Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from davidap. Show davidap's posts

    Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux?

    Obviously Kevin Garnett is a first ballot Hall of Famer and Mark Blount a relative nobody. My comparison is not to their overall skillsets, contributions, or legacies. Garnett is just about anything a team could want in a player. But I do have one concern. Could Garnett's performance in this contract year be an effort to secure one last giant payday that his next team (or the Celtics) will regret giving him? Mark Blount put up great numbers in a contract year too (including a 20/20 night), parlaying that one strong season into a lucrative long-term deal that quickly became an albatross.

    I love what Garnett is giving the Celtics right now. I consider it his best basketball since the '08 championship season. I just hope it isn't a fluke, or a temporary spike in performance designed to delude Ainge into giving him a 4 year/$60 million deal, or some other crazy contract. With Dwight Howard off the market this off-season, and JaVale McGee and Roy Hibbert restricted free agents likely to stay with their current teams, Garnett might actually be the best big available with an expectation of being paid accordingly. Despite his advancing age, he could point to someone like Karl Malone as a power forward who remained an elite player into his late 30s. This notion that Garnett will stay with the Celtics on the cheap just isn't going to happen if he continues on this pace.
     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from concord27. Show concord27's posts

    Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux?

    I could seem him taking a discount but not the minimum.  The ways he is playing  he will be worth it.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mployee8. Show Mployee8's posts

    Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux?

    Doubt he'll reup at VM but as I said earlier, they should offer $5M with a team option. Ray has been getting too much outside interest and there's no sense in overpaying to keep him especially now that it's obvious his offense has become a liability to the team's success. S&T for Mayo!
     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from concord27. Show concord27's posts

    Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux?

    In Response to Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux?:
    [QUOTE]KG playing for the VM could be the difference in signing OJ Mayo.
    Posted by Fiercest34[/QUOTE]
    If he wants to stay he will do it.  I hope he does.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mployee8. Show Mployee8's posts

    Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux?

    In Response to Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux?:
    [QUOTE]KG playing for the VM could be the difference in signing OJ Mayo.
    Posted by Fiercest34[/QUOTE]

    Agreed ... That's why either Pietrus or Ray must be sacrificed because KG can't take VM if NJ offers $8M ... the Players Union would put out a contract on him if he did that. Getting Mayo means Ray must go via S&T ...
     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from KyCelt2. Show KyCelt2's posts

    Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux?


     KG should get 8 to 10 million, and he'll be worth every penny!!  Also KG should never be mentioned in the same sentence as Mark Blount!
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from puddinpuddin. Show puddinpuddin's posts

    Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux?

    In Response to Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux?:
    [QUOTE] KG should get 8 to 10 million, and he'll be worth every penny!!  Also KG should never be mentioned in the same sentence as Mark Blount!
    Posted by KyCelt2[/QUOTE]

    Ooooops!!!

    Never again then.

    How about RG3 and Billy Kilmer in the same sentence?

    BTW... I'm ready for the signing and season to start. What excitement in FedEx Field coming.

    Pud
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from KyCelt2. Show KyCelt2's posts

    Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux?

    In Response to Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux? : Ooooops!!! Never again then. How about RG3 and Billy Kilmer in the same sentence? BTW... I'm ready for the signing and season to start. What excitement in FedEx Field coming. Pud
    Posted by puddinpuddin[/QUOTE]

     Just our LUCK, the Colts are thinking of signing RG3!!

     Baseball is almost here, i hope you get to watch Chipper some this season, his kind don't come along very often!!
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from df5. Show df5's posts

    Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux?

    You honestly think there is even a chance that KG will lay down and quit on this team, let alone in a way that is comparable to what Mark Blount did?

    What is wrong with you? How does that thought even cross a person's mind?!

    That's insane.

    This thread reeks of trolling.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from puddinpuddin. Show puddinpuddin's posts

    Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux?

    In Response to Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux? :  Just our LUCK, the Colts are thinking of signing RG3!!  Baseball is almost here, i hope you get to watch Chipper some this season, his kind don't come along very often!!
    Posted by KyCelt2[/QUOTE]

    Colts are already committed to Luck. How could you go wrong with either though.

    Try this out.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JaLn5bm0CY4

    The kid is lightnin'... at the 1min 20 second mark!

    WOW!!!

