re: the third game

[bird <birdwl@earthlink.net>]

> From: Kestas <Kestutis.Kveraga@dartmouth.edu>

A good evaluation of a stinker of a game, but you're correct when you 
caution against jumping to conclusions after this one -- not only on the 
relative talent of both teams, but on individuals players, too.

> Anderson's renaissance apparently ended in the first quarter of the first
> exhibition game, because he's been the old, dogsh*t Kenny ever since.

Yes, I was briefly hyped for Kenny, as he seemed like he was going to be 
effective this year.  My enthusiasm for that position is waning, because 
Kenny hasn't seemed to play like he did in the first half of the first 
game since.  Typical Kenny, though: these three games are just a microcosm 
of Kenny's career: flashes of good (sometimes great) play for a while (up 
to a year -- w/ the Nets and the Blazers) but a plateau that is decidedly 
... ineffective.  Oh, well.

> What's worse is that I realized in this game that Mark Berry was 
> absolutely
> right by harping all summer on the Celtics' refusal to look for any PF/C
> rebounder types to help out our center troika. We basically have one
> NBA-level big guy on the team, and even he is kinda flaky. Pot can't
> overcome his physical handicap no matter how hard he tries, and Blount is
> the most clueless basketball player I've seen since Moiso played for the
> Celtics.

Well, not to be flippant, but of _course_ Mark Berry's right about this -- 
I don't remember anyone saying he wasn't (though I could be wrong on that)
.  He's also correct that Walker should play the three -- it's just that, 
at some point, one must realize that certain things might happen, and that 
some things are just not going to happen.  Since I've resigned myself to 
"Walker-as-PF" I'm a much happier person, my teeth are whiter, my smile 
bigger, my stride longer and with more purpose.  The Celtics just aren't 
interested in another big man.  Do they need one?  Hell, yeah!  It's one 
thing to say that and another to count V and Blount as below NBA-quality, 
though.  V _does_ have a physical handicap, in that he isn't a leaper (and 
never will be), but he could be effective (and has been).  Blount did seem 
clueless as all get-out last night, but he certainly looked like he had a 
clue last year, so I don't think it's fair to say that "his brain is 
apparently incapable of the processing demands placed on it by the NBA 
game" -- I mean, it certainly wasn't up to the challenge last night (your 
point about winding up for the dunk vs. the Admiral was right on), but 
Mark Blount is a tenth-man: he shouldn't be getting 15 minutes a game, or 
starting.  The team ought to bring him along, use him as a shot-blocker, 
and get him to realize he needs to box out in order to be a rebounder.  
And V had some sort of bandage on his hand: it seemed to affect his shot.  
It seems clear that Battie (for all of _his_ faults) is the guy with the 
most talent of the troika.  He should be starting and getting the bulk of 
the minutes.

If Battie stays free of the injury bug and has a breakout year, so much 
the better.  Does C's management overrate our centers?  Yes.  Are they 
going to grab another big man?  No.  (Actually, it's possible Wallace & Co.
  know _exactly_ how limited the troika is, but are publicly putting out 
this line so as not to rag on them.  Why not get another big man, then?  
Well, maybe they don't think that if they got a guy like McCaskill (say) 
that they'd find enough playing time for him.  I know, that sounds a bit 
weak.  I don't mind them picking up another point guard (what with all the 
woes last year) or even Chris Herren specifically, but, while I don't mind 
the trade involving Moiso, I don't see the point of keeping McLeod on the 
roster -- this guy is going to get zero PT over this next year, even when 
he comes back from whatever injury bug has bitten him this time.)  It's 
just that, after the first couple of dozen times we mention the need for a 
big guy, what more is there to say about it?  It's a little like all the 
"personnel move" kind of posts (you know, the folks who _only_ post about 
how we ought to move this guy for this other guy, what if we traded that 
guy for this other guy over here, that sort of thing) -- the 10% of the 
moves suggested that are even remotely feasible haven't happened.  My 
personal preference is to discuss the team as it's composed, I guess.

> They instead signed Herren, who was so
>  necessary that he's played 8 min in 3 games so far.

Well, Herren is going to come in handy eventually, if say, Kenny gets 
injured.  I mean, I think counting on Randy Brown to play a month of games 
this year is counting too much.  If Kenny went down, I'd rather have Milt,
  Herren and Forte filling the position rather than Milt, Forte, and "roll 
the dice for a CBA-level guy".

> The other thing that bothered me was that my own comment about the
> center-initiated offense came true in spades last night, but they just 
> kept
> doing it. [...]. The only time
> you'd want to use an offense like that is if your center is Arvydas 
> Sabonis
> (or someone like him). You'd think that an army of coaches including Jack
> Ramsay would figure out a better offense, one that doesn't involve the
> least able players handling the ball in the most inapropriate situation 
> for
> them.

This one's a real stumper.  I don't mind the PG taking it to half court 
then dumping it off to Walker (or maybe eventually a guy like JJ) but to 
pass to the troika makes no sense that I can see.  Getting the other team'
s center out of the paint is a non-issue this year, and, frankly, never 
seemed to work as well as you'd think it might have anyway.  All I can 
think of is that the braintrust is working this like we've already got the 
franchise center, but that's clearly not the case.  I like the new 
emphasis on the running game (gotta work on it for sure, but to finally 
see it after years of "we're a running team that doesn't run" is 
gratifying), but the half-court sets are, at times, just mind-bogglingly 
lame.  I like the Walker pass to Pierce (or even JJ) down low, but can 
anyone name another play that works well in the half-court?  (Kenny used 
to run that pick-and-pop with V that wasn't so bad, but maybe we could 
involve some better offensive players (Walker, Pierce, JJ, K. Brown, etc) 
in these plays so as to get _their_ pet shots off.)

> Josh, I wish you asked Wallace what the rationale for that offense is.

Yeah, that would be a good one to ask the inside source.

Regards,

(The Celtic "Tird",
  Celticus "tirdius")