Re: Knicks game

["Berry, Mark S" <berrym@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Joe wrote:

Restored team confidence has value, but this is no time 
for players to relax and assume things will fall in 
place. Our defense and rebounding is a monumental 
embarrassment.

--- end ---

My fear is that Saturday's result gave them a false sense of confidence.
They're not going to get 46 points from Pierce, 60 percent shooting and
110-plus points very often. They needed all of those things to beat a
terrible Knicks team because, once again, the Celts played terrible defense
and didn't rebound. Forget everything else; if this team doesn't defend like
last year and at least hold its own on the boards, it will not win
consistently. They got away with it Saturday, but that won't happen often.
My fear is that the players had success shooting themselves out of trouble,
and will try to do it again. That's the wrong recipe for getting this thing
straightened out. The really scary thing is even after the nightmare in
Washington, and the glaring obviousness of the problems-defense and
rebounding-the Celts still didn't come out with the kind of intensity in
those areas that was the trademark of last year's team.

Anyway, thanks to Joe for his courtside (or high above courtside) report. I
thought Saturday's was a terribly coached game by both guys. I'll agree that
the Knicks executed well for three-plus quarters, but Chaney's decision not
to double-team Pierce down the stretch was nuts. Shira, of course, in
today's press release, says the Knicks had no choice because of the threats
of Delk E-Will and Battie on the opposite side of the floor. Now, Eric
Williams had his best game since he struck out nine guys in a Jersey little
league game when he was 12, but if your choices are Paul Pierce one-on-one
or taking your chances on Williams, a struggling Delk and an invisible
Battie, don't you send the extra guy at Pierce? Or two extra guys? Or three?
Anyway, I thought that was nuts. But thanks, anyway, Don.

Meanwhile, Obie held up his end in this chess match by playing Delk and
Shammond together for large stretches so that Houston could shoot over one
of the midgets whenever and wherever he wanted. The Knicks had exactly one
offensive option, and Obie rolled out the red carpet for the guy.

Finally, do you think anyone in the "braintrust" noticed the offensive
disparity when the team's three-pointers attempted was a more manageable
number (22, I think), and the free throw attempts were way up? Did anyone
notice? I didn't see it in any of the game reports. Attack the basket and
good things happen. The three-pointer certainly should be a weapon for this
team, but they're so much better when they attack the rim first. In a
related point, every coach in the NBA (except one) lays awake at night
trying to think of ways to force a double team and then exploit that double
team. The Celtics have two guys who demand a double-team anytime they get
the ball within 18 feet of the basket (unless Don Chaney is the opposing
coach). And yet, most of the time those guys get the ball 24 feet from the
basket. The Celtics are making it so much easier on the defense. I've
already seen two teams this season double-team Eric Williams in the low
post-Eric Freakin' Williams!!!-and that opens up options for other players.
Get Pierce and Walker down there, and the whole defense has to pay
attention. Start them out there facing the basket at the 3-point line, and
you're giving the defense a break.

Whatever. It's all moot if they don't start defending and rebounding much
better. Saturday's game was fun to watch and a much-needed win, but I don't
think it bodes well for the future of this team at all.

Mark