Re: Franchise players

["Ronald H. Evans" <ronald_evans@pipeline.com>]

>Date: Mon, 14 Jul 1997 18:00:48 -0400
>To: Jamey Rallis <rallis@vgi.com>
>From: "Ronald H. Evans" <ronald_evans@pipeline.com>
>Subject: Re: Franchise players
>Cc: celtics@igtc.com
>
>At 03:38 PM 7/14/97 -0400, you wrote:
>>One more puzzling question, when did the Celts suddenly become one of the
>>most talented teams in the NBA?  Draft night?  The Travis Knight signing?
>
> 
>       IMO the celtics are about average in terms of talent, but talent
doesn't win games. Talent base does not make the team good(consider the
Bullets or the 76ers), nor does lack of it make a team bad(the cav's last
year). Coaching and a players willingness to play within his abilities are
what really make a good team. The 76ers had Coleman, Iverson and stackhouse
this year. If teams really won according to talent, the 76ers would have
made the playoffs this year. Then look at the bulls, they have three
extremely talented players who play within their abilities(Rodman being the
foremost example) and do what it takes to win. Coaching and players
accepting their roles rather the talent will be the Celtics secret weapon if
they want to win this year. If Pitino can structure the team to hide its
weaknesses(frontcourt) and emphasize its strengths(backcourt), while keeping
the players happy. He may be very successful. 
>
>>I guess Billups and Mercer are already more talented than Mourning, Ewing,
>>Howard, Webber, Garnett, McDyess, Hardaway, Hardaway, Richmond, Hill,
>>Jordan, Pippen, etc.  I seem to recall most NBA teams have at least 3 very
>>solid players already, NBA proven players.  How does adding 2 players that
>>weren't even considered in the league of Duncan suddenly change a team's
>>talent base this much before they've even played a game?  Give them a
>>chance to play first before you set goals for them that they'll be
>>hard-pressed to match.
>
>Following my earlier statements about the relevance of talent in regard to
a teams actual performance, proving oneself is another overrated commodity.
While your statement has merit--both picks could have mental or physical
limitations preventing them from blossoming-- players "proving" themselves
may not be a benchmark for their success. Did Dana Barros prove himself with
his performance on the sixers? Did Derrick Coleman with the nets? Both are
gifted players but neither have had recent success. Experience will have
some influence on whether our picks prove themselves or not, but their
utilization and attitude will have greater bearing on their effectiveness.
>
>Responses welcomed
>
>Noah
>