Re: A Win?

[bird <birdwl@earthlink.net>]

> From: "Cecil Wright" <cecil@hfx.eastlink.ca>
>
> And the childlike glee the entire team
> exhibited when the buzzer went off was great to watch.

Yes, it was.  The NBA isn't as much of a game as it is a business, but I 
like it when players (and fans) can just enjoy the win.  They deserved it,
  "ugly" game and all.  A dubya is a dubya is a dubya.

> Regardless of the ugliness of it all, this was an important game for them 
> to
> win.  It won't always go their way but a win like this will give them 
> cause
> to believe that they can overcome obstacles.  Any playoff team has to win
> games when they do not have it clicking on all cylinders.  Last night was
> one of those games.

This is true.  And possibly most important is braking the losing streak 
and not allowing it to go to five games, instead of the four.  A turning 
point in the season doesn't have to be a huge blowout win.  Remains to to 
be seen if the Celts have turned a corner, or are just an around-.500 team 
that will lose games to teams they shouldn't, while beating teams they 
shouldn't, as well.  Even if that is the case, they still might have 
turned a small corner if they win a few in a row here and now.

> Someone mentioned that Toine's assists have gone down of late.  What are 
> his
> passing options other than Pierce?  Blount, Battie, VP?  Sometimes it's
> everything they can do to hang onto a bounce pass.  Kenny?  We won't even
> talk about his FG% right now.  Milt?  Has hit a few shots.  Strickland?
> Let's hope he can be consistent.  Johnson?  Not right now.  Williams?  Can
> he stay healthy?

This seems to be the discussion du jour on the list.  I don't think anyone 
is saying that Pierce and Walker should take 70% of the shots throughout 
the entire season, or that they shouldn't be passing to teammates, or that 
those teammates oughtn't to be moving without the basketball.  Players 3-9 
have to "step up" (in the parlance of NBA rhetoric) in order to make the 
distribution of shots more equal.  I'm not saying I like the "one-on-one" 
plays that the team seems to use a lot, but I wouldn't mind Pierce and 
Walker, for now, taking the bulk of the shot attempts.  Who else?  I mean,
  I don't see Walker or Pierce passing up assist opportunities to Tony 
Battie or anybody else under the basket in order to take the three, much 
as some on the list seem to think that is happening.  Most of the time, 
people are spotting up.  If that's how it's going to be, let Walker and 
Pierce do whatever they want with the ball, because, frankly, that's the 
only chance we've got.  If other guys would cut to the hoop, move without 
the ball, set effective picks, and the like, maybe we'd see more effective 
distribution of that ball.

I agree that team-oriented basketball is much better.  Right now, I'm not 
so sure we have that luxury.  We'd lose a lot of games finding out.  It 
might be better to transition slowly from the stars-dominated offense to 
one that spreads the wealth as our complementary players gain the 
confidence or accustom themselves to the league, or whatever they need to 
do to help carry the scoring load.  Then we might be the team we'd wish 
for.  Right now, I've got to agree with Jimbo: this is a break-even (or 
just-about) team.  When we either acquire or develop consistent 
complementary players before the windows close on Pierce and Walker is 
when we'll be a force in the league again.

I mean, Kenny Anderson?  I like his resurgence, I actually think he's 
playing well, but as a guy to help take on the scoring load?  I'll pass, 
unless Kenny is penetrating, in which case I'm fine, especially if people 
would cut to the hoop when that happens.  The rooks?  These guys are just 
waiting for their time.  Joe Johnson will be consistent someday -- maybe 
not this year, but then again, maybe he will.  Forte?  Same thing, though 
JJ has a better chance of being a quality pro.  K. Brown?  Talented, but 
very raw.  Would like to see him plugged in for defensive purposes, though:
  he can really change people's shots.  Strickland?  EWilliams?  V? Battie?
   Any one of these guys can have a 15-point game, but can't do it 
consistently.  Strickland never will if he only spots up beyond the arc; 
this guy is a good slasher, I'd like to see more of that.

We might just need to hitch a ride on Pierce and Walker's coattails for 
maybe another year or two.  I agree, the longer it takes, the more chance 
it'll backfire, but you can't just rush Joe Johnson out there and say, "OK,
  Joe, go ahead and score 18 a game, every game."  Once he (or someone else)
  does, though, look out.  If we upgrade the point guard and center 
positions at around the same time, I think we'll be perennial playoff 
contenders.

Bird
(The Celtic "Tird")

P.S. I did also want to weigh in on the "Best Duo" discussion Kestas 
started: I'd be tempted to pick Finley/Nowitski, too.  I think they are 
easier to build a team around.  However, what this really illustrates is 
the importance of the "role players": Dallas has Steve Nash, Howard, even 
Bradley and Hardaway.  We've got  Eric Williams and Tony Battie.  In the 
end, though, I'd pick out own Pierce and Walker, mostly because I think 
Pierce has a chance to be a "sky's the limit" kind of offensive player, as 
well as a defensive force in the league.  We'll see.