From pdelevett at yahoo.com  Thu Oct  1 05:41:06 2009
From: pdelevett at yahoo.com (Peter Delevett)
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2009 22:41:06 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Anybody seen Scal?
Message-ID: <604746.3528.qm@web110110.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

Thanks, Ryan. Glad to hear he spent some time in the gym this summer.  


--- On Wed, 9/30/09, Peter Delevett <pdelevett at yahoo.com> wrote:

> From: Peter Delevett <pdelevett at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Anybody seen Scal?
> To: celtics at igtc.com
> Date: Wednesday, September 30, 2009, 2:59 PM
> I was interested to read in the Globe
> that Scalabrine is playing in the second unit - I assume at
> the three. That surprised me a little 'cause I'd read an
> interview with Scal in which he said he hadn't played
> basketball all summer 'cause he didn't want to risk another
> concussion. Given the pudgy shape he was in during the
> playoffs, I'm curious to know if he's dropped any weight. 
> 
> Especially if Walker and Tony are hurt, Doc may need Scal
> to play some minutes at small forward, but it's hard to see
> him being able to do that if he's not in better condition
> than last season. Can anyone shed some light? 
> 
> 
> ? ? ? 
> 


      


From wayoftheray at yahoo.com  Thu Oct  1 21:58:00 2009
From: wayoftheray at yahoo.com (Way Of The Ray)
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 14:58:00 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: I Never Got The Pro Bill Walker,
	Anti JR Giddens Stance Of Celtics Fans
Message-ID: <578668.86890.qm@web110111.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

Whether his chronically injured knee has spelled the beginning of 
the end for Bill Walker as a NBA player, it made no sense to me
for Celtics fans to hold out more hope and praise for Walker, 
when Giddens is clearly the better NBA player.

- Giddens outplayed Walker in the NBDL

- Giddens outplayed Walker in the Summmer Laague

- Giddens can defend his position, while Walker can't.

- Giddens is not undersized for his position.

- Giddens is a better rebounder than Walker.

- Both equally athletic and needing to improve their ballhandling and outside shooting.

- And Giddens career isn't threatened by a chronically injured
knee.

Ray


      


From noah.evans at gmail.com  Thu Oct  1 22:23:17 2009
From: noah.evans at gmail.com (Noah Evans)
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 00:23:17 +0200
Subject: I Never Got The Pro Bill Walker, Anti JR Giddens Stance Of 
	Celtics Fans
In-Reply-To: <578668.86890.qm@web110111.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <578668.86890.qm@web110111.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <56a297000910011523i56cc26b6h702eb3de6e628e70@mail.gmail.com>

Injured nice guy > talented jerk.

On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 11:58 PM, Way Of The Ray <wayoftheray at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Whether his chronically injured knee has spelled the beginning of
> the end for Bill Walker as a NBA player, it made no sense to me
> for Celtics fans to hold out more hope and praise for Walker,
> when Giddens is clearly the better NBA player.
>
> - Giddens outplayed Walker in the NBDL
>
> - Giddens outplayed Walker in the Summmer Laague
>
> - Giddens can defend his position, while Walker can't.
>
> - Giddens is not undersized for his position.
>
> - Giddens is a better rebounder than Walker.
>
> - Both equally athletic and needing to improve their ballhandling and outside shooting.
>
> - And Giddens career isn't threatened by a chronically injured
> knee.
>
> Ray
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics
>


From davidp4660 at cox.net  Thu Oct  1 23:15:51 2009
From: davidp4660 at cox.net (davidp4660 at cox.net)
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 19:15:51 -0400
Subject: I Never Got The Pro Bill Walker, Anti JR Giddens Stance Of
	Celtics Fans
In-Reply-To: <56a297000910011523i56cc26b6h702eb3de6e628e70@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20091001191551.1UC5K.173653.imail@eastrmwml35>

Don't know who Ray is refering to.  I liked both player. but Ray is correct- Giddens did out play Walker in the NBDL and summer league.  Walker is just more fun to watch offensively when he explodes to the hole (not his knee).
---- Noah Evans <noah.evans at gmail.com> wrote: 
> Injured nice guy > talented jerk.
> 
> On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 11:58 PM, Way Of The Ray <wayoftheray at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Whether his chronically injured knee has spelled the beginning of
> > the end for Bill Walker as a NBA player, it made no sense to me
> > for Celtics fans to hold out more hope and praise for Walker,
> > when Giddens is clearly the better NBA player.
> >
> > - Giddens outplayed Walker in the NBDL
> >
> > - Giddens outplayed Walker in the Summmer Laague
> >
> > - Giddens can defend his position, while Walker can't.
> >
> > - Giddens is not undersized for his position.
> >
> > - Giddens is a better rebounder than Walker.
> >
> > - Both equally athletic and needing to improve their ballhandling and outside shooting.
> >
> > - And Giddens career isn't threatened by a chronically injured
> > knee.
> >
> > Ray
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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


From pdelevett at yahoo.com  Fri Oct  2 00:47:48 2009
From: pdelevett at yahoo.com (Peter Delevett)
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 17:47:48 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Giddens/Walker
Message-ID: <212351.72387.qm@web110104.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

Ray, did you actually watch any Flash games last season? I didn't, so I'll yield to your judgement if you did. But their stat lines don't necessarily back you up.

JG: 17 ppg, 6 rpg, 3 apg, 37% fg, 27% 3-pt, 1.1 spg, 2.27 to/g

BW: 19 ppg, 5 rpg, 1.5 apg, 56% fg, 40% 3-pt, 1.3 spg, 3.2 to/g

Seems pretty even to me. They both played 36 mpg (and both had a relatively low number of 3-point attemtps - 30 apiece).


      


From regmanw6 at yahoo.com  Fri Oct  2 02:56:01 2009
From: regmanw6 at yahoo.com (R Howe)
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 19:56:01 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Walker injury impact
Message-ID: <990252.38689.qm@web56701.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

Although B. Walker was going to be, at best, a scrub mins to limited situation player, his injury has some impact to end of roster players vying to make the team and maybe Ainge's timing in pulling the trigger to trade either or both Scals and TA expiring contracts.

My guess he now has to wait to mid season to make a trade or he decides to pull a trade before the season begins for a serviceable backup SF if he already does not think Walker will return from his latest knee injury. 

I think Walker was in the plans for the spot minutes I described, Doc had enough confidence in him as a rookie to give him some meaningful minutes. I was looking forward to see if he had made improvements from last year and hope he comes back strong.

Such things create opportunities that did not exist, in this case for Giddens to see if he is ready and prove to Doc he can be counted on to play swing-man plus spot PG mins. I don't think he had confidence in him last year.

Of course if TA is healthy enough to start the season it will give Doc and Ainge some mins to showcase him, for TA a minor break/opportunity to show he still belongs in the NBA on another team.

I don't think this impacts Hudson as he is pointing his attention to show he can play  PG at this level. I think for us he will do or die as a backup PG.

Go C's
? 



      

From alex.goldblatt at gmail.com  Fri Oct  2 03:13:07 2009
From: alex.goldblatt at gmail.com (Alex Goldblatt)
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 23:13:07 -0400
Subject: The 2009-2010 CBW Predictions List is OPEN!!
In-Reply-To: <740409.398.qm@web65516.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
References: <cb9.58e54c4d.37f3f7f6@aol.com>
	<740409.398.qm@web65516.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <3f0c87180910012013l7370eeaal7035eaf9e15820a4@mail.gmail.com>

72-10

On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 12:18 PM, asterix ninetynine
<asterix_9_9 at yahoo.com>wrote:

> I'll take 65-17
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: "Mafiaso316 at aol.com" <Mafiaso316 at aol.com>
> To: celtics at igtc.com
> Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 7:53:26 PM
> Subject: Re: The 2009-2010 CBW Predictions List is OPEN!!
>
> Put me down for 67 - 15 Snoopy
>
> Also Truth, KG, and Rondo for the All Star team this year.
>
> Sheed for 6th Man of the year.
>
>
>
> Paolo Dellasandro (Mafiaso316)
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>

From jlyell at verizon.net  Fri Oct  2 03:25:24 2009
From: jlyell at verizon.net (John Lyell)
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 20:25:24 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: The 2009-2010 CBW Predictions List is OPEN!!
In-Reply-To: <3f0c87180910012013l7370eeaal7035eaf9e15820a4@mail.gmail.com>
References: <cb9.58e54c4d.37f3f7f6@aol.com>
	<740409.398.qm@web65516.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
	<3f0c87180910012013l7370eeaal7035eaf9e15820a4@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <193211.81993.qm@web84005.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

66-16

John

From pmm at igtc.com  Fri Oct  2 04:08:19 2009
From: pmm at igtc.com (Paul M Moriarty)
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 21:08:19 -0700
Subject: The 2009-2010 CBW Predictions List is OPEN!!
In-Reply-To: <20090929223133.00DB5E1BC3B@ignite.igtc.com>
References: <20090929223133.00DB5E1BC3B@ignite.igtc.com>
Message-ID: <DCCC64BE-658D-4734-B977-8E7BAA67E33E@igtc.com>

Put me down for 60-22  & hanging number 18!

- Paul -


From jeffclark at gmail.com  Fri Oct  2 11:27:02 2009
From: jeffclark at gmail.com (jeffclark at gmail.com)
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 07:27:02 -0400
Subject: The 2009-2010 CBW Predictions List is OPEN!!
In-Reply-To: <DCCC64BE-658D-4734-B977-8E7BAA67E33E@igtc.com>
References: <20090929223133.00DB5E1BC3B@ignite.igtc.com>
	<DCCC64BE-658D-4734-B977-8E7BAA67E33E@igtc.com>
Message-ID: <84e131670910020427y39742619sec5bf859a8845e0@mail.gmail.com>

60-22

I don't get how people think 60 wins would be a major disappointment - I
think fans are getting kinda spoiled

-- 
Jeff
CelticsBlog.com
doughnutholes.wordpress.com

From noah.evans at gmail.com  Fri Oct  2 11:29:53 2009
From: noah.evans at gmail.com (Noah Evans)
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 13:29:53 +0200
Subject: The 2009-2010 CBW Predictions List is OPEN!!
In-Reply-To: <84e131670910020427y39742619sec5bf859a8845e0@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20090929223133.00DB5E1BC3B@ignite.igtc.com>
	<DCCC64BE-658D-4734-B977-8E7BAA67E33E@igtc.com>
	<84e131670910020427y39742619sec5bf859a8845e0@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <56a297000910020429w6f07bdf3r7bc31cd229614100@mail.gmail.com>

62-20

On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 1:27 PM,  <jeffclark at gmail.com> wrote:
> 60-22
>
> I don't get how people think 60 wins would be a major disappointment - I
> think fans are getting kinda spoiled
>
> --
> Jeff
> CelticsBlog.com
> doughnutholes.wordpress.com
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics
>


From davidp4660 at cox.net  Fri Oct  2 12:11:23 2009
From: davidp4660 at cox.net (davidp4660 at cox.net)
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 8:11:23 -0400
Subject: The 2009-2010 CBW Predictions List is OPEN!!
In-Reply-To: <84e131670910020427y39742619sec5bf859a8845e0@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20091002081123.LRGTO.393738.imail@eastrmwml28>

The league is getting better too.
---- jeffclark at gmail.com wrote: 
> 60-22
> 
> I don't get how people think 60 wins would be a major disappointment - I
> think fans are getting kinda spoiled
> 
> -- 
> Jeff
> CelticsBlog.com
> doughnutholes.wordpress.com
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics


From jaims at pldtdsl.net  Fri Oct  2 13:51:07 2009
From: jaims at pldtdsl.net (Jaims)
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 21:51:07 +0800
Subject: The 2009-2010 CBW Predictions List is OPEN!!
In-Reply-To: <20091002081123.LRGTO.393738.imail@eastrmwml28>
References: <84e131670910020427y39742619sec5bf859a8845e0@mail.gmail.com> 
	<20091002081123.LRGTO.393738.imail@eastrmwml28>
Message-ID: <001401ca4367$649d8de0$2dd8a9a0$@net>

snoopy, please put me down for 65-17 and banner 18!!! :)

thanks!


From jaims at pldtdsl.net  Fri Oct  2 13:52:15 2009
From: jaims at pldtdsl.net (Jaims)
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 21:52:15 +0800
Subject: Walker injury impact
In-Reply-To: <990252.38689.qm@web56701.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
References: <990252.38689.qm@web56701.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <001501ca4367$8d3fc6a0$a7bf53e0$@net>

only impact it will make is it gives tony allen 'another' chance to play....
ugh!!!



-----Original Message-----
From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf
Of R Howe
Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 10:56 AM
To: Celtics list
Subject: Walker injury impact

Although B. Walker was going to be, at best, a scrub mins to limited
situation player, his injury has some impact to end of roster players vying
to make the team and maybe Ainge's timing in pulling the trigger to trade
either or both Scals and TA expiring contracts.

My guess he now has to wait to mid season to make a trade or he decides to
pull a trade before the season begins for a serviceable backup SF if he
already does not think Walker will return from his latest knee injury. 

I think Walker was in the plans for the spot minutes I described, Doc had
enough confidence in him as a rookie to give him some meaningful minutes. I
was looking forward to see if he had made improvements from last year and
hope he comes back strong.

Such things create opportunities that did not exist, in this case for
Giddens to see if he is ready and prove to Doc he can be counted on to play
swing-man plus spot PG mins. I don't think he had confidence in him last
year.

Of course if TA is healthy enough to start the season it will give Doc and
Ainge some mins to showcase him, for TA a minor break/opportunity to show he
still belongs in the NBA on another team.

I don't think this impacts Hudson as he is pointing his attention to show he
can play  PG at this level. I think for us he will do or die as a backup PG.

Go C's
? 



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


From ellie.cutler at yahoo.com  Fri Oct  2 16:17:27 2009
From: ellie.cutler at yahoo.com (Ellie Cutler)
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 09:17:27 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Walker injury impact
In-Reply-To: <001501ca4367$8d3fc6a0$a7bf53e0$@net>
Message-ID: <408675.53532.qm@web63101.mail.re1.yahoo.com>

why is there no public word about Giddens?? I assume he's in camp, but we've heard nothing.

Ellie

--- On Fri, 10/2/09, Jaims <jaims at pldtdsl.net> wrote:

From: Jaims <jaims at pldtdsl.net>
Subject: RE: Walker injury impact
To: "'The Boston Celtics Mailing List'" <celtics at igtc.com>
Date: Friday, October 2, 2009, 9:52 AM

only impact it will make is it gives tony allen 'another' chance to play.....
ugh!!!



-----Original Message-----
From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf
Of R Howe
Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 10:56 AM
To: Celtics list
Subject: Walker injury impact

Although B. Walker was going to be, at best, a scrub mins to limited
situation player, his injury has some impact to end of roster players vying
to make the team and maybe Ainge's timing in pulling the trigger to trade
either or both Scals and TA expiring contracts.

My guess he now has to wait to mid season to make a trade or he decides to
pull a trade before the season begins for a serviceable backup SF if he
already does not think Walker will return from his latest knee injury. 

I think Walker was in the plans for the spot minutes I described, Doc had
enough confidence in him as a rookie to give him some meaningful minutes. I
was looking forward to see if he had made improvements from last year and
hope he comes back strong.

Such things create opportunities that did not exist, in this case for
Giddens to see if he is ready and prove to Doc he can be counted on to play
swing-man plus spot PG mins. I don't think he had confidence in him last
year.

Of course if TA is healthy enough to start the season it will give Doc and
Ainge some mins to showcase him, for TA a minor break/opportunity to show he
still belongs in the NBA on another team.

I don't think this impacts Hudson as he is pointing his attention to show he
can play? PG at this level. I think for us he will do or die as a backup PG.

Go C's
? 



? ? ? 
_______________________________________________
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



      

From davidp4660 at cox.net  Fri Oct  2 16:45:50 2009
From: davidp4660 at cox.net (davidp4660 at cox.net)
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 12:45:50 -0400
Subject: Walker injury impact
In-Reply-To: <001501ca4367$8d3fc6a0$a7bf53e0$@net>
Message-ID: <20091002124550.S04OS.405832.imail@eastrmwml43>

If he himself is ready.  Never any guarantee with TA.
---- Jaims <jaims at pldtdsl.net> wrote: 
> only impact it will make is it gives tony allen 'another' chance to play....
> ugh!!!
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf
> Of R Howe
> Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 10:56 AM
> To: Celtics list
> Subject: Walker injury impact
> 
> Although B. Walker was going to be, at best, a scrub mins to limited
> situation player, his injury has some impact to end of roster players vying
> to make the team and maybe Ainge's timing in pulling the trigger to trade
> either or both Scals and TA expiring contracts.
> 
> My guess he now has to wait to mid season to make a trade or he decides to
> pull a trade before the season begins for a serviceable backup SF if he
> already does not think Walker will return from his latest knee injury. 
> 
> I think Walker was in the plans for the spot minutes I described, Doc had
> enough confidence in him as a rookie to give him some meaningful minutes. I
> was looking forward to see if he had made improvements from last year and
> hope he comes back strong.
> 
> Such things create opportunities that did not exist, in this case for
> Giddens to see if he is ready and prove to Doc he can be counted on to play
> swing-man plus spot PG mins. I don't think he had confidence in him last
> year.
> 
> Of course if TA is healthy enough to start the season it will give Doc and
> Ainge some mins to showcase him, for TA a minor break/opportunity to show he
> still belongs in the NBA on another team.
> 
> I don't think this impacts Hudson as he is pointing his attention to show he
> can play  PG at this level. I think for us he will do or die as a backup PG.
> 
> Go C's
> ? 
> 
> 
> 
>       
> _______________________________________________
> 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


From pdelevett at yahoo.com  Fri Oct  2 17:01:21 2009
From: pdelevett at yahoo.com (Peter Delevett)
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 10:01:21 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Cap room? (Or, 'paging Kim Malo')
Message-ID: <515958.95033.qm@web110113.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

Interesting discussion going on at CelticsBlog. I'd assumed the C's would have the potential to go after some FAs next summer with Ray's, Scal's and Tony's deals all expiring. But a poster at C'blog is saying that even without those deals, we're still basically so close to the cap that the only way we'd be able to sign anybody is with the MLE. Is that correct?


>>Right now, we have the following salaries guaranteed for next season:

KG:  $18,832,044
Rasheed: $6,322,320
Perk:  $4,890,208
BBD:  $3,250,000 (roughly)

That adds up to $30.4 million.  To that, we need to add a $6.3 million "cap hold" for Rajon Rondo.  That brings us up to $36.7 million, for five players.  There's an additional roster hold of roughly $450k for each player on the roster below 12, which means we have to add an additional $3.2 million in salary.  That brings us up to $39.9 million.

Right now, the salary cap for next season is projected to be between $50.4 million and $53.6.  That means that, if Pierce opts out, we'll have between $10.5 million and $13.7 million to spend on free agents.

Even on the high side, $13.7 million isn't enough to sign a max free agent, and that's assuming that we resign Pierce for the minimum and renounce Ray Allen, Marquis Daniels, Eddie House, Bill Walker, J.R. Giddens, and all of our other free agents, as well as renouncing our right to use the MLE next season.

In other words, we don't have any cap room.




      


From noah.evans at gmail.com  Fri Oct  2 17:07:49 2009
From: noah.evans at gmail.com (Noah Evans)
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 19:07:49 +0200
Subject: Cap room? (Or, 'paging Kim Malo')
In-Reply-To: <515958.95033.qm@web110113.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <515958.95033.qm@web110113.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <56a297000910021007o1d89fb29hdabfb144a80cd9b6@mail.gmail.com>

NBA free agency is going to be completely redone when the next CBA is
negotiated so there's no point in speculating now.

On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 7:01 PM, Peter Delevett <pdelevett at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Interesting discussion going on at CelticsBlog. I'd assumed the C's would have the potential to go after some FAs next summer with Ray's, Scal's and Tony's deals all expiring. But a poster at C'blog is saying that even without those deals, we're still basically so close to the cap that the only way we'd be able to sign anybody is with the MLE. Is that correct?
>
>
>>>Right now, we have the following salaries guaranteed for next season:
>
> KG: ?$18,832,044
> Rasheed: $6,322,320
> Perk: ?$4,890,208
> BBD: ?$3,250,000 (roughly)
>
> That adds up to $30.4 million. ?To that, we need to add a $6.3 million "cap hold" for Rajon Rondo. ?That brings us up to $36.7 million, for five players. ?There's an additional roster hold of roughly $450k for each player on the roster below 12, which means we have to add an additional $3.2 million in salary. ?That brings us up to $39.9 million.
>
> Right now, the salary cap for next season is projected to be between $50.4 million and $53.6. ?That means that, if Pierce opts out, we'll have between $10.5 million and $13.7 million to spend on free agents.
>
> Even on the high side, $13.7 million isn't enough to sign a max free agent, and that's assuming that we resign Pierce for the minimum and renounce Ray Allen, Marquis Daniels, Eddie House, Bill Walker, J.R. Giddens, and all of our other free agents, as well as renouncing our right to use the MLE next season.
>
> In other words, we don't have any cap room.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics
>


From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Fri Oct  2 17:18:50 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 10:18:50 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Walker injury impact
In-Reply-To: <408675.53532.qm@web63101.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <77987.87375.qm@web65608.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

There are two possible reasons: 

The first is that Giddens is too far back on the depth chart to see much scrimmage time, and thus isn't going to get much of an opportunity to play and impress during practice.  By my count, JR is 6th on the depth chart, behind Ray/Paul/Daniels/House/TA.  Before Walker went down, he was 7th.

The second is that Giddens has been unable to do much in scrimmage due to limitations in his game.  As I've been saying repeatedly during the summer, Giddens plays best with the ball in his hands.  He'll not be given that luxury in training camp (or during the regular season for that matter)--and so he has to subsist on garbage opportunities, transition, and spot up shooting if he wants playing time.  Now, he has the game to make the most of put-backs, steals, and rebounding prowess--it's just a matter of him putting in the dirty work.  However, I'm afraid that fast break opportunities will be low (unless he's playing with Rondo, which he won't) and jump shooting opportunities high.  The problem with is: JR's not a good stand still jump shooter.  It's most likely that he'll get the bulk of his opportunities to impress via his ability to make spot-up jump shots.  As such, I don't think he's going to make much of an impression this preseason.  All the good
 things he does (which, on the offensive end, begin and end with the things he does with the ball in his hands) are pretty much all the things he doesn't get a chance to show off in practice or games.  And, as much as Doc says otherwise, defense isn't enough to get playing time.  You have to be able to score within the flow of offense--even better, you have to be able to hit open jump shots.  JR really can't do either of those things at a very efficient rate.  

And this is why, when the Giddens v. Walker debate is in effect, I'm strongly in the Walker camp.  Given their potential role on this team, and the kinds of opportunities they'll be presented with to achieve that role, it's pretty clear that Walker has the better skill set for the role available.  Walker's entire game is decidedly off-the-ball and in the post.  And he's a better spot-up shooter too.  He's better off the court too.

And since Giddens is much much better with the ball in his hands, I think it's a no-brainer to try him a little at the point, giving Eddie House another backcourt mate who can help him exploit his long-range shooting prowess.  And JR is actually good at penetrating and dishing, and he has a decent handle too.  Given the makeup of this team, JR's best bet for playing time is as a combo guard...even if that's a long shot, I think it's his best shot.

Giddens is a classic iso-player.  We just DON'T need that, however high his skill might be with the right development--we just need a role player who can hit a jump shot.

Ryan

--- On Fri, 10/2/09, Ellie Cutler <ellie.cutler at yahoo.com> wrote:

> From: Ellie Cutler <ellie.cutler at yahoo.com>
> Subject: RE: Walker injury impact
> To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" <celtics at igtc.com>
> Date: Friday, October 2, 2009, 11:17 AM
> why is there no public word about
> Giddens?? I assume he's in camp, but we've heard nothing.
> 
> Ellie
> 
> --- On Fri, 10/2/09, Jaims <jaims at pldtdsl.net>
> wrote:
> 
> From: Jaims <jaims at pldtdsl.net>
> Subject: RE: Walker injury impact
> To: "'The Boston Celtics Mailing List'" <celtics at igtc.com>
> Date: Friday, October 2, 2009, 9:52 AM
> 
> only impact it will make is it gives tony allen 'another'
> chance to play.....
> ugh!!!
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com
> [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com]
> On Behalf
> Of R Howe
> Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 10:56 AM
> To: Celtics list
> Subject: Walker injury impact
> 
> Although B. Walker was going to be, at best, a scrub mins
> to limited
> situation player, his injury has some impact to end of
> roster players vying
> to make the team and maybe Ainge's timing in pulling the
> trigger to trade
> either or both Scals and TA expiring contracts.
> 
> My guess he now has to wait to mid season to make a trade
> or he decides to
> pull a trade before the season begins for a serviceable
> backup SF if he
> already does not think Walker will return from his latest
> knee injury. 
> 
> I think Walker was in the plans for the spot minutes I
> described, Doc had
> enough confidence in him as a rookie to give him some
> meaningful minutes. I
> was looking forward to see if he had made improvements from
> last year and
> hope he comes back strong.
> 
> Such things create opportunities that did not exist, in
> this case for
> Giddens to see if he is ready and prove to Doc he can be
> counted on to play
> swing-man plus spot PG mins. I don't think he had
> confidence in him last
> year.
> 
> Of course if TA is healthy enough to start the season it
> will give Doc and
> Ainge some mins to showcase him, for TA a minor
> break/opportunity to show he
> still belongs in the NBA on another team.
> 
> I don't think this impacts Hudson as he is pointing his
> attention to show he
> can play? PG at this level. I think for us he will do or
> die as a backup PG.
> 
> Go C's
> ? 
> 
> 
> 
> ? ? ? 
> _______________________________________________
> 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
> 


      


From pdbauer at yahoo.com  Fri Oct  2 17:27:06 2009
From: pdbauer at yahoo.com (Paul Bauer)
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 10:27:06 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: The 2009-2010 CBW Predictions List is OPEN!!
In-Reply-To: <DCCC64BE-658D-4734-B977-8E7BAA67E33E@igtc.com>
Message-ID: <634199.15133.qm@web84004.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

61-21

--- On Fri, 10/2/09, Paul M Moriarty <pmm at igtc.com> wrote:


From: Paul M Moriarty <pmm at igtc.com>
Subject: Re: The 2009-2010 CBW Predictions List is OPEN!!
To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" <celtics at igtc.com>
Date: Friday, October 2, 2009, 12:08 AM


Put me down for 60-22? & hanging number 18!

- Paul -

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

From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Fri Oct  2 17:28:12 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 10:28:12 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Cap room? (Or, 'paging Kim Malo')
In-Reply-To: <515958.95033.qm@web110113.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <73660.94408.qm@web65616.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

Yeah, we don't have any cap room and it's a waste of time to think of ways to get some.  About the only scenario that works is if we renounce all free agents (meaning we lose their bird rights), and Paul Pierce opts out (and we renounce him too, losing his bird rights).  Then we'd have a chunk of cap room....but we could only bring back Pierce on the veteran's minimum or by using the MLE.

The thing that people forget is the cap hold--you can have free agents, but their 'cap hold' counts against the cap (and your cap space) until you renounce them completely.  Now, if you don't want them back, that's fine, but in the case with Ray and Paul and Rondo, you definitely want them back and you definitely want their bird rights so you can bring them back without worrying about the cap space available.  

The only way we bring in a max player is a sign-and-trade with Rondo plus Ray (or Paul or KG).  

Ryan

--- On Fri, 10/2/09, Peter Delevett <pdelevett at yahoo.com> wrote:

> From: Peter Delevett <pdelevett at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Cap room? (Or, 'paging Kim Malo')
> To: celtics at igtc.com
> Date: Friday, October 2, 2009, 12:01 PM
> Interesting discussion going on at
> CelticsBlog. I'd assumed the C's would have the potential to
> go after some FAs next summer with Ray's, Scal's and Tony's
> deals all expiring. But a poster at C'blog is saying that
> even without those deals, we're still basically so close to
> the cap that the only way we'd be able to sign anybody is
> with the MLE. Is that correct?
> 
> 
> >>Right now, we have the following salaries
> guaranteed for next season:
> 
> KG:? $18,832,044
> Rasheed: $6,322,320
> Perk:? $4,890,208
> BBD:? $3,250,000 (roughly)
> 
> That adds up to $30.4 million.? To that, we need to
> add a $6.3 million "cap hold" for Rajon Rondo.? That
> brings us up to $36.7 million, for five players.?
> There's an additional roster hold of roughly $450k for each
> player on the roster below 12, which means we have to add an
> additional $3.2 million in salary.? That brings us up
> to $39.9 million.
> 
> Right now, the salary cap for next season is projected to
> be between $50.4 million and $53.6.? That means that,
> if Pierce opts out, we'll have between $10.5 million and
> $13.7 million to spend on free agents.
> 
> Even on the high side, $13.7 million isn't enough to sign a
> max free agent, and that's assuming that we resign Pierce
> for the minimum and renounce Ray Allen, Marquis Daniels,
> Eddie House, Bill Walker, J.R. Giddens, and all of our other
> free agents, as well as renouncing our right to use the MLE
> next season.
> 
> In other words, we don't have any cap room.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ? ? ? 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics
> 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From kmalo17 at verizon.net  Fri Oct  2 18:07:48 2009
From: kmalo17 at verizon.net (Kim Malo)
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2009 14:07:48 -0400
Subject: Cap room? (Or, 'paging Kim Malo')
In-Reply-To: <515958.95033.qm@web110113.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <515958.95033.qm@web110113.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <0KQW00L2UFQA0AI6@vms173009.mailsrvcs.net>

At 01:01 PM 10/2/2009, Peter Delevett wrote:
>Interesting discussion going on at CelticsBlog. I'd assumed the C's 
>would have the potential to go after some FAs next summer with 
>Ray's, Scal's and Tony's deals all expiring. But a poster at C'blog 
>is saying that even without those deals, we're still basically so 
>close to the cap that the only way we'd be able to sign anybody is 
>with the MLE. Is that correct?

True, we're committed to about $55MM if Pierce picks up his option as 
expected $21MM



> >>Right now, we have the following salaries guaranteed for next season:
>
>KG:  $18,832,044
>Rasheed: $6,322,320
>Perk:  $4,890,208
>BBD:  $3,250,000 (roughly)

See above.
http://hoopshype.com/salaries/boston.htm
Makes it pretty clear.
Kim 


From callmebogie at yahoo.com  Fri Oct  2 18:23:59 2009
From: callmebogie at yahoo.com (Michael Gooen)
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 11:23:59 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Prediction (mine re: the upcoming season, Ray's re: Walker's knee)
In-Reply-To: <mailman.644.1254502914.2369.celtics@igtc.com>
Message-ID: <585267.67962.qm@web56804.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

Snoopy - please put me down for 63-19.


Way Of The Ray proclaimed:

<<As I told you back on July 9:  "And we're on the countdown to when Bill Walker takes out another ligament."  And of course, some of you -- who owe me a great apology -- got down right irritable about my comment.>>

Ryan W responded:  <<Self-congratulations is never cool, Ray.>>

Ryan, you'll have to forgive Ray.  He's just excited at the prospect of the Cs getting an injury exemption so they'll have a roster space for the immortal Ernest Brown.  :-)

Michael Gooen 


      


From austinceltic at hotmail.com  Fri Oct  2 19:25:13 2009
From: austinceltic at hotmail.com (Dwain Williams)
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 14:25:13 -0500
Subject: The 2009-2010 CBW Predictions List is OPEN!!
In-Reply-To: <634199.15133.qm@web84004.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <DCCC64BE-658D-4734-B977-8E7BAA67E33E@igtc.com>
Message-ID: <SNT111-W511D3B9F2EC4D1FA4D603ACFD20@phx.gbl>



65-17

 		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
Insert movie times and more without leaving Hotmail?.
http://windowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/QuickAdd?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Tutorial_QuickAdd_062009

From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Sat Oct  3 17:55:11 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2009 10:55:11 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Cs had Enemy Within
Message-ID: <326019.70805.qm@web65607.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

Anyone care to interpret these remarks from Doc Rivers?

Ryan


from:

http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/basketball/celtics/view/20091003celtics_had_enemy_within_doc_rivers_i_was_before_team/

CELTICS HAD ENEMY WITHIN

by Steve Bulpett


NEWPORT, R.I. - The Celtics [team stats] met several enemies last season and, according to Doc Rivers, sometimes they didn?t have to look beyond their own dressing room to find them.

The coach believes ancillary agendas got in the club?s way. Although those factors likely weren?t as large in their demise as Kevin Garnett?s absence, they played an unsettling role.

Rivers simply doesn?t think the Celts were as cohesive and focused as the season before.

?I thought two years ago it was just so simple, and everybody grabbed onto it and ran with it,? he said. ?You know, every single coach spends the whole year on that. Throughout the year it breaks at times, and you try to push it back together.

?But I thought last year there were so many other things going on - you know, contracts, fanfare, all that. I tell you, I think especially with the young guys, admiration is a difficult beast to deal with. How you handle that on a day-to-day basis is very challenging. I think that was a distraction that as a group we didn?t handle nearly as well as I?d like and as well as we could have.

?I thought we had a lot of different agendas. Guys were looking out for their own situations more than the team situation. That came through all year. It was never anything really big, but it was there all year. You could see it in little things, and I think when you take it as a whole it really had an effect on our season.?

Expanding on the point yesterday, Rivers seized upon a question regarding the importance of team chemistry.

?Let?s be honest: I think we have enough talent to win the world championship,? he said. ?I really believe that. And it comes down with all the teams at that level to how well they play together. You know, if we can get that right - if they?re willing to want to get that right - we have a shot at it. And if we don?t get that right, we?ll win a lot of games and then go home and be upset.

?I don?t think there?s any trick to that. The first part is the want-to, and I think we have that. I mean, so far. We haven?t played a game yet. Everybody wants to be in training camp. It?s when you start divvying out those minutes, when you start divvying out the sets for who gets the ball, that?s when your team is tested. And we?ll find out how that works out as the year goes.?

Earlier in the week, Rivers spoke quietly about the hangover from the 2007-08 championship run. It?s his opinion that the champagne toasts clouded his players? thinking at times. Lost on the way was the more prevalent sense of team that made for a great regular season and allowed the Celtics to battle through a 26-game playoff journey.

?Once you have success, it?s a boost to you and your confidence,? he said. ?That should be good, but sometimes guys take it in a different direction. They start thinking a little too much about their own situation, and it can be hard not to when everywhere you go people are telling you how great you are. It can be hard to keep things in perspective, and I think that was a problem for us last year.

?But I think that was a great teaching tool for us as we go into this year. It was a great lesson. Obviously I wouldn?t have wanted to learn that lesson as a group, but I think we did. I think because of that pressure, at times we were less tolerant of each other. That?s player to player more than player to coach.

?I just think we learned a lot about ourselves.?

Rivers now is hoping his team will weigh the two seasons and go back to the 2007-08 approach.


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From BDodgers at aol.com  Sat Oct  3 18:15:41 2009
From: BDodgers at aol.com (BDodgers at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2009 14:15:41 EDT
Subject: Extension decisions nearing deadline for Brewer, Love
Message-ID: <c0f.5a6168a5.37f8eecd@aol.com>

 
Extension decisions nearing deadline for Brewer,  Love
The Timberwolves have until the end of October for offering  contract 
extensions to some of their young players. 
 
By _JERRY ZGODA_ (http://www.startribune.com/bios/10646291.html) , Star 
Tribune  
Last update: October 2, 2009 - 12:56 AM

 
 



 
 
MANKATO ? The Timberwolves will use October to consider options for a third 
 point guard. They also by month's end must make contract-extension 
decisions on  youngsters Kevin Love, Corey Brewer and Oleksiy Pecherov. 
Extending Love a $3.6 million qualifying offer by the Oct. 31 deadline is  
what Wolves boss David Kahn calls a "no-brainer," but Pecherov is an  
unlikely keep. 
On Thursday, Kahn said he "can't fathom" not guaranteeing Brewer -- the  
seventh overall pick in the 2007 draft -- a $3.7 million contract for the  
2010-11 season. 
"I think I need to visit with the coaches and we need to watch Corey play  
this year," Kahn said. "It'd be hard for me to fathom as we speak today that 
we  don't pick up Corey as well [as Love]. But we've got all month to think 
about  it." 
Brewer said he hasn't even thought about that Oct. 31 deadline. 
"Either they like me or they're not going to like me," he said. "I hope 
they  like me because I like being here in Minnesota."Scrimmage  time  
Al Jefferson played one game of Thursday's night scrimmage and then  
watched the rest with a gigantic ice bag taped to each leg. Coach Kurt  Rambis 
called it a precaution to ensure Jefferson's surgically repaired knee  remains 
pain-free. 
Point guards Jonny Flynn and Ramon Sessions played together for  the first 
extended time in a scrimmage. "We wanted to see what it looked like,"  
Rambis said. "It didn't look great, but that doesn't mean  anything."Missing  
The Wolves play on without veterans Antonio Daniels and Mark  Blount, who 
have been given permission to pursue work elsewhere. 
And Kahn doesn't appear rushed to solve either situation. He said he isn't  
actively trying to trade either player. If their agents can't arrange a 
trade,  the Wolves are expected to agree to a contract buyout with each  
player.Still hurting  
Pecherov, the 7-foot, third-year forward acquired from Washington last  
summer, remains sidelined by a broken wrist sustained while playing with the  
Ukrainian national team more than a month  ago.



From jlyell at verizon.net  Sun Oct  4 23:34:43 2009
From: jlyell at verizon.net (John Lyell)
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 16:34:43 -0700
Subject: Extension decisions nearing deadline for Brewer, Love
In-Reply-To: <c0f.5a6168a5.37f8eecd@aol.com>
References: <c0f.5a6168a5.37f8eecd@aol.com>
Message-ID: <D5B8C890-C9BA-45FA-90B3-82EACBA3D506@verizon.net>

Brewer for Allen would be nice, although he hasn't hasn't shown a  
consistent game either, but could be a Bowen like defensive player



On Oct 3, 2009, at 11:15 AM, BDodgers at aol.com wrote:

>
> Extension decisions nearing deadline for Brewer,  Love
> The Timberwolves have until the end of October for offering  contract
> extensions to some of their young players.
>
> By _JERRY ZGODA_ (http://www.startribune.com/bios/10646291.html) ,  
> Star
> Tribune
> Last update: October 2, 2009 - 12:56 AM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> MANKATO ? The Timberwolves will use October to consider options for  
> a third
> point guard. They also by month's end must make contract-extension
> decisions on  youngsters Kevin Love, Corey Brewer and Oleksiy  
> Pecherov.
> Extending Love a $3.6 million qualifying offer by the Oct. 31  
> deadline is
> what Wolves boss David Kahn calls a "no-brainer," but Pecherov is an
> unlikely keep.
> On Thursday, Kahn said he "can't fathom" not guaranteeing Brewer --  
> the
> seventh overall pick in the 2007 draft -- a $3.7 million contract  
> for the
> 2010-11 season.
> "I think I need to visit with the coaches and we need to watch Corey  
> play
> this year," Kahn said. "It'd be hard for me to fathom as we speak  
> today that
> we  don't pick up Corey as well [as Love]. But we've got all month  
> to think
> about  it."
> Brewer said he hasn't even thought about that Oct. 31 deadline.
> "Either they like me or they're not going to like me," he said. "I  
> hope
> they  like me because I like being here in Minnesota."Scrimmage  time
> Al Jefferson played one game of Thursday's night scrimmage and then
> watched the rest with a gigantic ice bag taped to each leg. Coach  
> Kurt  Rambis
> called it a precaution to ensure Jefferson's surgically repaired  
> knee  remains
> pain-free.
> Point guards Jonny Flynn and Ramon Sessions played together for  the  
> first
> extended time in a scrimmage. "We wanted to see what it looked like,"
> Rambis said. "It didn't look great, but that doesn't mean   
> anything."Missing
> The Wolves play on without veterans Antonio Daniels and Mark   
> Blount, who
> have been given permission to pursue work elsewhere.
> And Kahn doesn't appear rushed to solve either situation. He said he  
> isn't
> actively trying to trade either player. If their agents can't  
> arrange a
> trade,  the Wolves are expected to agree to a contract buyout with  
> each
> player.Still hurting
> Pecherov, the 7-foot, third-year forward acquired from Washington last
> summer, remains sidelined by a broken wrist sustained while playing  
> with the
> Ukrainian national team more than a month  ago.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics


From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil  Mon Oct  5 11:14:50 2009
From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil)
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 07:14:50 -0400
Subject: They shot Old Yeller!?!?
In-Reply-To: <D5B8C890-C9BA-45FA-90B3-82EACBA3D506@verizon.net>
References: <c0f.5a6168a5.37f8eecd@aol.com>
	<D5B8C890-C9BA-45FA-90B3-82EACBA3D506@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <200910051114.n95BEtRB024309@ares.afrc.af.mil>

"They ain?t shot Old Yeller yet. They ain?t shot him yet. They ain?t took him in the back and killed him yet. I can still make a couple of plays.? KG

One of the underrated parts of having intense guys like KG and Sheed, etc are that you get good stuff like the above. Anyone can trash talk, it's not that hard, but it's another thing altogether to make it more than crude four letter words and derogatory references to relatives of all stripes. Now I don't doubt that there's plenty of that type exchange flying around too, but I would guess there aren't many 30 somethings, and definitely single digit twenty-somethings in the NBA that could rock the Old Yeller reference.

Good stuff.

From renrile at qualcomm.com  Mon Oct  5 15:43:38 2009
From: renrile at qualcomm.com (Enrile, Roy)
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 08:43:38 -0700
Subject: Celts training camp on NBATV
Message-ID: <0938E4C6C3C7CF48BB2F343EC9CF161814FDFF66D0@NASANEXMB02.na.qualcomm.com>

For those that missed the 2 hour show on celts training camp on NBA TV (their probably replaying it all week),  here's some parts I thought were interesting.

- Last years starters & the vet bench players scrimaged right of the bat.  Bench was Eddie, Marquis, Scal, Baby, Rasheed.

-On the court, Rasheed  is such a natural, it's a treat to watch.   He's moving the ball around from high post confidently, cutting to spots like he's been here for years, and finishing off jumphooks/Threes/PerkContestedFallaways,  w/ no dribbling & no effort.   No trashtalking or talking at all.

-Marquis didn't show much in the short coverage of the scrimmage, but Paul says he's surprised Daniels is so smart.

-Sheldon Williams got a 17 footer (Baby style) within the flow of the offense & hit it.  He's built like a stronger guy than Baby or Leon.  Like a pro weightlifter with abnormal long arms.

-Rajon gained some weight.   Still no fat, but is getting closer to Marcus Banks type muscular than to a skinny kid like Jamal Crawford.   

-KG has a brace but is moving pretty well w/ no limp in his strides, but apparently he's complaining of shin problems.  Paul looks slimmer like a typical nba 2 guard rather than SF.  

-In the teaching sessions,  Doc taught scal how to cheat & hold on to his mans jersey down by the waist so he can't easily cut or get to the pick.  Paul & KG started laughing.

-Doc says for the bench Rasheed gets the Baby shots from last year (pick & pop jumpers),  and Baby gets more of the Leon plays from last year (pick & roll to the basket).

From noah.evans at gmail.com  Mon Oct  5 15:47:50 2009
From: noah.evans at gmail.com (Noah Evans)
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 17:47:50 +0200
Subject: Celts training camp on NBATV
In-Reply-To: <0938E4C6C3C7CF48BB2F343EC9CF161814FDFF66D0@NASANEXMB02.na.qualcomm.com>
References: <0938E4C6C3C7CF48BB2F343EC9CF161814FDFF66D0@NASANEXMB02.na.qualcomm.com>
Message-ID: <56a297000910050847n26057db1l4f3bf953d238a7d1@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks for that, I'm looking forward to the beginning of the season.

On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 5:43 PM, Enrile, Roy <renrile at qualcomm.com> wrote:
> For those that missed the 2 hour show on celts training camp on NBA TV (their probably replaying it all week), ?here's some parts I thought were interesting.
>
> - Last years starters & the vet bench players scrimaged right of the bat. ?Bench was Eddie, Marquis, Scal, Baby, Rasheed.
>
> -On the court, Rasheed ?is such a natural, it's a treat to watch. ? He's moving the ball around from high post confidently, cutting to spots like he's been here for years, and finishing off jumphooks/Threes/PerkContestedFallaways, ?w/ no dribbling & no effort. ? No trashtalking or talking at all.
>
> -Marquis didn't show much in the short coverage of the scrimmage, but Paul says he's surprised Daniels is so smart.
>
> -Sheldon Williams got a 17 footer (Baby style) within the flow of the offense & hit it. ?He's built like a stronger guy than Baby or Leon. ?Like a pro weightlifter with abnormal long arms.
>
> -Rajon gained some weight. ? Still no fat, but is getting closer to Marcus Banks type muscular than to a skinny kid like Jamal Crawford.
>
> -KG has a brace but is moving pretty well w/ no limp in his strides, but apparently he's complaining of shin problems. ?Paul looks slimmer like a typical nba 2 guard rather than SF.
>
> -In the teaching sessions, ?Doc taught scal how to cheat & hold on to his mans jersey down by the waist so he can't easily cut or get to the pick. ?Paul & KG started laughing.
>
> -Doc says for the bench Rasheed gets the Baby shots from last year (pick & pop jumpers), ?and Baby gets more of the Leon plays from last year (pick & roll to the basket).
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics
>


From kmalo17 at verizon.net  Mon Oct  5 17:17:11 2009
From: kmalo17 at verizon.net (Kim Malo)
Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2009 13:17:11 -0400
Subject: Celts training camp on NBATV
Message-ID: <0KR1007M3XE079R0@vms173009.mailsrvcs.net>

At 11:43 AM 10/5/2009, Enrile, Roy wrote:
>For those that missed the 2 hour show on celts training camp on NBA 
>TV (their probably replaying it all week)

You can also watch it online if you want
http://www.nba.com/video/channels/nbatv/

>-In the teaching sessions,  Doc taught scal how to cheat & hold on 
>to his mans jersey down by the waist so he can't easily cut or get 
>to the pick.  Paul & KG started laughing.

And where it's harder for the refs to see it. <appreciative grin> You 
know, one of the things I most miss with the way they've changed and 
IMO downgraded a lot of season ticket holder benefits (now that they 
don't have a problem selling tickets) was an annual event where most 
probably got more into the autograph opportunities with the players, 
but I really got into just talking hoops, one on one, with Doc or 
Armand Hill or one of the other coaches or retired players for 10-15 
min. That's how I learned back when we all thought Doc was an idiot 
at least about X and O basics just how untrue that was, that the 
problem was with getting the players to execute not what they were being told.

Oh well.

>-Doc says for the bench Rasheed gets the Baby shots from last year 
>(pick & pop jumpers),  and Baby gets more of the Leon plays from 
>last year (pick & roll to the basket).

He'd better have added some more lift then because that's just asking 
for him to get stuffed with regularity. I thought that was part of 
why they moved him to outside shots in the first place.

Kim 


From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil  Mon Oct  5 17:42:11 2009
From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil)
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 13:42:11 -0400
Subject: Celts training camp on NBATV
In-Reply-To: <0KR1007M3XE079R0@vms173009.mailsrvcs.net>
References: <0KR1007M3XE079R0@vms173009.mailsrvcs.net>
Message-ID: <200910051742.n95HgDpE004036@poseidon.afrc.af.mil>

He'd better have added some more lift then because that's just asking 
for him to get stuffed with regularity. I thought that was part of 
why they moved him to outside shots in the first place.- Kim

Uh huh. The most obvious solution is for BOTH of them to play the two man game together given that BBD can handle a bit OR having one or the other on the opposite (weak) side of the floor clearing out space FOR the two man game on the strong side given the fact that they can both shoot out to at least 20 feet.

If they're just changing baby to a slasher that doesn't fit his abilities at all and would run counter to your earlier Xs and Os comments. There was a reason Leon and BBD had different roles - they had different skills. Trying to shoe-horn BBD into Leon's abilities to pick & roll and get fouls doesn't seem like it would be best use, but I'll be willing to hold judgment until pre-season to see it in action.



-----Original Message-----
From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Kim Malo
Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 1:17 PM
To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List
Subject: Re: Celts training camp on NBATV

At 11:43 AM 10/5/2009, Enrile, Roy wrote:
>For those that missed the 2 hour show on celts training camp on NBA 
>TV (their probably replaying it all week)

You can also watch it online if you want
http://www.nba.com/video/channels/nbatv/

>-In the teaching sessions,  Doc taught scal how to cheat & hold on 
>to his mans jersey down by the waist so he can't easily cut or get 
>to the pick.  Paul & KG started laughing.

And where it's harder for the refs to see it. <appreciative grin> You 
know, one of the things I most miss with the way they've changed and 
IMO downgraded a lot of season ticket holder benefits (now that they 
don't have a problem selling tickets) was an annual event where most 
probably got more into the autograph opportunities with the players, 
but I really got into just talking hoops, one on one, with Doc or 
Armand Hill or one of the other coaches or retired players for 10-15 
min. That's how I learned back when we all thought Doc was an idiot 
at least about X and O basics just how untrue that was, that the 
problem was with getting the players to execute not what they were being told.

Oh well.

>-Doc says for the bench Rasheed gets the Baby shots from last year 
>(pick & pop jumpers),  and Baby gets more of the Leon plays from 
>last year (pick & roll to the basket).

He'd better have added some more lift then because that's just asking 
for him to get stuffed with regularity. I thought that was part of 
why they moved him to outside shots in the first place.

Kim 

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


From Mencius01 at gmail.com  Mon Oct  5 17:54:51 2009
From: Mencius01 at gmail.com (Mencius)
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 10:54:51 -0700
Subject: The 2009-2010 CBW Predictions List is OPEN!!
Message-ID: <cbab3fa40910051054l29a8c2bfxbea1b35785d9d574@mail.gmail.com>

We're an old team.  It will begin to show.  Hopefully we can muster up
enough for one last championship, ala the Russell era.

I'm not convinced that Garnett will come back 100%.  He sure looked gimpy
the other day.  In spite of all that, we've got enough to win in the
mid-50s.  Chalk me up for 56-26.

From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Mon Oct  5 18:42:38 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 11:42:38 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Celts training camp on NBATV
In-Reply-To: <200910051742.n95HgDpE004036@poseidon.afrc.af.mil>
Message-ID: <615168.37886.qm@web65604.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

We're going to need some real preseason action to determine the worthiness of moving Baby closer to the hoop but I find it interesting that Doc is not even making the obligatory 'we-gotta-get-'Sheed-in-the-post' remarks in preseason.  Instead, he's encouraging what almost every other coach has decried--'Sheed's proclivity to jack jumpers.  On top of that, he's telling our vertically challenged smallish power forward to go back into the post--right after his break out season which was almost completely predicated on the ability to hit wide-open 15-footers. 

Now, I think Baby *can* do it--he's been consistently under-estimated for his entire career and this represents another chapter in the Evolution of Baby.  With improved conditioning and eating habits, combined with big time experience (in last year's playoffs) and personal maturity (from his summer of free agency), I don't doubt he can get some things done in the post.  His hook shot was coming along last season, and I remember quite a few from the 2nd round, a couple coming over D-Howard.  He looked very fluid in the post to my eyes.  Doc also wants him to concentrate on drawing fouls and doing that takes nothing more than an awareness of contact--it'll be a question of how many calls he gets, but I think he has a decent knack for drawing contact.  With his newly toned body rumbling towards the basket in a pick-and-roll situation, he can be very tough to defend in space once he gets up a head of steam.  Baby also has fantastic body control for someone
 as big as he is--if I remember correctly, Baby got to the rim pretty effectively in last year's playoffs, especially off pick-and-roll opportunities.  The potential is definitely there...  

But I think Patrick is right to stress that this doesn't have to be an either/or situation.  There's nothing saying that Baby or 'Sheed can't take turns in the post or on the perimeter...and I'd hope that we feature 'Sheed in the post alot when he has a clear advantage, just as I'd like us take advantage of Baby's new 3 point range as well, especially if they leave him wide open (which I believe they will).  It only makes us harder to defend if we diversify the attack--there's no need to proclaim before the preseason even starts who's going to be the post player and the perimeter player...we can only hope that they both do both when it's to their advantage.

Ryan

--- On Mon, 10/5/09, 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: Celts training camp on NBATV
> To: celtics at igtc.com
> Date: Monday, October 5, 2009, 12:42 PM
> He'd better have added some more lift
> then because that's just asking 
> for him to get stuffed with regularity. I thought that was
> part of 
> why they moved him to outside shots in the first place.-
> Kim
> 
> Uh huh. The most obvious solution is for BOTH of them to
> play the two man game together given that BBD can handle a
> bit OR having one or the other on the opposite (weak) side
> of the floor clearing out space FOR the two man game on the
> strong side given the fact that they can both shoot out to
> at least 20 feet.
> 
> If they're just changing baby to a slasher that doesn't fit
> his abilities at all and would run counter to your earlier
> Xs and Os comments. There was a reason Leon and BBD had
> different roles - they had different skills. Trying to
> shoe-horn BBD into Leon's abilities to pick & roll and
> get fouls doesn't seem like it would be best use, but I'll
> be willing to hold judgment until pre-season to see it in
> action.
> 
> 

> 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From gk_tyler at yahoo.com  Mon Oct  5 19:09:39 2009
From: gk_tyler at yahoo.com (gene kirkpatrick)
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 19:09:39 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: Camp video
Message-ID: <733327.77244.qm@web39601.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

It's sure frustrating to see the heads of the commentators and the iso on players on the bench rather than the action on the floor.? What I saw of Hudson is a good body, of Giddens was good composure, and that's about all.? Mostly a waste of an hour.? Looking forward to some game film.? Gene


      

From joefan11111 at aol.com  Mon Oct  5 20:05:46 2009
From: joefan11111 at aol.com (joefan11111)
Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2009 16:05:46 -0400
Subject: The 2009-2010 CBW Predictions List is OPEN!!
In-Reply-To: <20090929223133.00DB5E1BC3B@ignite.igtc.com>
Message-ID: <EC377416.6593.4E8D.834F.1C85DA578359@aol.com>

Snoopy - how about 53-29.?

Since almost everyone has predicted more than last seasons
62 wins with our better bench, ?I?ll play devil?s advocate.?
My guess is?53-29 this coming season.

Since the Celts have a much better bench this year,
it sounds reasonable that they would win more games than
last year.??But since we already have three players
recovering from injuries (Garnett,T. Allen, and Walker)?
and two others (Perk, Daniels) injuries?ready to happen,??I think
it will all come down to injuries on who wins the East.?Also our?
senior citizens (Allen, Pierce, Garnett) have injuries?
just waiting to happen.

Sorry to rain on the parade, but 53 wins is what I think.?
Our time has passed. Too many younger teams gaining?
on us with less payroll, more health, and more flexability.

Joe


From renrile at qualcomm.com  Mon Oct  5 20:23:09 2009
From: renrile at qualcomm.com (Enrile, Roy)
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 13:23:09 -0700
Subject: Celts training camp on NBATV
In-Reply-To: <0KR1007M3XE079R0@vms173009.mailsrvcs.net>
References: <0KR1007M3XE079R0@vms173009.mailsrvcs.net>
Message-ID: <0938E4C6C3C7CF48BB2F343EC9CF161814FE17F043@NASANEXMB02.na.qualcomm.com>

If Rivers starts calling Powe's first option postup plays for Davis (where Glen's not already on the move), then yeah I agree w/ you the lack of lift (and lack of arc/bankshots in his postup arsenal) would be a disaster & he'd get mostly stuffed.

But if Rajon, Paul can get the defense leaning first, then keep executing the old Leon,  drivendish, or picknRoll 1 step from the open basket plays, Glen could probably intimidate some shotblockers while coming in w/ that speed/weight (it intimidated the Piston front court when he was a rook).  Doc claims they'll run a little of Baby's normal jumpshooting plays too of course.

To me, a big key to a championship year is if Glen's new positioning, plus advice from CliffordRay will get him aggressive enough to shove people out early & attack the offensive boards.  If this years C's can keep the extra possessions/hyping up the starters, that Leon brought with O-boards/ThreePointPlays,  they should dominate in the playoffs this time.  Otherwise they'll mostly be a greatDefense & finesseOffense team all year & could be beatable.


-----Original Message-----
From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Kim Malo
Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 10:17 AM


He'd better have added some more lift then because that's just asking
for him to get stuffed with regularity. I thought that was part of
why they moved him to outside shots in the first place.



From shizzjr at hotmail.com  Mon Oct  5 20:28:29 2009
From: shizzjr at hotmail.com (Shawn Niles)
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 16:28:29 -0400
Subject: Manchester
Message-ID: <BAY111-W3582AEA89057C99023F33FA5CF0@phx.gbl>


Anyone know why they aren't coming to Manchester for a pre-season game this year? It's quite disappointing. 		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Powerful Free email with security by Microsoft.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/171222986/direct/01/

From wayoftheray at yahoo.com  Mon Oct  5 21:23:19 2009
From: wayoftheray at yahoo.com (Way Of The Ray)
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 14:23:19 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: With Joe Johnson Available, Hopefully Ainge Makes A Good Offer
Message-ID: <440085.9812.qm@web110110.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

The worst kept secret in the NBA is Joe Johnson is very much available.
Unless a lockout intercedes, sometime between now and the 2010 Summer of Free Agent Love, the Hawks are going to do their best to move him out
for a solid return.

You already know that Ainge is a big fan of Johnson and that he would be
an upgrade over Ray Allen, especially during the playoffs, where Allen's
contributions have been very mercurial. 

As far as what the Celtics will offer the Hawks, well expect the typical
Ainge low ball offer of Ray, Davis, Giddens and a first for Johnson and Jamal Crawford.  

Meanwhile in reality land, if the Celtics truly want Johnson, Ainge is going to have to pony up a combo of Ray & Rondo (for Johnson & Bibby) or Ray and Perkins (for Johnson, Pachulia & Mo Evans). 

The question is not whether you should trade Ray and Rondo for Johnson 
and Bibby, of course you should in one millisecond, but whether you can put the Ray/Rondo/Perkins trade troika to better use to acquire a greater
impact player than Johnson, say Wade, Amare or Bosh?

Ray




      


From jlyell at verizon.net  Tue Oct  6 01:52:59 2009
From: jlyell at verizon.net (John Lyell)
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 18:52:59 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: With Joe Johnson Available, Hopefully Ainge Makes A Good Offer
In-Reply-To: <440085.9812.qm@web110110.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <440085.9812.qm@web110110.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <145955.37131.qm@web84004.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

I like Ray but Joe is? younger and would be great with Rondo, Perk & baby

Bibby is done, Not sure We can give up Ray &?Rondo , maybe Baby

John




________________________________
From: Way Of The Ray <wayoftheray at yahoo.com>
To: Celtics Stuff <celticsstuffgroup at yahoogroups.com>; Celtics Are Idiots List <celtics at igtc.com>
Sent: Monday, October 5, 2009 2:23:19 PM
Subject: With Joe Johnson Available, Hopefully Ainge Makes A Good Offer

The worst kept secret in the NBA is Joe Johnson is very much available.
Unless a lockout intercedes, sometime between now and the 2010 Summer of Free Agent Love, the Hawks are going to do their best to move him out
for a solid return.

You already know that Ainge is a big fan of Johnson and that he would be
an upgrade over Ray Allen, especially during the playoffs, where Allen's
contributions have been very mercurial. 

As far as what the Celtics will offer the Hawks, well expect the typical
Ainge low ball offer of Ray, Davis, Giddens and a first for Johnson and Jamal Crawford.? 

Meanwhile in reality land, if the Celtics truly want Johnson, Ainge is going to have to pony up a combo of Ray & Rondo (for Johnson & Bibby) or Ray and Perkins (for Johnson, Pachulia & Mo Evans). 

The question is not whether you should trade Ray and Rondo for Johnson 
and Bibby, of course you should in one millisecond, but whether you can put the Ray/Rondo/Perkins trade troika to better use to acquire a greater
impact player than Johnson, say Wade, Amare or Bosh?

Ray




? ? ? 

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

From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Tue Oct  6 04:47:33 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 21:47:33 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: With Joe Johnson Available, Hopefully Ainge Makes A Good Offer
In-Reply-To: <440085.9812.qm@web110110.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <436206.93473.qm@web65607.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

If all is as you claim it, Ainge's "lowball" offer is the smart move.  Rondo's as good as Johnson and he's cheaper and younger. 

Regardless, this is a move to contemplate next summer, if at all.  THIS TEAM IS SET RIGHT NOW.  No need to tinker.

Ryan

--- On Mon, 10/5/09, Way Of The Ray <wayoftheray at yahoo.com> wrote:

> From: Way Of The Ray <wayoftheray at yahoo.com>
> Subject: With Joe Johnson Available, Hopefully Ainge Makes A Good Offer
> To: "Celtics Stuff" <celticsstuffgroup at yahoogroups.com>, "Celtics Are Idiots List" <celtics at igtc.com>
> Date: Monday, October 5, 2009, 4:23 PM
> The worst kept secret in the NBA is
> Joe Johnson is very much available.
> Unless a lockout intercedes, sometime between now and the
> 2010 Summer of Free Agent Love, the Hawks are going to do
> their best to move him out
> for a solid return.
> 
> You already know that Ainge is a big fan of Johnson and
> that he would be
> an upgrade over Ray Allen, especially during the playoffs,
> where Allen's
> contributions have been very mercurial. 
> 
> As far as what the Celtics will offer the Hawks, well
> expect the typical
> Ainge low ball offer of Ray, Davis, Giddens and a first for
> Johnson and Jamal Crawford.? 
> 
> Meanwhile in reality land, if the Celtics truly want
> Johnson, Ainge is going to have to pony up a combo of Ray
> & Rondo (for Johnson & Bibby) or Ray and Perkins
> (for Johnson, Pachulia & Mo Evans). 
> 
> The question is not whether you should trade Ray and Rondo
> for Johnson 
> and Bibby, of course you should in one millisecond, but
> whether you can put the Ray/Rondo/Perkins trade troika to
> better use to acquire a greater
> impact player than Johnson, say Wade, Amare or Bosh?
> 
> Ray
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ? ? ? 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics
> 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From pdelevett at yahoo.com  Tue Oct  6 04:49:12 2009
From: pdelevett at yahoo.com (Peter Delevett)
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 21:49:12 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Hudson
Message-ID: <505189.32405.qm@web110109.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

Just spotted an interesting thread on CelticsBlog re: Hudson's contract. One poster made this comment about Lester's training camp play; just was curious if anybody on this list had any similar reports.


>> Hudson may not have a high BBIQ ... Based on the few minutes i saw of the Celtics practice that was televised on NBATV.  Doc literally had to stop practice to instruct Hudson how to run a half-court 5-on-0 drill because he was out there wandering around aimlessly as they ran a standard offensive set.  Defensively he seems to lack basic understanding on man-to-man team defense schemes. 

This guy is 25 yet his court savvy is Gerald Green-like green when he was a rookie here.  He looks similar to Giddens last year at this same stage......totally lost and out of place on an NBA court.



      


From gk_tyler at yahoo.com  Tue Oct  6 14:03:36 2009
From: gk_tyler at yahoo.com (gene kirkpatrick)
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 07:03:36 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Hudson 
Message-ID: <483123.98333.qm@web39603.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

I saw the teaching incident with Hudson.? I wonder if his tenure at somewhat lesser venues makes his learning curve almost straight up.? If he's got the instincts for the game, he will pick it up, but he likely starts out behind recruits from top bb programs.
?
I'm beginning to realize what a major shot in the arm that Wallace and Daniels can mean to this team.? In the land where ball movement on offense and attitude on defense are kings, we have quite a season in store for us.? The hot, young teams will still be a problem, but I like our guys a whole bunch.? Gene


      

From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil  Tue Oct  6 14:30:48 2009
From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil)
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 10:30:48 -0400
Subject: Hudson 
In-Reply-To: <483123.98333.qm@web39603.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <483123.98333.qm@web39603.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <200910061430.n96EUpTo007859@artemis.afrc.af.mil>

The hot, young teams will still be a problem, but I like our guys a whole bunch.  - Gene

Excellent point. The Hawks and Bulls showed in successive years that youthful, athletic teams are the method to at the very least give this team trouble. 

I am maintaining my conjecture that the Marquis Daniels signing was the linchpin to success. While Sheed certainly provides superior depth and 5-tool skills; it remains the 2/3 position that the OTHER teams rely on to succeed. Whether the name on the opposing jersey is James, or Wade, or Bryant - I remain confident that a three headed monster of Pierce, Allen, and now Daniels is the recipe for successfully caging those beasts of the hardwood. Add to that the freeing of Eddie House to bomb away and suddenly that defensive aspect is multiplied to making those players also defend the Cs second unit differently (since most of the players above play 40 minutes a night in the playoffs) not allowing them to "roam" and create havoc having to guard the "guy with the ball in his hands" in Daniels.

I may portray a Negative Nancy persona to some degree regarding KGs health and Sheed's ability to integrate, but those are smaller concerns to the fact that talent wise this team is loaded. The NBA is all about matchups. Dictating matchups leads to easy wins because you can't "hide who you are". Adding 5-tool players like Sheed and Daniels to an already potent mix was masterful in allowing Doc the luxury to do exactly that: dictate the matchup, whether offensively or defensively, on a nightly basis.

I'm thrilled to see it in action.


-----Original Message-----
From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of gene kirkpatrick
Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 10:04 AM
To: celtics
Subject: re: Hudson 

I saw the teaching incident with Hudson.? I wonder if his tenure at somewhat lesser venues makes his learning curve almost straight up.? If he's got the instincts for the game, he will pick it up, but he likely starts out behind recruits from top bb programs.
?
I'm beginning to realize what a major shot in the arm that Wallace and Daniels can mean to this team.? In the land where ball movement on offense and attitude on defense are kings, we have quite a season in store for us.? The hot, young teams will still be a problem, but I like our guys a whole bunch.? Gene


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


From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Tue Oct  6 15:57:49 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 08:57:49 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Hudson
In-Reply-To: <505189.32405.qm@web110109.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <660398.7096.qm@web65613.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

Well, I think that poster may have an axe to grind.  I saw the same segment on NBA-TV and all Lester did was make a basket cut without looking for the pass.  Not enough to call his BB-IQ into question...

Ryan

--- On Mon, 10/5/09, Peter Delevett <pdelevett at yahoo.com> wrote:

> From: Peter Delevett <pdelevett at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Hudson
> To: celtics at igtc.com
> Date: Monday, October 5, 2009, 11:49 PM
> Just spotted an interesting thread on
> CelticsBlog re: Hudson's contract. One poster made this
> comment about Lester's training camp play; just was curious
> if anybody on this list had any similar reports.
> 
> 
> >> Hudson may not have a high BBIQ ... Based on the
> few minutes i saw of the Celtics practice that was televised
> on NBATV.? Doc literally had to stop practice to
> instruct Hudson how to run a half-court 5-on-0 drill because
> he was out there wandering around aimlessly as they ran a
> standard offensive set.? Defensively he seems to lack
> basic understanding on man-to-man team defense schemes. 
> 
> This guy is 25 yet his court savvy is Gerald Green-like
> green when he was a rookie here.? He looks similar to
> Giddens last year at this same stage......totally lost and
> out of place on an NBA court.
> 
> 
> 
> ? ? ? 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics
> 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From wayoftheray at yahoo.com  Tue Oct  6 22:15:37 2009
From: wayoftheray at yahoo.com (Way Of The Ray)
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 15:15:37 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Both NBA GMs & Myself Are Pessimistic About The Celtics Beating The
	Lakers
Message-ID: <685257.67436.qm@web110113.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

While a majority of NBA GMs think the Celtics will win the
Eastern Conference (which I agree with), 61 percent of those 
same GMs pick the Lakers to repeat as Champs, wth only 18
percent choosing the Celtics (Hat Tip Celtics Blog).

Why are the NBA GMs and myself so reticent about seeing the Celtics
get past LA for their 18th title?

Well, I will tell you:

- Artest makes a huge difference, including freeing Kobe up from
the toughest defensive assignments, making him an even better player.  

- Rondo is useless against the Lakers, because he has no outside shot. Thanks to no perimeter game, Kobe has guarded him exceedingly well in the past. Now with Artest,  Kobe can concentrate fully on Rondo leading to the all familiar 3-on-5 starting lineup offense (sans Perk & Rondo).

- Ray Allen has had two years of mercurial playoffs. I just don't trust him to puit it all together offensively against the Lakers and he certainly can't guard either Kobe or Artest.    

- Do the Celtics have anyone off the bench who can guard Lamar Odom? Both Wallace and KG could in the past, but now? Hmmmm. The Celtics still lack
a 6-8 or above quality defender who can guard anyone from PFs to SGs, sort
of like Posey or Mbah A Mouti. 
 
- And of course, the Lakers are free from the general health and age concerns replete on the Celtics with Garnett, Wallace, Allen, and Daniels.

Of course, I thought the additions of Daniels and Wallace were great moves
by Ainge and improved the club, but the fundamental flaws I see in the Celtics vs. the Lakers match up are Rondo and Ray. Against the Lakers, the
C's would be better off with a PG who can shoot and Joe Johnson at SG.

Ray 

  


      


From guiseppemiguel at gmail.com  Tue Oct  6 22:56:52 2009
From: guiseppemiguel at gmail.com (guiseppemiguel)
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 15:56:52 -0700
Subject: Both NBA GMs & Myself Are Pessimistic About The Celtics Beating 
	The Lakers
In-Reply-To: <685257.67436.qm@web110113.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <685257.67436.qm@web110113.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <ae17b0da0910061556y22d691f8ma97be37a123c053f@mail.gmail.com>

That's the second time in a few days you've said Ray Allen plays "mercurial"
in the playoffs?

He's been like the planet Mercury? Or he's been moody? Or he's been
eloquent, thievish and ingenious?

Which of the definitions do you mean? The third is pretty close actually,
but it doesn't have the negative connotation for which you're striving.

Are you trying to say he's been inconsistent? If so, why not just say that?

Sure he was in a slump in May 2008, but you're talking about the guy who
responded by setting the record for 3s in an NBA Finals series (21) and game
(7) against the Lakers, a series in which he may have been the legitimate
MVP when you include his ankle-breaking, game-winning drive in Game 4.

Sure he was up and down last playoffs. But without Garnett's injury, the Cs
go back to back. Any other breakdown of last spring is just wasted breath.
Show some respect to the man who brought us a title and, were it not for
things out of his control, would have brought us two.

As for the Lakers now with Artest, you have no idea the affect he may have
on them. It could be negative, considering his propensity to take over the
ball offensively (therefore taking the ball out of Kobe's hands). Odom? Ha.
He'll guard himself.

The only reason the Lakers won last year was because injuries layed waste to
their competition, from Stoudamire to Ginobli to Yao/McGrady to Garnett.

Any decent, healthy team would have swept through the Jazz, the Rocket's
D-League team, the Nuggs and the Magic, especially the way Gasol, the real
NBA Finals MVP, played.

Joe



On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 3:15 PM, Way Of The Ray <wayoftheray at yahoo.com>wrote:

> While a majority of NBA GMs think the Celtics will win the
> Eastern Conference (which I agree with), 61 percent of those
> same GMs pick the Lakers to repeat as Champs, wth only 18
> percent choosing the Celtics (Hat Tip Celtics Blog).
>
> Why are the NBA GMs and myself so reticent about seeing the Celtics
> get past LA for their 18th title?
>
> Well, I will tell you:
>
> - Artest makes a huge difference, including freeing Kobe up from
> the toughest defensive assignments, making him an even better player.
>
> - Rondo is useless against the Lakers, because he has no outside shot.
> Thanks to no perimeter game, Kobe has guarded him exceedingly well in the
> past. Now with Artest,  Kobe can concentrate fully on Rondo leading to the
> all familiar 3-on-5 starting lineup offense (sans Perk & Rondo).
>
> - Ray Allen has had two years of mercurial playoffs. I just don't trust him
> to puit it all together offensively against the Lakers and he certainly
> can't guard either Kobe or Artest.
>
> - Do the Celtics have anyone off the bench who can guard Lamar Odom? Both
> Wallace and KG could in the past, but now? Hmmmm. The Celtics still lack
> a 6-8 or above quality defender who can guard anyone from PFs to SGs, sort
> of like Posey or Mbah A Mouti.
>
> - And of course, the Lakers are free from the general health and age
> concerns replete on the Celtics with Garnett, Wallace, Allen, and Daniels.
>
> Of course, I thought the additions of Daniels and Wallace were great moves
> by Ainge and improved the club, but the fundamental flaws I see in the
> Celtics vs. the Lakers match up are Rondo and Ray. Against the Lakers, the
> C's would be better off with a PG who can shoot and Joe Johnson at SG.
>
> Ray
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics
>

From douglas342 at aol.com  Wed Oct  7 00:44:56 2009
From: douglas342 at aol.com (douglas342 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2009 20:44:56 -0400
Subject: Both NBA GMs & Myself Are Pessimistic About The Celtics Beating
	The Lakers
In-Reply-To: <685257.67436.qm@web110113.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <685257.67436.qm@web110113.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <8CC14FE86D109C4-1C38-1BA85@webmail-m039.sysops.aol.com>

I hate to agree with Ray, but were I a betting guy, I'd side with him. 
100% healthy, I pick the Cs, but if I'm putting cash on the line, I 
have to weigh injuries and/or the chance of injuries, and that's why my 
money would shift. Sure, Kobe might fracture his ego, or Phil's Zen 
might explode during a Sacramento game, sidelining him for the season, 
but the Lakers are younger and healthier than the Cs going in, so I 
gotta play those odds.

I had a crusty old work colleague years ago who used to rant about 
"Clinton, the media, and Doug." Now it's me, Ray, and the NBA GMs. Some 
company, huh?




-----Original Message-----
From: Way Of The Ray <wayoftheray at yahoo.com>
To: Celtics Insipid Stuff <celticsstuffgroup at yahoogroups.com>; Celtics 
Are Idiots List <celtics at igtc.com>
Sent: Tue, Oct 6, 2009 3:15 pm
Subject: Both NBA GMs & Myself Are Pessimistic About The Celtics 
Beating The Lakers



While a majority of NBA GMs think the Celtics will win the
Eastern Conference (which I agree with), 61 percent of those
same GMs pick the Lakers to repeat as Champs, wth only 18
percent choosing the Celtics (Hat Tip Celtics Blog).

Why are the NBA GMs and myself so reticent about seeing the Celtics
get past LA for their 18th title?

Well, I will tell you:

- Artest makes a huge difference, including freeing Kobe up from
the toughest defensive assignments, making him an even better player.

- Rondo is useless against the Lakers, because he has no outside shot. 
Thanks to
no perimeter game, Kobe has guarded him exceedingly well in the past. 
Now with
Artest, Kobe can concentrate fully on Rondo leading to the all familiar 
3-on-5
starting lineup offense (sans Perk & Rondo).

- Ray Allen has had two years of mercurial playoffs. I just don't trust 
him to
puit it all together offensively against the Lakers and he certainly 
can't guard
either Kobe or Artest.

- Do the Celtics have anyone off the bench who can guard Lamar Odom? 
Both
Wallace and KG could in the past, but now? Hmmmm. The Celtics still lack
a 6-8 or above quality defender who can guard anyone from PFs to SGs, 
sort
of like Posey or Mbah A Mouti.

- And of course, the Lakers are free from the general health and age 
concerns
replete on the Celtics with Garnett, Wallace, Allen, and Daniels.

Of course, I thought the additions of Daniels and Wallace were great 
moves
by Ainge and improved the club, but the fundamental flaws I see in the 
Celtics
vs. the Lakers match up are Rondo and Ray. Against the Lakers, the
C's would be better off with a PG who can shoot and Joe Johnson at SG.

