From an outsider's opinion

freakon0mics · Post #21 » by **freakon0mics** » Sun Feb 3, 2008 8:55 am

Stats are one thing but KG brings a whole another thing to the table. He's not only a gifted scorer but he is a defensive presence and a leader. The whole mood in the locker room has changed since he arrived in Boston. That says enough about him.

grantlongforpresident · Post #22 » by **grantlongforpresident** » Sun Feb 3, 2008 12:32 pm

ParticleMan wrote:I don't think Paul Pierce in place of Al in Minny wins any more games than they have. Al has been fantastic. You're right stats don't tell the whole story but neither do W-L, when you have such a crappy team.

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

wrong. Pierce has proven time and time again that he can elevate a crappy team to mediocrity. The only reason we sucked that bad last year is he got injured and then doc blatently tanked to the point where we almost got fined.

A healthy pierce would have gotten us the 8th seed.

Geech · Post #23 » by **Geech** » Sun Feb 3, 2008 1:17 pm

House and Posey (and Cassell?) probably aren't signing up without KG. Instead we'd have Green/Allan Ray and Scalabrine (and Telfair?) to play with Paul, Ray and Al. If they were going to then the corner without KG, it was going to take at least 3 more years and that puts Paul and Ray on the downswing of their careers.

Are the TWolves in really that much worse shape compared to last year's Celts? So far the Celtics have had the easiest schedule (27th easiest last year) and the TWolves have had the 3rd toughest. The TWolves are 5-5 over their last 10 games including the close loss to the Celts and look like they are starting to gel a bit with cap space and high draft picks to build with. A few years will only tell.

Tenbomber · Post #24 » by **Tenbomber** » Sun Feb 3, 2008 2:48 pm

ParticleMan wrote:yup. this is why the vast majority of C's fans didn't want to give up Al for KG at first. now they're happy because they didn't realize how good KG is, but they knew perfectly well how good Al is.

You are absolutely right Particleman!.....I love big Al Jefferson and he will be a force for years to come....hated to see Ryan Gomes go in the deal too...

But KG has just been unreal!....I had no idea he was this good.... I thought he was way overpaid but I've changed my thinking on that matter too.....he's worth every penny!

All things considered, this trade was the right move for us to make to change our fortunes around....I just cant belive our record thusfar!.... I really thought we would be no better than a 45-48 win team.....guess I was way wrong?

horaceworthy · Post #25 » by **horaceworthy** » Sun Feb 3, 2008 4:39 pm

sam_I_am wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Actually, Celtics fans didn't realize how empty Al's stats were. Now it is clear that 21/12 from Al can't keep a team from being worst in the league. Meanwhile 19/10 from KG has a team in the running for 70 wins.

Stats don't tell the story. Wins and Losses don't always tell the whole story but a great player should win at least 35 games in a season even without any help.

Actually, Al's 21/12 can (2nd worst baby, thank you Miami). The two situations aren't really comparable at all, as the Celtics have greatly improved the rest of their their supporting cast, and gotten better health. The Timberwolves dealt away their top 6 players (including KG) from last year. If you want to compare the two in terms of wins and losses, a better (but still not wholly accurate), comparison would be the final 42 games of last year for the Wolves to the first 42 games of this year, when Wittman was the coach. The Wolves went 12-30 over the final 42 games of last year, and they went 8-34 over the first 42 games of this year.

The "look at how much worse the Timberwolves have been without KG" has been overblown. Yes, KG's a better player, and the Celtics certainly made the right move in trading for him. However, even with him in place of Al, the Wolves are likely battling it out for one of the worst records in the league (that's one of the reasons why he was traded).

I can understand why you find Al's stats empty, though, since according to the bolded portion, you don't consider KG a great player.

kingly222 · Post #26 » by **kingly222** » Sun Feb 3, 2008 5:14 pm

sam_I_am wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Actually, Celtics fans didn't realize how empty Al's stats were. Now it is clear that 21/12 from Al can't keep a team from being worst in the league. Meanwhile 19/10 from KG has a team in the running for 70 wins.

Stats don't tell the story. Wins and Losses don't always tell the whole story but a great player should win at least 35 games in a season even without any help.

32-50? By your logic KG is overhyped and not great player.

