Pitino's influence (was Re: Mercer for Shandon and Quincy Lewis...)

[KK <Kestutis.Kveraga@Dartmouth.EDU>]

Warwick wrote:
 
> For the people that say that Rick Pitino hasn't changed the Boston Celtics for
> the better then I'd challenge anyone to a debate on that. Obviously, the Celtics
> are a lot closer to becoming a contender now than before Pitino arrived.

We've been down this road before, so I'll be brief. Yes, we're better now
than at the end of '96-'97 season, but the question is, how much of it is
due to Pitino. His arrival is heavily confounded with having high draft
picks (#3, 6, 10, and 8), which in the end fetched us Pierce, Mercer,
Potapenko, and, for better or worse, Kenny. The one improvement in personnel
that Pitino clearly should be credited for is the Declercq signing, which
resulted in the Potapenko trade. Anybody could've drafted Pierce, Mercer,
Battie, Billups etc. His remaining personnel moves were hit-or-miss
propositions resulting, IMO, in the net improvement of zero. 
  
Of course, then there's the less-tangible Pitino "aura" which, one might
argue, resulted in an increase in professionalism within the organization
(viz. the improvement of Barros and Minor), and the recovery of credibility
as an organization in the eyes of outsiders.  However, these gains lose some
of their luster when you consider the ill-fated '99 campaign and the
regression of certain players (Walker, Mercer, Anderson). Certainly, there
still was an improvement in this area. But, before ascribing all of it to
Pitino's genius, consider that it would've been nearly impossible for the
Celtics NOT to improve their standing, given that the organization was
deliberately losing games before Pitino's arrival. 

Kestas