EPTNBA 2010-2011 Season - Page 149
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
thehorsebecomesking
189 Posts
| ||
|
cLutZ
United States19574 Posts
On April 05 2011 05:01 thehorsebecomesking wrote: Clutz, what's your problem with Pierce? Wtf is 'overrated', where exactly do you think is he rated atm? 'Allegedly' hall-of-famer? So by your standards he isn't? For your own sake I hope you're either trolling or just hating while still admitting to yourself that he is good. You definitely need to watch some Boston games. He is good, just not HoF caliber. Now, I have a problem with certain players in the HoF as it is, but I don't see why people think he is so good. The East has been consistently worse than the West throughout his tenure, and during his prime he managed to miss the playoffs. I've heard things thrown around like, "3rd best Celtic ever," etc. He was the 2nd/3rd best player on a championship team and the 3rd/4th best player on a runner up. I don't see how that makes him a HoF player. | ||
|
altec1011
92 Posts
On April 05 2011 02:45 Holcan wrote: i never compared their stats, i only said Rondo had more under his belt, 5 rebounds off averaging a triple double for a series being one of my examples, i dunno why he went off on a rant. I wasn't comparing their past accomplishments, I was arging who the better player is. Clearly Rose is, I'm not sure how you can still fail to see that, considering he's on his pace for winning the MVP. Oh well, I'm done trying to show facts. | ||
|
Ferrose
United States11378 Posts
 He finally comes back, and gets hurt again. I'm sure that Boston really wishes that they still had Kendrick Perkins now >.> | ||
|
BlueRoyaL
United States2493 Posts
On April 05 2011 05:13 cLutZ wrote: He is good, just not HoF caliber. Now, I have a problem with certain players in the HoF as it is, but I don't see why people think he is so good. The East has been consistently worse than the West throughout his tenure, and during his prime he managed to miss the playoffs. I've heard things thrown around like, "3rd best Celtic ever," etc. He was the 2nd/3rd best player on a championship team and the 3rd/4th best player on a runner up. I don't see how that makes him a HoF player. can you explain then who was the 1st/2nd best player or the 2nd/3rd best player on the runner up? I agree with you to a degree in that I don't think he's as good as most people make him out to be, but I still think he's really good. He's usually the go to guy during crunch time. Hes good at getting to the line, has a good mid range jumper, and sometimes hits the 3s (lols) | ||
|
BlueRoyaL
United States2493 Posts
On April 05 2011 05:50 altec1011 wrote: I wasn't comparing their past accomplishments, I was arging who the better player is. Clearly Rose is, I'm not sure how you can still fail to see that, considering he's on his pace for winning the MVP. Oh well, I'm done trying to show facts. rose is the better player, not sure how anyone can really try to create an argument in rondos favor. Sure rondo has more under his belt but look at the team he is playing for? If Rose was the pg for the celtics, they could easily have just as many accomplishments as rondo playing for them. And comparing stats is one of the shittiest ways to make comparisons between players because everything is relative. Relative on their situation, the team they are playing with, etc. | ||
|
altec1011
92 Posts
On April 05 2011 05:57 BlueRoyaL wrote: rose is the better player, not sure how anyone can really try to create an argument in rondos favor. Sure rondo has more under his belt but look at the team he is playing for? If Rose was the pg for the celtics, they could easily have just as many accomplishments as rondo playing for them. And comparing stats is one of the shittiest ways to make comparisons between players because everything is relative. Relative on their situation, the team they are playing with, etc. I'm glad you agree  . And yeah, judging a player based solely on stats is stupid. Look at LeBron's stats - almost oscar robertson-like, and yet how many times has he failed to show up in clutch situations? Stats don't always show the entire picture, and in this case, lebron's lack of intagibles were revealed. | ||
|
Holcan
Canada2593 Posts
On April 05 2011 05:50 altec1011 wrote: I wasn't comparing their past accomplishments, I was arging who the better player is. Clearly Rose is, I'm not sure how you can still fail to see that, considering he's on his pace for winning the MVP. Oh well, I'm done trying to show facts. so rose is popular among fanboys who like seeing back scratching dunks, whoop dee doo. Rondo is still a competitor, and with the numbers he was putting up in the early season an argument could easily be made about how he is a better point guard, get off your high horse, just because the celtics have been injury ridden, and the bulls have been relatively okay injury wise doesnt mean the celtics are a non-factor. Stop acting like an obsessed fanboy, no one here cares if you are correct, anyone couldve guessed after Rose playing for Team USA he would have a break out year, you arent a genius, you're just the reason Rose is quickly becoming the next Lebron in terms of repersentation by fanboys. Thanks for turning a player i thought highly of, into a fanboy laden icon that he is today. | ||
