btw

[Sean Giovanello]

Kim, comparisons between a young Jermaine and a young Al are not really all
that helpful.  There are plenty of young players with plenty of promise who
never pan out - in fact far more than those who do.

Jermaine right now is a proven commodity and an excellent player.  Al, right
now, is not a proven commodity and is not an excellent player.  Can he
become one?  Sure.  I think he has a good shot of doing so and, at worst,
should be a Corliss Williamson or Joe Smith type player (long career, able
to score and rebound, etc).  My only point early and I think what Egg is
getting at is that however we feel about Jefferson, he faces the same uphill
climb as everyone else and very few players in such a situation make it to
the level that O'Neal has.  Thats a simple fact.

Thus, I guess, it comes down to do you prefer a proven 20 10 guy who is
still young or a guy who might get you that or a little more or a lot less
in a couple years time.   The nature of the business says you have to go
with JO cause there is no such thing as a sure thing and Al has raised some
questions along the way.

On 5/7/06, Eggcentric at aol.com <Eggcentric at aol.com> wrote:
>
>      < Uh huh. Now I realize that fairness doesn't enter into your
>      agenda any more than the salary cap enters into the minds
>      of people who propose not in this universe deals like Big Al
>      for O'Neal, but you might try comparing Jermaine after *his*
>      second season as a drafted from high school player rather
>      than after his 10th. He has had more years in the league to
>      become the player he is than anyone on the Cs, even Raef
>      and Pierce, much less Al. > - Kim
>
> Kim, I understand I'm comparing an acorn to an oak tree.
> But I was addressing Josh's statements that he would not be
> willing to trade the 21 yr. old Jefferson for the present 27 yr. old
> O'Neal... not for the 17 yr. old O'Neal who was drafted out of
> high school.
>
> I think it's irrelevant now how the 17 yr. old O'Neal performed
> in his early years. It's what he is NOW that counts. And it's hard
> for me to believe that Jefferson will ever be the player O'Neal is.
> O'Neal right now is a given for several years to come; Jefferson
> is not.
>
>      < Especially since Jermaine spent his first 4 years in the league
>      in Portland with as many or more questions about him as a
>      major potential based on skills *but* enigma/seeming bust
>      with a questionable drive, etc At least Al scores. That's why
>      they traded him despite all that rare potential in a center, which
>      in itself usually gets you more slack. With questions lingering
>      about whether he would reach his potential even after he came
>      to Indy. Nor has he been a complete non-headache there. >
>
> I chose O'Neal (along with Pierce and Gomes) for my fantasy team,
> so I closely followed his play.   I just think he's a great player.
> He also comes off to me as a mature, surprisingly well-spoken
> guy who consistently gives 100%.   Although in the absence of
> Reggie Miller's leadership, he has riled some of his teammates
> by being outspoken concerning their lack of effort,   he remains
> Coach Carlisle's favorite player. If we could somehow add him
> to a lineup of Pierce, West, Szczerbiak and Perk, then I would
> quickly get excited over our team's future.
>
>      < Not saying I'm positive Al will become the player his potential
>      says he can, because I'm not. Any more than I'm accepting all
>      your criticisms at face value. But this seems enough of a cheap
>      shot to be a bit unworthy of you. > - Kim
>
> Is it a cheap shot because you feel my criticisms of Jeff are
> untrue, or because you feel I have ignored his young age and
> possible future development?   As this list's resident season ticket
> holder, you are unquestionably an astute fan who knows as much
> about the game of basketball and our particular team as any
> poster I have come across.   Seriously, it's a pleasure to read your
> posts. So I am sincerely interested in knowing which of my
> criticisms of Jefferson so ruffled your fur.
>
> When I originally ragged on Banks as having a Joe Forte personality,
> that was also considered a cheap shot. When I ragged on Ricky
> Davis (another Dr. Brain approved player) while others here saw
> him as a reformed Saint, that was considered a negative, cheap
> shot.   It wasn't till after his trade to Minny that the fact surfaced
> that he had been a pain in the arse here all along.   McHale is
> also a disciple of Dr. Brain, yet Davis has already worn his
> welcome out there and is already on the trade block.   When I
> ragged on Payton's frequent days off allegedly to visit his poor
> sick mom and family in LA (even though he often never got as far
> as the West Coast),   I was accused of having no sympathy for
> loving dads, caring sons, and cancer victims.
>
> For sure, Jefferson was a rookie full of promise, the Hope
> Diamond in Danny's collection of draft gems.   But somewhere
> between his rookie year and second year, he changed.   Can he
> change back ... I hope so.   But would I prefer the just-coming-
> into-his-prime 27 yr. old O'Neal over him?   You bet. That was
> simply my response to Josh's posts after he claimed O'Neal
> was a "weak character" while he neglected to consider Jeff's
> own disappointing character this season.
>
> < That being said, do you get a reward for every time you use
> the words foul machine, which seems to be all you say about
> Perk too? > - Kim
>
> You have better recall of my past posts than I.   Henceforth,
> I shall instead describe Perk and Jeff as players whose constant
> foul trouble hampers their performances.   Is that a more accurate,
> less negative, less worn out description than "foul machine?"
>
>      < At least vary things by noting that with Al this past
>      season that was largely because of his idiotic new hobby of
>      continually trying to take charges that of course usually drew
>      a call the other way vs dropping it to imply that it was a matter
>      of his doing nothing but draw fouls with every breath... >
>      - Kim
>
> I must admit I didn't analyze the reasons for Jeff's fouls.   To me,
> a foul is a foul.   If he has averaged 2.8 fouls in 16.3 mpg, there
> is a problem somewhere, whether it is due to his new hobby
> or not.   And I wonder where his coaches are on this, or where his
> willingness is to improve his game.
>
> Egg
>
> PS - Viva Barbaro!   The next triple-crown winner?
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics