How I'm seeing it so far

[bird <birdwl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Having finally seen a few games on the Pass, I feel I can offer a few 
thoughts on the Celtics.  First off, though, thanks to everyone who 
shared their views on the first few preseason games -- it made not 
being able to actually see them seem a bit better.  Well, that and the 
meds.  Seriously, though, it was a great resource.

I'm amused by all the retractions of optimistic predictions.  I wonder 
why all the predictions before you saw some games, preseason though 
they may be?  I feel sorry for Snoopy, who's got to keep track of these 
things like it means something.  Probably far easier for him to make a 
rule about predictions being final, so that he doesn't have to.  Then 
again, I haven't heard one word of complaint out of him, so maybe he 
doesn't mind.  I'll have my prediction after the final preseason game, 
giving myself the most evidence to work with.

The only other preface I have is to suggest that people just send 
thoughts/reviews to the list without asking.  Who *doesn't* want to 
read them?  I sure do.  The more views the better, as far as I'm 
concerned.  Let's create an atmosphere where people don't feel like 
they can't send things to the list.  I'm talking about stuff people put 
on their websites, as well, like Josh's Hoopsworld articles, Shawn's 
site, and Snoopy's reviews.  I mean, if you'd rather just send a URL 
pointing to the exact review in the interest of saving space, that's 
cool, but I don't mind people sending transcripts of their 
reviews/columns from other sites. In fact, I'd like to see them. OK, 
onward.

Team Issues:

Rebounding: We suck.  OK, they don't really "suck", per se, but the 
Celts aren't a good rebounding team.  This vexes me greatly.  (Since it 
was just about the only thing I was really good at on my high school 
teams, it seems easy enough for professionals to do to me.)  We have a 
few good individual rebounders (Walker, Pierce, perhaps Battie), but 
they are often out of position for the bound because of the gameplan.  
The team needs to rebound better as a team because, like assists, we 
don't have designated rebounders.  This is a problem I really don't 
have a good solution for.  Bringing in some rebounder isn't going to 
work, much less happen.  It might be a matter of blocking guys out, 
though.  I know the team wants to run, but you need the ball to do 
that, and, too many times, I've seen a lone Celtic (most often Battie) 
in the key with 3-4 on the opposition surrounding him.  Guess who gets 
the ball?  Exactly.

The Fast Break: The C's ought to learn how to run one.  Sometimes, it 
works really well, and you see a lot of decent attempts at running one, 
but it never lasts for more than a game or two.  It needs to be done 
consistently.  It's a mindset more than anything else.  Running well 
will create easy buckets and let our more athletic guys (who aren't 
necessarily good shooters) score.  It's defensive thing, which is the 
whole key for this team anyway.

The Three:  Hey, I come from a traditional, pound-it-in-to-the-post 
viewpoint, but these guys are going to take the three.  I'm OK with 
that.  Taking the three on the fastbreak?  Cool.  Taking the three 
early in the shot clock?  OK, I can deal.  If it's open.  If the shot 
is an open one, we've got guys who can bury it.  If the team can be all 
about the D, this strategy can be very effective.  It's not like we're 
talking about Doug Moe's Nuggets.  Last year's team could clamp it 
down, and that made the three-centric offense work more effectively.  
This is not to say I wouldn't mind seeing some inside-out games with 
Baker, EWilliams and Walker (and even Battie and Pierce) throwing it 
back out to open post feeders, instead of just talking about it.

Defense: What this team is all about.  If they can't approximate, at 
least, the defensive effect of last year, it's not going to be a good 
year.  I have concerns about Vin Baker harassing the guard on the 
pick-and-roll, but I had the same concerns early last year, and, 
eventually, the team did it very, very effectively.  I love Dick 
Harter.  There's reason to be hopeful here.

Individuals:

Antoine Walker:  Lookin' good, as Freddie Prinze, Jr.'s dad would say.  
Seems to have improved in the low post, which, even though I never 
minded the threes, ain't a bad thing.  I don't think he'll average 10 
rebs/game like many of would like to see, but that's mostly because 
he'll be out of rebounding position.  I think that he's the leader of 
this team.  Deferring to Pierce as the better player probably cinches 
that, in an ironic way.  You see him talking to Baker on the court and 
on the sidelines, and you just have to thank your higher power for him. 
 One of those guys who may be a little soft-spoken off the court, but a 
driving, raging competitive force of nature on it.  Still, there's 
always room for improvement, and the first thing that always comes to 
mind with Walker is shot selection.  This has looked even better in the 
games I've seen so far.  I think you're always going to get 1-12 (or 
worse) nights with Walker, that's just how it's going to be.  And, I 
wouldn't want him to stop shooting on those nights, either, because he 
often pulls a decent game out of a terrible start.  Something that 
occurs to me, though, is that the team is asking a lot of Antoine: to 
cover their asses on rebounding, assists, and be the second scorer, and 
team leader, as well.  I think he's probably up to most of it, but he 
can't do everything, all the time, either.  I guess the other thing is 
that he could always improve on defense, though I think he's better 
than a lot of people give him credit for.

