Code Blue! Celts lose!

[bird <birdw@xxxxxxx>]

How's the suicide watch?

I admit that that last NJ game was a tough one -- and I had no dinner 
partner to fear, either -- but the season moves on.  (As an aside, have 
the Celts played well on a holiday in recent memory?)  The team will 
absorb this loss and come out and turn around this recent spate of 
mediocre play into a few wins.  (Say, the Miami Greasers and the 
always-soft Magic seem like nice candidates... .)

This is not to say that concern isn't warranted, because that's 
probably half the fun anyway.  What I find really interesting is that 
people use the less-than-spectacular play as evidence to support their 
own agendas as to What The Team Needs (tm).  And that's cool, because 
that's probably half of the other half of the fun.  But you got yer 
"Needs a Pure Point" camp, yer "Wallace Is a Muldoon" faction, and you 
got yer "The Team Only Appears To Be Doing Well -- In Reality They 
Suck" (sorry, that happens when the team in winning).

But just to show you that I'm just the same, you can put me in the 
"It's All About the Defense" camp.  With a little "Sure Would Like To 
See a Decent Fastbreak" thrown in.  OK, maybe more than just a little.

Mark Berry's right on when he says it's all about the D.  The C's 
remarkable ability to clamp down on teams for long stretches of games 
-- teams that can score, now, and for critical parts of games, like the 
end -- is what wins many games.  Sometimes, the heroics of 
Piercewalker, either individually or in tandem, win games.  Sometimes, 
and these are perhaps the best, it's a total and complete team effort.  
(Yet, those count just as much as the others.)  There are other 
reasons, but what wins have most in common with each other is that the 
Celtics' defense has at least allowed the team to be within striking 
distance.  Oh, sure, sometimes the team plays mediocre defense and wins 
anyway.  I haven't done any correlations, it just seems to me that the 
D is the common denominator in most wins.  And the teams doesn't need 
to have Pitino-esque-rah-rah-press defensive intensity the whole game, 
but it does need to pick and choose its spots wisely, and clamp down 
then.  Otherwise, just a nice baseline of harassing defense will do for 
most of the game.

While I wouldn't go so far as to repeat Obie's public comments that the 
"offense will take care of itself", I do think that somehow, 
Walkerpierce will make something happen at that end of the court.  Or, 
at least that's what Obie-won is going to rely on to bail them out 
with.  And, really, thinking of the offense that way -- in a 
traditional sense (of clock management, etc.), I mean -- doesn't seem 
right.  The offense is set up so that the first guy with an open look 
can take the shot.  And if that guy is Piercewalker, then, look out, 
because something is going to happen with the ball.  (What's going to 
happen most with the other four guys is a clear-out.)  Obie's seeming 
idea that time on the offensive end is time wasted (why, there's 
defensive to be played!) is hard to fathom.  I realize that the C's are 
about saturation of shots, but as successful, and yes, even appealing, 
as it's been, it still seems like more offensive structure would 
benefit everyone.  Maybe Obie & Co. are waiting until they get the 
personnel that they really want, and/or waiting to see what the new 
owners will and will not pay for, but my guess is that Obie thinks he's 
set with Delk and Battie, and with EWill and Walkerpierce, that's his 
starting five.

It's hard to believe that Obie wants that five to go out there and just 
create.  And yet, look how successful it can be with Piercewalker -- 
guys who can make it happen.  It's possible that The Inscrutable Obie 
just wants to milk Walkerpierce and the role players for another run 
towards the ECF, and then surround the stars with a better bench, spend 
some money, start in "earnest". Or, maybe he and Wallace are working on 
yet another mid-season swapfest for another Cinderella ending.  Or, 
(and I guess this isn't a mutually exclusive option), Obie's really got 
it in his mind that he can play his two best players 45 minutes a game, 
let the offense take care of itself, and not teach the fast break and 
still have a good 3-5 year window of opportunity.

Well, he may be right, but it's hard to see how wearing down your best 
players and not giving the team a useful offensive weapon like the 
break is going to hurt.  It's often occurred to me how Obie's given 
Boston fans a better version of what Pitino promised: a defensive, 
trapping team that creates turnovers, and bombs away on offense.  In 
addition to the "gimmicky" defensive now being played in the half-court 
(and working), one other thing that's different is that Pitino talked 
about the break but never ran it, while Obie comes right out and says 
they never even practice it.

And the break seems tailor-made for this team.  Not to mention right up 
Obie's alley.  He could incorporate the longball (as if he *wouldn't*), 
they'd spend less time on O, and did I mention the three would be an 
early option?  The fast break, Obie-won.  Look into it.  We don't need 
a pure point guard for this team to pass, we need five guys on the 
court willing to find the open man (or the man who *will* be open on 
the break).

As for the players, I have some limited hope that the new owners will 
open up the coffers and allow a few upgrades  to be gotten.  Delk's 
game must make him an Obie favorite, and Shammond will probably work 
out, as well, as soon as he embraces his inner Obie-ness and acts like 
a gunner and slasher/disher (as the coach probably wants) and not as 
the John Stockton-wannabe he's playing now.  The only way EWill's not 
getting PT is if he's traded.  Battie's becoming a good EC center, 
especially when they include him in the scoring.  Brown needs playing 
time to show if he can make it in the league, plain and simple.  He 
needs to get into the rotation.  Baker, if he comes along, will come 
along slowly.  This was to be expected.  The thing with Baker, and how 
could it not be, is the contract.  It was a gamble before the season 
started, and it's still a gamble.  Could pan out if Vinnie provides 
dividends in the playoffs or next year.  If you're not thinking 
long-term with Baker, I think you're forgetting that contract.  And, 
really, how can you do that?

But, looking for areas of improvement, the bench is a red flag.  I see 
how Walter McCarty is a benefit, given his defensive seamlessness on 
the team, and his low price and familiarity.  But I also see how the 
C's are the only team to carry only 12 guys, and I see how owners 
willing to take a tax risk could garner some help.  If Obie would play 
that help.  Because Obie needs to open the vault and let Kedrick and 
probably another guy into the main rotation.  Not a lot of minutes, 
especially to start, but in the rotation.

Just to show you that we've all got our point guard opinions, I'd go 
for Greg Anthony.  A veteran, so Obie might actually play him.  
Defensive-minded.  Can hit the three.  I'm not going to mention his 
vaults, because talking about his old frame and bad fg% doesn't help my 
argument one bit.  D'oh!

And then I'd pick up a defensive/rebounding big man.  But that's pure 
fantasy, because where's he going to find the playing time?

I'm not nearly so down on this team as some, but I am thinking more 
long-term than usual.  Probably because Walkerpierce are entering their 
prime, new owners may establish different spending patterns, may want 
to bring in new people.  You never know.  Meanwhile, if this season 
even approaches the fun of last year's campaign, I'll be pretty happy.  
This year's squad looks top have many of the same strengths and 
weaknesses, and the same propensities for playing down to the 
competition and also for coming back, so it looks like that could very 
well happen.

Sorry for the length and tendency (fully actualized in some places) to 
ramble.  Happy Festivus To All.

Bird