Re: Magic game

[Kestutis.Kveraga@dartmouth.edu (Kestutis Kveraga)]

--- You wrote:
There's clearly execution issues and the coach
isn't doing the best job he could. But would the personnel he used last
year make up a good defensive team if he just switched systems? I don't
believe that at all. I look at the front line that we were considering:
Potapenko, Fortson, Walker. And check off: Length: no. Athleticism: no.
Shotblocking: no. Experience: no. I don't care if you let them play
man-to-man or headless chicken, they're going to be terrible. 

So is the system beyond criticism? No. Do I think it's the "gimmick" that's
holding back our players from being a good defensive team? No. 
--- end of quote ---

You've distilled the issue very nicely here. Still, I think we have a better shot playing a man-to-man defense (and double-teaming only when absolutely necessary), rather than "headless chicken".  The reason I say that is that, IMO, even physically average defenders can play pretty good man-to-man defense when motivated. Sure, it helps if you have the physical abilities of a Bo Outlaw or Theo Ratliff, but the difference is not that great, because man-to-man defense is mostly being motivated to work hard on D (and that's Pitino's specialty, no?). Whereas if a complicated defensive scheme is not executed to perfection (which it rarely if ever seems to be in our case), it's a complete breakdown. 
With Brown, Griffin, Stith, even Herren and Pierce, we could have good conventional defense on the perimeter. The problem is the interior defense - some people can do some things well (Pot push people around, Battie and Moiso block shots), but no Celtic big man has the complete defensive package. Blount may become that player, but he needs to figure out what's allowed in the NBA, and generally get his feet wet. 
Kestas