Re: OUCH! (long)

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

At 15:42 2/26/00 -0900, you wrote:
>Not sitting on the bench in foul trouble he's not. 

He's never in foul trouble by definition, except perhaps in Pitino's mind.
You can't be in foul trouble if you're only playing 13mpg anyway and are
not a valued member of the regular rotation. 

> Not if he's a got a big
>"You're getting to the line." neon sign flashing over his head.

He does commit some stupid fouls, but I thought he did a good job on Vin
Baker. Besides, it's not as if his frontcourt teammates are the
reincarnation of Bill Russell either - but instead of fouling, they  just
let their guy score because they want to play more than 13 minutes. They,
like every regular viewer of Celtics'  games, have noticed the immutable
pattern of Pitino's substitutions, and they just don't want to pick up that
foul that exceeds the criterion for a particular quarter. 

>You mention "for the minutes he plays" as if it's no big deal. And let me
>tell you what I've always thought was the dirty little secret about
>efficiency on this team. Josh, I think, mentioned it during the week and
>he's right on the money. Kenny Anderson is, by the numbers, a very
>efficient point. However, he's efficient because he's not trying to make
>things happen. And if you tell me you don't want him to force it, this team
>is how many games under .500? Time for someone like the point guard to
>force something. Time for the point guard to take a chance trying to make
>something happen. Given the fact that, on most nights, aside from Walker
>and Pierce nobody else has an NBA offensive game, that is, everybody else
>can be shut down pretty easily, you're going to get turnovers because you
>"need" to force things. 

I agree with you here. I think Kenny's problem is in part that he more
often than not is the better bet to score (especially figuring in the risk
involved in making the pass) than the guy he's passing to. So, he's
reluctant to pass, especially when it's a risky pass, and as a result  he's
not well practiced in risky passes. He did try one last night (to V on a
fast break ) and it got intercepted. Kenny sometimes drives me nuts with
his conservativism, but not as much as, for example, watching Jason
Williams would, were he to play for the Celtics. 

> Let's discuss efficiency on offense. It's laughable
>at this point to watch Griffin with the ball. Do you think anybody is
>worried about him on defense? Is he getting around anybody going to the
>hoop? 
...
> Adrian! Take some responsibility. Make someone care on
>defense. Take a shot...but he can't. 

He's another guy who's perhaps overly disciplined. But if he knows he can't
hit it with any consistency, do you really want him to launch'em? I mean,
lots of players do just fine in this league taking shots from no farther
than 5 feet from the hoop.  

>minutes. Here's a question. Would this team be in a worse position if
>McCarty was suddenly gone? Would they be any worse on the court if Pitino
>had made that trade for Alvin Williams? Would their record be any worse? I
>recognize what McCarty and Fortson give you. I'm just saying that it's not
>enough to make it worth putting them out there. The down side is too great
>and this team already has enough players with big downsides.

Let's not put McCarty and Fortson in one pile, please. McCarty does not
have a single redeeming skill, except for knowing (insofar that's  possible
in principle) the vaunted Pitino Press, which is about as useful as knowing
Kendo is in modern warfare. 
But what, really , is the downside of putting Fortson out there? That he
fouls, or can't defend the Shaqs of the NBA? But who on this team can
without fouling? People like Pot might be somewhat better, but he used to
be, and still is to some degree, a fouling machine too. Others just give up
the layup as often as not. To me, I'd rather make them earn it from the FT
line, frustrate them with hard fouls, than have a dunkorama at our end of
the court.