Posted: 6/27/2012 11:25:18 AM
Originally Posted by 3BallBomber:
Garnett, Pierce, and Allen had already spent their best years in their respective teams before forming. James, Bosh, and Wade were entering their prime and much younger when they joined forces. KG spent 12 yrs in Minny before being traded - his best years were in the early to mid of 2000. His numbers started to go down especially rebounding once he was a Celtic. Allen spent 10 yrs in 2 diff teams and i also felt his best years were in Sonics (where he won alot of individual accolades) in the early to mid 2000's. Pierce the same though he is the younger of the 3. If you notice every year since they formed they started to deplete slowly indicating they were at the tail end of their careers.
The NEW Big Three are much younger, faster, and stronger. Which is expected when you consider Lebron was 26 and only 8 yrs in the league Bosh 27 before joing Wade who was 29 and if you think he is declining you'r sadly mistaken spite of how he performed in the playoffs this year. Lebron is only getting started in his career, Bosh exactly the same. & Wade i predict will be putting up far better numbers within these next couple of years.
Oh there's a big difference spite of what stats you choose to post.up.
Big difference? Not really.
The stats are not of my choosing. They are numbers documented by the NBA.
My only point is that none of them were crippled or past their primes in 2007, as you so clearly implied. Didn't mean to compare them to Miami's big 3, who obviously came together at a younger age and are still in their prime time--that's not a point of dispute.(We will have to see how Miami does in the future--I am curious). Just that the C's were all still great, All-Star level players and not nearly past their best years, as you seem to rthink. The data bear that out.
As to depleting numbers, obviously their stats went down when they joined, but's that's more because of the shared burden(and more even distribution of shots and opportunities). Also, KG played 7 minutes a game less when he joined the Celtics, which was a large factor in his drop in rebounds. Per 48 minutes, his rebounds remained virtually the same. Their change in stats were not solely or even remotely due to a severe decline in talent.
They all played at a high level from 2007-1010. Were it not for KG's season ending injury in 2008(a 62 win season), they might have had the distinct possibility of making 3 consecutive NBA Finals. Certainly not indicative of a Celtics regime in decline or aging to the point of noncompetitiveness. The last 2 years have been representative of their most severe decline(yet they still made the ECF this season), not the first 3 years they were together.
You choose to interpet the data in your own manner, which is fine. That's your right. However, there are different and just as valid, if not more objective, interpretations.