Whoa, folks, we're all Celts fans here.

[Chris Littlefield <chrisl@mjr.com>]

Hey, folks,

	I may be way outta line, here, but is it me or are some of us
starting to get a wee bit personal with our posts?  This is not, last I
heard, a forum for personal attacks.  If posters choose to make it so, I do
not have the ability to regulate or judge.  All I can say is that this
list, which has for the most part been entertaining and good-natured in its
content, has taken a recent turn for the nasty.  That I use the following
post as an example is circumstance only.  I have felt similarly about any
number of others.

	It seems to me that this whole "ML sucks v. ML is a genius" thing
has gotten out of hand.  On the one hand you have ML supporters, who set up
what almost amounts to a conspiracy theory where ML designed this whole
dive for the #1 slot.  On the other, ML detractors look at the roster and
the 13-59 record and indicate that ML must be as close to retarded as can
be without being utterly dysfunctional.

	Both of these opinions, stated as such, are _fine_.  You think what
you think.  I can and will argue my feelings on the matter, but I don't
think there's any need for the "Jesus, you're an idiot to think that, you
stupid moron!" types of postings we've seen recently.  Either of the
aforementioned opinions, uttered in the form of a rebuttal laced with
sarcasm and personally insulting undertones, I find to be distasteful.  I
can't stop it, but it's bound to lower the level of enjoyment the majority
of people seem to be taking in this list.  Thus I choose the same forum to
object to it.

	Now my rebuttal to Rick:


> You couldn't find a bigger moron on the planet. I'm sure he is a very
>intelligent guy.. he just can't coach.

Though your first and second sentences are contradictory, I do agree that
ML's not much of a coach.  They just do not play defense.  And given the
kind of defense Detroit's been playing all year with a 6'9" center, I lend
little credence to the "no center, can't play D" theory.

> Now on to Wesley, Williams and Walker. Listen..all of you who think
>those three can  play,...are getting better...could develop into good
>NBA players..
>
>Are they really getting better?. As individual players, I might agree
>they are getting better, but basketball is a team game.? Do you think
>they have improved in their understanding of how to run an offensive set
>during crunch time, or how to play tough switching defense when the game
>is on the line?

I think this goes to coaching.  Eric Williams has improved since last year.
This is particularly encouraging in light of how his season started.  He
seemed to have gotten even with last year in January.  Now he is better,
and seems to be getting more respect from the refs.  He does not seem to be
getting as many touches as he should.  Again, coaching.  Walker?  I think
he may be living on his talent, rather than seeking to improve.  There are
indications otherwise, but...


>I want you all to know that ML Carr had nothing to do with picking those
>guys. Wesley? Like him? Think he'd bring something in a trade? Think
>that Jerry West would rather have him at point instead of Van Exel?

How do you _know_ that ML had nothing to do with the decisions regarding
Wesley, Walker and Williams?  Who did, then?   If you want to imply insider
knowledge, back it up.  Otherwise, leave it out. I have no inside track.  I
rely on the papers and the Net.  But from what I have seen, thought, ML
Carr was always Wes' biggest supporter.  Williams?  Probably a team
decision, but ML's fingerprints were all over it.  He was a projected 2nd
round pick, not 14th.  The trade that brought us Walker?  Hey, from all
I've read, Dallas wanted lottery protection on the pick.  _ML_ stood firm,
and they caved.  Now we may have 2 high lottery picks.

>Your crazier than I thought if you think Wesley is a better player than
>Van Exel.

Frankly, you best check your stats, Mr. Sane.  Statistically, Wesley
dominates in all but one or two categories.  Also, check out ESPN's ratings
of a player's overall contribution to a game.  Wes is significantly ahead
of Nick the Dick.  I would probably take Wesley.  Yeah, he's good on an
awful team, but Van Exel's a smoking bomb, and will never be as good as he
thinks he is.

>I know you think he did...but he didn't. So wake up. Walker? He didn't
>want him.

How do you know this, I repeat?  Who did?  Wake us up. Tell us the real
story.

>Walker was a no brainer? So was Eddie Jones..Opps we got Montross. But
>this pick must of been part of ML's master plan to get Duncan. One other
>thing about the genius..Thank god NJ refused to trade # 1 picks.

Montross was the best player for the C's at the time.  We had no center.
Chief was leaving.  We were, if I recall, already overloaded with 2's
(albeit not good ones).  His rookie year was very good.  He got lost his
sophomore year.  Why?  Coaching.  ML didn't have need for him.  He
foundered.  He sucked in Dallas, but he's been much better since he went to
NJ.  He won't end up being that bad, and being big he brought with him
trade value.  Am I glad we traded him, though?  Yes.  Did we need to bottom
out or suffer the fate of Sacramento/Denver/Dallas/NJ/Washington?  I think
so.  And even if we get the #1 and #2 picks, nothing is assured.  Just
'cause you got some neat pieces does not mean that you are looking at the
C's next championship.  In the 10 years since 1986, the C's last
championship, how many teams have won titles?  4.
Detroit/Lakers/Chicago/Houston.  All those teams had superstars and strong
supporting casts.  And the list of wannabes or just-missed-it's is long.


>No, we can and should rightfully thank ML if we get Duncan..If we do, it
>will be because of his coaching ability. There is not another coach in
>the world who could have done as poorly with this talent as he has done.

I don't know what to think here.  His team likes and respects him, and
there are some very good players, potential future All-Stars, on the team.
However, all developments seem to have taken place on an individual level.
This is not a team, but a group of players.  They are not synergistic.
They do not seem to complement each other very well.

They need unity.
They need balance as a team.
They need to complement each other.
They do not need their 3 best players to be small forwards.
They do not need their future franchise forwards to both need a consistent
outside shot.
They need a shooting guard with height, range, and ball-handling skills
(Derek Anderson, Miles Simon come to mind)
They need size.
They need to learn to play team defense.

These are coaching and personnel issues.

ML has done his best to put the team in a position to address the latter.
Now he has to deal with the former.

Using the 80's C's as a template, you have McHale and Parish, the inside
forces.  You have Bird and Maxwell as the inside-outside duo that free
Parish and McHale to work inside.  You have multiple ball-handlers in Bird,
Ainge, and DJ who can also hit from downtown, further creating space
inside.  Defensively McHale would take the opposition's scorer.  Bird, not
God's gift to individual defense, would freelance and wreak havoc.  Chief
would man the middle, swallow up the intruders.  They were big everywhere,
and in the early 80's, pretty damn quick.  Bird, though, was the glue, the
leader, the driver.  His will drove that team, but not even he could have
done it alone.  A healthy Bird on this year's team would have created, I
have no doubt, 60 wins, and a major problem in the playoffs.  Does anyone
here dispute that?  As a GM, I don't know that he could have the same
effect.  As a coach, he might have the same level of success that Magic
had.  None.

In the 90's, the Bulls have been the template, with aggressive defense,
multiple ballhandlers, great versatility, and the best player on the
planet.  They also had great coaching. This year's Celts have a few of the
pieces, no leadership, and bad coaching, to which can be added the most
player-games lost due to injury in the league.  Give the C's a decent-sized
shooting guard, an interior player the likes of Duncan, and one more
decent-sized player (Van Horn) or a penetrating point guard (Knight), plus
a real coach, and they're on their way.


Bottom line at the end of this somewhat scattershot post?  ML is better off
as a GM than a coach.  And let's be nice.  We'll end up committing
cyber-cide if this level of tension keeps up until May 18.

PS, I thought Miles Simon and Mike Bibby were AWESOME!!!  What a great game!

Chris