The truth is that Kevin Garnett was never as good as Paul Pierce

[Boris Badenov]

Folks, I believe the star PF/C to star swingman is an inside-out relationship.

That's why I'd brought up the whole Ewing or K Malone metaphors.

The aforementioned play an inside game but lack an outside man, who can balance the two halves. Thus, neither Starks nor Stockton, completed the circle to bring either the Knicks or the Jazz, to a true championship contender level.

I had to read that twice to see that you're (a) comparing Starks and Stockton, and (b) claiming that the Jazz weren't a "true championship contender."

Starks was a slightly above average starter. Stockton is a first-ballot Hall of Famer and one of the top 5 PGs of all time.

And the Jazz were not only perennial contenders for a decade, with two finals trips and several deep playoff runs, they are considered by many to have one or two of the best teams to not win a championship (the 1996-97 and 1997-98 teams).

And on the main point here, there is no objective basis for putting Garnett and Pierce on the same level. Garnett is consensus top 5 at his position, all-time. Pierce is not on that level.

[wahz]

I feel the frustration with Garnett. He has truly brought this on himself. he is now going to win one title playing with PP and Ray and Rondo. What would a team with Ray and Rondo and PP need? Oh a superb low post guy and great defender on the lane. What is KG? apparently he isn't enough to combine to win a title with a top 5 point guard, a top 3 jump shooter and a top 5 wing player. Its odd isn't it? someone on this team has been awfully overrated and its probably not Rondo, Ray or PP, imho.

[SHAQATTACK]

In the past 2008 2009 , KG and PP and Ray could easch put up 25 points a game at will.  Now they can barely combine for 30 points a game together. Playing good as you used to onece in while ...an't getting done in this league.  Your Supers in this era have to get 30-40 points a game to susceed against the HEAT , OKC and LA ....their best guys get these numbers everynight out ....we no longer can count on KG for the big double doubles that we need to win a game against a top team.

Our players can't provide that offense EVERY NIGHT , like they could 4 years ago...the writting was on the wall end of last year.

Crap .......even without Wade and LBJ , the Heat beat the HAWKS ... not to see the trouble we are in , is to be blind to the facts.

[TitleMaster]

Starks was a slightly above average starter. Stockton is a first-ballot Hall of Famer and one of the top 5 PGs of all time.

And the Jazz were not only perennial contenders for a decade, with two finals trips and several deep playoff runs, they are considered by many to have one or two of the best teams to not win a championship (the 1996-97 and 1997-98 teams).

First of all, I didn't say that Stockton was a poor player. I'd said that he doesn't complement the inside PF game w/ an extraordinaire outside game. Stockton's overall game was mainly his *assists* record in getting the ball back to Malone, in their pick 'n roll schemes. During the playoffs, opponents adapt to this, isolating him when Malone dishes it off, as Stockton seldom tries to win it by himself or find another scorer in the wings, like Mike Bibby did, during those '02-'04 western conf playoffs esp in '02, when he almost beat the Lakers by himself w/o Webber & Stojakovic in the final minutes.

I feel the frustration with Garnett. He has truly brought this on himself. he is now going to win one title playing with PP and Ray and Rondo. What would a team with Ray and Rondo and PP need? Oh a superb low post guy and great defender on the lane. What is KG? apparently he isn't enough to combine to win a title with a top 5 point guard, a top 3 jump shooter and a top 5 wing player. Its odd isn't it? someone on this team has been awfully overrated and its probably not Rondo, Ray or PP, imho.

That's exactly it, we have more overall talent on the Cs than most other teams out there. When we won in '08, we had a fully loaded bench (Posey, Powe, Brown, House, BBD, Cassell), all positions had coverage for the most part. And yet, w/o that superb bench, we don't even get past the Cavs w/ Delonte West & Ilgauskas, as their next best players to LBJ. That doesn't make me feel all that great.

Aside from the '74 and '86 squads, no Cs championship squad in our lifetimes (I wasn't alive during the Russell era) had so much support in getting the job done. In '81/'84, Max stood up and performed the grungy bench frontliner for the big three, and in '76, well ... the Suns weren't really all that great. Thus, I'd say that the '08 squad had as good of a supporting cast, if not a notch better, than the '86 squad w/ Walton/Sichting.

[Celtics18]

I'm shocked that this discussion has so much life.  I couldn't care less which of the two was a better player in his prime, I just desperately want to see them both play better than they have to start the season . . . TOGETHER.

[TitleMaster]

I'm shocked that this discussion has so much life.  I couldn't care less which of the two was a better player in his prime, I just desperately want to see them both play better than they have to start the season . . . TOGETHER.

I believe that the reason why this topic has so much life is that for one, it's controversial but two, there's a sliver of truth to it which C's fan can't stand to look at.

