From: CeltsSteve@xxxxxxx To: Celtics@xxxxxxxx Subject: Re: is there... Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2003 13:10:54 EST
In a message dated 11/8/03 8:07:57 AM Pacific Standard Time, Eggcentric@xxxxxxx writes:
> Steve, I realize you are still upset over Pitino and now Walker no longer
> being part of our team. Yet anyone who has watched the Celts certainly must
> realize that we alternate between looking GREAT one quarter (new up-tempo
> style) and DISMAL the very next quarter (reverting back to last season's classic
> Obie offense). And so we sit here wondering how our coach can allow this -
> each act a course, each scene a different dish - to cause so many games to
> slip away.
>
> The real debate here is over Pierce taking it upon himself to play iso God,
> and whether or not that is Obie's idea or his.
>
> In either case, Kestas is right -our team's floor style, all four periods of
> each game, is absolutely OBIE'S RESPONSIBILITY. If Obie does not approve of
> what he is seeing on the court, then let him call a time out to reinforce
> the principles he has allegedly been preaching. Can you honestly say you feel
> he is doing this?
Brenda, now why did I just KNOW you'd try to add a response to anything that
Kestas (or Mark B.) posted especially if I might have responded with an
opposite point of view? Might it be your propensity to generally be their biggest
cheerleader on this list or might it be the fact that you, too, hold a well
documented disdain (is hate too strong of a word?) for O'Brien? And Lord knows
Paul is pretty much infallible in your eyes to begin with so anyone who holds his
feet to the fire MUST be wrong, right?.
We've been over this many, many times before. I have NO problem with Pitino
being gone. I was against him coming to the C's in the first place so it was
absolutely no problem to see him leave. I'm also not upset over Walker being
gone. It was a decision that Ainge made and we've/I've moved on.
What I am upset about -- frustrated is a much better word -- are the group of
what I'll label as "enablers" on this list and among Celtic fans in general
who held Walker to one standard and Pierce to another. With Walker now gone. I
would expect the same degree of objectivity and better yet, accountability,
from those same fans as it relates to Pierce that they previously held Antoine
to. Even your boy Peter May in today's column told it like is 'tis and fingered
Pierce. Hell, to Pierce's credit, he at least tried to step up and admitted
something to the effect it was his poor decision making that resulted in the
loss last night.
As I responded to Lapdoggy earlier this morning on the other list, I know
there might be many folks who would laugh or scoff at what I am about to say but
I truly am NOT a Paul Pierce hater. I really do love the kid and what he can
do for the C's.
What I am, though, is an equal opportunity "basher". Paul has had a free ride
for 5 years from the Boston media. It's been a love fest of sorts. Much of it
deserved but a lot of his warts, faults, shortcomings, lapses, and brain
farts on the court have been overlooked or greatly down played.
Well, the other Captain is now gone. He was bashed relentlessly and
unmercifully; much of the bashing was deserved and some (much?) undeserved. That
matters not now. He is gone and the spotlight's glare falls solely on Paul Pierce. I
am going to make a concerted effort to make sure that when Paul does well and
deserves effusive praise he gets it. Conversely, when Paul screws up and
deserves to be called out I'm going to do that as well. Last night's loss falls on
him and him alone; not O'Brien, not Chris Wallace, not the bench, not the
lack of a PG, and certainly not Antoine.
The gloves are off. No more free rides. I applaud Peter May for writing what
he did today as I have been a critic of his in the past as well.
> <Kestas, the game wasn't lost in that sequence you are citing in the second
> quarter. >- CeltsSteve
>
> Irrelevant to this overall debate and to the salient points Kestas has
> advanced.
No, my point about the game not being lost in the second quarter was not
irrelevant to the "salient" points Kestas was advancing. Kestas was on a fishing
expedition IMO. The whole world saw Pierce commit 3 critical TOs down the
stretch in a game that was very winnable. It was tied 84 - 84 with about 3 minutes
or so left to play. The sequence Kestas referred to happened in the first
half and despite Pierce's antics at that juncture of the game -- which Kestas and
you are trying to blame O'Brien for -- the team was still in a position to
win the game with 3 minutes to play. But by transfer of blame to O'Brien for
something that occurred in the 1st half, you are conveniently trying to shift
accountability away from Pierce's critical TOs in crunch time as if those, too,
were O'Brien's fault. O'Brien didn't commit those three TOs; nor did Ainge nor
Chris Wallace nor Pitino.
Nice try, but I'm sorry . . . that dog won't hunt. Despite Pierce's antics
in the second quarter there still was time for O'Brien to make adjustments
and get the team back in a position to win the game. Unfortunately, there was no
more time for adjustments by the coach with only three minutes to play
because of three "bad decisions" as our Captain called them.
> <Nobody on this list, you included, is gullible enough to believe that
> OBrien purposely told Pierce: "Paul, on the next 4 possessions I want you to go
> one on five come hell or high water. Don't pass, don't drive and dish, don't
> do anything but put the whole team on your back and try to win this game
> right here and right now in the 2nd quarter before intermission. > -CeltsSteve
>
> Of course few of us are gullible enough to believe Obie would direct Pierce
> to perform in that exact fashion. It does not, however, preclude the
> possibility that Obie directed that the ball should go to Pierce, not anticipating
> the turnovers and 4 on1's.
On that I would agree completely with you. I don't know definitively one way
or the other because as I said, I only watched the game from home and it was
in that context that I also asked Kestas if he might have attended the game and
heard or saw something that he could share with us as to why he felt so
strongly that O'Brien DID direct Pierce to go iso in the 2nd quarter as it was that
point of view from him as basis of his point on why the C's lost the game to
begin with and not Pierce's critical TOs down the stretch. Did you attend the
game? Perhaps you might have heard O'Brien say something that you could share
with us. I have to believe it was NOT O'Brien specifically telling Pierce to
go iso because it would seem to me if O'Brien wanted the team to get the ball
to Pierce that is one thing. But the stretch in question as I recall and
without benefit of the replay tape was pretty much all Paul; all iso with him
handling the ball and not coming off screens or getting the ball from the PGs.
> What many of us do understand and what you clearly DO NOT understand is
> that it is Obie's responsibility to fix whatever breaks. If Pierce or any other
> players are not serving as Obie floor reps in his preferred system, then put
> on the floor players who will.
>
> But he doesn't, because he is a tunnel-vision bench coach who relies upon
> his assistants to map out general pregame strategies like ''Get the ball to
> Pierce.'' Come game time, he is rendered helpless to make significant changes
> no matter the flow of the game.
>
> What a bore it must be for Obie to wake up every morning as the same person.
> - Egg
Oh I understand CLEARLY and agree with you and Kestas that it is O'Brien's
responsibility and in his job description to serve as the bench coach and to be
able to make changes on the fly as game situations and match ups dictate. I
also understand clearly that as the head coach, there is also an unwritten
commonly accepted notion and practice of trusting in your players -- especially
your star player, nay superstar player in this case -- and not trying to cause a
spectacle of publicly benching him by pulling him out of a game because said
superstar tries to do too much and takes it upon himself to carry the offense
for a 3 or 4 minute stretch of time; especially in the 2nd quarter right before
half-time. Apparently, that is a salient point you CLEARLY do not grasp or
understand.
By the way, how is Larry Johnson enjoying his retirement/buyout checks these
days?
CeltsSteve