Re: So what exactly did Heinsohn say?

["Thomas Murphy" <tfmiii@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 12:58:35 EST
> From: Eggcentric@xxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: So what exactly did Heinsohn say?

I'm glad to see the fears concerning "censorship" were ill-founded...

> A bit late but....
>
> < Gotta love Peter May's column today: gee, wonder which side on Obiegate
>  Van Grundy will take? What intrepid reporting.
>
> ... The only bad side of Obie's leaving the bench (I won't say "quit,"
since
>  he did that long before he tendered his resignation) is that he can't
take
>  the media hacks with him on his way out of town. Mark Murphy salivates
> over the prospect of Obie coaching in NJ with Eric Williams and Mark
> Blount at his side.
>
> ... What happened to the days when journalists reported rather than
>  editorialized.  (Egg - I thought many of this list's gripes with the
> local press were due to them merely reporting factual quotes rather
> than stating their own twisted minds)... or did they ever exist?
> When we start taking the "wisdom" of Springer, Murphy and May over
> the words of Cousy, Max and Heinsohn (Egg: which groupsb livelihood is
> dependent on being past or present Celt-friendly?)

I think that applies fairly equally to both groups. Cousy I think is above
reproach, nor is he financially dependent upon the Celts. I'm fairly
confident about Max too, although I'm sure he tones things down a bit.
Heinsohn has been and always will be a tool for the company.

Springer appears to be a hard-working, ambitious person who is looking to
cultivate contacts in order to advance her career. She doesn't seem to know
too much about basketball however. Ditto Murphy.  May lost interest long
ago... he's what these younger folks hope to be: someone who knows former
players and coaches around the league and can put the touch on them for info
now that they are manning the coaching, broadcast, league and management
ranks. So please don't pretend that the writers have no career interests in
cultivating contacts around the league. When they're given the chance to
cozy up to one relatively powerful individual (who the betting is won't be
around for long) and in so doing burn their bridges with contacts cultivated
over the past 3-6 years... which way do you think they'll jump?

Plus, as we well know from more "serious" forms of journalism, the dynamic
of the press pool is not exactly the equivalent of Solomon's court -- see
below.

> -- and, I might add,
> the plain evidence of our own eyes -- it will be a sad day. >
> - - Tom Murphy
>
> It's all a CONSPIRACY, Tom.
>

Really? I would have put it down to the usual suspects: cliquishness,
laziness, and typecasting  -- all resulting in the familiar phenomenon known
as pack journalism.

But I've got to admit, you really wailed on that strawman wicked fierce.

>     ''If the early days of Ainge's leadership indicate what is to
>     come, the future is nothing to look forward to.<''  - Holley, 1/28
>
>     ''There have been some noted lows in franchise history, but few
>     have been lower than this.<''  - Ryan, 1/28
>
>     <''There is a growing sense that the organization is adrift, that
>     Ainge is trying to move to fast and that while he may know his
>     basketball,he is a little weak in the people department.<''
>     - Ryan, 1/28
>
>     <''They (Wyc and Steve) are now presiding over a certified disaster
>     of a franchise.<'' - Ryan, 1/28
>
>     ''You wonder where Ainge is taking the Celtics.<'' - Jackie Mac,1/28
>
>     <''He (Ainge) looked at it strictly as a basketball transaction, both
>     in terms of talent and cap space, and later explained he thought
>     chemistry and leadership were overrated. Apparently, he thinks
>     defense is overrated, too.<''  - Jackie Mac, 1/28
>
>     <''This is where I part company with Ainge. You cannot measure
>     athletes or coaches strictly on points and rebounds, or X's and O's.
>     Character does matter. Chemistry is essential.<'' - Jackie Mac, 1/28
>
> <   ''With these things, there always has to be a reason, there always
>     has to be somebody that's at fault. But I don't really think that
>     I'm at fault.<'' - Ainge via Shira, 1/28
>
>     <''Time will judge whether Ainge's moves to date will strengthen
>     the Celtics' bid to win or fate them to more visits to the draft
>     lottery.  But there is no question that Ainge and the C's needed
>     O'Brien's stability through the storm.<''  - Bulpett, 1/28
>
>     ''But word from two sources yesterday was that perceived pressure
>     from ownership (Egg - these are the real culprits; Ainge is but their
>     puppet) had more to do with O'Brien's call. Maybe he saw imperfection
>     on an even higher plane than Ainge and sought to avoid an expected
>     crash.'' - Bulpett, 1/28
>
>     <''Two Celtics sources confirmed that O'Brien was angered by
>     comments from Wyc Grousbeck in a Herald story last Sunday. The
>     Celtics owner spoke of his expectations in light of the team's two
>     major trades this season, and that the organization never
>     ``consciously'' took a stepback when deciding to make the trades.<''
>     - Murphy, 1/28
>
>     ''The playing time of Banks and Hunter noticeably increased over
>     the last two weeks. Ainge, however, expressed surprise that O'Brien
>     would find his methods intrusive.<''  - Murphy, 1/28
>
> Oh no, has the local Press upset you by backing up what I had vehemently
> been shrieking and squeaking in fifty different sharps and flats?  Or do
> you merely feel they, too, are idiots for thinking as they do?

