[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Celtics Mailbag: Mike Gorman Answers more questions

I would argue though, that many of them were as good as they were because Red taught them how to play the right way. I keep going back to Belichick and the Pats. The Pats have many players playing great right now who have not done well on other teams in recent years. Doesn't the coach get a lot of credit there?

Same with the C's in my opinion. I don't think a lot of the guys Red had would have been nearly as good in other places. I think it was because Red knew how to motivate them and how to coach them. My original point was not that the Celts never had good players. It was that Red got the most out of what he had, no matter how good or bad the player was. That's opposite of Phil Jackson, who just goes to whatever team has the best player in the league, does nothing, and then takes claims to be a better caoch than Red.


From: "Jim Hill" <jahill199@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: <jahill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Celtics" <celtics@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Celtics Mailbag: Mike Gorman Answers more questions
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 23:59:47 -0500

<Also, when you look at Red's teams, he often didn't have 'superstar'
players. >

Not to quibble, but how many of the top fifty to ever play the game were on
the teams Red coached?  He had some pretty darn good players himself.

Good points though.

<Jim


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.551 / Virus Database: 343 - Release Date: 12/11/2003

_________________________________________________________________
Expand your wine savvy  and get some great new recipes  at MSN Wine. http://wine.msn.com