    Pud
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from docomospur. Show docomospur's posts

    Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux?

    I really can't see the contract being the key motivating factor for KG. Doesn't mean he won't think about the money in the offseason but I just see him playing hard first and foremost because of his fiercely competitive nature.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from aciemvp. Show aciemvp's posts

    Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux?

    I read an article about an interview with KG- he stated that he's doing this to prove those who call him "old" wrong.  And granted he has looked rather old in the last couple years since that knee injury.  I think he's just gaining back his full confidence- following a knee injury you have to get your mind right- do everything 100% without hesitation once again takes a lot longer for some people than the actually getting healthy part does.

    If we can get him at $5M next year then I'd do it.  He's not a safe bet as a "big money" team cornerstone any more and has already made a truckload of gold bricks off of this league, no small amount off of the C's and he's going to be 37 next year, in his 19th year.  He's one injury away from being all done.

    But if we DO get him at $5m then take the extra 22M that's freed up plus the expiration of Jerlame O'neals money for nothing deal and you have a decent piece of money to add some players to the team to make us respectable.  I wouldn't go around desperately to try to sign the wrong pieces just for the sake of signing someone who put up stats somewhere else who likely wouldn't fit, but take a long look around.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from ConnectingRod. Show ConnectingRod's posts

    Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux?

    In Response to Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux?:
    [QUOTE]I read an article about an interview with KG- he stated that he's doing this to prove those who call him "old" wrong.  And granted he has looked rather old in the last couple years since that knee injury.  I think he's just gaining back his full confidence- following a knee injury you have to get your mind right- do everything 100% without hesitation once again takes a lot longer for some people than the actually getting healthy part does. If we can get him at $5M next year then I'd do it.  He's not a safe bet as a "big money" team cornerstone any more and has already made a truckload of gold bricks of this league, no small amount off of the C's and he's going to be 37 next year, in his 19th year.  He's one injury away from being all done. But if we DO get him at $5m then take the extra 22M that's freed up plus the expiration of Jerlame O'neals money for nothing deal and you have a decent piece of many to add some players to the team to make us respectable.  I wouldn't go around desperately to try to sign the wrong pieces just for the sake of signing someone who put up stats somewhere else who likely wouldn't fit, but take a long look around.
    Posted by aciemvp[/QUOTE]

    If KG gets 5m the Celtics don't have the extra 22m anymore. The Cs will more likely to have 17m once KG gets 5m.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from aciemvp. Show aciemvp's posts

    Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux?

    In Response to Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux? :   The Big Baby S&T was a good deal for Orlando because they wanted Bass out of Orlando. Teams will just give Ray a contract, no need to do a S&T as Ray is an unrestricted FA.
    Posted by Fiercest34[/QUOTE]

    And doc wanted davis out of boston because he was so "troublesome".  i think it was a big mistake and it's playing out right now with KG, albeit playing great, having to put his body through soaking up huge minutes at the 5 because bass can't even touch doing that job.

    and stat by stat, bass is not doing much more than davis this year, 3% better field goals, going steadily colder of late, nowhere near the defensive presence, not as good hands.  better pure jump shooter, perhaps quicker on a burst on a drive but nowhere near the footwork on defense and no help on the help defense system.

    davis was still improving as a player and was playing knockout ball and mopping up a TON of minutes at the 5 (if you remember, our best stretch of ball last year was when o'neal AND o'neal were both hurt) until his PATELLAR TENDON INJURY- which is not an insignificant injury- he was never the same after that- but many fans just wanted to ride him out of town on a rail for "being a fat guy" or whatever.  and doc rivers did too.  horrible coaching by doc to dime out davis to the press repetitively.  there's a good reason why grant hill categorically refused to come to boston more than once....

    I bring this up because if we had davis right now, with KG playing the knockout ball that he is, he and davis had a great interplay on the floor, and davis also covered up a lot of defensive gaps- made life easy for the old guys. I mean we could really go deep and who knows what could happen in a short lockout year when a lot of these guys were not in ball shape because they thought the season was flushed = a LOT of injuries and more yet to come.  nobody in the celts thought that through- they just bet the farm on jermaine and that was that.  a horrible bet, and 230 pound wilcox and 235 pound hollins are doormats for the elite 5's in this league.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from aciemvp. Show aciemvp's posts

    Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux?

