Daily Babble: Theorizing About Kobe's Value In Celts Terms
by Steve Weinman on Dec 28, 2007 11:51 PM EST
in NBA Articles
Email
PrintIndeed, I'm ripping off my own forum thread and taking it to the main page in my efforts to add my two cents (as promised, or threatened, depending on your sentiments about my writing) to debate one of my favorite hypothetical "would never happen in a million years for either team" trade ideas, courtesy of a reader known as The Guru. A quick excerpt from my post on the initial thread to set the table:
Just finished up a column on Kobe and how he probably confounds me more than any other player in the league, but a conversation I had with someone while writing the piece led to an interesting question in order to debate Bryant's relative value. A disclaimer beforehand: Obviously, the chances of Bryant coming to Boston lie somewhere in the vast range between zero and none, and the chances of Mitch Kupchak and Danny Ainge having this type of discussion are somewhat similar. That said, the question still intrigues me:
It is December 27, 2007. You're Danny Ainge. The Lakers call and offer you Kobe Bryant (plus some necessary parts to make salaries match; I'm not looking to delve too far into technicality here but more to address the pure basketball value of the players involved) in exchange for Paul Pierce and Ray Allen. Your response?
It's my hypothesis that especially on this board, the responses will be overwhelmingly in favor of a quick rejection, and understandably so given our natural biases as C's fans and the early-season success this team has had so far. That in mind, there is still certainly an intrigue for me to that type of deal, and if put in the position, I think it's one I would have to consider making. I'm curious to hear what other posters on this board think before expounding more on this.
Having let a couple of days pass to let the responses come in and to do some thinking of my own, it certainly appears that the initial results were, as expected, overwhelmingly against the idea of making that type of move if it ever presented itself. The principal reasons given were the 2-for-1 nature of the move (at least as far as superstars were concerned, the C's would going from the Big Three to the Big Two) and the possible chemistry issues that could be invited by bringing in Bryant.
Both of those are fair arguments. That said, while I can't say with one hundred percent certainty that I would make the move, it is an idea that would be very intriguing if presented and one that would merit a very serious degree of consideration, for the myriad of reasons outlined below. And my belief is that, unlike many of my colleagues in the forum, I would lean toward making the deal.
So far as the individual comparisons between Kobe and Paul Pierce or Kobe and Ray Allen, there are none. Kobe is the NBA's premier individual talent, and -- to estimate his capabilities conservatively -- he is in a stratosphere with just one other player at the swing positions: LeBron James. At a scoring-oriented position where relatively able players come a dime a dozen, Bryant is clearly on another level. He has established himself over the past few seasons as the best scorer in the game (though he currently sits at second in the league with 27.2 points per game). Though not quite as strong as Pierce, at 6-foot-6 and 220 pounds, Bryant plays a relatively powerful game for a two-guard, and he absorbs contact very well. The man is a threat from everywhere on the floor and can completely commandeer a game on the offensive end when his team needs him to do so. He is a decent rebounder (5.2 per game for his career) and is currently having his best season in that department with 6.3 boards per game.
What really separates Kobe beyond the fact that he is simply a better scorer than virtually everyone else, what provides the most reasonable case for the comparisons that are often made between Bryant and His Airness himself is the defense. Bryant isn't merely a good defender; he is a great one. He is easily the best of the scoring swingmen in this league in that area, and he can be called on to shut down the opponent's best player on a nightly basis. TNT analyst Doug Collins observed last season that because of the added offensive burden placed on Bryant over the past few seasons, he has had to resort to conserving energy and playing defense in spurts for the Lakers. On a team with Kevin Garnett helping take the burden off of him on both ends of the floor, that would likely no longer be the case, allowing Bryant to fully flourish defensively once more. Pierce and Allen may be putting forth increased effort and focus on the defensive end of the floor, but neither of them hold a candle to Bryant in that regard. With Bryant and, as one poster suggested, Trevor Ariza on the floor (or perhaps incumbent James Posey) to go along with Garnett, the top-ranked defense would be far more strangling than it already is, which would really be saying something.
