[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Marcus Banks and last-second shots
- To: Celtics <celtics@xxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Marcus Banks and last-second shots
- From: Mark Piotrowski <markp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 14:49:22 -0500
- In-reply-to: <70D2010FF6138A44B4B5D3D5492A7C6B016A5397@ws-bco-mse3.milky-way.battelle.org>
- References: <70D2010FF6138A44B4B5D3D5492A7C6B016A5397@ws-bco-mse3.milky-way.battelle.org>
- Sender: owner-celtics@xxxxxxxx
On Mar 8, 2004, at 2:07 PM, Berry, Mark S wrote:
I have little tolerance for players playing selfishly, and that was
this felt like with Marcus. This wasn't the first time it happened,
the most blatant.
good point -- i'm curious what is going through Marcus' head. At best
it appears to have been some form of passive-aggressiveness...not a
good sign. But for now i'm still willing to chalk it up to being a
immature rookie, and pray that i'm right.
but i agree that -- at least right now -- that Banks is not the long
term answer. Meaning specifically that if the best player on the board
at our pick is a PG, you'd have to take him.
look what happened in Chicago. Even if Jason Williams hadn't wrecked
his motorcycle -- Hinrich would probably be starting ahead of him. And
credit the Bulls for taking Hinrich even though they had a PG (or 2 if
you count Crawford, which i don't).
It also illustrates, a little, the point i was trying to make a while
back about draft position. Williams was taken #2, Hinrich #7, Crawford
#8 -- none of those was seen as a trememdous stretch or slider, but
Hinrich is proving to be the best of the lot. My point is/was is that
not only is every draft different, but that the needs/temperment of the
teams ahead of you affect the players available -- that really there
are so many factors -- that playing for draft position is always
(unless its the difference betwen #5 and #1) a bad idea, IMO.
As for Pierce, I'm growing frustrated. He was lousy much of last season
and he has been lousy this season (and when I say lousy, I mean it in
relative terms). Is he top 12-20 in the NBA. Absolutely. But that's not
his reputation, at least as far as most Celtic fans go. Two years ago
were comparing him to Kobe and T-Mac. Now, he's not in those
He's a good player. Sometimes very good. But he's not a great player
can elevate a team.
I'll admit to sharing in your frustration, but i'm also confused by
Pierce -- which is maybe the source of my (perhaps naive) hope about
I guess i'm hoping for that he's pressing, trying to do too much. His
FG% is down each of the past 3 years, but his Rebounds and assists have
actually gone up. Some point out that his TOs have also gone up, but
his Assist-to-Turnover ratio has actually gotten better over the past 3
years too (.96 / 1.08 / 1.2 / 1.32 this year).
Why -- and i don't mean this rhetorically -- has his game slipped from
2 years ago? I genuinely don't get it. I don't know if Pierce was
ever a player that would elevate a team. By that i mean a player like
Bird, Jordan, even Lebron James from what little he's shown so far,
that makes players around him better.
But he was DOMINANT offensively, just dominant. Why has that changed?
Even last year -- when Walker was still here -- it seemed to slip a
little. He got that rep for me in the 2001 playoffs where he seemed
Bird-like in his ability to hit any shot -- driving, 3pt, mid range.
But he doesn't have that same dominance now. The same shots that he
used to make aren't falling. How does a player lose that? Is it the
players around him? Is he not trying as hard? Is he resting on his
laurels, not practicing as much? Is it mental? is he trying to do too
much and thus not doing it all as well? Did the Obie/Harter defensive
system take too much energy on the D end of the floor out of the
I know we only know the Pierce we see on the TV -- but i'm so perplexed
by why he still isn't the dominant type player he used to be -- he's
still so young. I just keep hoping that the next coach will see that
top-8 level player in Paul and be able to coax it out of him -- push
him, pull him, challenge him, coax him, whatever it takes.
Because a circa-2001 Paul Pierce surrounded by team with talent spots
#2-10 (which we're approaching) is a team that can make the finals --
and challenge for a title -- in 1-2 years, IMO. But the key is Pierce
returning to that 2001 form.
Or is this the new Celtics curse -- where young "veteran all-stars"
just start a steady decline (like Antoine did?) a few years in after
their 1st Max contract? Let's pray not.
(the other) mark
From: Mark Piotrowski [mailto:markp@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, March 08, 2004 2:01 PM
To: Berry, Mark S
Subject: Re: Marcus Banks and last-second shots
i saw that too and was a bit struck by it -- especially b/c Pierce was
calling for the ball.
what i thought at the time was that Banks has had a tendency to have
the ball at the end of the quarters he's been in and usually has driven
to the hoop, taking wild shots. I figured maybe he'd been chewed out
for doing so in the past... leading him to say "fine i won't take any
shots at the end of the half"
i'm wiling to give him a pass on this, but did find it strange.
I also just wanted to go on record as saying I still believe Pierce is
a dominant player -- and don't think his reputation is unearned or
inflated (as someone mentioned re: Heinsohn's comments in the past
about Pierce) I think he's playing poorly right now -- but still think
he's one of the best 12-20 players in this league. Here's to hoping he
picks it up over the last 20 games.
(the other) mark
On Mar 8, 2004, at 1:06 PM, Berry, Mark S wrote:
only thing I can think of is that he lost
track of time.
--- --- ---
Nope. He clearly looked at the clock and made the decision not to
Carroll and Pierce couldn't believe it. And time wasn't his excuse -
"out of my range" was his excuse.
I wish I could be sure it wasn't selfishness, but I'm having trouble
coming up with any other explanation.