And that's that KG's game is not this out-of-this world performance but instead, it's always 'well, he only had Wally back in year X', as if that justifies him, not taking the ball inside, starting in '08, drawing contact or a double, and then dishing out to Pierce (or someone else) for a jumper, and now, it's wide open. Realize, if you swapped Karl Malone, for KG, this play would be exacted time and time again, and guess what?... There's not a darn thing anyone can do about it! No amount of team defense can stop a tank roll like that! Yeah, put one or two guys on Malone, one guy on Pierce, & one guy between Pierce & Malone ... guess what you have, 3 to 4 open Celtics.

[BballTim]

Paul Pierce is very much like the Ginobili of this conference.

While everyone loves to say that the Spurs *are balanced*, etc, etc, all one really needs to do is look at Manu's health. As soon as his ankle or hamstring is sore/pulled, the Spurs run is over. The difference between them winning it all and being ousted by the Lakers or the Mavs is one player, who can put it on his back and deliver.

   This is, of course, ridiculous. You're giving Manu all the credit for the Spurs success because of his lack of durability. If you think that the Spurs, with Manu but without TD, would be a title threat then you're sadly mistaken.

During the Robinson era, that person was TD. During the Manu era, TD was the defensive big man who did the work down low, so that Ginobili could roam around and make it happen.

  Sigh. The Spurs without TD would have been significantly worse than the Spurs without Manu.

For us, we have Paul Pierce. And for the most part, I would love to have seen him on a team, like the Spurs, so that he could prove my point. Instead, he was carrying the Cs, for many seasons with a faux point forward, Walker, instead of someone, who can rebound, play paint defense, and take good shots.

Someone once said that if we'd switched KG with Carlos Boozer, during that 2008 year, that the Jazz immediately wins the title. For this, I disagree, as the Jazz were not a defensive-minded team, unlike Thib's C's. I think that Boozer plays in the middle and does as fine a job as anyone else, guarding the paint and scoring down low, but this time side-by-side with enforcer Perkins, prior to his recent follies in Chicago. I like Boozer/Perks up front, it definitely gives PP and Ray Ray, a lot to work with. And yes, we'll be hearing all kinds of stories of Carlos not being clutch, however, in this alternate scenario, since he is playing down low, it really wouldn't be all that necessary.

In this arrangement, Pierce can still lead the C's to a title as long as Carlos brings his 'A' game to the series and doesn't mail it in due to personal issues. But he doesn't need to overachieve, which we clearly haven't seen from KG either.

  The Celts weren't any more defensive minded before KG got here than the Jazz were. Saying you could win the title with Boozer instead of KG is kind of like saying they could have won the title with Ariza instead of Pierce.

Pierce was the lynchpin, Ariza was never that, just an great bench player.

  KG was the team's leading scorer and rebounder in the 08 postseason as well as our best defender.

[TitleMaster]

Sigh. The Spurs without TD would have been significantly worse than the Spurs without Manu.

The Spurs w/o TD is a team w/o a star big man in the middle and thus, no championship aspirations. I don't think anyone will argue against that point.

But during the prior Robinson era, Robinson filled that role while TD was allowed to score w/o shouldering the defense.

When the admiral retirement, the roles were reversed, and soon the dynamo was in Manu, having his Paul Pierce games, with a Robinson-like presence in the middle, so that he could roam, inside-out.

KG was the team's leading scorer and rebounder in the 08 postseason as well as our best defender.

Yes, a jump shooter or Alley Oop dunker off Rondo's assists.

And being a PF, he's suppose to be a great rebounder (& being 7 ft doesn't hurt either) but I wouldn't exactly say that either Rondo or Pierce were poor rebounder, either, coming from different positions.

[Roy H.]

KG was an ELITE rebounder, elite passer for a big man, arguably the most elite defender of all time, and a pretty elite shooter as a big.  Pierce was good to great at all those things, but never near the top of the league.

I agree with all of that, except for somebody being able to argue that KG was the best defender of all time.



But yeah, I don't understand this thread, honestly.  Pierce has had spurts where he's been more unstoppable than KG, but on balance, KG was consistently the better player for most of their careers.  People forget that Pierce spent about half of a decade where he declined to play much defense.

[Boris Badenov]

I'm shocked that this discussion has so much life.  I couldn't care less which of the two was a better player in his prime, I just desperately want to see them both play better than they have to start the season . . . TOGETHER.

Realize, if you swapped Karl Malone, for KG, this play would be exacted time and time again, and guess what?... There's not a darn thing anyone can do about it! No amount of team defense can stop a tank roll like that!

A team with KG at his peak and a few other good defenders could do a pretty good job against it.

The fact that you keep talking about offense indicates what you're missing here. Championships are won with defense. KG is an all-time defensive great at his position.

[TitleMaster]

Folk, once again, you miss the part of how the defense and the offense, work together in the big man/swingman combo.