One other point about the comparisons between Kobe and MJ, however warranted they may or may not be (that is another discussion for another time, to be sure): the issue of killer instinct. As my good buddy, Chicago native and devout Jordan believer Mays loves to say, "Those two players share a sociopathic approach to dominating basketball games. That is all there is to it. They have to succeed. End of story." Mays means this as a compliment. While this certainly isn't to advocate the labeling of Bryant as any sort of sociopath, the point stands: Kobe Bryant is a stone-cold killer on the basketball court. There is something intangibly different in the way he works at and plays the game. He wants and needs to kill you, and he will do it or die trying. Given that there is certainly a school of thought that shares Mays's sentiment that there have been two guys over the last two decades to possess this singular will to succeed on the floor, this isn't a knock on the respective desire levels of Pierce and Allen. We have seen thus far that both are very much committed to going out and getting a title, and both want badly to go out and push this team to success. But they aren't Kobe. Because nobody is. He is that special.
As for the chemistry and character issues, the concerns are certainly legitimate. However, much as I have been a devout adversary of Bryant's in this regard for a long time (see the column from earlier in the week for details), and as much deserved love as Pierce is getting right now, it isn't fair to brand Kobe the cancer and canonize Pierce for his behaviors over the last few years. Lest we forget that Pierce was the one who made one of the most thoughtless gaffes in the last decade of Celtics basketball with his thuggish elbow to Jamaal Tinsley's mug that got him ejected from Game 6 of the playoff series with Indiana in 2005. Or that he followed that up by loafing and getting T'd up in the embarassing Game 7 loss at home, a game the Celtics were fortunate to even be a part of after Pierce's teammates picked up the slack and bailed him out with an overtime win in Game 6. Or that Pierce had started some semi-public rumblings of his own about his discontent with the team and possible desire to leave if Danny Ainge didn't bring in veteran help this summer.
Particularly on this site, that last paragraph absolutely must be disclaimed with the declaration that those weren't irreparable acts by Pierce. He has since largely redeemed himself in the eyes of Celts fans all over the place. He made major strides as a teammate and leader during the 33-win 2005-06 season and was for the most part a model citizen throughout the two seasons after that Indiana playoff series and prior to his trade demands. Since the summer, he has been a joy once more, saying and doing all the right things and happily ceding a major portion of the spotlight in Beantown to his new 'mates. Pierce is playing solid basketball and looking better on defense than he has in a long time, and he deserves a lot of credit for the turnaround. But by the same token, Bryant is playing excellent team basketball and saying all the right things in Los Angeles, only to have it largely written off by the idea that it is easy to act well when one's team is winning and everything is peachy. Undoubtedly, adversity is perhaps the best test of character, but both Kobe and Paul have made their share of mistakes in the face of adversity. And both are currently helping their teams move in the right direction. There needs to be one standard, which is the point about Pierce here. It isn't that he is a bad guy (he isn't), or that he sinned in ways that will never be pardoned in Boston (he didn't) or that he doesn't deserve the love he has rediscovered in Boston (he certainly does), but simply that there is an inherent hypocrisy in slamming Bryant and canonizing another individual guilty of some similar behaviors.
Right now, Pierce is playing winning basketball, and all is well in Boston. Kobe Bryant is playing winning basketball, and all is well in Los Angeles. Kobe Bryant plays basketball better than Paul Pierce does, and he might even play it well enough that it would be worth losing Ray Allen to get Bryant as well. As Pierce has matured, it certainly appears that Bryant has as well in his own way, and one would have to expect that he would relish the opportunity to play with Kevin Garnett. In fact, it might not even be out of the question to presume that KG might be able to exert some positive influence on him and bring him toward being a bigger part of the team off the floor.
Certainly, the chemistry is important, and it has been wonderful to date in Boston this season, but it has been wonderful for a team that has faced minimal if any adversity. Of course, one would love to believe that if and when adversity shows itself, this chemistry will remain intact, and as an ever-optimistic Celtics fan, I'm certainly predisposed to believe that this will be the case. But the truth is that I don't know. And that makes putting the extra value on the part of this I feel more certain about -- the simple issue of basketball ability -- seem more palatable.
