2009 Celticsblog Draft: Voting Analysis : Team of the Future

[Edgar]

To mgent

thank u for your depth comment
I am sure u  always knew depth win championships


we appreciatte your comment and your vote



We sacrifice our first rounder but trade to not having a single roster spot
over 12th round
that help us to build this machine of a team without a first rounder
some people tend to forget that

portland is the team of the poor, the team of the masses the peoples team


VOTE PORTLAND!!!!!!

Vote Portland!!!!

[Fafnir]

Paul's minutes rose late in the year after KG was out. You really think KG's absence didn't have anything to do with it?

I think per/36 numbers do reflect better when you compare Paul to KG because KG playes around 38 minutes in the playoffs two years ago. He'd likely have done the same this year.

It also is a good way to show the rate he is scoring when on the court which is important. How many minutes you can play is important, but quality matters too.

[KCattheStripe]

Paul's minutes rose late in the year after KG was out. You really think KG's absence didn't have anything to do with it?

I think per/36 numbers do reflect better when you compare Paul to KG because KG playes around 38 minutes in the playoffs two years ago. He'd likely have done the same this year.

It also is a good way to show the rate he is scoring when on the court which is important. How many minutes you can play is important, but quality matters too.

They rose, but not substantially. Also, it is dangerous to rely just on statistics. ITs why the Oakland A's haven't won anything since the 80's and its why the Rockets won't win anything under their new GM.

[Fafnir]

Paul's minutes rose late in the year after KG was out. You really think KG's absence didn't have anything to do with it?

I think per/36 numbers do reflect better when you compare Paul to KG because KG playes around 38 minutes in the playoffs two years ago. He'd likely have done the same this year.

It also is a good way to show the rate he is scoring when on the court which is important. How many minutes you can play is important, but quality matters too.

They rose, but not substantially. Also, it is dangerous to rely just on statistics. ITs why the Oakland A's haven't won anything since the 80's and its why the Rockets won't win anything under their new GM.

Then why are you rating scoring so highly? Garnett's our best defensive player by every measure.

[Edgar]

Paul's minutes rose late in the year after KG was out. You really think KG's absence didn't have anything to do with it?

I think per/36 numbers do reflect better when you compare Paul to KG because KG playes around 38 minutes in the playoffs two years ago. He'd likely have done the same this year.

It also is a good way to show the rate he is scoring when on the court which is important. How many minutes you can play is important, but quality matters too.

They rose, but not substantially. Also, it is dangerous to rely just on statistics. ITs why the Oakland A's haven't won anything since the 80's and its why the Rockets won't win anything under their new GM.

Then why are you rating scoring so highly? Garnett's our best defensive player by every measure.

its not lack of scoring only
is lack of natural scoring leader.
deffense will help in most of the matches but not in finals quality one ( series)
against of team with variants.
and TONS of  scoring from everywhere

[Fafnir]

Paul's minutes rose late in the year after KG was out. You really think KG's absence didn't have anything to do with it?

I think per/36 numbers do reflect better when you compare Paul to KG because KG playes around 38 minutes in the playoffs two years ago. He'd likely have done the same this year.

It also is a good way to show the rate he is scoring when on the court which is important. How many minutes you can play is important, but quality matters too.

They rose, but not substantially. Also, it is dangerous to rely just on statistics. ITs why the Oakland A's haven't won anything since the 80's and its why the Rockets won't win anything under their new GM.

Then why are you rating scoring so highly? Garnett's our best defensive player by every measure.

its not lack of scoring only
is lack of natural scoring leader.
deffense will help in most of the matches but not in finals quality one ( series)
against of team with variants.
and TONS of  scoring from everywhere

I'm sold on fake Portland, Edgar. 

[Roy Hobbs]

Paul's minutes rose late in the year after KG was out. You really think KG's absence didn't have anything to do with it?

I think per/36 numbers do reflect better when you compare Paul to KG because KG playes around 38 minutes in the playoffs two years ago. He'd likely have done the same this year.

It also is a good way to show the rate he is scoring when on the court which is important. How many minutes you can play is important, but quality matters too.

They rose, but not substantially. Also, it is dangerous to rely just on statistics. ITs why the Oakland A's haven't won anything since the 80's and its why the Rockets won't win anything under their new GM.

Then why are you rating scoring so highly? Garnett's our best defensive player by every measure.

its not lack of scoring only
is lack of natural scoring leader.
deffense will help in most of the matches but not in finals quality one ( series)
against of team with variants.
and TONS of  scoring from everywhere

I'm sold on fake Portland, Edgar. 

It doesn't count unless you write it in scrolling text.

[Fafnir]

Paul's minutes rose late in the year after KG was out. You really think KG's absence didn't have anything to do with it?

