Let me just say this: I would absolutely love to see Mr. Iverson wearing Celtic Green. It'd be a festive color,
representing the gift that keeps on giving for the Holiday season.
I've read both sides of
the debate, and I actually listened to some of my co-workers at WMUA argue about the pros and cons on their talk show. Here
are some of the arguments against the Celtics trading for him:
- He's a cancer in the locker room
- Trading away our youth for an older player is destroying the
direction our team is going in, and he's not worth trading away "the future" of our franchise, Al Jefferson.
- He's not worth the players we're offering.
- He couldn't possibly make
Boston a championship contender.
I'll address all of these, as they're common arguments
for those who dislike the trade idea.
Here's Celtics.com's roster listing. Please focus on the number of players with two years of experience or less. NINE OUT OF FIFTEEN. How...HOW, would
trading away 11-year veteran Theo "Why am I here?" Ratliff, Al Jefferson, and maybe somebody like Telfair or Gerald
Green suddenly make Boston an old team? I think people are forgetting that Ryan Gomes, Tony Allen, Rajon Rondo, and Delonte
West would still be around.
As for Iverson being too old: he's no dinosaur folks. He's
gotten better it seems EVERY year. His statistics are amongst the best in the league. He clearly has years left in him. He's
better than players several years younger than him anyway.
About the so-called "unfair trade"
excuse. Let's put some statistics out there. First..Theo Ratliff is NOT the answer for the big man the Celtics have lacked
since the Robert Parrish era. Look at his statistics:
22 minutes per game...3.50 TOTAL REBOUNDS per game....and
a mind boggling 2.5 POINTS per game. To say Theo's underperforming is the understatement of all understatements. Theo's
more past his prime than Iverson may ever be..oh wait...that means we'd be trading a garbage minutes player (no really,
Theo's putting up bench warmer numbers) for an all-star MVP candidate!
Also keep in mind a contract comparison:
According to
ESPN.Com's "Trade Machine", Theo is raking in $11,666,666, with 2 years left on his contract. (remember..2.5 points a game. 3.5 rebounds.) Iverson makes
$17,184,375 with 3 more years on his contract. That's about a
$5, 517, 709 and 1 year contract difference between
a non-factor and an All-Star leading scorer. Please tell me how this trade would hurt the Celtics. If anything, the money
would be in the right place for once. Keep in mind the Celts would be giving away other players, so this money gap would be
MUCH smaller. In terms of dollar signs alone, this trade looks good.
Now let's look at Gerald Green,
another player Boston may give away....12.8 minutes a game...5.7 points per game...1.8 rebounds a game. Yes, he is only 20...but
Iverson was better than this at 20. MUCH...MUCH better. There's no guarantee Gerald will blossom into a leader. It's
all POTENTIAL. Haven't the Celtics had enough of POTENTIAL?
As for Al Jefferson, his stats show he's
the biggest loss if he were to be included in a trade package:
2006-07 Statistics
PPG
10.6
RPG
8.60
APG
0.8
EFF
+ 14.86
the last one is his effectiveness rating according to
Celtics.com...not bad... I like him the most out of the possible people we'd trade for Iverson..but still..he's NOT
Iverson. He does NOT have the intensity, nor the leadership ability that Iverson has. Nor does he have the sheer numbers of
Iverson, as listed below:
2006-07 Statistics
PPG
31.2
RPG
2.70
APG
7.3
EFF
+ 23.40
What a fabulous effectiveness rating. Keep in mind that Iverson essentially plays by himself
on a terrible team with an owner who has made no attempt to develop a good supporting cast like the Celtics would provide
him with. Even with all of this in mind, people forget that Iverson brings intangibles: marketability, leadership, passion.
Sound familiar? Jordan excelled in all three. Iverson is every bit as valuable as the players the Celtics would be trading
for him. Again, there's NO GUARANTEE any of them would ever hold a candle to Iverson's performance level on a nightly
basis anyway.
Now let's move on to Iverson being a "cancer." A cancer???? ("practice?!
we talkin 'bout PRACTICE!!!") Yes, he had a bad attitude about practice a few years back. I'd say he redeemed
himself by playing his little butt off every night for an absolutely horrible team that shows no signs of improvement...I'd
say he proved himself playing for Team USA. I'd definitely say he proves himself by nearly killing himself the way he
recklessly attacks the basket.
I also think that alot of this criticism has to do with his "thug"
persona that people accuse him of having. His tattoos frighten some sportswriters who don't know how to adjust to the
streets meeting the court. I'd say that his body is Iverson's need for self-expression. Iverson NEEDS that toughness
to play the way he does...pounding his tiny 5'11 160 lb frame against the big bodied seven-footers in the lane. What's
wrong with his body reflecting the will that has gotten him this far in life? Has his tattoos ever caused any physical harm?
No? Then who cares? Let his performance speak louder than his ink, because I thought we aren't supposed to focus on skin
so much.
Yes, he has complained before..he's no Kevin Garnett in the sense that Garnett is so loyal to
Minnesota he won't even speak the sad reality of his current situation...but he's REALISTIC when he does complain.
Does his owner make bad decisions? YES. Iverson will say that. Does he complain when coaches try to deal with him through
the media rather than in person? Yes. Sure, he has some flaws...but when he is on that court, he PLAYS HIS HEART OUT. What
Celtic fan would not want a guy like that on the floor?
Look at the way Paul Pierce pouts and occasionally
gives up when his team lets him down. Look at how easily his will can be broken. Iverson does not do that. Iverson can ask
to be traded, but he still plays hard. HOW can we question the value of Iverson when he has all the emotion and passion Pierce
lacks when things get tough? Maybe they'd make the perfect pair! A guard-tandem that goes down in history as one of the
greatest of all time, because maybe Iverson puts Pierce's whiny attitude in check like Jordan kept Rodman at bay. Speaking
of that comparison--I'm willing to bet that Pierce would try and keep Iverson in line in terms of practice discipline.
I'd say Iverson would be more of a cure than a cancer.
And finally...he couldn't make the Celts
a championship contender? Iverson led the Sixers to the finals on his own sheer will before, with a mediocre supporting cast.
He may not be the big man the Celtics have longed for...but he PLAYS LIKE A BIG MAN, and even without him, we still lack that
anyway. Crossing fingers and praying that the youth turn out exactly how Danny Ainge hoped may seem foolish years from now
if a talent like Allen Iverson is skipped over.
I say if the Celtics add Iverson to their roster, they're
an immediate threat to go deep in the playoffs. Doc Rivers may have to do a bit better of a coaching job, though.
And no, I don't think he's going to end up out West. From what i've read, he's refusing anything
that isn't in the East. I think Iverson would be the best Christmas present Boston could ask for.
North Residential Apartments at the University of Massachusetts Amherst
Finally,
Upperclassmen had on-campus living just for themselves. $93 Million was spent on these beauties. Four bedrooms, two bathrooms,
and a kitchen/living room area. UMass Juniors and Seniors should all be thankful that they no longer have to choose between
1970's styles dorms (and the Southwest towers are certainly an eyesore to boot), or party-worn off-campus housing. But
for 6,750 dollars of living costs a year for these, you'd think that there'd be a few less problems.
A lack of cell phone service is one of the biggest issues. I caught onto this almost immediately
when I moved into my dorm in September and saw that I had zero bars of service on my T-Mobile Razr (and I'm supposed to
have full-service in this area). Asking around, it was clear that other students were having the same problem. My roommates
got service, but it's only one bar at most. Once I had called T-Mobile and asked them to boost my service, they told me
that this has been a major issue in the area and that they were trying to work out something with the towers to try to fix
it. Some people had Blackberry phones which were not functional. Oh, and my phone still doesn't get service months later.
Of course, I foolishly did not pursue this as a potential story for a newspaper.
A month later the story pops up in the Massachusetts Daily Collegian. According to several officials on campus, it's a
problem with the structure of the building itself, meaning that this isn't a fixable issue. GREAT!
It's not a major issue for some people, but for others it is. Consider how many students use
their cell phones are their primary source of contacting others. If one doesn't get service, they don't even know
they're being left voice-mail, which could be from potential employers, or even important messages from parents. Can they
use their dorm phones, you ask? For local outgoing or general incoming calls, yes. Everything else, you have to pay for. Phone
cards, long distance programs, etc. So, students have cell phone bills to pay, on top of regular phone charges if they don't
want to go down elevators, or flights of stairs and walk outside every time they need to make a call. Consider also how freezing
it gets during New England Winter seasons...it's not pleasant to have to go outside every time communication needs to
be made by phone, or voice-mail needs to be checked.
My question is: How did
those who built these apartments not consider this major inconvenience? Is this a common problem with student apartments?
After a while, these extra charges to do simple things add up.
There was also
a story in the Collegian about how one of the head workers of the construction project may have expedited the process by leaving
wires exposed, using questionable material, and in general using unethical methods. Could this be a much bigger problem than
we all realize? Perhaps this cell phone issue is the least of student worries who paid something close to out-of-state tuition
(I believe that cost is $26,000)..and I can only imagine how much money an out-of-state student has to pay to live here considering
that UMass financial aid gets worse every year. Let's hope that the cell phone issue can somehow be resolved, and that
more serious issues never arise.
