re: My case against Obie and Chris Wallace

[bird <birdwl@earthlink.net>]

This thread (and Mark and Kestas, especially) bring up some good points 
that I'd like to address.

> From: "Berry, Mark S" <berrym@BATTELLE.ORG>

> This is a terrible, terrible rebounding team, and yet every time these 
> two [Obie and Wallace]
> discuss the roster it begins and ends with Walker at PF and "our three
> centers hold their own..."

I wonder how much of this is the fact that they do not have the big men 
to support a "Walker at SF" lineup right now.  Our best players are 
swingman-types, and they need playing time at the 2 and 3.  Playing 
Pierce and Walker at those positions gives the remaining players 
something like 15 minutes per game to divide amongst themselves.  So 
Walker, as has been discussed here previously, is the PF sort of "by 
default".

> You
> might be able to survive with the mediocre centers if you had a stud
> rebounder/defender at PF. You might be able to survive with Antoine at 
> PF if
> you had a stud rebounder/defender at center. But you can't continue to 
> run
> out a lineup of Walker at PF with Vitaly/Battie/Blount at center, get
> outrebounded by the margins the Celts are getting outrebounded (the 
> numbers
> in the last month are startling), and still expect to win.

But in the long run, a studly PF or C is better for this team.  They can 
use some of that "extra" swingman talent to bolster the team after 
acquiring the big man, or even use them in order to get the big man.  
Me, I'd go for the option that calls for Walker to move to the three, 
and just grab whatever big man is best, PF or C, whatever.  The four or 
five guys (Battie, V, Blount, New Big Man, maybe Moiso or another 
acquisition) would have to make an effective 4/5 rotation.  The problem 
as I see it is that you need a quality guy.  The Celts management the 
past few years has been all about acquiring amount, not talent, although 
picking where they did, they got most of the talent they could have.  
I've got a feeling (just a feeling...) that the Celts will have to get a 
guy through free agency or trades because, unless the balls bounce very 
favorably or guys drop, the draft may end up giving us amount, but not 
talent.  But hey, maybe you can move guys after the draft for 1 or 2 
quality guys.   And maybe quality players drop to where we're picking.

> O'Brien seems as stubborn as Pitino in his outright refusal
> to play Antoine at SF alongside another big body at PF. Some might argue
> he'd change his approach if given time in training camp, and maybe 
> that's
> true. But he has given no indication at all that he has even considered 
> such
> a change in philosophy.

Right, back on track, this is about keeping Obie and team.  Well, it'd 
be hard for Obie to change the fundamental part of the team's make-up 
mid-season.  Nor is he under any compulsion to indicate his coaching 
decisions beforehand.  Still, it _is_ more likely that he will continue 
the Pitino _modus operandi_ of playing small; I mean if you stack up how 
he's coached, who he was an assistant under, etc, he's probably going to 
keep Antoine at the 4.

> O'Brien and Wallace are so focused on the here and now
> and making the playoffs, that they can't see the forest for the trees. 
> I see
> them using draft picks and free agent signings to plug holes in an 
> effort to
> get that last playoff spot, but we need someone thinking long-term.

This is true, but what I don't understand is the idea that making the 
playoffs is somehow "settling" or a goal in and of itself.  What do you 
want them to do, focus on winning the championship right now?  Not going 
to happen.  Generally speaking, teams need to set attainable goals, like 
making the playoffs for the first time since the early '90's (is that 
about right?).  I don't think Wallace and Obie are myopic 
forest-observers, not seeing the trees, but I do think they might not 
blaze anymore big, new trails in that forest.  Then again, they might 
suprise.

> From: Kestutis.Kveraga@dartmouth.edu (Kestutis Kveraga)
>
> Mark is absolutely right on with these points. This is my main reason 
> for not
> supporting Obie's return next season as well. He's done a nice job, bu 
> like
> Mark says, has given no indication that he understands the severity of 
> the
> problem. Same for Wallace: he might be a great GM who got overridden by 
> Pitino,
> or he might Pitino's ideological comrade as far as team-building 
> philosophy is
> concerned. We don't know that now, and I'd rather not find out too late 
> that he
> is the latter.

Yup, if the team sticks with Obie/Wallace and they continue on the path 
they are on, the team will be hurt by it, of that I'm pretty sure.  And 
you're right in that's all about "finding out" whether they're going to 
continue the Poultrino way or branch out.  I think it's unfair to 
characterize Obie and giving "no" sign that he's willing to change from 
Pitino's strategy or tactics, though.  He has -- shortening the 
rotation, less wierd substitutions.  He's also kept some of it -- 
playing McCarty, sometimes you see EWilliams playing power forward, 
etc.  You could say that the things he changed are minor, and you'd be 
right, but in the middle of a season, and, up until recently, a 
legitimate playoff run, how much should the guy have tinkered?  The 
off-season, with it's draft and player acquisition, is the time to 
re-evaluate the team and the focus of strategies and tactics that are 
going to help the team win.  One of those might very well be moving 
Walker to the three, and trying a bigger lineup that would force teams 
to match-up with _us_ instead of us trying to play up to them.

The other main thing to consider about Obie's return (this has a lot 
less to do with Wallace) are the player's thoughts.  They might really 
disapprove of Obie being let go.  Yeah, sure, professionals will still 
play and all that, but I think so-called "little things" like the 
"chemistry" of the team, the players' relationships with the coaches and 
all that, are huge.  Then again, if they bring in a guy who the players 
like and can respect, then it's all good.  It's just as much of a 
crapshoot as whether or not Obie is Poultrino II or his own coach, 
though.

> Assuming Gaston doesn't sell, he has to get someone
> to run the basketball operations very soon , or stick with the same 
> crew for
> next year. It's ultimately up to him, and so far his record has been
> disastrous.

And there you have it; it's all up to "Thanks Dad".  Depends who (if 
anyone) else he brings in to "run" the team, and in what capacity.  Does 
anyone really want Rich Pond calling the shots?  *shudder*.  Bottom 
line, if I were in charge, I'd predicate the (re-)hiring of basketball 
people on whether or not they agreed with my basketball sense (or 
convince me of their viewpoint), same way I'd pick Supreme Court 
Justices if I were President.  Why is it that I think that Gaston's main 
concern is money (i.e. winning just enough to turn a healthy profit), 
and not building a dominant team?

Regards,

(The Celtic "Tird",
  Celticus "tirdius")
mailto:celtictird@yahoo.com