

KG can do no wrong.

[indeedproceed]

Biased against: Cassell, Tony Allen, Scals, PoB, and Pierce to a certain degree.

Biased for: KG, Bill Walker, Ray Allen, KP.

[housecall]

OK, I'm going to be the one to put my foot in it.  Should I?  Hmmm, well, why not?

When I read the OP, the first thing that I immediately thought of have been the series of Paul Pierce vs. Kevin Garnett threads that have been going around.  I'd say I first noticed them at the end of last season, and they picked up intensity after Pierce's Finals MVP and his statement about being the best in the league.  So, full disclosure:

Binky: Kevin Garnett.  He is simply my favorite athlete of all time.  I have followed his ups and downs, living and dying with him for the past decade.  I have seen him criticized for perceived weaknesses more than any great player in any sport that I've ever seen, with the possible exception of ARod.  But whereas ARod actually earns his reputation for shrinking on the big stage, KG has consistently been at his best in his biggest games but his reputation sticks to him no matter how much good he does.  When the Cs won the title, seeing KG FINALLY reach the mountaintop was the greatest sports moment of my life that I wasn't personally involved in.  All of my friends knew it, and I got congratulations calls/e-mails/texts like it was my son or brother that had won the title.

Buggers: (Here's where I step in it) Paul Pierce.  It's not that he bugs me himself, as in fact I've always thought he was underrated and I appreciate his greatness.  It's more that, because he's the native son here, it seems that KG gets slighted among many Cs fans in the effort to elevate their Captain.  I definitely understand the notion...back when Minnesota was talking about trading for Iverson, I was irrationally semi-against the idea (despite the fact I felt it a guaranteed title) because I knew if he came in and the Wolves won Iverson would get the credit.  And since we're being candid in this thread, I can admit that as a KG fan that would have bugged me.  So I can see why long-time Cs fans would be irked that so many in the national media credit KG with the turnaround instead of giving Pierce more shine.  But as a KG fan, I must admit that this attitude irks me in return and I find myself irritated when Pierce makes his "I'm the best" statements, especially since Garnett and Allen have both gone so far out of their ways to deflect any personal shine and have always made it about the team.

TP for saying it like it really is.I have some of the same feelings about the subject but as you stated the thread is so pro Pierce that its hard to give constructive criticism without being accused of hating on someone.I do not hate anyone in this life,but i hate some of the things and ways of people.For instance Pierce's overall character was never a favorite of mine.I can't judge him because i really do not know him personally but from the seat we sit i have seen times when i thought Paul was selfish or self serving,egotistical but some have said to me those are the qualities it takes to help achieve the star status he has.Im not down with anyone who puts himself higher than others.Im not totally sure this is the type of human being Pierce really is.Its just a armchair observation.So i guess i have had some hard feelings about Paul over the years i kept hidden. 

[CoachBo]

From spending a lot of time on this blog, it's become clear that certain posters have their "binkies", while other players consistently draw the scorn of certain members.  I was curious to see how candid people would be about their irrational support / criticism of certain players.

I'll go first:

Binkies:

Ray Allen -- I'm defensive of Ray, because I think he's a lot better than people give him credit for.  He's a star-quality player who has taken a backseat for the good of the team.  He also has a beautiful stroke to watch.

Leon Powe -- I love the way he hustles, and the way he's consistently and constantly produced when in the game.  It doesn't hurt that certain people used to downplay Powe's contribution to boost BBD's.

I of course love the rest of the starters, and most of the other players, as well.  (At times, Eddie House approaches binky-status, because I like him more than his production warrants.)

Guys that get under my skin:

Tony Allen -- Candidly, I don't like his semi-thuggish background, and his mental mistakes on the floor irritate the heck out of me.  Tony is a poor decision maker, and I just don't like the way he plays the game.  I fully recognize that at his best, he is very good, and his teammates like him.  Still, he rubs me the wrong way.

Big Baby -- BBD draws my scorn mostly because he's vastly overrated.  He's not a very good player, and yet people constantly talk about his "potential".  The guy has done very little to get in shape after his pre-draft workouts, and hasn't been very productive at the NBA level yet.  I think part of my hard feelings towards him are because I chose Powe in the "Leon vs. Baby" debate, and BBD's supporters made me like him less than I should.

Patrick O'Bryant -- I'm not a huge fan of Paddy O'Blount, mostly because I see him as a waste of talent.  The guy reminds me of Blount, minus the gum chewing.  I'd like to see the guy improve, but he just doesn't seem to hustle or care about playing very much.

