When 2 > 3
The recent trade of Kevin Garnett to the Boston Celtics revisits an age old quandary. Is a team better served to have more superstars and a group of bench warmers or one superstar and solid, if unspectacular, role players? With Garnett (31), Paul Pierce (29) and Ray Allen (32), the Celtics have three very established players. All three are still at the top of their game but not for long. So how do things bode for Boston fans?
One should go back to the 1996 season of the Houston Rockets for an answer. The team was led by Hakeem Olajuwon (34), Charles Barkley (33), and Clyde Drexler (34). After a couple titles in 93 and 94, the Rockets were looking to gear up for one more push. While the team was a bit older than the current Celtics squad, some elements are sure to ring true.
First off, the players seemed to all get along. Barkley wanted the ring badly (as does KG and the other Celtics for that matter) and was on a mission to acquiesce. But during crunch time, teammates were unsure what to do. Who should they give the ball too? Before it was Hakeem in the post and Drexler on the wing but now Barkley was down low too. The team played well but ultimately couldn't quite close the deal.
I predict that Boston will seem similar results. Pierce will likely still be the leader (like Olajuwon) since he was there the longest despite Garnett being the best player. But like the Rockets, the Celtics will be cursed with almost too many high scorers. All three averaged over 20ppg last year. Whereas the Houston squads had none of the players averaging over 20ppg. How will this play with each player mentally? Time will tell, but it could be tough for each to drop roughly 7ppg when they've never been that low in years.
Furthermore, there were rumblings in years past about Pierce and ex Celtic Antoine Walker griping about shots. How will things fare now, especially with Ray Allen needing the ball to be effective?
2008 should see Garnett again be a terror on the boards and he'll likely drop a bit in scoring. Pierce will likely stay about the same across the board. But Ray Allen is only effective as a shooter. And a shooter without the ball is a problem waiting to happen. Like other shooters going to teams with other established ball handlers-see Peja Stojakovic, Glen Rice, etc-many times it results in an under utilized player. Look for Allen to still shoot effectively but for his number of shots to drop dramatically. He could easily go from 25ppg to 16ppg. With offenses down across the league it will be tough to balance 3 20+ppg scorers.
Once playoff time rolls around, the Celtics will be a top 4 seeded team. They won't get out of the East though. Like the Rockets in the 90's and the Lakers of the 00's, sometimes too much talent is a hindrance. A team at most can carry 2 superstars, just look at the past champions. Miami, LA, Houston, Chicago, Detroit. All had 2 superstars and solid role players. The Celtics would be better served to trade Ray Allen for a couple Horace Grants or Robert Horrys.
One should go back to the 1996 season of the Houston Rockets for an answer. The team was led by Hakeem Olajuwon (34), Charles Barkley (33), and Clyde Drexler (34). After a couple titles in 93 and 94, the Rockets were looking to gear up for one more push. While the team was a bit older than the current Celtics squad, some elements are sure to ring true.
First off, the players seemed to all get along. Barkley wanted the ring badly (as does KG and the other Celtics for that matter) and was on a mission to acquiesce. But during crunch time, teammates were unsure what to do. Who should they give the ball too? Before it was Hakeem in the post and Drexler on the wing but now Barkley was down low too. The team played well but ultimately couldn't quite close the deal.
I predict that Boston will seem similar results. Pierce will likely still be the leader (like Olajuwon) since he was there the longest despite Garnett being the best player. But like the Rockets, the Celtics will be cursed with almost too many high scorers. All three averaged over 20ppg last year. Whereas the Houston squads had none of the players averaging over 20ppg. How will this play with each player mentally? Time will tell, but it could be tough for each to drop roughly 7ppg when they've never been that low in years.
Furthermore, there were rumblings in years past about Pierce and ex Celtic Antoine Walker griping about shots. How will things fare now, especially with Ray Allen needing the ball to be effective?
2008 should see Garnett again be a terror on the boards and he'll likely drop a bit in scoring. Pierce will likely stay about the same across the board. But Ray Allen is only effective as a shooter. And a shooter without the ball is a problem waiting to happen. Like other shooters going to teams with other established ball handlers-see Peja Stojakovic, Glen Rice, etc-many times it results in an under utilized player. Look for Allen to still shoot effectively but for his number of shots to drop dramatically. He could easily go from 25ppg to 16ppg. With offenses down across the league it will be tough to balance 3 20+ppg scorers.
Once playoff time rolls around, the Celtics will be a top 4 seeded team. They won't get out of the East though. Like the Rockets in the 90's and the Lakers of the 00's, sometimes too much talent is a hindrance. A team at most can carry 2 superstars, just look at the past champions. Miami, LA, Houston, Chicago, Detroit. All had 2 superstars and solid role players. The Celtics would be better served to trade Ray Allen for a couple Horace Grants or Robert Horrys.
posted by christopher at 2:04 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home