I think per/36 numbers do reflect better when you compare Paul to KG because KG playes around 38 minutes in the playoffs two years ago. He'd likely have done the same this year.

It also is a good way to show the rate he is scoring when on the court which is important. How many minutes you can play is important, but quality matters too.

They rose, but not substantially. Also, it is dangerous to rely just on statistics. ITs why the Oakland A's haven't won anything since the 80's and its why the Rockets won't win anything under their new GM.

Then why are you rating scoring so highly? Garnett's our best defensive player by every measure.

its not lack of scoring only
is lack of natural scoring leader.
deffense will help in most of the matches but not in finals quality one ( series)
against of team with variants.
and TONS of  scoring from everywhere

I'm sold on fake Portland, Edgar. 

It doesn't count unless you write it in scrolling text.

I'm sold on fake Portland, Edgar. 

[Edgar]

Paul's minutes rose late in the year after KG was out. You really think KG's absence didn't have anything to do with it?

I think per/36 numbers do reflect better when you compare Paul to KG because KG playes around 38 minutes in the playoffs two years ago. He'd likely have done the same this year.

It also is a good way to show the rate he is scoring when on the court which is important. How many minutes you can play is important, but quality matters too.

They rose, but not substantially. Also, it is dangerous to rely just on statistics. ITs why the Oakland A's haven't won anything since the 80's and its why the Rockets won't win anything under their new GM.

Then why are you rating scoring so highly? Garnett's our best defensive player by every measure.

its not lack of scoring only
is lack of natural scoring leader.
deffense will help in most of the matches but not in finals quality one ( series)
against of team with variants.
and TONS of  scoring from everywhere

I'm sold on fake Portland, Edgar. 

It doesn't count unless you write it in scrolling text.

I'm sold on fake Portland, Edgar. 

[Fafnir]

LOL, tp.

[Roy Hobbs]

[KCattheStripe]

Paul's minutes rose late in the year after KG was out. You really think KG's absence didn't have anything to do with it?

I think per/36 numbers do reflect better when you compare Paul to KG because KG playes around 38 minutes in the playoffs two years ago. He'd likely have done the same this year.

It also is a good way to show the rate he is scoring when on the court which is important. How many minutes you can play is important, but quality matters too.

They rose, but not substantially. Also, it is dangerous to rely just on statistics. ITs why the Oakland A's haven't won anything since the 80's and its why the Rockets won't win anything under their new GM.

Then why are you rating scoring so highly? Garnett's our best defensive player by every measure.

I'm not rating scoring "so" highly, in fact I've said that its Pierce's scoring coupled with his defense and his leadership that make him more valuable.

[Fafnir]

Paul's minutes rose late in the year after KG was out. You really think KG's absence didn't have anything to do with it?

I think per/36 numbers do reflect better when you compare Paul to KG because KG playes around 38 minutes in the playoffs two years ago. He'd likely have done the same this year.

It also is a good way to show the rate he is scoring when on the court which is important. How many minutes you can play is important, but quality matters too.

They rose, but not substantially. Also, it is dangerous to rely just on statistics. ITs why the Oakland A's haven't won anything since the 80's and its why the Rockets won't win anything under their new GM.

Then why are you rating scoring so highly? Garnett's our best defensive player by every measure.

I'm not rating scoring "so" highly, in fact I've said that its Pierce's scoring coupled with his defense and his leadership that make him more valuable.

Pierce is a far worse defender than Garnett though, that's what confuses me about your rationale.

Leadership he has, but so does Garnett.

[KCattheStripe]

Paul's minutes rose late in the year after KG was out. You really think KG's absence didn't have anything to do with it?

I think per/36 numbers do reflect better when you compare Paul to KG because KG playes around 38 minutes in the playoffs two years ago. He'd likely have done the same this year.

It also is a good way to show the rate he is scoring when on the court which is important. How many minutes you can play is important, but quality matters too.

They rose, but not substantially. Also, it is dangerous to rely just on statistics. ITs why the Oakland A's haven't won anything since the 80's and its why the Rockets won't win anything under their new GM.

Then why are you rating scoring so highly? Garnett's our best defensive player by every measure.

I'm not rating scoring "so" highly, in fact I've said that its Pierce's scoring coupled with his defense and his leadership that make him more valuable.

Pierce is a far worse defender than Garnett though, that's what confuses me about your rationale.

Leadership he has, but so does Garnett.

Well, I think we've arrived at the the point you and I have been cricling around the entire day: You think KG is better offensively than I'm giving him credit for, and I think Pierce is better defensively than you're giving him credit for.

[Roy Hobbs]

Note to KC:  Since Fafnir has now been made a member of the mod staff, you're no longer allowed to argue with his.  Mod conspiracy.