Finally, to the most significant issue of all: That of winning a championship, which is the ultimate goal. Given that this Celts team is off to a wonderfully enjoyable 24-3 start, it is understandable that the old faithful "Don't fix what ain't broke" sentiment was expressed with regard to making moves with this Celtics team. So far as having a solid regular season record and grabbing a high seed, this Celts team is nowhere near broken and can likely continue rolling along as currently constructed. What the playoffs will bring, however, remains to be seen. Make no mistake; I'm no pessimist: I embody the fact that fan is the root of fanatic, and I firmly believe that this team as currently constructed can and will win the 2008 NBA title. But being a fan who is head-over-heels in love with his basketball club does not necessarily equate to pure objectivity. Bringing in Bryant doesn't solve the Celtics' greatest concerns (the questions at point and center as well as the depth issues), but it would likely give them the best scorer and the best big man in most playoff series and a proven playoff winner. Bryant understands what it means to play winning playoff basketball in this league, and he has done it at the highest level there is. That cannot be overlooked. Further, while looking to make defensive improvements to the league's top defensive team may seem nitpicky at this point, it is defense that wins games in the playoffs, and the addition of Kobe would make this team a far stronger defensive unit come spring time. That stone-cold killer issue becomes all the more important then, too. Also, it doesn't hurt that Bryant would provide an alternate ball-handler when necessary and would likely be more successful in that regard than Piece or Allen.
Ultimately, I've now spent an evening musing about an imaginary trade idea that will never happen, so to wrap up, it comes down to this: There is an understandable plethora of reasons for not liking the idea of moving Paul Pierce and Ray Allen for Kobe Bryant, many of which were expressed well in the forum (although we certainly welcome more explanations in the comments section). But there are responses to many of those reasons, and above all for those who support the idea, there is this, the truth that keeps hitting home over and over again as the Lakers' early-season success continues: Kobe Bryant might just be that special.
But that situation will never present itself, and that is likely for the best. Because make no mistake: I am indeed head-over-heels enamored with this basketball team. No matter the outcome, it is and will be a joy to watch them go about their quest for a championship. As I have said all year, we Celts fans are just along for the ride right now. And I couldn't think of a place I would rather be. How about you?
Steve's daily posts can be found on the CelticsBlog NBA page. Check back daily for quality content.
29 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
NoraG1,
Certainly an understandable viewpoint. But do you think this team as currently constructed with its three stars can win? And how good do you think that possibility is? Given your comment, I would have to assume that you are sold on that, but if you aren’t, would you not rather keep building by bringing in a better player who is two years younger than either of the two being traded away?
If we’re sure this team is a title winner as it currently stands, then obviously, there would be no need to ever consider a move like this. As a fan, I wholly believe this team can do just that. As a trying-to-be-slightly-more-objective observer of the game, I question how legitimate that shot is right now. And once that becomes the case, I think at least considering a move like this becomes a must.
Again, I’m not hardcore in favor of accepting a deal such as the one proposed in the column. But especially given the (expected) vast sentiment against it, I did want to make a few points here regarding the need to be willing to at least take an offer like that into consideration.
Thanks for writing in.
-sw
The fact that the Celtics have a shot is completely legitimate by any objective standards and I think even a Celtics hater might have to concede that it is a legitimate shot (by legitamate shot I mean that it would come as only a mild surprise to anyone and a shock to no one if they won it all).
But you said that there is no reason to consider a move like this if “we’re sure this team is a title winner as it currently stands.” I don’t think anyone can really say they’re sure this team IS a title winner as currently stands. The problem I have with even considering this type of trade is that we couldn’t be sure that the team would be a title winner if we made the trade. A great as Kobe is, there are at least as many valid arguments that point to the conclusion that such a trade would not give the team a better chance to win it all than they have now than there are valid arguments otherwise.
Not that I’m in favor of status quo for its own sake, but when a team that has JUST been assembled over the summer is off to a start that almost couldn’t possibly be better, why even THINK about the possibility of shaking things up in any way until we see what this team can do in a postseason?
Weak arguments generally require lots of wording to be made.
The fact that you brought up an ill advised foul and a poor press conference as a gaff of Pierce’s in the past decade while ignoring Kobe’s many gaffs throughout that same time period is indicative of how little substance you are working with.
And I think we all know Kobe’s gaff’s, like his game, are in another stratosphere.
by kgiessler on Dec 29, 2007 7:55 AM EST reply actions
Kobe plus city full of young college girls = bad idea.
To me, in terms of talent, the difference between Paul Pierce and Kobe Bryant just isn’t worth Ray Allen. In terms of sheer numbers, Kobe is averaging approximately six more points per game than Paul this season. While I know the impact is more than just numbers, I’m sure we can make up that six point gap in ways other than sacrificing possibly our most clutch player, and one of the best shooters of all-time. Who steps up to fill Ray’s spot? Tony? Hahahahaha. Posey? House? Any move we make severely limits our depth, which is already borderline.
However, this trade shouldn’t come down to a simple assessment of talent. Kobe is a distraction who has single-handedly firebombed championship teams in the past, and who has created his share of locker room discord. He also has certain off-the-court, um, indiscretions that the team should stay away from.
And for the record, unlike Roy Hobbs, I’m referring to his basketball related or on court behavior. Even there what I’ve seen from Kobe is deplorable.
He’s an amazing player, but if he was as good as he’s being made out to be, or as good as he likes to think he is, he’d have the extra ring and not Shaq. Plain and simple.
by kgiessler on Dec 29, 2007 8:31 AM EST reply actions
“Of course, one would love to believe that if and when adversity shows itself, this chemistry will remain intact, and as an ever-optimistic Celtics fan, I’m certainly predisposed to believe that this will be the case. But the truth is that I don’t know. And that makes putting the extra value on the part of this I feel more certain about — the simple issue of basketball ability — seem more palatable.”
Very good point. Sometimes i just forget this.
But the depth issue remains. We’d play with a lineup of Rondo/Kobe/Posey/KG/Perks, with House as the only legit option coming off the bench. How many minutes mpg would Kobe and KG have to log just to keep us competitive in any game unless we were facing the Knicks?
And, as special as Kobe may be, he never led his team to anything better than a playoffs 1st round.
Anyway, it’s an excellent reading, as always.
YES.
If Ainge was called and offered Kobe (and necessary parts) for #34 & #20, he’d have to listen.
How long the call would last would really depend on what those necessary parts were.
NO. I wouldn’t make the deal.
I love the team as constituted now and wouldn’t change a thing.
Why?
Would Kobe on this team instead of Allen & Pierce make the team 25-2 instead of 24-3?
Unlikely.
Pierce will be a Celtice forever and that, my friends, is both Prim and Prop.
while kobe is a great defender, celts would give up 2 starters and mess w/ (defensive) chemistry that appears to be backbone of the team, especially on cold-shooting nights.
celts (playoff caliber) rotation is only 7 deep right now…
i’d rather add 1 more piece (cassell?) than subtract 2 and weaken the bench.
matching up w/ detroit should be the focus. celts will have to go 8 deep and find a way to control billups while neutralizing rush-weed, mcdyess, maxiel.
kobe cant guard everybody…
Another nice, well thought article Steve. It is really the first one I’ve ever read in a long time that looks at a specific situation that essentially related to the merits of having two, top five, Gold Star players versus the merits of having one, top five, Gold Star player and two, Silver Star players.
It might not be to hard to argue in general that two, top five players is the stronger hand, yet in this particular instance I’m not so sure that would prove to be the case. It might, I’m just not especially confident in it I guess because I have a feeling that it might cause too much readjustment for the team and possibly deteriorate the current unity and teamwork that seems to be developing so well. Garnet, Pierce and Allen have provided a glue and chemistry for the Celtics that has pulled together what might well be an otherwise shaky basketball team, into an unselfish, defense-minded unit capable of beating pretty much anyone anytime.
So I guess the question is, would a combination of Garnet and Bryant be able to accomplish that same magic? My gut tells me it probably wouldn’t. There is something very special about how GPA have come together and bonded with the rest of the C’s. The benefits of it combined with the drive and leadership the three of them provide their team is something I’m not sure could be accomplished with Paul and Ray gone, even if their replacement was one of the best players in the league. It is a compelling discussion though.
Again, nice work.
The lakers would have to throw in Jordan Farmar and a future first along with Kwame Brown’s expiring. Plus they would have to pay 3 mil in cash to cover part of Kwame’s buyout. Then I might listen.
Two months ago I would have made that deal in a heartbeat. But Pierce has shown this year that he can be more than just a turnover prone chucker, and that makes me much less eager to deal him.
no question, kobe is fabulous. somehow the allen-pierce-rest of the team with kg in capital letters= the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. the italy trip, the blend of paul, the old hand with big baby,the cold winter adds up more than what kobe brings. i see him as a sunshine guy- hollywood- bigger than life, with personal consultants up the wazoo used to dealing with the busses and the philly jacksons, not the parochial boston beaners.danny the mormon seems like the anti kobe or vice versa.somehow, the magic that is happening would not continue.now, if we could ever lure lebron…
Kobe is clearly the most talented player of the three key principals, but one of the primary reasons that the C’s have been having so much success this year is because of having so many different guys who can pull the ball in the hoop. The quantity has been key; how many open 3’s have Pierce and Allen gotten because the defense was focused elsewhere? Would Kobe be getting as many great looks as those two guys, if the defense had one fewer player to focus their attention on? It would be a LOT easier to double-team KG or Kobe if the third-best scorer on the floor was House or Posey, versus if you’re trying to defend the current Big Three (plus House or Posey as the 4th guy).
by the_Bird on Dec 29, 2007 11:06 AM EST reply actions
The deal would have to be Pierce and Shuttlesworth for Kobe, Kwame and Farmar. Perkins, Garnett, Posey, Kobe and Rondo, with Farmar and TA coming off the bench would be a dominant defensive team.
Pierce’s improved play this year is a reason not to do the deal.
Speculation as to whether or not Kobe would embrace ubuntu is not a reason not to do the deal.
Brickowski said: Speculation as to whether or not Kobe would embrace ubuntu is not a reason not to do the deal.
Honestly Brick, if the discussion is only about Ray and Paul being traded straight up for Kobe without other parts, ubuntu is a very important consideration for not doing the deal. Anyway, I don’t see any sort of trade coming together that would involve Kobe, Kwame and Jordan. Stranger things have happened but such a deal is not one seems to me would mesh with Danny.
I’m afraid I have to disagree on one point of what you said Who. I don’t believe that a Kobe-KG combo alone would be any guarantee of a Finals appearance, much less a likely championship. However, I do believe it could produce a championship caliber team if the right, other parts were put together with whatever is left of the existing team and the whole group came together well. I doubt that could happen this year though. Maybe, but probably next would be my thinking.
kgiessler said:
Weak arguments generally require lots of wording to be made.
The fact that you brought up an ill advised foul and a poor press conference as a gaff of Pierce’s in the past decade while ignoring Kobe’s many gaffs throughout that same time period is indicative of how little substance you are working with.
And I think we all know Kobe’s gaff’s, like his game, are in another stratosphere.
kgiessler,
It seems that perhaps we aren’t on the same page regarding my intentions with that paragraph about Pierce and his transgressions. I didn’t purport to ignore Kobe’s issues; however, his troubles have been well-documented in a variety of ways and were already known as one of the primary issues of bringing him to town through the discussion in the forum beforehand. I didn’t see a need to rehash the public’s (and my) problems with him, although I did go so far as to link and to mention the column I wrote earlier in the week here in the NBA section about Kobe where I did mention all those problems. As I tried to stress in the column, the point of my commentary about Pierce wasn’t to suggest that he is somehow worse[/i] than Kobe (that’s a matter of perspective and something I would be far more comfortable letting our readers decide for now) but to point out that Pierce has made his share of mistakes and that there needs to be one standard used for the two of them.