Ray






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


From davidp4660 at cox.net  Wed Oct  7 12:16:17 2009
From: davidp4660 at cox.net (davidp4660 at cox.net)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 8:16:17 -0400
Subject: Both NBA GMs & Myself Are Pessimistic About The Celtics Beating
	The Lakers
In-Reply-To: <8CC14FE86D109C4-1C38-1BA85@webmail-m039.sysops.aol.com>
Message-ID: <20091007081617.0K7OS.468917.imail@eastrmwml38>

Chances are just as good for any other contender that an injury or two can happen.  Bynum could go down, as could Artest.  He's no spring chicken either.  Vince Carter has had his woes of knee injuries early in his career (jumpers knee) and he's as old as Pierce.  Shaq is Shaq and Ilgauskus is who I just said he was.  Both at the ends of their career.  Duncan too, has had some problems in recent years.  So, it's not just the Celtics.  Tell you what, don't be a betting man because most come out losing in the end.  On paper, the championship is going through Boston.
We'll see what happens, but I'm being optimistic on this one.
---- douglas342 at aol.com wrote: 
> I hate to agree with Ray, but were I a betting guy, I'd side with him. 
> 100% healthy, I pick the Cs, but if I'm putting cash on the line, I 
> have to weigh injuries and/or the chance of injuries, and that's why my 
> money would shift. Sure, Kobe might fracture his ego, or Phil's Zen 
> might explode during a Sacramento game, sidelining him for the season, 
> but the Lakers are younger and healthier than the Cs going in, so I 
> gotta play those odds.
> 
> I had a crusty old work colleague years ago who used to rant about 
> "Clinton, the media, and Doug." Now it's me, Ray, and the NBA GMs. Some 
> company, huh?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Way Of The Ray <wayoftheray at yahoo.com>
> To: Celtics Insipid Stuff <celticsstuffgroup at yahoogroups.com>; Celtics 
> Are Idiots List <celtics at igtc.com>
> Sent: Tue, Oct 6, 2009 3:15 pm
> Subject: Both NBA GMs & Myself Are Pessimistic About The Celtics 
> Beating The Lakers
> 
> 
> 
> While a majority of NBA GMs think the Celtics will win the
> Eastern Conference (which I agree with), 61 percent of those
> same GMs pick the Lakers to repeat as Champs, wth only 18
> percent choosing the Celtics (Hat Tip Celtics Blog).
> 
> Why are the NBA GMs and myself so reticent about seeing the Celtics
> get past LA for their 18th title?
> 
> Well, I will tell you:
> 
> - Artest makes a huge difference, including freeing Kobe up from
> the toughest defensive assignments, making him an even better player.
> 
> - Rondo is useless against the Lakers, because he has no outside shot. 
> Thanks to
> no perimeter game, Kobe has guarded him exceedingly well in the past. 
> Now with
> Artest, Kobe can concentrate fully on Rondo leading to the all familiar 
> 3-on-5
> starting lineup offense (sans Perk & Rondo).
> 
> - Ray Allen has had two years of mercurial playoffs. I just don't trust 
> him to
> puit it all together offensively against the Lakers and he certainly 
> can't guard
> either Kobe or Artest.
> 
> - Do the Celtics have anyone off the bench who can guard Lamar Odom? 
> Both
> Wallace and KG could in the past, but now? Hmmmm. The Celtics still lack
> a 6-8 or above quality defender who can guard anyone from PFs to SGs, 
> sort
> of like Posey or Mbah A Mouti.
> 
> - And of course, the Lakers are free from the general health and age 
> concerns
> replete on the Celtics with Garnett, Wallace, Allen, and Daniels.
> 
> Of course, I thought the additions of Daniels and Wallace were great 
> moves
> by Ainge and improved the club, but the fundamental flaws I see in the 
> Celtics
> vs. the Lakers match up are Rondo and Ray. Against the Lakers, the
> C's would be better off with a PG who can shoot and Joe Johnson at SG.
> 
> Ray
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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


From jlyell at verizon.net  Wed Oct  7 13:08:57 2009
From: jlyell at verizon.net (John Lyell)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 06:08:57 -0700
Subject: Both NBA GMs & Myself Are Pessimistic About The Celtics Beating
	The Lakers
In-Reply-To: <20091007081617.0K7OS.468917.imail@eastrmwml38>
References: <20091007081617.0K7OS.468917.imail@eastrmwml38>
Message-ID: <5DF31945-FEB6-4698-B37F-57FA8890EEC1@verizon.net>

I agree. To date Bynum is an overpaid , underschieving cap hit. Who  
knows how Artest will fit in, basketball's T.O.? Hopefully the others  
experience the issues we did last year



On Oct 7, 2009, at 5:16 AM, <davidp4660 at cox.net> wrote:

> Chances are just as good for any other contender that an injury or  
> two can happen.  Bynum could go down, as could Artest.  He's no  
> spring chicken either.  Vince Carter has had his woes of knee  
> injuries early in his career (jumpers knee) and he's as old as  
> Pierce.  Shaq is Shaq and Ilgauskus is who I just said he was.  Both  
> at the ends of their career.  Duncan too, has had some problems in  
> recent years.  So, it's not just the Celtics.  Tell you what, don't  
> be a betting man because most come out losing in the end.  On paper,  
> the championship is going through Boston.
> We'll see what happens, but I'm being optimistic on this one.
> ---- douglas342 at aol.com wrote:
>> I hate to agree with Ray, but were I a betting guy, I'd side with  
>> him.
>> 100% healthy, I pick the Cs, but if I'm putting cash on the line, I
>> have to weigh injuries and/or the chance of injuries, and that's  
>> why my
>> money would shift. Sure, Kobe might fracture his ego, or Phil's Zen
>> might explode during a Sacramento game, sidelining him for the  
>> season,
>> but the Lakers are younger and healthier than the Cs going in, so I
>> gotta play those odds.
>>
>> I had a crusty old work colleague years ago who used to rant about
>> "Clinton, the media, and Doug." Now it's me, Ray, and the NBA GMs.  
>> Some
>> company, huh?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Way Of The Ray <wayoftheray at yahoo.com>
>> To: Celtics Insipid Stuff <celticsstuffgroup at yahoogroups.com>;  
>> Celtics
>> Are Idiots List <celtics at igtc.com>
>> Sent: Tue, Oct 6, 2009 3:15 pm
>> Subject: Both NBA GMs & Myself Are Pessimistic About The Celtics
>> Beating The Lakers
>>
>>
>>
>> While a majority of NBA GMs think the Celtics will win the
>> Eastern Conference (which I agree with), 61 percent of those
>> same GMs pick the Lakers to repeat as Champs, wth only 18
>> percent choosing the Celtics (Hat Tip Celtics Blog).
>>
>> Why are the NBA GMs and myself so reticent about seeing the Celtics
>> get past LA for their 18th title?
>>
>> Well, I will tell you:
>>
>> - Artest makes a huge difference, including freeing Kobe up from
>> the toughest defensive assignments, making him an even better player.
>>
>> - Rondo is useless against the Lakers, because he has no outside  
>> shot.
>> Thanks to
>> no perimeter game, Kobe has guarded him exceedingly well in the past.
>> Now with
>> Artest, Kobe can concentrate fully on Rondo leading to the all  
>> familiar
>> 3-on-5
>> starting lineup offense (sans Perk & Rondo).
>>
>> - Ray Allen has had two years of mercurial playoffs. I just don't  
>> trust
>> him to
>> puit it all together offensively against the Lakers and he certainly
>> can't guard
>> either Kobe or Artest.
>>
>> - Do the Celtics have anyone off the bench who can guard Lamar Odom?
>> Both
>> Wallace and KG could in the past, but now? Hmmmm. The Celtics still  
>> lack
>> a 6-8 or above quality defender who can guard anyone from PFs to SGs,
>> sort
>> of like Posey or Mbah A Mouti.
>>
>> - And of course, the Lakers are free from the general health and age
>> concerns
>> replete on the Celtics with Garnett, Wallace, Allen, and Daniels.
>>
>> Of course, I thought the additions of Daniels and Wallace were great
>> moves
>> by Ainge and improved the club, but the fundamental flaws I see in  
>> the
>> Celtics
>> vs. the Lakers match up are Rondo and Ray. Against the Lakers, the
>> C's would be better off with a PG who can shoot and Joe Johnson at  
>> SG.
>>
>> Ray
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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


From davidp4660 at cox.net  Wed Oct  7 13:20:04 2009
From: davidp4660 at cox.net (davidp4660 at cox.net)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 9:20:04 -0400
Subject: Both NBA GMs & Myself Are Pessimistic About The Celtics Beating
	The Lakers
In-Reply-To: <5DF31945-FEB6-4698-B37F-57FA8890EEC1@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <20091007092004.8MA71.469911.imail@eastrmwml38>

Bynum does have oodles of potential.  But he seems to have problems physically and maturity wise.  If he gets it together, he can be a powerful force.  And I'm thowing this one out too- I think Greg Oden will be a disappointment.  I don't think he'll ever be the player he was/is touted to be.  I think Durant was the score in that draft, not Oden.
---- John Lyell <jlyell at verizon.net> wrote: 
> I agree. To date Bynum is an overpaid , underschieving cap hit. Who  
> knows how Artest will fit in, basketball's T.O.? Hopefully the others  
> experience the issues we did last year
> 
> 
> 
> On Oct 7, 2009, at 5:16 AM, <davidp4660 at cox.net> wrote:
> 
> > Chances are just as good for any other contender that an injury or  
> > two can happen.  Bynum could go down, as could Artest.  He's no  
> > spring chicken either.  Vince Carter has had his woes of knee  
> > injuries early in his career (jumpers knee) and he's as old as  
> > Pierce.  Shaq is Shaq and Ilgauskus is who I just said he was.  Both  
> > at the ends of their career.  Duncan too, has had some problems in  
> > recent years.  So, it's not just the Celtics.  Tell you what, don't  
> > be a betting man because most come out losing in the end.  On paper,  
> > the championship is going through Boston.
> > We'll see what happens, but I'm being optimistic on this one.
> > ---- douglas342 at aol.com wrote:
> >> I hate to agree with Ray, but were I a betting guy, I'd side with  
> >> him.
> >> 100% healthy, I pick the Cs, but if I'm putting cash on the line, I
> >> have to weigh injuries and/or the chance of injuries, and that's  
> >> why my
> >> money would shift. Sure, Kobe might fracture his ego, or Phil's Zen
> >> might explode during a Sacramento game, sidelining him for the  
> >> season,
> >> but the Lakers are younger and healthier than the Cs going in, so I
> >> gotta play those odds.
> >>
> >> I had a crusty old work colleague years ago who used to rant about
> >> "Clinton, the media, and Doug." Now it's me, Ray, and the NBA GMs.  
> >> Some
> >> company, huh?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Way Of The Ray <wayoftheray at yahoo.com>
> >> To: Celtics Insipid Stuff <celticsstuffgroup at yahoogroups.com>;  
> >> Celtics
> >> Are Idiots List <celtics at igtc.com>
> >> Sent: Tue, Oct 6, 2009 3:15 pm
> >> Subject: Both NBA GMs & Myself Are Pessimistic About The Celtics
> >> Beating The Lakers
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> While a majority of NBA GMs think the Celtics will win the
> >> Eastern Conference (which I agree with), 61 percent of those
> >> same GMs pick the Lakers to repeat as Champs, wth only 18
> >> percent choosing the Celtics (Hat Tip Celtics Blog).
> >>
> >> Why are the NBA GMs and myself so reticent about seeing the Celtics
> >> get past LA for their 18th title?
> >>
> >> Well, I will tell you:
> >>
> >> - Artest makes a huge difference, including freeing Kobe up from
> >> the toughest defensive assignments, making him an even better player.
> >>
> >> - Rondo is useless against the Lakers, because he has no outside  
> >> shot.
> >> Thanks to
> >> no perimeter game, Kobe has guarded him exceedingly well in the past.
> >> Now with
> >> Artest, Kobe can concentrate fully on Rondo leading to the all  
> >> familiar
> >> 3-on-5
> >> starting lineup offense (sans Perk & Rondo).
> >>
> >> - Ray Allen has had two years of mercurial playoffs. I just don't  
> >> trust
> >> him to
> >> puit it all together offensively against the Lakers and he certainly
> >> can't guard
> >> either Kobe or Artest.
> >>
> >> - Do the Celtics have anyone off the bench who can guard Lamar Odom?
> >> Both
> >> Wallace and KG could in the past, but now? Hmmmm. The Celtics still  
> >> lack
> >> a 6-8 or above quality defender who can guard anyone from PFs to SGs,
> >> sort
> >> of like Posey or Mbah A Mouti.
> >>
> >> - And of course, the Lakers are free from the general health and age
> >> concerns
> >> replete on the Celtics with Garnett, Wallace, Allen, and Daniels.
> >>
> >> Of course, I thought the additions of Daniels and Wallace were great
> >> moves
> >> by Ainge and improved the club, but the fundamental flaws I see in  
> >> the
> >> Celtics
> >> vs. the Lakers match up are Rondo and Ray. Against the Lakers, the
> >> C's would be better off with a PG who can shoot and Joe Johnson at  
> >> SG.
> >>
> >> Ray
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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


From Eric at ericalbert.net  Wed Oct  7 13:23:26 2009
From: Eric at ericalbert.net (Eric Albert)
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2009 09:23:26 -0400
Subject: Time of game tonight? Channel?
Message-ID: <20091007132345.2DD7BE1C027@ignite.igtc.com>

Is the Celtics game tonight at 7:30 or 8:30 Eastern time? Is it televised? What channel? Any pre- or post-game? Thanks!

-- Eric


From noah.evans at gmail.com  Wed Oct  7 13:34:33 2009
From: noah.evans at gmail.com (Noah Evans)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 15:34:33 +0200
Subject: Both NBA GMs & Myself Are Pessimistic About The Celtics Beating 
	The Lakers
In-Reply-To: <5DF31945-FEB6-4698-B37F-57FA8890EEC1@verizon.net>
References: <20091007081617.0K7OS.468917.imail@eastrmwml38>
	<5DF31945-FEB6-4698-B37F-57FA8890EEC1@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <56a297000910070634m223386b9yff40882e1d0b0962@mail.gmail.com>

Kobe usually has issues with strong personalities(Malone, Shaq
etc...). Ron Ron puts them both to shame. I've already got my popcorn
ready.

On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 3:08 PM, John Lyell <jlyell at verizon.net> wrote:
> I agree. To date Bynum is an overpaid , underschieving cap hit. Who knows
> how Artest will fit in, basketball's T.O.? Hopefully the others experience
> the issues we did last year
>
>
>
> On Oct 7, 2009, at 5:16 AM, <davidp4660 at cox.net> wrote:
>
>> Chances are just as good for any other contender that an injury or two can
>> happen. ?Bynum could go down, as could Artest. ?He's no spring chicken
>> either. ?Vince Carter has had his woes of knee injuries early in his career
>> (jumpers knee) and he's as old as Pierce. ?Shaq is Shaq and Ilgauskus is who
>> I just said he was. ?Both at the ends of their career. ?Duncan too, has had
>> some problems in recent years. ?So, it's not just the Celtics. ?Tell you
>> what, don't be a betting man because most come out losing in the end. ?On
>> paper, the championship is going through Boston.
>> We'll see what happens, but I'm being optimistic on this one.
>> ---- douglas342 at aol.com wrote:
>>>
>>> I hate to agree with Ray, but were I a betting guy, I'd side with him.
>>> 100% healthy, I pick the Cs, but if I'm putting cash on the line, I
>>> have to weigh injuries and/or the chance of injuries, and that's why my
>>> money would shift. Sure, Kobe might fracture his ego, or Phil's Zen
>>> might explode during a Sacramento game, sidelining him for the season,
>>> but the Lakers are younger and healthier than the Cs going in, so I
>>> gotta play those odds.
>>>
>>> I had a crusty old work colleague years ago who used to rant about
>>> "Clinton, the media, and Doug." Now it's me, Ray, and the NBA GMs. Some
>>> company, huh?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Way Of The Ray <wayoftheray at yahoo.com>
>>> To: Celtics Insipid Stuff <celticsstuffgroup at yahoogroups.com>; Celtics
>>> Are Idiots List <celtics at igtc.com>
>>> Sent: Tue, Oct 6, 2009 3:15 pm
>>> Subject: Both NBA GMs & Myself Are Pessimistic About The Celtics
>>> Beating The Lakers
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> While a majority of NBA GMs think the Celtics will win the
>>> Eastern Conference (which I agree with), 61 percent of those
>>> same GMs pick the Lakers to repeat as Champs, wth only 18
>>> percent choosing the Celtics (Hat Tip Celtics Blog).
>>>
>>> Why are the NBA GMs and myself so reticent about seeing the Celtics
>>> get past LA for their 18th title?
>>>
>>> Well, I will tell you:
>>>
>>> - Artest makes a huge difference, including freeing Kobe up from
>>> the toughest defensive assignments, making him an even better player.
>>>
>>> - Rondo is useless against the Lakers, because he has no outside shot.
>>> Thanks to
>>> no perimeter game, Kobe has guarded him exceedingly well in the past.
>>> Now with
>>> Artest, Kobe can concentrate fully on Rondo leading to the all familiar
>>> 3-on-5
>>> starting lineup offense (sans Perk & Rondo).
>>>
>>> - Ray Allen has had two years of mercurial playoffs. I just don't trust
>>> him to
>>> puit it all together offensively against the Lakers and he certainly
>>> can't guard
>>> either Kobe or Artest.
>>>
>>> - Do the Celtics have anyone off the bench who can guard Lamar Odom?
>>> Both
>>> Wallace and KG could in the past, but now? Hmmmm. The Celtics still lack
>>> a 6-8 or above quality defender who can guard anyone from PFs to SGs,
>>> sort
>>> of like Posey or Mbah A Mouti.
>>>
>>> - And of course, the Lakers are free from the general health and age
>>> concerns
>>> replete on the Celtics with Garnett, Wallace, Allen, and Daniels.
>>>
>>> Of course, I thought the additions of Daniels and Wallace were great
>>> moves
>>> by Ainge and improved the club, but the fundamental flaws I see in the
>>> Celtics
>>> vs. the Lakers match up are Rondo and Ray. Against the Lakers, the
>>> C's would be better off with a PG who can shoot and Joe Johnson at SG.
>>>
>>> Ray
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>


From davidp4660 at cox.net  Wed Oct  7 14:44:58 2009
From: davidp4660 at cox.net (davidp4660 at cox.net)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 10:44:58 -0400
Subject: Time of game tonight? Channel?
In-Reply-To: <20091007132345.2DD7BE1C027@ignite.igtc.com>
Message-ID: <20091007104458.7IU8Y.463277.imail@eastrmwml32>

I think it's on com-cast.  It is televised, but don't know if there is a pre-game show.
---- Eric Albert <Eric at ericalbert.net> wrote: 
> Is the Celtics game tonight at 7:30 or 8:30 Eastern time? Is it televised? What channel? Any pre- or post-game? Thanks!
> 
> -- Eric
> 
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics


From littlerich07 at yahoo.com  Wed Oct  7 15:32:51 2009
From: littlerich07 at yahoo.com (LittleRich)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 08:32:51 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Time of game tonight? Channel?
In-Reply-To: <20091007104458.7IU8Y.463277.imail@eastrmwml32>
Message-ID: <686240.64976.qm@web32806.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Hi All,

CNNSE has this on it's website:  I assume its eastern time.


6:00 pm - The After Party with Jay Glazer  
6:30 pm - Mohegan Sun Sports Tonight (LIVE)  
7:00 pm - Mohegan Sun Sports Tonight  
7:30 pm - Affliction : BANNED  
8:00 pm - Celtics Pre-Game Live (LIVE)  
8:30 pm - Celtics Preseason: Boston at Houston 


--- On Wed, 10/7/09, davidp4660 at cox.net <davidp4660 at cox.net> wrote:

> From: davidp4660 at cox.net <davidp4660 at cox.net>
> Subject: Re: Time of game tonight? Channel?
> To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" <celtics at igtc.com>
> Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 10:44 AM
> I think it's on com-cast.? It is
> televised, but don't know if there is a pre-game show.
> ---- Eric Albert <Eric at ericalbert.net>
> wrote: 
> > Is the Celtics game tonight at 7:30 or 8:30 Eastern
> time? Is it televised? What channel? Any pre- or post-game?
> Thanks!
> > 
> > -- Eric
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> 


      


From gk_tyler at yahoo.com  Wed Oct  7 23:23:31 2009
From: gk_tyler at yahoo.com (gene kirkpatrick)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 16:23:31 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: found it
Message-ID: <183684.22082.qm@web39603.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Hidalgo is home to the Vipers, the Rockets D league team.? That's whey we're far, far away from home tonight.? It's the equivalent of a flight to Denver or so.? Hope all goes well; sounds like they have good facilities.? Gene


      

From jahillsr at comcast.net  Thu Oct  8 01:59:07 2009
From: jahillsr at comcast.net (Jim Hill)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 21:59:07 -0400
Subject: 1/2 Time
Message-ID: <000001ca47ba$ec1fda00$c45f8e00$@net>

Nice play by ALL the good guys in Green.  The new guys are better than
projected but its still the first ? of the first pre-season game.    But
still, not much to complain about.

 

Go Celtics.

 

<Jim


From joefan11111 at aol.com  Thu Oct  8 12:43:53 2009
From: joefan11111 at aol.com (joefan11111)
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2009 08:43:53 -0400
Subject: Houston game
Message-ID: <CC09E88C.D73D.4A48.97D4.1ED570C3E799@aol.com>

Glad to see Garnett effective despite him being removed?
after 4 minutes instead of 8 minutes in the 3rd period?
due to exhaustion and stiffening up.? It will take a while
but I'm convinced he will return to 100%.? If anyone
can do it, Kevin can.

But how the heck did we lose to these Houston guys who?
were missing 4 starters - Ming, McGrady, Artest,?
and Battier. Know its only a pre-season game, but?
I'm bummed.? Our 2nd best bigs in the league next to
the fakers Gasol Bynum and Oden were actually
outrebounded by this poor rebounding lottery team?
with no name Dorsey grabbing 9 rebounds. ? And?
who the heck is David andersen?? Brooks made?
Rondo look like a confused rookie on both offense and
defense. I was actually?ashamed of our teams performance 
including Giddens?and Hudson who were also disappointing.?

Daniels looked good and Rasheed had his moments
althought he looks a bit heavy, slow and out?of condition 
he'll do fine.? Great addition.

On to the next game.

From wayoftheray at yahoo.com  Thu Oct  8 14:44:22 2009
From: wayoftheray at yahoo.com (Way Of The Ray)
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 07:44:22 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: The Houston Horror: Seriously Undermanned Rockets Rout Boston In
	Preseason Travesty
Message-ID: <266075.52967.qm@web110107.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

Fortunately they're exhibition games and they don't count. Let's go right to the scoreboard...

- The Rockets were said to be offering Aaron Brooks around before the draft for a 1st round pick. Now, he would have been a great Ainge pickup, as he ran over and around Rajon Rono (no D), and was clearly the best PG on the floor.

- Thank God Rajon Rondo, who was inhabiting the Rondoverse all during the game, went to shooting school in the offseason, or he would have been 0 for 4, rather than 1 for 4. He will never be a good shooter. 

- Lester Hudson once again proved that he is not a PG. He's a middle 
class Nate Robinson and should be sent to Europe to develop. He simply
can't run an offense. A fact on exhibit to NBA scouts and executives at the Portsmouth Invitational, where he was turnover prone and his teams offensively stagnant (now you know why he was drafted 58th). If he sticks with the Celtics, it's best to pair him with Marquis Daniels. 

- Michael Sweetney after undergoing the Amare Stoudamire weight loss plan (so he's mobile enough to guard someone)should make the Celtics, as he can still be an effective inside force, and with the loss of Powe, the Celtics lack a low post scoring big man, since both Rasheed and KG are jump shoot
oriented these days.

- KG, there's something not quite right with him. He's not the same dominant player, but things could become better, at least Celtics fans hope so.

- Rasheed was very good and should replace Perkins in the starting lineup. 

- Perkins and Davis are slimmer, whether that will translate into them becoming better players, is still a question mark, although Davis likely
could experience the bigger development.

- Tony Allen put on his usual Tony Allen performance... he was held out due to injury.

- JR Giddens was invisible offensively (Rivers had mentioned that earlier  as being a weakness of JR) but decent defensively.  

- Marquis Daniels came as advertised. He's not the best backup PG option, but compared to House and Lester, a vast improvement, and all-in-all a very good player and wonderful addition to the Celtics.

- Pierce, Ray, Scalabrine, House, and Williams did what you expected of them. 

- The Rockets big men looked pretty decent. David Anderson would be a nice backup on the Celtics.

Ray


      


From ellie.cutler at yahoo.com  Thu Oct  8 15:54:25 2009
From: ellie.cutler at yahoo.com (Ellie Cutler)
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 08:54:25 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: thoughts on Hidalgo game
Message-ID: <80699.69311.qm@web63104.mail.re1.yahoo.com>

My random thoughts after watching last night's game:

Lester Hudson - maybe the mowhawk is an attempt to look younger than 25...? He's comfortable handling the ball although he lost it late in the 4th to hand the game over to Houston.? He has Rondo-like hands on D, is a better shooter, and got more than one Tommy Point.? He hit a nice trey and once he gets secure in his role will look for his shot more.? This time he was trying to show he's a good little PG and distribute the ball - the 2nd/3rd unit had some trouble w/offense. Nobody asking for the ball until Sweetney showed up.? He was pretty amazing in the paint on O - shovel him the ball and he was an automatic 3 point play.? Not so hot on the other end, though - kept getting fronted - on *defense* - by the Houston forward(s).? I don't know if we have a spot for him - prob. need a backcourt player more.

Speaking of ncaa standouts, Sheldon Williams earned minutes in the real season rotation as far as I'm concerned.? He is smooth, doesn't waste any energy (the anti-Giddens), just knows his body, how to use it, where to be on the court, what to do with the ball the instant he gets it.? I was very impressed.? I can't believe we have come from Mikki Moore as 1st center off the bench to Sheldon Williams as 3rd string center!? People, we are AWESOME at the 4/5, and are so much more ready to pick up if KG goes down, and esp if Doc controls his minutes (he better goddamn do that!!).

Giddens spent his minutes jumping as high as possible (which was pretty damn high!) every time the ball went up. Trouble was he didn't know what to do once he was up there. Lots of thrashing around. All these bench guys need to get worked into some offensive sets - nobody seems to want the ball except House and... Mike Sweetney! ? I don't get how someone is fighting for an NBA roster and shows up in that kind of shape.? Of course when I see these heavy guys w/twinkletoes and soft hands, I remember the biggest one that got away - Thomas Hamilton.? But he was before fitness and training took such a giant leap forwards. NO excuse for Sweetney that I see. Esp. when his competitinon is the best 4/5 group in the league.? But I give it to him; he knows how to play PF.? Every time someone shoveled him the ball in the paint he:
?- caught it
?- snaked around and put it in the basket
?- got fouled
?- made the free throw

Sheldon Williams had a great stuff on an offensive rebound off a Houston free throw.

Perk looks awesome! Slim and more fluid in his movement. At one point, he dribbled the ball the length of the floor and slammed full tilt into rookie Budlinger.? KG and Wallace howled off the bench.

Pierce was sloppy/MIA.

Daniels showed something in the 2nd half - nice assists and ball movement.? Although his first time down the court I had flashes of Mikki Moore - real skinny guy with hair flying.? He was smiling and interacting w/kids on the sidelines when he was on the bench which was nice to see.

Sheed and KG played together for awhile.? There was nobody in the post on O - Wallace sets up like he's Eddie House...? but on D they were a true force together - it was great to see.? 

Somebody made an analogy that Wallace coming to Boston was like when Bill Walton came in 86.?? Rasheed was so happy on the bench, good on the court, and seems to be having a great time.

Gorman mentioned the Rondo had been working on his shot over the summer with one of the best PGs and shooters ever, Mark Price!? Loved hearing that.

KG looked great and his shot was falling. He was sweating like crazy, then I noticed flies buzzing around and realized it was HOT in that little D-League arena on the Mexican border.? The kids manning the mopup brooms were on the court every few minutes trying to keep it dry.? I actually like the though of pre-season games being played in D-league arenas - gives everybody a taste of what they're aspiring too (when I used to visit family in El Paso, I loved going to the Diablo baseball games - nothing like a full house minor league atmosphere).

Keys to #18 is Doc Rivers - manage those minutes!!! The play of Shelden Williams will make it easier for him to do w/KG.? I'm not quite sure where Daniels is going to end up getting most of his minutes. He was at the 3 a lot w/House & Hudson at guards.? Though I gotta say, we are thin in the backcourt as far as great players.? Joe Johnson is not tough enough to be a celtic. DWade? Now there's something to think about...

but not this season.?? If KG holds up, if Daniels can defend the 3...? I like our chances very much and LOVE our frontcourt.? 

Ellie




      

From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Thu Oct  8 16:37:52 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 09:37:52 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: thoughts on Hidalgo game
In-Reply-To: <80699.69311.qm@web63104.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <871590.643.qm@web65612.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

Great review Ellie!

You were spot on in most of your impressions, especially about Giddens...the guy is so damned athletic, but he doesn't know what to do with it, especially on offense.  if he only had a jump shot, he'd be another Trevor Ariza.

As for Rondo, his shooting form has improved--his elbow's tucked closer to his chest.  He had a pretty sub-par game, really wasn't aggressive enough and looked more interested in getting others involved than he was in reeking havoc.  While I wish he would have Rondo'd the Rockets, I think his play was decidedly team-first, which bodes well for what may be a contract-year.  Rondo's not going to go after individual stats--he's a team player all the way.

I like Hudson a lot--he definitely needs to go the D-League and work on his PG skills.  That said, he's already a better dribbler and passer than House ever will be--with some practice I think he can be a Will Bynum type 2nd team sparkplug guy...and House's eventual replacement.  He's a real force on defense and he strokes it from deep!

Ryan

--- On Thu, 10/8/09, Ellie Cutler <ellie.cutler at yahoo.com> wrote:

> From: Ellie Cutler <ellie.cutler at yahoo.com>
> Subject: thoughts on Hidalgo game
> To: celtics at igtc.com
> Date: Thursday, October 8, 2009, 10:54 AM
> My random thoughts after watching
> last night's game:
> 
> Lester Hudson - maybe the mowhawk is an attempt to look
> younger than 25...? He's comfortable handling the ball
> although he lost it late in the 4th to hand the game over to
> Houston.? He has Rondo-like hands on D, is a better
> shooter, and got more than one Tommy Point.? He hit a nice
> trey and once he gets secure in his role will look for his
> shot more.? This time he was trying to show he's a good
> little PG and distribute the ball - the 2nd/3rd unit had
> some trouble w/offense. Nobody asking for the ball until
> Sweetney showed up.? He was pretty amazing in the paint on
> O - shovel him the ball and he was an automatic 3 point
> play.? Not so hot on the other end, though - kept getting
> fronted - on *defense* - by the Houston forward(s).? I
> don't know if we have a spot for him - prob. need a
> backcourt player more.
> 
> Speaking of ncaa standouts, Sheldon Williams earned minutes
> in the real season rotation as far as I'm concerned.? He is
> smooth, doesn't waste any energy (the anti-Giddens), just
> knows his body, how to use it, where to be on the court,
> what to do with the ball the instant he gets it.? I was
> very impressed.? I can't believe we have come from Mikki
> Moore as 1st center off the bench to Sheldon Williams as 3rd
> string center!? People, we are AWESOME at the 4/5, and are
> so much more ready to pick up if KG goes down, and esp if
> Doc controls his minutes (he better goddamn do that!!).
> 
> Giddens spent his minutes jumping as high as possible
> (which was pretty damn high!) every time the ball went up.
> Trouble was he didn't know what to do once he was up there.
> Lots of thrashing around. All these bench guys need to get
> worked into some offensive sets - nobody seems to want the
> ball except House and... Mike Sweetney! ? I don't get how
> someone is fighting for an NBA roster and shows up in that
> kind of shape.? Of course when I see these heavy guys
> w/twinkletoes and soft hands, I remember the biggest one
> that got away - Thomas Hamilton.? But he was before fitness
> and training took such a giant leap forwards. NO excuse for
> Sweetney that I see. Esp. when his competitinon is the best
> 4/5 group in the league.? But I give it to him; he knows
> how to play PF.? Every time someone shoveled him the ball
> in the paint he:
> ?- caught it
> ?- snaked around and put it in the basket
> ?- got fouled
> ?- made the free throw
> 
> Sheldon Williams had a great stuff on an offensive rebound
> off a Houston free throw.
> 
> Perk looks awesome! Slim and more fluid in his movement. At
> one point, he dribbled the ball the length of the floor and
> slammed full tilt into rookie Budlinger.? KG and Wallace
> howled off the bench.
> 
> Pierce was sloppy/MIA.
> 
> Daniels showed something in the 2nd half - nice assists and
> ball movement.? Although his first time down the court I
> had flashes of Mikki Moore - real skinny guy with hair
> flying.? He was smiling and interacting w/kids on the
> sidelines when he was on the bench which was nice to see.
> 
> Sheed and KG played together for awhile.? There was nobody
> in the post on O - Wallace sets up like he's Eddie
> House...? but on D they were a true force together - it was
> great to see.? 
> 
> Somebody made an analogy that Wallace coming to Boston was
> like when Bill Walton came in 86.?? Rasheed was so happy
> on the bench, good on the court, and seems to be having a
> great time.
> 
> Gorman mentioned the Rondo had been working on his shot
> over the summer with one of the best PGs and shooters ever,
> Mark Price!? Loved hearing that.
> 
> KG looked great and his shot was falling. He was sweating
> like crazy, then I noticed flies buzzing around and realized
> it was HOT in that little D-League arena on the Mexican
> border.? The kids manning the mopup brooms were on the
> court every few minutes trying to keep it dry.? I actually
> like the though of pre-season games being played in D-league
> arenas - gives everybody a taste of what they're aspiring
> too (when I used to visit family in El Paso, I loved going
> to the Diablo baseball games - nothing like a full house
> minor league atmosphere).
> 
> Keys to #18 is Doc Rivers - manage those minutes!!! The
> play of Shelden Williams will make it easier for him to do
> w/KG.? I'm not quite sure where Daniels is going to end up
> getting most of his minutes. He was at the 3 a lot w/House
> & Hudson at guards.? Though I gotta say, we are thin in
> the backcourt as far as great players.? Joe Johnson is not
> tough enough to be a celtic. DWade? Now there's something to
> think about...
> 
> but not this season.?? If KG holds up, if Daniels can
> defend the 3...? I like our chances very much and LOVE our
> frontcourt.? 
> 
> Ellie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ? ? ? 
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics
> 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From Eric at ericalbert.net  Thu Oct  8 16:42:07 2009
From: Eric at ericalbert.net (Eric Albert)
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2009 12:42:07 -0400
Subject: thoughts on Hidalgo game
In-Reply-To: <80699.69311.qm@web63104.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
References: <80699.69311.qm@web63104.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20091008164232.1038BE1C035@ignite.igtc.com>

One bright spot in last night's game was Big Baby on the boards: he was much more aggressive (and effective) than in the past. Perhaps he's inhabited by the ghost of Leon Powe. Nice to see.

-- Eric


From davidp4660 at cox.net  Thu Oct  8 20:01:24 2009
From: davidp4660 at cox.net (davidp4660 at cox.net)
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 16:01:24 -0400
Subject: thoughts on Hidalgo game
In-Reply-To: <20091008164232.1038BE1C035@ignite.igtc.com>
Message-ID: <20091008160124.QG2VL.263703.imail@eastrmwml39>

Sweetney didn't look bad for and 18 wheeler.  Damn, he's huge, but showed he has some game in him.  If he can shed 20 lbs, he would be a nice addition-where, I don't know just yet.
---- Eric Albert <Eric at ericalbert.net> wrote: 
> One bright spot in last night's game was Big Baby on the boards: he was much more aggressive (and effective) than in the past. Perhaps he's inhabited by the ghost of Leon Powe. Nice to see.
> 
> -- Eric
> 
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics


From Roger.Belanger at ips.invensys.com  Thu Oct  8 20:08:04 2009
From: Roger.Belanger at ips.invensys.com (Belanger, Roger)
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 16:08:04 -0400
Subject: thoughts on Hidalgo game
In-Reply-To: <20091008160124.QG2VL.263703.imail@eastrmwml39>
References: <20091008164232.1038BE1C035@ignite.igtc.com>
	<20091008160124.QG2VL.263703.imail@eastrmwml39>
Message-ID: <9BE665184612EC41BBCAE7902C7422EFBE2C1D3FDF@INVSFOXXCHMBX01.corp.com>

Dude, hate to disagree, but 20 pounds off him would have the same effect as throwing a deck chair off an ocean liner. He must be eating sandwiches that weigh 20 pounds. He needs to drop 60 to 80 to get to big baby size. Trust me, I'm a biiiiiiig guy, I have expertise in this area LOL.

roger


Roger S. Belanger
Phone: 1-508-549-2796
Fax: 1-508-549-2263
Invensys IT Global Service Desk
US Toll Free Number: +1-866-873-7435
UK Number: +44-289-095-4803
International Number: +1-508-549-3444


-----Original Message-----
From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of davidp4660 at cox.net
Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 4:01 PM
To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List
Subject: Re: thoughts on Hidalgo game

Sweetney didn't look bad for and 18 wheeler.  Damn, he's huge, but showed he has some game in him.  If he can shed 20 lbs, he would be a nice addition-where, I don't know just yet.
---- Eric Albert <Eric at ericalbert.net> wrote: 
> One bright spot in last night's game was Big Baby on the boards: he was much more aggressive (and effective) than in the past. Perhaps he's inhabited by the ghost of Leon Powe. Nice to see.
> 
> -- Eric
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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


*** Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail, including any associated or attached files, is intended solely for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. This e-mail is confidential and may well also be legally privileged. If you have received it in error, you are on notice of its status. Please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Please do not copy it or use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person. This email comes from a division of the Invensys Group, owned by Invensys plc, which is a company registered in England and Wales with its registered office at Portland House, Bressenden Place, London, SW1E 5BF (Registered number 166023). For a list of European legal entities within the Invensys Group, please go to http://www.invensys.com/legal/default.asp?top_nav_id=77&nav_id=80&prev_id=77. You may contact Invensys plc on +44 (0)20 7821 3848 or e-mail inet.hqhelpdesk at invensys.com. This e-mail and any attachments thereto may be subject to the terms of any agreements between Invensys (and/or its subsidiaries and affiliates) and the recipient (and/or its subsidiaries and affiliates).



From davidp4660 at cox.net  Thu Oct  8 21:51:49 2009
From: davidp4660 at cox.net (davidp4660 at cox.net)
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 17:51:49 -0400
Subject: thoughts on Hidalgo game
In-Reply-To: <9BE665184612EC41BBCAE7902C7422EFBE2C1D3FDF@INVSFOXXCHMBX01.corp.com>
Message-ID: <20091008175149.ZB701.265344.imail@eastrmwml39>

OK, they are listing him at 275 but we all know he's over 300 or danm close.  Still, 20 lbs off his frame would do wonders for his game. that's his body type, and it is not going to change.  I think, though, the kid can play.
---- "Belanger wrote: 
> Dude, hate to disagree, but 20 pounds off him would have the same effect as throwing a deck chair off an ocean liner. He must be eating sandwiches that weigh 20 pounds. He needs to drop 60 to 80 to get to big baby size. Trust me, I'm a biiiiiiig guy, I have expertise in this area LOL.
> 
> roger
> 
> 
> Roger S. Belanger
> Phone: 1-508-549-2796
> Fax: 1-508-549-2263
> Invensys IT Global Service Desk
> US Toll Free Number: +1-866-873-7435
> UK Number: +44-289-095-4803
> International Number: +1-508-549-3444
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of davidp4660 at cox.net
> Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 4:01 PM
> To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> Subject: Re: thoughts on Hidalgo game
> 
> Sweetney didn't look bad for and 18 wheeler.  Damn, he's huge, but showed he has some game in him.  If he can shed 20 lbs, he would be a nice addition-where, I don't know just yet.
> ---- Eric Albert <Eric at ericalbert.net> wrote: 
> > One bright spot in last night's game was Big Baby on the boards: he was much more aggressive (and effective) than in the past. Perhaps he's inhabited by the ghost of Leon Powe. Nice to see.
> > 
> > -- Eric
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> 
> 
> *** Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail, including any associated or attached files, is intended solely for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. This e-mail is confidential and may well also be legally privileged. If you have received it in error, you are on notice of its status. Please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Please do not copy it or use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person. This email comes from a division of the Invensys Group, owned by Invensys plc, which is a company registered in England and Wales with its registered office at Portland House, Bressenden Place, London, SW1E 5BF (Registered number 166023). For a list of European legal entities within the Invensys Group, please go to http://www.invensys.com/legal/default.asp?top_nav_id=77&nav_id=80&prev_id=77. You may contact Invensys plc on +44 (0)20 7821 3848 or e-mail inet.hqhelpdesk at invensys.com. This e-mail 
>  and any attachments thereto may be subject to the terms of any agreements between Invensys (and/or its subsidiaries and affiliates) and the recipient (and/or its subsidiaries and affiliates).
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics


From joefan11111 at aol.com  Fri Oct  9 13:46:18 2009
From: joefan11111 at aol.com (joefan11111)
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2009 09:46:18 -0400
Subject: thoughts on Hidalgo game
In-Reply-To: <9BE665184612EC41BBCAE7902C7422EFBE2C1D3FDF@INVSFOXXCHMBX01.corp.com>
Message-ID: <9B7D414A.DC9C.4268.A7A5.C3C2E858D4CD@aol.com>

Right on Roger, ? Sweetney could be a sweet signing if he would lose more like
70?pounds. ?A 20 lb. loss like someone suggested would be a drop in the bucket 
like me losing 8 ounces. ?

Sweetney has talent if?he just gave a damn. And we could use his inside talent.
Maybe Danny is on to something and will eventually cut his losses with either 
Tony Allen or Giddens or Hudson to sign?Sweetney. ? Hope it works out.

Can't wait for season to start. ?Go Kevin, go Sweetney!

Joe




From davidp4660 at cox.net  Fri Oct  9 16:07:57 2009
From: davidp4660 at cox.net (davidp4660 at cox.net)
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 12:07:57 -0400
Subject: thoughts on Hidalgo game
In-Reply-To: <9B7D414A.DC9C.4268.A7A5.C3C2E858D4CD@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20091009120757.JEVY9.274778.imail@eastrmwml39>

No way he can lose that much.  His frame is what it is.  20-30 would be hard enough.  Still, he's not far from being an NBA player.
---- joefan11111 <joefan11111 at aol.com> wrote: 
> Right on Roger, ? Sweetney could be a sweet signing if he would lose more like
> 70?pounds. ?A 20 lb. loss like someone suggested would be a drop in the bucket 
> like me losing 8 ounces. ?
> 
> Sweetney has talent if?he just gave a damn. And we could use his inside talent.
> Maybe Danny is on to something and will eventually cut his losses with either 
> Tony Allen or Giddens or Hudson to sign?Sweetney. ? Hope it works out.
> 
> Can't wait for season to start. ?Go Kevin, go Sweetney!
> 
> Joe
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics


From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil  Fri Oct  9 18:06:19 2009
From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil)
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 14:06:19 -0400
Subject: The Houston Horror: Seriously Undermanned Rockets Rout Boston
	In	Preseason Travesty
In-Reply-To: <266075.52967.qm@web110107.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <266075.52967.qm@web110107.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <200910091806.n99I6LBL004516@ares.afrc.af.mil>

"Fortunately they're exhibition games and they don't count." - WOTR

But let's rip them anyway. May I refer you to the above line you wrote?

"He will never be a good shooter."

Neither was(is) Jason Kidd. If he hits 30-35% (Antoinesque dare I say?) of jumpers (not total shots, just jumpers) he'll be fine. He has unworldly touch around the hoop as a finisher with more "english" on his shots than Minnesota Fats (whoops, just made everyone realize how old I am) that will carry him through his twenties (again like Kidd) and as he reaches his thirties that shooting stroke will mature.

"Michael Sweetney after undergoing the Amare Stoudamire weight loss plan (so he's mobile enough to guard someone)should make the Celtics"

Uh, where? There's a roster limit even in fantasy basketball isn't there?

"Rasheed was very good and should replace Perkins in the starting lineup"

He may, in fact, supplant Perk in the finishing lineup, but Perk is the only foil to Dwight Howard (last I checked reigning EC champion) and could be argued makes the Cs defense click. I still don't get the Perk hatred by bloggers almost everywhere. I really don't. He's not a star, doesn't act like a star, is only "nasty" on the court, signed for money that made sense to his abilities, and might be one of only three or four true old fashioned centers in the league. You can throw out name after name (I'll be hearing the 2009 #1 pick's name about three posts from now I'm sure as a "way better player than Perk"), but on THIS team he is the right fit and marginalizing him would be about as short sighted as one could get.

"Marquis Daniels came as advertised. He's not the best backup PG option, but compared to House and Lester, a vast improvement, and all-in-all a very good player and wonderful addition to the Celtics."

Agree with everything except ON THIS TEAM he is the best backup PG option. I'm sure someone will say "but we can trade TA, Scal and R. Allen's expiring contract for_____________________" (Chris Paul or some other "name" for the simple fantasy league reasons better not argued). God help me if I hear Starbury mentioned again as the savior to all that is the Cs bench (which I'm sure I will).

I'll shoot right back up to the first line above. The Celtics weren't in this game (from the coaches standpoint) to win. They were looking at specific milestones and situations. I've given Doc a lot of crap in the past (some earned IMHO, other stuff unfair); but he has REALLY come to employ the same pre-season mentality as the Patriots. The score is irrelevant. He wants to see his players in certain situations, try different combinations of players he likely won't in the regular season, and do some other evaluations on his team prior to the season.  