    In Response to Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux? : If KG gets 5m the Celtics don't have the extra 22m anymore. The Cs will more likely to have 17m once KG gets 5m.
    Posted by ConnectingRod[/QUOTE]

    kg's book number this year is 27m, i don't know what the cap was reduced by.  so under equal cap you have 27m plus 5 or 6m of o'neal, 32m freeing up.  sign kg for 5m then there's 27m.  if the cap went down 5m, which i think it did then you wind up net 22m.  right?
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from ConnectingRod. Show ConnectingRod's posts

    Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux?

    In Response to Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux? : And doc wanted davis out of boston because he was so "troublesome".  i think it was a big mistake and it's playing out right now with KG, albeit playing great, having to put his body through soaking up huge minutes at the 5 because bass can't even touch doing that job. and stat by stat, bass is not doing much more than davis this year, 3% better field goals, going steadily colder of late, nowhere near the defensive presence, not as good hands.  better pure jump shooter, perhaps quicker on a burst on a drive but nowhere near the footwork on defense and no help on the help defense system. davis was still improving as a player and was playing knockout ball and mopping up a TON of minutes at the 5 (if you remember, our best stretch of ball last year was when o'neal AND o'neal were both hurt) until his PATELLAR TENDON INJURY- which is not an insignificant injury- he was never the same after that- but many fans just wanted to ride him out of town on a rail for "being a fat guy" or whatever.  and doc rivers did too.  horrible coaching by doc to dime out davis to the press repetitively.  there's a good reason why grant hill categorically refused to come to boston more than once.... I bring this up because if we had davis right now, with KG playing the knockout ball that he is, he and davis had a great interplay on the floor, and davis also covered up a lot of defensive gaps- made life easy for the old guys. I mean we could really go deep and who knows what could happen in a short lockout year when a lot of these guys were not in ball shape because they thought the season was flushed = a LOT of injuries and more yet to come.  nobody in the celts thought that through- they just bet the farm on jermaine and that was that.  a horrible bet, and 230 pound wilcox and 235 pound hollins are doormats for the elite 5's in this league.
    Posted by aciemvp[/QUOTE]

    But the Cs ended up having the better player in Brandon Bass. You also can't have Bass and Baby together on the court. That would be like a team of fat midgets. LOL
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from aciemvp. Show aciemvp's posts

    Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux?

    In Response to Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux? : But the Cs ended up having the better player in Brandon Bass. You also can't have Bass and Baby together on the court. That would be like a team of fat midgets. LOL
    Posted by ConnectingRod[/QUOTE]

    people keep saying that, but it's not true.  bass might be a better pure jump shooter.  not by much compared to how davis was nailing shots during our elite stretch last year- announcers were saying night after night he was shoo in for 6th man of the year, UNTIL the patellar tendon injury which everyone likes to ignore.

    bass cannot: play help defense, play minutes at the 5 (so KG is doing that this year), has inferior-to-davis passing skills and court vision. 

    bass is better at: driving the ball to the hoop from a distance, dunking, and blocks

    but rebounding?  per minute, bass is nearly the same as davis was last year on average- he's taken many nights off. 

    i dare you to take a look at their stat lines from last year- they are extremely close.

    where it breaks in favor of "i would rather have glen davis by a country friggun mile" is that he can play defense on big 5's- any of them- howard, bynum, duncan.  and he does that very well. 

    ainge had no plan this year but to believe (???@!#@#$#$) that jerlame o'neal was going to play 30 minutes a night at the 5 when we sent davis out of town.  it's a deal that made no sense and it was done to appease doc rivers' non-sensical hatred of davis that should have never existed.  davis was a little bit immature but a very affable kid and NOT a head case- if he was then you would have seen and heard of it from the big 3.  this was a doc rivers the idiot issue. 

    or else if it wasn't tell me why in 6 years in the league with a point guard shooting high 50s and low 60s free throws- that was surely a better reason to go play rat to the press than anything glen davis ever did as far as importance to a team at your position. 

    davis was still improving.  nobody knows what bass was doing because no team would give him a lot of minutes because he's not good on defense.  sometimes he's passable and other times he gives away the store.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from aciemvp. Show aciemvp's posts

    Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux?

    or the quickest way of determining- if bass IS better for this team, then why does KG now have to book ALL of his minutes at the 5 now where he is outsized and prone to wearing down his body, at risk for injury from the bump and grind?  when davis was here, KG played 5 only when we "went small" in certain VERY spot situations.....