Regarding the issue of Pierce’s play in the Indiana series, it is a flatly unjust understatement to call what he did merely an “ill-advised foul.” It wasn’t a basketball play at all, and it was a foolish loss of temper at the worst possible time. Pierce made himself look like a thug (all the more unfortunate, because by and large, he [i]isn’t a thug), showed no poise, no composure and no presence of mind. It was a thoughtless act and one that proved nearly fatal for his team. Perhaps we aren’t thinking of the same play?
All that said, I can understand your sentiments against Kobe, and I appreciate that you wrote in. Happy to hear more from you.
-sw
cordobes said:
“Of course, one would love to believe that if and when adversity shows itself, this chemistry will remain intact, and as an ever-optimistic Celtics fan, I’m certainly predisposed to believe that this will be the case. But the truth is that I don’t know. And that makes putting the extra value on the part of this I feel more certain about — the simple issue of basketball ability — seem more palatable.”
Very good point. Sometimes i just forget this.
But the depth issue remains. We’d play with a lineup of Rondo/Kobe/Posey/KG/Perks, with House as the only legit option coming off the bench. How many minutes mpg would Kobe and KG have to log just to keep us competitive in any game unless we were facing the Knicks?
And, as special as Kobe may be, he never led his team to anything better than a playoffs 1st round.
Anyway, it’s an excellent reading, as always.
cordobes,
Much thanks for writing in, and the kind words about my writing are much appreciated.
While I made the case here in favor of the trade, I can’t help but agree with you (and many on this board who shared the sentiment) about the depth issue. I think part of the resolution here is figuring out what the spare parts would be that would come along with Kobe. If Trevor Ariza is involved, do you breathe easier with Posey in the lineup and Ariza and TA trying to fill Posey’s role of the bench? Or do you feel that those two aren’t ready to carry that load?
Very nice point about the minutes. I had considered the depth from a pure “number of viable options” standpoint but not from that angle. Certainly makes one think more carefully before okaying the move.
Thanks for your comment; looking forward to hearing more from you.
-sw
Who and Bob,
I’m not sure where to stand so far as your conflict of viewpoint is concerned on this one. From past posts, I have seen Bob’s reasoning, but thus far, Who has made the assertion about a guaranteed trip to the Finals on a couple of occasions now but hasn’t gone much farther in his explanation. Who, care to expound upon this theory? I’m not sure I disagree with you, but I’m curious to get your reasoning.
-sw
Bob,
Much thanks for the kind words.
You make a valid point (and one that has been echoed) about the special chemistry on this team. It really has been a dream to watch and to listen to these guys from day one through the present thus far. That said, I think that sadly enough, we will have to see this team face adversity before we really know how strong those bonds are for absolutely sure. Granted, in an ideal world, there is no adversity, and our boys cruise to the title. But somehow, I can’t imagine it will be that easy all the way through, and I think only then will we know how much that chemistry means. I’m a fan, and I have the utmost faith that it is in fact that strong, but at this point, I wonder how certain we can be. Any further thoughts on this?
-sw
Steve Weinman, as folks here will tell you, I’ve been one of Pierce’s harshest critics on this blog. Last summer I was ready to trade him for Kirilenko and a pick.
But he is not the player he was during the Indiana series. That’s water over the proverbial dam. This year Pierce has become an effective two-way player.
Kobe’s sexual transgressions and feud with Shaq are also water over the damn. He is playing the best basketball of his career, and that’s awfully good.
But the Lakers would have to include something more than Kwame’s expiring deal. Ray Allen is just about as good as Pierce, and as good as Kobe is, I’d rather have two all-star caliber wingmen than just one. The spare part has to be Farmar. Except for Bynum (who presumably is untouchable), none of the Lakers’ other young players do much for me. In particular, I have no use for Ariza, who is inferior in every way to Tony Allen.
