Re: Sons of Gene

["Berry, Mark S" <berrym@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Kestas and Tammo brought up Marcus Banks, Chucky Atkins and our point
guard situation.



I have to agree with all the points you've made. Chucky, who I really
like so far, is a defensive sieve. No question. When you're torched by
Milt Palacio, you know you can't play defense. And we all remember
Kenny's play against Chucky in the playoffs.



I also agree that the reason Chucky has looked SO good isn't because of
his play (which has been very good in its own right), but rather because
everyone else playing point guard the last few years has been so
terrible. Chucky plays like a point guard. We had forgotten what that
looked like. In this case, the positives of his offensive play outweigh
the negatives of his defensive play. Why? Because a good offensive point
guard makes everyone better offensively. That's what Chucky is doing.
And it's not rocket science, by the way. What he has done is pretty
simple stuff. He's not Magic Johnson.



As for Marcus, I also agree that he has been given a lot of slack on
this list. I think Chucky has illustrated just how far from a natural
point guard Marcus really is. Point guard is like quarterback. You can
have all the tangibles in the world, but they don't mean a thing unless
you have the intangibles. If you could build a quarterback, he'd look
like Ryan Leaf. If you could build a point guard, he'd look like Marcus
Banks (OK, he'd be a little taller - but the quickness, speed,
athleticism are all ideal). The things everyone misses with point guards
are the natural instincts for the position. Marcus doesn't have them.
And, as Tammo pointed out, his defense has been vastly overrated. He
shows flashes when he's a real disruptor, but he's just as often getting
rubbed off on screens and trailing his man. Most troubling of all, he
hasn't progressed at all in the areas he needed to improve.



What does all this mean? It means the Celtics, barring a miraculous leap
by Marcus in the offseason, still don't have their long-term answer at
point guard. It means that position becomes a priority in free agency
and the draft. I'm cooling on Brent Barry, just because he's not that
much of an improvement on Chucky and will come at mid-level money or a
little more for four years. And he's 32. If the option was Marcus
Banks/Mike James or Brent Barry, I'd be all for it. If the option is
Chucky or Barry, I'll just stick with Chucky.



Chucky also allows you to burn another draft pick on a point guard to
develop. Maybe that late first-rounder turns into Chris Duhon or someone
like that. Maybe the lottery pick turns into Shaun Livingston. Who
knows? But that's a crucial position. Ideally, though, you'd be able to
grab a big guy with the early pick. Whatever. Anyway, the point is - we
still don't have our long-term answer at point guard.



Mark