Re: Kenny vs. Milt

[bird <birdwl@earthlink.net>]

> From: Jamey Rallis <rallis@vgi.com>

> This was covered by many people last season, but I'll remind Alex anyway.
> It's more than numbers.
[...]
> It's not always about numbers, sometimes you actually have to watch the
> game.

Yes, nothing lies like statistics, but the lie normally occurs when too 
much weight is given to them, or they are misunderstood -- statistics are 
just numbers, but quantitative criteria can be quite useful.  Certainly it 
can be a way to mitigate the subjective perception that watching games 
gives you.  (I mean, people have suggested that one needs to be physically 
at the games to actually watch them which isn't really true.  It just 
provides a _different_ (not better) perspective.)  I hardly think, though,
  that you need to "remind" Alex of these things.  Alex (and his numbers, 
which he neither overuses nor misinterprets) have been so persuasive in 
this discussion that he almost has me believing that Kenny Anderson will 
have a productive season next year.  That remains to be seen, but it's 
true that Milt is not an "answer" at point guard until he works on parts 
of his game (outside shot, for starters, which apparently is what  the 
Celtic playing point needs to do, according to the game plan set out by 
the guy whose job it is to do just that (Obie)).

I agree with you when you say Milt pushes the ball up better than any 
guard we had last year, and that the team needs exactly that.  Perhaps the 
problem with even a healthy KA is that he doesn't seem to ever do this.    
Currently, I'm kind of enamored with the idea of JJ and/or Forte getting 
time at PG, though converting players into points never really seems to 
work.  JJ, as has been mentioned, played a lot of point guard until he 
shot up in size, so maybe there is some hope for that to work out.  I've 
even come around to the idea of Walker playing point; but, as has also 
been mentioned, I'd like to see him actually _play_ that position (such 
that we'd have two swingmen and two big men to compliment him at the same 
time).  Let the other team worry about the matchup problems this will 
create.  That's not going to happen, though, in all likelihood, because we'
ve got a glut of swingmen, and they're probably better skilled then our 
big men.  If players can just improve their games over the next two 
seasons (and most of them have taken at least small steps in that 
direction) then the team is at least headed in the right direction.  This 
is better than, say, pining for the days of Pitino just because he managed 
to make every internet trade into a possibility because of his quick 
trigger finger.

It could be a very interesting season, and I'm willing to give strategies 
that seem unconventional, unorthodox or just downright weird a chance.  
Perhaps those strategies will require unconventional roles for players (i.
e. a "terrible half court offensive point guard" like Milt, or a 
three-point bomber of a power forward, or the like).  At least it's a 
matter of designing a game plan based on the type of talent the team has 
instead of the other way around.

(The Celtic "Tird",
  Celticus "tirdius")