Re: Would this work in Boston? (I say yes)

[Kestas <Kestutis.Kveraga@dartmouth.edu>]

At 17:25 1/19/2002 -0800, you wrote:
>I want to know where you are getting this information. 

I'm making an inference based on the information available to people on
this list. 

> Are you saying that
>Toine refuses to play any position other than PF?  If that were the case he
>would never bring the basketball upcourt nor would he hoist all those 3
>pointers if he were strictly playing that position.

Please, don't be ridiculous.

>Besides, on this roster, as it is currently comprised, and as has been
>alluded to previously, there are no viable alternatives.

The problem is, it's a catch-22: they can't play Walker at the 3 because we
don't have any other PFs*, but we don't want to GET a PF because "Antoine
is going to play 40 minutes at PF" (Wallace's words to Josh). 

*unless you slide Battie over, but then you don't have a decent center when
Pot's stinking up the joint (which happens quite often) AND you have to
bring Blount into the rotation. 

>You seem to imply that Walker plays the 4 because he is too lazy or out of
>shape to cover opposing 3s. 

I'm implying no such thing. What I'm saying is, Walker probably fancies
himself as this super-versatile PF who can do it all. He doesn't want run
around picks chasing all those SFs/SGs; instead, he wants to bang bodies
with the big boys and  get "his" rebounds. Is he lazy or out of shape? No.
Is that the optimal way to use his talents? I don't believe so.  
Heck, Bird was not dissimilar to Toine in this respect: he was an
unathletic 6-9 guy who could do it all on offense but was not a great
individual defender. So he played SF. Obviously, he had McHale and Parish
next to him, not Pot and Battie. 

> I don't know that it is the case or that Obie
>is bowing down to Toine because he is the coach-terminator.

Obie is not stupid. He knows his fate rests in Walker's and Pierce's hands
and is acting accordingly. 

Kestas