was: A lighter Antoine

["j.hironaka" <j.hironaka@unesco.org>]

	This isn't a totally bullet-proof example, but a lot of teams in the past 
have won with a fifth starter of questionable talent (Kurt Rambis or Mark 
Iavaroni come to mind) provided they had bigtime versatile scorers 
throughout the starting lineup plus an outstanding, instant offense or 
instant defense 35 mpg sixth man (say maybe a Kedric down the road, or the 
Havlicekian Joe Johnson). I'm not talking about next season, obviously.

	But when I mention Rambis and Iavaroni, I think you all know where I'm 
getting at. Potapenko doesn't need to start like those guys did (although 
they actually only played maybe 15-20 minutes anyway). But he could at 
least be part of a bruiser lineup option when Antoine moves to the point. 
In other words, our most consistent shot blocker (either Blount or Battie) 
needs to stay at center with Vitaly at PF. That's a lineup that can be 
successful if the hustle and teamwork is there, IMO. Then you pick up two 
others from a deep group (Paul Pierce, Joe Johnson, Kenny, Forte, Kedrick 
Brown, Milt...) in order to guard any water-bug point guards that might 
stay in the game while also filling the second and third scorer/playmaker 
role. There are other lineups that I'd love to see with our new team, but 
that's at least one option.

	To me, "Antoine at point guard" probably just amounts to "anyone who gets 
the defensive rebound can go take it end-to-end to make a play." There will 
be no traditional hand-off at the foul-line-extended to your point guard. 
Joe Johnson can take the rebound and run, Joe Forte can (if he's worked 
this summer on what he's supposed to), Kedrick can rush out to fill lanes 
and move around for long jumpers (if he can adjust quicker to the pro game).

	Some of our new young players have an inherent ability to pass the ball 
around (not all of the top 9 picks can boast that) as well as having good 
shooting eyes. None of the rookies come with a mediocre reputation on 
defense either, although this is a whole new ball game.

	Anyway, big picture is that I hope Harter and Obiewon adjust to matchups 
better than their predecessor. There will be times when Potapenko, Battie, 
Walker on the court just makes sense (and times when it won't). But chances 
are you'll never see that lineup even in a training camp experiment (just 
as you never saw Fortson paired with both Antoine and a center).

	In the brief time before his season-ending injury, Fortson was averaging 
something like 15 boards and 18 points for Dave Cowens (on limited 
touches). Outside of the twilight zone Pitino context, I can't fathom how a 
player with that level of (efficient) production could possibly be written 
off as an overall liability.

	I bet Fortson (or Potapenko) could have beaten Paul Silas (circa 1976) in 
any foot race. I bet they could beat Oakley right now. Sorry, this post is 
turning into a major non sequitar.

	My original point I think is that the Celtics may have --or at least with 
patience may eventually have--enough scoring power, passing ability and 
perimeter defense athleticism and size to "get away with" a traditional 
Fortson-Battie or Potapenko-Battie type PF-C lineup in games. I think the 
players with the passing-scoring-shooting skills are there, so it really 
all boils down to team chemistry.

	I'd love to add a quality power rebounder and post defender, but here's my 
point. By drafting the best players available (in their judgement it was 
guard-forwards), Boston is at least in a better position to trade for the 
missing piece down the road. But first we need to see what we've actually 
got here now. It could be a pretty schizophrenic year.

	That's just as well, because I'm not completely sold that ownership, the 
coach or management are part of the longterm solution. But some of the 
players might be (at least I hope so).

Joe


***