In the first quarter, the most relevant to actual in season gameplay, the Cs cruised to a pretty easy 10 point lead. That's what I'm looking at - can the starting 6 (Sheed incl.) continue to lead this team to reg. season wins and compete with the elite starting fives on the other teams? The bench has relevance, but it is the starters that will win/lose the majority of your games for you.

-----Original Message-----
From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Way Of The Ray
Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 10:44 AM
To: Celtics Stuff; Celtics Are Idiots List
Subject: The Houston Horror: Seriously Undermanned Rockets Rout Boston In Preseason Travesty

Fortunately they're exhibition games and they don't count. Let's go right to the scoreboard...

- The Rockets were said to be offering Aaron Brooks around before the draft for a 1st round pick. Now, he would have been a great Ainge pickup, as he ran over and around Rajon Rono (no D), and was clearly the best PG on the floor.

- Thank God Rajon Rondo, who was inhabiting the Rondoverse all during the game, went to shooting school in the offseason, or he would have been 0 for 4, rather than 1 for 4. He will never be a good shooter. 

- Lester Hudson once again proved that he is not a PG. He's a middle 
class Nate Robinson and should be sent to Europe to develop. He simply
can't run an offense. A fact on exhibit to NBA scouts and executives at the Portsmouth Invitational, where he was turnover prone and his teams offensively stagnant (now you know why he was drafted 58th). If he sticks with the Celtics, it's best to pair him with Marquis Daniels. 

- Michael Sweetney after undergoing the Amare Stoudamire weight loss plan (so he's mobile enough to guard someone)should make the Celtics, as he can still be an effective inside force, and with the loss of Powe, the Celtics lack a low post scoring big man, since both Rasheed and KG are jump shoot
oriented these days.

- KG, there's something not quite right with him. He's not the same dominant player, but things could become better, at least Celtics fans hope so.

- Rasheed was very good and should replace Perkins in the starting lineup. 

- Perkins and Davis are slimmer, whether that will translate into them becoming better players, is still a question mark, although Davis likely
could experience the bigger development.

- Tony Allen put on his usual Tony Allen performance... he was held out due to injury.

- JR Giddens was invisible offensively (Rivers had mentioned that earlier  as being a weakness of JR) but decent defensively.  

- Marquis Daniels came as advertised. He's not the best backup PG option, but compared to House and Lester, a vast improvement, and all-in-all a very good player and wonderful addition to the Celtics.

- Pierce, Ray, Scalabrine, House, and Williams did what you expected of them. 

- The Rockets big men looked pretty decent. David Anderson would be a nice backup on the Celtics.

Ray


      

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


From davidp4660 at cox.net  Fri Oct  9 18:40:51 2009
From: davidp4660 at cox.net (davidp4660 at cox.net)
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 14:40:51 -0400
Subject: The Houston Horror: Seriously Undermanned Rockets Rout Boston
	In	Preseason Travesty
In-Reply-To: <200910091806.n99I6LBL004516@ares.afrc.af.mil>
Message-ID: <20091009144051.PNB55.499217.imail@eastrmwml34>

Shooting can always improve.  Good point with Jason Kidd.  Court vision, speed and defensive ability, including rebounding is already there.  A shot is only gravy and would make him easily a top 3 pg.
---- Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil wrote: 
> "Fortunately they're exhibition games and they don't count." - WOTR
> 
> But let's rip them anyway. May I refer you to the above line you wrote?
> 
> "He will never be a good shooter."
> 
> Neither was(is) Jason Kidd. If he hits 30-35% (Antoinesque dare I say?) of jumpers (not total shots, just jumpers) he'll be fine. He has unworldly touch around the hoop as a finisher with more "english" on his shots than Minnesota Fats (whoops, just made everyone realize how old I am) that will carry him through his twenties (again like Kidd) and as he reaches his thirties that shooting stroke will mature.
> 
> "Michael Sweetney after undergoing the Amare Stoudamire weight loss plan (so he's mobile enough to guard someone)should make the Celtics"
> 
> Uh, where? There's a roster limit even in fantasy basketball isn't there?
> 
> "Rasheed was very good and should replace Perkins in the starting lineup"
> 
> He may, in fact, supplant Perk in the finishing lineup, but Perk is the only foil to Dwight Howard (last I checked reigning EC champion) and could be argued makes the Cs defense click. I still don't get the Perk hatred by bloggers almost everywhere. I really don't. He's not a star, doesn't act like a star, is only "nasty" on the court, signed for money that made sense to his abilities, and might be one of only three or four true old fashioned centers in the league. You can throw out name after name (I'll be hearing the 2009 #1 pick's name about three posts from now I'm sure as a "way better player than Perk"), but on THIS team he is the right fit and marginalizing him would be about as short sighted as one could get.
> 
> "Marquis Daniels came as advertised. He's not the best backup PG option, but compared to House and Lester, a vast improvement, and all-in-all a very good player and wonderful addition to the Celtics."
> 
> Agree with everything except ON THIS TEAM he is the best backup PG option. I'm sure someone will say "but we can trade TA, Scal and R. Allen's expiring contract for_____________________" (Chris Paul or some other "name" for the simple fantasy league reasons better not argued). God help me if I hear Starbury mentioned again as the savior to all that is the Cs bench (which I'm sure I will).
> 
> I'll shoot right back up to the first line above. The Celtics weren't in this game (from the coaches standpoint) to win. They were looking at specific milestones and situations. I've given Doc a lot of crap in the past (some earned IMHO, other stuff unfair); but he has REALLY come to employ the same pre-season mentality as the Patriots. The score is irrelevant. He wants to see his players in certain situations, try different combinations of players he likely won't in the regular season, and do some other evaluations on his team prior to the season.  
> 
> In the first quarter, the most relevant to actual in season gameplay, the Cs cruised to a pretty easy 10 point lead. That's what I'm looking at - can the starting 6 (Sheed incl.) continue to lead this team to reg. season wins and compete with the elite starting fives on the other teams? The bench has relevance, but it is the starters that will win/lose the majority of your games for you.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Way Of The Ray
> Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 10:44 AM
> To: Celtics Stuff; Celtics Are Idiots List
> Subject: The Houston Horror: Seriously Undermanned Rockets Rout Boston In Preseason Travesty
> 
> Fortunately they're exhibition games and they don't count. Let's go right to the scoreboard...
> 
> - The Rockets were said to be offering Aaron Brooks around before the draft for a 1st round pick. Now, he would have been a great Ainge pickup, as he ran over and around Rajon Rono (no D), and was clearly the best PG on the floor.
> 
> - Thank God Rajon Rondo, who was inhabiting the Rondoverse all during the game, went to shooting school in the offseason, or he would have been 0 for 4, rather than 1 for 4. He will never be a good shooter. 
> 
> - Lester Hudson once again proved that he is not a PG. He's a middle 
> class Nate Robinson and should be sent to Europe to develop. He simply
> can't run an offense. A fact on exhibit to NBA scouts and executives at the Portsmouth Invitational, where he was turnover prone and his teams offensively stagnant (now you know why he was drafted 58th). If he sticks with the Celtics, it's best to pair him with Marquis Daniels. 
> 
> - Michael Sweetney after undergoing the Amare Stoudamire weight loss plan (so he's mobile enough to guard someone)should make the Celtics, as he can still be an effective inside force, and with the loss of Powe, the Celtics lack a low post scoring big man, since both Rasheed and KG are jump shoot
> oriented these days.
> 
> - KG, there's something not quite right with him. He's not the same dominant player, but things could become better, at least Celtics fans hope so.
> 
> - Rasheed was very good and should replace Perkins in the starting lineup. 
> 
> - Perkins and Davis are slimmer, whether that will translate into them becoming better players, is still a question mark, although Davis likely
> could experience the bigger development.
> 
> - Tony Allen put on his usual Tony Allen performance... he was held out due to injury.
> 
> - JR Giddens was invisible offensively (Rivers had mentioned that earlier  as being a weakness of JR) but decent defensively.  
> 
> - Marquis Daniels came as advertised. He's not the best backup PG option, but compared to House and Lester, a vast improvement, and all-in-all a very good player and wonderful addition to the Celtics.
> 
> - Pierce, Ray, Scalabrine, House, and Williams did what you expected of them. 
> 
> - The Rockets big men looked pretty decent. David Anderson would be a nice backup on the Celtics.
> 
> Ray
> 
> 
>       
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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


From joefan11111 at aol.com  Fri Oct  9 19:15:48 2009
From: joefan11111 at aol.com (joefan11111)
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2009 15:15:48 -0400
Subject: The Houston Horror: Seriously Undermanned Rockets Rout Boston
	In	Preseason Travesty
In-Reply-To: <200910091806.n99I6LBL004516@ares.afrc.af.mil>
Message-ID: <A4A829E1.1DA7.4F97.987B.2DDA7FF8251C@aol.com>

>> I still don't get the Perk hatred by bloggers almost everywhere?
>> I really don't. He's not a star, doesn't act like a star,?
>> is only "nasty" on the court, signed for money that made?
>> sense to his abilities, and might be one of only three or?
>> four true old fashioned centers in the league.?
?

Haven?t seen hatred for Perk anywhere but an interesting debate.??

Perk?s great for our team only cause we have so many shooters.
Just went over the list of starting centers old fashioned or not in 
the league and?came up with Perk being ranked around 22nd on
my draft list behind in no particular?order Howard, Duncan, Shaq, Bynum, 
Jefferson, Nene, Horford,?Kaman, Camby, Bogut, Okafor, Rash Wallace, 
Brook Lopez, Bargnani,?Scola, Oden, Chandler, Biedrins, J. O?Neal,
Ilguaskas, Haywood. ?Lots of good ones.


On Oct 9, 2009, at 2:06:19 PM, Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil wrote:


From:   Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil
Subject:    RE: The Houston Horror: Seriously Undermanned Rockets Rout Boston   In  Preseason Travesty
Date:   October 9, 2009 2:06:19 PM EDT
To: celtics at igtc.com
"Fortunately they're exhibition games and they don't count." - WOTR

But let's rip them anyway. May I refer you to the above line you wrote?

"He will never be a good shooter."

Neither was(is) Jason Kidd. If he hits 30-35% (Antoinesque dare I say?) of jumpers (not total shots, just jumpers) he'll be fine. He has unworldly touch around the hoop as a finisher with more "english" on his shots than Minnesota Fats (whoops, just made everyone realize how old I am) that will carry him through his twenties (again like Kidd) and as he reaches his thirties that shooting stroke will mature.

"Michael Sweetney after undergoing the Amare Stoudamire weight loss plan (so he's mobile enough to guard someone)should make the Celtics"

Uh, where? There's a roster limit even in fantasy basketball isn't there?

"Rasheed was very good and should replace Perkins in the starting lineup"

He may, in fact, supplant Perk in the finishing lineup, but Perk is the only foil to Dwight Howard (last I checked reigning EC champion) and could be argued makes the Cs defense click. I still don't get the Perk hatred by bloggers almost everywhere. I really don't. He's not a star, doesn't act like a star, is only "nasty" on the court, signed for money that made sense to his abilities, and might be one of only three or four true old fashioned centers in the league. You can throw out name after name (I'll be hearing the 2009 #1 pick's name about three posts from now I'm sure as a "way better player than Perk"), but on THIS team he is the right fit and marginalizing him would be about as short sighted as one could get.

"Marquis Daniels came as advertised. He's not the best backup PG option, but compared to House and Lester, a vast improvement, and all-in-all a very good player and wonderful addition to the Celtics."

Agree with everything except ON THIS TEAM he is the best backup PG option. I'm sure someone will say "but we can trade TA, Scal and R. Allen's expiring contract for_____________________" (Chris Paul or some other "name" for the simple fantasy league reasons better not argued). God help me if I hear Starbury mentioned again as the savior to all that is the Cs bench (which I'm sure I will).

I'll shoot right back up to the first line above. The Celtics weren't in this game (from the coaches standpoint) to win. They were looking at specific milestones and situations. I've given Doc a lot of crap in the past (some earned IMHO, other stuff unfair); but he has REALLY come to employ the same pre-season mentality as the Patriots. The score is irrelevant. He wants to see his players in certain situations, try different combinations of players he likely won't in the regular season, and do some other evaluations on his team prior to the season.?

In the first quarter, the most relevant to actual in season gameplay, the Cs cruised to a pretty easy 10 point lead. That's what I'm looking at - can the starting 6 (Sheed incl.) continue to lead this team to reg. season wins and compete with the elite starting fives on the other teams? The bench has relevance, but it is the starters that will win/lose the majority of your games for you.

-----Original Message-----
From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Way Of The Ray
Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 10:44 AM
To: Celtics Stuff; Celtics Are Idiots List
Subject: The Houston Horror: Seriously Undermanned Rockets Rout Boston In Preseason Travesty

Fortunately they're exhibition games and they don't count. Let's go right to the scoreboard...

- The Rockets were said to be offering Aaron Brooks around before the draft for a 1st round pick. Now, he would have been a great Ainge pickup, as he ran over and around Rajon Rono (no D), and was clearly the best PG on the floor.

- Thank God Rajon Rondo, who was inhabiting the Rondoverse all during the game, went to shooting school in the offseason, or he would have been 0 for 4, rather than 1 for 4. He will never be a good shooter.?

- Lester Hudson once again proved that he is not a PG. He's a middle?
class Nate Robinson and should be sent to Europe to develop. He simply
can't run an offense. A fact on exhibit to NBA scouts and executives at the Portsmouth Invitational, where he was turnover prone and his teams offensively stagnant (now you know why he was drafted 58th). If he sticks with the Celtics, it's best to pair him with Marquis Daniels.?

- Michael Sweetney after undergoing the Amare Stoudamire weight loss plan (so he's mobile enough to guard someone)should make the Celtics, as he can still be an effective inside force, and with the loss of Powe, the Celtics lack a low post scoring big man, since both Rasheed and KG are jump shoot
oriented these days.

- KG, there's something not quite right with him. He's not the same dominant player, but things could become better, at least Celtics fans hope so.

- Rasheed was very good and should replace Perkins in the starting lineup.?

- Perkins and Davis are slimmer, whether that will translate into them becoming better players, is still a question mark, although Davis likely
could experience the bigger development.

- Tony Allen put on his usual Tony Allen performance... he was held out due to injury.

- JR Giddens was invisible offensively (Rivers had mentioned that earlier as being a weakness of JR) but decent defensively.?

- Marquis Daniels came as advertised. He's not the best backup PG option, but compared to House and Lester, a vast improvement, and all-in-all a very good player and wonderful addition to the Celtics.

- Pierce, Ray, Scalabrine, House, and Williams did what you expected of them.?

- The Rockets big men looked pretty decent. David Anderson would be a nice backup on the Celtics.

Ray




_______________________________________________
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


From shizzjr at hotmail.com  Fri Oct  9 19:20:46 2009
From: shizzjr at hotmail.com (Shawn Niles)
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 15:20:46 -0400
Subject: The Houston Horror: Seriously Undermanned Rockets Rout Boston
	In	Preseason Travesty
In-Reply-To: <A4A829E1.1DA7.4F97.987B.2DDA7FF8251C@aol.com>
References: <200910091806.n99I6LBL004516@ares.afrc.af.mil>
Message-ID: <BAY111-W2668FEFE6F702988B7B80BA5CB0@phx.gbl>


Wow.. if you really believe what you just wrote I seriously question your basketball knowledge. Most of them aren't even centers.
 
> Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 15:15:48 -0400
> Subject: RE: The Houston Horror: Seriously Undermanned Rockets Rout Boston In Preseason Travesty
> From: joefan11111 at aol.com
> To: celtics at igtc.com
> 
> >> I still don't get the Perk hatred by bloggers almost everywhere 
> >> I really don't. He's not a star, doesn't act like a star, 
> >> is only "nasty" on the court, signed for money that made 
> >> sense to his abilities, and might be one of only three or 
> >> four true old fashioned centers in the league. 
>  
> 
> Haven?t seen hatred for Perk anywhere but an interesting debate.  
> 
> Perk?s great for our team only cause we have so many shooters.
> Just went over the list of starting centers old fashioned or not in 
> the league and came up with Perk being ranked around 22nd on
> my draft list behind in no particular order Howard, Duncan, Shaq, Bynum, 
> Jefferson, Nene, Horford, Kaman, Camby, Bogut, Okafor, Rash Wallace, 
> Brook Lopez, Bargnani, Scola, Oden, Chandler, Biedrins, J. O?Neal,
> Ilguaskas, Haywood.  Lots of good ones.
> 
> 
> On Oct 9, 2009, at 2:06:19 PM, Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil wrote:
> 
> 
> From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil
> Subject: RE: The Houston Horror: Seriously Undermanned Rockets Rout Boston In Preseason Travesty
> Date: October 9, 2009 2:06:19 PM EDT
> To: celtics at igtc.com
> "Fortunately they're exhibition games and they don't count." - WOTR
> 
> But let's rip them anyway. May I refer you to the above line you wrote?
> 
> "He will never be a good shooter."
> 
> Neither was(is) Jason Kidd. If he hits 30-35% (Antoinesque dare I say?) of jumpers (not total shots, just jumpers) he'll be fine. He has unworldly touch around the hoop as a finisher with more "english" on his shots than Minnesota Fats (whoops, just made everyone realize how old I am) that will carry him through his twenties (again like Kidd) and as he reaches his thirties that shooting stroke will mature.
> 
> "Michael Sweetney after undergoing the Amare Stoudamire weight loss plan (so he's mobile enough to guard someone)should make the Celtics"
> 
> Uh, where? There's a roster limit even in fantasy basketball isn't there?
> 
> "Rasheed was very good and should replace Perkins in the starting lineup"
> 
> He may, in fact, supplant Perk in the finishing lineup, but Perk is the only foil to Dwight Howard (last I checked reigning EC champion) and could be argued makes the Cs defense click. I still don't get the Perk hatred by bloggers almost everywhere. I really don't. He's not a star, doesn't act like a star, is only "nasty" on the court, signed for money that made sense to his abilities, and might be one of only three or four true old fashioned centers in the league. You can throw out name after name (I'll be hearing the 2009 #1 pick's name about three posts from now I'm sure as a "way better player than Perk"), but on THIS team he is the right fit and marginalizing him would be about as short sighted as one could get.
> 
> "Marquis Daniels came as advertised. He's not the best backup PG option, but compared to House and Lester, a vast improvement, and all-in-all a very good player and wonderful addition to the Celtics."
> 
> Agree with everything except ON THIS TEAM he is the best backup PG option. I'm sure someone will say "but we can trade TA, Scal and R. Allen's expiring contract for_____________________" (Chris Paul or some other "name" for the simple fantasy league reasons better not argued). God help me if I hear Starbury mentioned again as the savior to all that is the Cs bench (which I'm sure I will).
> 
> I'll shoot right back up to the first line above. The Celtics weren't in this game (from the coaches standpoint) to win. They were looking at specific milestones and situations. I've given Doc a lot of crap in the past (some earned IMHO, other stuff unfair); but he has REALLY come to employ the same pre-season mentality as the Patriots. The score is irrelevant. He wants to see his players in certain situations, try different combinations of players he likely won't in the regular season, and do some other evaluations on his team prior to the season. 
> 
> In the first quarter, the most relevant to actual in season gameplay, the Cs cruised to a pretty easy 10 point lead. That's what I'm looking at - can the starting 6 (Sheed incl.) continue to lead this team to reg. season wins and compete with the elite starting fives on the other teams? The bench has relevance, but it is the starters that will win/lose the majority of your games for you.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Way Of The Ray
> Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 10:44 AM
> To: Celtics Stuff; Celtics Are Idiots List
> Subject: The Houston Horror: Seriously Undermanned Rockets Rout Boston In Preseason Travesty
> 
> Fortunately they're exhibition games and they don't count. Let's go right to the scoreboard...
> 
> - The Rockets were said to be offering Aaron Brooks around before the draft for a 1st round pick. Now, he would have been a great Ainge pickup, as he ran over and around Rajon Rono (no D), and was clearly the best PG on the floor.
> 
> - Thank God Rajon Rondo, who was inhabiting the Rondoverse all during the game, went to shooting school in the offseason, or he would have been 0 for 4, rather than 1 for 4. He will never be a good shooter. 
> 
> - Lester Hudson once again proved that he is not a PG. He's a middle 
> class Nate Robinson and should be sent to Europe to develop. He simply
> can't run an offense. A fact on exhibit to NBA scouts and executives at the Portsmouth Invitational, where he was turnover prone and his teams offensively stagnant (now you know why he was drafted 58th). If he sticks with the Celtics, it's best to pair him with Marquis Daniels. 
> 
> - Michael Sweetney after undergoing the Amare Stoudamire weight loss plan (so he's mobile enough to guard someone)should make the Celtics, as he can still be an effective inside force, and with the loss of Powe, the Celtics lack a low post scoring big man, since both Rasheed and KG are jump shoot
> oriented these days.
> 
> - KG, there's something not quite right with him. He's not the same dominant player, but things could become better, at least Celtics fans hope so.
> 
> - Rasheed was very good and should replace Perkins in the starting lineup. 
> 
> - Perkins and Davis are slimmer, whether that will translate into them becoming better players, is still a question mark, although Davis likely
> could experience the bigger development.
> 
> - Tony Allen put on his usual Tony Allen performance... he was held out due to injury.
> 
> - JR Giddens was invisible offensively (Rivers had mentioned that earlier as being a weakness of JR) but decent defensively. 
> 
> - Marquis Daniels came as advertised. He's not the best backup PG option, but compared to House and Lester, a vast improvement, and all-in-all a very good player and wonderful addition to the Celtics.
> 
> - Pierce, Ray, Scalabrine, House, and Williams did what you expected of them. 
> 
> - The Rockets big men looked pretty decent. David Anderson would be a nice backup on the Celtics.
> 
> Ray
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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
 		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Powerful Free email with security by Microsoft.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/171222986/direct/01/

From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil  Fri Oct  9 19:29:49 2009
From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil)
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 15:29:49 -0400
Subject: The Houston Horror: Seriously Undermanned Rockets Rout Boston
	In	Preseason Travesty
In-Reply-To: <A4A829E1.1DA7.4F97.987B.2DDA7FF8251C@aol.com>
References: <200910091806.n99I6LBL004516@ares.afrc.af.mil>
	<A4A829E1.1DA7.4F97.987B.2DDA7FF8251C@aol.com>
Message-ID: <200910091929.n99JTqio006807@apollo.afrc.af.mil>

I've done this before (I think it was vs an Egg post actually). Most of the guys you name...ain't centers in the classic sense - they're converted PFs.

Howard - uh, yeah, but has he added an offensive aspect to his game every year (no, he bulls left from the low block)
Duncan - Not a C, but I'll give this one to you
Shaq - maybe 5 years ago
Bynum - Not as good a defender
Jefferson - PF!
Nene - PF!
Horford - PF!
Kaman - Seriously????? 
Camby - PF, but I'll give you this one
Bogut - no way in hell - can't defend a lick
Okafor - PF!
R. Wallace - PF!
Brook Lopez - Talk to me in two years
Bargnani - Euro-center - can't defend
Scola - Who?
Oden - Worth debating 
Chandler - PF
Biedrins - See Bargnani
J. O Neal - PF, but I'll give you this one too despite the fact he's never won anything in the clutch
Ilguaskas - Euro-center, but I'll give this one to you despite his defensive shortcomings 
Haywood - Wow, seriously, wow.

What no Blake Griffin (do I really have to wait three posts?)?

So that's Howard, Duncan, Camby, Oden Ilgauskas and O'Neal. Two of those would I see making the Celtics BETTER today (Howard and Duncan), three who wouldn't make them worse (Camby, Oden and Ilg) and one I wouldn't trade for Perk straight up (O'Neal).


-----Original Message-----
From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of joefan11111
Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 3:16 PM
To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List
Subject: RE: The Houston Horror: Seriously Undermanned Rockets Rout Boston In Preseason Travesty

>> I still don't get the Perk hatred by bloggers almost everywhere?
>> I really don't. He's not a star, doesn't act like a star,?
>> is only "nasty" on the court, signed for money that made?
>> sense to his abilities, and might be one of only three or?
>> four true old fashioned centers in the league.?
?

Haven?t seen hatred for Perk anywhere but an interesting debate.??

Perk?s great for our team only cause we have so many shooters.
Just went over the list of starting centers old fashioned or not in 
the league and?came up with Perk being ranked around 22nd on
my draft list behind in no particular?order Howard, Duncan, Shaq, Bynum, 
Jefferson, Nene, Horford,?Kaman, Camby, Bogut, Okafor, Rash Wallace, 
Brook Lopez, Bargnani,?Scola, Oden, Chandler, Biedrins, J. O?Neal,
Ilguaskas, Haywood. ?Lots of good ones.


On Oct 9, 2009, at 2:06:19 PM, Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil wrote:


From:   Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil
Subject:    RE: The Houston Horror: Seriously Undermanned Rockets Rout Boston   In  Preseason Travesty
Date:   October 9, 2009 2:06:19 PM EDT
To: celtics at igtc.com
"Fortunately they're exhibition games and they don't count." - WOTR

But let's rip them anyway. May I refer you to the above line you wrote?

"He will never be a good shooter."

Neither was(is) Jason Kidd. If he hits 30-35% (Antoinesque dare I say?) of jumpers (not total shots, just jumpers) he'll be fine. He has unworldly touch around the hoop as a finisher with more "english" on his shots than Minnesota Fats (whoops, just made everyone realize how old I am) that will carry him through his twenties (again like Kidd) and as he reaches his thirties that shooting stroke will mature.

"Michael Sweetney after undergoing the Amare Stoudamire weight loss plan (so he's mobile enough to guard someone)should make the Celtics"

Uh, where? There's a roster limit even in fantasy basketball isn't there?

"Rasheed was very good and should replace Perkins in the starting lineup"

He may, in fact, supplant Perk in the finishing lineup, but Perk is the only foil to Dwight Howard (last I checked reigning EC champion) and could be argued makes the Cs defense click. I still don't get the Perk hatred by bloggers almost everywhere. I really don't. He's not a star, doesn't act like a star, is only "nasty" on the court, signed for money that made sense to his abilities, and might be one of only three or four true old fashioned centers in the league. You can throw out name after name (I'll be hearing the 2009 #1 pick's name about three posts from now I'm sure as a "way better player than Perk"), but on THIS team he is the right fit and marginalizing him would be about as short sighted as one could get.

"Marquis Daniels came as advertised. He's not the best backup PG option, but compared to House and Lester, a vast improvement, and all-in-all a very good player and wonderful addition to the Celtics."

Agree with everything except ON THIS TEAM he is the best backup PG option. I'm sure someone will say "but we can trade TA, Scal and R. Allen's expiring contract for_____________________" (Chris Paul or some other "name" for the simple fantasy league reasons better not argued). God help me if I hear Starbury mentioned again as the savior to all that is the Cs bench (which I'm sure I will).

I'll shoot right back up to the first line above. The Celtics weren't in this game (from the coaches standpoint) to win. They were looking at specific milestones and situations. I've given Doc a lot of crap in the past (some earned IMHO, other stuff unfair); but he has REALLY come to employ the same pre-season mentality as the Patriots. The score is irrelevant. He wants to see his players in certain situations, try different combinations of players he likely won't in the regular season, and do some other evaluations on his team prior to the season.?

In the first quarter, the most relevant to actual in season gameplay, the Cs cruised to a pretty easy 10 point lead. That's what I'm looking at - can the starting 6 (Sheed incl.) continue to lead this team to reg. season wins and compete with the elite starting fives on the other teams? The bench has relevance, but it is the starters that will win/lose the majority of your games for you.

-----Original Message-----
From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Way Of The Ray
Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 10:44 AM
To: Celtics Stuff; Celtics Are Idiots List
Subject: The Houston Horror: Seriously Undermanned Rockets Rout Boston In Preseason Travesty

Fortunately they're exhibition games and they don't count. Let's go right to the scoreboard...

- The Rockets were said to be offering Aaron Brooks around before the draft for a 1st round pick. Now, he would have been a great Ainge pickup, as he ran over and around Rajon Rono (no D), and was clearly the best PG on the floor.

- Thank God Rajon Rondo, who was inhabiting the Rondoverse all during the game, went to shooting school in the offseason, or he would have been 0 for 4, rather than 1 for 4. He will never be a good shooter.?

- Lester Hudson once again proved that he is not a PG. He's a middle?
class Nate Robinson and should be sent to Europe to develop. He simply
can't run an offense. A fact on exhibit to NBA scouts and executives at the Portsmouth Invitational, where he was turnover prone and his teams offensively stagnant (now you know why he was drafted 58th). If he sticks with the Celtics, it's best to pair him with Marquis Daniels.?

- Michael Sweetney after undergoing the Amare Stoudamire weight loss plan (so he's mobile enough to guard someone)should make the Celtics, as he can still be an effective inside force, and with the loss of Powe, the Celtics lack a low post scoring big man, since both Rasheed and KG are jump shoot
oriented these days.

- KG, there's something not quite right with him. He's not the same dominant player, but things could become better, at least Celtics fans hope so.

- Rasheed was very good and should replace Perkins in the starting lineup.?

- Perkins and Davis are slimmer, whether that will translate into them becoming better players, is still a question mark, although Davis likely
could experience the bigger development.

- Tony Allen put on his usual Tony Allen performance... he was held out due to injury.

- JR Giddens was invisible offensively (Rivers had mentioned that earlier as being a weakness of JR) but decent defensively.?

- Marquis Daniels came as advertised. He's not the best backup PG option, but compared to House and Lester, a vast improvement, and all-in-all a very good player and wonderful addition to the Celtics.

- Pierce, Ray, Scalabrine, House, and Williams did what you expected of them.?

- The Rockets big men looked pretty decent. David Anderson would be a nice backup on the Celtics.

Ray




_______________________________________________
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


From davidp4660 at cox.net  Fri Oct  9 21:24:37 2009
From: davidp4660 at cox.net (davidp4660 at cox.net)
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 17:24:37 -0400
Subject: The Houston Horror: Seriously Undermanned Rockets Rout Boston
	In	Preseason Travesty
In-Reply-To: <200910091929.n99JTqio006807@apollo.afrc.af.mil>
Message-ID: <20091009172437.2X1V3.313298.imail@eastrmwml31>

Right on.  To rank Perkins as 22nd best center, when he anchored the NBA champs two years ago alone, should vault him into the top 10.  Perk doesn't get the recognition he desrves because they're not on the stat sheet.  His ability to rebound and start a fast break (ala Bill Walton, bill Russell) and his ability to neutralize his opponent don't get given much consideration in rankings as such.  Watching hime daily, you get to appreciate just how solid he makes this team.  And, he's only 25.
---- Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil wrote: 
> I've done this before (I think it was vs an Egg post actually). Most of the guys you name...ain't centers in the classic sense - they're converted PFs.
> 
> Howard - uh, yeah, but has he added an offensive aspect to his game every year (no, he bulls left from the low block)
> Duncan - Not a C, but I'll give this one to you
> Shaq - maybe 5 years ago
> Bynum - Not as good a defender
> Jefferson - PF!
> Nene - PF!
> Horford - PF!
> Kaman - Seriously????? 
> Camby - PF, but I'll give you this one
> Bogut - no way in hell - can't defend a lick
> Okafor - PF!
> R. Wallace - PF!
> Brook Lopez - Talk to me in two years
> Bargnani - Euro-center - can't defend
> Scola - Who?
> Oden - Worth debating 
> Chandler - PF
> Biedrins - See Bargnani
> J. O Neal - PF, but I'll give you this one too despite the fact he's never won anything in the clutch
> Ilguaskas - Euro-center, but I'll give this one to you despite his defensive shortcomings 
> Haywood - Wow, seriously, wow.
> 
> What no Blake Griffin (do I really have to wait three posts?)?
> 
> So that's Howard, Duncan, Camby, Oden Ilgauskas and O'Neal. Two of those would I see making the Celtics BETTER today (Howard and Duncan), three who wouldn't make them worse (Camby, Oden and Ilg) and one I wouldn't trade for Perk straight up (O'Neal).
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of joefan11111
> Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 3:16 PM
> To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> Subject: RE: The Houston Horror: Seriously Undermanned Rockets Rout Boston In Preseason Travesty
> 
> >> I still don't get the Perk hatred by bloggers almost everywhere?
> >> I really don't. He's not a star, doesn't act like a star,?
> >> is only "nasty" on the court, signed for money that made?
> >> sense to his abilities, and might be one of only three or?
> >> four true old fashioned centers in the league.?
> ?
> 
> Haven?t seen hatred for Perk anywhere but an interesting debate.??
> 
> Perk?s great for our team only cause we have so many shooters.
> Just went over the list of starting centers old fashioned or not in 
> the league and?came up with Perk being ranked around 22nd on
> my draft list behind in no particular?order Howard, Duncan, Shaq, Bynum, 
> Jefferson, Nene, Horford,?Kaman, Camby, Bogut, Okafor, Rash Wallace, 
> Brook Lopez, Bargnani,?Scola, Oden, Chandler, Biedrins, J. O?Neal,
> Ilguaskas, Haywood. ?Lots of good ones.
> 
> 
> On Oct 9, 2009, at 2:06:19 PM, Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil wrote:
> 
> 
> From:   Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil
> Subject:    RE: The Houston Horror: Seriously Undermanned Rockets Rout Boston   In  Preseason Travesty
> Date:   October 9, 2009 2:06:19 PM EDT
> To: celtics at igtc.com
> "Fortunately they're exhibition games and they don't count." - WOTR
> 
> But let's rip them anyway. May I refer you to the above line you wrote?
> 
> "He will never be a good shooter."
> 
> Neither was(is) Jason Kidd. If he hits 30-35% (Antoinesque dare I say?) of jumpers (not total shots, just jumpers) he'll be fine. He has unworldly touch around the hoop as a finisher with more "english" on his shots than Minnesota Fats (whoops, just made everyone realize how old I am) that will carry him through his twenties (again like Kidd) and as he reaches his thirties that shooting stroke will mature.
> 
> "Michael Sweetney after undergoing the Amare Stoudamire weight loss plan (so he's mobile enough to guard someone)should make the Celtics"
> 
> Uh, where? There's a roster limit even in fantasy basketball isn't there?
> 
> "Rasheed was very good and should replace Perkins in the starting lineup"
> 
> He may, in fact, supplant Perk in the finishing lineup, but Perk is the only foil to Dwight Howard (last I checked reigning EC champion) and could be argued makes the Cs defense click. I still don't get the Perk hatred by bloggers almost everywhere. I really don't. He's not a star, doesn't act like a star, is only "nasty" on the court, signed for money that made sense to his abilities, and might be one of only three or four true old fashioned centers in the league. You can throw out name after name (I'll be hearing the 2009 #1 pick's name about three posts from now I'm sure as a "way better player than Perk"), but on THIS team he is the right fit and marginalizing him would be about as short sighted as one could get.
> 
> "Marquis Daniels came as advertised. He's not the best backup PG option, but compared to House and Lester, a vast improvement, and all-in-all a very good player and wonderful addition to the Celtics."
> 
> Agree with everything except ON THIS TEAM he is the best backup PG option. I'm sure someone will say "but we can trade TA, Scal and R. Allen's expiring contract for_____________________" (Chris Paul or some other "name" for the simple fantasy league reasons better not argued). God help me if I hear Starbury mentioned again as the savior to all that is the Cs bench (which I'm sure I will).
> 
> I'll shoot right back up to the first line above. The Celtics weren't in this game (from the coaches standpoint) to win. They were looking at specific milestones and situations. I've given Doc a lot of crap in the past (some earned IMHO, other stuff unfair); but he has REALLY come to employ the same pre-season mentality as the Patriots. The score is irrelevant. He wants to see his players in certain situations, try different combinations of players he likely won't in the regular season, and do some other evaluations on his team prior to the season.?
> 
> In the first quarter, the most relevant to actual in season gameplay, the Cs cruised to a pretty easy 10 point lead. That's what I'm looking at - can the starting 6 (Sheed incl.) continue to lead this team to reg. season wins and compete with the elite starting fives on the other teams? The bench has relevance, but it is the starters that will win/lose the majority of your games for you.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Way Of The Ray
> Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 10:44 AM
> To: Celtics Stuff; Celtics Are Idiots List
> Subject: The Houston Horror: Seriously Undermanned Rockets Rout Boston In Preseason Travesty
> 
> Fortunately they're exhibition games and they don't count. Let's go right to the scoreboard...
> 
> - The Rockets were said to be offering Aaron Brooks around before the draft for a 1st round pick. Now, he would have been a great Ainge pickup, as he ran over and around Rajon Rono (no D), and was clearly the best PG on the floor.
> 
> - Thank God Rajon Rondo, who was inhabiting the Rondoverse all during the game, went to shooting school in the offseason, or he would have been 0 for 4, rather than 1 for 4. He will never be a good shooter.?
> 
> - Lester Hudson once again proved that he is not a PG. He's a middle?
> class Nate Robinson and should be sent to Europe to develop. He simply
> can't run an offense. A fact on exhibit to NBA scouts and executives at the Portsmouth Invitational, where he was turnover prone and his teams offensively stagnant (now you know why he was drafted 58th). If he sticks with the Celtics, it's best to pair him with Marquis Daniels.?
> 
> - Michael Sweetney after undergoing the Amare Stoudamire weight loss plan (so he's mobile enough to guard someone)should make the Celtics, as he can still be an effective inside force, and with the loss of Powe, the Celtics lack a low post scoring big man, since both Rasheed and KG are jump shoot
> oriented these days.
> 
> - KG, there's something not quite right with him. He's not the same dominant player, but things could become better, at least Celtics fans hope so.
> 
> - Rasheed was very good and should replace Perkins in the starting lineup.?
> 
> - Perkins and Davis are slimmer, whether that will translate into them becoming better players, is still a question mark, although Davis likely
> could experience the bigger development.
> 
> - Tony Allen put on his usual Tony Allen performance... he was held out due to injury.
> 
> - JR Giddens was invisible offensively (Rivers had mentioned that earlier as being a weakness of JR) but decent defensively.?
> 
> - Marquis Daniels came as advertised. He's not the best backup PG option, but compared to House and Lester, a vast improvement, and all-in-all a very good player and wonderful addition to the Celtics.
> 
> - Pierce, Ray, Scalabrine, House, and Williams did what you expected of them.?
> 
> - The Rockets big men looked pretty decent. David Anderson would be a nice backup on the Celtics.
> 
> Ray
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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


From jahillsr at comcast.net  Sat Oct 10 00:56:09 2009
From: jahillsr at comcast.net (Jim Hill)
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 20:56:09 -0400
Subject: thoughts on Hidalgo game
Message-ID: <000001ca4944$754b3fb0$5fe1bf10$@net>

Gotta go with Roger on this one.  I doubt Sweetney would notice 20 lbs.  He
needs to drop a few shirt sizes.  The guy sure showed he has skills however.

 

<Jim

 

>OK, they are listing him at 275 but we all know he's over 300 or danm
close.  Still, 20 lbs off his frame would do wonders for his game. that's
his body >type, and it is not going to change.  I think, though, the kid can
play.

>---- "Belanger wrote: 

>> Dude, hate to disagree, but 20 pounds off him would have the same effect
as throwing a deck chair off an ocean liner. He must be eating sandwiches
>>that weigh 20 pounds. He needs to drop 60 to 80 to get to big baby size.
Trust me, I'm a biiiiiiig guy, I have expertise in this area LOL.

