re: More on Antoine

[bird <birdwl@earthlink.net>]

(Mea culpa if this gets sent to the list twice.)

An excellent post.  A few things:

> From: Alexander Wang <awang@MIT.EDU>
>
> Antoine is an obvious target for the wrath of fans (and pseudo-fans)
> because he is one of the two leaders on this team, he has an ugly game,
> he's obnoxious - the wiggle, complaining to the refs, ill-advised
> statements to the media - plus he makes a lot of money.

Yeah, it *is* ugly, isn't it?  He's got a quick release, which is well and 
good, but it never seems like he's in the correct position when he lets go 
of the ball.  Walker's not a shooter, partly because he doesn't have good 
shooter's form.  Walker's obnoxious court persona can be troublesome 
(complaining to the refs improves the chances that calls won't go your way;
  being thrown out of games) but seems to be necessary component of his 
game.  As he gets older, I'm pretty sure it'll tone itself down (as it 
already has).  The wiggle thing doesn't bother me at all.  The last two 
points are the kinds of things that get completely forgotten once the team 
starts winning games.  One might say that these things prevents the team 
from winning, but I don't think that's the case.

> It seems there are several arguments.
> [...]
> 3. Antoine is a valuable player whose rebounding and assists do matter, 
> and
> whose offensive inefficiency is at least partially a result of the lack of
> talent on the rest of the team. This is something that Paul M. and I
> believe. Personally I think that Antoine does deserve some criticism
> because there are times where he seems to make boneheaded plays evidently
> because he's "feeling it."

Yes.  He certainly does deserve some criticism, as he's in a slump which 
is partially of his own making.  Though a shooter must shoot (and clearly 
Antoine and Obie think of Walker as a _shooter_), shooter that doesn't 
have a mind on his shot selection doesn't help the team.  Who else is the 
team going to rely on for points, though?  Paul Pierce?  Excellant.  Let's 
hope he has a formidable night, though.  Eric Williams?  V?  Tony Battie?  
Yikes.  Joe Johnson?  Now we're talking, but he's a rook and his NBA 
career amounts to a whopping four games.  Kenny Anderson?  Though Kenny 
can have breakout games, I wouldn't want to see him taking a lot of 
contested shots, unless they are a result of his penetration, and there 
are offensive rebounders present.

> Personally I feel that the ultimate
> shortcoming of the current team is not on the offensive end. The problem 
> is
> that a combination of Antoine and Battie/Blount/Potapenko (BBP) at the 4/
> 5
> spots is too weak defensively to compete for a championship.

This is all too true.  I hope that C's management is focusing on the 
method whereby the team will acquire a F/C that can be effective and that 
(more than likely) can replace one of the Troika on the roster, but my 
fear is that they really do think the Troika is sufficient, and are not 
doing so.

> Similarly, Antoine puts up tons of shots and a lot of them are
> bad, but does our offense really get better without him? It's not like he'
> s
> really stealing opportunities from Pierce. I remember the old Pitino
> substitution patterns where Pierce and Walker would both be off the floor
> at the same time, and the rest of the players would pass it around
> hopelessly until the fearless McCarty threw up a shot.

Precisely.  We need one of these two guys on the court at all times, 
otherwise the offense breaks down.  And Walker is getting more minutes per 
game than Pierce right now (41.5 vs. 37.5), thus more shot attempts (100 
to 90).  This seems to indicate that these two guys are exactly the ones 
who need to be taking most of the shots.  In fact, Pierce ought to 
probably take more, since he is the more efficient scorer.  He's been 
having foul trouble and plays positions that are better stocked with this 
roster, though.

> After four games, I just
> don't see the big emergency that requires us to "pull the plug" on Walker.
> Wait a bit, see how the team looks with Joe Johnson developing and coached
> by O'Brien for a full season or at least until it's clear which way the
> season is heading.

No, of course not.  I am pleased with Joe Johnson's progress, but I'd sure 
like to see more of K. Brown and Forte.  The latter was tantalizingly 
useful in the pre-season, and Brown ought to soak up a few of the 
EWilliams/McCarty minutes, at least.  Strickland seems like he might turn 
out to be a good pickup.  Though I have concerns, there's quite a bit more 
to like about the start of this season than not.

Regards,

(The Celtic "Tird")