Re: Knight Move

[Adam Suchocki <Twilight@world.std.com>]

This list is for the discussion of Celtics and basketball.  I did not 
see anything like a personal attack in my post, and would not call it a 
pissing match.  Debating whether or not a real center is needed for a 
championship team, what constitutes a real center, and whether the 
Celtics have it within their capabilities of getting a real center are 
all definately under this heading.  

Evaluating basketball talent is as much opinion as fact.  You stated 
opinions and I disagreed, such is the nature of discussion.  We both 
brought arguments in our defense, some which each of us disagree with.  
That also is the nature of discussion, and the nature of this group.  
Please do not feel that my disagreement with your opinion is in any way 
a personal attack on you, but be willing to defend your views when 
posted.  Everyone can learn from debating eachothers opinions, and that 
is the fun of this list.

As to Edwards, my point is still the same.  If you are calling him a 
real center, there are a lot of them in the NBA, and the whole issue of 
whether the Celtics need one for a championship is moot.  We can pick up 
a Dean Garret, Luc Longley (who I would put on par with Edwards late in 
his career), Greg Ostertag, Briant Reeves, etc. and go for it.  I think 
two types of teams have won champioships of late - trapping guard 
oriented teams, of which Detroit and Chicago could qualify, and teams 
with a dominant inside presence - ala Houston, LA, and Boston. 

Because Detroit acquire someone who played the center position, does not 
mean that was the diference.  A lot of other factors came into play - 
the Dantley for Aquire trade, the extra experience of the whole team 
after the tough losses to Boston (in my opinion a very key factor in 
their development), the improvement of Joe DUmars.  In my opinion, 
Edwards played a role, but a secondary role on that team, and they could 
have survived without his presence in the paint.

As to Parish vs. Knight (even as a rookie).  Parish averaged nearly 
twice as many rebounds and over 50% more points than Knight despite 
playing similar minutes.  Likewise, he was better in blocks by a decent 
margin.  That is a fairly large statistical diference.  SImilarly, 
Knights numbers are not as good as Eric Montross's rookie season.

Finally, I'll be honest, I don't understand the McHale to Knight 
comparrison.  If you were implying that he would not have the impact of 
a McHale, but were simply comparing him to McHale in that he could be a 
6th man, I do not object (though I think there would be many more 
talented 6th men the Celtics could acquire).

Finally, the contract comparison doesn't work for me.  Perhaps Knight 
will develop, but I do not see his contract as an improvement over 
Barros, Minor, or Ellison.  It is larger than Ellison's, and I see both 
as questionmarks - knight is more likely to play, but if Ellison plays, 
he has a lot more talent than Knight.  The Minor contract is on par with 
Knights, and so far, Minor has been slightly more productive as a pro. 
As to barros, his real contract (not the 30 million one first announced) 
is also on par with Knights.  The big difference is the pay schedule 
(Barros gets more money up front, and will actually become more cost 
effective as time goes by).  Barros has at least played at All-Star 
level and has been much more effective than Knight over his career.  
Time may prove otherwise, but that is just opinion at this point (but 
again, that's the point of discussion.

In closing, this is a personal note: As I said before, all I have been 
disagreeing with is some of your opinions.  If you participate in a 
discussion group, this is what you should expect.  I have been posting 
here for several years, and I have never participated in personal 
attacks, and I don't like the implications that this has been other than 
a discussion.  Saying such things as lets take this off line, because I 
think this has gotten personal, and then filling out several paragraphs 
of arguments on the issue is turning this personal.  Calling offering a 
differing opinion a pissing match, is getting personal.  Playful jabs 
and a cocky attitude are more than acceptable (though sometimes 
confusing) in a discussion, but playing the injured part when differing 
opinions are presented (and yes, we both have been presenting more 
opinion than fact, though again, you seem to be implying I am supplying 
opinion to your fact) and using it a a shield to put forth more opinion 
is rather counterproductive to discussion.  I apologize if I miss-spoke 
in a way that lead you to believe I was attacking you, but please be 
more aware that people debate ideas here, and people will challenge your 
statements.

Adam

PS.  Sorry to all who may be bored by the above.  I'm indulging myself 
in a public reply that does deal with personal issues, but I think even 
the discusion of discussion is useful on this group at times.


Ecophiloso@aol.com wrote:
> 
> Sorry I haven't had the time, Adam, to deal with your cogent critique of my
> position.  I offer a mere pearl below but I suggest if you really want to get
> into a pissing match we take it to private channels rather than clutter all
> these fine people's electrons and neurons with what is beginning to seem to
> me to be a personal issue.
> 
> Despite the fact that I was living in the Detroit area while the Pistons were
> climbing the hill and finally winning their two championships, I remained a
> Celtic fan.  Nowhere did I characterize Edwards as on par with that long list
> of fine pivot men.  Nor did I ever mention Wilt.  I was merely responding to
> what I considered a specious argument on your part that NBA championships are
> won w/o centers.  I had the opportunity to admire the team Jack McCloskey
> built and Chuck Daly coached as they beat Chicago out of two championships
> they could very well have claimed as their own.  At the time, I maintained
> that the Pistons would not win until they acquired a center and moved
> Laimbeer to the perimeter.  They did so.  They won.  'Nuff said.
> 
> I was comparing Parish's numbers after his rookie season, not his entire GS
> career, to Knight's numbers after his rookie season.  I maintain that the two
> cases are similar but rather than go back and forth on this one, I suggest we
> check back on this issue in seven years.
> 
> I was comparing McHale's role, not his game, with Knight's potential role on
> this team.  Again, let's let time be the judge.
> 
> BTW, I hear Big Country just signed for $66 over 6 yrs. w/Van.  I think
> Knight's money will be considered a bargain two years down the road.  This
> contract is nothing like the boondoggles we have with Barros, Minor and
> Ellison.  I'm not trying to add more fuel to the fire, just going on record
> with an opinion.  I'll be happy to revisit the issue once things have moved
> from the realm of opinion to that of fact.
> 
> Daniel