Re: [Celtics' Stuff Re: Way of the Ray vs Way of O'Brien

["Lance Jacobson" <lancejacob@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Mr. Goat:

I'm not sure if I remember whether HowieCarrfan is the same guy as Way of the Ray.
Nobody gave me a scorecard.  However, you seem to have trouble understanding my post.
I'm explaining Obie's game plan as I see it, not defending it.  And it's just your
opinion that my "criterium" for success is lacking.

Sure, the post play to Baker in order to set up the 3pt shot relies on having an open
man who can catch the pass and make the spot-up shot.  I've acknowledged that Obie
thinks those percentages are better than a passing PG can create with a motion
offense.

Let's get one thing straight HCF, or Ray or mom or whoever you are.  I don't like this
offense, but I like the idea that Baker's getting the ball in the post for two
reasons:

1) Baker can score from the low post better than anybody we had last year, especially
against the East

2) Baker can see the perimeter scorers better than Kenny could when driving to the
hoop.  That means the ball has a better chance of going to an open man.

No matter what Pierce says, this team isn't designed to win the Finals, it's designed
to go there.  Beat NJ.   It's assumed that the Celts will win as many games as they
did last year and only have to beat the Nets to get to the next step.  I'm HOPING like
hell that Obie uses this game and roster strategy in order to get the captains to
share control of the ball, and that NEXT year he brings in a quality PG and a rookie
PG who can learn the system but already knows how to pass.  I've told Musty many times
that I figure Obie's trying to alter the mindset of the captains and he's doing it in
stages, rather than bringing in Rod Strickland to replace Kenny and have nobody moving
to the basket for another season and then having RS take a gun to our most prolific
scorers.  Don't laugh, it could happen.

For us to have a good PG, and nobody moving, is a waste.  Obie'd love it if a guy can
shoot AND pass, but he won't get a chance to pass.  And for the money, he brought in
the best 3pt shooting guards he could find.  You don't agree that that's his plan?

Baaaah, your criterium for success is lacking.

One year of success with the Pitino/O'Brien
method in a crappy, injured conference doesn't imbue
one with great hope for the long term or suggest that
it's the right way to go about things.

Efficiency equals wins and O'Brien's method isn't very
efficient, unless they're playing against the subpar Eastern
Conference, which someday won't be as abysmal.

Fortunately as far as the playoffs go this time around,
their already lucking out with Miami's and New
York's troubles, and Detroit trading regular season
stud Stackhouse. So I guess it's better to be lucky than good.

But get a real PG and this team can be truly good and take
better advantage of the luck.
Ray


--- In Celticsstuffgroup@y..., "Lance Jacobson" <lancejacob@a...>
wrote:
>     1. The Macrowave - The "Microwave" Vinnie Johnson flourished,
because
>     he had Isiah Thomas and Joe Dumars running the Detroit offense,
freeing
>     him up to concentrate on his explosive offense. Unfortunately
for the
>     "Macrowave" Shammond Williams, the burden of at least partly
running the offense is
>     his, taking away from what he does best.
>
>     2. Tony Delk - First things first, a team really doesn't need
both the Macrowave
>     and Delk, as they're redundant, essentially the same type of
player. It would be
>     best to package one of them in a deal for a legitimate point
guard.  Any ways,
>     playing Delk out of position at PG hurts his offense. He's an
undersized SG and
>     that's where he should be, coming off the bench as Mr. Instant
Offense.
>
>     3. Vin Baker - Walker, the de facto point guard, simply won't
be as efficient, by
>     a long stretch, in getting the ball to Baker in the low post.
You need a real PG
>     for that.
>
>     4. Antoine Walker: As a point guard he shoots too much (20 per
game),
>     doesn't pile up enough assists (5.0 per game), has a low
assists to turnover
>     ratio (compared to real PGs, Walker A/T is near the bottom of
the bunch), shoots at a
>     low percentage, and more importantly, is not that effective in
running an offense. Would
>     you rather have Walker guiding the offense or Payton, Kidd,
Nash, Van Exel, Williams,, Strickland, Cassell, Tinsley, Parker,
Miller, Bibby, Bryant, Marbury,
>     Stockton, Anderson,  Iverson, Davis, Stoudamire, Jaric, Best,
McInnis, Knight, etc.?
>     Walker is no Bird, and even Bird had Archibald, Buckner,
Henderson, Johnson,
>     and Ainge. >>Ray
>
> Ray, this is an interesting treatise, but has nothing to do with
the Celtics.
>
> If O'Brien believes that his shooters can hit threes at a 40%
efficiency, whether they're named Delk, Williams or Walker, that's
going to be his method of getting Easy Baskets.  You can write all
the Celtic History you want, mention 35 good point guards, but let's
understand one thing:
>
> If the Celts shoot 43% from the three point line on 60 shots per
game, they're scoring 78 points right there.  Forget assists.  Forget
nice passes and behind-the-back plays.  Forget Larry had Ainge, Burns
had Allen and Bush had Quayle.  It's not the way the team's built,
it's not the plan.  Walker can get over half court against any PF
defender, and that's that.  Dump it into Baker, set up at the Condo
on the Arc. and let it rain.
>
> Who cares if TD isn't a point guard?  He can guard them and hit the
three.  Same with Bremer.  Walker can get the ball to Baker, because
they're both tall.  Then Baker backs into his spot.  What's hard
about that?
>
> Hey, I'd love to see the Celts play basketball, but they have no
intention of doing that.  It'll be Feeding Time at the Arc, and
Baker's the zookeeper.  Watch and yawn, but Obie thinks it's exciting
as hell.