Fan favorite Scalabrine

Tue Feb 12 06:48:03 CST 2008

Scalabrine = Greg Kite

----- Original Message ----
From: "bosox18 at charter.net" <bosox18 at charter.net>
To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List <celtics at igtc.com>
Sent: Monday, February 11, 2008 10:52:27 PM
Subject: Fan favorite Scalabrine

I have to agree with Ryan on this particular occasion. Scal is playing terribly even by his own standards. He's the poorest rebounding 4 in the league and his supposed strength -- besides his intangibles -- is his non-existent perimeter shooting, in which he has absolutely no confidence.

I almost could have kissed Jeff Van Gundy Sunday when one announcer talked about Scal's 3-point marksmanship and Van Gundy took him to task, mocking the redhead's wretched 32 percent shooting.

At least three or four times during that game, though, they talked about how Scal was a huge fan favorite. Can this possibly be? I've taken the cheers for Scal to be good-natured support for the handicapped JV kid who comes in with a 45-point lead. Now that we're winning, he's a lovable victory cigar, right? Has it become something more? Is he really a fan favorite to the uninformed masses?

Steve O

---- Ryan W <ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com> wrote: 
> Kim, you're usually spot on with everything you post,
> but I gotta disagree with your claim that Scal's not
> cutting into Leon and Baby's minutes.  That's exactly
> what he's doing and I don't see how you can argue
> otherwise.  Baby, Powe, Posey, KG, and Scal all play a
> hybrid 4/5 position.  When Scal plays this hybrid
> position, it's more like a 3/4 with no rebounding,
> slightly better ball movement, and supposedly better
> outside shooting.  When Baby and Powe play it, it's
> more like a 4/5 with tough-nosed rebounding and
> defensive muscling position, with more layups/dunks,
> and better interior passing (in the case of Baby). 
> Posey is Scal if Scal had actual talent, athleticism,
> and giant brass balls and KG is a combination of
> Scal/Posey/Powe/Baby with great intensity,
> determination, athleticism, and without their faults
> (or the fat asses, a term I use endearingly).  While
> Scal plays a different (and seriously less-effective)
> version of the 4/5 than do Baby or Powe, they
> effectively play the same position on the court and
> thus when Scal starts in the absence of KG, he's
> taking minutes away from Posey, Powe, and Baby.  I
> would argue that those minutes would be better spent
> on Baby, Powe, and Posey, both in the short term and
> long term view of things.  Pollard has no place in
> this discussion, as he's completely entrenched in the
> 5 position and is pretty much Perk's backup, if
> anything.  It's about Scal playing over Powe and Baby
> and what that potentially does to both their
> development and our ability to win games.
> 
> I will agree with you that we're not losing games
> because of Scal, mainly because we're not losing many
> games period.  And even in those games we do lose,
> Scal isn't playing enough to be the scapegoat.  But,
> if we look at the games we do win, I think there are
> several games where we can point to the play of Powe
> or Baby and say it was their play that made
> such-and-such win possible (Friday's Timberwolves win
> an example of a game Powe helped win, and the Spurs
> game an example of one that Baby has helped win).  Can
> the same be said of Scalabrine?  Absolutely not.  And
> that's where the complaining stems from--Scal ain't
> winning us games with his play.  At most, he does
> nothing.  And that's when he's doing the 'intangibles'
> so very much celebrated by his coach.  
> 
> Small intangible digression:  lauding anyone's
> intangibles should be done sparingly.  Intangibles are
> only intangibles if they've got tangibles to affix
> themselves to.  Nobody at the bakery is lauding
> Sally's intangibles--that she's always got a smile on
> her face, is willing to listen to everyone's problems,
> is never taking her breaks, etc...--if she can't
> fucking bake a fucking cake.  Scalabrine can't bake a
> fucking cake out there, but Doc wants to spent half
> his press conference lauding him for shadowing the
> ball and taking time of the shot clock.  Yes, Doc,
> that was great, but he also didn't collect a rebound
> in 22 minutes while playing a position that pretty
> much demands rebounding.  When we talk about
> intangibles, we are really talking about invisible
> things that add to what can be seen.  When we say KG
> or Posey have great intangibles, we're really saying
> that in addition to their good shooting, rebounding,
> defensive prowess, they do the little things that
> can't be measured and thus their shooting, rebounding,
> defensive prowess is actually better than the
> statistics would say.  In Scal's case, he doesn't get
> numbers and so even if you try to say that he does the
> little things that can't be measured you're aren't
> saying much because basically when you add something
> that can't be seen to something else that equals zero
> (Scal's statistical output), well, you're pretty much
> going to get zero no matter what kind of math you're
> practicing.
> 
> If everybody's effectiveness was measured as
> Scalabrine's is on this team, we'd have one horrible
> team.  Sure, he *sometimes* does the little things,
> but that is NOT a reason to give him playing time. 
> Especially when the guys he's playing in front of are
> actually contributing to wins.  Powe and Baby have
> intangibles too; and in contrast to Scal's, these
> intangibles are in addition to the actual tangibles,
> like scoring and rebounding.  
> 
> I'll leave you with this: in our two biggest wins (at
> Detroit and yesterday against San Antonio), an
> unheralded, overweight rookie named Glen Davis has
> come out of nowhere and surprised the other team and
> directly led us to victory.  Those kind of big game
> performances are exactly the kind of intangibles that
> I'm looking for--the one's that produce wins.  
> 
> Ryan
> --- Kim Malo <kmalo17 at verizon.net> wrote:
> > 
> > Gotta admit I don't understand the continued
> > obsession this year with 
> > Scal and the sky is falling moaning should he step
> > foot on the court. 
> > Past years, fine, valid case. But he's spent most of
> > this season on 
> > the bench where he belongs, getting sparse minutes
> > in only a few 
> > games, and the only person whose minutes he's really
> > taking is 
> > Pollard's because he's healthier. He's NOT cutting
> > into Leon and BB's 
> > development / minutes and he's not losing us games.
> > People assume if 
> > Scal wasn't out there that they'd be playing and I
> > don't think you 
> > can do that. The only reason he's seeing a bit more
> > play now is to 
> > add height that they don't bring and fill a small
> > role that Pollard 
> > would probably get first shot at if he was healthier
> > because he's 
> > more of a true center. KG and Perk come back and
> > based on what Doc's 
> > actually done this season, not just wishful
> > thinking, Scal goes back 
> > to spending most of his time in the best seat in the
> > house to watch the game.
> 
> 
> 
>      ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Be a better friend, newshound, and 
> know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.  http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics

_______________________________________________
The Boston Celtics Mailing List
celtics at igtc.com
http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics

      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs