Sunsfan81

Oh come on. K.C. Jones was better than Eric Snow.

The question is greatest Celtics, not the best individual players the Celtics have ever had. Pierce is clearly a better player than K.C. Jones, but K.C. Jones probably meant more to the franchise than Pierce who has won nothing. If Pierce retires right now I don't think that the Celtics would retire his number, while K.C.'s is retired.

Najee

Essentially, K.C. Jones = the Eric Snow of his day, save that Snow has better overall statistics and Jones is considered the better defender.

That's the thing that kills me regarding "the legendary" K.C. Jones -- he wasn't considered an elite player in his day, and yet he's inducted into the Basketball Hall of Fame and lauded as some all-time great. He is the measuring stick that misguided idiots use for their "Robert Horry for the Hall of Fame" campaign.

Last I looked, Jones didn't lead a team anywhere -- he simply rode the coattails of elite players, such as Bill Russell, Bob Cousy and John Havlicek. Paul Pierce has led the Cs to the playoffs, including the 2002 Eastern Conference finals.

I would expect Jones to win more, considering he metaphorically handed out towels to some of the best players ever. Conversely, you overlook the fact that Pierce "has won nothing" because his best teammate has been Antoine Walker; hell, recycled trash like Kenny Anderson and a too-old Gary Payton have been some of Pierce's more effective running partners!

I would say Jones being the coach of the 1980s Celtics teams that won two titles also played a factor in him getting his number retired in the 1980s. Barring a trade, there is a good chance Pierce will get his jersey retired if he finishes out his career in Celtic green -- if I recall correctly, he's on pace to become Boston's all-time leading scorer.

Sunsfan81

Oh no way. K.C. Jones was a better player than Snow. Better defensively, and he was a better playmaker. Plus the starting PG on 3 championship teams and an important player off the bench in 5, for a total of 8 championships, he is miles ahead of Eric Snow in Hall of Fame worthiness.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Najee That's the thing that kills me regarding "the legendary" K.C. Jones -- he wasn't considered an elite player in his day, and yet he's inducted into the Basketball Hall of Fame and lauded as some all-time great. He is the measuring stick that misguided idiots use for their "Robert Horry for the Hall of Fame" campaign.

Well he was a very good playmaker and a great defender. I don't think he should be in the Hall of Fame either, but he's more deserving than Horry. Horry's biggest contributions were some big shots. K.C. Jones ran the offense of championship teams. His passing and defense were very valuable.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Najee Last I looked, Jones didn't lead a team anywhere -- he simply rode the coattails of elite players, such as Bill Russell, Bob Cousy and John Havlicek. Paul Pierce has led the Cs to the playoffs, including the 2002 Eastern Conference finals.

While of course he benefited from the great teammates he had, he was still an important contributor and a valuable player on those teams.

Najee

In particular, I'm talking about the Philadelphia-era Eric Snow that paired with Allen Iverson at the start of the decade. Look at K.C. Jones' numbers at his peak, particularly his offensive numbers. If you adjusted his numbers for Snow's era, Jones' numbers are very similar with Snow being the better overall shooter.

The fact that you have to go to Snow to find a comparable player to Jones should indicate something. A hall of famer is at the very least an All-Star-quality player in his era, and Jones fell well short of that.

I love how you keep falling back on this "played on championship teams" line, while ignoring that it's a team sport and that the only way K.C. Jones won anything was because he was playing with Bill Russell, Bill Sharman, Bob Cousy, John Havlicek and Sam Jones all those years. Jones is not a hall of fame-worthy player, PERIOD.

You don't become hall of fame-worthy for being a bit player and the only reason Jones is a hall of famer was because a veterans' committee voted him in some 20 years after he retired. Jones was inducted shortly after his run as Celtics coach ended in 1989 as some goodwill gesture -- it's fair to say it was not a coincidence.

OK, so where is Michael Cooper's nomination? Bobby Jones'? Dennis Rodman's? There is no way a sane person can make an argument that Jones is "more deserving" than them. In fact, the only valid knock against Robert Horry vs. K.C. Jones is that Horry is not associated with one team the way K.C. Jones is.

Sunsfan81

I definitely think Rodman should be a Hall of Famer, and will probably get there eventually. Hey with K.C. Jones in the Hall of Fame I wouldn't mind seeing Michael Cooper and Bobby Jones nominated.

Sunsfan81

Well he indeed was a valuable player on many championship teams. I'm just stating it because that's very important to a lot of voters. That's the main reason he got elected. I put some importance on that too, but not as much as many of the voters do because I don't think he's a Hall of Fame worthy player either. However, you seem to put no importance in it at all. But it should have some importance. K.C. Jones in the Hall of Fame can be justified far more than Eric Snow.

Najee

The voters evidently didn't see it that way. K.C. Jones was inducted 22 years after his playing career was over; if he was considered a viable hall of famer as a player he would have been inducted by the traditional voting committee. Instead, he was inducted by the veterans committee one year after he retired as coach of the 1980s Celtics teams.

It is very fair to say Jones did not get inducted solely for his contributions as a player, which seems to be your impression here. It was a combination of being a known player for a multiple championship team, the coach for the Celtics teams that won the 1984 and 1986 and the Washington Bullets team that advanced to the 1975 Finals and an overall good guy that the NBA likes to promote (similar to the considerations Joe Dumars received in his nomination) that got Jones inducted. IMO, there is no coincidence that his induction in 1989 came one year after stepping down as Celtics coach.

I discount Jones the player in the context of this and any discussion of all-time great players because while he was a contributor for those Celtics teams, it was in a minor capacity. Jones never showed any indication that he was more than a spot player and I don't feel he should be recognized for being a marginal player regardless for whom he played. Jones should be recognized rightfully as a part of the Celtics dynasty but he should have been inducted in the Basketball Hall of Fame as a coach or as contributor, not as a player.

Najee

You keep trying to twist the words to rationalize your position. No one is making an argument for Eric Snow for the Basketball Hall of Fame -- the argument is that K.C. Jones was no better a caliber player than Snow, but yet you think Jones is superior because he rode the coattails of the Celtics teams. Being a spot player on championship teams do not make you a "hall-of-fame worthy" player.

I asked some uncles who saw K.C. Jones play in the 1960s, and they agree with the comparison to Snow. They said Jones was basically a bit player. Plus, they said there is nothing to suggest Jones was superior to Snow as a player and they also don't think Jones is superior simply because he had more team success.

Jones could be justified as a hall of famer using a combination of his career as a player, a coach (which, IMO, is what really got him inducted) and overall good citizen of the NBA -- thus he should have been inducted as a contributor; as a player solely, there is no way he should be called a hall of famer.

Sunsfan81

Which he was. He was better both offensively and defensively. He was even a better rebounder. Plus he was better in leadership and other intangibles.

Sunsfan81