RE: [Celtic_Pride] article from Globe

["Berry, Mark S" <berrym@BATTELLE.ORG>]

Toine's a soft power forward. He could be the league's most physical small
forward if they played him there. Brian Grant for Toine? I'd think about it
much harder than you might expect. One thing I've grown to appreciate the
last few years is the value of Brian Grant/Dale Davis/P.J. Brown/Charles
Oakley/Antonio Davis/Horace Grant/Tyrone Hill/Anthony Mason and all the
other hard-nosed, defense-minded, rebounding power forwards in the league.
It's funny how good teams seem to follow them around.

The league's consistent winners don't get posted up effectively on the front
line, and their big men take up space and discourage penetration. Teams
still attack the middle against the Celts because the centers are weak and
Toine is an undersized power forward. They either attack in the post or
penetrate fearlessly because of that hole in the middle. I don't agree that
you need a power forward to guard small forwards to cover for Toine. The
most important thing this team needs is a power forward who can guard power
forwards. If Toine is a step slow getting to a jump-shooting small forward,
I can live with that, as long as he posts up that guy on the other end and
overpowers him in the low post.

If Blount rebounds... if Vitaly rebounds... if Stith and Brown rebound...
Blount and Vitaly just aren't going to be good rebounders, Battie is barely
passable, Stith probably won't be here, and Brown can't stay on the floor...
and he's your backup point guard anyway. Should we really be building our
team with the hope that we get rebounding from our backup point guard?

As far as a dominant center... they could always end up in the top three of
the lottery, but you're right... it's not likely and outside of that, they
won't find a "dominant" center. That's why I mentioned guys like Haywood and
Diop. I don't think anyone expects them to be dominant, but they have the
requisite size/ability combo to handle their position without help and clog
up a lot of traffic in the middle. Zydrunas Ilgauskas isn't dominant, but he
makes a huge difference. Arvydas Sabonis... same thing. David Robinson,
even, at this point in his career. The Celts don't need dominant, but they
do need legitimate.

Could the team use a point guard? Desperately. Could they use a third
scorer? Certainly. But priority No. 1 has to be improving that front line.
That's where games are won and lost in the NBA.

Mark



-----Original Message-----
From: OzerskyJA [mailto:OzerskyJA@cmog.org]
Sent: Monday, March 05, 2001 4:24 PM
To: 'Berry, Mark S'; 'Hironaka'; celtics@igtc.com
Subject: RE: [Celtic_Pride] article from Globe


I don't know, Mark.  Usually I'm with you in these matters, but it seems
to me that Twon has been rebounding to the tune of 10 a game while
shooting from the outside, as well as working downlow so as to pass out of
doubleteams.  I think Twon is our franchise player, for better or worse.  I
don't think he's "soft" at all.  It's not that I wouldn't trade him for an
all-nba power forward, but that's not going to happen.  Who would you rather
have, Twon or Brian Grant?  It seems to me that the Celtics need Pierce to
rebound more aggressively, and Mark Blount to rebound at least as well as
Vitaly.  Get a few rebounds from physical guards like Stith and Randy Brown,
and we'll be OK.  The only way you can play Twon at the three spot is if you
have a super quick four who can cover small forwards on the perimeter, and
then he's not doing the heavy rebounding duty you are after.  

This is all a roundabout way of saying that I believe Pierce and Walker to
be the cornerstones of a championship team.  I don't believe a dominant
center is needed, or any other impossible-to-find component.  Get another
prime-time scorer and/or a true playmaker, get rid of Kenny, get everybody
else playing at the level of Eric Williams and Bryant, and let this team
alone.  I think we can compete against nearly anybody.

And I'll tell you one more thing.  If the Celtics do make the playoffs this
year, they will be an intensely focused and battle-tested group.  What they
are going through now is much harder than a five-game preliminary series.  

Got to beat Milwaukee Wednesday, though.
Josh Ozersky	
Marketing Communications Specialist 
Corning Museum of Glass

