RE: Doom and Gloom

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

Anything can happen. That's why they play the games. But your analysis of
the Knicks just highlights the Celtics' problems. You bash Jackson, Ward and
Eisley. I'm not saying they're world-beaters, but all three are better than
any point guard on the Celtic roster. Think about that. Houston and Sprewell
are true shooting guards, no question, but you think the Celtics don't have
guys playing out of position? Our two best players are natural small
forwards, but one will play power forward and one will play shooting guard.
And Camby, he may be injury-prone, but he's a difference-maker when he's in
there. Thomas, Weatherspoon and Harrington are better than any of our
"centers."

You're right that in basketball, good teams are better than the sum of their
parts. The Knicks are a good example. They play well together. They still
have the same basic cast of characters and the same coach. Why should that
change? The Celtics don't play well together, at least not consistently. 

The East is much deeper this year, and the Celtics will need significant
improvement to make a move. I just don't think they've made that
improvement. Maybe they'll surprise me and become one of those teams that
gels and exceeds expectations, but I haven't seen any reason to believe that
yet.

Mark

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Josh O. [mailto:igtcjosh@yahoo.com] 
Sent:	Wednesday, October 24, 2001 12:36 PM
To:	Berry, Mark  S; 'celtics@igtc.com'
Subject:	Doom and Gloom

The bottom line is that nobody knows how the Celtics
will play this year.  They can beat nearly any team in
any given game, and if they win one or two more than
they lose, over the course of a whole season, they
will have a decent chance at making the playoffs.  The
other teams can worry about themselves.  I think,
though, that Mark's assessment of the Knicks shows the
kind of masochistic mentality we are afflicted with
these days.  The Knicks have three good players, two
of whom play the same perimeter position, and the
third is injured half the time, and a pussy to boot. 
Mark Jackson, for all his gifts, makes Kenny Anderson
look like Dennis Johnson on defense, and can't get
into the lane to save his life.  Charlie Ward has
gotten more attention for his opinions on the Jewish
problem than for his play, which has driven all of New
York to demand his being traded.  The guy is a
marginal talent at best.  That leaves Howard Eisley as
the difference maker at point guard, and while he is a
solid player, how many coaches in the NBA do you think
sit down with their staff to ask, "how are we going to
stop Eisley?"  Johnson was the Knicks only serious low
post presence, which mitigated their reliance on
perimeter shooting (which he was also good at.)  He
was also a key leader.   What they were was a solid,
well-coached team that knew how to play together in a
very disciplined way.  For a few years they were they
greatest beneficiaries of the Ewing Theory -- as they
should be, given that they brought it to light.  But
even if they beat us in every meeting, I still think
this is the year the wheels come off.  The truth is,
none of the teams in the East really scare me.  The
only one we seem to have a hard time beating is
Philadelphia.  Everybody else we have beaten fairly
frequently.  Even Indiana, which had our number for a
long time, we seem to be drawing pretty close to. 
That will change when and if Jermaine O'Neal emerges
as the top center in the east, but that makes only two
teams by my count.  Basketball is a funny thing.  The
whole is more than the sum of its parts, and even
teams that we today look at position by position as
all-time champions struggle to win.  Talent will out
and lesser teams will be exposed in the crucible of
the playoffs, but the regular season is a time when
teams can make hay if they play hard, believe in
themselves, and get a few key baskets down the
stretch.

43 wins.

Josh
--- "Berry, Mark  S" <berrym@BATTELLE.ORG> wrote:
> Josh O wrote: 
> 
> Milwaukee (see above) 
> Miami (Alonzo, on a Riley team) 
> Philadelphia (with Dikembe + lots of chemistry, and
> a
> gamebreaking offensive player) 
> Orlando (two-star combo like us, but better, with
> better talent 3-12) 
> 
> These are the teams that we will be hard-pressed to
> beat: 
> 
> Toronto (chemistry, role players, game-breaking
> talent) 
> Pacers (dominant young center we can't match up with
> in Jermaine O'Neal, killer veterans in Jalen Rose,
> et
> al.) 
> Charlotte: (real tough backcourt, offensive machine,
> tough-minded) 
> 
> 
> These are teams I think we should beat this year: 
> New York (will miss Larry Johnson badly) 
> 
> ---end---
> 
> Josh, I just don't understand how you dismiss the
> Knicks so easily. The team
> won 48 games and finished 12 games ahead of the
> Celtics last year. Allan
> Houston and Latrell Sprewell are in their primes and
> Marcus Camby is a
> difference-making big man. They have three point
> guards (Jackson, Ward and
> Eisley) better than anyone on the Celts' roster.
> They have big men to
> spare-Kurt Thomas, Othella Harrington, Clarence
> Weatherspoon. They lost
> Rice, but he didn't fit at all there last year. They
> picked up a much better
> fit-Shandon Anderson (because he's comfortable
> coming off the bench at
> either swing position, replacing Sprewell or
> Houston). They also have one of
> the best coaches in the business. They play great
> defense, they're a veteran
> team. Are they a championship contender? No, but I
> think they remain well
> ahead of the Celts. Larry Johnson? I don't think
> they're shedding any tears.
> 
> I don't disagree with the rest of your assessment,
> other than I consider
> Toronto in that upper echelon with Milwaukee,
> Philly, Miami (that Strickland
> signing could send them either way) and Orlando.
> Barring injury, the
> Celtics' best hope for slippage comes from Indiana
> (the Isiah factor) or
> Charlotte (the Coleman chemistry factor). But Indy
> could just as easily make
> a leap into 50-win territory, and Charlotte seemed
> to settle into a pretty
> solid group late last season and in the playoffs.
> 
> I also think you dismiss some of the other teams too
> easily. Atlanta will be
> tough if Ratliff stays healthy. Jersey, with Kidd,
> will be improved.
> Washington, with Jordan, will be in the mix (Jordan
> and Hamilton could
> approach Pierce-Walker scoring numbers... look at
> the rest of the rosters).
> Detroit made some nice additions (Rebraca is a
> player), and will be in the
> mix in that 8-12 group.
> 
> The Celtics just didn't make the necessary
> improvements to jump over anyone,
> and the teams behind them all improved. They added
> three nice prospects, but
> that's what they are. Obie basically has admitted
> that Kedrick and Forte
> aren't going to see big minutes yet. Joe Johnson has
> tremendous upside, but
> he won't contribute as much as Stith did last
> season. The PGs remain
> terrible, the centers are awful. The bench is lousy.
> And the new rules seem
> destined to hurt this team that relies so much on
> isolation to accomplish
> anything offensively. The Celts have other
> questions... can Pierce
> consistently be the March Player of the Month guy,
> or will he go back to
> being a solid, 20-ppg guy? Huge factor. Can the team
> rebound at all? Can
> Obie really coach, or was last year's finish more a
> function of the players'
> release from Stalag Pitino? Antoine is a question
> all his own...
> 
> I'm hoping for the best, but this team is going to
> need a lot of things to
> go right (and many to go wrong for others) to make
> the playoffs.
> 
> Mark
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com