|
cLutZ
United States19574 Posts
On April 05 2011 05:55 BlueRoyaL wrote: can you explain then who was the 1st/2nd best player or the 2nd/3rd best player on the runner up? I agree with you to a degree in that I don't think he's as good as most people make him out to be, but I still think he's really good. He's usually the go to guy during crunch time. Hes good at getting to the line, has a good mid range jumper, and sometimes hits the 3s (lols) Title team: #1. Garnett, by a large margin. #2. Allen/Pierce, tossup IMO. Last Year #1. Garnett, small margin #2. Rondo, way ahead of the next two #3. Allen/Pierce tossup again. Allen is possibly the best ever at what he does. His role might be slightly less important than what PP does, which is why it is a toss up IMO. He is good, but I think he really relies on getting bailed out by the refs (a lot of players do this, its not always a knock) more than an elite player should have to. And I don't think his actual game is good enough to justify the refs continually bailing him out. | ||
|
a176
Canada6688 Posts
On April 04 2011 14:23 igotmyown wrote: Big Baby plays with a lot of heart, but he's not even close to the best 6th man. He's undersized, gets his shot blocked at a much higher rate than other players, can't guard length with a good shooting touch (Gasol), and at best developed a non-existent mid range game to a mediocre one. His best quality other than his hustle is that he has good lateral movement and plays within the Celtics defensive system well (unlike powe). And I guess he can wall off players that can only dunk. Gordon's great as long as he's not your primary scorer. But once you play/pay him like one, you're in for a disappointment. if big baby keeps improving at the pace he is now (esp over the summer), he's gonna be really great to watch next year. | ||
|
lolsixtynine
United States600 Posts
On April 05 2011 06:22 Holcan wrote: the bulls have been relatively okay injury wise Yeah. Boozer? Noah? They mean nothing to the Bulls. And they only missed a combined 49 games. | ||
|
Holcan
Canada2593 Posts
On April 05 2011 06:43 lolsixtynine wrote: Yeah. Boozer? Noah? They mean nothing to the Bulls. And they only missed a combined 49 games. I know right, isnt that an insanely low amount of injured players for a team. | ||
|
thehorsebecomesking
189 Posts
On April 05 2011 05:13 cLutZ wrote: He is good, just not HoF caliber. Now, I have a problem with certain players in the HoF as it is, but I don't see why people think he is so good. The East has been consistently worse than the West throughout his tenure, and during his prime he managed to miss the playoffs. I've heard things thrown around like, "3rd best Celtic ever," etc. He was the 2nd/3rd best player on a championship team and the 3rd/4th best player on a runner up. I don't see how that makes him a HoF player. Yeah, let's make a case for Pierce not being a hall-of-famer just based on the fact that he isn't 'amazing' at 33. Fuck, I actually think he is amazing with his stat line this season, no? If he isn't a HoF then 2/3rd of the HoFs shouldn't be there either. + Show Spoiler + | ||
|
altec1011
92 Posts
On April 05 2011 06:49 Holcan wrote: I know right, isnt that an insanely low amount of injured players for a team. they're arguably the bulls' second and third best players on the team... and they actually missed more than 49 games combined because I know boozer's missed at least 25 whereas Noah missed atleast 30. Who did the celtics play without? A few games without KG, Shaq who is getting older (which was expected), delonte west (lol), and that's pretty much it. The celtics have kept their "Big 4" for the most part and Glen Davis is having a career season. Rondo's been "speculated" to be injured by the wise words of Kevin Garnett, whereas Doc Rivers had said that he was completely fine. And please don't be upset calling people fanboys and whatnot, I was simply just stating facts. Rondo is a fantastic player, but if you had to give a genuine answer, I think anyone with a sane mind would choose to build their team around Rose because he's the better player. | ||
|
altec1011
92 Posts
On April 05 2011 06:22 Holcan wrote: anyone couldve guessed after Rose playing for Team USA he would have a break out year, you arent a genius, Are you sure about that? I'm a regular poster on other basketball community sites, and almost no one (including the posters here in TL) had expected him to have a season like this... and become the youngest player to win the MVP. If my memory's serves correct, it's been Durant and LeBron's new-look Heat who's been getting all the undeserved hype... and you actually have the balls to say that Rose's hype is undeserved? Rose earned his status, unlike LeBron, who had a predetermined aura of "greatness" when he entered the NBA. | ||
