RE: A Win?

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

True enough, Cecil, but that's only a small part of it. The Nets are fun to
watch. They love playing with Jason Kidd. Love it. They run and know they'll
get the ball. They come off screens hard, knowing the ball will hit them in
the chest and lead to a good shot. Kidd is unbelievable. He can't shoot at
all-well under 40 percent for the season-but he's always the best player on
the floor. He dominates games. Do you think the rest of the Celtics really
enjoy playing with Pierce or Walker? They may like them as friends, but do
they really enjoy playing with them? I doubt it.

As for MacCullough... I shouldn't get started, but here goes... Part of
having a decent center is actually giving the guy the ball and doing so
where he can do something with it. Kidd does that with MacCullough.
Perimeter players around the league have either never learned or forgotten
how to play with decent big men. I hate to use the 1980s Celtics as an
example, but look at the way they used Parish. On a team with Bird and
McHale, it was Parish who almost always was given the first opportunity
offensively in the game. They wanted to establish his presence early and
play off of that the rest of the game. Plus, it got Parish involved quickly
and kept him involved. Teams just don't do that anymore. Players and coaches
just seem to have lost the understanding for how to utilize big men (not
Shaq or Duncan types, but MacCullough, Ratliff, Mohammed, Campbell types).

Now, the Celtics don't have anyone even in this second (or third) tier of
big men, but they still make no effort to get them involved early. None.
It's Pierce or Walker from beginning to end. Then they complain when they
don't have a third option. Who has a chance? Jersey is getting the max out
of MacCullough. He's not great, but they're using him as well as he can be
used and getting as much out of him as is possible. Do you feel the Celtics
get the most out of any of their players? Outside of Pierce and Walker, is
there even an argument about maximizing any of the players on the roster?
Palacio is probably as close as they come. But that's not too encouraging
when at least nine guys on your roster aren't being utilized to the best of
their abilities.

Mark 



 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Cecil Wright [mailto:cecil@hfx.eastlink.ca] 
Sent:	Thursday, November 29, 2001 2:42 PM
To:	Berry, Mark  S; Kestutis.Kveraga@dartmouth.edu; celtics@igtc.com;
celticsstuffgroup@yahoogroups.com
Subject:	Re: A Win?

Hi Mark,

While I do not want to undervalue the presence of Kidd to the Nets, there is
more to their early resurgence than that.

1. Kenyon Martin is healthy when he was not last year.
2. Van Horn is healthy when he was not last year.
3. Kittles is healthy when he was not last year.
4. They have a young center, though not great, is consistent, as well as
being Canadian :-)

I am not disputing that Kidd is a great player who can make his teammates
better.  Just that there are other factors which have played a role in their
prominence thus far.

Cecil





----- Original Message -----
From: "Berry, Mark S" <berrym@BATTELLE.ORG>
To: <Kestutis.Kveraga@dartmouth.edu>; <celtics@igtc.com>;
<celticsstuffgroup@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 5:58 AM
Subject: Re: A Win?


> Exactly Kestas! This is it exactly. It's called trusting your teammates. I
> hate to keep using the same example, but it's funny how all those lousy
> players in New Jersey suddenly pulled their games together at the same
time
> Jason Kidd arrived.
>
> It's amazing what happens when a team is passing. Guys start running and
> cutting and doing all the things the Celtics aren't. Why should they?
> They're not going to get the ball. I'd even take the extreme... Jason
> Williams. Remember the effect he had on Sacramento when he arrived? He was
> wild and uncontrolled, and his passes sometimes ended up in the second
deck,
> but he made passing fun and cool. Suddenly Webber and Divac were whipping
> behind-the-back and no-look passes. The team was running because they knew
> Williams would get them the ball or knock out a kid in the front row while
> trying.
>
> I'm tired of the argument that selfish, one-on-one basketball from Pierce
> and Walker is the only way for this team to win. If that's true, it would
be
> the first time in the history of basketball that good, unselfish, team
play
> didn't improve the performance of a collection of players. The Celtics
were
> what they were because of a history of playing unselfish, team basketball.
> They had great players, but they also had players who played the game the
> right way, and that made them better. These Celtics don't. Is it the
system,
> the coach, the players? I don't know, but we're on our second coach now
and
> I think we can see which way things are going. And don't tell me it's
> today's NBA or anything like that. I don't buy it. If these players won't
> play team-first basketball, get rid of them and find some who will.
They're
> out there, in places like Philly, San Antonio, Utah, Sacramento, Minnesota
> and Indiana. If they're in Boston, it's time for them to show themselves.
>
> Mark
>
> P.S. I know the Celtics' supporting cast isn't great, but right now we're
> putting them in the absolute worst position they can be in. We're not
giving
> them a chance to succeed. If the ball was moving, players were running and
> cutting and finding the open man, we'd all be amazed at how their
> performance would change. Is Tony Battie a good post-up player? No, but
he's
> fast and has pretty good hands. Shouldn't the Celts try to get him
involved
> running the floor and cutting to the basket off of penetration? Don't
> Kedrick Brown and JJ seem like players who would make good finishers on
the
> break or on slashes to the basket? Why ask them to spot up outside the
> 3-point line and wait for a pass only when Pierce or Walker are shut down?
> Try to put them in the best possible position for success. If the "stars"
> won't play along, find different stars. Believe me, these guys aren't
> irreplaceable. When we get someone who is, we'll know it.
>
> --- --- ---
>
> It works both ways, you know. If you don't give people the ball, they
> become tentative, make more mistakes on offense, and shoot a lower
> percentage. They can't be thinking that if they miss their first shot,
they
> won't see the ball again. I still think they should at least TRY to get
> other people involved by getting them shots in their favorite spots early.
> You can't tell me Pot isn't gonna make a 12-15 jumper reliably, given the
> opportunity. Or that Battie isn't going to score a few baskets if given
the
> ball around the hoop.
> Now, if you post them above the 3-point line and expect them to create
> their own shot, the results won't be pretty. Walker and Pierce have to
> realize that getting others involved improves their own scoring
> opportunities, not to mention team performance and chemistry.