To be clear, I support all of the above guys because they're Celtics.  When they do well, I cheer them.  However, when they screw up, I'm probably harder on them than I am other players.

So, those are my biases.  Anybody else?

+1, Roy. Well stated and I thoroughly agree. TP.

I'd deal TA and BBD without blinking an eye right now. Probably wait until game 20 on Paddy O'Blount, then I'd release him.

[Fan from VT]

I have a hard time separating "players I love" from "players who can do no wrong." Additionally, I love all celtics, but I am more critical of others.

Disclaimer: I despise "intangibles." though I believe that intangibles exist, I firmly believe that 90% of the time, if someone says that a player has "intangibles" as a positive quality, what they really mean is that they inexplicably really like a player whose surprising unproductivity does not mesh with their mental image of a player's production, but because they want the player they like to be "good" player, they use "intangibles" as a positive attribute, because it is essentially a bullet-proof argument. (after all, if you don't see the inangibles, it's not the player's fault, it's YOUR fault for not being sophisticated enough to recognize intangibles.)

That said, I love tony allen, but he isn't a binkie. If he were traded in the right deal, i wouldn't lose too much sleep. I think that he tries extremely hard and works hard to get better. he lacks elite natural talent (i think he practices his ball handling, but some people, no matter how much they practice, have a ceiling) and he's battled injuries, but i think he brings more to the table than he takes away.

Powe is a binkie. I think this is because I was touting his virtues during his college season (after all, during those miserable seasons looking forward to the draft was half the fun of being a celtic fan). I firmly believed that he was a lottery talent who fell because he had injury issues. since he is basically injury free, i'd say he was a major steal, and i love watching him improve.

Now that he's won a title, Pierce is a binkie too. I want him to retire a celtic and play in one jersey for his pro career and enter springfield as a celtic only.




Noting my disclaimer above, players who are disproportionately valued due to intangibles i tend to be harsher on than average. i still like them, but for some reason i feel a need to bring their reps back to earth. for example, i think many people view Big Baby and Powe as equivalent players, with Davis's intangibles making up the enormous difference in talent and actual production. after watching tons of celtics games, i just do not buy this. powe is simply better, and i'm easily drawn into discussions about this.

I think posey was a very valuable player, but considering he was the 6th most important player on our roster, i think he became quite overvalued. still like him though, as i like all celtics.

[JSD]

I like the makeup of this team and would put the starting five in the binky status.

I do get irked at times with some of the player decisions and the team in general... Stay away from politics! You guys know and play basketball... Not politics! KG, take a line from Michael Jordan "Republicans buy sneakers too".

- I like Scal on this team because he knows his role and content with it. A lot of 10 - 12th guys out there are ****ing and complaining behind the scenes I'm sure. Plus, this is his last year to year and a half here anyway.

- I like Tony Allen and I think he can be a good 6th man in this league. He can at times be out of the offensive flow but he's still finds his way back. He's going to have a good year.

[Tnerb02]

Favorites
KG- Simply put, he is the man, even if he makes a mistake it's ok because you know he will make up for it. Plus his intensity is great.
Pierce- He's been on the team for so long, how can you not like him? A lot of the older crowd on here seems to criticize him too much like they did with Walker, but he has been the face of the Celtics and I just don't know how Celtics fans can not like him. Plus he is one of the most clutch players in the NBA.
Ray- When his shot is on, he is the best shooter in the world.
Perk- There were times where I thought Perk was a bust, but he has proved to me that he is a legitimate NBA center and Perk is a beast. How can you not like that stare?
Powe- He is a great NBA player and an even better human being.

Players who can get on my nerves
Rondo- I know a lot of people will disagree with me but there are a ton of plays that he makes where it leaves me scratching my head. He seems to force too many plays and has too many unnecessary turnovers. I also cringe whenever he shoots a three. He is still a good player, but he is not the future HOF that many people on here make him out to be.
Cassell- He's washed up and should retire.
Pruitt- He will never be a good NBA player and he's just taking up a roster spot.
POB- He isn't very good.

People I like but only when we're winning
Scal- He's like a mascot.

[cordobes]

Buggers: (Here's where I step in it) Paul Pierce.  (...)

TP for saying it like it really is.I have some of the same feelings about the subject but as you stated the thread is so pro Pierce that its hard to give constructive criticism without being accused of hating on someone. (...)

