Was Big Al really that much better then Sully?

[kozlodoev]

Sully is better offensively, better passer and shooter and higher IQ. I also think Sully is a better rebounder.

Sorry, not even remotely close to the truth.

[bballdog384]

Yeah, a lot of people were very upset to give up Jefferson. Most were for the KG trade, but Al was our hope for the future - and at that time it was hard to see him go.

Sullinger feels much more 'expendable' as an asset than Big Al ever did.

[pearljammer10]

Big Al was miles better at the time and ultimately will probably have an overall better career statistically as well.

[86MaxwellSmart]

Big Al came straight from High School---where he averaged something like 44 points a game...of course we all thought the Sky was the limit for him...he tore his ACL soon after the Minny trade...
He had pretty high trade value....BUT---Sully + Pick #6 should have More value than Big Al...and K.Love is not KG.

[jambr380]

No, he was not, but perception is everything.

Al received 2 seasons of development before averaging those stats in his 3rd, Sully just completed his 2nd. In his second season, Al averaged 7.9PPG, 5.1RPG, 18.0MPG. Regardless of the per36, Al would not have been the valuable centerpiece that he was for the KG trade. Al was where Greg Monroe is at (except AJ still had a year left on his rookie deal), Sully will get to that point next year (IMO), but he won't hold the value until then.

You make a very good point. It wasn't until his third year that Big Al 'broke out'. If Sully gets big minutes on a not-very-good team, he will have similar stats, just maybe not the 'look' of a future big-time player. I wish he had the opportunity to have that third year.

I was a huge Al fan while he was here, but I think some may be overrating how he was thought of back at the time of the KG trade. I agree he had more 'potential', but I don't think the difference is quite as drastic as some are saying.

[Kevin OConnor]

Way better.

[obnoxiousmime]

I don't understand why people bring this up. The suggestion seems to be that Sullinger should be valued as highly as Jefferson was. Ostensibly this is to disprove the notion that the Celtics' offer for Love isn't good enough. The problem is that in regard to trades, it doesn't matter what Celtics fans think, just what Minnesota or the rest of the league's GMs think. That is, unless your point is to say Sullinger is undervalued and we should actually keep him.

When people make these arguments it sounds like this: "Why doesn't Minnesota see what we see? He's really good! We're trying to deal him, but actually he's not bad, believe us!" Can you see the contradiction here?

And the answer is Jefferson was considered more valuable.

[greg683x]

Big Al came straight from High School---where he averaged something like 44 points a game...of course we all thought the Sky was the limit for him...he tore his ACL soon after the Minny trade...
He had pretty high trade value....BUT---Sully + Pick #6 should have More value than Big Al...and K.Love is not KG.

Love definitely isnt Garnett, but we also didnt get KG when he was entering his mid 20s like Love is.  We got him at 31, the general consensus at the time was we had a 3 year window.  That would give us almost a decade to get it right with Love should we hang onto him that long

[footey]

Sully is better offensively, better passer and shooter and higher IQ. I also think Sully is a better rebounder.

Sorry, not even remotely close to the truth.

for real.

[droopdog7]

Comparing stats is missing the point. At the time of the trade, big al was perceived to be a vastly superior prospect than sully today. No comparison. Al was widely believed (rightly or wrongly) to be a lock for 20-10 production and some felt he had the best low post moves in the league. If things broke right, he was a superstar big man you could build around. 

Now in retrospect we know that al capped out as a 20-10 guy and didn't reach superstardom

On the flip side, Sullinger isn't even widely regarded as a future starter. You'll see several folks saying he's a future role player. Glen Davis with the brain or Ryan Gomes.  Sure, some (in boston) think he has star potential... But the perception of him is nowhere near big al in 07.

Al was seen as a potential cornerstone. Sully is seen as a solid role player with some upside ... Basically Terrence jones.

If you are going to argue that sully is a coveted prospect on the level or big al, you might as well say the same thing about Terrence jones.

Pretty much nailed it.  Big Al considerably better prospect than Sully.  There were people back then that didn't want to trade Big Al for KG straight up. 

[droopdog7]

Big Al came straight from High School---where he averaged something like 44 points a game...of course we all thought the Sky was the limit for him...he tore his ACL soon after the Minny trade...
He had pretty high trade value....BUT---Sully + Pick #6 should have More value than Big Al...and K.Love is not KG.

Heres the thing.  It's possible that some teams don't value sully at all.  Of you view him as nothing more than a future role player, then this isn't far from the truth.  So really, the question is whether the #6 has more or less value than Big Al, because Sully simply isn't moving the needle.

[incoherent]

I did state in my original post that I thought Al was better, most of us can agree.  I just think they are a lot closer then some realize.  The stats indicate similar per minute production.

While the edge definitely goes to Al, I don't think they are "miles apart" or that Al was "way better".  That's the exact kind of exaggeration that led me to make this post. 

[Future Celtics Owner]

at the time Big Al was a better prospect. And it was dif back then because players coming out of high school had a natural learning curve.

[droopdog7]

I did state in my original post that I thought Al was better, most of us can agree.  I just think they are a lot closer then some realize.  The stats indicate similar per minute production.

While the edge definitely goes to Al, I don't think they are "miles apart" or that Al was "way better".  That's the exact kind of exaggeration that led me to make this post.

Thats the thing.  Way better may be the truth, regardless of whether people like it or not.  And I know you presented numbers to state your case about how close they are.  But deeper inspection suggest that Al was much better even based on the numbers.  This doesn't even get into potential, which in my opinion is not that  close.

[Beat LA]

Yeah, Al's low post moves were world class early on. There were nights that he just couldn't be stopped one on one. That one exceptional skill makes him a slightly better prospect than Sully in my book, at that stage in their careers at least.

Al's inside game was so deadly that he pump-faked Tim Duncan to the rafters before slamming it home, as one article said at the time concerning our bright future, with him as a cornerstone.  Neither is a great athlete, but no one is saying that Sullinger has the best set of post moves this side of Kevin McHale, as Tommy and many others stated at the time.  Jefferson isn't really a shot blocker, but he was a double-double machine at the time of the trade.  The scariest thing is that McHale taught him even more post moves after he went to Minnesota.

As for Sullinger, he is undoubtedly the better passer, and his knack for rebounding certainly trumps Al's, but he doesn't play near the basket enough for us to have enough data to do a fair comparison.  His ceiling might be a Boozer/West type - not a great athlete, but a good shooter, a better rebounder than either of those guys, and a very good passer.  For him to become either of those guys, though, he'll need to develop some post moves, or at least better ones.  He's really wasting his talent sitting out there and chucking 3s imo, but then so is Olynyk.  Wasn't post play supposed to be Kelly's forte coming out of college?