2009 Celticsblog Draft: Voting Analysis : Team of the Future

[Fafnir]

and KC I know pierce had some trophey at the end of the finals.  But was it because he was a dominant scorer that didnt lead his team in scoring?

Actually he did lead his team in scoring in the finals (Ray was second). Surprisingly the same was true for Pierce in the ECF. Interestingly, these were the two rounds of the playoffs that KG had never gotten past before. So I think Edgar's question stands, Who scores for KG when the bright lights are on?

3 PPG more isn't a big enough difference in the Finals to suggest Garnett can't handle the big stage. Not when he was our best player thoughout the entire playoffs.

Scoring isn't everything.

True, but when you couple it with Pierce's defense and leadership, it becomes the difference maker. I still contend that Pierce was the most important player on that Celtics team. If you take Pierce out of this pas seasons playoffs and put in Garnett, they don't get past Chicago.

Garnett was checking Odom/Gasol and is a better rebounder and defender than Pierce.

Our main reason for struggling against Chicago was our awful frontcourt rotation of BBD/Perk/Scal. Taking away Pierce would be equally bad due to our SF issues. But KG is a better player than Pierce.

[nickagneta]

As for the amount of time that Redd and Ginobelli are driving the basket over the last two seasons Manu has shot jump shots 74% and 70% of the time and Redd 71% and 70% of the time. That doesn't sound like they aren't perimeter players to me.

All wings are perimeter players, by definition.  However, any time you're averaging 30% of your shots from inside, it means you get to the hoop.

For instance:  Paul Pierce, 73% of shots are jumpers. 

Do you consider Paul to be strictly a "perimeter player"? 

Or, D. Wade.  66% of his shots are jumpers.  Is he a "perimeter player"?

Ginobelli used to be constantly around or below 60% of his shots being jump shots. Now he's in the lower 70's and rising. Meanwhile his FTA over the last couple of years have dropped and I see this as a continuing trend. He is now a perimeter player.

Redd's reputation has always been as an outside shooter and has numbers closer to 80% over the years than he has 70%. Yes 2-3 years ago he was in the top 20 in FTA per game but he never put up Pierce, Kobe, LeBron and Kevin Martin numbers of close to or over 10 FTA per game. He was usually around 6-7. After an injury, I see it much like IP, his game, which has mostly been a perimeter game is going to go further in that direction.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree there but you're starting team looks to lack serious defensive ability, rebounding prowess and an inside game. Luckily the Portland bench makes up for that.
And as much as Kobe and Wade and Pierce and LeBron may have jump shooting numbers close to 70% it's because they are regularly in the top 10 of FTA per game which means that the shots they are attempting going inside aren't being included in those numbers because they are getting fouled and those shots aren't being counted as attempts.

[Fafnir]

OK  we gotta spring and get KC a DVR too so in the future he can record the games and refresh his memory later on

So I can remember his 15 points a game and lack of production in LA? Nah, I remember those pretty well.

18 PPG in the Finals, 20 PPG in the playoffs. Not to mention his huge performance in Game 6.

He was also by far our best player in the Cleveland series. He carried the team to Game 7. Even in Game 7 he scored a bunch of points in the fourth after Paul was worn down from the amazing first three quarters.

I love KG, but allow me to play some devil's advocate here.  In our two losses, he averaged 13 points per game and shot 37%, against the defensive beasts Pau Gasol and Lamar Odom.  Isn't the idea that KG won't let his team lose a little overdone?

(I know that's not your argument, but some others have made it.)

It is, and he didn't play all that well in LA. But he was still just as good as Pierce for the whole series in my opinion. He was definitely our best player in the playoffs.

He was asked to guard Gasol/Odom. Pierce was usually on Walton/Rad Man for most of his minutes. Only checking Kobe late in games or on switches. Posey and Ray handled the majority of that.

[KCattheStripe]

and KC I know pierce had some trophey at the end of the finals.  But was it because he was a dominant scorer that didnt lead his team in scoring?

Actually he did lead his team in scoring in the finals (Ray was second). Surprisingly the same was true for Pierce in the ECF. Interestingly, these were the two rounds of the playoffs that KG had never gotten past before. So I think Edgar's question stands, Who scores for KG when the bright lights are on?

3 PPG more isn't a big enough difference in the Finals to suggest Garnett can't handle the big stage. Not when he was our best player thoughout the entire playoffs.

Scoring isn't everything.

True, but when you couple it with Pierce's defense and leadership, it becomes the difference maker. I still contend that Pierce was the most important player on that Celtics team. If you take Pierce out of this pas seasons playoffs and put in Garnett, they don't get past Chicago.

Garnett was checking Odom/Gasol and is a better rebounder and defender than Pierce.

Our main reason for struggling against Chicago was our awful frontcourt rotation of BBD/Perk/Scal. Taking away Pierce would be equally bad due to our SF issues. But KG is a better player than Pierce.

Taking away Pierce would have been worse, as it would have left Slamons unchecked. Meanwhile KG's defense would have stopped Joakim Noah, which (and this isn't a knock on KG) isn't hard.  Without Paul's scoring and willing ness to take over a game, plus his perimeter D and leadership, we lose that series, even with KG.

[Rondo2287]

OK KC but I dont really get your argument.  Our biggest flaw last year was that we had NOBODY to back up Paul Pierce.  Granted big baby surprised us but he played great.  If we had somebody that could fill in for pierce with the quality that big baby did for KG then I think we would have gotten by without Paul.  I think the difference there isnt that Pierce is better than KG but that Big Baby is better than tony allen

[nickagneta]

All this dialogue and no voting.


Rondo you are losing and you are spending time in here arguing the games with Roy and Edgar. You need to get the vote out and discussing the fine points of KG's game isn't helping you get more votes.

Mass PM's.
Vote for Toronto threads.
A vote for Toronto scrolling text sig so that every post you have in every thread will have a Vote Toronto advertisement.


Time to get creative. You're losing and debating Roy and edgar for the last three hours has produced exactly zero votes in the voting thread.

[Fafnir]

and KC I know pierce had some trophey at the end of the finals.  But was it because he was a dominant scorer that didnt lead his team in scoring?

Actually he did lead his team in scoring in the finals (Ray was second). Surprisingly the same was true for Pierce in the ECF. Interestingly, these were the two rounds of the playoffs that KG had never gotten past before. So I think Edgar's question stands, Who scores for KG when the bright lights are on?

3 PPG more isn't a big enough difference in the Finals to suggest Garnett can't handle the big stage. Not when he was our best player thoughout the entire playoffs.

Scoring isn't everything.

True, but when you couple it with Pierce's defense and leadership, it becomes the difference maker. I still contend that Pierce was the most important player on that Celtics team. If you take Pierce out of this pas seasons playoffs and put in Garnett, they don't get past Chicago.

Garnett was checking Odom/Gasol and is a better rebounder and defender than Pierce.

Our main reason for struggling against Chicago was our awful frontcourt rotation of BBD/Perk/Scal. Taking away Pierce would be equally bad due to our SF issues. But KG is a better player than Pierce.

Taking away Pierce would have been worse, as it would have left Slamons unchecked. Meanwhile KG's defense would have stopped Joakim Noah, which (and this isn't a knock on KG) isn't hard.  Without Paul's scoring and willing ness to take over a game, plus his perimeter D and leadership, we lose that series, even with KG.

You're looking at individual match ups too much. Its a team game.

With KG in our line up we were the best rebounding team in the NBA and a top defense. His help on penetrating, shot blocking, and rebounding are that important.

Having two shot blockers so you can rest them and still have a defensive presense is another big advantage to having KG and Perk.

[KCattheStripe]

OK KC but I dont really get your argument.  Our biggest flaw last year was that we had NOBODY to back up Paul Pierce.  Granted big baby surprised us but he played great.  If we had somebody that could fill in for pierce with the quality that big baby did for KG then I think we would have gotten by without Paul.  I think the difference there isnt that Pierce is better than KG but that Big Baby is better than tony allen

No, my point was that against Chicago last year, KG's defense wouldn't have made up for the lack of Pierce's scoring. Which is the problem I see with your team, I don't see anyone who can take over a game.

[Rondo2287]

Nick I hear ya, but this is more fun.  I would rather basketball related discussion than begging for votes via PM

[Roy Hobbs]

All this dialogue and no voting.


Rondo you are losing and you are spending time in here arguing the games with Roy and Edgar. You need to get the vote out and discussing the fine points of KG's game isn't helping you get more votes.

Mass PM's.
Vote for Toronto threads.
A vote for Toronto scrolling text sig so that every post you have in every thread will have a Vote Toronto advertisement.


Time to get creative. You're losing and debating Roy and edgar for the last three hours has produced exactly zero votes in the voting thread.

Haha.  In other words, call in your friends / trick people into voting for you. 

[Fafnir]

OK KC but I dont really get your argument.  Our biggest flaw last year was that we had NOBODY to back up Paul Pierce.  Granted big baby surprised us but he played great.  If we had somebody that could fill in for pierce with the quality that big baby did for KG then I think we would have gotten by without Paul.  I think the difference there isnt that Pierce is better than KG but that Big Baby is better than tony allen

No, my point was that against Chicago last year, KG's defense wouldn't have made up for the lack of Pierce's scoring. Which is the problem I see with your team, I don't see anyone who can take over a game.

