Re: Tell me I didn't see thi

["Dan Forant" <dforant1@nycap.rr.com>]

The Celts are my team but I can't make excuses for them when they suck.
Yesterday was one of those days. Maybe we forget we have many marginal NBA
players on the team trying to support Pierce and Walker. Well today they
didn't support. Maybe their just over-achievers. It's just a fact. The facts
speak for themselves.

Pierce missed the first big free throw that barely made it to the basket at
the end. He now has a problem with free throws, it's a fact he plain choked.
Here's hoping he will snap out it for game 5. Rogers threw up a few bricks
also. Pierce has company.

DanF

----- Original Message -----
From: "bird" <birdwl@earthlink.net>
To: <Celtics@igtc.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 4:47 AM
Subject: Re: Tell me I didn't see thi


> > From: "Dan Forant" <dforant1@nycap.rr.com>
> >
> > Pierce's form was great. But it was a choke big league time. And if you
> > think the supporting cast contributed, I went to the wrong picnic today!
> > Williams, Rogers, Battie, and Delk, STUNK. If *anyone* of these guys
play
> > near to their capabilities (we don't ask much from them) we win by 10.
>
> To you it was a choke, to me, I just can't get down on the guy, struggling
> from the line in his first playoff series.  Usually, when he misses from
> the charity stripe, it's because he fades away at the end, or, perhaps
> even worse, changes the way he shoots the shot, as in Game two.  It was a
> good looking shot; he had good form; it just didn't fall.  These things
> happen.  It's not necessarily a choke.
>
> And, you may think the supporting cast "STUNK", but I'll that sort of
> judgement for players who play really badly.  While numbers aren't
> everything, Battie had nine rebounds, two good blocks, and a modest 6
> points, though 3-4 shooting.  Perhaps if we'd have worked to get him some
> more baseline jumpers like Game three?  Rogers had 12 points, five
> rebounds and four assists in 24 minutes.  Now, you may call that a bad
> performance, but I don't.  Kenny had 11 points, three or four shots of
> which were key down the stretch, and six rebounds.  Thing is he went 5-16.
>    Delk did not have a particularly good game, but he had 4 assists and
> didn't turn the ball over but twice.  Williams also didn't shine, but his
> minutes were limited, due to Obie going with the Anderson/Delk backcourt
> that worked so well last game, but resulted in the last two statistics.
> In fact, the whole team rebounded pretty well (43-43), though Walker and
> Pierce had nine each, all the Celtic regulars had more than one rebound.
> The team out-stole the Nets 10-4.  These stats aren't completely
> meaningless, just overwhelmed by the loss.
>
> Were any of these guys good enough for the C's to win?  No.  If Rogers
> scores 15 points, we win, but it doesn't mean that he "STUNK" because he
> only scored 12.  In fact, none of the players were quite good enough such
> that he made the team win.  If anyone of them played just a *bit* better,
> we win!  I realize that, and maybe you have a plausible point when you say
> Williams and Delk stunk.  But Battie and Rogers had decent games.  Neither
> they specifically, nor the team, in general, were good enough to win,
that'
> s all.
>
> Bird