Re: One Q after a great victory

[David A Wickerham <aw623@freenet.buffalo.edu>]

While Pitino mentioned the press, his primary comments were aimed at the
way we got back into the game by taking good shots only.  He said that
last year, we would have compounded the problem of the early slump by
taking bad shots (I assume he meant "toine or Pierce hoisting up quick 3's
to try to get us back in the game).  He was saying the Celtics persevered
rather than paniced.  I agree with him.

The first unit did press a bit in the second half, but didn't seem that
successful to me.  Obviously Pitino saw it a little differently, and who
am I to contradict him.


On Thu, 18 Nov 1999, Thomas Murphy wrote:

> Last night was a fun and FANtastic game to watch. Joe is right on, we need
> to put a little swagger in our troops and hopefully last night's victory
> will do just that. I'm looking forward to them stomping all over the media
> darlings from exit 16W on Friday. It was also refreshing to see that
> Pitino's ego didn't prevent him from adjusting his substitution patterns.
> Heinsohn also deserves praise for his comments regarding those substitution
> patterns both earlier in Chicago (I almost fell out of my chair!) and last
> night. Is this possibly the Cooz's influence? ;)
> 
> I think another key was the return to a more reasonable expenditure of
> energy on the part of the players. I've been under the impression ever
> since the Charlotte game that the Cs have been simply too exhausted by the
> end of the game to properly execute or even move on offense due to the toll
> taken by the manic combination of fast-break offense and a trapping,
> pressing defense. I thought that this was evident in the cliffhanger 4th
> quarters against the Bugs, Knicks and terri-Bulls as well as the implosion
> against Detroit. Even though the "first team" does not full court press
> like the "second team" it seemed that the high octane offense in
> combination with constant trapping and occasional pressing was enough to
> wear it out - despite liberal substitutions - by the 4th. I was glad to see
> the return to a more moderate yet still effective defensive scheme against
> the Cavs reminiscent of the first two games of the year and I think that
> more than anything was responsible for the Cs ability to put it into a
> higher gear in the 4th.
> 
> And then I read the following quote in the game summary on ESPN:
> 
> "This is one of my favorite victories as the Celtics coach because we
> really did not play well," Rick Pitino said. "Last year at this time, we
> would have lost this game by 25 or 30. **Our press gave us a big lift in
> the second half** and we executed some outstanding passes in the second
> half. We had to come and play with great tenacity in the second half and we
> did."
> 
> http://www.espn.go.com/nba/2000/991117/recap/clebos.html
> 
> I was under the impression that the Celtics were able to rise to the
> occasion in the 4th quarter precisely because they HAD NOT pressed much at
> all in the second half (other than when McCarty was brutalizing us at the
> end of the 3rd). Am I mistaken? Please, and I don't mean this just
> rhetorically, help me out here and let me know what you guys saw - was it
> the press that got us back in the 2nd half or smart defense coupled with
> better offensive execution (thereby limiting the Cavs break)? 
> 
> Go Celts Go!!  Tom Murphy
> 
> 

-----------------------------------------------------------------
	  Dave Wickerham
	  aw623@freenet.buffalo.edu
	  Saratoga Springs, NY