Re: Good Housekeeping Award ?

[Adam A Suchocki <Twilight@world.std.com>]

Mark me down as someone not in favor of a house cleaning.  The examples
being thrown around as teams doing the right thing by firing coaches and
GM's (Philly, Denver) have been doing that every year.  Both teams are
totally disorganized and have very bad chemistry, and this has to be in
part due to the constantly changing management.  Players don't know who to
listen to, 'cause the coach or GM might be gone next year, and a strange
collection of players is achieved as each year new management comes in
with a new plan and a new list of players they want.  You get teams like
Philly that have most of their players playing out of position because the
new management wasn't able to move the players they didn't want , but they
went ahead and aquired new ones anyway.
 
You can knock Carr for being to optimistic at times, and you can knock him
for the Barros deal, but other than that, he has done more than anyone in
the Boston media thought was possible for this team.

Two years ago, everyone in the Boston media (and nationally - see peter
vescey) proclaimed the Celtics as the franchise with the worst future in
the league.  Despite some salary cap problems, ML has done something in
two years that all said was impossible - he rebuilt the team with a
nucleus of young talented players.  Walker, Williams, Wessley, Minor + 2
lottery picks is a very good nucleus after two years.  Ad to that veteran
leadership in Fox, Radja, and maybe Barros or Conlon, and the team appears
to have a good balance to talent and experience to steadily improve over
the next few years.  The bootom line is, for the first time in several
years, it looks like the team should stedily improve each year instead of
slowly decline.
 
Could there be beter management available than ML and company? Possibly.
But can we get someone in who won't tear apart the good moves in search of
the type of nucleus they'd like to work with (we don't need Nellie or
Larry Brown coming in and trading away are best assets because they don't
fit their style or play - if the team was contending right now, I'd say
sure, juggle the pieces and find the right combination for your coaching
style - like Riley did in Miami - but first you need to let your
foundation stabalize.  Give the 3 W's more time to work together, and use
the draft picks to fill in the gaps (throw in Duncan and Foyle and things
start looking pretty nice).  But you don't want the players constantly at
odds with management.  The key players all like ML, and they seem to
respect him.  Over the enxt couple of years, a little respect between the
players and the management can make the free agency market a lot less
painless, and it can help to keep the young players focussed on
improvement instead of wondering where they are going to play next year
and trying to figure out who in management they should listen to.  

The Celtics have achieved a lot with hard work and good decision making in
the past, but they also have done very well with loyalty to management and
players.  A lot of their free agent moves have revovled around players
wanting to come to Boston - Bill Walton for example.  The team needs to
maintain that loyalty so hey can continue to attract players like Vin
BAker who long for the Celtic Mystique.

Anyway, aslong as ML hasn't done anything to hurt the franchise, and as
long as he continues to move the team forward in the rebuilding process, I
have trouble seeing anyone new who could come in and not set the
rebuilding process back a few years.  With the 3 year rookie contracts,
you need stability right from the start, and right now the 3 W's an Fox
seem content with ML.  If the team doesn't improve over the next year and
a half, then I say dump ML, otherwise, let him and the team continue to
develop together.

Adam