Who has made the assertion about a guaranteed trip to the Finals on a couple of occasions now but hasn’t gone much farther in his explanation. Who, care to expound upon this theory?
Sure
I think Kobe gives this team something that neither Pierce or Ray Allen are capable of. The biggest thing is catching the ball from 30 feet and destroying a whole defense with his penetration. Neither Ray or Paul are good enough at that. Also, neither are as good as Kobe in making the decision on what to do after the intial penetration – what type of shot or type of pass.
Why is this important? This isn’t the NBA of years past. This has been increasing in importance for years and has only grown more still with the rule changes. Come playoff time in a close game this is what makes Dwayne Wade and LeBron James so dangerous and capable of taking a game over. It’s so difficult to plan for without giving up open shots to the supporting cast.
When our offense struggles we are in need of developing a go-to play or four. We don’t have one. I’m not just talking about end-of-game plays, I mean any time when our offense begins to stall. KG isn’t inclined to be that type of scorer and Ray hasn’t been able to do that consistently. Pierce is the only guy we got, and we all know he’s far better when he catches the ball from the midpost or elbow and makes a play from there – which makes him reliant on someone setting the table for him. Again this is far easier for a defense to plan against than Kobe catching from 30 feet. Pierce’s decision making, experience of big occasions and versatility of moves are not as good as Kobe Bryant either … there is a level of doubt in Pierce come huge games that doesn’t exist with Kobe. Kobe might miss but we all know he’s very likely to make the correct play no matter the stage.
Again, this is how Wade, James and of course MJ were able to take over huge playoff games over the years. Kobe has done the same in LA and that threat is huge. Especially when things aren’t going well.
And I don’t just mean the 30 foot drive (just in case someone thinks that), just using it as an example of his ability to create for himself and teammates from anywhere on the floor and outside of where the defense can plan for him.
We also struggle to handle backcourt pressure. Kobe is one of the best ball handlers in the league. He regularly took over the ball handling duties for LA during their championship years. He is very capable and again gives us something our team sorely needs. We’ve all been concerned about our vulnerabilities with bringing the ball up when Rondo is off the floor.
He also has the experience and track record of rising to the occassion and staying within the team during big playoff games.
…………………………………….
Rondo, Kobe, Posey, KG, Perkins – that is a mean defensive squad. Better than today’s group. It also has a steady dose of offense. With Ray and Pierce gone, Rondo would have a larger role in creating plays which I’m very comfortable with. The bench would be weak but they could add to it.
Let’s see have I left something important out … probably. Suppose I should add all the benefits of Kobe Bryant’s defensive ability, leadership (make no mistake his poise under title pressures would be huge) and all those other intangibles – toughness, there’s few guys in this league that are tougher than Kobe. Knock him to the ground and he’s going to look to kill you, he never backs down. You hit him hard on a drive, well he just comes more often, harder than before and you better believe he’s going to get you with his elbow or knee on the way down. Plus he’s the best pure scorer in the NBA. One of the best passers outside the point and all the other Kobe abilities.
I think what Kobe brings to the team, in combination with what KG brings plus the defense and shooting of the supporting cast … immediately makes us the favourite of every playoff series especially every series in the East. That balance between what Kobe can bring and what KG can bring …. it will be lethal and make the game easier for every Celtic on the court.
kobe is undeniably a great player. othewordly scorer, great defender, etc. no argument. i think you’re soft-selling the character/distraction issues relative to pierce, though. here’s the thing, pierce is not an alpha dog, he is not a natural leader. i was in favor of trading him in the past because he was not the guy to set a high bar for his team mates and make them better. granted, he took big strides in this department in the last few years. he was a much better citizen and mentor in the last two years, and i give him credit for that. but now we have kg, and he is an alpha dog. he’s a natural leader on and off the court, and in the best way possible. he leads by example, by his high standards, and by encouragement. kg standing on the sideline, or down on a knee, in the fourth quarter of a blowout win, waving a towel and shouting encouragement to the scrubs in priceless. this is a quality in a player of his skill and ability that you cannot pay for. lots has been written about his passion, but i would say kobe has an immense amount of passion as well. it’s how it finds expression that makes all the difference. kg channels it into pure positive energy that the team feeds off. it’s a beautiful thing to behold.
