Re: random things make you say Hmmmm

["Josh Ozersky" <jozersky@xxxxxxxxxx>]

And as Russell demonstrated, it's individual talent that wins
championships.  Pierce's dribble is better than you portray it.
Once he starts wheeling and dealing with his back to his defender,
he can be stripped, but his ability to dribble drive is what makes
him the star he is.  His arms are so long -- freakishly long, really --
that he is occasionally vulnerable, but only when trying to split
double and triple teams.  Limit him to three dribbles, and he can
get by anybody.  I think the whole thing with Pierce is about his
bringing up the ball.  If he sets up and gets the ball, he's the guy
from two years ago.  If he tries to attack from 23 feet out, the
whole offense, including his own, dies on the vine.  It's amazing
to me that Carroll and Obie couldn't see that.  Kestas makes fun
of Tommy Heinsohn, but he's been seeing it and saying it for
years now.

Josh

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "R. Singh" <keltsfan@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <Celtics@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 2:01 PM
Subject: RE: random things make you say Hmmmm


> To me, the Paul Pierce circa 2002-01 and the Paul Pierce of today are
> the same player except for two details. This Paul Pierce can't shoot as
> well and doesn't play defense nearly as well. Other than that, nothing
> much has changed. Pierce is still a terrible ball-handler who is prone
> to playing dumb basketball by forcing his dribble drive and forcing
> shots thereby killing any offensive flow.  Look at his numbers the last
> two years.  He's basically become another Antoine Walker.  While I agree
> that Pierce played team ball at Kansas where the coach would have sat
> his butt down if he didn't play proper, he now has had untold praise
> heaped on him, feeding his ego to the point that I really wonder if this
> jack can be put back in the box. 
> 
> I hope I'm wrong because he does possess skills that any championship
> caliber team would love, but as Mr. Russell said, it's  team ego, not
> individual ego, that ultimately wins championships. 
> 
> Ravi
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-celtics@xxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-celtics@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf
> Of Berry, Mark S
> Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 7:32 AM
> To: Celtics@xxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: random things make you say Hmmmm
> 
> 
> Josh, you mention Roy Williams and that's exactly why I still have hope
> that Pierce will turn it around. He was an unselfish team player at
> Kansas, who fit into a system and excelled. So he CAN be that kind of
> player. That we agree on.
> 
> 
> 
> Unfortunately, he's playing exactly like the guy you mentioned - Jerry
> Stackhouse. It's not about what he CAN be. It's about what he is. Right
> now, he's Stackhouse. He needs a strong coach - and a willingness to be
> coached - to return to Paul Pierce, circa 2001-02.
> 
> 
> 
> I just think you're seeing him only as the guy from two seasons ago and
> not recognizing that he hasn't been that guy for a while. We all know
> he's capable of it. But at some point he has to do it. If he isn't
> willing, then, like Ravi said, he has to go. You don't build your team
> around Jerry Stackhouse.
> 
> 
> 
> Mark
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- --- ---
> 
> 
> 
> Josh wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know where you and Mark get the idea that
> Pierce is a ball-hogging offense killer.  He does
> do that without a coach, but so would any top-flight
> scorer.  If anything, Pierce's flaw is in being too comfortable as
> another cog in the machine.  The guy was schooled well by Roy Williams,
> and knows what it means to play within a team context.  You're talking
> about Jerry Stackhouse, not Paul Pierce.