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Berry, Mark  S [SMTP:berrym@BATTELLE.ORG]
> Sent:	Monday, March 05, 2001 2:19 PM
> To:	'Hironaka'; Berry, Mark  S; celtics@igtc.com
> Subject:	RE: [Celtic_Pride] article from Globe
> 
> All true enough, Joe. I just believe that 3-pointers almost invariably are
> governed by the law of diminishing returns. The "points per shot" idea is
> deceiving for a few reasons, not the least of which is more bad things
> happen on missed 3-pointers than on missed post-ups (fewer offensive
> rebounds, long rebounds that tend to lead to fast breaks, offensive
> breakdown, players standing and watching...). Toine's 3-point shooting
> should be a strength, but when he displays it so much, to the point of
> virtually forgoing his post/dribble-drive game, it just makes him easier
> to
> defend and less of a threat. If he took three or four 3-pointers a game
> (which still would rank him among the league-leaders in attempts), and
> they
> all were good shots, it stands to reason that his percentage would be
> higher, opponents would respect that threat more, and it would open up his
> overall game more. I think Pierce grasped this last year, when he seemed
> to
> be becoming just a spot-up 3-point shooter. He really diversified his
> attack
> over the summer and this season, and is a much better player and more
> dangerous 3-point shooter. 
> 
> If the Celts would just stick Toine at SF and leave him there a while, we
> might see some changes. He'd overpower almost every small forward in the
> league. The 3-pointers would still be there whenever he wanted them, but
> the
> higher percentage shot would be posting up the smaller man. Look how
> successful Pierce has been doing just that this season. 
> 
> Moving Toine to the SF position would signal a needed change in philosophy
> for the Celts. Teams can win games in the NBA trying to "out-quick" their
> opponents, but the most successful teams over the long haul out-size the
> other guy. The Celts have tried small-ball long enough. Let's start
> pounding
> teams with Toine at SF and work on upgrading the PF and C positions. Maybe
> PF is manned by Battie/Moiso/Vitaly next season... maybe by a banger
> acquired in the draft. I'm hoping the draft produces an Eddy Curry, Yao
> Ming, Brendan Haywood or Dasagna Diop... a center with legit NBA size. I'm
> hoping trades can bring in help at the PF/C spots. We need a point guard,
> but the bigger need is in the frontcourt. The Celts have had sand kicked
> in
> their faces too long. Again, if they don't believe Toine can play SF, then
> trade him this offseason (but I'm tired of the argument that he can't
> defend
> small forwards--is he really doing that well defending power forwards? At
> least at SF, he'd be a matchup nightmare for his opponent). Those are the
> only options. This team will never progress above mediocrity if it's built
> around an undersized, soft power forward.
> 
> Mark
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hironaka [mailto:j.hironaka@unesco.org]
> Sent: Monday, March 05, 2001 1:54 PM
> To: Berry, Mark S; celtics@igtc.com
> Subject: Re: [Celtic_Pride] article from Globe
> 
> 
> "Berry, Mark S" wrote:
> 
> > Me again:
> > Think about that. He's second in the league in attempts, but 44th in
> > percentage. Should someone who is so average from long range be taking
> so
> > many 3-pointers?
> 
> Yeah, I don't disagree totally about those ten treys a game, but Antoine
> is
> shooting .432 (345-804) from 2-point range this season and that figure
> might
> presumably be even lower if he wasnt able to draw big defenders outside
> with
> his
> bombs .371 (149-402). I'm not saying .432 wouldn't also rank him 44th
> among
> forwards in the league, but it well might, and what becomes the argument
> then?
> 
> The short answer is that Antoine is another of many unique player, with an
> individual shortcomings that can't always be treated separately from his
> overall
> package of strengths. Havlicek, for example, though not great at anything
> in
> particular was good at almost everything.
> 
> As noted before, Antoine would need to up his 2-point shooting to over
> .550
> in
> order to match the per-shot-attempt scoring efficiency of his effort to
> date
> from out in Larry Land (since you get 1.5 as many points per field goal
> made
> out
> there).
> 
> Pitino coached it into his game plans all his life, regardless of what he
> says.
> Say you have a wide-open three early in the shot clock, as opposed to a
> contested three later with the clock running down. If  you number crunch
> and
> discover that you statistically hit your wide-open threes at a high enough
> proficiency to make it worth it, then the game plan is bombs away whatever
> the
> shot clock. It is not pretty and it doesn't always look like team
> basketball,
> but there is a logic behind it that I don't disagree with. Why wait until
> the
> shot clock is way down just for appearances sake, if you are open early on
> in
> the clock and have shown you make a high percentage of wide open threes?
> The
> downside, as Mark notes, is sometimes Toine will have a terrible night on
> his
> three attempts, whereas it is relatively rare that you will have 2-10
> nights
> attempting only post-up moves and dunks.
> 
> If we aquired a guy who could be our All Star-caliber inside scorer and
> banger,
> then great, but clearly none of the other prospects have stepped up yet so
> we
> can't blame Antoine for playing a jack-of-all trades role. Tony Battie was
> drafted 3-places ahead of Antoine. Moiso and Fortson came several lottery
> picks
> later. Even Potapenko was a late lottery pick I think. If we had ended up
> with a
> McDyess instead of a Paul Pierce, we probably wouldn't be having this
> conversation about Antoine's game.
> 
> ****
>