> roger

 


From davidp4660 at cox.net  Sat Oct 10 03:02:22 2009
From: davidp4660 at cox.net (davidp4660 at cox.net)
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 23:02:22 -0400
Subject: thoughts on Hidalgo game
In-Reply-To: <000001ca4944$754b3fb0$5fe1bf10$@net>
Message-ID: <20091009230222.U6OKB.280937.imail@eastrmwml33>

He'd have to reguregetate Oliver Miller to lose that much weight.  No  way this guy can lose more than 25-30.  Just not that body type, short of  gastric bypass surgery, this guy will only see 275 with 500 helium balloons tied to him.  Too bad, because he does have some nice skills.
---- Jim Hill <jahillsr at comcast.net> wrote: 
> Gotta go with Roger on this one.  I doubt Sweetney would notice 20 lbs.  He
> needs to drop a few shirt sizes.  The guy sure showed he has skills however.
> 
>  
> 
> <Jim
> 
>  
> 
> >OK, they are listing him at 275 but we all know he's over 300 or danm
> close.  Still, 20 lbs off his frame would do wonders for his game. that's
> his body >type, and it is not going to change.  I think, though, the kid can
> play.
> 
> >---- "Belanger wrote: 
> 
> >> Dude, hate to disagree, but 20 pounds off him would have the same effect
> as throwing a deck chair off an ocean liner. He must be eating sandwiches
> >>that weigh 20 pounds. He needs to drop 60 to 80 to get to big baby size.
> Trust me, I'm a biiiiiiig guy, I have expertise in this area LOL.
> 
> > roger
> 
>  
> 
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics


From jahillsr at comcast.net  Sat Oct 10 03:20:49 2009
From: jahillsr at comcast.net (jahillsr at comcast.net)
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 03:20:49 +0000
Subject: thoughts on Hidalgo game
Message-ID: <83172317-1255144672-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1601272923-@bda551.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>

True. He had some nice moves again tonight. We'll see what happens. <Jim 
------Original Message------
From: davidp4660 at cox.net
To: Celtics igtc
Cc: Jim Hill
Subject: Re: thoughts on Hidalgo game
Sent: Oct 9, 2009 11:02 PM

He'd have to reguregetate Oliver Miller to lose that much weight.  No  way this guy can lose more than 25-30.  Just not that body type, short of  gastric bypass surgery, this guy will only see 275 with 500 helium balloons tied to him.  Too bad, because he does have some nice skills.
---- Jim Hill <jahillsr at comcast.net> wrote: 
> Gotta go with Roger on this one.  I doubt Sweetney would notice 20 lbs.  He
> needs to drop a few shirt sizes.  The guy sure showed he has skills however.
> 
>  
> 
> <Jim
> 
>  
> 
> >OK, they are listing him at 275 but we all know he's over 300 or danm
> close.  Still, 20 lbs off his frame would do wonders for his game. that's
> his body >type, and it is not going to change.  I think, though, the kid can
> play.
> 
> >---- "Belanger wrote: 
> 
> >> Dude, hate to disagree, but 20 pounds off him would have the same effect
> as throwing a deck chair off an ocean liner. He must be eating sandwiches
> >>that weigh 20 pounds. He needs to drop 60 to 80 to get to big baby size.
> Trust me, I'm a biiiiiiig guy, I have expertise in this area LOL.
> 
> > roger
> 
>  
> 
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics



Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Sat Oct 10 05:34:32 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2009 22:34:32 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: thoughts on Hidalgo game
In-Reply-To: <20091009230222.U6OKB.280937.imail@eastrmwml33>
Message-ID: <291735.89872.qm@web65611.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

Yeah, Sweetney is fat--maybe 70-80 lb overweight.  Check out: 

http://www.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=948713&start=15

There's a side-by-side picture of Mike from 03' and 09'.  It's startling. 09' Mike doesn't even FIT IN HIS PICTURE.  It's that bad.

I like Mike's skills like everyone else, but even in the BEST CASE SCENARIO where he works his tail off, he won't be in playing shape until next season.  He has some wildcard potential, but it's small.

Ryan

--- On Fri, 10/9/09, davidp4660 at cox.net <davidp4660 at cox.net> wrote:

> From: davidp4660 at cox.net <davidp4660 at cox.net>
> Subject: Re: thoughts on Hidalgo game
> To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" <celtics at igtc.com>
> Cc: "Jim Hill" <jahillsr at comcast.net>
> Date: Friday, October 9, 2009, 10:02 PM
> He'd have to reguregetate Oliver
> Miller to lose that much weight.? No? way this guy
> can lose more than 25-30.? Just not that body type,
> short of? gastric bypass surgery, this guy will only
> see 275 with 500 helium balloons tied to him.? Too bad,
> because he does have some nice skills.
> ---- Jim Hill <jahillsr at comcast.net>
> wrote: 
> > Gotta go with Roger on this one.? I doubt
> Sweetney would notice 20 lbs.? He
> > needs to drop a few shirt sizes.? The guy sure
> showed he has skills however.
> > 
> >? 
> > 
> > <Jim
> > 
> >? 
> > 
> > >OK, they are listing him at 275 but we all know
> he's over 300 or danm
> > close.? Still, 20 lbs off his frame would do
> wonders for his game. that's
> > his body >type, and it is not going to
> change.? I think, though, the kid can
> > play.
> > 
> > >---- "Belanger wrote: 
> > 
> > >> Dude, hate to disagree, but 20 pounds off him
> would have the same effect
> > as throwing a deck chair off an ocean liner. He must
> be eating sandwiches
> > >>that weigh 20 pounds. He needs to drop 60 to
> 80 to get to big baby size.
> > Trust me, I'm a biiiiiiig guy, I have expertise in
> this area LOL.
> > 
> > > roger
> > 
> >? 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> 


      


From ellie.cutler at yahoo.com  Sat Oct 10 12:48:29 2009
From: ellie.cutler at yahoo.com (Ellie Cutler)
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 05:48:29 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Sweetney
In-Reply-To: <291735.89872.qm@web65611.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <96110.42479.qm@web63107.mail.re1.yahoo.com>

Tommy Heinsohn spent the scrub time in last night's Knicks game talking about Sweetney, saying that Al Jefferson was the best post player he'd seen since McHale and Sweetney has a lot of his moves, just not the athleticism. Also that the Celts needed Sweetney's bulk and he bets he makes the team.

Baby hit a running hook that sent Heinsohn into the stratosphere - did somebody run a summer camp for hook shots?

First unit very sluggish in the first half - 2nd half came out crisp and quick and quickly built up a lead.? What a difference when Rondo is on his game.

Oh, and Tony Allen came in for awhile, showing on both O & D why he does not belong on this team, imho. Giddens is a smarter player.

Sheed on fire from 3-pt range.? Ditto for Scal.

Hudson showing good hands and some great bounce passes into the paint.

Still don't see all the hype for Daniels - guess he will show it as he gets more comfortable w/his new team.

Perk was player of the game - man, he looks awesome at his new weight, and was hitting his FTs to boot.

With Daniels, Hudson, and House on the floor together, why is Eddie bringing up the ball?? His PG play tonight was b.a.d. - and we don't need him to do that. It also took away from his shooting - for all his minutes, he only had a few shots.

This team has some serious depth charges!

?-Ellie

--- On Sat, 10/10/09, Ryan W <ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Ryan W <ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: thoughts on Hidalgo game
To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" <celtics at igtc.com>
Date: Saturday, October 10, 2009, 1:34 AM

Yeah, Sweetney is fat--maybe 70-80 lb overweight.? Check out: 

http://www.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=948713&start=15

There's a side-by-side picture of Mike from 03' and 09'.? It's startling. 09' Mike doesn't even FIT IN HIS PICTURE.? It's that bad.

I like Mike's skills like everyone else, but even in the BEST CASE SCENARIO where he works his tail off, he won't be in playing shape until next season.? He has some wildcard potential, but it's small.

Ryan

--- On Fri, 10/9/09, davidp4660 at cox.net <davidp4660 at cox.net> wrote:

> From: davidp4660 at cox.net <davidp4660 at cox.net>
> Subject: Re: thoughts on Hidalgo game
> To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" <celtics at igtc.com>
> Cc: "Jim Hill" <jahillsr at comcast.net>
> Date: Friday, October 9, 2009, 10:02 PM
> He'd have to reguregetate Oliver
> Miller to lose that much weight.? No? way this guy
> can lose more than 25-30.? Just not that body type,
> short of? gastric bypass surgery, this guy will only
> see 275 with 500 helium balloons tied to him.? Too bad,
> because he does have some nice skills.
> ---- Jim Hill <jahillsr at comcast.net>
> wrote: 
> > Gotta go with Roger on this one.? I doubt
> Sweetney would notice 20 lbs.? He
> > needs to drop a few shirt sizes.? The guy sure
> showed he has skills however.
> > 
> >? 
> > 
> > <Jim
> > 
> >? 
> > 
> > >OK, they are listing him at 275 but we all know
> he's over 300 or danm
> > close.? Still, 20 lbs off his frame would do
> wonders for his game. that's
> > his body >type, and it is not going to
> change.? I think, though, the kid can
> > play.
> > 
> > >---- "Belanger wrote: 
> > 
> > >> Dude, hate to disagree, but 20 pounds off him
> would have the same effect
> > as throwing a deck chair off an ocean liner. He must
> be eating sandwiches
> > >>that weigh 20 pounds. He needs to drop 60 to
> 80 to get to big baby size.
> > Trust me, I'm a biiiiiiig guy, I have expertise in
> this area LOL.
> > 
> > > roger
> > 
> >? 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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



      

From gk_tyler at yahoo.com  Sat Oct 10 13:08:15 2009
From: gk_tyler at yahoo.com (gene kirkpatrick)
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 06:08:15 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: one stat
Message-ID: <789845.66430.qm@web39605.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Combined rebounds of Rasheed and Baby--20.? Wow, that's encouraging.? Gene



      

From patterson.adam at yahoo.com.au  Sat Oct 10 13:22:51 2009
From: patterson.adam at yahoo.com.au (Adam Patterson)
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 06:22:51 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Sweetney
Message-ID: <872393.76419.qm@web63803.mail.re1.yahoo.com>

Why is he wearing #45 though?

http://i37.tinypic.com/6pu5oi.jpg

The Celtics still have #50 available...

http://www.nba.com/celtics/history/RetiredNumbers.html

:)



--- Ellie Cutler wrote:

Tommy Heinsohn spent the scrub time in last night's Knicks game talking about Sweetney, saying that Al Jefferson was the best post player he'd seen since McHale and Sweetney has a lot of his moves, just not the athleticism. Also that the Celts needed Sweetney's bulk and he bets he makes the team.

Baby hit a running hook that sent Heinsohn into the stratosphere - did somebody run a summer camp for hook shots?

First unit very sluggish in the first half - 2nd half came out crisp and quick and quickly built up a lead..  What a difference when Rondo is on his game.

Oh, and Tony Allen came in for awhile, showing on both O & D why he does not belong on this team, imho. Giddens is a smarter player.

Sheed on fire from 3-pt range.  Ditto for Scal.

Hudson showing good hands and some great bounce passes into the paint.

Still don't see all the hype for Daniels - guess he will show it as he gets more comfortable w/his new team.

Perk was player of the game - man, he looks awesome at his new weight, and was hitting his FTs to boot.

With Daniels, Hudson, and House on the floor together, why is Eddie bringing up the ball?  His PG play tonight was b.a.d. - and we don't need him to do that. It also took away from his shooting - for all his minutes, he only had a few shots.

This team has some serious depth charges!

 -Ellie

--- On Sat, 10/10/09, Ryan W <ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Ryan W <ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: thoughts on Hidalgo game
To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" <celtics at igtc.com>
Date: Saturday, October 10, 2009, 1:34 AM

Yeah, Sweetney is fat--maybe 70-80 lb overweight.  Check out: 

http://www.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=948713&start=15

There's a side-by-side picture of Mike from 03' and 09'.  It's startling. 09' Mike doesn't even FIT IN HIS PICTURE.  It's that bad.

I like Mike's skills like everyone else, but even in the BEST CASE SCENARIO where he works his tail off, he won't be in playing shape until next season.  He has some wildcard potential, but it's small.

Ryan

--- On Fri, 10/9/09, davidp4660 at cox.net <davidp4660 at cox.net> wrote:

> From: davidp4660 at cox.net <davidp4660 at cox.net>
> Subject: Re: thoughts on Hidalgo game
> To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" <celtics at igtc.com>
> Cc: "Jim Hill" <jahillsr at comcast.net>
> Date: Friday, October 9, 2009, 10:02 PM
> He'd have to reguregetate Oliver
> Miller to lose that much weight.  No  way this guy
> can lose more than 25-30.  Just not that body type,
> short of  gastric bypass surgery, this guy will only
> see 275 with 500 helium balloons tied to him.  Too bad,
> because he does have some nice skills.
> ---- Jim Hill <jahillsr at comcast.net>
> wrote: 
> > Gotta go with Roger on this one.  I doubt
> Sweetney would notice 20 lbs.  He
> > needs to drop a few shirt sizes.  The guy sure
> showed he has skills however.
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > <Jim
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > >OK, they are listing him at 275 but we all know
> he's over 300 or danm
> > close.  Still, 20 lbs off his frame would do
> wonders for his game. that's
> > his body >type, and it is not going to
> change.  I think, though, the kid can
> > play.
> > 
> > >---- "Belanger wrote: 
> > 
> > >> Dude, hate to disagree, but 20 pounds off him
> would have the same effect
> > as throwing a deck chair off an ocean liner. He must
> be eating sandwiches
> > >>that weigh 20 pounds. He needs to drop 60 to
> 80 to get to big baby size.
> > Trust me, I'm a biiiiiiig guy, I have expertise in
> this area LOL.
> > 
> > > roger
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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


      __________________________________________________________________________________
Get more done like never before with Yahoo!7 Mail.
Learn more: http://au.overview.mail.yahoo.com/

From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Sat Oct 10 16:49:45 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 09:49:45 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: The Houston Horror: Seriously Undermanned Rockets Rout Boston In
	Preseason Travesty
In-Reply-To: <200910091806.n99I6LBL004516@ares.afrc.af.mil>
Message-ID: <953926.66496.qm@web65612.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

Oh, I like this Pat.  You ought to let him out of the box more often :)  Great response to Ray.

Your comments on Perk were especially prescient.  He was beasting all night long against the Knicks and supposed center David Lee, hitting fall-aways left and right.  As you noted, he's one of the only true centers in the league, probably the 2nd best defensive center in the league, a perfect fit for this particular team next to KG, and signed to a very reasonable contract.  I hope Perk is a C for life.  

I'd take it even one step further--Perk has a couple All-Star games him.  He's one of those slow burners--slowing improving season-by-season, bringing a little something new to his game every year.  This year, it's improved quickness and fluidity around the basket.  Look for him to get into double figures on his scoring average.

Ryan

--- On Fri, 10/9/09, Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil <Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil> wrote:

<snip,snip>

> "Rasheed was very good and should replace Perkins in the
> starting lineup"
> 
> He may, in fact, supplant Perk in the finishing lineup, but
> Perk is the only foil to Dwight Howard (last I checked
> reigning EC champion) and could be argued makes the Cs
> defense click. I still don't get the Perk hatred by bloggers
> almost everywhere. I really don't. He's not a star, doesn't
> act like a star, is only "nasty" on the court, signed for
> money that made sense to his abilities, and might be one of
> only three or four true old fashioned centers in the league.
> You can throw out name after name (I'll be hearing the 2009
> #1 pick's name about three posts from now I'm sure as a "way
> better player than Perk"), but on THIS team he is the right
> fit and marginalizing him would be about as short sighted as
> one could get.
>


      


From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Sat Oct 10 16:59:07 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 09:59:07 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Sweetney
In-Reply-To: <96110.42479.qm@web63107.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <751398.70025.qm@web65612.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

TA was pretty terrible on offense last night, and I like Tony Allen a lot.  

But let's remember two things: he had a good November last year (averaging 10 points a game) and then tore up his ankle in the first game of December.  As it was revealed on Media Day, he continued to play the rest of the season with torn ligaments in that ankle; that says alot about his desire to help the team, and also goes a ways towards explaining what was another up-and-down year for him.  

Point two: in the recovery from offseason ankle surgery to repair the torn ligament, TA was off his feet for 13 weeks!  I can't even fathom that, but just imagine how rusty you'd be after being off your feet that long. 

But for as bad as TA was on offense, he also contributed mightily to the defense--the House/TA/Daniels/Wallace/Baby lineup played great defense and I think limited NY to a point a minute while they were on the court.  Not bad.  I think TA's still got a chance to play meaningful minutes--he just has to get himself healthy (I realize I've written that sentence about Tony way too many times to count).  But even in his current state, he brings a lot more to the table that Giddens...

Ryan
--- On Sat, 10/10/09, Ellie Cutler <ellie.cutler at yahoo.com> wrote:

> From: Ellie Cutler <ellie.cutler at yahoo.com>

> 
> Oh, and Tony Allen came in for awhile, showing on both O
> & D why he does not belong on this team, imho. Giddens
> is a smarter player.
> 



      


From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Sat Oct 10 17:09:07 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 10:09:07 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: More Words of Wisdom from Rajon Rondo
Message-ID: <485198.32018.qm@web65608.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

Rajon Rondo gets the point
Learned a lot from offseason
By Steve Bulpett
Saturday, October 10, 2009


Rajon Rondo is stubborn. Rajon Rondo is hardheaded. Rajon Rondo is cocky.

Those are among his good qualities.

Without them - or his quickness, big hands and long arms - he?s not even in the NBA right now, let alone a starting point guard with one championship ring and another well within the realm of possibility. He is not Larry Bird or Michael Jordan - two players who embodied those aforementioned attributes - but he is dribbling around the All-Star door.

That he had to endure a summer of criticism and trade talk means he perhaps went a bit too far at times last season. When it was suggested that general manager Danny Ainge may have been trying to give him a kick in the shorts when matter-of-factly pointing out his weaknesses, Rondo shrugged.

?I don?t know,? he said. ?I don?t know. I don?t know what the plan was this summer. It?s like every year when they bring in a veteran guard in the season. That?s a little kick, too.

?I know they still believe in me. I know that. And it might have been just to give me a little kick. But whatever it is, it?s only to better our team. I don?t think it?s specifically directed to hurt me. It could be to get me to be more of a leader.?

Actions speak louder than words, but Rondo?s verbiage voiced volumes.

?I can get better,? Rondo said. ?I?ve got to learn to listen to my teammates better. I think we all do, but it?s starting with me as the point guard. I can be a better listener and be a lot more open on the court.?

If the first step toward correcting a problem is admitting one exists, Rondo is doing more than inching forward. He plays with an almost arrogant confidence but knows he can improve.

?I think so. I think I have a lot of upside,? Rondo said. ?I still think I can get better on defense. A lot of people think I?m a great defender, but I think I?m just an average defender right now. I can get a lot better. And defending is not about steals; it?s about locking your man up and being there for your teammates. I think I can improve, as far as keeping my man out of the paint. Just being solid, trying to be more solid this year, not gambling.?

There were some problems with that late last season. And when a steal attempt doesn?t work, it leads to dribble penetration and open looks against the Celts? help defense.

At the other end of the floor, Rondo clearly needed to do something about opponents daring him to shoot. That meant a trip to see former Cleveland point guard Mark Price in Atlanta.

?I worked with him a couple of sessions,? Rondo said. ?Not a lot. I just went down there and got a feel for what he was talking about.?

Did it work?

?I don?t know,? he said. ?We?ll see. I?m just trying to be more consistent - you know, the same shot every time when I shoot. Sometimes I may lean back or fade the wrong way on some of my shots. I?m trying to be more consistent, staying square to the rim, having my shoulders square to the ball and the rim.

?I hope it works. I?m looking forward to seeing if it does.?

He?s also looking forward to quieter summers.

?For the first time going through it - you know, your name?s being brought up in trade rumors - it?s difficult to go through as an individual,? Rondo said. ?Nobody wants to get traded, but that?s the nature of the game. Nobody?s guaranteed to stay in one particular place their entire career. I?ve got living examples. I?ve got two future Hall of Famers that have been traded. Ray (Allen)?s been traded (three) times, and Kevin (Garnett)?s been traded. So anyone?s tradeable.?

Then again, those two were dealt because their teams weren?t ready to win. If Rondo adds ?consistent? to his other attributes, he?s going nowhere.




      


From kmalo17 at verizon.net  Sat Oct 10 19:37:58 2009
From: kmalo17 at verizon.net (Kim Malo)
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 15:37:58 -0400
Subject: Idle thoughts after attending a Garden Party
Message-ID: <0KRB00AZCD7HPA4K@vms173005.mailsrvcs.net>

They've already started the marketing campaign with the pregame video 
montage that follows up game shots from last year with a clip of 
Rasheed and Marquis sharing a screen, with the next frame just one 
word - Re-loaded.

You know that all's right (or getting close) with the Boston 
basketball world when the impression of Kevin Garnett's head is back 
embedded in the stantion padding he's beaten it against before the 
tip off to get ready to play (and people call Sheed crazy <g>...)

Sheed, Celtics fans are going to love Sheed. ***I'm** going to love 
Sheed.  From the defense and blocks to the reliable outlet 3s to that 
nifty little in the air move going into the basket.

And I think I'm going to like Daniels a lot too.

I think my biggest surprise was how relatively together they all 
look. Perfect? No. But they don't look ragged in the ways you expect 
a team integrating new players in training camp playing only its 2nd 
pre-season games. Yeah, I know about the level of competition, but 
this is more about the communication / co-ordination, playing roles 
and relative dearth of unforced errors of the sort you generally see 
in training camp like the pass zigging as the recipient zags.

Perk from the opening of the game, offensive force, you can only hope 
to contain him <g>. Seriously, some really nice shots - a hook that 
must have pleased Tommy and that midranger from the baseline that 
would have sailed over the basket 2 years ago, maybe even last year. 
He also looks really really cut. A bit thinner but all defined muscle.

I hope that was his season's worth of missed FT for Ray. Can't tell 
you how weird it felt to watch Ray miss FT and Perk make them.

Surprisingly large crowd, although I suspect a lot of them are 
friends of the season ticketholders and corporate employees getting a 
tax free extra benefit.

Sigh, I'm hoping it's a lot of the crowd was amateur night, but the 
Scal-a-bri-ne chants were louder than ever. I like Scal and am glad 
he's recovered enough to play again but this is so obnoxious, whether 
its in the spirit of fondly mocking the geeky younger brother or 
treating him like a pet.

Baby worked at it over the summer. His body doesn't look that much 
thinner but his face does indicating the body is more muscle and less 
fat. He does have some more lift, not a lot, but a bit more. And yes 
is clearly trying to play more inside and also go after rebounds 
more. We'll see.

But we've got to sort out this whole backup PG thing. Rondo can't 
play 48 min, I don't want Eddie playing the point because a) he's too 
easy to trap b) he's not good as a distributor and the offense 
stagnates / falls apart into nothing, and c) just as important is 
that it leaves him focusing on things he doesn't do well vs the one 
he does - getting open and shooting. Benefits no one, least of all 
him. Some things to like about Lester, but clearly not ready. JR 
wasn't really playing the point to judge in what was a small sample 
anyway. And while I can see why they think Daniels can bring the ball 
up, "can bring the ball up" isn't really the same as playing the 
point and I'd rather his minutes went at the Ray / Paul backup slot

No signs of knee problems with Garnett's movements. Yeah, he missed a 
bunch of shots he usually makes, but not because of favoring 
something while shooting and no signs of a hitch while running.

*> Happy Sigh <* They're baaaaaaaack.....
Kim


From Eric at ericalbert.net  Sat Oct 10 21:33:01 2009
From: Eric at ericalbert.net (Eric Albert)
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 17:33:01 -0400
Subject: Idle thoughts after attending a Garden Party
Message-ID: <20091010213352.7BC42E1C03A@ignite.igtc.com>


>Kim Malo <kmalo17 at verizon.net> wrote:
>
>And while I can see why they think Daniels can bring the ball up, "can bring the ball up" isn't really the same as playing the point and I'd rather his minutes went at the Ray / Paul backup slot

Based on what I've seen so far (which is not much), I kinda like Daniels as the backup point. He sees the floor well, makes the right pass, and plays under control. That puts him ahead of all other recent backup points. (Yes, I realize this says nothing.)

He's already picked up a couple of nice assists. I expect him to gain steadily in this department once we have a regular rotation and he gets to know where his teammates are, and where they want the ball.

And really, with a bench that includes Rasheed Wallace, Eddie House, and Big Baby (playing against the opponents' second line), a point guard doesn't have to do *that* much. The combination of mild cluefulness with better surrounding players may be all we need.

Daniels brings some nice extras, too:

His playing point means Eddie is *not* playing point.

We finally have some height at the position.

He can create his own offense when he needs to, so opponents have to guard him. A career average of 10 points on 46% shooting and 73% free throws in 24 minutes is a pleasant plus.

He likes little kids.

He's got a fabulous smile.

And, perhaps most important: he wears his hair like Mikki Moore but, in fact, is not Mikki Moore.

-- Eric


From davidp4660 at cox.net  Sun Oct 11 12:25:27 2009
From: davidp4660 at cox.net (davidp4660 at cox.net)
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 8:25:27 -0400
Subject: Idle thoughts after attending a Garden Party
In-Reply-To: <20091010213352.7BC42E1C03A@ignite.igtc.com>
Message-ID: <20091011082527.7ZLAB.286310.imail@eastrmwml45>

So did Roman Polanksi.  I couln't resist.
---- Eric Albert <Eric at ericalbert.net> wrote: 
> 
> >Kim Malo <kmalo17 at verizon.net> wrote:
> >
 (on Marquis Daniels)

> He likes little kids. 


From kmalo17 at verizon.net  Sun Oct 11 13:28:37 2009
From: kmalo17 at verizon.net (Kim Malo)
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 09:28:37 -0400
Subject: Idle thoughts after attending a Garden Party
In-Reply-To: <20091010213352.7BC42E1C03A@ignite.igtc.com>
References: <20091010213352.7BC42E1C03A@ignite.igtc.com>
Message-ID: <0KRC00EPBQS00NCT@vms173013.mailsrvcs.net>

At 05:33 PM 10/10/2009, Eric Albert wrote:

> >Kim Malo <kmalo17 at verizon.net> wrote:
> >
> >And while I can see why they think Daniels can bring the ball up, 
> "can bring the ball up" isn't really the same as playing the point 
> and I'd rather his minutes went at the Ray / Paul backup slot
>
>Based on what I've seen so far (which is not much), I kinda like 
>Daniels as the backup point. He sees the floor well, makes the right 
>pass, and plays under control. That puts him ahead of all other 
>recent backup points. (Yes, I realize this says nothing.)

Pretty much ; )
I didn't say he was horrible at it, I said I'd rather that he was 
played what was supposed to be his primary role, and that we had more 
of a true point there. I think I'm going to really like Daniels as a 
player and hope he will give them the impetus to finally cut Tony 
loose, even if it means eating the contract, for his sake as much as ours.

>And really, with a bench that includes Rasheed Wallace, Eddie House, 
>and Big Baby (playing against the opponents' second line), a point 
>guard doesn't have to do *that* much. The combination of mild 
>cluefulness with better surrounding players may be all we need.

That's the common assumption and I don't agree. The reason isn't 
because I think we need someone with fabulous court vision "creating" 
what might not be there, more able to make the perfect pass, set 
teammates up perfectly, etc. - a la the standard true point. As you 
note, we've enough talent to live with quite a bit less than 
perfection in that stuff.

But you're making things more difficult for yourself at an even more 
basic level, because basketball is very much a game of rhythm and 
flow. The consistent problem with "can bring the ball up" types as 
handlers is that they clog the offense up to some degree, and so lose 
you that flow, as much or more because of delays in making any 
decision as not making the best one (again, a la true point). This is 
where the good talent around him isn't as much of a help as you might 
think - they can help clean up after bad decisions, they can't do 
much about no decisions so they don't see the ball or keep getting it 
with too much clock gone. "Can bring" types just tend to, well, 
fiddle and diddle much more and longer. Eddie is one of the worst, 
but hardly the only example we've seen. Drives me crazy to watch. 
Amongst other things it also costs you an advantage you might have 
had over opponents' susceptible 2nd team defense - the ability to 
control game tempo, pace and flow for both sides. This BTW was one of 
my real issues with Pruitt, who had some size (since you mention it 
below) and PG tools, but never gave the slightest sense of trying to 
run things, just mechanically executing instructions given. While the 
offense tending to start later and further from the hoop / in a 
weaker position forces too many unnecessarily bad shots  Maybe just 5 
sec later, but do that consistently and it also gives the defense an 
extra edge they can use while the lack of flow makes it harder to 
work around them to neutralize that edge.

Overall just more lost possessions (not just a failed possession, but 
a failed possession because of what you did to yourself) - TO, shot 
clock violations, rushed weaker shots while avoiding shot clock 
violations, poorly executed plays, etc. And not so much because of 
less-than-pure-PG-play sins of commission as too common sins of omission.

Maybe they don't clog things up and fiddle and diddle on every play, 
and the degree to which it's a problem varies from player to player 
(yes, Daniels in a very small sample was better about it than both 
Eddie and Hudson, at least Hudson right now), but it is a consistent 
problem inherent in playing people out of position at the PG. While 
having talented teammates who are good passers and shooters, better 
able to get free or able to handle less than perfect passes, etc. out 
there just doesn't help that much if they don't get ball in the first 
place or usually get it with too little time, a defense that's had 
time to set up to best stop them, and no flow / on court connection 
with their teammates to beat that defense.

>Daniels brings some nice extras, too:
>
>His playing point means Eddie is *not* playing point.

Well yeah and I know you're being funny, but come on, that's hardly 
an extra Daniels brings since we already had other alternatives 
without him. It also means that Daniels isn't backing up Pierce / 
Ray, which is what he's here for and IMO a bigger need than another 
out of position backup point,

>We finally have some height at the position.

That's nice but it's only because you're playing him out of position 
and it's not a requirement of the position. Hey, you want height, 
play Perk. That means Eddie isn't playing the point either, and 
Perk's a good passer with surprisingly good court vision who can at 
least see over attempts to trap him. He even did a successful end to 
end dribble last season, something that we would have died laughing 
at the mere thought of a couple years ago.

>He can create his own offense when he needs to, so opponents have to 
>guard him. A career average of 10 points on 46% shooting and 73% 
>free throws in 24 minutes is a pleasant plus.

Yeah, but he can do this from any position, including the role he was 
primarily brought in for. You need a point who is willing to take the 
shot (be nice if he makes, but he's *got* to take - this was my 
earlier issue with Rondo more than his shooting % per se) to help 
keep defenses honest, but after that it's not a need or inherent in 
slotting him at the point.

>He likes little kids.

Medium rare? Sausage onna stick (sorry, just got the latest Discworld book)?

>He's got a fabulous smile.

Not to mention the hair...

>And, perhaps most important: he wears his hair like Mikki Moore but, 
>in fact, is not Mikki Moore.

Ah, there's the hair...
Thanks. Nice to talk basketball not trades again ; )
Kim  


From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Sun Oct 11 16:14:44 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 09:14:44 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Idle thoughts after attending a Garden Party
In-Reply-To: <0KRC00EPBQS00NCT@vms173013.mailsrvcs.net>
Message-ID: <394444.11367.qm@web65610.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

Agree with your thoughts vis a vis the point guard position.  It's my thought that the thing standing in front of a true point guard on that 2nd team is none other than Eddie House--as long as Eddie House is on the team, we won't have a true point guard behind Rondo.  Not only is House not the answer, his value as a shooter causes us to find sneaky ways to get him on the court as a 2 guard, sneaky ways which undermine finding a true point guard, and keep making us 'settle' for swing guards with good handles, like TA and Daniels (or Pruitt and Hudson as well).

So, when that point in the season comes when everyone's throwing out trade ideas with our expirings, remember that House will have to go in any deal--beyond that fact that House stands in the way of a real 2nd string point guard, it makes no sense to bring in extra salary onto a team that goes 9 deep.  If we make any improvement to this team, it'll be at the expense of House.  He's the odd man out.

Ryan

--- On Sun, 10/11/09, Kim Malo <kmalo17 at verizon.net> wrote:

> From: Kim Malo <kmalo17 at verizon.net>
> Subject: Re: Idle thoughts after attending a Garden Party
> To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" <celtics at igtc.com>
> Date: Sunday, October 11, 2009, 8:28 AM
> At 05:33 PM 10/10/2009, Eric Albert
> wrote:
> 
> > >Kim Malo <kmalo17 at verizon.net>
> wrote:
> > >
> > >And while I can see why they think Daniels can
> bring the ball up, "can bring the ball up" isn't really the
> same as playing the point and I'd rather his minutes went at
> the Ray / Paul backup slot
> > 
> > Based on what I've seen so far (which is not much), I
> kinda like Daniels as the backup point. He sees the floor
> well, makes the right pass, and plays under control. That
> puts him ahead of all other recent backup points. (Yes, I
> realize this says nothing.)
> 
> Pretty much ; )
> I didn't say he was horrible at it, I said I'd rather that
> he was played what was supposed to be his primary role, and
> that we had more of a true point there. I think I'm going to
> really like Daniels as a player and hope he will give them
> the impetus to finally cut Tony loose, even if it means
> eating the contract, for his sake as much as ours.
> 
> > And really, with a bench that includes Rasheed
> Wallace, Eddie House, and Big Baby (playing against the
> opponents' second line), a point guard doesn't have to do
> *that* much. The combination of mild cluefulness with better
> surrounding players may be all we need.
> 
> That's the common assumption and I don't agree. The reason
> isn't because I think we need someone with fabulous court
> vision "creating" what might not be there, more able to make
> the perfect pass, set teammates up perfectly, etc. - a la
> the standard true point. As you note, we've enough talent to
> live with quite a bit less than perfection in that stuff.
> 
> But you're making things more difficult for yourself at an
> even more basic level, because basketball is very much a
> game of rhythm and flow. The consistent problem with "can
> bring the ball up" types as handlers is that they clog the
> offense up to some degree, and so lose you that flow, as
> much or more because of delays in making any decision as not
> making the best one (again, a la true point). This is where
> the good talent around him isn't as much of a help as you
> might think - they can help clean up after bad decisions,
> they can't do much about no decisions so they don't see the
> ball or keep getting it with too much clock gone. "Can
> bring" types just tend to, well, fiddle and diddle much more
> and longer. Eddie is one of the worst, but hardly the only
> example we've seen. Drives me crazy to watch. Amongst other
> things it also costs you an advantage you might have had
> over opponents' susceptible 2nd team defense - the ability
> to control game tempo, pace and flow for both sides. This
> BTW was one of my real issues with Pruitt, who had some size
> (since you mention it below) and PG tools, but never gave
> the slightest sense of trying to run things, just
> mechanically executing instructions given. While the offense
> tending to start later and further from the hoop / in a
> weaker position forces too many unnecessarily bad
> shots? Maybe just 5 sec later, but do that consistently
> and it also gives the defense an extra edge they can use
> while the lack of flow makes it harder to work around them
> to neutralize that edge.
> 
> Overall just more lost possessions (not just a failed
> possession, but a failed possession because of what you did
> to yourself) - TO, shot clock violations, rushed weaker
> shots while avoiding shot clock violations, poorly executed
> plays, etc. And not so much because of
> less-than-pure-PG-play sins of commission as too common sins
> of omission.
> 
> Maybe they don't clog things up and fiddle and diddle on
> every play, and the degree to which it's a problem varies
> from player to player (yes, Daniels in a very small sample
> was better about it than both Eddie and Hudson, at least
> Hudson right now), but it is a consistent problem inherent
> in playing people out of position at the PG. While having
> talented teammates who are good passers and shooters, better
> able to get free or able to handle less than perfect passes,
> etc. out there just doesn't help that much if they don't get
> ball in the first place or usually get it with too little
> time, a defense that's had time to set up to best stop them,
> and no flow / on court connection with their teammates to
> beat that defense.
> 
> > Daniels brings some nice extras, too:
> > 
> > His playing point means Eddie is *not* playing point.
> 
> Well yeah and I know you're being funny, but come on,
> that's hardly an extra Daniels brings since we already had
> other alternatives without him. It also means that Daniels
> isn't backing up Pierce / Ray, which is what he's here for
> and IMO a bigger need than another out of position backup
> point,
> 
> > We finally have some height at the position.
> 
> That's nice but it's only because you're playing him out of
> position and it's not a requirement of the position. Hey,
> you want height, play Perk. That means Eddie isn't playing
> the point either, and Perk's a good passer with surprisingly
> good court vision who can at least see over attempts to trap
> him. He even did a successful end to end dribble last
> season, something that we would have died laughing at the
> mere thought of a couple years ago.
> 
> > He can create his own offense when he needs to, so
> opponents have to guard him. A career average of 10 points
> on 46% shooting and 73% free throws in 24 minutes is a
> pleasant plus.
> 
> Yeah, but he can do this from any position, including the
> role he was primarily brought in for. You need a point who
> is willing to take the shot (be nice if he makes, but he's
> *got* to take - this was my earlier issue with Rondo more
> than his shooting % per se) to help keep defenses honest,
> but after that it's not a need or inherent in slotting him
> at the point.
> 
> > He likes little kids.
> 
> Medium rare? Sausage onna stick (sorry, just got the latest
> Discworld book)?
> 
> > He's got a fabulous smile.
> 
> Not to mention the hair...
> 
> > And, perhaps most important: he wears his hair like
> Mikki Moore but, in fact, is not Mikki Moore.
> 
> Ah, there's the hair...
> Thanks. Nice to talk basketball not trades again ; )
> Kim? 
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics
> 


      


From Eric at ericalbert.net  Sun Oct 11 16:22:12 2009
From: Eric at ericalbert.net (Eric Albert)
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 12:22:12 -0400
Subject: Idle thoughts after attending a Garden Party
Message-ID: <20091011162251.29609E1C044@ignite.igtc.com>

Kim, your points are well taken. But, while Daniels doesn't race the ball up like Rondo, I haven't gotten the impression he's lollygagging it either. And I see Daniels doing a bit more than *just* bringing the ball up.

There was the time he pushed it, caved the defense, and hit Eddie for a wide-open three. Plus at least two times when he attacked the defense, and, when they reacted, made bounce passes in traffic to a teammate under the basket. I see these as *making* plays, not just passing the ball around the perimeter or (God help us) dribbling in place.

These are plays that Eddie and Gabe (or Hudson, so far) *never* make. So I guess I'm saying that, in a tiny sample, I've seen Daniels do reasonable point-guard stuff. And that's cool since (I gather) he hasn't played much point, and he's currently playing with a ragtag second team that he doesn't know.

Maybe, I fantasize, he'll get even better with practice and knowing his teammates. Then his height and offense will, indeed, be pluses. I know, I know: it's much more likely that, once the real season starts, opposing defenses will put some effort into guarding him, and all his weaknesses will be exposed. But right now I'm enjoying having a player on the second team who, on occasion, resembles a point guard.

Oh, related to bringing the ball up: how great was that full-court baseball pass from Rasheed to Pierce? Two of those a game could add a couple of wins over the season while bringing back warm memories of Larry and Chief.

And amen to talking basketball. Call me kooky, but I find it more compelling to discuss players we have than those we don't.

