back to basics

[Ryan Lee <rlee_at_channing@xxxxxxxxx>]

hey C-listers,

totally agree with Berry's and Kesta's comments. as usual you guys are right on the money.  Carroll may not be a premier coach but at least he has some common sense like start Mihm. Anyway I wanted to forward you all a letter I wrote to Mike Holley of the Globe yesterday.

 

-----Original Message-----

From: Ryan Lee

Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2004 3:01 PM

To: holley@xxxxxxxxx

Subject: response to 1/28/04 O'Biren column

 

Dear Mr. Holley,

I read your sports column daily and more often than not, I usually agree with what you write. Having read your article today about O'Brien's departure and how Ainge is detrimental to the Celtics' future, I have to disagree. The only reason I'm writing is that I find it distressing that alot of the media do not see the big picture. Yes Obie, brought alot of chemistry to the team, he was able to handle Walker's big ego, he made a defender out of Kenny Anderson, and he nearly led the Celtics to the Finals a few year's back but I still think that Obie is an overrated coach who took advantage of the situation.

When Obie first took over for the Ricktator, it was clear as day that the players had quit on Pitino. They were tired of Rick's disciplinary ways and his overbearing ego. Obie assumes control and all of a sudden the team becomes competitive? Did Obie install some sort of revolutionary offensive scheme that turned the team into a contender? No he didn't, all he did was lay off the reins a little and gave the players some freedom. The players responded by playing harder and actually listening. If anything Obie just has better people skills than Pitino. Does that automatically make him a great coach? 

In regards to the Obie's successful tenure with the Celtics, I feel that it is more from having Dick Harter's defensive schemes than Obie's overall coaching skills. Harter is to Obie as Tex Winter is to Phil Jackson. Without Harter the Celtics would still be languishing near the bottom of the East because ,frankly, O'brien's offense certainly was not any better than Pitino's. When Walker was here, OBrien's more or less kept Pitino's offensive scheme of having Toine and Pierce dominate the ball with 3 spot up shooters standing around not moving. That was successful strategy enough for a couple of years since the East was in constant flux with players constantly switching teams. Having had the same squad for 5 years, the Celts' chemistry was alot better than the rest of the East.

it helped that Eastern conference had and still has a shortage of talent. So the Celts with Obie's somewhat flawed offense and Harter's solid defense enjoyed success for the first time in a long while. After a few years of seeing the same thing over and over again from the Celts, teams made adjustments and figured out the shortcomings of an offense with so little ball distribution. stick an athletic big man on Walker to keep toine from going inside, also let Walker build a house of 3 point bricks, and force Pierce to carry the team since the Big Two rarely passed out anyway (and don't be misled by Walker's assist numbers, alot of those passes were to Pierce). But was Obie able to counter those adjustments last season? no he didn't, he kept the same ballhogging principles that had amazingly worked in the past and as a result we got swept by the Nets the next time around. And that was a Nets team that was more or less identical to the one they faced in the eastern conference finals the
 previous year. A good coach would know how to adapt and keep the other teams guessing.

I have to admit that with the celts success the past few years, I too was fooled into believing that Obie was a coaching godsend. I still couldn't tolerate Walker's selfish game but I figured as long as the wins were coming, who cares that the Celts shot too many 3s? But this season was an eye opener specifically in regards to Vin Baker. Obie must have had some sort of bias to playing Baker since Walker was always his favorite forward. It absolutely disgusted me this season how O'Brien anchored Vin on the bench due to "defensive inconsistencies". When Vin got the ball more than say 5 times a game, he put up great numbers and even led the celts in field goal percentages. Early during this season when Baker was playing great ball, he was touching the ball frequently and abusing the other team's forwards. But all of a sudden for some unbeknowst reason, way before the alcohol violations occurred, Obie stopped having the team give Vin the ball. He went from shooting 10 shots a game to
 only getting the ball 3-4 times a game. Unless you're Bruce bowen, no player can be inspired to play any basketball much less any defense if they're not getting the ball. I'm sure it was frustrating for Vin to work his way in the post to get open only to have Mike James throw it up for a 3. Also Vin's benching had nothing to do with his "lack" of defense. Vin was never a great defender even during his hey day but this season, I rarely saw Vin get completely blown by. Obie would give people the impression that Vin was literally a statue on defense which he was not. And it's not like Walker was any better on D since no-names like Marcus Fizer would abuse Toine in the post. 

And so Vin languished on the pine until he probably got depressed and hit the bottle again because his imbecilic coach had a grudge against him. 



what made things even worse for the C's was that Obie basically abandoned the low post completely and decided that waltah and blount would be starters. The whole offense became a 3 point bonanza with Pierce, Mike James, and Waltah of all people leading the charge. Then it would be hilarious to hear Obie sound like a broken record player during the post game interview giving you media guys the same reasons over and over again about why they lost:

"we're not getting enough scoring in the post", "not enough rebounding", "our defense was terrible". The funny and ironic thing is he had low post scoring in Vin who was wasting away on the bench and a plethora of rebounders in Perkins, Mihm, and Hunter. But yet he continued to play inferior 3rd string players because they were his sentimental "defensive" favorites. 

It should have been common sense to obie that: if you don't play your best players, you will lose. The only thing I was surprised about was that Obie actually played Jiri this season. It totally went against his philosophy of playing rookies major minutes. But sadly Jiri has been relegated to becoming a 3 point spot up shooter lately probably due to Obie.

I fully support Ainge's moves because the celts have the potential of being a championship squad maybe not this year but definitely down the road. The team is quicker and more atheltic now and all it needs is a REAL coach to bring them together and play the right combination of people. It's clear as day that the celtics were not going to go anywhere with Toine as evidenced by the thrashing the nets gave Boston during the playoff rematch. As long as walker and pierce were on the same team, Obie was going to play the same tired old offensive schemes. And if by some chance that the celts had made the finals with walker this year, do you really think they stand a chance against a playoff ready Lakers, Kings, or Spurs team? 

Furthermore on a side note, walker was allowed to play major minutes and blossom as a player during ML Carr's regime and is now a possible all-star candidate because of his trials and tribulations. Doesn't it make sense for Banks, Perkins, Mihm, and Davis to have the same trial by fire to see if they too can develop into something special? Under Obie's strategy, walker would not have seen the light of day as a rookie. I think that you're being too extreme in pinning all the losses on ainge and it's wrong to make Obie into this coaching saint when clearly he is not.

Regards,

Ryan Lee
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!