Re: Vin Baker

["Dan Forant" <dforant1@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Some good points here. The Baker trade will come to fruition in a few years
as a disaster. To even mention him even in Parish's late career is silly.
Why will he do better in the playoffs as compared to now? Will he don a
different suit?

DanF

----- Original Message -----
From: "Berry, Mark S" <berrym@BATTELLE.ORG>
To: <hironaka@nomade.fr>; "Berry, Mark S" <berrym@BATTELLE.ORG>
Cc: <celtics@igtc.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 9:42 AM
Subject: RE: Vin Baker


> We'll have to agree to disagree, Joe. WHEN Vin manages to get good post
> position without fouling, and WHEN he manages to catch the ball when he
has
> that position, he has been OK, I guess. I say that very grudgingly. He
still
> isn't finishing much. His shooting percentage is anemic for an alleged
> low-post scorer. I just don't see much there. He isn't active at all.
>
> I really don't see how you can compare him in a positive way to Parish or
> Walton. Those guys were warriors. Parish's low-post offense was
different-a
> turnaround jumper-but much more effective, even though the strength of his
> game was his defense and rebounding (career weaknesses for Vin). Walton,
> with the Celtics, was a sixth man of course, but during that glorious 1986
> season when he was healthy, he was an absolute force off the bench. He
> rebounded, blocked shots, scored some, and, most importantly, was a
> brilliant passer. He entered the game and made an impact. Vin enters the
> game and you don't notice. I just don't see how you can compare them
> positively in any way.
>
> You wrote: "But relatively speaking Baker's fine to above average compared
> to true centers around the league, or even "old school" centers we've had
> in the past (Hall of Fame caliber centers)."
>
> Above average? Even in this center-starved league, Baker has been nothing
> short of abysmal. I'm not even talking relative to his contract. His play,
> even if he were a minimum-wage guy, has been bad. I don't see how you can
> paint it any other way. And above average compared to the Hall of Fame
> caliber centers in Boston in the past? I don't see how you can possibly
say
> that.
>
> You concluded: " People shouldn't get worked up about Vin Baker as long as
> we're winning, regardless of what Callahan and other write."
>
> On this point, we completely agree. He's a bit player (thankfully). This
is
> Pierce and Walker's team, with solid contributions from Battie, Delk, and
> the Williams boys. The only reason I get worked up about Baker is because
of
> what he means for the future of this franchise, and what he should mean
for
> Chris Wallace's future (he shouldn't have one). But for crying out loud,
> there are people on this list who consider Kedrick the key to the season,
> even though we have no evidence that he'll be anything more than a
> jumping-jack off the bench-if he even gets off the bench. It's only
natural
> that our $50 million man catch a little heat.
>
> Mark
>
>
>
>  -----Original Message-----
> From: hironaka@nomade.fr [mailto:hironaka@nomade.fr]
> Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 6:05 PM
> To: berrym@BATTELLE.ORG
> Cc: celtics@igtc.com
> Subject: Re: Vin Baker
>
> > ---------- Initial message -----------
> >
> >  And, I'm sure you know, Vin looks as bad as his stats.
> He's terrible.
> >
>
> Wow, I really don't agree! If Tony Battie attempted the
> same pivot and upfakes, much less the occasional dribble
> drives, that Vin Baker rolls into, he would look clumsier
> by far. I'm certain of this.
>
> I'd like to see Battie attempt a turnaround or post move
> this year, but I don't think its happened to date.
>
> To put it another way, Baker seems more refined on his
> pivot moves compared to Parish or Walton (circa 1986).
> These are the only Celtics centers I can really compare
> him to, having largely missed out on earlier eras. If you
> strongly disagree with this assertion, let's argue.
>
> Baker's not as swift as Parish, but not as clumsy or
> stiff-legged. Parish had the ball stripped by guards
> frequently, comparitively speaking.
>
> Walton also was rapidly losing his grace and mobility of
> course. He rarely laid down effective pivot moves of the
> quality that Baker has shown this year. Do you disagree?
>
> I missed last week's Philly game and a few others, but
> I've yet to see Baker miss by a mile off of any pivot
> move.
>
> Sundov is the only other big man who has tried any kind
> of post move this year, and you've seen the results. He's
> 1-10 on 2-point FG% so far.
>
> Once Baker goes into a given pivot move, he seems very
> much in control. And if it were smooth but strictly
> robotic, like Walker in the past and occasional present,
> Baker wouldn't be able to adjust to how the defense
> reacts. He'd get his shot blocked.
>
> But not only does Baker show strong technique on his
> initial pivot move, but I see he notices and is able to
> adjust a little to where his defender is at the end of
> the move. He basically has a strong professional grasp of
> that part of the game. Its a rare thing these days.
>
> Mark, I can hardly believe we are this far off in our
> opinion. He's been disappointing, but not "terrible".
>
> I felt that what George Callahan wrote about Baker's
> clumsiness and effort was phony. I felt he probably tuned
> into only a few games all year.
>
> These evaluations are relative position-by-position,
> don't expect Baker to be Walker. But relatively speaking
> Baker's fine to above average compared to true centers
> around the league, or even "old school" centers we've had
> in the past (Hall of Fame caliber centers).
>
> I've said it before, I think its appropriate to fault
> Chris Wallace for not recognizing that this type of
> player could be a dinosaur. That's exactly what Baker has
> been, with the new defensive rules.
>
> But as far as saying Baker looks "terrible", I couldn't
> agree. In terms of back-to-the-basket technique he looks
> good in his opportunities and makes the most of it.
>
> And as far as Baker making grossly obvious or clumsy
> fouls, again, I think I just need to be more attentive
> about in watching him.
>
> He gotten a fair number of whistles that aren't very
> apparent in the televised replays. Maybe you disagree.
> Maybe I missed some idiotic reach-ins or not-part-of-the-
> game shoves. I don't recall these types of fouls.
>
> Obviously I must be really wrong, or partly wrong, about
> Vin Baker. I say that sincerely. ANd since I'm voicing
> opinions on him, I'll try to pay stricter attention to
> his game from now on. Up to now, there have been more
> interesting controversies to focus on during games.
> People shouldn't get worked up about Vin Baker as long as
> we're winning, regardless of what Callahan and other
> write.
>
> Joe H.
>
> -------------------
> L'e-mail gratuit pas comme les autres.
> NOMADE.FR, pourquoi chercher ailleurs ?