Re: Pierce's role: Co-star to leading man

[Ryan W <ubiquitous_am_i@xxxxxxxxx>]

Not to get brain doctor on your ass, but you seem a
little defiant in your responses (not that that's
necessarily a bad thing)...

--- Kestutis Kveraga <Kestutis.Kveraga@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> --- You wrote:
> Yeah, crazy talk from E.  But apparently everybody
> has
> their own theory on how to get thru to Antoine (as
> evidenced by this list).  It seems the E was the
> only
> one who ever truly knew Toine.  You've got to
> imagine
> the fact that E got traded so quickly after Pitino
> was
> hired to be one of those early moments where Toine
> began to lose respect for Rick.  Would it all have
> been different if we hadn't originally traded E?  We
> would have had a happy Walker (or at least a happier
> Walker).  We would have had a great small forward in
> pre-injury E (and I think this year is showing that
> post-injury E could have been comparable to
> pre-injury
> E had we given him the opportunities).  Even though
> we
> got E back, I would submit that the trading of Eric
> Williams was the worst Pitino trade ever (and I
> hated
> the Billups trade from Day 1, though it kinda worked
> out for us)...
> 
> +++ No, E was different then (yet another example of
> how being traded can
> change one's mentality). Besides, E or E, Walker was
> the same. 

Just for the sake of argument, I would say that it was
probably the knee injury that spurred his
rejuvination, not the trade to Denver.  Then again,
going to Denver seemed to like a fire under Blount's
ass.

> 
> Yeah, but notice how the potential rift between
> Baker
> and Pierce appears to have been mended (from the
> Baker
> comments that you haven't quoted that appeared in
> the
> original article) while the rift (assuming there was
> one) between Kedrick and Paul has not been mended. 
> This partially explains one thing I've noticed about
> Kedrick...he doesn't seem particularily close to the
> team.  When you see shots of the team celebrating on
> the bench, usually Kedrick is celebrating on his
> own,
> while other players are bumping chests or
> high-fiving.
>  Even on the court, there really isn't much
> comaraderie between Kedrick and the other players. 
> Is
> this a product of Kedrick's personality (is he just
> a
> loner) or is it some team wide hostility.  Who
> knows...but it is bothersome (if Kedrick doesn't
> feel
> a part of the team, it will definitely affect his
> play).
> 
> 
> +++ "Rift" is the wrong word to use, IMO. It applies
> a disagreement between
> equals. It sounds to me like Baker and Kedrick were
> definitely on the bottom of
> the teams' social hierarchy and maybe still are.
> Neither seems to have the
> balls to stand up to anyone. 

Sometimes, it's simply one's personality to be like
that and it's not a question of having balls or guts
or the courage to stand up to someone.  Another aspect
of this are the group dynamics at play...like you
said, both are at the bottom of the teams' social
hierarchy.  How does one fix that?  The coach fixes
that, by recognizing it and addressing it.  How do you
address it?  Make the two players more important to
the team.  If O'Brien went out of his way to get more
touches for Baker, or more alley-opps for Kedrick or
some post-up opportunties (I believe he's best in the
post--think back to college where he played power
forward--in the Chicago game he was getting all his
points in the inside...even a running lefthander)--in
short, getting those two more involved by showing them
that their success is crucial to the team's
success--then both players would gain more confidence,
their expectations would rise, they'd be more likely
to grab at the proverbial chalice of life.  With this
change in confidence, the teams' perception would
change, along with the group dynamic.  You can already
see that happening with Vinnie.  Of course, O'Brien's
not deep enough for that (or if he's deep enough, then
he doesn't think it would do any good)...we'd need a
coach like Phil Jackson to think so outside of the
box.  
> 
> 
> 
> On this last comment regarding body language, you're
> sounding a lot like the Brain Doctor (remember, I'm
> the only one on this list who actually is giving
> Ainge
> the benefit of the doubt on the Brain doctor, so
> this
> is not necessarily a bad thing).  I watched the same
> exchange and got the opposite impression.  I sensed
> that is was a good move on Paul's part (since it was
> a
> bad shot) and that Marcus was receptive to it.  
> --- end of quote ---
> 
> +++ I'm not inferring the entire personality from
> this, or career prospects,
> like the infamous Niednagel. Regardless, it's very
> possible I could be wrong
> about my inference.
> Kestas

True that, Kestas (the part about inferring career
prospects and the like from body language).  But it
seems to me that "going Brain doctor" is the act of
attaching extraordinary meaning to the personalized
manner in which we perceive reality (Niednagel has
just structured his in a scientific sounding manner). 
If that's the case, then we're all closet Brain
Doctors.  

Ryan


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