re: Antoine at SF

[bird <birdwl@earthlink.net>]

>From: Ellie Cutler <ellie@oreilly.com>
>
>I don't even remember the Antoine at SF experiment.  Was it ever given a
>real chance - like over a few months? 

*snort* Not hardly.  I think Poultrino gave it a half-baked effort 
over a few games a couple of years ago.  Since this has been 
something of a bee in my bonnet during the Walker years, I've tried 
to keep an eye on when Antoine has played the three, or guarded the 
opposing SF, or generally just acted like a small forward, as in how 
he is playing now.  It has rarely been in the playbook prior to 
Obie's tenure.  And he's still a PF.

>Was Toine that slow that all the SFs
>in the league ran circles around him?  It doesn't seem to me like he
>defends PFs any better than he would SFs.  Or was it that we never had a
>real PF to put next to him?  It doesn't look like Battie will be back with
>any kind of impact this season, so we can't try him there.

Yeah, I think that's the crux of it: as someone mentioned earlier, 
Antoine is PF by default now, though's playing more like a SF.  That, 
and our best "5" right now (er, maybe best "4" plus PG) includes 
Stith _and_ Pierce, so you've got to play them at SG/SF.  While I'm 
not sure Mark Berry's reasoning is correct (why can't a PF 
revolutionize how his position is played?  Where is it written that a 
PF doesn't take 10-12 three pointers a game?) his conclusion is 
absolutely so: Walker is a SF.  He can maybe be a backup PF, spelling 
Battie and V, but maybe it'd be better to just give him a damn 
position -- and that's gotta be at 3, SF,  Point Forward, whatever. 

He can take smaller 3's "down on the box" (as Tommy keeps saying), 
and shoot over them for the long ball.  Guys his height who are 
"longer", he can deal with better than he can deal with players that 
height and length who are PF's (i.e. bulkier).  On defense, I think 
he plays better perimeter defense than in the paint, where he goes 
for the strip (hey, when it works, and it isn't called a foul, good 
job) or fronts taller players.  I guess the feeling is he'll lose 
those really fast forwards -- Spreewell and the type.  Maybe so. 
Let's at least see how it works.

Because it'll get another rebounder on the team, playing at the power 
forward position.  And we need another rebounder.  The only player 
always under the hoop is the center -- Walker will still get his 6-9 
rebs a game, maybe, and the team'll get more total.

It means re-evaluating the makeup of the team, though: if 
Walker/Pierce are getting 40 mins a games, then there's only about 16 
mins a game _total_ at the wings.  That probably goes to one guy, 
maybe two.  We have six guys who play there now (AG, Carr, Pierce, 
Stith, McCarty [though he's been playing backup center recently], and 
Williams) -- seven if Walker plays there.  We keep two (maybe three?) 
backups, and we've still gotta lose a few ballplayers.  We'd need to 
make room for the 1-2 big men we'd need to establish a good rotation 
of players (and one that puts something away in case of injuries, 
too).  And what if we grab some SG/SF types with a few of the picks 
we have?  Does anyone have a realistic idea that we can get rid of 
EWilliams' contract?

In other words, maybe (maybe, maybe...) next year.  I've been saying 
that since '97, so I don't know how much faith I have that it'll 
happen.  Maybe we pick up a big man or two in the draft/via some 
creative trades, or maybe Moiso developes.  See?  That's what I'm 
talking about: as one poster recently noted, Moiso has yet to show 
that he has even the talent of Waltuh.

Regards,

The Celtic "Tird"

P.S. Still, players have been known to have inept rookie years and 
bounce back the next year.  And, they've been known to be complete 
busts.  I can't help wondering about a healthy Danny Fortson/Tony 
Battie PF rotation.  Aw, just stop it.