Re: Bulpett on Walker and Pitino

[bird <birdw@teleport.com>]

>From: "Thomas Murphy" <tfmiii@worldnet.att.net>

Hi Tom.  While I can't go along with a lot of your opinions or ideas 
that stem from your assumptions or major points, I have to say I 
think you're right on with a lot of those points.  Let me pick out a 
few to talk about:

>It is funny how some people want to place all the blame for the Pitino
>fiasco on either the players (as is no other team in the leagues has to deal
>with similarly situated players) or his skills as a GM.

Funny as in "ha ha" or funny as in "damn, that's strange"?  Either 
way, there is a lot of "all or nothing" reasoning going on in the 
papers and the internet (and barrooms and the like as well, 
probably), and I don't understand that either.  I'm pretty sure _no 
one_ really could pin down any _one_ reason for Pitino's failure with 
the C's.  Not suprisingly, it was probably a combination of many 
things.

>I'd like to point out that Pitino has several flaws that led him to
>being THE most inflexible, obstinate 'coach' I have ever seen. Ironically
>each of the flaws is something that Pitino himself attributes to the young
>people he coaches:

Good point.  His inflexibility is probably his major flaw.  (Lot's of 
other coaches are inflexible, too, though: witness Dunleavy's whole 
veneration of the "matchup ideal" -- what a joke that is.)  Many of 
the others things people point to as flaws don't matter much to me at 
all ("He said one thing and did another!" and the like, for example). 
Though Josh has pointed out that Pitino did attempt a more half-court 
style of defense with Fortson and Potapenko, I think that that effort 
was really half-hearted and perhaps even unconsciously set up to 
fail.  That's some serious speculation, though, and who knows what 
goes in the mind of Rick Pitino?  Many people think they do, but they 
are mistaken.

>Pitino was (and still is) EGOTISTICAL to a fault ...
>
>Pitino was (and is) SELFISH ...

These are the kinds of things I'm not really sure about in your 
argument.  They may be true, but I'm just not convinced.  Doesn't 
really matter anyway.  I guess it's too early to expect, but I sure 
hope we're done talking about Rick Pitino in the weeks to come. 
Maybe he'll even attain the current status of More Losses Carr, who, 
under a new revisionist reading is not the tanker of seasons, but a 
"good coach" or someone who is sorely missed.  Of course, Pitino will 
never achieve that sort of status, mostly, I think, because he never 
played for the Celtics.  He'll probably always be vilified.  Never 
can tell with revisionists, though.

>Rick's arrogance is why some
>people are so gleeful now that his failure has been sealed

Pitino's arrogance may play a role, but let's be fair, much of the 
reason behind the glee is that media-types in Boston eat their 
players and coaches for breakfast, lunch and dinner.  I've lived in 
an NBA city, and through the magic of the internet and the League 
Pass, one can get a decent sampling of what other media-types in 
other NBA cities are saying about their team.  Few, with a number of 
exceptions, like New York, are as vehement or strident or shrill in 
their criticism.  Of course, some are merely shills for their 
employers, as with the Blazer TV play-by-play guy.  Neither is 
desirable, imo.

>I say good riddance to the egotistical sh!thead who never had the patience
>or time of day for the opinions or feelings of 'losers' - welcome to the
>'fellowship of the miserable'. It is human to fail - the true mark of a
>superior person is how they face up to adversity.

This is also another point in which your argument breaks downs, imo. 
Pitino didn't say much that was incisive or very clever, but his 
"fellowship of the miserable" tag to those cretins who call in to 
radio talk shows was right on the mark, as far as I see.  They are 
miserable, and they do form a sort of "acid-hearts club" kind of 
fellowship.  I'm no fan of Rick Pitino (though people try to make me 
into one), but I'll give him credit where I think he deserves it. 
And this is one of those times.

>He leaves this team in a worse situation than he found it both on the court
>and in business terms. And please, do not wave those three draft picks in my
>face.

Ok, I won't, but the team has more talent now than when he started. 
Walter McCarty used to start.  As Ray might say, that's all you need 
to know.  If you want to get more in-depth, I'd offer the 
acquisitions of Herren and Stith, and even Tony Battie, who, if he 
can continue to improve, might be a good pickup in the long run.  He 
took a really pathetic 15-win team and turned them into a 
consistently mediocre 30-win team.  That's improvement.  Not as much 
as was called for, but to deny that it is improvement is just not 
mathematically correct.  Did Pitino make blunders as a GM?  You bet. 
Did he do some good things?  Yes, thought pitifully few people are 
willing to admit that.  Many who don't are doing that same thing they 
resent Pitino for, or accuse him of doing.  It's all a bit laughable, 
really.

>[Pitino], with his pious flim-flam cant (worthy of a mountebank)
>about leaving for the 'good of the team' and 'positioning the team for the
>future'.

Like everyone else in the NBA are honest, salt-of-the-earth types who 
never seek to misdirect or use these sorts of con man techniques when 
they think it'll benefit them.  Rick Pitino is not an aberration. 
Unique, maybe, but not in this way, I don't think.

Regards,

Bill, Celtic "Tird"