Catching up

[Eggcentric at aol.com]

PIERCE AND WEST
Both are on my fantasy league roster.   So while making out Monday's 
lineup,   I assumed the loss of second-leading scorer Wally would 
penalize Pierce with additional coverage but help West to gain 
respectable stats.   I was wrong;   Wally's absence affected both 
players. 

Pierce's injured elbow may have played a role in his worst game 
to date, but you can't discount Skiles no-brainer defensive plan 
to gang up on Pierce with no other respected scorer in the lineup.   
Nor can you discount Deng's superior defense.    

As for Delonte, once again he confirmed he is simply not an 
adequate SG.   As I have harped on, the West to SG plan has 
been an almost shocking disaster as Delonte is proving to 
be too short in getting off his shot as well as defending 
against taller quicker shooting guards.

In trading for Telfair and moving West to SG,   our BT now 
realize they have essentially neutered Delonte.   Telfair is 
street-smart, selfish poison who plays little "D."   So really 
what has he given us that West couldn't had he remained 
our numero uno PG?    I certainly would have preferred last 
season's West at PG and Brandon Roy (post injury) at SG to 
this season's Telfair at PG and West at SG.    I'm not surprised 
that the team is contemplating moving West back to the PG 
position.   Three (West/Telfair/Rondo) has been a crowd while 
we have been suffering from an inadequate number of BIGS.    
Such an almost laughable unbalanced roster. 

WALLY AS SIXTH MAN
How can we afford to move Wally to sixth man?   It's too easy 
to defend against Pierce when he's the sole scorer on the 
parquet floor.   And we have yet to win a game when Pierce has 
scored less than 29 points.   Posthumously, Asterix, IMO 
Wally's biggest asset is how quickly he shoots the ball if he 
has a shot, or immediately passes it off if he doesn't have 
a shot.   

THE BULLS
Chicago is looking more and more like the team I thought they 
would be. So many wonderful, heads-on-straight young players.   
Hinrich, Deng, Nocioni, Gordon, Duhon .... they all seem to 
"get it."   We have plenty of good coaches, too, such as Clifford 
Ray.   Yet few of our young players seem to "get it" even after 
three or four seasons.   The fault of   our coaches ... I don't 
think so.   


PIERCE TO CHICAGO, NOT 
Why would Chicago give up terrific young talent like Deng, etc. 
as well as the NY '07 pick for Pierce and his lofty contract?   The 
most likely trade for Danny right now is Telfair (who he should 
trade) or Delonte (who he shouldn't trade) for a mediocre but 
necessary big.    Rondo needs minutes.   If he could develop his
shot, he'd be dynamite.
 
RIVERS "If they look good in practice, etc"
Doc's statements may sound ridiculous, but I think what he is 
really saying (but can't say) is that if the young guys can't 
learn/follow the simplest plays/rotations in practice, how can 
they perform well in games?   And guess what, they haven't.   
The distribution of minutes seems to be based in Doc's abject 
frustration over the lack of Bball IQ and slow progress among 
our kiddie corps no matter how many hours of tutoring they 
receive.   Is youth their major problem?   I understand Danny is
beginning to feel it is not.

SCALABRINE
To amplify the above paragraph, I ask:   if you were the 
coach and saw Scalabrine doing everything right in practice 
and for instance Allen and Green not having a clue, wouldn't 
you feel more secure in playing Scalabrine? 

Eggy