|
city42
1656 Posts
On April 05 2011 07:07 thehorsebecomesking wrote: Yeah, let's make a case for Pierce not being a hall-of-famer just based on the fact that he isn't 'amazing' at 33. Fuck, I actually think he is amazing with his stat line this season, no? If he isn't a HoF then 2/3rd of the HoFs shouldn't be there either. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJ64tfHcIek + Show Spoiler + Boston fans never cease to amaze. There's a huge case to be made against Pierce when it comes to the HOF. He missed the playoffs 5 of his first 9 seasons, despite playing in the weakest era in any conference in NBA history. With Pierce as their best player, the Celtics never won 50 games, and finished below .500 6 times in 9 years. When KG arrived, the media started drooling over the defensive transformation he unleashed in Boston. What does that say about PP? The guy was the leader of the team for a decade, and he never held himself or his teammates accountable on that side of the ball. And lest we forget, the Celtics were done with his prima donna attitude and desperately tried to deal him in '05. Also your last statement is utter crap. Are you insinuating that PP is either as qualified as, or more qualified than, 2/3 of the HOF? Oh wait, almost forgot a meaningless video: | ||
|
Ferrose
United States11378 Posts
On April 05 2011 07:07 thehorsebecomesking wrote: Yeah, let's make a case for Pierce not being a hall-of-famer just based on the fact that he isn't 'amazing' at 33. Fuck, I actually think he is amazing with his stat line this season, no? If he isn't a HoF then 2/3rd of the HoFs shouldn't be there either. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJ64tfHcIek Dude, that was so epic. After a few threes, you could hear the crowd go crazy every time he even attempted a three. And Larry Brown was just like "God dammit" LOL On April 05 2011 07:36 city42 wrote: Boston fans never cease to amaze. There's a huge case to be made against Pierce when it comes to the HOF. He missed the playoffs 5 of his first 9 seasons, despite playing in the weakest era in any conference in NBA history. With Pierce as their best player, the Celtics never won 50 games, and finished below .500 6 times in 9 years. When KG arrived, the media started drooling over the defensive transformation he unleashed in Boston. What does that say about PP? The guy was the leader of the team for a decade, and he never held himself or his teammates accountable on that side of the ball. And lest we forget, the Celtics were done with his prima donna attitude and desperately tried to deal him in '05. Also your last statement is utter crap. Are you insinuating that PP is either as qualified as, or more qualified than, 2/3 of the HOF? Oh wait, almost forgot a meaningless video: You sound like those people who say that football players are only as good as the amount of Super Bowl rings they have. | ||
|
city42
1656 Posts
On April 05 2011 07:38 Ferrose wrote: You sound like those people who say that football players are only as good as the amount of Super Bowl rings they have. Say what? First of all, an individual has MUCH more impact on a basketball game than on a football game, so the analogy is already broken beyond repair. Secondly, I'm not commenting on the wins and losses specifically, but drawing a connection between his woeful lack of leadership and the success of his team. And most importantly, we're not talking about what's right or wrong, we're talking about the Hall of Fame. The HOF is keeping some deserving candidates out right now on the basis that they didn't win enough when they were the marquee player on a team, so why should Pierce be treated differently? | ||
|
thehorsebecomesking
189 Posts
On April 05 2011 07:53 city42 wrote: Say what? First of all, an individual has MUCH more impact on a basketball game than on a football game, so the analogy is already broken beyond repair. Secondly, I'm not commenting on the wins and losses specifically, but drawing a connection between his woeful lack of leadership and the success of his team. And most importantly, we're not talking about what's right or wrong, we're talking about the Hall of Fame. The HOF is keeping some deserving candidates out right now on the basis that they didn't win enough when they were the marquee player on a team, so why should Pierce be treated differently? I don't know where you pull those arguments from but Pierce will be a HoF, it is a fact. You can take lebron and throw this worthless rhetoric at him as well, yet it won't change the fact he's one of the top players if not the best atm. Pierce carried Cs on his shoulders all that time and every playoff run until the big three was entirely his achievement. 9 time All Star 2002-2011? Please. The guy knows how to fucking play. | ||
|
slyboogie
United States3423 Posts
| ||
| ||