Paul Pierce:  Probably the team's best player (but, then again, every 
time I come to this conclusion, Walker puts together a stretch of games 
that belies it).  Definitely the smoothest offensive player.  Gets to 
any position he wants to on the court.  Needed to work on his passing 
from last year, and the preseason games shows that he seems to have 
done that.  I just hope it continues.  Still tends to drive into 
traffic and lose the ball, or get stripped on the way.  I'd say he 
needs to either be more selective in choosing when to drive, and/or 
become more adept at weaseling his way past defenders in the paint, or 
just outside of it.  If guys would cut more to the hoop (without 
allowing their defender to sag -- always the problem) they might get 
the ball more from Pierce on his drives.  And still needs to have a 
consistent form (no backing away) on free throws.  I'm not buying that 
he's a merely an "arm-waver" on D, but there's still room for 
improvement there, as well.  Like Walker, needs to make passes and 
rebound the ball, be the go-to guy, etc.  Basically, the Captains' 
roles are to do everything.  That's difficult, to say the least.  If 
one of them goes down for a significant stretch, we're hosed.

Eric Williams:  If you're not seeing the benefit of EWill on the court, 
I just don't think you're paying enough attention.  Though it is partly 
about the intangibles, it's more than that.  He's the guy saving the 
ball from going out of bounds.  He's doing the little things.  And he's 
always doing them.  I was never a huge fan, but last year made me into 
a believer, and he's looks lighter and quicker this year.  I'm still 
not buying that he's a good on-the-ball defender, but he's a good team 
defender, and that's what counts in Harter's defensive scheme anyway.  
Looks like he might take more low post opportunities this year -- with 
his quickness, if it stays around, that could be good.  Seems to be a 
glue for the first unit.  Still not a great outside shooter, but isn't 
afraid to make the extra pass, either.  I just think that the people 
who are really down on him are people who won't change their views, no 
matter what evidence may be before them.

Tony Battie:  Looking better and more consistent.  This is most 
welcome.  Still not a great positional rebounder, but if he can become 
as good a passer from the high post on a consistent basis as he showed 
in the Dallas preseason game, that'll make up for a lot of it.  The 
baseline jumper is money.  He also seems to be one of the few C's 
looking for the offensive rebound almost all the time.   Has gotten 
very very effective in the harrass-the-pick-and-roll defense.  The 
improvement with Battie has come along slowly, but it's coming.  I'm 
not so sure most people have underrated him in the past, but if they 
continue to think of him as that player in the past, and he really has 
improved as much as he seems to have, they will start underrating him 
greatly.  For the first time, I'm not only comfortable with Battie as 
starting center, I'm on the bandwagon.

Tony Delk:  Also looks like he's improved dramatically since last year, 
though how he could be worse is hard to imagine.  Not a point guard, 
but could play a decent backup of one on TV.  His starting at point 
makes me uncomfortable, but hey, something has to.  Can be an effective 
on-the-ball defender, and obviously can shoot the lights out.  Not a 
great (or even good) passer, and doesn't have a good handle, but if the 
team can maximize what he *does* do well, and minimize his faults, they 
may be on to something.  If Shammond Williams can eventually start, 
Delk might be just the ticket as the first point off the bench, a 
"microwave" of sorts.  Because if he's not scoring, you've got to pull 
him -- his defense isn't good enough to keep him in the game if he's 
not hot.

Shammond Williams:  We might have a find here.  This kid can score, and 
has a good handle, as well.  Can penetrate, and looks to dish fairly 
often when he does.  Haven't seen a lot of good passing other than when 
he does get into the lane, but I'm not so sure that's all that 
important (not that it wouldn't be nice).  Seems like his defense ain't 
half bad, either.  There's a lot to like and be hopeful about with 
Shammond.  With maturity, he may well turn into an effective guard.  
Needs to improve on all the things he's decent at, because he's not 
quite there with any them, except maybe pure scoring.  Did I mention he 
could score the basketball?  People who are still stuck on the whole 
Seattle/Earl Watson thing need to realize that it's all about what 
Shammond can do *now*, for *this* team.  Past performance means very 
little compared to what he will do throughout the upcoming season.

Kedrick Brown:  Looked to have improved incrementally before he went 
down to injury.  It's all about "could be" and "might be" with Brown 
right now.  Right now, no one can really say anything other than the 
usual phrases we're all probably so tired of: "freakishly athletic", 
"raw", et al.  I'm looking forward to getting Kedrick back, though, and 
he could really be useful coming off the bench.

Vin Baker:  Oy, vey.  That having been said, I won't call him a bust 
before the Break, either.  He always starts slow.  Looks pretty 
terrible now, but whether that will continue through the playoffs must 
be waited for.  While I'd like to divorce the contract from the play on 
the court, in today's NBA, that just can't be done.  We don't need 
Baker to actually play like a max contract guy (though that would be 
OK), but he's got to approximate playing like an effective East Coast 
big man.  There's no more to be said about him; he'll show he'll work 
out over the next year and beyond.  I wouldn't put much stock in what 
Peter May (of all people) has to say.  His job is to create conflict to 
make a "good story".  It's way, way, way too early to tell with Vinnie, 
but I'm sure that won't stop people.  (Would I rather have Rodney 
Rogers or Vin Baker, straight up?  I'd go with Rogers.  Unless Vin can 
approach max contract performance on the court, Rogers is still the 
better fit, and, arguably, even the better player.  A useless question 
to answer, though, except to make fun of Chris Wallace, which is, 
sometimes, way too easy.)

Walter McCarty:  Seems to have calmed down somewhat.  I was never a 
huge fan, but I see the benefit of bringing back a utility guy like 
Wallah.  He *can* play four positions.  He can guard two-guards.  
Remember when he was effective at center, against Shaq, of all people?  
His minutes ought to go down a bit when Brown comes back, or at least I 
hope so.  During the season, you can't fault his work ethic or energy.  
Perhaps if there's less concentration on singing during the off-season, 
he might deserve those minutes he keeps talking about getting.  Needs 
to pass more than shoot the ball, though.

Bruno Sundov:  Another possible find here.  The guy can shoot, but I 
haven't noticed one lick of defense being played.  That can be taught, 
though, especially with Harter doing the teaching.  As a guy backing up 
Walker at the four, and getting some time at center, this could be the 
best big man in a long line of backup big men that the C's have trotted 
out in the last handful of years.  Not a good rebounder, though, and 
that's worrisome in a guy who's 7'2".  Still, if used correctly, he 
could be effective.  Seems to want to do the right thing on the court, 
and shows some inkling of how to do it, which makes me think that, with 
playing time, and some good instruction from the coaching staff, he may 
turn into an effective backup big man.  An improvement over Blount 
(easily) and V (probably), especially in what the C's seem to want from 
their big men.

J.R. Bremer:  I have no real idea about what he can do.  Looks like he 
can shoot, and is built like a tank.  Everything else in conjecture 
until he plays some significant time.  Still, when you think about it, 
this may be the best third point option the Celts have had in a long 
while.  Maybe.

Ruben Wolkowyski:  Again, not enough info.  Looks like he can score 
down low, and may be a decent rebounder.  On the other hand, I suspect 
defense is non-existent (at least until I see some).  While I liked V's 
game (other than the very apparent faults -- *cough* brick hands 
*cough*), W may be better suited to what the C's want from their big 
men.  Possibly.

The Coaches:  I don't think Obie is a "moron" or "insane".  I don't 
know why he's doing some things, like playing the Caps 40 minutes/game 
in the preseason.  While I can see that he wants to simulate the 
regular season in order to prepare the team, I don't see the 
percentages in it myself.  And I'm not sure he's handling Vin Baker in 
the best way, but then again, this is Obie-won we're talking about 
here: even his detractors (well, the rational ones, anyway) have got to 
give him his props in regards to personnel management.  If anyone can 
handle Baker in a good way, Jimmy O'Brien can.  Obie gets a lot of 
heat, because we all think, at various points, we're better at 
basketball than he is -- because we played on our high school team, or 
because we sit on our couches watching a lot of basketball, or because 
we go to the games.  We're all guilty of that.  Maybe, just maybe, he 
knows just enough to do well.  He surprised a lot of people last season 
with how well he (and the team) did (and don't give me a lot of hooey 
about how it was *all* the mid-season trade's effect, though it 
certainly helped) -- he had the team playing pretty well before that.  
Not designing *any* plays for Baker, though?  That doesn't seem good.  
The Eric Williams Lovefest?  I'm seeing why.  The Destroyer of Dayton?  
Old news; move on, there's nothing to see here.  No offensive strategy? 
 Well, there is one, but I'm not sure it'll be all that effective.

As for Dick Harter, thank god.  If anyone can re-create (or even 
surpass) the defensive clamp that was last year's team, it's Dick 
Harter.  As for the other guys, I have no idea what they do, much less 
how well they do it.

Well, that's about it.  As far as the players from 1-12, this could be 
the best bunch of talent we've had in a while.  The Captains are 
entering their prime, some key guys have improved their games, and the 
new guys could be better that some of the flotsam and jetsam the roster 
has held the last few years.  I'd rather have Sundov than Blount; 
Bremer may be better than the rotating third-point-guard-of-the-month; 
while none of our point guards are better (or even close) point guards 
than Kenny Anderson, they may fit into the gameplan better -- at least 
during the regular season.  The C's may struggle without a "true" point 
in the playoffs, though, where the emphasis is on getting the ball to 
scorers against much more pressure.  Are their concerns?  Oh yeah.  
There are always concerns.  But I'm guardedly optimistic.  Things 
aren't ever as bad as the "sky is falling" crowd here thinks.  They're 
never quite as good as the most optimistic of us thinks, either.  The 
East is wide open yet again, and for all the talk of how good the 
Hornets are, or the Nets are, the C's can easily compete, given the 
right situation and lack of injuries.  I'll predict after the final 
preseason game, but it won't be some barely .500 or worse 
prognostication.  You've got to roll with the punches, people -- 
preseason does not a season make.

Bird