In the big man scenario, his defenses are supposed to be focused on patrolling the paint and controlling the boards. KG, albeit, a great rebounder, plays like a supersized guard or point forward, than a big man, because his defenses are either circa the high post or nearing the perimeter than where he needs to be, the low post. Then, you might say ... ok, we have Perks. Well that great, now let's have someone monkey w/ KP's shoulder (or have him run around for a while, thus beating on his ankle or simply wear out his cardiovascular conditioning) and then, the opponent has a new strategy ... clog the paint and the Cs defense (followed by offense) will come to a halt. Yes, Ilgauskas, Wallace, Gasol, & the coaches are aware of this technique.

Thus, when push comes to shove, the Celtics now have three guards: Ray, Garnett, & Rondo. The 1st is either hot/cold (& typically needs to come off a screen), the 2nd (pass first but a mid-range jump shooter), and the latter, a guy who can mainly do a layup. Do you see the problem with the above, we have a donut team, when under pressure, but we're suppose to have a top tier PF/big man on our squad?

But instead of seeing the above, which is kinda apparent, fans always fall back to ... 'but he's 20+ ppg / 10+ rpg' and 'Wally sucked during the Wolves time'

In a true big man->to->swingman combo, clogging the paint, simply doesn't suffice, as a choke off strategy. Instead, it'll be a combination of the opponent getting hot, followed a defense which minimizes the touches that either the big man or the swingman, can receive during a certain possessions. Or if its a suffocation defense, then 2 of the other Celts players will be more or less, wide open. If those 2 players can't hit a wide open shot, well, it's game over.

[BballTim]

Sigh. The Spurs without TD would have been significantly worse than the Spurs without Manu.

The Spurs w/o TD is a team w/o a star big man in the middle and thus, no championship aspirations. I don't think anyone will argue against that point.

But during the prior Robinson era, Robinson filled that role while TD was allowed to score w/o shouldering the defense.

When the admiral retirement, the roles were reversed, and soon the dynamo was in Manu, having his Paul Pierce games, with a Robinson-like presence in the middle, so that he could roam, inside-out.

  Oh, I see now. Your idea of the better player is the one who plays better on offense because they have fewer defensive responsibilities (in other words, you're not actually basing it on total contribution to a team's winning). Oh, and I don't know whether you actually watched the Spurs win titles with TD and Robinson, but you're wildly underestimating Duncan's defense.

KG was the team's leading scorer and rebounder in the 08 postseason as well as our best defender.

Yes, a jump shooter or Alley Oop dunker off Rondo's assists.

And being a PF, he's suppose to be a great rebounder (& being 7 ft doesn't hurt either) but I wouldn't exactly say that either Rondo or Pierce were poor rebounder, either, coming from different positions.

  But, still, he was our best scorer, our best defender and our best rebounder.

[TitleMaster]

Folks, in Game 2 of the 2008 NBA finals, Leon Powe owned the paint: scoring, get boards, putbacks, defense, etc. That was the kind of game which KG needed to bring into playoff situations, not this vagabond wandering point forward/tall guard.

If KG had the above sort of game, combined with everything Paul Pierce does, then the Cs have an virtual 1-2 dynamo like no other.

Now, don't get me wrong, when the situation calls for it, meaning that the opponent doesn't have the ability to pound it down low, then sure, he can be the wanderer and be highly effective. But since his game is that predictable, it only goes to indicate that the opponent will adapt to his presence of not being in the paint but being somewhere else. 

[Fafnir]

Folks, in Game 2 of the 2008 NBA finals, Leon Powe owned the paint: scoring, get boards, putbacks, defense, etc. That was the kind of game which KG needed to bring into playoff situations, not this vagabond wandering point forward/tall guard.

If KG had the above sort of game, combined with everything Paul Pierce does, then the Cs have an virtual 1-2 dynamo like no other.

Now, don't get me wrong, when the situation calls for it, meaning that the opponent doesn't have the ability to pound it down low, then sure, he can be the wanderer and be highly effective. But since his game is that predictable, it only goes to indicate that the opponent will adapt to his presence of not being in the paint but being somewhere else.  

Powe had two rebounds that game and twenty four points.

TWO and he had 4 fouls in 14 minutes and wasn't on the floor late because of his poor defense.

Meanwhile KG had a ho hum 17 and 14.

Powe's next best game was 8 points and 4 rebounds mostly in garbage time in game 6. He also put up 2 rebounds and 1 point in his only start of the playoffs in game 5.

Go watch the Finals again, we ran our offense through Pierce on the wing and KG in the post. For the most part he owned the paint with 18/13. After his knee injury KG became completely a jump shooter, but before then he was as dynamic an offensive player as Pierce in addition to being a superior defender/rebounder at a more premium position.

[TitleMaster]

Yes, I know that Powe only had a good game in the 2008 finals. The point was the style of play in that game, in the paint. It's not whether or not Powe was a great player.

KG needed (since it won't ever happen) to play down low and let Pierce wander about, as a swingman.

But no, 'he's 20+ ppg, 10+ rpg & Wally sucked in Minn' , yes, I've heard the diatribe before.