I fall on the side of thinking that no, Melo is not a cancer.
I also fall on the side of no, I'm not interested in having him on the Celtics.
I don't like the style of basketball that his talent dictates as I don't find it efficient.
And no way no how is he as good as Paul Pierce was.
(stuff deleted for brevity)
"Mr Anthony, you're no Paul Pierce."
Why not compare Pierce's numbers from his rookie year 'til 06-07, when he was the same age as Carmelo is now?
(more stuff deleted for brevity)
The net +/- stays about the same at 6.4
Sure, whatever - that comparison still doesn't favor Anthony.
I didn't do that split because wouldn't we all have assumed that the last few years were ones of supposed 'decline' for Pierce? I guess not.
I just think it's more useful to compare NBA players at similar points in their careers, especially when a large part of the conversation so far has hinged around whether or not Melo could make the same transition Pierce did when KG and Ray ended up on the Celtics.
And, to the "decline," when you're talking about points per FGA the quality of your teammates can speak volumes. I think pre-trade Pierce is more similar to Carmelo than a lot of us choose to remember.
... long, imho irrelevant quotes deleted, again, for brevity ...
As I said in my first sentence, I do not believe Anthony is a 'cancer'. The comparisons of their 'attitudes' doesn't interest me as I do not pretend those quotes give me any real insight into their psyche or social skills in the locker room. Don't care.
All I know - and I know this from every visible fact available to me - is that Anthony is not as good a basketball player through his career right now as Paul Pierce was in his career through the same point and most likely won't be as good by the time all is said and done with his career. He'll probably score more total points. And he may get on a better team and win a title. But he's simply not as good of a basketball player, imo.
And I will qualify myself by stating that I place a high premium on efficiency with the basketball, minimizing misses and maximizing results on the scoreboard. Others may use other measures to assess what's important to them in a basketball player.
Also, I think you are bending over backwards a bit too far trying to apologize for Anthony based on the team around him. Those Denver teams were good, making the playoffs in the West every season and winning 49+ games in 5 of those seasons. They had far more talent around Anthony than Pierce had in most of the pre-KG era. And it's not like he had some crappy coach like Avery Johnson. He had George Karl, one of the best coaches in the NBA.
So for Anthony to come through that and have a net plus/minus on/off rating of just 0.9? That, to me, says something.
Again, Anthony is very good. Extremely talented. But I don't personally like the style of ball his talents dictate as I don't think it makes for good basketball.
Nothing about this asserts that he could not 'change his style' and realize better results in the future in some hypothetical new situation. But I'm not, personally, interested in seeing him in green.
Edit: to fix broken quote block