PDA

View Full Version : Who loses more: Boston without KG and Allen or SA without Tim and Manu



DAF86
03-20-2009, 11:35 AM
Why?

VI_Massive
03-20-2009, 11:36 AM
Why?

Pretty even if you ask me. But if you include no Leon Powe and no Scalabrine and no Tony Allen, the advantage swings to us.

DAF86
03-20-2009, 11:38 AM
Pretty even if you ask me. But if you include no Leon Powe and no Scalabrine and no Tony Allen, the advantage swings to us.

I'm just focusing in the four stars, and I can't really make my mind.

VI_Massive
03-20-2009, 11:40 AM
I'm just focusing in the four stars, and I can't really make my mind.

I guess I would say us. Both teams still have one star -- Parker and Pierce respectively. But we have Mason and Finley who can provide scoring from someone other than Parker. They have something similar with Rondo, but that's about it for them as far as scorers.

vander
03-20-2009, 11:44 AM
you're totally out of touch, the Spurs Big 3 is now TP/Bonner/Mason
manu and TD are injury-riddled, overpaid, has-beens, we're fine without them


:flag:

Dex
03-20-2009, 11:48 AM
It's almost a tough draw, but I'd have to give the slight edge to the Celtics.

Not because I believe KG and Allen, as a duo, are better than Duncan and Ginobili. When all are at full strength, I'd actually say the opposite. Both teams rely upon the strengths of their Big Three, and supplement them with role players and shooters. Both teams can rely on their defense and offensive foundation to keep themselves in nearly every game.

However, I think the Spurs team has a better supporting cast and structure than the Celtics. Tony Parker is capable of carrying a bigger load than Rondo, and the Spurs still have guys like Mason, Finley, and now Gooden who can occasionally explode for a 20 point game. The Spurs have been playing without Ginobili for half the season now, and while I'd hate to see them going into the playoffs this way, they haven't exactly looked like shark fodder.

However, if you remove Allen and Garnett from the Celtics equation, who picks up the scoring slack? Pierce may be good for 25, but that leaves Rondo and the supporting cast with a lot of ground to make up. Who else is gonna score those points? Headcase Marbury? Mikki Moore? Glen Davis?

It would ultimately come down to the battle of the benches, and I think San Antonio has the better bench ever since Posey left Beantown. Therefore, I think the Celtics need their Big 3 healthy more than the Spurs.

That being said, let's just hope EVERYBODY is good to go for the playoffs. This injury bug has been ridiculous.

DAF86
03-20-2009, 11:50 AM
you're totally out of touch, the Spurs Big 3 is now TP/Bonner/Mason
manu and TD are injury-riddled, overpaid, has-beens, we're fine without them


:flag:

If getting high draft picks is our new goal, then sure we're fine.

DAF86
03-20-2009, 11:52 AM
It's almost a tough draw, but I'd have to give the slight edge to the Celtics.

Not because I believe KG and Allen, as a duo, are better than Duncan and Ginobili. When all are at full strength, I'd actually say the opposite. Both teams rely upon the strengths of their Big Three, and supplement them with role players and shooters. Both teams can rely on their defense and offensive foundation to keep themselves in nearly every game.

However, I think the Spurs team has a better supporting cast and structure than the Celtics. Tony Parker is capable of carrying a bigger load than Rondo, and the Spurs still have guys like Mason, Finley, and now Gooden who can occasionally explode for a 20 point game. The Spurs have been playing without Ginobili for half the season now, and while I'd hate to see them going into the playoffs this way, they haven't exactly looked like shark fodder.

However, if you remove Allen and Garnett from the Celtics equation, who picks up the scoring slack? Pierce may be good for 25, but that leaves Rondo and the supporting cast with a lot of ground to make up. Who else is gonna score those points? Headcase Marbury? Mikki Moore? Glen Davis?

It would ultimately come down to the battle of the benches, and I think San Antonio has the better bench ever since Posey left Beantown. Therefore, I think the Celtics need their Big 3 healthy more than the Spurs.

That being said, let's just hope EVERYBODY is good to go for the playoffs. This injury bug has been ridiculous.

The comparison you should do here is Parker/Pierce not Parker/Rondo.

Horse
03-20-2009, 01:20 PM
kg has become more of just a defensive player and we all know gay allen does'nt play d. So I definetly think we lose more!