-- Eric

>Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 09:28:37 -0400
>To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List <celtics at igtc.com>
>From: Kim Malo <kmalo17 at verizon.net>
>Subject: Re: Idle thoughts after attending a Garden Party
>Reply-To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List <celtics at igtc.com>
>Sender: celtics-bounces at igtc.com
>
>At 05:33 PM 10/10/2009, Eric Albert wrote:
>
>>>Kim Malo <kmalo17 at verizon.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>And while I can see why they think Daniels can bring the ball up, "can bring the ball up" isn't really the same as playing the point and I'd rather his minutes went at the Ray / Paul backup slot
>>
>>Based on what I've seen so far (which is not much), I kinda like Daniels as the backup point. He sees the floor well, makes the right pass, and plays under control. That puts him ahead of all other recent backup points. (Yes, I realize this says nothing.)
>
>Pretty much ; )
>I didn't say he was horrible at it, I said I'd rather that he was played what was supposed to be his primary role, and that we had more of a true point there. I think I'm going to really like Daniels as a player and hope he will give them the impetus to finally cut Tony loose, even if it means eating the contract, for his sake as much as ours.
>
>>And really, with a bench that includes Rasheed Wallace, Eddie House, and Big Baby (playing against the opponents' second line), a point guard doesn't have to do *that* much. The combination of mild cluefulness with better surrounding players may be all we need.
>
>That's the common assumption and I don't agree. The reason isn't because I think we need someone with fabulous court vision "creating" what might not be there, more able to make the perfect pass, set teammates up perfectly, etc. - a la the standard true point. As you note, we've enough talent to live with quite a bit less than perfection in that stuff.
>
>But you're making things more difficult for yourself at an even more basic level, because basketball is very much a game of rhythm and flow. The consistent problem with "can bring the ball up" types as handlers is that they clog the offense up to some degree, and so lose you that flow, as much or more because of delays in making any decision as not making the best one (again, a la true point). This is where the good talent around him isn't as much of a help as you might think - they can help clean up after bad decisions, they can't do much about no decisions so they don't see the ball or keep getting it with too much clock gone. "Can bring" types just tend to, well, fiddle and diddle much more and longer. Eddie is one of the worst, but hardly the only example we've seen. Drives me crazy to watch. Amongst other things it also costs you an advantage you might have had over opponents' susceptible 2nd team defense - the ability to control game tempo, pace and flow for both sides. This BTW was one of my real issues with Pruitt, who had some size (since you mention it below) and PG tools, but never gave the slightest sense of trying to run things, just mechanically executing instructions given. While the offense tending to start later and further from the hoop / in a weaker position forces too many unnecessarily bad shots  Maybe just 5 sec later, but do that consistently and it also gives the defense an extra edge they can use while the lack of flow makes it harder to work around them to neutralize that edge.
>
>Overall just more lost possessions (not just a failed possession, but a failed possession because of what you did to yourself) - TO, shot clock violations, rushed weaker shots while avoiding shot clock violations, poorly executed plays, etc. And not so much because of less-than-pure-PG-play sins of commission as too common sins of omission.
>
>Maybe they don't clog things up and fiddle and diddle on every play, and the degree to which it's a problem varies from player to player (yes, Daniels in a very small sample was better about it than both Eddie and Hudson, at least Hudson right now), but it is a consistent problem inherent in playing people out of position at the PG. While having talented teammates who are good passers and shooters, better able to get free or able to handle less than perfect passes, etc. out there just doesn't help that much if they don't get ball in the first place or usually get it with too little time, a defense that's had time to set up to best stop them, and no flow / on court connection with their teammates to beat that defense.
>
>>Daniels brings some nice extras, too:
>>
>>His playing point means Eddie is *not* playing point.
>
>Well yeah and I know you're being funny, but come on, that's hardly an extra Daniels brings since we already had other alternatives without him. It also means that Daniels isn't backing up Pierce / Ray, which is what he's here for and IMO a bigger need than another out of position backup point,
>
>>We finally have some height at the position.
>
>That's nice but it's only because you're playing him out of position and it's not a requirement of the position. Hey, you want height, play Perk. That means Eddie isn't playing the point either, and Perk's a good passer with surprisingly good court vision who can at least see over attempts to trap him. He even did a successful end to end dribble last season, something that we would have died laughing at the mere thought of a couple years ago.
>
>>He can create his own offense when he needs to, so opponents have to guard him. A career average of 10 points on 46% shooting and 73% free throws in 24 minutes is a pleasant plus.
>
>Yeah, but he can do this from any position, including the role he was primarily brought in for. You need a point who is willing to take the shot (be nice if he makes, but he's *got* to take - this was my earlier issue with Rondo more than his shooting % per se) to help keep defenses honest, but after that it's not a need or inherent in slotting him at the point.
>
>>He likes little kids.
>
>Medium rare? Sausage onna stick (sorry, just got the latest Discworld book)?
>
>>He's got a fabulous smile.
>
>Not to mention the hair...
>
>>And, perhaps most important: he wears his hair like Mikki Moore but, in fact, is not Mikki Moore.
>
>Ah, there's the hair...
>Thanks. Nice to talk basketball not trades again ; )
>Kim  
>
>_______________________________________________
>The Boston Celtics Mailing List
>celtics at igtc.com
>http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics


From alex.goldblatt at gmail.com  Sun Oct 11 16:32:55 2009
From: alex.goldblatt at gmail.com (Alex Goldblatt)
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 12:32:55 -0400
Subject: Idle thoughts after attending a Garden Party
In-Reply-To: <0KRC00EPBQS00NCT@vms173013.mailsrvcs.net>
References: <20091010213352.7BC42E1C03A@ignite.igtc.com>
	<0KRC00EPBQS00NCT@vms173013.mailsrvcs.net>
Message-ID: <3f0c87180910110932j31a2ca82vb9e5083e24c97d92@mail.gmail.com>

"Well yeah and I know you're being funny, but come on, that's hardly an
extra Daniels brings since we already had other alternatives without him. It
also means that Daniels isn't backing up Pierce / Ray, which is what he's
here for and IMO a bigger need than another out of position backup point,"

Kim, will have to disagree: I'm not sure you can name any really viable
solution to the backup point spot. Premise for using House at the point
always been his  3pt spot-up shooting, not ballhandling. Prior MD, we had to
use either Paul or Ray to run the point. MD gives must-to-have relieve for
both players to get more rest. Bottom line - there are quite a few
weaknesses in the current lineup that should be compensated by the
versatility of the rest of. So "bigger need" should be adjusted to the bare
necessities of this team.

AG

From kmalo17 at verizon.net  Sun Oct 11 21:24:36 2009
From: kmalo17 at verizon.net (Kim Malo)
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 17:24:36 -0400
Subject: Idle thoughts after attending a Garden Party
In-Reply-To: <394444.11367.qm@web65610.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
References: <0KRC00EPBQS00NCT@vms173013.mailsrvcs.net>
	<394444.11367.qm@web65610.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <0KRD00AI6CTII7G9@vms173019.mailsrvcs.net>

At 12:14 PM 10/11/2009, Ryan W wrote:
>Agree with your thoughts vis a vis the point guard position.  It's 
>my thought that the thing standing in front of a true point guard on 
>that 2nd team is none other than Eddie House--as long as Eddie House 
>is on the team, we won't have a true point guard behind Rondo.  Not 
>only is House not the answer, his value as a shooter causes us to 
>find sneaky ways to get him on the court as a 2 guard, sneaky ways 
>which undermine finding a true point guard, and keep making us 
>'settle' for swing guards with good handles, like TA and Daniels (or 
>Pruitt and Hudson as well).

Gee Ryan, dunno as I agree with all that, although I can certainly 
see where you're coming from.  But to begin with, I just don't see 
that playing Eddie at the 2 undermines the PG, and 2 IS his natural 
position, undersized as he is, so I also don't see how it's sneaky 
getting him on the court as a 2. Playing him anywhere else reduces 
his benefit as a shooter because he has to do something other than 
get open and shoot, which is what he does best.

I'm fairly sure that the tendency to go for swing guards has a lot 
more to do with Danny being such a player himself and so seemingly 
convinced from his own experience that any other 2 can do the same 
crossover role since he knows how "easy" it is; and after all 
undersized 2s are easier to find than true PG. Danny also likes 
shooters, so that makes him even happier to go in that direction. 
Little, if anything, to do with Eddie.

I also think they've finally coming to accept that you just can't 
have Eddie at the point, even if they still clutch at it occasionally 
with their cold, grasping claws. Which I agree shouldn't have taken 
them so long. But one indicator was that while they were working 
things out about Daniels they were pitching him as someone who could 
backup at the point - which has to be seen as recognition that Eddie 
isn't the answer there.

>So, when that point in the season comes when everyone's throwing out 
>trade ideas with our expirings, remember that House will have to go 
>in any deal--beyond that fact that House stands in the way of a real 
>2nd string point guard, it makes no sense to bring in extra salary 
>onto a team that goes 9 deep.  If we make any improvement to this 
>team, it'll be at the expense of House.  He's the odd man out.

Well no. In his legit role as a microwave offense shooter he's far 
from the odd man out, because he brings something others don't. Can't 
underestimate what a difference maker he is when he is ON, especially 
in lighting up a 2nd unit that's not exactly instant offense. And 
it's not like he makes that much to worry about extra salary. I'm not 
going to stay up nights crying if he goes but don't agree that 
trading him is such a necessity or that he is a complete liability.

Kim  


From kmalo17 at verizon.net  Sun Oct 11 21:43:42 2009
From: kmalo17 at verizon.net (Kim Malo)
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 17:43:42 -0400
Subject: Idle thoughts after attending a Garden Party
In-Reply-To: <20091011162251.29609E1C044@ignite.igtc.com>
References: <20091011162251.29609E1C044@ignite.igtc.com>
Message-ID: <0KRD00G8DDPCGWAH@vms173019.mailsrvcs.net>

At 12:22 PM 10/11/2009, Eric Albert wrote:
>Kim, your points are well taken. But, while Daniels doesn't race the 
>ball up like Rondo, I haven't gotten the impression he's 
>lollygagging it either.

Yeah, but Eric, I didn't say anything about racing the ball up, much 
less accuse Daniels of lollygagging (and now I have that scene from 
Major League playing in my head)... my entire discussion was about 
what happens after it's up. I've seen guys race the ball up like 
they're rocket propelled and still screw things up fiddling and 
diddling because they can't decide what to do next.  Getting it up 
quickly only helps if you take advantage of it - something Rondo 
himself has had to learn.

>And I see Daniels doing a bit more than *just* bringing the ball up.

Yeah, as anyone playing point does, even Eddie House. But again this 
is not what I said. I'm sorry, I thought I was pretty clear but 
apparently I was impossible to understand.

>These are plays that Eddie and Gabe (or Hudson, so far) *never* 
>make. So I guess I'm saying that, in a tiny sample, I've seen 
>Daniels do reasonable point-guard stuff. And that's cool since (I 
>gather) he hasn't played much point, and he's currently playing with 
>a ragtag second team that he doesn't know.

And as I said, there isn't necessarily a capital P problem with every 
play. Hell, if I work at it, I can come up with a good pass or two 
that Eddie has made. No question that Daniels has looked fairly good 
in a small sample, but there is still an overall difference in what 
happens and I still prefer him filling the role we primarily got him 
for instead. Alex may disagree that that's as much a need because of 
limited viable options at the PG but the options backing up Paul / 
Ray are even worse and we need to have options if we want to cut down 
their minutes which everyone seems convinced we need to do to have 
them ready come play off time..

>Maybe, I fantasize, he'll get even better with practice and knowing 
>his teammates. Then his height and offense will, indeed, be pluses. 
>I know, I know: it's much more likely that, once the real season 
>starts, opposing defenses will put some effort into guarding him, 
>and all his weaknesses will be exposed. But right now I'm enjoying 
>having a player on the second team who, on occasion, resembles a point guard.

Sigh, this isn't what I said either. I'm not saying he's a stiff and 
my point wasn't specific to him, it was reasons there is a problem 
with "can handle" types playing the PG in general.  I like him, I'm 
sure he'll get better, I'm not saying he'll be exposed as a total 
stiff (although yes, he will get exposed some more probably) although 
I dunno as I'd go so far as to say he resembles a PG. But nor does he 
resemble Eddie House trying to play one. I don't like the situation 
but I'm not disagreeing that he does a better job there from Eddie 
from what we've seen (and I'm fairly comfortable that won't change 
when we see more)

>Oh, related to bringing the ball up: how great was that full-court 
>baseball pass from Rasheed to Pierce? Two of those a game could add 
>a couple of wins over the season while bringing back warm memories 
>of Larry and Chief.

Yeah, I think we're going to see some nice little 2 man plays, with 
the 2 men varying from night to night (and that's part of what's good 
about it). Funny, but we may actually have better passing skills 
amongst our big men than out guards, taking the whole crew vs the 
whole crew. And I agree - I'm a big fan of easy shots and their part 
in adding a few wins, while also reducing wear and tear on out aging starters.

>And amen to talking basketball. Call me kooky, but I find it more 
>compelling to discuss players we have than those we don't.

Me, I just hate shopping of any kind, which is what trade talk basically is.
Kim



From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Sun Oct 11 22:45:59 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2009 15:45:59 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Idle thoughts after attending a Garden Party
In-Reply-To: <0KRD00AI6CTII7G9@vms173019.mailsrvcs.net>
Message-ID: <700719.22653.qm@web65603.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>



--- On Sun, 10/11/09, Kim Malo <kmalo17 at verizon.net> wrote:

> 
> Gee Ryan, dunno as I agree with all that, although I can
> certainly see where you're coming from.? But to begin
> with, I just don't see that playing Eddie at the 2
> undermines the PG, and 2 IS his natural position, undersized
> as he is, so I also don't see how it's sneaky getting him on
> the court as a 2. Playing him anywhere else reduces his
> benefit as a shooter because he has to do something other
> than get open and shoot, which is what he does best.

Well, I get what you're saying too--it's just that with House as resident 2-guard-in-a-point-guard's body, we don't have the option of bringing in the typical point-guard-in-a-point-guard's body because you can't play them together, and as such that really hamstrings us in terms of bringing a real point guard because it's pretty hard to find tall point guards that match House's short 2-guard-ness. Ergo, because House is small and not a point guard, we have to bring in combo guards as our backup point guards.  And until House is gone, it'll always be that way.  House's presence makes us compromise on the kind of point guards we can bring in...

> 
> I'm fairly sure that the tendency to go for swing guards
> has a lot more to do with Danny being such a player himself
> and so seemingly convinced from his own experience that any
> other 2 can do the same crossover role since he knows how
> "easy" it is; and after all undersized 2s are easier to find
> than true PG. Danny also likes shooters, so that makes him
> even happier to go in that direction. Little, if anything,
> to do with Eddie.

Very good point--that's exactly what Danny was, and Doc too, to a degree, though he was much more pointy.  Combo guards are much easier to find too, as you note.  But, as I point out above, my argument is that Eddie's role on the team necessitates this kind of search and pretty much precludes this team from having a real backup point guard, even taking into consideration Danny's natural inclination for such a player.

> 
> I also think they've finally coming to accept that you just
> can't have Eddie at the point, even if they still clutch at
> it occasionally with their cold, grasping claws. Which I
> agree shouldn't have taken them so long. But one indicator
> was that while they were working things out about Daniels
> they were pitching him as someone who could backup at the
> point - which has to be seen as recognition that Eddie isn't
> the answer there.

Yeah, to their credit they've come to that conclusion, though I think it's been Eddie's superior play at the 2, and not the detriment his play at the 1 causes for the rest of the team, that was conclusive in reaching that conclusion.  It's my opinion that it should have been the other way around as a matter of principle.

Again, though, in terms of relative harm, having non-point guards at point doesn't hurt as much when you have veteran talent at the other spots in the lineup--there's a reason House at the point was a reasonable decision in 08 and lunacy in 09.  So, while I think our non-point guard led 2nd team is a weakness, I don't think it's *that* big of a weakness.  The only real weakness is from a depth standpoint--if Rondo went down then we'd be a team with no real point guard, and that would be a problem.

> 
> > So, when that point in the season comes when
> everyone's throwing out trade ideas with our expirings,
> remember that House will have to go in any deal--beyond that
> fact that House stands in the way of a real 2nd string point
> guard, it makes no sense to bring in extra salary onto a
> team that goes 9 deep.? If we make any improvement to
> this team, it'll be at the expense of House.? He's the
> odd man out.
> 
> Well no. In his legit role as a microwave offense shooter
> he's far from the odd man out, because he brings something
> others don't. Can't underestimate what a difference maker he
> is when he is ON, especially in lighting up a 2nd unit
> that's not exactly instant offense. And it's not like he
> makes that much to worry about extra salary. I'm not going
> to stay up nights crying if he goes but don't agree that
> trading him is such a necessity or that he is a complete
> liability.

I can see where you're coming and strictly speaking, you are correct--we could upgrade the team, and move House from 9th to 10th man and make him more of a situational bomber who plays around quarters and when you need 3s.  But, from a practical standpoint, and taking into consideration that you have to give something to get something, and you can only have so many people in the rotation at one single time, it's pretty clear--at least to me--that if we use our expirings to upgrade the team, it'll be at the expense of House--he's the 9th man in our top 9 and the most expendable.  And, given that I think his presence limits the type of backup point guard player we can bring in, it's pretty obvious I'd be in favor of that kind of upgrade, though I do appreciate Eddie's stroke and the spirit he undoubtedly brings to the team.  

Again, I'm not even advocating a trade--I really like the team as it stands and I don't think we need any improvement right now--I just think if one comes along including House in it is a definite possibility.  At some point, to make the team better you can't just keep adding good player on top of good player--instead, you have to swap out a good player for a different kind of good player because there's only so much room in the rotation.  

It's my hope that Hudson eventually makes House expendable--not this season, but next.  He has better dribbling and defensive talent than House, but it'll be a matter of getting past his rookie mistakes and getting more comfortable at the point before he can reasonably challenge for Eddie's role.

Ryan

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From Eric at ericalbert.net  Mon Oct 12 04:07:54 2009
From: Eric at ericalbert.net (Eric Albert)
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 00:07:54 -0400
Subject: Speaking of point guards...
Message-ID: <20091012040836.191F8E1C044@ignite.igtc.com>

What's with Rondo? He played today's game (especially the first half) like he was on drugs. Bad drugs.

-- Eric


From alex.goldblatt at gmail.com  Mon Oct 12 04:29:09 2009
From: alex.goldblatt at gmail.com (Alex Goldblatt)
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 00:29:09 -0400
Subject: Idle thoughts after attending a Garden Party
In-Reply-To: <700719.22653.qm@web65603.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
References: <0KRD00AI6CTII7G9@vms173019.mailsrvcs.net>
	<700719.22653.qm@web65603.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <3f0c87180910112129q26577e79t515e5432244d8fb2@mail.gmail.com>

"It's my hope that Hudson eventually makes House expendable--not this
season, but next.  He has better dribbling and defensive talent than House"

Huh?.. Based on what exactly?.. He's just another tweener: no real
understanding of the game, no real dribbling abilities - all about scoring
by him own self. I'm pretty much sored on him after watching his game.
Unless some miracle will happen - I see his departure from the league next
season.

AG

On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 6:45 PM, Ryan W <ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>
> --- On Sun, 10/11/09, Kim Malo <kmalo17 at verizon.net> wrote:
>
> >
> > Gee Ryan, dunno as I agree with all that, although I can
> > certainly see where you're coming from.  But to begin
> > with, I just don't see that playing Eddie at the 2
> > undermines the PG, and 2 IS his natural position, undersized
> > as he is, so I also don't see how it's sneaky getting him on
> > the court as a 2. Playing him anywhere else reduces his
> > benefit as a shooter because he has to do something other
> > than get open and shoot, which is what he does best.
>
> Well, I get what you're saying too--it's just that with House as resident
> 2-guard-in-a-point-guard's body, we don't have the option of bringing in the
> typical point-guard-in-a-point-guard's body because you can't play them
> together, and as such that really hamstrings us in terms of bringing a real
> point guard because it's pretty hard to find tall point guards that match
> House's short 2-guard-ness. Ergo, because House is small and not a point
> guard, we have to bring in combo guards as our backup point guards.  And
> until House is gone, it'll always be that way.  House's presence makes us
> compromise on the kind of point guards we can bring in...
>
> >
> > I'm fairly sure that the tendency to go for swing guards
> > has a lot more to do with Danny being such a player himself
> > and so seemingly convinced from his own experience that any
> > other 2 can do the same crossover role since he knows how
> > "easy" it is; and after all undersized 2s are easier to find
> > than true PG. Danny also likes shooters, so that makes him
> > even happier to go in that direction. Little, if anything,
> > to do with Eddie.
>
> Very good point--that's exactly what Danny was, and Doc too, to a degree,
> though he was much more pointy.  Combo guards are much easier to find too,
> as you note.  But, as I point out above, my argument is that Eddie's role on
> the team necessitates this kind of search and pretty much precludes this
> team from having a real backup point guard, even taking into consideration
> Danny's natural inclination for such a player.
>
> >
> > I also think they've finally coming to accept that you just
> > can't have Eddie at the point, even if they still clutch at
> > it occasionally with their cold, grasping claws. Which I
> > agree shouldn't have taken them so long. But one indicator
> > was that while they were working things out about Daniels
> > they were pitching him as someone who could backup at the
> > point - which has to be seen as recognition that Eddie isn't
> > the answer there.
>
> Yeah, to their credit they've come to that conclusion, though I think it's
> been Eddie's superior play at the 2, and not the detriment his play at the 1
> causes for the rest of the team, that was conclusive in reaching that
> conclusion.  It's my opinion that it should have been the other way around
> as a matter of principle.
>
> Again, though, in terms of relative harm, having non-point guards at point
> doesn't hurt as much when you have veteran talent at the other spots in the
> lineup--there's a reason House at the point was a reasonable decision in 08
> and lunacy in 09.  So, while I think our non-point guard led 2nd team is a
> weakness, I don't think it's *that* big of a weakness.  The only real
> weakness is from a depth standpoint--if Rondo went down then we'd be a team
> with no real point guard, and that would be a problem.
>
> >
> > > So, when that point in the season comes when
> > everyone's throwing out trade ideas with our expirings,
> > remember that House will have to go in any deal--beyond that
> > fact that House stands in the way of a real 2nd string point
> > guard, it makes no sense to bring in extra salary onto a
> > team that goes 9 deep.  If we make any improvement to
> > this team, it'll be at the expense of House.  He's the
> > odd man out.
> >
> > Well no. In his legit role as a microwave offense shooter
> > he's far from the odd man out, because he brings something
> > others don't. Can't underestimate what a difference maker he
> > is when he is ON, especially in lighting up a 2nd unit
> > that's not exactly instant offense. And it's not like he
> > makes that much to worry about extra salary. I'm not going
> > to stay up nights crying if he goes but don't agree that
> > trading him is such a necessity or that he is a complete
> > liability.
>
> I can see where you're coming and strictly speaking, you are correct--we
> could upgrade the team, and move House from 9th to 10th man and make him
> more of a situational bomber who plays around quarters and when you need 3s.
>  But, from a practical standpoint, and taking into consideration that you
> have to give something to get something, and you can only have so many
> people in the rotation at one single time, it's pretty clear--at least to
> me--that if we use our expirings to upgrade the team, it'll be at the
> expense of House--he's the 9th man in our top 9 and the most expendable.
>  And, given that I think his presence limits the type of backup point guard
> player we can bring in, it's pretty obvious I'd be in favor of that kind of
> upgrade, though I do appreciate Eddie's stroke and the spirit he undoubtedly
> brings to the team.
>
> Again, I'm not even advocating a trade--I really like the team as it stands
> and I don't think we need any improvement right now--I just think if one
> comes along including House in it is a definite possibility.  At some point,
> to make the team better you can't just keep adding good player on top of
> good player--instead, you have to swap out a good player for a different
> kind of good player because there's only so much room in the rotation.
>
> It's my hope that Hudson eventually makes House expendable--not this
> season, but next.  He has better dribbling and defensive talent than House,
> but it'll be a matter of getting past his rookie mistakes and getting more
> comfortable at the point before he can reasonably challenge for Eddie's
> role.
>
> Ryan
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics
>

From jaims at pldtdsl.net  Mon Oct 12 08:20:43 2009
From: jaims at pldtdsl.net (Jaims)
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 16:20:43 +0800
Subject: Speaking of point guards...
In-Reply-To: <20091012040836.191F8E1C044@ignite.igtc.com>
References: <20091012040836.191F8E1C044@ignite.igtc.com>
Message-ID: <7635E03B-3A12-4179-830E-0F2921599D1C@pldtdsl.net>

I agree. 3 straight preseason games of passiveness n sloppiness so  
far. He has been d one getting rondo'd so far. Hopefully he won't  
carry it onto d regular season.

Jaims

On Oct 12, 2009, at 12:07 PM, Eric Albert <Eric at ericalbert.net> wrote:

> What's with Rondo? He played today's game (especially the first  
> half) like he was on drugs. Bad drugs.
>
> -- Eric
>
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics


From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Mon Oct 12 14:20:47 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 07:20:47 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Idle thoughts after attending a Garden Party
In-Reply-To: <3f0c87180910112129q26577e79t515e5432244d8fb2@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <231642.8289.qm@web65604.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

He plays defense, is not afraid to make mistakes, has outstanding athleticism, and can score in bunches, from getting to the rim all the way to hitting 3s--he's just not a shooter, he's a scorer.  In terms of House vs. Hudson, it's not a contest--Ed's obviously the better player right now because he has experience, but Hudson's a comer, and Doc likes him too.  For a while I thought the 10th man battle was between Scal and TA (after Walker went down)...now I must revise that, it's between Hudson/Scal/TA.

By the way, you're indictment of Hudson's game read like my indictment of House's ;)

Ryan

--- On Sun, 10/11/09, Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com> wrote:

> From: Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Idle thoughts after attending a Garden Party
> To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" <celtics at igtc.com>
> Date: Sunday, October 11, 2009, 11:29 PM
> "It's my hope that Hudson eventually
> makes House expendable--not this
> season, but next.? He has better dribbling and
> defensive talent than House"
> 
> Huh?.. Based on what exactly?.. He's just another tweener:
> no real
> understanding of the game, no real dribbling abilities -
> all about scoring
> by him own self. I'm pretty much sored on him after
> watching his game.
> Unless some miracle will happen - I see his departure from
> the league next
> season.
> 
> AG
> 
> On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 6:45 PM, Ryan W <ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > --- On Sun, 10/11/09, Kim Malo <kmalo17 at verizon.net>
> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Gee Ryan, dunno as I agree with all that,
> although I can
> > > certainly see where you're coming from.? But
> to begin
> > > with, I just don't see that playing Eddie at the
> 2
> > > undermines the PG, and 2 IS his natural position,
> undersized
> > > as he is, so I also don't see how it's sneaky
> getting him on
> > > the court as a 2. Playing him anywhere else
> reduces his
> > > benefit as a shooter because he has to do
> something other
> > > than get open and shoot, which is what he does
> best.
> >
> > Well, I get what you're saying too--it's just that
> with House as resident
> > 2-guard-in-a-point-guard's body, we don't have the
> option of bringing in the
> > typical point-guard-in-a-point-guard's body because
> you can't play them
> > together, and as such that really hamstrings us in
> terms of bringing a real
> > point guard because it's pretty hard to find tall
> point guards that match
> > House's short 2-guard-ness. Ergo, because House is
> small and not a point
> > guard, we have to bring in combo guards as our backup
> point guards.? And
> > until House is gone, it'll always be that way.?
> House's presence makes us
> > compromise on the kind of point guards we can bring
> in...
> >
> > >
> > > I'm fairly sure that the tendency to go for swing
> guards
> > > has a lot more to do with Danny being such a
> player himself
> > > and so seemingly convinced from his own
> experience that any
> > > other 2 can do the same crossover role since he
> knows how
> > > "easy" it is; and after all undersized 2s are
> easier to find
> > > than true PG. Danny also likes shooters, so that
> makes him
> > > even happier to go in that direction. Little, if
> anything,
> > > to do with Eddie.
> >
> > Very good point--that's exactly what Danny was, and
> Doc too, to a degree,
> > though he was much more pointy.? Combo guards are
> much easier to find too,
> > as you note.? But, as I point out above, my
> argument is that Eddie's role on
> > the team necessitates this kind of search and pretty
> much precludes this
> > team from having a real backup point guard, even
> taking into consideration
> > Danny's natural inclination for such a player.
> >
> > >
> > > I also think they've finally coming to accept
> that you just
> > > can't have Eddie at the point, even if they still
> clutch at
> > > it occasionally with their cold, grasping claws.
> Which I
> > > agree shouldn't have taken them so long. But one
> indicator
> > > was that while they were working things out about
> Daniels
> > > they were pitching him as someone who could
> backup at the
> > > point - which has to be seen as recognition that
> Eddie isn't
> > > the answer there.
> >
> > Yeah, to their credit they've come to that conclusion,
> though I think it's
> > been Eddie's superior play at the 2, and not the
> detriment his play at the 1
> > causes for the rest of the team, that was conclusive
> in reaching that
> > conclusion.? It's my opinion that it should have
> been the other way around
> > as a matter of principle.
> >
> > Again, though, in terms of relative harm, having
> non-point guards at point
> > doesn't hurt as much when you have veteran talent at
> the other spots in the
> > lineup--there's a reason House at the point was a
> reasonable decision in 08
> > and lunacy in 09.? So, while I think our
> non-point guard led 2nd team is a
> > weakness, I don't think it's *that* big of a
> weakness.? The only real
> > weakness is from a depth standpoint--if Rondo went
> down then we'd be a team
> > with no real point guard, and that would be a
> problem.
> >
> > >
> > > > So, when that point in the season comes
> when
> > > everyone's throwing out trade ideas with our
> expirings,
> > > remember that House will have to go in any
> deal--beyond that
> > > fact that House stands in the way of a real 2nd
> string point
> > > guard, it makes no sense to bring in extra salary
> onto a
> > > team that goes 9 deep.? If we make any
> improvement to
> > > this team, it'll be at the expense of
> House.? He's the
> > > odd man out.
> > >
> > > Well no. In his legit role as a microwave offense
> shooter
> > > he's far from the odd man out, because he brings
> something
> > > others don't. Can't underestimate what a
> difference maker he
> > > is when he is ON, especially in lighting up a 2nd
> unit
> > > that's not exactly instant offense. And it's not
> like he
> > > makes that much to worry about extra salary. I'm
> not going
> > > to stay up nights crying if he goes but don't
> agree that
> > > trading him is such a necessity or that he is a
> complete
> > > liability.
> >
> > I can see where you're coming and strictly speaking,
> you are correct--we
> > could upgrade the team, and move House from 9th to
> 10th man and make him
> > more of a situational bomber who plays around quarters
> and when you need 3s.
> >? But, from a practical standpoint, and taking
> into consideration that you
> > have to give something to get something, and you can
> only have so many
> > people in the rotation at one single time, it's pretty
> clear--at least to
> > me--that if we use our expirings to upgrade the team,
> it'll be at the
> > expense of House--he's the 9th man in our top 9 and
> the most expendable.
> >? And, given that I think his presence limits the
> type of backup point guard
> > player we can bring in, it's pretty obvious I'd be in
> favor of that kind of
> > upgrade, though I do appreciate Eddie's stroke and the
> spirit he undoubtedly
> > brings to the team.
> >
> > Again, I'm not even advocating a trade--I really like
> the team as it stands
> > and I don't think we need any improvement right now--I
> just think if one
> > comes along including House in it is a definite
> possibility.? At some point,
> > to make the team better you can't just keep adding
> good player on top of
> > good player--instead, you have to swap out a good
> player for a different
> > kind of good player because there's only so much room
> in the rotation.
> >
> > It's my hope that Hudson eventually makes House
> expendable--not this
> > season, but next.? He has better dribbling and
> defensive talent than House,
> > but it'll be a matter of getting past his rookie
> mistakes and getting more
> > comfortable at the point before he can reasonably
> challenge for Eddie's
> > role.
> >
> > Ryan
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Tired of spam?? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> protection around
> > http://mail.yahoo.com
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Mon Oct 12 14:23:12 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 07:23:12 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Speaking of point guards...
In-Reply-To: <20091012040836.191F8E1C044@ignite.igtc.com>
Message-ID: <218033.62083.qm@web65612.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

Good or bad drugs not withstanding, I think Rondo's just easing his way into this season...setting up the offense, but not doing much to get his own game going...it'll come, be patient.  For better or worse, Rondo does have an on/off switch and it's been 'off' for the most part--I think as we get closer to the regular season, Rondo's going to move more towards 'on'.

Ryan

--- On Sun, 10/11/09, Eric Albert <Eric at ericalbert.net> wrote:

> From: Eric Albert <Eric at ericalbert.net>
> Subject: Speaking of point guards...
> To: Celtics at igtc.com
> Date: Sunday, October 11, 2009, 11:07 PM
> What's with Rondo? He played today's
> game (especially the first half) like he was on drugs. Bad
> drugs.
> 
> -- Eric
> 
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics
> 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Mon Oct 12 16:57:12 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 09:57:12 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Speaking of point guards...
In-Reply-To: <218033.62083.qm@web65612.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <12895.29809.qm@web65612.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

One more thing: they still haven't put any plays in for Ray or Paul.  Also, according to the Globe, Doc had them running the same play over and over for the entire 1st quarter yesterday.  Really hard for the point guard to get going when there are no plays in for the team's best 2 scorers...

There's nothing to worry about with Rajon.  If anything, the fact that he's laying low is a GOOD THING in the sense that he's not going to go after individual statistics to increase his free agent value--nope, he's going to do what's best for the team, even if it might cost him money in his next contract.  

Ryan

--- On Mon, 10/12/09, Ryan W <ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com> wrote:

> From: Ryan W <ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: Speaking of point guards...
> To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" <celtics at igtc.com>
> Date: Monday, October 12, 2009, 9:23 AM
> Good or bad drugs not withstanding, I
> think Rondo's just easing his way into this season...setting
> up the offense, but not doing much to get his own game
> going...it'll come, be patient.? For better or worse,
> Rondo does have an on/off switch and it's been 'off' for the
> most part--I think as we get closer to the regular season,
> Rondo's going to move more towards 'on'.
> 
> Ryan
> 
> --- On Sun, 10/11/09, Eric Albert <Eric at ericalbert.net>
> wrote:
> 
> > From: Eric Albert <Eric at ericalbert.net>
> > Subject: Speaking of point guards...
> > To: Celtics at igtc.com
> > Date: Sunday, October 11, 2009, 11:07 PM
> > What's with Rondo? He played today's
> > game (especially the first half) like he was on drugs.
> Bad
> > drugs.
> > 
> > -- Eric
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> > celtics at igtc.com
> > http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics
> > 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> protection around 
> http://mail.yahoo.com 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics
> 


      


From alex.goldblatt at gmail.com  Mon Oct 12 19:55:07 2009
From: alex.goldblatt at gmail.com (Alex Goldblatt)
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 15:55:07 -0400
Subject: Idle thoughts after attending a Garden Party
In-Reply-To: <231642.8289.qm@web65604.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
References: <3f0c87180910112129q26577e79t515e5432244d8fb2@mail.gmail.com>
	<231642.8289.qm@web65604.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <3f0c87180910121255y3130a371y6a834d2ecbd6faae@mail.gmail.com>

Not exactly - I was very specific pointing out Hudson's weaknesses. Eddie
plays his 3rd season with the C's - and not by some freak accident. I stated
pretty much obvious that he will play the 1 for the backup unit, and
explained why - few months ago. See no point in continuing any conversation
on this subject: you facing the facts.

Biggest flaw with Hudson is his total lack of vision of the court and poor
bball IQ. He's a volume shooter - not the player you need to play on this
team, especially the point.

AG

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:20 AM, Ryan W <ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com> wrote:

> He plays defense, is not afraid to make mistakes, has outstanding
> athleticism, and can score in bunches, from getting to the rim all the way
> to hitting 3s--he's just not a shooter, he's a scorer.  In terms of House
> vs. Hudson, it's not a contest--Ed's obviously the better player right now
> because he has experience, but Hudson's a comer, and Doc likes him too.  For
> a while I thought the 10th man battle was between Scal and TA (after Walker
> went down)...now I must revise that, it's between Hudson/Scal/TA.
>
> By the way, you're indictment of Hudson's game read like my indictment of
> House's ;)
>
> Ryan
>
> --- On Sun, 10/11/09, Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > From: Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com>
> > Subject: Re: Idle thoughts after attending a Garden Party
> > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" <celtics at igtc.com>
> > Date: Sunday, October 11, 2009, 11:29 PM
> > "It's my hope that Hudson eventually
> > makes House expendable--not this
> > season, but next.  He has better dribbling and
> > defensive talent than House"
> >
> > Huh?.. Based on what exactly?.. He's just another tweener:
> > no real
> > understanding of the game, no real dribbling abilities -
> > all about scoring
> > by him own self. I'm pretty much sored on him after
> > watching his game.
> > Unless some miracle will happen - I see his departure from
> > the league next
> > season.
> >
> > AG
> >
> > On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 6:45 PM, Ryan W <ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- On Sun, 10/11/09, Kim Malo <kmalo17 at verizon.net>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Gee Ryan, dunno as I agree with all that,
> > although I can
> > > > certainly see where you're coming from.  But
> > to begin
> > > > with, I just don't see that playing Eddie at the
> > 2
> > > > undermines the PG, and 2 IS his natural position,
> > undersized
> > > > as he is, so I also don't see how it's sneaky
> > getting him on
> > > > the court as a 2. Playing him anywhere else
> > reduces his
> > > > benefit as a shooter because he has to do
> > something other
> > > > than get open and shoot, which is what he does
> > best.
> > >
> > > Well, I get what you're saying too--it's just that
> > with House as resident
> > > 2-guard-in-a-point-guard's body, we don't have the
> > option of bringing in the
> > > typical point-guard-in-a-point-guard's body because
> > you can't play them
> > > together, and as such that really hamstrings us in
> > terms of bringing a real
> > > point guard because it's pretty hard to find tall
> > point guards that match
> > > House's short 2-guard-ness. Ergo, because House is
> > small and not a point
> > > guard, we have to bring in combo guards as our backup
> > point guards.  And
> > > until House is gone, it'll always be that way.
> > House's presence makes us
> > > compromise on the kind of point guards we can bring
> > in...
> > >
> > > >
> > > > I'm fairly sure that the tendency to go for swing
> > guards
> > > > has a lot more to do with Danny being such a
> > player himself
> > > > and so seemingly convinced from his own
> > experience that any
> > > > other 2 can do the same crossover role since he
> > knows how
> > > > "easy" it is; and after all undersized 2s are
> > easier to find
> > > > than true PG. Danny also likes shooters, so that
> > makes him
> > > > even happier to go in that direction. Little, if
> > anything,
> > > > to do with Eddie.
> > >
> > > Very good point--that's exactly what Danny was, and
> > Doc too, to a degree,
> > > though he was much more pointy.  Combo guards are
> > much easier to find too,
> > > as you note.  But, as I point out above, my
> > argument is that Eddie's role on
> > > the team necessitates this kind of search and pretty
> > much precludes this
> > > team from having a real backup point guard, even
> > taking into consideration
> > > Danny's natural inclination for such a player.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > I also think they've finally coming to accept
> > that you just
> > > > can't have Eddie at the point, even if they still
> > clutch at
> > > > it occasionally with their cold, grasping claws.
> > Which I
> > > > agree shouldn't have taken them so long. But one
> > indicator
> > > > was that while they were working things out about
> > Daniels
> > > > they were pitching him as someone who could
> > backup at the
> > > > point - which has to be seen as recognition that
> > Eddie isn't
> > > > the answer there.
> > >
> > > Yeah, to their credit they've come to that conclusion,
> > though I think it's
> > > been Eddie's superior play at the 2, and not the
> > detriment his play at the 1
> > > causes for the rest of the team, that was conclusive
> > in reaching that
> > > conclusion.  It's my opinion that it should have
> > been the other way around
> > > as a matter of principle.
> > >
> > > Again, though, in terms of relative harm, having
> > non-point guards at point
> > > doesn't hurt as much when you have veteran talent at
> > the other spots in the
> > > lineup--there's a reason House at the point was a
> > reasonable decision in 08
> > > and lunacy in 09.  So, while I think our
> > non-point guard led 2nd team is a
> > > weakness, I don't think it's *that* big of a
> > weakness.  The only real
> > > weakness is from a depth standpoint--if Rondo went
> > down then we'd be a team
> > > with no real point guard, and that would be a
> > problem.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > > So, when that point in the season comes
> > when
> > > > everyone's throwing out trade ideas with our
> > expirings,
> > > > remember that House will have to go in any
> > deal--beyond that
> > > > fact that House stands in the way of a real 2nd
> > string point
> > > > guard, it makes no sense to bring in extra salary
> > onto a
> > > > team that goes 9 deep.  If we make any
> > improvement to
> > > > this team, it'll be at the expense of
> > House.  He's the
> > > > odd man out.
> > > >
> > > > Well no. In his legit role as a microwave offense
> > shooter
> > > > he's far from the odd man out, because he brings
> > something
> > > > others don't. Can't underestimate what a
> > difference maker he
> > > > is when he is ON, especially in lighting up a 2nd
> > unit
> > > > that's not exactly instant offense. And it's not
> > like he
> > > > makes that much to worry about extra salary. I'm
> > not going
> > > > to stay up nights crying if he goes but don't
> > agree that
> > > > trading him is such a necessity or that he is a
> > complete
> > > > liability.
> > >
> > > I can see where you're coming and strictly speaking,
> > you are correct--we
> > > could upgrade the team, and move House from 9th to
> > 10th man and make him
> > > more of a situational bomber who plays around quarters
> > and when you need 3s.
> > >  But, from a practical standpoint, and taking
> > into consideration that you
> > > have to give something to get something, and you can
> > only have so many
> > > people in the rotation at one single time, it's pretty
> > clear--at least to
> > > me--that if we use our expirings to upgrade the team,
> > it'll be at the
> > > expense of House--he's the 9th man in our top 9 and
> > the most expendable.
> > >  And, given that I think his presence limits the
> > type of backup point guard
> > > player we can bring in, it's pretty obvious I'd be in
> > favor of that kind of
> > > upgrade, though I do appreciate Eddie's stroke and the
> > spirit he undoubtedly
> > > brings to the team.
> > >
> > > Again, I'm not even advocating a trade--I really like
> > the team as it stands
> > > and I don't think we need any improvement right now--I
> > just think if one
> > > comes along including House in it is a definite
> > possibility.  At some point,
> > > to make the team better you can't just keep adding
> > good player on top of
> > > good player--instead, you have to swap out a good
> > player for a different
> > > kind of good player because there's only so much room
> > in the rotation.
> > >
> > > It's my hope that Hudson eventually makes House
> > expendable--not this
> > > season, but next.  He has better dribbling and
> > defensive talent than House,
> > > but it'll be a matter of getting past his rookie
> > mistakes and getting more
> > > comfortable at the point before he can reasonably
> > challenge for Eddie's
> > > role.
> > >
> > > Ryan
> > >
> > > __________________________________________________
> > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> > protection around
> > > http://mail.yahoo.com
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
> >
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics
>

From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Mon Oct 12 21:55:52 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 14:55:52 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Hudson vs. House
Message-ID: <889277.11070.qm@web65605.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

Listen, Hudson's a rookie from a small college playing a new position--there's going to be a learning curve for him and that's pretty understandable.  It might be prudent to take that into consideration when you evaluate him.  It's not that he has a lack of court vision or low BBIQ; it's more his lack of experience as a point guard, and him getting used to the speed of the NBA game.  But the other parts of his game--his defense, shot-making ability, feistiness, his handle--all make him an NBA player, something which Doc has already admitted in the press.  There's a reason Doc's considering Lester for 10th man....  

