RE: Michael Holley finally says it.

["Thomas Murphy" <tfmiii@worldnet.att.net>]

Again, I have to go with Kestutis on these points. 

I really had my doubts about Doc before the season - I really thought it
was going to be another Quinn Buckner (is he still collecting check from
Dallas?). But lets face it - Doc has a talent: he is out-coaching a man
(Pitino) who has done nothing BUT coach his entire adult life.

Larry Brown has proven himself to be an inept GM but he has done his usual
bang-up job as a coach. If we think we have it bad with Twon or Fortson
(the whipping boy of the moment) just imagine trying to coach Iverson.

M. L. left us with some luggage, but the cap cloggers that currently
afflict us are mostly of Pitino's own making. Barros, Ellison and Minor are
NOT the key reasons that this team is currently underachieving (as to
Barros's performance - or lack thereof - the coach does have alternatives).

-TomM

> ------------------------------
> 
> Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2000 21:00:50 -0500
> From: Kestas <Kestutis.Kveraga@Dartmouth.EDU>
> Subject: RE: Michael Holley finally says it. 
> 
> At 14:55 2/11/00 -0500, you wrote:
> 
> > You can't
> >be serious that you would rather have Doc Rivers over Pitino. You must
have
> >just needed another argument to add to your post. 
> 
> No, I'm completely serious. I didn't expect Doc to able to coach, but he
> has impressed. If Pitino  had been in his situation with that crew, we'd
be
> drowning in excuses now (not that we aren't already).  I don't think
you'll
> argue that Orlando has more talent than we do, yet they are above us in
the
> standings and playing very nice basketball with that mixture of CBAers,
> late picks, and little-known FA signees. 
> 
> > Larry Brown has done
> >nothing in Philly with much more talent than Pitino including the games
> >leading scorer.
> 
> Well, he got them to play defense and got them to conference semifinals -
> something that Ricky hasn't, and most likely won't, accomplish. As for
the
> talent comparison, I'm not so sure Philly has "much more" talent. Sure,
> their bench is deeper, but if you compare the starting lineups, we match
up
> quite well. Kenny is better than Snow, Walker is better than Hill, Lynch
> and Griffin about the same (Adrian has slid a little since the injury),
> Ratliff is significantly better than Pot in only one category - blocks,
> and, while Iverson scores more points and hands out more (4.6 to 3)
assists
> than Pierce, he trails Paul in every other statistical category. Their
> 1-through-9 lineup is better, but, IMO, not so much better  that it
> accounts for all the difference  in achievements. They've had quite a few
> injuries, too. 
> 
> >Maybe he took on a bigger contract, but he got someone usefull to the
team.
> >If you have to have a contract for a guy, it might as well be a guy you
can
> >play. Dee was a  useless complainer who did nothing but ruin chemistry.
> 
> That's why I said I'm not complaining about the trade, and I supported it
> when it happened. But the fact remains that he didn't free up cap space
in
> that trade - quite the opposite. 
> 
> >Every team might have a guy or two who doesn't perform, but I don't
think
> >anyone was stuck with as many of these guys as the celtics. Thanks M.L.
I
> >would like to be stuck with Portlands "deadbeats". Their 11th guy is
Stacey
> >Augman.
> 
> I think the Blazers are a testament to what an astute GM can do for a
team.
> Sure, they're owned by multibillionaire Allen, but if you look at their
> roster, only the big guns are paid a significant amount (by NBA
standards).
> The biggest contract for a non-contributor is $1M/yr. (Gary Grant signed
at
> $2M for 2 years). Schrempf, still a solid if limited-minutes contributor,
> is getting $2M per, and Augmon is signed for the minimum. They've done a
> fabulous job rebuilding from the early 90s championship-contender teams
of
> Drexler, Porter and Ducky.
> 
> We can blast M.L. for all of the Celtics' problems - he's an easy target,
a
> lightning rod if you will. Saying anything good about M.L. is like
> supporting John Rocker, voting for David Duke, or thinking that Haider is
> the greatest Austrian since Hitler.  But  M.L.  did pull off the most
> brilliant trade of the 90s - BWS Montross for the picks that became
Antoine
> and Mercer. And I think he too, like Pitino,  was saddled with problems
not
> of his making - some of the bad decisions made by Gavitt and Volk.
> Ultimately, it all comes back to the ownership for not hiring the right
> people to do the job, and not knowing whom to open the wallet for and
whom
> not to.