Kenny and Tony and V, oh my!

[bird <birdwl@earthlink.net>]

I'm intoxicated with wins, and it has a lot to do with the play of Kenny 
Anderson, Tony Battie, and, to a somewhat lesser extent, Potapenko and 
Strickland.

Because, sure, Walker and Pierce are going to have their games (Pierce: 
another 36 points, 6 rebs, assorted blocks, steals, assists; Walker: 
another 19, 9, & 7), but a big reason why the Celts are winning are the 
other guys, and those four I mentioned particularly stand out.

Especially Kenny.  Can you say enough about how he's playing?  I don't 
think so.  Hitting jumpers, making passes, pushing the ball; haven't seen 
a consistent Kenny Anderson of the kind we're seeing now in years.  I'm 
impressed.  If Kenny's going to get 18 and 8 even occasionally, we've got 
a good thing going.  I love how he's eschewed the open three for the 
little step-in.  He's automatic recently.

And I don't think we've seen a more consistently active run from 
Battie ... ever.  Nine rebounds in 23 minutes?  Outstanding.  It seems as 
if Battie is always hanging around for the offensive rebound, or tipping 
the ball, or flying around the court defensively.  He's like a composed 
Walter McCarty with skills.

V's also rebounding better, and the team is gaining confidence in his 
inside game, and that can only help matters.  As for Strickland, he's a 
warrior, always pushing the ball, looking to either lay the ball in, or 
dish it.  Lovely.  And defensively he's solid and hard-working.

I didn't mention EWill, but of course he, too, has contributed.  I still 
don't think he's a great individual defender, and I hate to see him get 
time at the 4, but I am willing to start believing that he directs the 
defense or does some thing or set of things that help this team.  
Versatile, and he always seems to do what the team needs at the time 
whether it be scoring or diving for a loose ball, or what-have-you.  Looks 
like O'Brien isn't so much of a "moron" as some of us thought.  (I never 
thought he was, but the EWill thing clearly escaped me.)

I'd also like to get back to some of the irritants I was experiencing mere 
weeks ago.  For example, the defensive rotation on picks wasn't working 
well at all, but the team has seemed to get it down.  I like how it 
bothers the player with the ball.  I mean, if a team like Utah isn't going 
to exploit this rotation, I think Obie or Dick Harter or whomever, is on 
to something.  I'm starting to become convinced, anyway.  It's a lot less 
gimmicky than it first appeared.  Just goes to show you how much of a 
difference there is between doing something well and not.  I guess that's 
pretty obvious, but the function of this rotation only became clear to me 
after I saw the team implementing it correctly.

As for the UCLA-style high post passing from our centers, well, I still 
don't like it all that much, but I've found that I can accept it quite a 
bit more easily when it isn't Mark Blount, and when T or V aren't trying 
to throw the ball into the paint area.  On the wing the pass looks pretty 
good.  One good thing about it is that you've got the guy least likely to 
score passing off to four guys who can, usually, put it in the hole.  This 
stands to reason (i.e. it seems to fit with Obie's philosophies).

Speaking of Blount, he's terrible.  When he was in for the five minutes he 
played last game, I watched him intently.  For that amount of time, it 
seemed to me that most of the bad things that happened to the C's were a 
direct or indirect result of something Mark Blount either did badly or 
neglected to do at all (like going  for a rebound).  One incident really 
stood out for me: after a missed Jazz free throw, Blount tried to block 
out some Jazz player.  He looked as if he had a good grasp of what you're 
supposed to do (that is, he got in front of the other guy, trying to block 
him out and control an area of the court).  Unfortunately, he allowed this 
Jazz player to ride him until he was fully 100% under the basket, 
therefore giving up the position to the other guy.  It really was pathetic.
   You're a seven-footer; try to keep opposing players from dictating where 
you go on the court.  I don't remember if the Jazz got the rebound on that 
play, but if they didn't, it wasn't because Mark Blount was doing a good 
job.  I thought Blount was in there because Battie and V got into foul 
trouble, but looking at the boxscore today tells me that V only had one 
foul total, so that couldn't be the case.  I hate to see Blount on the 
court for even one minute, so this is obviously something I see as 
detrimental.

As for Milt and his DNP-CD, this has a lot to do with Kenny.  Last year, 
Milt looked good partially as a result of just how useless Kenny was.  
Milt was the anti-Kenny, actually pushing the ball, making jumpshots and 
invigorating the team with defense -- things Kenny was incapable of or 
unwilling to do last year.  This year, Kenny is pushing the ball and 
making jumpers.  When he's doing that, the only reason to put Milt in the 
game is for his defense -- and Erick Strickland is also an option, as well.
   Plus, Kenny's playing some fine D, especially for him.  The strengths of 
Mega Milt, then, are somewhat duplicated by both Kenny and Strickland, and,
  because Kenny is a much better passer and distributer, the rotation at PG 
is the way it is.  The only thing Milt is better at than Kenny or 
Strickland is hitting last-minute shots.  He's still young and 
defensive-minded, though, and will probably still be on an upswing when 
Kenny really is over and done with (in a couple of years?  Longer?  Wow.)

I seem to recall some listmembers advising patience and actually espousing 
that the team could be pretty decent if management allowed players we 
already had to improve their games.  Those people, geniuses one and all, 
seem somewhat prophetic now.  One wonders whether it will be borne out in 
the long run.  I don't think anyone of those prophets would be arrogant 
enough to congratulate themselves in one of their own posts, or to suggest 
that they "told you so", but if they did, they would undoubtedly have more 
of a right than many who do.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm rooting for the Jazz tonight 
at New Jersey, for the obvious reason.  May even put it on the tube and 
cheer Stockton and Malone on.  Let's just hope the Celtics can remain 
consistent throughout the whole season.  They're on pace to win something 
like 54 games: this may too much to hope for (though not to much to shoot 
for, for the team itself), but if the team could win even 50 games, that 
would be freaking amazing.  Just think, not only might the team make the 
playoffs, they may even grab home-court advantage.  Outstanding.  For the 
record, I'd be thrilled to death if they just won one playoff game.  This 
team has a knack for overshooting my expectations this year, though, so 
that would be welcome, as well.

Bird
(The Celtic "Tird")

P.S. If the originator of my soon-to-be-erstwhile parenthetical moniker 
continues to stay away from the list, I will happily retire it.  No doubt 
this fills the bulk of you will either rampant disinterest or complete 
ennui, so I'll say no more of it, if only because I fear to jinx the 
outcome.  (I did attempt to write this last bit in code (read: large words 
he would probably be unable to understand) so as to minimize conflict.  We 
shall see... .)