Its funny how people try to dissect Al's game yet KG always gets aa free pass. I notice alot of post are saying this team wouldnt have as many wins as it does now if Al was here, that may be true, but with such a potent low post option on offense, the celtics would be much tougher to beat in the playoffs. Dont try to figure out Al, just sit back and enjoy the show.

reggielewis · Post #27 » by **reggielewis** » Sun Feb 3, 2008 10:42 pm

i love al and yes his offense is always going to be missed! however ill trade his low pst moes for kg's defense any day of the wek simply because kg makes his teammates better defensively and offensively.

crm0922 · Post #28 » by **crm0922** » Sun Feb 3, 2008 10:58 pm

ParticleMan wrote:I don't think Paul Pierce in place of Al in Minny wins any more games than they have. Al has been fantastic. You're right stats don't tell the whole story but neither do W-L, when you have such a crappy team.

This is crazy talk. They'd be MUCH better with PP. Don't you see how teams collapse on him defensively? They don't do that with Al, they just double him and hope he turns it over.

C

toecutter · Post #29 » by **toecutter** » Mon Feb 4, 2008 12:05 am

crm0922 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

This is crazy talk. They'd be MUCH better with PP. Don't you see how teams collapse on him defensively? They don't do that with Al, they just double him and hope he turns it over.

C

Paul Pierce led teams from 98-01:
19W, 31L
35W, 47L
36W, 46L

crm0922 · Post #30 » by **crm0922** » Mon Feb 4, 2008 1:20 am

toecutter wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Paul Pierce led teams from 98-01:
19W, 31L
35W, 47L
36W, 46L

Those were Walker-lead teams. Nice try, though. And don't go and quote me last year's record. You know Pierce was injured for all but the first 20-30 games. (yes, I know he actually played in more than 20-30 games).

This argument is (Please Use More Appropriate Word). Every coach in the league would rather have PP if the goal was to win more games now.

C

JahReid · Post #31 » by **JahReid** » Mon Feb 4, 2008 1:42 am

It just comes down to what a special player KG is. He is one of the best players of the past 20 years. Al probabley will put up better numbers than KG for each of their respective careers but KG cand lead a team with his intensity unlike any other player. He plays as hard as any player in the NBA and gains the respect of all his teammates. The team just will be better with KG, he defines the level of play. Al is the best low post scorer in the NBA it's just not the same as how serious KG takes the game.

chavopepe2 · Post #32 » by **chavopepe2** » Mon Feb 4, 2008 4:49 am

No matter how good Al is this trade was essential for the Celtics for one reason: It gave the organization Hope...and hope is more important than any one individual player to winning basketball games.

toecutter · Post #33 » by **toecutter** » Mon Feb 4, 2008 11:36 pm

crm0922 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Those were Walker-lead teams. Nice try, though. And don't go and quote me last year's record. You know Pierce was injured for all but the first 20-30 games. (yes, I know he actually played in more than 20-30 games).

This argument is (Please Use More Appropriate Word). Every coach in the league would rather have PP if the goal was to win more games now.

C

Walker-led teams? Glad to see you weren't watching during Paul's early years. Those teams were designed with the sole-purpose of making Paul Pierce the focus of the offense.

Walker may have had a co-leadership with Paul, but he wasn't the only one imposing his will on the team. Come to think of it, it was probably better that they did it this way.

Look what happened when Paul Pierce was the unquestioned "leader" of the squad in 2005:

33W 49L

The argument is (Please Use More Appropriate Word)? Seems to me you don't even know what the argument is.

threrf23 · Post #34 » by **threrf23** » Tue Feb 5, 2008 5:21 am

Well to give Al some props, if you look at Minny's last 9 games...

They are 5-4, with their losses including a 3 pt loss on the road @ Denver, the 1 pt loss to us, and a close loss to Houston tonight.

Al is averaging 26.6 ppg 12.9 rpg 1.6 apg 1 stl 1.4 blk. In about 36 minutes per.

If you take away his 15/5 performance against us, the best defensive team in the league,

He is then averaging 28 ppg 13.9 rpg 1.5 apg .8 stl 1.4 blk, while shooting better than 50% in each game.

And he'd probably be better alongside a true C a bit more often.

btw to prevent argument, I want to clarify I am not saying we made a bad trade, just giving Al some props. And I'm happy that I no longer look like a delusional homer for being one of probably two or three posters who had previously commented that it was realistic for Al to average 30/15 over the course of a season at some point during his career.