now i get to my point about paul vs. kobe. paul has accepted his secondary role willingly, from all the evidence we can see. in fact, i think he’s in his natural position right now. he is free to be a killer on the court and have a little less of the spotlight. some people are just better suited to this role. by contrast look at garnett in minne. he suffered through many years on that team with sub-par talent surrounding him and never made it into a public issue, never blamed those around him, never dogged games and had immature outbursts (that i’m aware of). that’s what makes him the natural leader, the perfect teammate. he does not complain or lash out in hardship, he just focuses and channels that energy.
and this is where i would never do the hypothetical trade for kobe. i can’t imagine him being comfortable in the second fiddle position that pierce has fit into so perfectly. it is not his natural state. he is, by all accounts, a prima donna. he wants top-level talent around him, but is there any doubt that he wants it to be just one notch below him? ok, so everyone is perhaps one notch below him, but you get the point. the chemistry with shaq is the best example of this. when given a chance to play with shaq in his prime, i don’t care if you are the best in the universe, ever, you play with him and let him be the main guy, and you win championships until his legs fall off. does anyone doubt that pierce would have just played with shaq for as long as it lasted and kept his mouth shut? sure, maybe kobe has changed, maybe he’s learned his lesson, but the events of the past year don’t give me much faith in that.
finally, a quick thought on allen. again, he is a superb player who is a model citizen in every way. he plays his heart out, is the ultimate professional and doesn’t seek the spotlight. he fits in so well, and is the perfect guy to have around young players like rondo and tony. those are rare qualities, especially in one so talented.
to me this is the key issue. these players mesh so well, and maybe adversity will reveal that as a lie, but i don’t see it. we have three all-stars who all seem to be playing their ideal roles and i just don’t think you can mess with that for someone like bryant who is difficult, to put it mildly. i know i’ll probably get flamed for saying this, because i want to see banner 17 hung just as much as any fan here, but here it is: if given the choice to watch these guys go into the twilight of their careers while battling for championships and falling short, and watching kobe bring another championship to boston, i’d take garnett, pierce and allen over the championship. to me they embody the celtics spirit, and they are better for the club now, and in the long run. fortunately, i think we have a better chance with these guys anyway, but there, i said it.
by reverb09 on Dec 29, 2007 8:04 PM EST reply actions
truthhurts,
Rest assured, my willingness to make a move like this has absolutely nothingto do with the team’s record in the early going. At 25-3, I couldn’t be happier. It has been a wonderful start to the season, and I can’t stress it enough.
The goal here, as always, is to best prepare this team for winning a championship. Going 25-3 thus far is excellent, and I take nothing away from that. Getting through the Eastern Conference bracket with series against teams such as Orlando and Detroit and then winning a Finals against the likes of San Antonio, Phoenix, Dallas, Utah, or one of the several other Western Conference teams is what concerns me. And my question — not my assessment, because I don’t profess to know anything for sure here, but my question — is how much more capable of winning those most important games Kobe makes this team, and how much is worth sacrificing for him.
This isn’t remotely about bringing in top individual talent for the sake of being able to win one-on-one competitions or anything of the like. It is about bringing in the type of players that would best prepare the Celts to return to team glory. That was my goal here. Hope that clears it up.
-sw
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
NBA Playoffs Content Module
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Behind the Box Score, where the Boston Celtics are moving on to the conference finals
- NBA Playoffs Fan Fiction: San Antonio Spurs vs. Oklahoma City Thunder
- The Indiana Pacers? Gone till November
- Shaquille O’Neal is in a Chinese beer commercial, too (VIDEO)
- ‘Deep Thoughts’ and Cheap Thoughts: San Antonio Spurs vs. Oklahoma City Thunder
