Re: Fw: [Celtics' Stuff from hero to goat

["Lance Jacobson" <lancejacob@xxxxxxxxx>]

Anyway, I don't think people were saying that most here think Pierce is an
unqualified good thing, only that he *is* a good thing, faults and
failures and all.  Just as with the irrational anti-Walker faction, the
counterpoint here is not a well thought-out argument, but a lot of stuff
thrown up against the wall to see what sticks.  The main point seems to be
that not only is Pierce a bad, terrible, selfish player, but that he
actually embodies all that is wrong with NBA basketball.  (Oh, and
that he secretly wants Usama bin Laden's love child, too -- I almost
forgot.)  In the process, of course, the aim seems to be to irritate as
many people as humanly possible. >>Bird

Look, Bird, I'm of Mediterranean extraction and it's horribly offensive to
have you insinuate that I accuse Pierce of any connection with Bin Laden or
that I imply that he has evil in his intentions.  I've never said it, implied
it, suggested it or anything of the sort.

He's insensitive, selfish, egotistical beyond definition, as in "the world
revolves around me".  Does that make him evil?  Not at all.  So cut the crap
about implying that I'm condemning the guy as a bad human being.

You don't have to tell me that he's "flawed", either.  We're all flawed.  You
don't have to tell me that Pierce has been important to the Celtics and has
done good things, including those in the community.  I know that.  I read the
papers and follow the games.

My ENTIRE point is that Pierce is trending AWAY from being a Positive force on
the Celtics as his own skills improve.  We've seen Iverson's impact on the
Sixers, and he's known to put effort in every minute he plays, something I
don't attribute to Paul, and others may agree.  However, a team built around
his game has and will continue to suffer from an inability to maintain a good
scoring flow, to facilitating good ball movement and player movement.  Antoine
was seemingly the first Celtic to look for a game full of isolation plays; now
we've got two guys doing it.  You think that's a good thing?  Especially as
Twan has become more versatile and varied in his offensive role?

YOU can decide whether Paul's good or bad.  I say he's a good player going in
a bad direction.  The trending is rapid and dangerous, IMO.  You use the
available evidence to draw your own conclusions, but I've not said that Paul
doesn't contribute to the team.  The things he's begun to do have hurt them,
and he seems encouraged to continue.  Is that what you want?