    even at the start of this year, KG was covering all the minutes at 5 that jerlame couldn't play.  they're getting away with it right now, but i'll tell ya, i'd much much much rather have davis than bass if you're serious about going deep in the playoffs. 

    when ainge 1) traded for bass and 2) got nothing other than the ROUGH steamer to mop 5 minutes from o'neal the worn out 2 legged horse, he kind of showed me that he really wasn't in it to win it this year, just to "compete".  you never do that in a short year like this.

    i mean the likelihood of o'neal playing most of the regular season and all of the playoffs is the same odds of me growing a pube that will stretch from here to china
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from edcap99. Show edcap99's posts

    Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux?

    KG's inspired play this season is for real. In my opinion, KG is playing hard to win and not merely to secure a big payday for a future contract. This guy is a future hall of famer, and he plays with pride and dignity. If he can continue to play at or near this level for the next two years, I think he is worth at least a two-year contract extension of $8M - $10M per season. KG not only brings his playing skills to the court, but also an entire culture of discipline and industry. He will also be an excellent example and mentor to the younger players the Celtics will bring into their fold. I don't mind paying a premium for KG's services. He is the total package. His value to the team is inestimable. I'm certain KG would like to retire a Celtic, and will re-sign with the team if he is offered a fair and reasonable deal.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux?

    I agree with Ed.....!!

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from heirplain. Show heirplain's posts

    Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux?

    In Response to Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Kevin Garnett: Mark Blount Redux? : people keep saying that, but it's not true.  bass might be a better pure jump shooter.  not by much compared to how davis was nailing shots during our elite stretch last year- announcers were saying night after night he was shoo in for 6th man of the year, UNTIL the patellar tendon injury which everyone likes to ignore. bass cannot: play help defense, play minutes at the 5 (so KG is doing that this year), has inferior-to-davis passing skills and court vision.  bass is better at: driving the ball to the hoop from a distance, dunking, and blocks but rebounding?  per minute, bass is nearly the same as davis was last year on average- he's taken many nights off.  i dare you to take a look at their stat lines from last year- they are extremely close. where it breaks in favor of "i would rather have glen davis by a country friggun mile" is that he can play defense on big 5's- any of them- howard, bynum, duncan.  and he does that very well.  ainge had no plan this year but to believe ( ???@!#@#$#$ ) that jerlame o'neal was going to play 30 minutes a night at the 5 when we sent davis out of town.  it's a deal that made no sense and it was done to appease doc rivers' non-sensical hatred of davis that should have never existed.  davis was a little bit immature but a very affable kid and NOT a head case- if he was then you would have seen and heard of it from the big 3.  this was a doc rivers the idiot issue.  or else if it wasn't tell me why in 6 years in the league with a point guard shooting high 50s and low 60s free throws- that was surely a better reason to go play rat to the press than anything glen davis ever did as far as importance to a team at your position.  davis was still improving.  nobody knows what bass was doing because no team would give him a lot of minutes because he's not good on defense.  sometimes he's passable and other times he gives away the store.
    Posted by aciemvp[/QUOTE]

    I'm not sure how this thread changed over to Bass vs Davis but ..

    1st I don't believe KG would mail in anything. He is almost like the KG of old except smarter and actually better in some ways, at least to me. Learning how to efficiently play the 5 has really improved his game there.

    I would be in favor of keeping him with the C's for all the reasons that have been mentioned here and don't believe a two year 5-8m price tag would be too much if some kind of productivity clause was included..(but not needed imo)

    20-25 mpg with the rest schedule he playing on seems to be a stroke of genius on DR's part.

    I was always impressed with BB's fire plug presense down low but he was constantly exposed in that role. With some of the powerful 5's such as (the new) Bynum and the super high jumping athletic 4's and 5's his powerful 4x4 rock solid presence doesn't equal the multi talented Bass.over all. This is true especially since Bass is buying into the "D" game more and more and is actually passing the ball.

    We don't really need to get into the imature aspect of Glen as he seemed like a fun loving nice guy but showed his poor judgement more that a few times. Overall I liked his game though....one recent example..

    http://slumz.boxden.com/f16/glen-big-baby-davis-fined-obscene-gesture-video-1726904/
     

Share