Moss or KG

rsceltic34 · Post #1 » by **rsceltic34** » Wed Jan 9, 2008 4:25 am

Two big names were traded to boston area teams this past year but who has proved to be the better pickup. With Moss breaking records for most TD receptions in a season and KG well on his way to his second MVP selection who is the better offseason pickup.

I say KG because without him the C's would not be 29-3 they would be MUCH closer to .500, but the Pats without Moss are still top 3 in the NFL.

theGreatRC · Post #2 » by **theGreatRC** » Wed Jan 9, 2008 4:30 am

KG, easily. He is the anchor of this team.

Post #3 » by **wetsthebed** » Wed Jan 9, 2008 4:36 am

Moss is great addition, but the Patriots were contenders before they got Moss.

KG has helped turn a lotto team into one of the best in the league.

s1ickd · Post #4 » by **s1ickd** » Wed Jan 9, 2008 5:09 am

basketball is a sport where one player can more easily have an impact on the team. tom brady is the only guy on the pats that would hugely change the way their talent is rated.

you can actually argue that without Paul Pierce, this Celtics team is not a contender. Garnett may be more valubale, but Pierce isn't far behind.

GoGoCeltics · Post #5 » by **GoGoCeltics** » Wed Jan 9, 2008 6:27 am

I want to say KG, because the NBA is more of a star's league than the NFL and Kevin has turned this team completely around, but the Patriots put up historic numbers. Undefeated, plus the record for passing/receiving touchdowns is just too much to pass up. On top of that, the NBA regular season is still young. There is still a LOT of time left. Without those records, however, I would say KG easily.

TheSheriff · Post #6 » by **TheSheriff** » Wed Jan 9, 2008 7:13 am

KG. Of the three former Minny imports (Moss, Ortiz, and KG), he is the one only one which nearly singlehandedly turned a franchise around. The Red Sox were good before ortiz (now great), and the Pats were great (now historic). The Celtics were a joke, and are now great (though Allen and Pierce did have a lot to do with that aswell).

thefoulness · Post #7 » by **thefoulness** » Wed Jan 9, 2008 7:44 am

KG over Moss.

Moss don't play no D.

But Ortiz over both those guys. Ortiz got two rings.

All three are dominant players.

But KG still needs to win, and Moss, as good as he is as a receiver which is the best alive, he still gets to play with Tom Brady.

In a way, Moss and Pierce have the same issue - they are the man, but they also play with The Man.

Post #8 » by **Bleeding Green** » Wed Jan 9, 2008 8:04 am

Moss has played a few downs as an extra safety.

But KG obviously. But I still think the Celtics are still the second- or third-best team in the East if they don't make the KG trade. Pierce, Allen, Jefferson and Rondo is still a hell of a nice core.

Relative Autonomy · Post #9 » by **Relative Autonomy** » Wed Jan 9, 2008 12:13 pm

i think it's hard to say. i think a team with allen, pierce and jefferson still would have been pretty damn good not 29-3 but still well over .500

daveisceltics · Post #10 » by **daveisceltics** » Wed Jan 9, 2008 12:21 pm

KG.
WRs are not that important.

Rondo_Fan · Post #11 » by **Rondo_Fan** » Wed Jan 9, 2008 12:26 pm

KG.

He is the guy that turned this franchise around.

Randy Moss is nice, but we were already a dynasty without him.

GuyClinch · Post #12 » by **GuyClinch** » Wed Jan 9, 2008 12:53 pm

Hmm.. In the US football much bigger then hoops though, IMHO - and the C's have done anything yet..

If say the C's lost in the first round and the Pats won the superbowl - with Moss scoring a bunch of touchdowns then you still have to rate Moss higher.

Pete

Rondo_Fan · Post #13 » by **Rondo_Fan** » Wed Jan 9, 2008 1:23 pm

Bleeding Green wrote:But I still think the Celtics are still the second- or third-best team in the East if they don't make the KG trade. Pierce, Allen, Jefferson and Rondo is still a hell of a nice core.

This is a good point.

However, where are the Pats if they don't pick up Moss? Obviously, a lot worse than they are now, but they still might be the best team in football. You might be talking 12-4, something like that, but still heading into the playoffs with a first round bye.

