Re: Pacers game

[Josh Ozersky <josh_ozersky@yahoo.com>]

It's always nice to read Joe's posts.  So lucid and engaging.  I
suspect that, even if the team has its heads on straight, that we
probably won't be able to get back to .500 until mid April, but then
we should make some hay.  It's hard to put together five wins in a
row.  (I certainly hope one comes on april 2 v. the bucks, since I am
coming for my first visit to the fleet center.)

RE Potapenko.  It's amazing how much stupid shit I have read about
this guy.  He's a great find, because he is a great cop/bruiser, which
we have needed, and he has real low-post scoring ability with his
EuroMcHale moves.  You know what Peter May said?  He said VP was
"really a power forward" because he was 6 10.  Can you imagine how
dumb people are?  "7 feet- center.  6' 10" - power forward."  Stupid
in the first place because two inches don't matter over the long run,
stupid in the second place because the only place they DO matter is in
arm length, not forehead length; and very stupid, in the third place,
because one look at Potapenko and it is obvious that he was born to
man the paint.  People are suckered by shot-blocking (witness Stewart,
the guy from the sonics, Ratliff et al.).  Center play is all about
leverage, position, and angles.  As for boxing out, it's an end in
itself, but I do think under Pitino VP can become a 10 rpg a game man,
if he can just hold on to the ball.  It's important not to overcoach a
guy like that.  You don't want to get him thinking too much, or trying
to do things he can't.  

May is dead wrong, of course, but it is interesting to think of a
starting five with Battie, VP, Toine, Pierce, and Kenny, with Ron
Mercer anchoring the press team.  I would love to see that. 





---Joe Hironaka  wrote:
>
> Alex Wang wrote:
> 
> > >Potapenko turned the ball over five times but was generally
> > >effective. (Compare him to Riley, five fouls in five minutes.)
> > >He had some nice putbacks and a nice drive and dish to Walker.
> > >His timing on defensive rebounds looks like it needs work
> > >though.
> 
> Good point from Zhi Zhi.  My take on "Battleship Potapenko" is that
he was
> consistently leaning back to clear his guy from the paint, rather
than actively
> chasing the caroms. From the limited amount I know about playing the
actual game,
> textbook boxing out and getting lots of boards are actually kind of
antithetical,
> no matter what your coaches always claim (I guess Potapenko is a
classic
> "sucker"). That is to say, when you box out well it's often your
teammate that
> gets the boards and the glory. This is because it's hard IMHO to
effectively shift
> from pushing backwards on your man (who's usually latched physically
to you) and
> leaping forward or laterally to claim a board that doesn't happen to
fall in your
> lap (i.e. most boards). The great rebounders obviously have great
instincts for
> where the caroms will go, and do not necessarily stay right where
they are to
> focus on boxing out. You see such guys start to roam on each shot's
release (this
> is true BTW not just with 'Toine).
> 
> Actually I thought Vitaly was closing in on double figure rebounds
in the first
> half alone, although the boxscore proved otherwise. I guess I'm
"making a short
> story long", but my point is that Vitaly is a guy who helped his
team plenty
> against Indy even if it didn't show up in his stats or in Smits'
numbers (thanks
> to a monster fourth quarter mostly against Riley). Vitaly left a lot
of clear
> paint in front of him, which isn't easy against such an athletic
frontline. I saw
> him working for it and earning it, and hope he keeps this up.  I'll
admit he does
> seem a good 5 inches shorter than Smits, though. Head to head,
"Potapenko vs.
> Smits" looked like a baby pit bull vs. a collie. I can't think of a
better
> analogy.
> 
> BTW, I'm usually the type of armchair GM that judges NBA players by
their "actual"
> productivity, based on looking at NBA.COM stats (that's probably why
I kept on
> defending "Chiquita Boy" against all you meanies). So I credit
Ozersky, Zhi Zhi
> Wang, MG and all you others for seeing more in Vitaly's game then is
apparent at
> all from boxscores. From what I saw over the weekend, Vitaly really
is some kind
> of Rabid Dog (maybe this has something to do with Chernobyl?).  He
is uncommonly
> mean and strong for a well-coordinated EBWB (euro big white boy). I
didn't see a
> 15-foot jumpshot in his arsenal, however, which is something every
EBWB normally
> seems to have. If he actually has one hidden somewhere, I think
he'll one day
> develop into a more likeable, non-whiny version of Bill Laimbeer (in
other words,
> a championship center).
> 
> Although the (pseudo) national TV win against Indy would have been a
great launch
> pad for a 6-game winning streak, I think it can still plausibly
happen. If Paul
> "Is anyone home?" Pierce gets his game together (let us pray), we
ought to be back
> at .500 to start our stretch run in April. More importantly, I'd say
we now have
> five useful lottery picks that are 24-or-under (Ron, Toine, Paul,
Train, Tony),
> and we don't need another diaper brat.
> 
> Personally, I think we intentionally suckered Cleveland by our play
last week into
> thinking we have one more lottery year in us. :-)  If it makes you
feel any
> better, recall that every time our Celts have moved a lottery pick,
it usually led
> to nice things. Think of Samaki Walker in 1996 (for Antoine Walker)
or Joe Barry
> Carroll and another total loser at #13 in 1980 (for Kevin McHale and
Robert
> Parish).
> 
> BTW, I feel bad for all you folks who were forced to watch Stephon
"71 million is
> a Diss" Marbury on NBC, instead of the Celtics-Indiana game. No
question, you guys
> all deserve better. I'm just finally catching up on reading the last
week's worth
> of the list digest, and saw some terrific posts as usual from the
usual suspects.
> 
> Let's just start with a solid win (or any kind of win) against the
talented but
> bumbling LA Slippers.
> 
> Joe
> 
> P.S. On the subject of the Timberpoodles, I hope they continue to
have a great
> year. For me, early evidence that the lepprechaun is back is 1) Paul
Pierce at
> #10, and 2) McHale's team rewarded with a great start despite giving
up Goog for
> absolutely nothing, merely to hurt the LA Fakers (who begged them to
take Eddie
> Jones and more, via a sign and trade). It's a shame the T-Poodles
lost Goog, but
> I'm very glad McHale dumped Marbury and got talent in return. Kevin
McHale has a
> tough job in Minnie, but he's bound to do fine. If there is any
justice in the
> world, he will continue to attract more talent through his
integrity, passion and
> enduring "Celtic Pride".
> 
> ***
> 
> 
> 
> 

_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com