Bummed

Sat May 2 02:08:02 UTC 2009

 I don't mean to beat you up on this Ryan, we are on the same team.  But TA
has proven over & over that he is NOT a good defensive matchup because of
his stupidity!!!  Don't take my word for it, look at the results.  I won't
mention again his hidious effect on the offense.  Nothing good happens when
he is on the court, nothing.

-----Original Message-----
From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf
Of Ryan W
Sent: Friday, May 01, 2009 5:06 PM
To: celtics at igtc.com
Subject: RE: Bummed

Yep, you're right about the quickness disparity, which again makes me beat
the TA drum even more.  We NEED him out there on the perimeter--the Bulls
have 4 guards who can get to the rim and shoot with range.  Eddie House is
at a distinct disadvantage in any matchup and he can't get a shot off on the
other end either.  In fact, he's an easy guard and bad defender.
Additionally, his one strength contributes the one of the team's overall
weaknesses--the over-reliance on jump shooting.

As for what the coaches should or shouldn't do, well, I think it's clear
that our starting five beats their starting five pretty easily (the +/-
numbers bear this out).  Baby and Perk against Noah/Miller/Thomas has been
about a wash--except for the fact that they have 3 players to our 2, which
leads to them being fresher and more able to foul when necessary.  But, when
Chicago goes small (with a three guard, Rose/Hinrich/Gordon backcourt and
Salmons at 4), we're royally screwed.  None of our bigs can matchup with
Salmons, which forces us to go small to match up.  We put Paul at 4 and then
have to decide who the third guard is going to be...Doc has tried House to
no avail, and Marbury, who is scared out of his mind, and TA, who at least
can play defense.  I'm not under any allusions about TA's greatness, but in
this series, when Chicago goes small, he's the best answer we have.  Doc, as
coach, should have known this on Day 1 and been playing TA in the 1st  half
in order to get him ready for crunch time minutes in case Chicago went
small.  And he should have put in some sets to better use TA on offense.
But neither of those things have happened.  When Doc has gone to TA, it's
been in desperation and with absolutely zero confidence.  I mean, TA's a
pretty good offensive player at times, but Doc's insistence that he pretty
much forget about playing offense has in turn taking any offensive strengths
TA might have and flushed them down the toilet, not the mention the fact
that TA's playing time usually comes in crunch time, which again adds more
indecision and lack of confidence.

But you know what?  Doc is a stubborn coach.  Last year, it was a smart
thing.  We didn't make adjustments; we didn't have to, we were always the
better team.  Instead of adjustments, we just went harder and it usually
worked.  Doc's kept the same mantra this season, even as our circumstances
have changed.  That's been the mistake.  It's not about going harder right
now, it's about making the smarter adjustment.  Playing TA and going to him
on offense was part of what should have been our adjustment.  But, Doc,
being stubborn has kept going to Eddie House, even though it was clear from
Game 1 that Eddie's shortness combined with the length of the Bulls
backcourt was a bad match.  The Bulls can defend the perimeter, especially
against 5'11" shooting guards.

But it goes even beyond substitutions--we're not even running any plays for
House when he's in there!  It's one thing to be stubborn and stick with your
guy (those are admirable traits), but it's another thing to be stubborn and
dumb.  We need to be running House off the same guantlet of picks that we
devise for Ray Allen and not sitting Ed in the corner and 'hoping' the Bulls
forget about him.

Ryan
--- On Fri, 5/1/09, Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil
<Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil> wrote:

> From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil <Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil>
> Subject: RE: Bummed
> To: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com, celtics at igtc.com
> Date: Friday, May 1, 2009, 1:45 PM
> While I'd love to agree that we'll win with defense...I'm not so sure
> I agree. The single area in which we do not match up well with Da
> Bulls is quickness. We are out-quicked at every single position except
> PG. While our team based defense is well tuned to defend rotationally
> against pass the ball offenses, we are being exposed by the quickness
> disparity especially at the end of games.
>
> It's why during the course of the game we get so many "takeaways" on
> bad passing decisions by almost all the Bulls players and then when
> they go spread "all one on one" without any passing late in the game
> (and
> overtime) they have generally good offensive success.
> (It's why for all the Doc haters - Del Negro is being outcoached...if
> he went all spread and ditched the passing half court offense the Cs
> are done like dinner).
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com
> [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Ryan W
> Sent: Friday, May 01, 2009 2:30 PM
> To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> Subject: RE: Bummed
>
>
> Actually, that's not a question worth asking.  I love Bill Walker but
> he would get owned on defense.  Not that he doesn't have talent, but
> the refs would give him no respect.
>
> We'll win on Saturday with defense.  To me, that means TA should get
> all the 2/3 minutes and Marbury should only play if Rondo needs to
> rest.  House ONLY for situations that our offense only.
>
> Ryan
>
>
> --- On Fri, 5/1/09, Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil
> <Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil> wrote:
>
> > From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil
> <Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil>
> > Subject: RE: Bummed
> > To: celtics at igtc.com
> > Date: Friday, May 1, 2009, 12:58 PM
> > 'Where is Bill Walker?' is a question worth
> asking.
> > The one single area the Celtics need a HUGE boost -
> high
> > energy athleticism and we have exactly one guy
> currently
> > capable of that on our bench.
> >
> > Now I'm not equating Walker to Rose, but I will
> say the
> > following truisms.  They are both rookies. Neither had
> seen
> > "playoff intensity" before. Given Tony's proclivity for ill-timed
> > offensive end gaffs and late
> game
> > fouls is Walker even an option? Would he be
> "that"
> > much worse?
> >
> > I know in Doc's mind he isn't going to play
> one
> > solitary second, but "desperate times" and
> all
> > that. Unfortunately the chances were earlier in the series...I will
> > be surprised to see any of the Celtic
> bench
> > players at all in Game 7. Hyperbole? Maybe, but then again...
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com
> > [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of gene kirkpatrick
> > Sent: Friday, May 01, 2009 1:49 PM
> > To: celtics at igtc.com
> > Subject: re: Bummed
> >
> > I'm mad, too, Eddie.  Well, some of you remember
> that
> > old political ad.  Regarding Tony and Stephon--I
> think
> > it's tough when your assignment is 90% defense or
> 90%
> > move the ball and penetrate.  Tony clearly has not
> been
> > looking to offense, and then he needs to take a shot
> or two
> > and isn't in rhythm.  Same with Stephon--he's
> so
> > focused on not hurting us that he's not in rhythm
> to
> > shoot.  Tony can score and Stephon can shoot.  I understand they are
> > role players, but there are only 5
> on
> > the court and eventually they will all need to
> shoot.  Too
> > bad both of them had such a short time to get back
> into the
> > full rhythm of their games before playoffs.  If we go further, I
> > hope we see more of them than less.  We
> need one
> > of them, at least, to step up.
> >  
> > I have long felt that crunch time demanded a defensive
> team
> > on the court.  It's easier to catch up or hold on
> when
> > the other team is frustrated offensively.  I would
> have
> > Perk and Tony on the floor to protect the lane and
> decrease
> > the easier shots.  Swap out for offense if you need
> Ray or
> > House on the floor, but be sure to defend.
> >  
> > I agree that Pierce is hurt; it looks like his back to
> me,
> > although he begins games looking loose.
> >  
> > Gene  PS:  We drafted for athletic bench help with Giddens & Walker
> > but neither developed (or was
> > developed) quickly enough.
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.287 / Virus Database: 270.12.8/2086 - Release Date: 05/01/09
06:17:00