RE: Pierce

["R. Singh" <keltsfan@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Ryan,

I think Ainge and Co, as well as some thoughtful posters on this and the
celticstuff board, considered the negative impact that would occur to
Pierce's game when Walker was traded.  However Ainge is thinking that
long term, Marcus Banks or perhaps another yet to be acquired player
will be able to be the dynamic playmaker and, potentially, the scorer
that Pierce needs beside him. 

Much in the long term depends on Banks ability to deliver the goods but
also on O'Brien's ability to implement the type of game that Ainge
envisions the Celtics playing. 

But as I alluded to in another post, the question is: what is the long
term?  Pierce is soon to be approaching his prime and in the NBA the
window closes rapidly unless a team is blessed with a Shaquille O'Neal
or Tim Duncan type of big man or a LeBron James type of "small man"
talent. 

Ravi

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-celtics@xxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-celtics@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Ryan W
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 6:25 PM
To: celtics@xxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Pierce


--- Josh Ozersky <jozersky1@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I saw where Ravi put quote marks around Pierce's
> "star."  Pierce is a star; I don't think you can
> help him
> by bringing in another guy (e.g. Ray Allen) who
> plays
> his name position.  If Pierce doesn't start playing
> like
> himself again, it won't matter who we get.  And if
> he
> does start playing to the level we're used to, he
> won't
> need another all-star 2 or 3 to help him.

This is a good question, and one we really haven't
broached yet on this list.  Why is Pierce playing so
unlike himself?  His shooting is off, but like O'Brien
said in his post game interview last night, to hell
with shooting; it's how you play that matters.  And he
hasn't been playing well (at least compared to what
he's done in the past) as his court presence has been up-and-down as
well.  Some nights, he's a step or two ahead of the game (like against
Indiana) and other games he's way behind (like last night; but don't
underestimate the effect Pippen's "defense" had on that; with all those
sneaky slaps to the wrist, all the bumps that weren't called--that never
seem to get called--Pierce's flow was hampered).  While I have
confidence that eventually Pierce will "put it together" I think it's
within reason to question the role that has been thrust upon him.  It
seems that we're trying to make Pierce into the player that Antoine
SHOULD have been, yet doing this with a player without the same skill
set.  Pierce is great because he can score in every way ever devised.
Yet the coaching staff is compelling Pierce to be a playmaker; to get
others involved.  Why?  Well the point guard situation is one reason,
but it's not the only one. 
There's nothing preventing us from devising
quick-hitting plays (as Tommy calls them, 2 dribble
drives) where Paul gets the ball, makes a move to the
basket in 2 dribbles or less.  This is why he isn't
shooting as many free throws (that and Antoine's not
around to set him up with so many great looks).  We're
asking Pierce to "create."  We're asking him to
dribble, break the double team and find the open man. 
Pierce CAN do it, but just has been doing it
inconsistently so far.  But SHOULD he be doing it? 
We'll see.

Another question that begs to be asked and answered is
one that most of us (I assume) are subconsciously
repressing.  It is:  Was Pierce as great a player as
he appeared to be (since Pitino left) because of the
looks generated by Antoine?  It's a question I'll
leave to others for now, because I think with time
Pierce can "put it together" in his new role, but
nonetheless, did any of us (Ainge especially) even
consider the possible negative effect to Paul's game
that might occur if Antoine was traded?  To my
knowledge, it was never discussed.  Hell, I myself
made the comment that Paul would benefit from his
absence.  But that must be questioned...
  
> I'm comfortable
> with the idea of Pierce being the featured scorer in
> a
> motion offense a la the Jordan Bulls or the Karl
> Malone
> Jazz.  But obviously, you need the whole team to
> play
> well around him, and a point guard to run the show
> and
> handle the ball.  A veteran would help a lot right
> now.  I
> believe in Banks, but I would like to put James on
> the
> bench and let an experienced PG run the first unit.
> The
> guy can't be a defensive liability like Brevin
> Knight, either;
> he needs to be big and aggressive and sturdy, or at
> least
> long.  If only Jiri weren't so slow, he would be a
> good
> stopgap; when he's out there, he's the de facto
> point
> because his floor game and court sense are so good.
> I really would like to see him get some of James'
> minutes,

The reason we didn't run AT ALL last night, or that
much in the past couple games, is a problem that
starts and ends with the point guards.  James is
seriously limited.  Banks has been "scared straight". 
O'Brien must come to the realization that if you're
going to be a running team you have to have the
confidence in your points to make risky passes.  We
all know how much Tommy screams about advancing the
ball or how this-or-that player is open when it
appears he's covered.  The thing is, that player is
open, except we never attempt to risky pass.  We need
to unleash our latent abilities.  We need to throw a
couple risky passes, EVEN IF THEY RESULT IN TURNOVERS,
just to keep that fast break mindset alive and to keep
the other team honest.  And this need to throw risky
passes applies in the halfcourt as well.  How many
alley-opps have we thrown in the halfcourt?  None. 
And this is with a player, Kedrick Brown, whose best
asset right now is his ability to jump.  The reason we
don't throw them is because O'Brien is, by nature, a conservative coach.
He needs to loosen up...and the run game will return.

> much like I would like to see Hunter get minutes
> from
> Walter, Brown, and LaFrentz.  We could've used a few
> rebounds last night.

This is preposturous.  Hunter is a bruiser.  His lack
of agility is obvious.  He'll have a future in this
league because he's a hard worker and has built
himself a Ben Wallace type body.  I believe he'll
eventually gain enough agility to be a Malik Rose type
player, but that's down the road.  To give him minutes
over Kedrick and LaFrentz would be stupid.  Of course,
anything that limits Walter's minutes would be a good
thing.  Actually, it was a decent move last night by
O'Brien to insert Walter.  He obviously noticed a lack
of overall hustle and willingness to run.  So at least
we know he can percieve.  The thing is, he inserted
the wrong "engergizer".  Chicago was playing a mean
zone (so mean that they should have been called for
defensive three seconds quite a few times).  What
breaks zones?  Three-point shooting and slashing. 
Who's on the bench that could provide those things? 
Jumaine Jones.  He's a better shooter than Walter, and
a better man off-the-dribble.  He should have been
given Walter's minutes last night...

>But again -- what does any of
> this
> matter if Pierce can't make big shots for us?
> 
> Josh

Josh, one thing before I end; good job on this week's
article for hoopsworld.  It was, for my money, one of
the best articles you ever written for that site.  


Ryan

P.S. (since apparently nobody's adroit enough to read
through an entire post, let me make this hidden
comment where it's sure to be ignored: If something is inappropriate [or
at least is alleged to be inappropriate], yet no one notices it, is it,
in turn, inappropriate to bring such undetected "inappropriateness" to
the forefront?  Just wondering...)

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree