I'm just curious.

[damekmo@teleport.com]

I have two questions....just curious. When Rick Pitino was hired, should we
have expected him to create a team that would win being very efficient at
both ends of the floor. Specifically...for now, concerning offense...should
we all have expected Rick's Celtics to win taking the same number of shots
as their opponent but shooting a higher percentage? Or is Rick's game
pushing the ball up court, forcing the other team to get back quickly,
taking a quick shot, and winning, not because of shooting percentage, but
because of the number of shots taken. Do Pitino's teams work the clock and
win....ever?

The second question. I suppose we can all agree that Grant Hill is,
perhaps, the best small forward in basketball. If not the best...pretty
close. Tons of talent. Definitely "the man." The team leader. Oh...by the
way...check out the problems on that team on the Sporting News website, but
I digress. Hill's a great player. My question is, is being a great player
the same as being an effective one. Is Grant Hill a great and effective
player because he puts up spectacular numbers and can do it all, or is he a
great but ineffective player because his teams haven't gone anywhere? Is
being the best player on the team the same as being effective? Is putting
up great numbers the same as being effective?

Paul M.