As for Hudson being "a volume shooter - not the player you need to play on this team, especially the point"--that's simply not true and actually applies more fittingly to House than Hudson.  Hudson is an efficient scorer who can make an impact on the game without even scoring...House is good in one instance--when his shot is falling.

Unlike House, Hudson has a complete game.  You don't go out and get the first quadruple-double in NCAA history by being a 'volume shooter' who has a 'total lack of vision.'  His line that night?  25 points, 12 rebounds, 10 assists and 10 steals.

Unlike House, Hudson also has a well-rounded offensive game.  He doesn't just chuck threes--he can get in the lane, get to the rim, or hit from midrange just as well as he can stroke a 3.  Having the ability to dribble will do that for you. 

All this doesn't change the fact that House is the better player NOW--experience goes a long way in the NBA, and House has that on his side, which is why he's the better player right now.  But after next year I'd hope that Hudson's small price tag plus his year of experience will be enough to displace House.

Finally, Re: facing the facts, *you* and *your* Eddie-as-the-real-backup-1 argument were universally shot down a couple months back in pretty much much everyone's minds.  You're right, there's no need to go down that road again, as your argument was lacking then and nothing's changed.  It's pretty weird for you to bring up a thread from a couple months ago in such a triumphant manner--when in fact that thread ended with you slinking into the corner with your tail between your legs after multiple posters shot holes in your argument.  


Ryan


--- On Mon, 10/12/09, Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com> wrote:

> From: Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Idle thoughts after attending a Garden Party
> To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" <celtics at igtc.com>
> Date: Monday, October 12, 2009, 2:55 PM
> Not exactly - I was very specific
> pointing out Hudson's weaknesses. Eddie
> plays his 3rd season with the C's - and not by some freak
> accident. I stated
> pretty much obvious that he will play the 1 for the backup
> unit, and
> explained why - few months ago. See no point in continuing
> any conversation
> on this subject: you facing the facts.
> 
> Biggest flaw with Hudson is his total lack of vision of the
> court and poor
> bball IQ. He's a volume shooter - not the player you need
> to play on this
> team, especially the point.
> 
> AG
> 
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:20 AM, Ryan W <ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > He plays defense, is not afraid to make mistakes, has
> outstanding
> > athleticism, and can score in bunches, from getting to
> the rim all the way
> > to hitting 3s--he's just not a shooter, he's a
> scorer.  In terms of House
> > vs. Hudson, it's not a contest--Ed's obviously the
> better player right now
> > because he has experience, but Hudson's a comer, and
> Doc likes him too.  For
> > a while I thought the 10th man battle was between Scal
> and TA (after Walker
> > went down)...now I must revise that, it's between
> Hudson/Scal/TA.
> >
> > By the way, you're indictment of Hudson's game read
> like my indictment of
> > House's ;)
> >
> > Ryan
> >
> > --- On Sun, 10/11/09, Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > From: Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com>
> > > Subject: Re: Idle thoughts after attending a
> Garden Party
> > > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" <celtics at igtc.com>
> > > Date: Sunday, October 11, 2009, 11:29 PM
> > > "It's my hope that Hudson eventually
> > > makes House expendable--not this
> > > season, but next.  He has better dribbling
> and
> > > defensive talent than House"
> > >
> > > Huh?.. Based on what exactly?.. He's just another
> tweener:
> > > no real
> > > understanding of the game, no real dribbling
> abilities -
> > > all about scoring
> > > by him own self. I'm pretty much sored on him
> after
> > > watching his game.
> > > Unless some miracle will happen - I see his
> departure from
> > > the league next
> > > season.
> > >
> > > AG
> > >


      


From alex.goldblatt at gmail.com  Mon Oct 12 22:52:38 2009
From: alex.goldblatt at gmail.com (Alex Goldblatt)
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 18:52:38 -0400
Subject: Hudson vs. House
In-Reply-To: <889277.11070.qm@web65605.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
References: <889277.11070.qm@web65605.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <3f0c87180910121552t4106b947i37cba2c11df18315@mail.gmail.com>

No, simple fact remains: Ediie plays the backup point. Nuf said. Anything
else is pretty much irrelevant.

"Unlike House, Hudson has a complete game.  You don't go out and get the
first quadruple-double in NCAA history by being a 'volume shooter' who has a
'total lack of vision.'  His line that night?  25 points, 12 rebounds, 10
assists and 10 steals."

Surprisingly any NCAA stat line rarely translates into the actual NBA level
game. There are stats - and there is THE GAME. If you can break down his
GAME to show that he can play - fine, go ahead and try it. But when I see a
player being pressed at the half court just to over-dribble to the degree
of shaving 20sec off the clock just to get to the 3pt line - yet just for
jerking off a rainbow over taller defender - this is as far from the basic
understanding that there are 4 more players around on teh floor at the same
time as it gets.

The fact that Doc pulls him off the court after a coupe of this ill-advised
"quadruple-doubles" speaks volumes. What you really cannot get is what
Eddie's true value is: he KNOWS HIS ROLE ON THIS TEAM. And will never screw
things up simply because he knows what is asked of him: spot up shooting and
bring the ball up the court. Simple things that actually never show up in
the stat line.

I think I've got enough of typing on it though... So long.. Until you'll be
able to come up with something better than just ranting..

AG

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 5:55 PM, Ryan W <ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Listen, Hudson's a rookie from a small college playing a new
> position--there's going to be a learning curve for him and that's pretty
> understandable.  It might be prudent to take that into consideration when
> you evaluate him.  It's not that he has a lack of court vision or low BBIQ;
> it's more his lack of experience as a point guard, and him getting used to
> the speed of the NBA game.  But the other parts of his game--his defense,
> shot-making ability, feistiness, his handle--all make him an NBA player,
> something which Doc has already admitted in the press.  There's a reason
> Doc's considering Lester for 10th man....
>
> As for Hudson being "a volume shooter - not the player you need to play on
> this team, especially the point"--that's simply not true and actually
> applies more fittingly to House than Hudson.  Hudson is an efficient scorer
> who can make an impact on the game without even scoring...House is good in
> one instance--when his shot is falling.
>
> Unlike House, Hudson has a complete game.  You don't go out and get the
> first quadruple-double in NCAA history by being a 'volume shooter' who has a
> 'total lack of vision.'  His line that night?  25 points, 12 rebounds, 10
> assists and 10 steals.
>
> Unlike House, Hudson also has a well-rounded offensive game.  He doesn't
> just chuck threes--he can get in the lane, get to the rim, or hit from
> midrange just as well as he can stroke a 3.  Having the ability to dribble
> will do that for you.
>
> All this doesn't change the fact that House is the better player
> NOW--experience goes a long way in the NBA, and House has that on his side,
> which is why he's the better player right now.  But after next year I'd hope
> that Hudson's small price tag plus his year of experience will be enough to
> displace House.
>
> Finally, Re: facing the facts, *you* and *your* Eddie-as-the-real-backup-1
> argument were universally shot down a couple months back in pretty much much
> everyone's minds.  You're right, there's no need to go down that road again,
> as your argument was lacking then and nothing's changed.  It's pretty weird
> for you to bring up a thread from a couple months ago in such a triumphant
> manner--when in fact that thread ended with you slinking into the corner
> with your tail between your legs after multiple posters shot holes in your
> argument.
>
>
> Ryan
>
>
> --- On Mon, 10/12/09, Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > From: Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com>
> > Subject: Re: Idle thoughts after attending a Garden Party
> > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" <celtics at igtc.com>
> > Date: Monday, October 12, 2009, 2:55 PM
> > Not exactly - I was very specific
> > pointing out Hudson's weaknesses. Eddie
> > plays his 3rd season with the C's - and not by some freak
> > accident. I stated
> > pretty much obvious that he will play the 1 for the backup
> > unit, and
> > explained why - few months ago. See no point in continuing
> > any conversation
> > on this subject: you facing the facts.
> >
> > Biggest flaw with Hudson is his total lack of vision of the
> > court and poor
> > bball IQ. He's a volume shooter - not the player you need
> > to play on this
> > team, especially the point.
> >
> > AG
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:20 AM, Ryan W <ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > He plays defense, is not afraid to make mistakes, has
> > outstanding
> > > athleticism, and can score in bunches, from getting to
> > the rim all the way
> > > to hitting 3s--he's just not a shooter, he's a
> > scorer.  In terms of House
> > > vs. Hudson, it's not a contest--Ed's obviously the
> > better player right now
> > > because he has experience, but Hudson's a comer, and
> > Doc likes him too.  For
> > > a while I thought the 10th man battle was between Scal
> > and TA (after Walker
> > > went down)...now I must revise that, it's between
> > Hudson/Scal/TA.
> > >
> > > By the way, you're indictment of Hudson's game read
> > like my indictment of
> > > House's ;)
> > >
> > > Ryan
> > >
> > > --- On Sun, 10/11/09, Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > From: Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com>
> > > > Subject: Re: Idle thoughts after attending a
> > Garden Party
> > > > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" <celtics at igtc.com>
> > > > Date: Sunday, October 11, 2009, 11:29 PM
> > > > "It's my hope that Hudson eventually
> > > > makes House expendable--not this
> > > > season, but next.  He has better dribbling
> > and
> > > > defensive talent than House"
> > > >
> > > > Huh?.. Based on what exactly?.. He's just another
> > tweener:
> > > > no real
> > > > understanding of the game, no real dribbling
> > abilities -
> > > > all about scoring
> > > > by him own self. I'm pretty much sored on him
> > after
> > > > watching his game.
> > > > Unless some miracle will happen - I see his
> > departure from
> > > > the league next
> > > > season.
> > > >
> > > > AG
> > > >
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics
>

From kmalo17 at verizon.net  Mon Oct 12 23:38:30 2009
From: kmalo17 at verizon.net (Kim Malo)
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 19:38:30 -0400
Subject: Speaking of point guards...
In-Reply-To: <12895.29809.qm@web65612.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
References: <218033.62083.qm@web65612.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
	<12895.29809.qm@web65612.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <0KRF006K8DOFWBHA@vms173019.mailsrvcs.net>

At 12:57 PM 10/12/2009, Ryan W wrote:
>One more thing: they still haven't put any plays in for Ray or 
>Paul.  Also, according to the Globe, Doc had them running the same 
>play over and over for the entire 1st quarter yesterday.  Really 
>hard for the point guard to get going when there are no plays in for 
>the team's best 2 scorers...
>
>There's nothing to worry about with Rajon.  If anything, the fact 
>that he's laying low is a GOOD THING in the sense that he's not 
>going to go after individual statistics to increase his free agent 
>value--nope, he's going to do what's best for the team, even if it 
>might cost him money in his next contract.

Yeah, but he's shown a tendency to do this since he's been here, 
which is one of the things Danny was undoubtedly referring to when 
saying he wasn't a max player yet and which was part of the debate 
about whether he's an allstar despite how good he is when he's on.

He's had a tendency all along to all too clearly take games off and 
slide / be unengaged at times, particularly when he seems to feel 
it's "OK" because it's a weak opponent or otherwise "meaningless 
game". Not all the time but definitely not a one time anomaly. Am I 
worried about it? Not particularly, although I'd rather see signs 
he'd gotten over it or at least wasn't so obvious about doing 
it.  But neither can I see it as praiseworthy. It's part of a 
disappointing pattern, not a matter of doing best for the team (who 
are best served as they coalesce in the preseason by his playing 
well) vs contract concerns.
Kim


From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Tue Oct 13 00:59:33 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 17:59:33 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Hudson vs. House
In-Reply-To: <3f0c87180910121552t4106b947i37cba2c11df18315@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <854282.69905.qm@web65608.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

--- On Mon, 10/12/09, Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com> wrote:
> No, simple fact remains: Ediie plays
> the backup point. Nuf said. Anything
> else is pretty much irrelevant.

What's irrelevant is attempting to engage you in a meaningful conversation, especially on a topic as unknowable as this one (due to the fact that Lester is at the beginning of his career and the sample size is SO SMALL)...but I will continue for the rest of the list's sake--your type of nonsense will not stand, especially on the topic of Eddie House and the point guard position. 

> 
> "Unlike House, Hudson has a complete game.? You don't
> go out and get the
> first quadruple-double in NCAA history by being a 'volume
> shooter' who has a
> 'total lack of vision.'? His line that night?? 25
> points, 12 rebounds, 10
> assists and 10 steals."
> 
> Surprisingly any NCAA stat line rarely translates into the
> actual NBA level
> game. 

Yeah--I brought up the record-setting performance not to show that Hudson was going to make the All-Star game, but to show that your dismissal of Hudson's game after 3 outings is short-sighted and ill-founded.  No reasonable person makes up their mind after watching one game (or seeing one play).  Hudson's record-setting performance is germane to a discussion about his all-around basketball ability.


> There are stats - and there is THE GAME. If you can
> break down his
> GAME to show that he can play - fine, go ahead and try it.

That's exactly what I've been doing, if you'd trouble yourself to read what I write.  I've mentioned exactly one stat in this entire conversation, and did that only to show that you ought to see a bit more of Hudson's game before you pass judgment on his ability.  Anyway, here it is again, a breakdown of his GAME.  Take note.

Hudson's strengths:

1. Defense/athleticism: on several occasions, Lester has used his great athleticism and long arms to gather steals, cut off his man on the way to the rim, or dive to save a ball and start a fast break.  Just watching him will tell you he's a good athlete with a well-defined muscularity.  He has plenty of natural athletic ability which he'll need to succeed in the NBA.
2. Shot-making ability--so far, in three games, Hudson has made a stand-still jumper from 3, hit a mid-range jumper after dribbling around a defender and finding a hole in the defense, and driven to the rim and used his body to protect the ball and score.  These moves which I watched with my own two little eyes are indicative of Lester's ability to score in many different ways.  
3. He's feisty.  Rookies often shrink in the spotlight and act is if they don't belong.  Lester's not this way--he has a natural confidence and sticks his nose into the game, not backing down to anyone or any situation.  He doesn't play scared unlike other young players we've had, such as Gabe Pruitt. He has an inner confidence, which I can see by watching him on the court and looking at his body language--his head is up, and he doesn't get down on himself when something doesn't go right for him.
4. His handle: Lester can get where he wants to get to on the court and he can use his dribble to do it.  I've seen it.  It remains to be seen whether he can take his dribbling ability and apply it to the point guard spot.  As of now, he can use it to score with--but can he use it to set the offense too?

There, I've broken down his GAME.  I'm sure that very persuasive to you simply because I saw it.  

> But when I see a
> player being pressed at the half court just to over-dribble
> to the degree
> of shaving 20sec off the clock just to get to the 3pt line
> - yet just for
> jerking off a rainbow over taller defender - this is as far
> from the basic
> understanding that there are 4 more players around on teh
> floor at the same
> time as it gets.

Ignoring the colorful metaphor of "jerking off a rainbow" (which is hilarious), all you've done is taken one play and extrapolated a conclusion.  Forgive me for thinking that your conclusion is short-sighted--your sample size is SO small that it's ridiculous to take any meaningful conclusion from it.  As such, I'm inclined to reject your opinion and question your intelligence. I'm mean, how many times has Eddie House struggled to get the ball over half court only to 'jerk off a rainbow' without passing it to anyone?  But you're not so easy to bury him, are you?  Could it be because his sample size is bigger?  Me thinks so.

See, you see that play and think "Hudson doesn't have it."  I see that play and think, "Hudson's struggling in his conversion to point guard and also struggling with the speed of the game."  Why do I think that way?  Not because I can see the future, but because I've taken the totality of situation into consideration--things like Hudson's performance in college (including the quadruple-double), his personal history, his role as scorer in college, the difficulties of changing positions at the pro level, especially converting to point guard, and the difficulties of most players when they transition from college to the pros, especially when those players come from small schools.  What have you taken into consideration?  Nothing, it seems, except a mere 20 seconds.  That's just bad science, man.  It's not persuasive.  It's an unsupported opinion--not the iron clad argument you assume it to be.

> 
> The fact that Doc pulls him off the court after a coupe of
> this ill-advised
> "quadruple-doubles" speaks volumes. 

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that didn't happen.  

> What you really cannot
> get is what
> Eddie's true value is: he KNOWS HIS ROLE ON THIS TEAM.
> And
> will never screw
> things up simply because he knows what is asked of him:
> spot up shooting and
> bring the ball up the court. 

He *can't* bring the ball up the court very well--which is why Paul Pierce, Ray Allen, Rajon Rondo, Tony Allen, Gabe Pruitt, Sam Cassell, Stephan Marbury, Marquis Daniels, and, yes, even Lester Hudson have all been on the court with Eddie House all for the express reason of BRINGING THE BALL UP THE COURT.  Why?  Because House isn't good at it and it's NOT HIS ROLE.

> Simple things that actually
> never show up in
> the stat line.

Yeah, you and the stat line, what a tired refrain that has become.  You want to know why stats are brought up in the first place?  It's because one's impression of the game is quite subjective...so subjective that you can denigrate Hudson for some of the same shortcomings that you've come to ignore in House without even realizing it.  That's where stats come in--they attempt to objectify the game so as to help one analyze it.  They are not the end-all be-all, since they too can be tweaked and misused to effect a desired conclusion--but they are a good jumping off point for a reasonable discussion.  In the least, they shouldn't be ignored out of hand...

But whatever the case, it seems that you want to throw out any stat which doesn't jive with your perception...and that's just foolish and completely ignores the fact that your perceptions aren't foolproof, just like mine or anyone else's.

Regardless of your disdain for stats, the nature of our disagreement is centered on our subjective perceptions of Hudson's game.  So, would you please drop the 'stats don't mean anything' refrain?  They don't apply to the discussion we're having...though ideally they would play a role since they could be used to settle what amounts to a difference of subjective opinion.

> 
> I think I've got enough of typing on it though... So long..
> Until you'll be
> able to come up with something better than just ranting..
> 
> AG

And what are you coming up with, exactly?  You're completely overestimated the strength of your argument--and believe me I hesitate to even label as 'argument' something which amounts to one 20 second impression and conclusion.  All you'll even said is that you saw one play and from that one play are certain that Hudson will be out of the league by next season.  I'm not quite convinced by that 'argument.'

See, we're having a subjective disagreement.  I'm saying Hudson can dribble, you're saying he can't.  I'm saying House can't dribble, you're saying he can.  You're saying you saw Hudson do one thing bad over one 20 second period and that therefore he you've determined he can't play.  I'm saying whoa that doesn't seem very reasonable...

How does this discussion reach a conclusion?  Well, we'll probably have to wait for more results to come in.  Only three games in, it's a little early, at least from my perspective, to say the guy can't play.  In fact, I think there's a lot to be encouraged by, especially if Lester keeps learning and getting better, things which most rookies seem to be able to accomplish throughout the season.  I think the raw materials are there, and it's just a matter of developing those skills on the pro level.  I'd be happy to take this discussion up again in 20 games, provided you, Alex, are ready to admit that perhaps your 20 seconds of evaluation were not enough to be certain?  Are you ready to admit that, Alex?  Further, should our perceptions continue to be at odds, would you also allow for the use of some objective information, like statistics, that might help us get beyond on our own personal biases?  

Ryan




      


From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Tue Oct 13 01:40:27 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 18:40:27 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Speaking of point guards...
In-Reply-To: <0KRF006K8DOFWBHA@vms173019.mailsrvcs.net>
Message-ID: <911592.14478.qm@web65612.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

Good point, Kim, part of Rondo's problem is taking too many nights off, or simply floating out there and not putting his stamp on the game.  His game in the preseason so far could be seen as falling into those same habits...

But I think it's illustrative to remember that Rondo's ideal play exists between too poles--too disengaged on the one hand, and too far outside the team concept on the other.  The problem is, the things that make Rondo engaged are often the things that get him outside of the team concept, things like gambling for steals, going for the homerun pass, and the like.  He has a certain flair to his game--flair which causes him to break from the team concept from time to time.  Part of the maturity process for Rondo is finding the right balance between flair and team-first play, learning to focus his flair in ways that don't leave to rest of the team out to dry.  I think he's trying to find that balance, which explains his long periods of simply 'running the offense' and those bursts when he does some Rondo things...

So, early in the year (especially in the preseason), I think it's probably better in the long run for Rondo to tend towards being disengaged, but also playing within the team concept, because such play will help the entire team get on the same page faster.  If it went to the other extreme, where Rondo was engaged and playing outside of the team concept (perhaps for the benefit of increasing his worth in contract negotiations), then it might be counterproductive to the development of the team.  That's where I was coming from when I said it was a GOOD THING.  It's GOOD relative the alternatives and relative the development of the team.  It won't be good if it persists into the regular season...

So, until he's playing disengaged when the games count and the team has presumably 'come together' and is all on the same page, I'm not too worried in general.  

Ryan

--- On Mon, 10/12/09, Kim Malo <kmalo17 at verizon.net> wrote:

> From: Kim Malo <kmalo17 at verizon.net>
> Subject: Re: Speaking of point guards...
> To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" <celtics at igtc.com>, "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" <celtics at igtc.com>
> Date: Monday, October 12, 2009, 6:38 PM
> At 12:57 PM 10/12/2009, Ryan W
> wrote:
> > One more thing: they still haven't put any plays in
> for Ray or Paul.? Also, according to the Globe, Doc had
> them running the same play over and over for the entire 1st
> quarter yesterday.? Really hard for the point guard to
> get going when there are no plays in for the team's best 2
> scorers...
> > 
> > There's nothing to worry about with Rajon.? If
> anything, the fact that he's laying low is a GOOD THING in
> the sense that he's not going to go after individual
> statistics to increase his free agent value--nope, he's
> going to do what's best for the team, even if it might cost
> him money in his next contract.
> 
> Yeah, but he's shown a tendency to do this since he's been
> here, which is one of the things Danny was undoubtedly
> referring to when saying he wasn't a max player yet and
> which was part of the debate about whether he's an allstar
> despite how good he is when he's on.
> 
> He's had a tendency all along to all too clearly take games
> off and slide / be unengaged at times, particularly when he
> seems to feel it's "OK" because it's a weak opponent or
> otherwise "meaningless game". Not all the time but
> definitely not a one time anomaly. Am I worried about it?
> Not particularly, although I'd rather see signs he'd gotten
> over it or at least wasn't so obvious about doing it.?
> But neither can I see it as praiseworthy. It's part of a
> disappointing pattern, not a matter of doing best for the
> team (who are best served as they coalesce in the preseason
> by his playing well) vs contract concerns.
> Kim
> 
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics
> 


      


From Eric at ericalbert.net  Tue Oct 13 02:21:57 2009
From: Eric at ericalbert.net (Eric Albert)
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 22:21:57 -0400
Subject: Hudson vs. House
Message-ID: <20091013022216.DD60BE1C043@ignite.igtc.com>


>Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>No, simple fact remains: Ediie plays the backup point. Nuf said. Anything
>else is pretty much irrelevant.

I just don't understand what you're saying here.

Are you saying Eddie *does* sometimes play the backup point? Well, yes -- he plays it terribly.

Are you saying Eddie *should* play the backup point? If so, why? I can't think of any reason for this, short of all the point guards in the NBA suddenly dropping dead.

I'm an Eddie House fan, and think he has a place on this team. That place is spotting up for threes, so a real point guard can pass him the ball.

-- Eric


From alex.goldblatt at gmail.com  Tue Oct 13 03:02:54 2009
From: alex.goldblatt at gmail.com (Alex Goldblatt)
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 23:02:54 -0400
Subject: Hudson vs. House
In-Reply-To: <20091013022216.DD60BE1C043@ignite.igtc.com>
References: <20091013022216.DD60BE1C043@ignite.igtc.com>
Message-ID: <3f0c87180910122002x7981fe2o89762c99a00f0d8@mail.gmail.com>

Ryan, GAME - not some potential strength nobody ever seen... Give me the
game situation breakdown instead of imaginary qualities.

I gave you specific case showing what he is about as a player. I've been
playing this game for too long to mistakenly consider him for being anything
more than he is right now. You have any proof supporting your opinion?
Bring it on - just not some meaningless stats or something out of the wet
dreams...

==================================

Sorry Eric: this one belongs to one of the old conversations we had the
other day with Ryan (and not just him) insisting that House will not play
the 1 and that we will bring another point or will see another Starbury crap
in Green while Eddie will be at the 2 (obviously miserably failed concept).

Difference between the position and ball distribution duties is rather big,
as you know. 'Fatoine played the point forward - does not mean that we had
nobody playing the point on the floor. Different question is what your
actual responsibilities playing the 1 are, and you're right: spot-up
shooting and bringing the ball up the floor against the press is pretty much
what he has to do to make a solid backup point spreading the floor for the
slashers/low post bangers.

AG

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:21 PM, Eric Albert <Eric at ericalbert.net> wrote:

>
> >Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >No, simple fact remains: Ediie plays the backup point. Nuf said. Anything
> >else is pretty much irrelevant.
>
> I just don't understand what you're saying here.
>
> Are you saying Eddie *does* sometimes play the backup point? Well, yes --
> he plays it terribly.
>
> Are you saying Eddie *should* play the backup point? If so, why? I can't
> think of any reason for this, short of all the point guards in the NBA
> suddenly dropping dead.
>
> I'm an Eddie House fan, and think he has a place on this team. That place
> is spotting up for threes, so a real point guard can pass him the ball.
>
> -- Eric
>
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics
>

From jlyell at verizon.net  Tue Oct 13 03:24:17 2009
From: jlyell at verizon.net (John Lyell)
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 20:24:17 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Hudson vs. House
In-Reply-To: <3f0c87180910122002x7981fe2o89762c99a00f0d8@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20091013022216.DD60BE1C043@ignite.igtc.com>
	<3f0c87180910122002x7981fe2o89762c99a00f0d8@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <595461.57520.qm@web84005.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Eddie's stength is at the 2 getting open on the perimeter




________________________________
From: Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com>
To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List <celtics at igtc.com>
Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 8:02:54 PM
Subject: Re: Hudson vs. House

Ryan, GAME - not some potential strength nobody ever seen... Give me the
game situation breakdown instead of imaginary qualities.

I gave you specific case showing what he is about as a player. I've been
playing this game for too long to mistakenly consider him for being anything
more than he is right now. You have any proof supporting your opinion?
Bring it on - just not some meaningless stats or something out of the wet
dreams...

==================================

Sorry Eric: this one belongs to one of the old conversations we had the
other day with Ryan (and not just him) insisting that House will not play
the 1 and that we will bring another point or will see another Starbury crap
in Green while Eddie will be at the 2 (obviously miserably failed concept).

Difference between the position and ball distribution duties is rather big,
as you know. 'Fatoine played the point forward - does not mean that we had
nobody playing the point on the floor. Different question is what your
actual responsibilities playing the 1 are, and you're right: spot-up
shooting and bringing the ball up the floor against the press is pretty much
what he has to do to make a solid backup point spreading the floor for the
slashers/low post bangers.

AG

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:21 PM, Eric Albert <Eric at ericalbert.net> wrote:

>
> >Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >No, simple fact remains: Ediie plays the backup point. Nuf said. Anything
> >else is pretty much irrelevant.
>
> I just don't understand what you're saying here.
>
> Are you saying Eddie *does* sometimes play the backup point? Well, yes --
> he plays it terribly.
>
> Are you saying Eddie *should* play the backup point? If so, why? I can't
> think of any reason for this, short of all the point guards in the NBA
> suddenly dropping dead.
>
> I'm an Eddie House fan, and think he has a place on this team. That place
> is spotting up for threes, so a real point guard can pass him the ball.
>
> -- Eric
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

From Eric at ericalbert.net  Tue Oct 13 03:34:59 2009
From: Eric at ericalbert.net (Eric Albert)
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 23:34:59 -0400
Subject: Hudson vs. House
Message-ID: <20091013033517.65C18E1C043@ignite.igtc.com>


>Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>Different question is what your
>actual responsibilities playing the 1 are, and you're right: spot-up
>shooting and bringing the ball up the floor against the press is pretty much
>what he has to do to make a solid backup point spreading the floor for the
>slashers/low post bangers.

Eddie cannot bring the ball up against the press. He has never been able to do this.

Is there anyone else on this list who agrees with Alex that Eddie is in any way a point guard (other than being short)?

-- Eric


From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Tue Oct 13 04:21:47 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 21:21:47 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Hudson vs. House
In-Reply-To: <3f0c87180910122002x7981fe2o89762c99a00f0d8@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <554291.17905.qm@web65606.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

--- On Mon, 10/12/09, Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com> wrote:
> Ryan, GAME - not some potential
> strength nobody ever seen... Give me the
> game situation breakdown instead of imaginary qualities.

Listen, I just spelled out what I saw--it happened in a game and then I 'broke it down.' Hudson hit a three; Hudson dribbled around a defender and hit a mid range jumper; Hudson made a steal in transition; Hudson dived and saved a ball from going out of bounce, starting a fast break; Hudson drove in traffic and dished it to a big man for a 3 point play--and from those plays I've come to the conclusion that Hudson can score in a variety of ways, can dribble relatively well, can play good defense (for a rookie), has good athleticism, and is a good prospect for the backup point guard position. How much more precise must I be?  

You, on the other hand, hastily described one play that may or may not have happened, and then drew some pretty far-ranging conclusions and then smugly determined that the matter was settled.  How is that a game situation breakdown?  That's one play, from which you concluded what could easily be considered 'imaginary qualities.'  There's strength in numbers--not strength in stats, but strength in the number of times something happens.  If it only happens once, jeez, it doesn't mean that much.  Can't you see that?

Obviously, you didn't understand my larger point: that given the small sample size, we're both arguing with limited evidence and until more evidence comes in the conversation must be delayed; that is, assuming you'll grant me the fact that perhaps more information might be helpful in determining Hudson's ability as an NBA player, and more useful in determining anything of note.  Will you grant me that?  Or are you confident that one 20 second stretch in the first game of someone's career is all you need to determine an NBA player?  Are you some kind of basketball Creskin?

> 
> I gave you specific case showing what he is about as a
> player. 

Assuming you did, how are you so certain that a 20 second play in a meaningless game is indicative of anything?  You do realize that it's best to get a decent amount of information before coming to a conclusion?  From your reasoning, I keep getting the vibe that you think one viewing is enough--that just seems insane.  That's like seeing the opening montage of a movie and arguing it deserves an Academy Award.

> I've been
> playing this game for too long to mistakenly consider him
> for being anything more than he is right now. 

Yeah, but have you been playing this game long even to consider that perhaps what he is now can't be determined except over the course of say maybe 20 games when we see him in a wide range of game situations against many different opponents and schemes?  Or do you completely discount the effect experience and confidence and time and place have in someone's play?

> You have any proof supporting
> your opinion?

What is proof to you?  I've spent thousands of words trying to give you proof--recounting plays and why such plays led me to such conclusions.  I admit the sample is small--but things like his college career, and his college position, plus his relative newness to the NBA are all relevant factors to consider when determining Hudson's ultimate ability and all count as proof.  Stats are proof too, at least to most people.

> Bring it on - just not some meaningless stats or something
> out of the wet
> dreams...

What again are you bringing, again?  I mean, break something down for me--don't half-assedly recount one play and say that settles it.  That's supremely weak.

> 
> Sorry Eric: this one belongs to one of the old
> conversations we had the
> other day with Ryan (and not just him) insisting that House
> will not play
> the 1 and that we will bring another point or will see
> another Starbury crap
> in Green while Eddie will be at the 2 (obviously miserably
> failed concept).


Obviously failed concept?  You realize that Doc just said the same thing the other day?  And that he basically endorsed this so-called 'failed concept,' not to mention the fact that pretty much everyone except you agrees that not only is Eddie better at the 2 than the 1, he's also been playing a majority of his time at the 2 for the last 2 seasons, including last season with Marbury.  I could show the 82games.com stats which track his game time at each position, but we all know what you think of stats.  


Ryan


      


From noah.evans at gmail.com  Tue Oct 13 08:10:41 2009
From: noah.evans at gmail.com (Noah Evans)
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 10:10:41 +0200
Subject: Hudson vs. House
In-Reply-To: <20091013033517.65C18E1C043@ignite.igtc.com>
References: <20091013033517.65C18E1C043@ignite.igtc.com>
Message-ID: <56a297000910130110oaffe8d4hee378df1cf6fa1c0@mail.gmail.com>

That's why I really wished we could have gotten Grant Hill. With Hill
handling the ball and distributing, Eddie, Scabs and gang could go hog
wild. As it stands our best ball handler in the second unit is
Daniels(is this true?) which forces Eddie to do what he's not good at.

On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 5:34 AM, Eric Albert <Eric at ericalbert.net> wrote:
>
>>Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>Different question is what your
>>actual responsibilities playing the 1 are, and you're right: spot-up
>>shooting and bringing the ball up the floor against the press is pretty much
>>what he has to do to make a solid backup point spreading the floor for the
>>slashers/low post bangers.
>
> Eddie cannot bring the ball up against the press. He has never been able to do this.
>
> Is there anyone else on this list who agrees with Alex that Eddie is in any way a point guard (other than being short)?
>
> -- Eric
>
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics
>


From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Tue Oct 13 14:41:33 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 07:41:33 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Hudson vs. House
In-Reply-To: <56a297000910130110oaffe8d4hee378df1cf6fa1c0@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <81413.57477.qm@web65610.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

Noah, what do you think of Daniels then?  To me, he's filled in just as well as Hill would have...plus he's younger and arguably a better scorer and defender.

Ryan

--- On Tue, 10/13/09, Noah Evans <noah.evans at gmail.com> wrote:

> From: Noah Evans <noah.evans at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Hudson vs. House
> To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" <celtics at igtc.com>
> Date: Tuesday, October 13, 2009, 3:10 AM
> That's why I really wished we could
> have gotten Grant Hill. With Hill
> handling the ball and distributing, Eddie, Scabs and gang
> could go hog
> wild. As it stands our best ball handler in the second unit
> is
> Daniels(is this true?) which forces Eddie to do what he's
> not good at.
> 
> On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 5:34 AM, Eric Albert <Eric at ericalbert.net>
> wrote:
> >
> >>Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>Different question is what your
> >>actual responsibilities playing the 1 are, and
> you're right: spot-up
> >>shooting and bringing the ball up the floor against
> the press is pretty much
> >>what he has to do to make a solid backup point
> spreading the floor for the
> >>slashers/low post bangers.
> >
> > Eddie cannot bring the ball up against the press. He
> has never been able to do this.
> >
> > Is there anyone else on this list who agrees with Alex
> that Eddie is in any way a point guard (other than being
> short)?
> >
> > -- Eric
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> 


      


From HRBlaine at aol.com  Tue Oct 13 15:19:26 2009
From: HRBlaine at aol.com (HRBlaine at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 11:19:26 EDT
Subject: Idle thoughts after attending a Garden Party 
Message-ID: <c86.5d0ad232.3805f47e@aol.com>

You didn't finish your sentence Kim.  I think you mean "Talk  basketball 
for idiots."  I'd rather talk trades than have you explain (once  again and to 
someone who *should* know better) why MD *AIN'T* a  freakin PG.  "NICE TO 
HAVE HEIGHT," damn Kim, I can't believe you  dignified THAT with a response, 
even a funny put down.  Actually, I'd  rather have Veal at the point than 
Perk.  Even tho he's the shorter of the  two.  I guess that makes us both 
fools, responding to another.  I  can't believe either of us be that crazy.  
Please Kim, who're the Cs  going to trade to get a backup PG since you say that 
Dan's latest second round  gem ain't ready and Pruitt's gone, christ knows 
where?  That's a much more  interesting subject IMNSHO, since most of us 
already know that MD ain't a PG  even if he did play it for 5 minutes once 
DURING AN ATOMIC  ATTACK before coming to Boston.  And as for "likes little 
kids."  hopefully most men who do are in jail.  ("Prison" sounds too nice.)   
(Obligatory reference to the least noble Roman of them all, at  least 
partially deleted; hey, at least he did a girl.  In France,  he would have got a 
medal.)  If I seem to be in a bad mood, I am, as I've  had to sign on multiple 
times  because my freakin air card keeps fing up  and breaking my net 
connection.   
 
 
In a message dated 10/12/2009 5:57:00 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, Kim  
writes:

Thanks.  Nice to talk basketball not trades again ;  )



From HRBlaine at aol.com  Tue Oct 13 15:36:11 2009
From: HRBlaine at aol.com (HRBlaine at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 11:36:11 EDT
Subject: Idle thoughts after attending a Garden Party 
Message-ID: <cd9.5d3f605f.3805f86b@aol.com>

Which is,  apparently,  why there are so many nude pictures of  women on 
the internet.  Nice to know that you're probably not  alone in your hatred.  
I'll make a deal with you Kim, you stop  responding to the MD lovers and I'll 
quit responding to you.  Of course,  since y'all give me so many straight 
lines....
 
 
In a message dated 10/12/2009 5:57:00 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, Kim  
writes:

Me, I  just hate shopping of any kind, which is what trade talk basically  
is.



From noah.evans at gmail.com  Tue Oct 13 15:53:27 2009
From: noah.evans at gmail.com (Noah Evans)
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 17:53:27 +0200
Subject: Hudson vs. House
In-Reply-To: <81413.57477.qm@web65610.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
References: <56a297000910130110oaffe8d4hee378df1cf6fa1c0@mail.gmail.com>
	<81413.57477.qm@web65610.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <56a297000910130853w5dd6ee0cubcd3ec84ac70d16c@mail.gmail.com>

"And while I can see why they think Daniels can bring the ball up,
"can bring the ball up" isn't really the same as playing the point and
I'd rather his minutes went at the Ray / Paul backup slot" -- Kim

On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 4:41 PM, Ryan W <ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Noah, what do you think of Daniels then? ?To me, he's filled in just as well as Hill would have...plus he's younger and arguably a better scorer and defender.
>
> Ryan
>
> --- On Tue, 10/13/09, Noah Evans <noah.evans at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> From: Noah Evans <noah.evans at gmail.com>
>> Subject: Re: Hudson vs. House
>> To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" <celtics at igtc.com>
>> Date: Tuesday, October 13, 2009, 3:10 AM
>> That's why I really wished we could
>> have gotten Grant Hill. With Hill
>> handling the ball and distributing, Eddie, Scabs and gang
>> could go hog
>> wild. As it stands our best ball handler in the second unit
>> is
>> Daniels(is this true?) which forces Eddie to do what he's
>> not good at.
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 5:34 AM, Eric Albert <Eric at ericalbert.net>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >>Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>Different question is what your
>> >>actual responsibilities playing the 1 are, and
>> you're right: spot-up
>> >>shooting and bringing the ball up the floor against
>> the press is pretty much
>> >>what he has to do to make a solid backup point
>> spreading the floor for the
>> >>slashers/low post bangers.
>> >
>> > Eddie cannot bring the ball up against the press. He
>> has never been able to do this.
>> >
>> > Is there anyone else on this list who agrees with Alex
>> that Eddie is in any way a point guard (other than being
>> short)?
>> >
>> > -- Eric
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > 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
>


From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Tue Oct 13 15:59:15 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 08:59:15 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Idle thoughts after attending a Garden Party
In-Reply-To: <c86.5d0ad232.3805f47e@aol.com>
Message-ID: <831632.91912.qm@web65602.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

MD has played point guard for 3 NBA teams, for his college team, and for his high school team.  Why again *AIN'T* he a point guard?  Explain it clearly for those of us who see someone doing something and assume he can in fact do it...