No, not upset at all. I'm quite familiar with the Boston press, particularly
with how they love to hate their sports figures.

Statements like the Celtics being a "certified disaster of a franchise," or
the "future is nothing to look forward to" hardly instills one with a sense
that this represents a balanced assessment of the current situation. Maybe
of Coach Carroll's abilities, but hardly of the franchise.

Ask yourself this: are you really are prepared to agree with those two
statements? ( I think I know Egg's answer, but does this really jive with
what the rest of you think?)

As for the press backing what you claim to have been "shrieking," that is
far from clear. Questions about the value of stability, team chemistry, and
Ainge's vision of the future are what they are talking about. There are
perhaps two comments that can be construed as supporting your case: the one
about Ainge being a "little weak in the people department" (coming from Bob
"I'd like to smack Joumana Kidd" Ryan no less -- now THERE'S people skills
for you) and the mystifying comment regarding Ainge being intrusive. I say
mystifying because we are talking about a coach whose previous career can be
basically summed up as: "Pitino's assistant." As I recall, Pitino was
anything but a shrinking violet, so are we to take it that Ainge is in
reality so much more intrusive than Pitino? Or does it have something to do
with the fact that ANYBODY hired to run the franchise would by definition
limit some of the virtually unprecedented freedom that Obie had enjoyed as a
coach?

So in sum, I'd have to say that despite their hostility towards Ainge the
press has not endorsed the "Portrait of Dorian Grey" imagery you've been
painting.

You ask if think the members of the press are idiots? I imagine what you're
really asking is if I agree or disagree with their assessments -- since it
actually is possible for two people to disagree without one of them
necessarily being an "idiot." It should be clear that I do NOT agree with
their vision of the future regarding this franchise, for reasons previously
mentioned, and I suspect that I am not alone in that regard. Does that make
me -- or anyone else who shares that opinion -- an "idiot"?

And BTW I never called you an "idiot"--as you so clevery attempted to
insinuate.

Egg: "Or do you merely feel they, too, are idiots..."

Am I to to be subjected to the "Danny treatment" too?

My, you ARE a tricksy Egg....

> Due to my naivete,  I had originally hoped that I might balance/add a bit
> of color to the IGTC list by stabbing at all the <''perceived<''
falsehoods
> I was reading about Ainge.  I felt if I merely spoke truths as I knew
> them to be and honestly attempted to back up such assertions
> (recently downgraded to innuendo) it might add a bit of input, a
> dissenting voice to this pro-Danny list.  Cheesh, do you think I failed?
> Not the first time in my life, I assure you, and probably not the last.

Have you failed to add color? No.

Have you failed to back up your "assertions"? Assuredly yes!

After all, if you had backed them up we wouldn't be having this
conversation, would we?

> Coming from someone I so respected, your remarks sure got me wondering
> if I had merely allowed my brain to lie where my heart and eyes lay.  But
> then I rationalized that maybe it was just a case of truth forever on the
> scaffold, wrong forever on the throne?

Okay.... (puzzled look)

> Ever true to myself (don't you dare fall asleep on me now; it's not even
> 1 PM yet), I came up with this. It is what has kept me ticking while all
> was not clicking.  Here it is, DRUM ROLL PLEASE.
>
> Just maybe, the highy-respected (at least by me) Tom Murphy, the seldom
> heard from lurker Adam Litchy (except for the three times per Bball season
> he feels he cannot stand to read yet one more post from the half-crazed
Egg),
> and our favorite chameleon (step to the front, DForant, and take a bow)
> should begin to acknowledge our teambs realities and face them without
> soft concealments and the spreading of blame to all the wrong places...
i.e.
> this precious little Egg... you sh-tl-ss bullies!!!!!!!!

Who is blaming you for the state of the franchise?

Who is bullying you?

Why are you resorting to ad hominem attacks?

And why do you insist on portraying yourself as a victim?

> Can't stand to hear negative opinions oh mighty Celt experts?  Betcha
> you would likely enjoy watching the Celts more if you had never added
> your written-in-ink tomes to such a mouth board.  I always wondered
> how that worked... like for instance, if you bravely state you don't
> like Pierce, do you then hope he goes 1 for 20 with 6 TO's each game?

I've never claimed to be an expert, so you can drop the mocking honorific.

I not only can stand hearing negative opinions, I can dish them out too. I
do prefer, however, to dish out criticism or praise on the basis of what I
can observe or deduce... not on the "say so" of an internet "source" who has
the "inside dope" from... what was it? a neighbor's friend's roommate's
boyfriend?

As for how rooting against the Celts works, you'll have to ask someone else.
I wouldn't know.

Cheers - TomM

> Sincerely,
>
> The Deviled Egg
> (leftover from SB party; dizzied and dazzled, but sorta hanging in)