Well, I don't agree with your judgment on Pierce, but that's true, not only regarding Pierce but with most of the C's players, especially those who were drafted by the club. Pierce is the best player in the world, Perkins is more useful than Bynum, O'Bryant is as good as Bynum, Rondo and Allen have decent jump-shots, etc, are the kind of extraordinary, but rather common statements that can be read here. Guys who can make alley-oops also get more love than they deserve. Fans, and not only Celtics fans, generally over-appreciate their own players (and, again, even more those who are in the team since joining the league).

Disclaimer: I despise "intangibles." though I believe that intangibles exist, I firmly believe that 90% of the time, if someone says that a player has "intangibles" as a positive quality, what they really mean is that they inexplicably really like a player whose surprising unproductivity does not mesh with their mental image of a player's production, but because they want the player they like to be "good" player, they use "intangibles" as a positive attribute, because it is essentially a bullet-proof argument. (after all, if you don't see the inangibles, it's not the player's fault, it's YOUR fault for not being sophisticated enough to recognize intangibles.)

Just out of curiosity, what do you call "intangibles"? I believe that the "intangibles" conundrum results that the word as a shaky and precarious definition. Some people call intangibles to any skill or production that doesn't matter in fantasy leagues. For example, do you consider screening as an intangible? Help-defense? Boxing out? Off-the-ball movement? I think all those things are pretty tangible, people are just not paying attention to them when watching games or don't care about them, probably depreciating the impact of those traits have in the game. For instance, is defense an "intangible" skill?

[BudweiserCeltic]

I love all the people that consider TA a bugger, and keep mentioning his turnover ways, when this particular season he's been one of the more responsible ones with the ball so far in our team.

[nickagneta]

Buggers: (Here's where I step in it) Paul Pierce.  (...)

TP for saying it like it really is.I have some of the same feelings about the subject but as you stated the thread is so pro Pierce that its hard to give constructive criticism without being accused of hating on someone. (...)

Well, I don't agree with your judgment on Pierce, but that's true, not only regarding Pierce but with most of the C's players, especially those who were drafted by the club. Pierce is the best player in the world, Perkins is more useful than Bynum, O'Bryant is as good as Bynum, Rondo and Allen have decent jump-shots, etc, are the kind of extraordinary, but rather common statements that can be read here. Guys who can make alley-oops also get more love than they deserve. Fans, and not only Celtics fans, generally over-appreciate their own players (and, again, even more those who are in the team since joining the league).

Disclaimer: I despise "intangibles." though I believe that intangibles exist, I firmly believe that 90% of the time, if someone says that a player has "intangibles" as a positive quality, what they really mean is that they inexplicably really like a player whose surprising unproductivity does not mesh with their mental image of a player's production, but because they want the player they like to be "good" player, they use "intangibles" as a positive attribute, because it is essentially a bullet-proof argument. (after all, if you don't see the inangibles, it's not the player's fault, it's YOUR fault for not being sophisticated enough to recognize intangibles.)

Just out of curiosity, what do you call "intangibles"? I believe that the "intangibles" conundrum results that the word as a shaky and precarious definition. Some people call intangibles to any skill or production that doesn't matter in fantasy leagues. For example, do you consider screening as an intangible? Help-defense? Boxing out? Off-the-ball movement? I think all those things are pretty tangible, people are just not paying attention to them when watching games or don't care about them, probably depreciating the impact of those traits have in the game. For instance, is defense an "intangible" skill?

Unfortunately, cordobes, things like setting good screens, boxing out, help defense, off the ball movement, free throw shooting, not going to the hole when its one on three, going to the hole on a three on one instead of pulling up for a three pointer, offensive rebounding, and a host of other little but very necessary and tangible things are now considered intangible by the three point contest, dunk contest, alley oop, dribble through the legs for no reason, And1 generation.

With the advent of nba.com, espn, espn.com and the like, video highlights and stats are now all the rage for NBA players and when someone describes "intangibles" they are usually describing things that maybe(notice I am bolding this to emphasize that I do not include young and old but more mindsets) someone else or a different generation might think are things that should be ingrained in every basketball player from the time they first start to play organized ball.

I see people tortured BBD but I see a guy that boxes out constantly and uses his lower body in the box like other players only wish they could. I see a guy willing to sacrifice his body and play great defense. I see a guy that might be too out of shape and short to offensive rebound, but has the heart desire and proper skills to do so. I see a guy that since day one has gotten better and better at setting screens for players and who roles to the basket in the open lane with good motion and speed for a guy his size. I see a guy that almost never stops moving without the ball on offense.

His limitations are obvious but Baby has those very tangible "intangibles" that I like to see in every player but see in so very few sometimes.