KG scores at roughly the same rate and with greater efficiency than Pierce though. I don't buy it.

I agree that Toronto doesn't have enough to overcome their bench's disadvantage.

[Fafnir]

All this dialogue and no voting.


Rondo you are losing and you are spending time in here arguing the games with Roy and Edgar. You need to get the vote out and discussing the fine points of KG's game isn't helping you get more votes.

Mass PM's.
Vote for Toronto threads.
A vote for Toronto scrolling text sig so that every post you have in every thread will have a Vote Toronto advertisement.


Time to get creative. You're losing and debating Roy and edgar for the last three hours has produced exactly zero votes in the voting thread.

Haha.  In other words, call in your friends / trick people into voting for you. 

Nothing wrong with making personal pitches!

[KCattheStripe]

and KC I know pierce had some trophey at the end of the finals.  But was it because he was a dominant scorer that didnt lead his team in scoring?

Actually he did lead his team in scoring in the finals (Ray was second). Surprisingly the same was true for Pierce in the ECF. Interestingly, these were the two rounds of the playoffs that KG had never gotten past before. So I think Edgar's question stands, Who scores for KG when the bright lights are on?

3 PPG more isn't a big enough difference in the Finals to suggest Garnett can't handle the big stage. Not when he was our best player thoughout the entire playoffs.

Scoring isn't everything.

True, but when you couple it with Pierce's defense and leadership, it becomes the difference maker. I still contend that Pierce was the most important player on that Celtics team. If you take Pierce out of this pas seasons playoffs and put in Garnett, they don't get past Chicago.

Garnett was checking Odom/Gasol and is a better rebounder and defender than Pierce.

Our main reason for struggling against Chicago was our awful frontcourt rotation of BBD/Perk/Scal. Taking away Pierce would be equally bad due to our SF issues. But KG is a better player than Pierce.

Taking away Pierce would have been worse, as it would have left Slamons unchecked. Meanwhile KG's defense would have stopped Joakim Noah, which (and this isn't a knock on KG) isn't hard.  Without Paul's scoring and willing ness to take over a game, plus his perimeter D and leadership, we lose that series, even with KG.

You're looking at individual match ups too much. Its a team game.

With KG in our line up we were the best rebounding team in the NBA and a top defense. His help on penetrating, shot blocking, and rebounding are that important.

Having two shot blockers so you can rest them and still have a defensive presense is another big advantage to having KG and Perk.

Thats fine, but at the end of the day you need a player who can lead your team on the offensive end. Even the Bad Boys had Issiah. Someone has to be able to take over the game on the other end. KG doesn't do that, Ray does it once a series. Pierce is that guy for us. Couple that with his defense and his leadership and he's the best player on this team.

[Roy Hobbs]

All this dialogue and no voting.


Rondo you are losing and you are spending time in here arguing the games with Roy and Edgar. You need to get the vote out and discussing the fine points of KG's game isn't helping you get more votes.

Mass PM's.
Vote for Toronto threads.
A vote for Toronto scrolling text sig so that every post you have in every thread will have a Vote Toronto advertisement.


Time to get creative. You're losing and debating Roy and edgar for the last three hours has produced exactly zero votes in the voting thread.

Haha.  In other words, call in your friends / trick people into voting for you. 

Nothing wrong with making personal pitches!

Lol.  True, true.


VOTE PORTLAND!

CROTONATS ROCK!

[KCattheStripe]

OK KC but I dont really get your argument.  Our biggest flaw last year was that we had NOBODY to back up Paul Pierce.  Granted big baby surprised us but he played great.  If we had somebody that could fill in for pierce with the quality that big baby did for KG then I think we would have gotten by without Paul.  I think the difference there isnt that Pierce is better than KG but that Big Baby is better than tony allen

No, my point was that against Chicago last year, KG's defense wouldn't have made up for the lack of Pierce's scoring. Which is the problem I see with your team, I don't see anyone who can take over a game.

KG scores at roughly the same rate and with greater efficiency than Pierce though. I don't buy it.

I agree that Toronto doesn't have enough to overcome their bench's disadvantage.

At a per game or per minute rate, but what that stat doesn't take into account is scoring flurries. When was the last time you can remember KG putting the team on his back on Ripping off ten in a row? KG does his offensive damage a little bit in each quarter, which is fine. But I think everyone here has gone a little defense happy here and is forgetting the importance of having an offensive leader.