Tricky Ricky · Post #14 » by **Tricky Ricky** » Wed Jan 9, 2008 1:40 pm

This shouldnt even be a question, its easily KG. Moss is prob the best reciever in the league maybe even ever with the exception of Jerry Rice but without Moss the Pats would still be contending for a super bowl. Now say the KG deal never even happened the Celtics might be a lottery or 7th/8th seed team.

CornbreadMaxwell31 · Post #15 » by **CornbreadMaxwell31** » Wed Jan 9, 2008 4:08 pm

thefoulness wrote:Moss don't play no D.

But Ortiz over both those guys. Ortiz got two rings.

Now this is funny.

tombattor · Post #16 » by **tombattor** » Wed Jan 9, 2008 4:09 pm

I'd take KG over Brady and Moss. Without KG, the Celtics are one of the worst teams in the league. Even without Moss and Brady, the Patriots will still be a good team. As good as those 2 are, it's the Patriots' D and OL that's been the key to their dynasty.

GuyClinch · Post #17 » by **GuyClinch** » Wed Jan 9, 2008 4:19 pm

Please. The Patriots wouldn't be .500 without Brady and Moss. It's a team game - part of the reason the Pats defense is OKAY is because Brady can keep the offense on the field.

If we had Cassell back there - the defense would be on the field all the time - get worn out and be postively medicore. Tom Brady is NFL MVP for a REASON.

It's the same with the O Line - yeah its OKAY but if we had Drew Bledsoe back there we would be racking up the sacks against. Brady has a quick release and a great pocket feel.. This makes the O line look better then it is.

Polian and the rest of the NFL crew have made the game INCREDIBLY QB and offense oriented. You can't win anymore like the Pats did in 2001 by smacking the crap out of recievers, playing the run tough and doing just enough on O. It's a different game.

Pete

tombattor · Post #18 » by **tombattor** » Wed Jan 9, 2008 4:41 pm

GuyClinch wrote:Please. The Patriots wouldn't be .500 without Brady and Moss. It's a team game - part of the reason the Pats defense is OKAY is because Brady can keep the offense on the field.

If we had Cassell back there - the defense would be on the field all the time - get worn out and be postively medicore. Tom Brady is NFL MVP for a REASON.

It's the same with the O Line - yeah its OKAY but if we had Drew Bledsoe back there we would be racking up the sacks against. Brady has a quick release and a great pocket feel.. This makes the O line look better then it is.

Polian and the rest of the NFL crew have made the game INCREDIBLY QB and offense oriented. You can't win anymore like the Pats did in 2001 by smacking the crap out of recievers, playing the run tough and doing just enough on O. It's a different game.

Pete

Calm down. Obviously Brady and Moss, more so Brady, are 2 of the biggest reasons the Patriots are 16-0. Duh! But if you replaced the OL (5 people) with inferior players, then it'll hurt the Patriots more than replacing Moss or Brady with an inferior player. As good as Brady is, he can't do what he does, if he's fighting off DEs in the pocket all day. Same goes for Manning or any other QB.

Same thing with their D. Patriots' D isn't as good this year as it has been in the past, but it's still among the best in the league. Brady nor Moss plays D. In fact, the fact they pass so much, puts D on the field quicker, with less time run off than had they been more of a pound-the-ball team, like the Broncos with Terrell Davis or Dallas with Emmit Smith. Those guys truly kept their D's off the field and ran out the clock with a lead in 4th quarters. That doesn't mean Brady or Moss isn't good, it's just what it is.

Do I doubt that Brady is at worst 2nd best QB in the league and a certain HOFer? Nope. Do I doubt that Moss is the most talented WR and probably the best WR in the league? Nope.

I'm not saying that Brady or Moss isn't great. It's just that KG is the reason the Celtics' D went from one of the worst to arguably the best and our offense is much more efficient. The bottom line is, 1 or 2 players in football can't make as big of impact as 1 KG can in basketball.

shrink · Post #19 » by **shrink** » Wed Jan 9, 2008 5:52 pm

Garnett is superior offensively than the other two, and certainly superior defensively.

Even better, he sets an attitude that makes the other Celtics better and more confident.

SuigintouEV · Post #20 » by **SuigintouEV** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 3:41 am

Bleeding Green wrote:Moss has played a few downs as an extra safety.

But KG obviously. But I still think the Celtics are still the second- or third-best team in the East if they don't make the KG trade. Pierce, Allen, Jefferson and Rondo is still a hell of a nice core.

it looks like a young 2001 bucks i guess