Ryan

--- On Tue, 10/13/09, HRBlaine at aol.com <HRBlaine at aol.com> wrote:

> From: HRBlaine at aol.com <HRBlaine at aol.com>
> Subject: Re: Idle thoughts after attending a Garden Party
> To: celtics at igtc.com
> Date: Tuesday, October 13, 2009, 10:19 AM
> You didn't finish your sentence
> Kim.? I think you mean "Talk? basketball 
> for idiots."? I'd rather talk trades than have you
> explain (once? again and to 
> someone who *should* know better) why MD *AIN'T* a?
> freakin PG.? "NICE TO 
> HAVE HEIGHT," damn Kim, I can't believe you? dignified
> THAT with a response, 
> even a funny put down.? Actually, I'd? rather
> have Veal at the point than 
> Perk.? Even tho he's the shorter of the?
> two.? I guess that makes us both 
> fools, responding to another.? I? can't believe
> either of us be that crazy.? 
> Please Kim, who're the Cs? going to trade to get a
> backup PG since you say that 
> Dan's latest second round? gem ain't ready and
> Pruitt's gone, christ knows 
> where?? That's a much more? interesting subject
> IMNSHO, since most of us 
> already know that MD ain't a PG? even if he did play
> it for 5 minutes once 
> DURING AN ATOMIC? ATTACK before coming to
> Boston.? And as for "likes little 
> kids."? hopefully most men who do are in jail.?
> ("Prison" sounds too nice.)???
> (Obligatory reference to the least noble Roman of them all,
> at? least 
> partially deleted; hey, at least he did a girl.? In
> France,? he would have got a 
> medal.)? If I seem to be in a bad mood, I am, as
> I've? had to sign on multiple 
> times? because my freakin air card keeps fing up?
> and breaking my net 
> connection.???
>  
>  
> In a message dated 10/12/2009 5:57:00 P.M. Eastern Daylight
> Time, Kim? 
> writes:
> 
> Thanks.? Nice to talk basketball not trades again
> ;? )
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics
> 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil  Tue Oct 13 15:59:41 2009
From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil)
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 11:59:41 -0400
Subject: Hudson vs. House
In-Reply-To: <56a297000910130853w5dd6ee0cubcd3ec84ac70d16c@mail.gmail.com>
References: <56a297000910130110oaffe8d4hee378df1cf6fa1c0@mail.gmail.com>
	<81413.57477.qm@web65610.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
	<56a297000910130853w5dd6ee0cubcd3ec84ac70d16c@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <200910131559.n9DFxi30029462@apollo.afrc.af.mil>

I hate to be the master of the obvious, but:

If Daniels, Scal and House are out there together (with any combo of Sheed, Baby, Perk or Williams), as has been the case a lot this preseason, then they are in fact allowing Pierce and Allen rest regardless of who of that triumvirate does what role on the floor.


-----Original Message-----
From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Noah Evans
Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 11:53 AM
To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List
Subject: Re: Hudson vs. House

"And while I can see why they think Daniels can bring the ball up,
"can bring the ball up" isn't really the same as playing the point and
I'd rather his minutes went at the Ray / Paul backup slot" -- Kim

On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 4:41 PM, Ryan W <ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Noah, what do you think of Daniels then? ?To me, he's filled in just as well as Hill would have...plus he's younger and arguably a better scorer and defender.
>
> Ryan
>
> --- On Tue, 10/13/09, Noah Evans <noah.evans at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> From: Noah Evans <noah.evans at gmail.com>
>> Subject: Re: Hudson vs. House
>> To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" <celtics at igtc.com>
>> Date: Tuesday, October 13, 2009, 3:10 AM
>> That's why I really wished we could
>> have gotten Grant Hill. With Hill
>> handling the ball and distributing, Eddie, Scabs and gang
>> could go hog
>> wild. As it stands our best ball handler in the second unit
>> is
>> Daniels(is this true?) which forces Eddie to do what he's
>> not good at.
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 5:34 AM, Eric Albert <Eric at ericalbert.net>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >>Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>Different question is what your
>> >>actual responsibilities playing the 1 are, and
>> you're right: spot-up
>> >>shooting and bringing the ball up the floor against
>> the press is pretty much
>> >>what he has to do to make a solid backup point
>> spreading the floor for the
>> >>slashers/low post bangers.
>> >
>> > Eddie cannot bring the ball up against the press. He
>> has never been able to do this.
>> >
>> > Is there anyone else on this list who agrees with Alex
>> that Eddie is in any way a point guard (other than being
>> short)?
>> >
>> > -- Eric
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > 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


From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Tue Oct 13 16:04:39 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 09:04:39 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Hudson vs. House
In-Reply-To: <56a297000910130853w5dd6ee0cubcd3ec84ac70d16c@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <408787.90754.qm@web65608.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

So, then, you seem to think that Hill could do more than bring the ball up?  

Okay, well, I just don't see that.  Hill's smoother from an aesthetic standpoint, but he's no more a pure point than Daniels is...  I mean, Kim could have written that same sentence in reference to Hill, right?

I also think Kim may have been a little hard on Daniels.  He *can* do more than bring up the ball--he has *some* point guard instincts.

Ryan

--- On Tue, 10/13/09, Noah Evans <noah.evans at gmail.com> wrote:

> From: Noah Evans <noah.evans at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Hudson vs. House
> To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" <celtics at igtc.com>
> Date: Tuesday, October 13, 2009, 10:53 AM
> "And while I can see why they think
> Daniels can bring the ball up,
> "can bring the ball up" isn't really the same as playing
> the point and
> I'd rather his minutes went at the Ray / Paul backup slot"
> -- Kim
> 
> On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 4:41 PM, Ryan W <ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> > Noah, what do you think of Daniels then? ?To me, he's
> filled in just as well as Hill would have...plus he's
> younger and arguably a better scorer and defender.
> >
> > Ryan
> >
> > --- On Tue, 10/13/09, Noah Evans <noah.evans at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> From: Noah Evans <noah.evans at gmail.com>
> >> Subject: Re: Hudson vs. House
> >> To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" <celtics at igtc.com>
> >> Date: Tuesday, October 13, 2009, 3:10 AM
> >> That's why I really wished we could
> >> have gotten Grant Hill. With Hill
> >> handling the ball and distributing, Eddie, Scabs
> and gang
> >> could go hog
> >> wild. As it stands our best ball handler in the
> second unit
> >> is
> >> Daniels(is this true?) which forces Eddie to do
> what he's
> >> not good at.
> >>
> >> On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 5:34 AM, Eric Albert
> <Eric at ericalbert.net>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>Different question is what your
> >> >>actual responsibilities playing the 1 are,
> and
> >> you're right: spot-up
> >> >>shooting and bringing the ball up the
> floor against
> >> the press is pretty much
> >> >>what he has to do to make a solid backup
> point
> >> spreading the floor for the
> >> >>slashers/low post bangers.
> >> >
> >> > Eddie cannot bring the ball up against the
> press. He
> >> has never been able to do this.
> >> >
> >> > Is there anyone else on this list who agrees
> with Alex
> >> that Eddie is in any way a point guard (other than
> being
> >> short)?
> >> >
> >> > -- Eric
> >> >
> >> >
> _______________________________________________
> >> > 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
> 


      


From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Tue Oct 13 16:06:45 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 09:06:45 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Hudson vs. House
In-Reply-To: <200910131559.n9DFxi30029462@apollo.afrc.af.mil>
Message-ID: <319987.28281.qm@web65612.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

We'll see how much of that is preseason and how much of that is Doc's plan once the regular season rolls around.  But you're right: regardless of who does what, Paul/Ray are getting the rest they need so far...whether it be Scal, or TA, or Hudson out there as 10th man.

Ryan

--- On Tue, 10/13/09, 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: Hudson vs. House
> To: celtics at igtc.com
> Date: Tuesday, October 13, 2009, 10:59 AM
> I hate to be the master of the
> obvious, but:
> 
> If Daniels, Scal and House are out there together (with any
> combo of Sheed, Baby, Perk or Williams), as has been the
> case a lot this preseason, then they are in fact allowing
> Pierce and Allen rest regardless of who of that triumvirate
> does what role on the floor.
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com
> [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com]
> On Behalf Of Noah Evans
> Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 11:53 AM
> To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> Subject: Re: Hudson vs. House
> 
> "And while I can see why they think Daniels can bring the
> ball up,
> "can bring the ball up" isn't really the same as playing
> the point and
> I'd rather his minutes went at the Ray / Paul backup slot"
> -- Kim
> 
> On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 4:41 PM, Ryan W <ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> > Noah, what do you think of Daniels then? ?To me, he's
> filled in just as well as Hill would have...plus he's
> younger and arguably a better scorer and defender.
> >
> > Ryan
> >
> > --- On Tue, 10/13/09, Noah Evans <noah.evans at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> From: Noah Evans <noah.evans at gmail.com>
> >> Subject: Re: Hudson vs. House
> >> To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" <celtics at igtc.com>
> >> Date: Tuesday, October 13, 2009, 3:10 AM
> >> That's why I really wished we could
> >> have gotten Grant Hill. With Hill
> >> handling the ball and distributing, Eddie, Scabs
> and gang
> >> could go hog
> >> wild. As it stands our best ball handler in the
> second unit
> >> is
> >> Daniels(is this true?) which forces Eddie to do
> what he's
> >> not good at.
> >>
> >> On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 5:34 AM, Eric Albert
> <Eric at ericalbert.net>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>Different question is what your
> >> >>actual responsibilities playing the 1 are,
> and
> >> you're right: spot-up
> >> >>shooting and bringing the ball up the
> floor against
> >> the press is pretty much
> >> >>what he has to do to make a solid backup
> point
> >> spreading the floor for the
> >> >>slashers/low post bangers.
> >> >
> >> > Eddie cannot bring the ball up against the
> press. He
> >> has never been able to do this.
> >> >
> >> > Is there anyone else on this list who agrees
> with Alex
> >> that Eddie is in any way a point guard (other than
> being
> >> short)?
> >> >
> >> > -- Eric
> >> >
> >> >
> _______________________________________________
> >> > 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
> 
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics
> 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From davidp4660 at cox.net  Tue Oct 13 16:50:12 2009
From: davidp4660 at cox.net (davidp4660 at cox.net)
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 12:50:12 -0400
Subject: Idle thoughts after attending a Garden Party
In-Reply-To: <c86.5d0ad232.3805f47e@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20091013125012.BHROT.313734.imail@eastrmwml45>

Pruitt was released two days ago I believe.  Haven't heard if anyone has picked him up since. I thought it was with the Knicks, but that could be wrong.
---- HRBlaine at aol.com wrote: 
> You didn't finish your sentence Kim.  I think you mean "Talk  basketball 
> for idiots."  I'd rather talk trades than have you explain (once  again and to 
> someone who *should* know better) why MD *AIN'T* a  freakin PG.  "NICE TO 
> HAVE HEIGHT," damn Kim, I can't believe you  dignified THAT with a response, 
> even a funny put down.  Actually, I'd  rather have Veal at the point than 
> Perk.  Even tho he's the shorter of the  two.  I guess that makes us both 
> fools, responding to another.  I  can't believe either of us be that crazy.  
> Please Kim, who're the Cs  going to trade to get a backup PG since you say that 
> Dan's latest second round  gem ain't ready and Pruitt's gone, christ knows 
> where?  That's a much more  interesting subject IMNSHO, since most of us 
> already know that MD ain't a PG  even if he did play it for 5 minutes once 
> DURING AN ATOMIC  ATTACK before coming to Boston.  And as for "likes little 
> kids."  hopefully most men who do are in jail.  ("Prison" sounds too nice.)   
> (Obligatory reference to the least noble Roman of them all, at  least 
> partially deleted; hey, at least he did a girl.  In France,  he would have got a 
> medal.)  If I seem to be in a bad mood, I am, as I've  had to sign on multiple 
> times  because my freakin air card keeps fing up  and breaking my net 
> connection.   
>  
>  
> In a message dated 10/12/2009 5:57:00 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, Kim  
> writes:
> 
> Thanks.  Nice to talk basketball not trades again ;  )
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics


From kmalo17 at verizon.net  Tue Oct 13 16:33:54 2009
From: kmalo17 at verizon.net (Kim Malo)
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 12:33:54 -0400
Subject: Speaking of point guards...
In-Reply-To: <911592.14478.qm@web65612.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
References: <0KRF006K8DOFWBHA@vms173019.mailsrvcs.net>
	<911592.14478.qm@web65612.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <0KRG003BSOONJJS6@vms173019.mailsrvcs.net>

At 09:40 PM 10/12/2009, Ryan W wrote:
>Good point, Kim, part of Rondo's problem is taking too many nights 
>off, or simply floating out there and not putting his stamp on the 
>game.  His game in the preseason so far could be seen as falling 
>into those same habits...
>
>But I think it's illustrative to remember that Rondo's ideal play 
>exists between too poles--too disengaged on the one hand, and too 
>far outside the team concept on the other.  The problem is, the 
>things that make Rondo engaged are often the things that get him 
>outside of the team concept, things like gambling for steals, going 
>for the homerun pass, and the like.

That's not a bad point, and one I can buy.

>He has a certain flair to his game--flair which causes him to break 
>from the team concept from time to time.  Part of the maturity 
>process for Rondo is finding the right balance between flair and 
>team-first play, learning to focus his flair in ways that don't 
>leave to rest of the team out to dry.  I think he's trying to find 
>that balance, which explains his long periods of simply 'running the 
>offense' and those bursts when he does some Rondo things...
>
>So, early in the year (especially in the preseason), I think it's 
>probably better in the long run for Rondo to tend towards being 
>disengaged, but also playing within the team concept, because such 
>play will help the entire team get on the same page faster.

Maybe, but I think you're taking disengaged to mean just not giving 
his all and its general meaning is a bit stronger than that. He 
wasn't playing within the team concept because by definition 
disengaged means you're not part of the team, you're not engaged in 
what they're doing.  There's a middle ground between high flair and 
zombie. And no, his being disengaged won't help the team get on the 
same page faster because they're having to do it without him, a key 
part. Which also means the page they're on won't be the same one as 
they'll be looking at when he is engaged. Can they still come 
together, sure, they're mostly veterans. But no way it's helpful. 
While honestly IMO it's never a good tendency to have as a habit. Bad 
habits are always harder to stop than you think when you establish 
them, and this one is a pattern not a new one, which shows no sign of 
stopping.

>If it went to the other extreme, where Rondo was engaged and playing 
>outside of the team concept (perhaps for the benefit of increasing 
>his worth in contract negotiations), then it might be 
>counterproductive to the development of the team.  That's where I 
>was coming from when I said it was a GOOD THING.  It's GOOD relative 
>the alternatives and relative the development of the team.  It won't 
>be good if it persists into the regular season...
>
>So, until he's playing disengaged when the games count and the team 
>has presumably 'come together' and is all on the same page, I'm not 
>too worried in general.

I'm not all that worried either. Disappointed but not overly worried 
at this point.

Kim  


From kmalo17 at verizon.net  Tue Oct 13 16:50:39 2009
From: kmalo17 at verizon.net (Kim Malo)
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 12:50:39 -0400
Subject: Idle thoughts after attending a Garden Party
In-Reply-To: <c86.5d0ad232.3805f47e@aol.com>
References: <c86.5d0ad232.3805f47e@aol.com>
Message-ID: <0KRG00HWOPGL96V1@vms173015.mailsrvcs.net>

At 11:19 AM 10/13/2009, HRBlaine at aol.com wrote:
>You didn't finish your sentence Kim.  I think you mean "Talk  basketball
>for idiots."  I'd rather talk trades than have you explain 
>(once  again and to
>someone who *should* know better) why MD *AIN'T* a  freakin PG.

I wouldn't ; )

>Please Kim, who're the Cs  going to trade to get a backup PG since 
>you say that
>Dan's latest second round  gem ain't ready and Pruitt's gone, christ knows
>where?

NY, and as I noted, he really isn't a point anyway.
I like what I've seen of Hudson but he's a rookie and it's the 
pre-season. He's not supposed to look ready. The open question is how 
long it takes him to get ready.

>If I seem to be in a bad mood, I am, as I've  had to sign on multiple
>times  because my freakin air card keeps fing up  and breaking my net
>connection.

Ah, Danny's dark influence strikes everywhere ; )
Kim


From kmalo17 at verizon.net  Tue Oct 13 16:51:55 2009
From: kmalo17 at verizon.net (Kim Malo)
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 12:51:55 -0400
Subject: Hudson vs. House
In-Reply-To: <56a297000910130853w5dd6ee0cubcd3ec84ac70d16c@mail.gmail.co m>
References: <56a297000910130110oaffe8d4hee378df1cf6fa1c0@mail.gmail.com>
	<81413.57477.qm@web65610.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
	<56a297000910130853w5dd6ee0cubcd3ec84ac70d16c@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <0KRG001AYPIP2KUE@vms173015.mailsrvcs.net>

I'm honored ; )
Kim

At 11:53 AM 10/13/2009, Noah Evans wrote:
>"And while I can see why they think Daniels can bring the ball up,
>"can bring the ball up" isn't really the same as playing the point and
>I'd rather his minutes went at the Ray / Paul backup slot" -- Kim
>
>On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 4:41 PM, Ryan W <ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Noah, what do you think of Daniels then?  To me, he's filled in 
> just as well as Hill would have...plus he's younger and arguably a 
> better scorer and defender.
> >
> > Ryan
> >
> > --- On Tue, 10/13/09, Noah Evans <noah.evans at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> From: Noah Evans <noah.evans at gmail.com>
> >> Subject: Re: Hudson vs. House
> >> To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" <celtics at igtc.com>
> >> Date: Tuesday, October 13, 2009, 3:10 AM
> >> That's why I really wished we could
> >> have gotten Grant Hill. With Hill
> >> handling the ball and distributing, Eddie, Scabs and gang
> >> could go hog
> >> wild. As it stands our best ball handler in the second unit
> >> is
> >> Daniels(is this true?) which forces Eddie to do what he's
> >> not good at.


From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Tue Oct 13 17:33:43 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 10:33:43 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Speaking of point guards...
In-Reply-To: <0KRG003BSOONJJS6@vms173019.mailsrvcs.net>
Message-ID: <235530.39084.qm@web65604.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>



--- On Tue, 10/13/09, Kim Malo <kmalo17 at verizon.net> wrote:
> 
> Maybe, but I think you're taking disengaged to mean just
> not giving his all and its general meaning is a bit stronger
> than that. He wasn't playing within the team concept because
> by definition disengaged means you're not part of the team,
> you're not engaged in what they're doing.? There's a
> middle ground between high flair and zombie. And no, his
> being disengaged won't help the team get on the same page
> faster because they're having to do it without him, a key
> part. Which also means the page they're on won't be the same
> one as they'll be looking at when he is engaged. Can they
> still come together, sure, they're mostly veterans. But no
> way it's helpful. While honestly IMO it's never a good
> tendency to have as a habit. Bad habits are always harder to
> stop than you think when you establish them, and this one is
> a pattern not a new one, which shows no sign of stopping.

Probably should have been more precise there.  I was just trying to say that between 'going for it' and potentially playing outside the team concept, and just laying back and letting the game come to him (while still running the team, getting them into sets and trying to manage the flow), Rondo is erring on the side of letting the game come to him, especially early in the season when being strictly team-first helps the team grow the fastest.  "Disengaged" wasn't the right word, because as you say it's means he's disengaged from the team--not what I was getting at all.  More like trying to melt into the team concept, putting the team first and not doing anything to hold back the growth of the team--while also turning down opportunities to get to the rim, or take chances in transition, or going after offensive rebounds, things which *might* leave the team susceptible to break downs...he's just playing careful right now.

But, yeah, it's a bad habit, one with an ongoing pattern, but one that I think is lessening over time and perhaps one that's more pronounced during this time of year.  The progression that I see is still favorable long term...it's just a matter of waiting for his maturity to take hold.  He's still just 23 years old.  Usually, young players with talent as good as Rondo are given permission to play outside of the team concept because their talent warrants it--in Rondo's case, the presence of 3 Hall-of-Famers has taken away his permission to 'do what he likes'.  Ultimately, I think it'll be a huge boon to his career, and really speed up his development in the long term, unlike situations where young players 'own' a team before they even learn how to play the game--for instance, think of how different Antoine's game would have developed had he come onto this year's team as a 19 year old.  Conversely, think where Rondo might have been headed had he come to a
 15-win non-veteran team coached by Pitino.  It makes one shudder to think.

Ryan

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From noah.evans at gmail.com  Tue Oct 13 18:07:21 2009
From: noah.evans at gmail.com (Noah Evans)
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 20:07:21 +0200
Subject: Hudson vs. House
In-Reply-To: <0KRG001AYPIP2KUE@vms173015.mailsrvcs.net>
References: <56a297000910130110oaffe8d4hee378df1cf6fa1c0@mail.gmail.com>
	<81413.57477.qm@web65610.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
	<56a297000910130853w5dd6ee0cubcd3ec84ac70d16c@mail.gmail.com>
	<0KRG001AYPIP2KUE@vms173015.mailsrvcs.net>
Message-ID: <56a297000910131107u782f9201k91de0e567b48988f@mail.gmail.com>

Anytime. :)

On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 6:51 PM, Kim Malo <kmalo17 at verizon.net> wrote:
> I'm honored ; )
> Kim
>
> At 11:53 AM 10/13/2009, Noah Evans wrote:
>>
>> "And while I can see why they think Daniels can bring the ball up,
>> "can bring the ball up" isn't really the same as playing the point and
>> I'd rather his minutes went at the Ray / Paul backup slot" -- Kim
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 4:41 PM, Ryan W <ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > Noah, what do you think of Daniels then? ?To me, he's filled in just as
>> > well as Hill would have...plus he's younger and arguably a better scorer and
>> > defender.
>> >
>> > Ryan
>> >
>> > --- On Tue, 10/13/09, Noah Evans <noah.evans at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> From: Noah Evans <noah.evans at gmail.com>
>> >> Subject: Re: Hudson vs. House
>> >> To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" <celtics at igtc.com>
>> >> Date: Tuesday, October 13, 2009, 3:10 AM
>> >> That's why I really wished we could
>> >> have gotten Grant Hill. With Hill
>> >> handling the ball and distributing, Eddie, Scabs and gang
>> >> could go hog
>> >> wild. As it stands our best ball handler in the second unit
>> >> is
>> >> Daniels(is this true?) which forces Eddie to do what he's
>> >> not good at.
>
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics
>


From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil  Tue Oct 13 18:14:39 2009
From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil)
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 14:14:39 -0400
Subject: Speaking of point guards...
In-Reply-To: <0KRG003BSOONJJS6@vms173019.mailsrvcs.net>
References: <0KRF006K8DOFWBHA@vms173019.mailsrvcs.net>
	<911592.14478.qm@web65612.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
	<0KRG003BSOONJJS6@vms173019.mailsrvcs.net>
Message-ID: <200910131814.n9DIEffm023571@artemis.afrc.af.mil>

I don't buy into the "team" versus "me" factor as root causal to this at all. It's maturity plain and simple.

The aspect most worrisome remains that if his desire is at this level in a contract year - will it ever be "full tilt, full time" to quote the former #54 of the Patriots? Age 23 or not, he stands to leave theoretically millions on the table if he continues his lacksadaisical play of a week or two on, and a week or two off. Even if he doesn't understand that, his agent assuredly does. 

And we as fans understand that it's not opponent specific; it's all about timing. If you're an opposing point guard and you catch Rajon on an off night - you're going to have a career evening. The vice versa is also true. If he simply was toasted by Calderon (just as an example) every time out we could postulate that there was something about Calderone that Rondo simply had trouble with, but it's totally unpredictable depending simply on Rondo's (this isn't the right word but I'll use it anyway) bio-rhythm.

Antoine never got the maturity thing. He went to retirement (not self-imposed/chosen retirement BTW) thinking he was more than his skills said he was to paraphrase the Tuna. He had an excellent NBA skillset - no one can ever deny that, but he often maximized skills he wished he had more than the ones he actually did. That's maturity. Self-realization. 

Rondo, while mired in a completely different set of circumstances, has now intensity and skill utlization issues stemming from much the same - is he self aware number one, and will he leverage that awareness to it's potential number two?

-----Original Message-----
From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Kim Malo
Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 12:34 PM
To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List; The Boston Celtics Mailing List
Subject: Re: Speaking of point guards...

At 09:40 PM 10/12/2009, Ryan W wrote:
>Good point, Kim, part of Rondo's problem is taking too many nights 
>off, or simply floating out there and not putting his stamp on the 
>game.  His game in the preseason so far could be seen as falling 
>into those same habits...
>
>But I think it's illustrative to remember that Rondo's ideal play 
>exists between too poles--too disengaged on the one hand, and too 
>far outside the team concept on the other.  The problem is, the 
>things that make Rondo engaged are often the things that get him 
>outside of the team concept, things like gambling for steals, going 
>for the homerun pass, and the like.

That's not a bad point, and one I can buy.

>He has a certain flair to his game--flair which causes him to break 
>from the team concept from time to time.  Part of the maturity 
>process for Rondo is finding the right balance between flair and 
>team-first play, learning to focus his flair in ways that don't 
>leave to rest of the team out to dry.  I think he's trying to find 
>that balance, which explains his long periods of simply 'running the 
>offense' and those bursts when he does some Rondo things...
>
>So, early in the year (especially in the preseason), I think it's 
>probably better in the long run for Rondo to tend towards being 
>disengaged, but also playing within the team concept, because such 
>play will help the entire team get on the same page faster.

Maybe, but I think you're taking disengaged to mean just not giving 
his all and its general meaning is a bit stronger than that. He 
wasn't playing within the team concept because by definition 
disengaged means you're not part of the team, you're not engaged in 
what they're doing.  There's a middle ground between high flair and 
zombie. And no, his being disengaged won't help the team get on the 
same page faster because they're having to do it without him, a key 
part. Which also means the page they're on won't be the same one as 
they'll be looking at when he is engaged. Can they still come 
together, sure, they're mostly veterans. But no way it's helpful. 
While honestly IMO it's never a good tendency to have as a habit. Bad 
habits are always harder to stop than you think when you establish 
them, and this one is a pattern not a new one, which shows no sign of 
stopping.

>If it went to the other extreme, where Rondo was engaged and playing 
>outside of the team concept (perhaps for the benefit of increasing 
>his worth in contract negotiations), then it might be 
>counterproductive to the development of the team.  That's where I 
>was coming from when I said it was a GOOD THING.  It's GOOD relative 
>the alternatives and relative the development of the team.  It won't 
>be good if it persists into the regular season...
>
>So, until he's playing disengaged when the games count and the team 
>has presumably 'come together' and is all on the same page, I'm not 
>too worried in general.

I'm not all that worried either. Disappointed but not overly worried 
at this point.

Kim  

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


From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Tue Oct 13 20:21:19 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 13:21:19 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Speaking of point guards...
In-Reply-To: <200910131814.n9DIEffm023571@artemis.afrc.af.mil>
Message-ID: <540644.52304.qm@web65613.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>



--- On Tue, 10/13/09, Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil <Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil> wrote:

> I don't buy into the "team" versus
> "me" factor as root causal to this at all. It's maturity
> plain and simple.
> 

It's a chicken and egg kinda thing, don't you think?  The 'me' versus 'team' dilemma gets progressively easier to negotiate as you gain maturity.

Ryan

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From kmalo17 at verizon.net  Tue Oct 13 20:40:17 2009
From: kmalo17 at verizon.net (Kim Malo)
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 16:40:17 -0400
Subject: Speaking of point guards...
In-Reply-To: <235530.39084.qm@web65604.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
References: <0KRG003BSOONJJS6@vms173019.mailsrvcs.net>
	<235530.39084.qm@web65604.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <0KRH00BMO03PFXAX@vms173015.mailsrvcs.net>

At 01:33 PM 10/13/2009, Ryan W wrote:
>Ultimately, I think it'll be a huge boon to his career, and really 
>speed up his development in the long term, unlike situations where 
>young players 'own' a team before they even learn how to play the 
>game--for instance, think of how different Antoine's game would have 
>developed had he come onto this year's team as a 19 year 
>old.  Conversely, think where Rondo might have been headed had he 
>come to a 15-win non-veteran team coached by Pitino.  It makes one 
>shudder to think.

Antoine's a good example for your case, because you're right, I've 
always thought a lot of his problems as an NBA player have roots in 
his coming to the league to a team with an overly permissive coach (I 
think you're forgetting that his first coach was ML, who thought the 
sun shone out of his butt and treated him in front of everyone else 
as if it did - even Pitino would have been better). He's not a bad 
person, and except as applied to his own game, where ego gets in the 
way, has a very high BBIQ.
Kim 


From alex.goldblatt at gmail.com  Wed Oct 14 02:02:08 2009
From: alex.goldblatt at gmail.com (Alex Goldblatt)
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 22:02:08 -0400
Subject: Hudson vs. House
In-Reply-To: <56a297000910131107u782f9201k91de0e567b48988f@mail.gmail.com>
References: <56a297000910130110oaffe8d4hee378df1cf6fa1c0@mail.gmail.com>
	<81413.57477.qm@web65610.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
	<56a297000910130853w5dd6ee0cubcd3ec84ac70d16c@mail.gmail.com>
	<0KRG001AYPIP2KUE@vms173015.mailsrvcs.net>
	<56a297000910131107u782f9201k91de0e567b48988f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3f0c87180910131902r439ffa2cm596797f0e51af865@mail.gmail.com>

Yep, that's "the point"... :))

"can bring the ball up" isn't really the same as playing the point and
I'd rather his minutes went at the Ray / Paul backup slot" -- Kim
Let me ask you guys something: would you rather see a backup point - or
capable players being able to play the point "by committee"?? I brought up
this subject with Kim, but got no response yet: if you play a certain
position as a team, you spare player's cycles  no matter what. Same
obviously applies to pretty much any position on the floor.

Btw, I have a HUGE soft spot for Hill: he's always been one of my favorite,
incredibly intelligent player that I'd love to see coaching/GM'ing some day.
It's a shame we did not get him - right guy on the right team. With all my
respect to MD, he's a few levels below Hill from the bball IQ stand point
(no offense).

AG
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 2:07 PM, Noah Evans <noah.evans at gmail.com> wrote:

> Anytime. :)
>
> On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 6:51 PM, Kim Malo <kmalo17 at verizon.net> wrote:
> > I'm honored ; )
> > Kim
> >
> > At 11:53 AM 10/13/2009, Noah Evans wrote:
> >>
> >> "And while I can see why they think Daniels can bring the ball up,
> >> "can bring the ball up" isn't really the same as playing the point and
> >> I'd rather his minutes went at the Ray / Paul backup slot" -- Kim
> >>
> >> On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 4:41 PM, Ryan W <ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> >> > Noah, what do you think of Daniels then?  To me, he's filled in just
> as
> >> > well as Hill would have...plus he's younger and arguably a better
> scorer and
> >> > defender.
> >> >
> >> > Ryan
> >> >
> >> > --- On Tue, 10/13/09, Noah Evans <noah.evans at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> From: Noah Evans <noah.evans at gmail.com>
> >> >> Subject: Re: Hudson vs. House
> >> >> To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" <celtics at igtc.com>
> >> >> Date: Tuesday, October 13, 2009, 3:10 AM
> >> >> That's why I really wished we could
> >> >> have gotten Grant Hill. With Hill
> >> >> handling the ball and distributing, Eddie, Scabs and gang
> >> >> could go hog
> >> >> wild. As it stands our best ball handler in the second unit
> >> >> is
> >> >> Daniels(is this true?) which forces Eddie to do what he's
> >> >> not good at.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>

From BDodgers at aol.com  Wed Oct 14 04:13:40 2009
From: BDodgers at aol.com (BDodgers at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 00:13:40 EDT
Subject: From ESPN Insider
Message-ID: <d27.3f0f2fb7.3806a9f4@aol.com>

 
 
Is there a Marbury-Pierce rift? 
 

 
_Stephon Marbury_ 
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=509)  spent a lot of the NBA offseason on his  computer and cell phone, 
tweeting and live video-streaming. He's without a home  in the NBA now, and some 
are pointing to his erratic behavior online as a reason  no team has, or 
will, pick him up this season. 
_Red's Army has kept a close eye on Starbury's  Twitter stream_ 
(http://www.redsarmy.com/home/2009/10/does-marbury-have-a-beef-with-paul-pierce.html)  
and found these two choice bits about _Paul Pierce_ 
(http://espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=662)  recently: "Paul pierce is better then kobe  
bryant yes or no. Ask him what does he think. You know how I feel about kobe 
so  we won't speak on it. LIL" 
"Go tell Doc and Danny your daddy's that some one you fake truth. Your 
style  is played out number 34. The hood knows your so far gone." 
Something tells us if Marbury is still looking to play in the league, a  
return to the Celtics is unlikely at this  point.


From kmalo17 at verizon.net  Wed Oct 14 05:57:57 2009
From: kmalo17 at verizon.net (Kim Malo)
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 01:57:57 -0400
Subject: Hudson vs. House
In-Reply-To: <3f0c87180910131902r439ffa2cm596797f0e51af865@mail.gmail.co m>
References: <56a297000910130110oaffe8d4hee378df1cf6fa1c0@mail.gmail.com>
	<81413.57477.qm@web65610.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
	<56a297000910130853w5dd6ee0cubcd3ec84ac70d16c@mail.gmail.com>
	<0KRG001AYPIP2KUE@vms173015.mailsrvcs.net>
	<56a297000910131107u782f9201k91de0e567b48988f@mail.gmail.com>
	<3f0c87180910131902r439ffa2cm596797f0e51af865@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <0KRH00H9DPY3KH7E@vms173013.mailsrvcs.net>

At 10:02 PM 10/13/2009, Alex Goldblatt wrote:
>Yep, that's "the point"... :))
>
>"can bring the ball up" isn't really the same as playing the point and
>I'd rather his minutes went at the Ray / Paul backup slot" -- Kim
>Let me ask you guys something: would you rather see a backup point - or
>capable players being able to play the point "by committee"?? I brought up
>this subject with Kim, but got no response yet:

Didn't see it.

I'd rather see a backup point, which I would think was obvious. 
Doesn't mean the committee doesn't help bring the ball at times up 
under different circs, but the whole team offensive flow almost 
always works best when the offense is initiated consistently out of 
more of a pure PG skillset and mindset.

>if you play a certain
>position as a team, you spare player's cycles  no matter what. Same
>obviously applies to pretty much any position on the floor.
>
>Btw, I have a HUGE soft spot for Hill: he's always been one of my favorite,
>incredibly intelligent player that I'd love to see coaching/GM'ing some day.
>It's a shame we did not get him - right guy on the right team. With all my
>respect to MD, he's a few levels below Hill from the bball IQ stand point
>(no offense).

What do you mean by BBIQ? I wondered about that when I saw you insist 
Hudson has none, which I disagree with.  Daniels is not a few levels 
below Hill in BBIQ, he's got a fairly nice one. What he's a few 
levels below him in is experience. Experience can effect what BBIQ 
tells you and your ability to implement the results, but it isn't a 
strict one on one correlation.  BBIQ is an intangible; it's your 
ability to analyze and synthesize the game mentally. It's not so much 
about making the right play as understanding in a multifaceted way 
exactly why that was the right play. You may not even be able to 
execute it - Scal's a good case there. He clearly sees quite well 
what the situation calls for in basketball terms, especially on 
defense, but just can't always physically make it happen.  But 
because he has a high BBIQ he's still a more effective team defender 
as he seamlessly rolls and switches than someone like Tony Allen, who 
has athleticism and instincts but not a lot of BBIQ.

Kim 


From noah.evans at gmail.com  Wed Oct 14 08:56:37 2009
From: noah.evans at gmail.com (Noah Evans)
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 10:56:37 +0200
Subject: Hudson vs. House
In-Reply-To: <0KRH00H9DPY3KH7E@vms173013.mailsrvcs.net>
References: <56a297000910130110oaffe8d4hee378df1cf6fa1c0@mail.gmail.com>
	<81413.57477.qm@web65610.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
	<56a297000910130853w5dd6ee0cubcd3ec84ac70d16c@mail.gmail.com>
	<0KRG001AYPIP2KUE@vms173015.mailsrvcs.net>
	<56a297000910131107u782f9201k91de0e567b48988f@mail.gmail.com>
	<3f0c87180910131902r439ffa2cm596797f0e51af865@mail.gmail.com>
	<0KRH00H9DPY3KH7E@vms173013.mailsrvcs.net>
Message-ID: <56a297000910140156y5d8c5970pe5aa03633e1ec828@mail.gmail.com>

Hill's combination of size and ball-handling makes him much harder to
pressure bringing the ball up the floor(he can out dribble bigger
players and look over the little guys) and he has 10+ years experience
running an offense and getting other people involved. MD *may* reach
that level someday and certainly has fresher legs but Hill would have
a been a wonderful stabilizing influence on our second unit.

On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 7:57 AM, Kim Malo <kmalo17 at verizon.net> wrote:
> At 10:02 PM 10/13/2009, Alex Goldblatt wrote:
>>
>> Yep, that's "the point"... :))
>>
>> "can bring the ball up" isn't really the same as playing the point and
>> I'd rather his minutes went at the Ray / Paul backup slot" -- Kim
>> Let me ask you guys something: would you rather see a backup point - or
>> capable players being able to play the point "by committee"?? I brought up
>> this subject with Kim, but got no response yet:
>
> Didn't see it.
>
> I'd rather see a backup point, which I would think was obvious. Doesn't mean
> the committee doesn't help bring the ball at times up under different circs,
> but the whole team offensive flow almost always works best when the offense
> is initiated consistently out of more of a pure PG skillset and mindset.
>
>> if you play a certain
>> position as a team, you spare player's cycles ?no matter what. Same
>> obviously applies to pretty much any position on the floor.
>>
>> Btw, I have a HUGE soft spot for Hill: he's always been one of my
>> favorite,
>> incredibly intelligent player that I'd love to see coaching/GM'ing some
>> day.
>> It's a shame we did not get him - right guy on the right team. With all my
>> respect to MD, he's a few levels below Hill from the bball IQ stand point
>> (no offense).
>
> What do you mean by BBIQ? I wondered about that when I saw you insist Hudson
> has none, which I disagree with. ?Daniels is not a few levels below Hill in
> BBIQ, he's got a fairly nice one. What he's a few levels below him in is
> experience. Experience can effect what BBIQ tells you and your ability to
> implement the results, but it isn't a strict one on one correlation. ?BBIQ
> is an intangible; it's your ability to analyze and synthesize the game
> mentally. It's not so much about making the right play as understanding in a
> multifaceted way exactly why that was the right play. You may not even be
> able to execute it - Scal's a good case there. He clearly sees quite well
> what the situation calls for in basketball terms, especially on defense, but
> just can't always physically make it happen. ?But because he has a high BBIQ
> he's still a more effective team defender as he seamlessly rolls and
> switches than someone like Tony Allen, who has athleticism and instincts but
> not a lot of BBIQ.
>
> Kim
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics
>


From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil  Wed Oct 14 11:20:40 2009
From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil)
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 07:20:40 -0400
Subject: Exhibit A meet exhibit B
In-Reply-To: <56a297000910140156y5d8c5970pe5aa03633e1ec828@mail.gmail.com>
References: <56a297000910130110oaffe8d4hee378df1cf6fa1c0@mail.gmail.com>
	<81413.57477.qm@web65610.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
	<56a297000910130853w5dd6ee0cubcd3ec84ac70d16c@mail.gmail.com>
	<0KRG001AYPIP2KUE@vms173015.mailsrvcs.net>
	<56a297000910131107u782f9201k91de0e567b48988f@mail.gmail.com>
	<3f0c87180910131902r439ffa2cm596797f0e51af865@mail.gmail.com>
	<0KRH00H9DPY3KH7E@vms173013.mailsrvcs.net>
	<56a297000910140156y5d8c5970pe5aa03633e1ec828@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <200910141120.n9EBKh97015216@apollo.afrc.af.mil>

Demonstrating the hypothesis, Rondo goes out and explodes last night. Maybe the "should I attack" vs "should I defer" aspect is a factor given that the Big 3 all sat and MD and Sheed got hurt. If that is the case from a coaching standpoint "take what the defense gives you" should be the mantra to everyone on the Celtics. If Rondo can get 40 on a given night - take it. If Pierce is burning up the nets - same deal - ad infinitum. 

However the focus factor remains worrisome to a degree. Many of the other teams we play rely more heavily on their PG than we do having three HOF guys (all of whom can basically get their own shot any time down the floor) to fall back on. The days that Rondo "coasts" for lack of a better term allowing that opposing PG to gain and set the momentum, often makes those games much harder than they necessarily have to be.


From wayoftheray at yahoo.com  Wed Oct 14 13:03:20 2009
From: wayoftheray at yahoo.com (Way Of The Ray)
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 06:03:20 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: JR Giddens Unleashes His Inner Rodman To Save The Celtics From Rondo
Message-ID: <35023.66760.qm@web110112.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

It was a glimpse in to the post Pierce-KG-Allen future and a scary one at that.

If Rajon Rondo is allowed to be the best player on your team, you'll
be hearing a lot of the following from NBA Commissioner David Stern in
the years to come: "With the First... Second... Third... pick in the NBA Draft, the Boston Celtic select..."

But fortunately, for one night, the Celtics were saved from the horrendous shooting of Rajon Rondo because of the magnificent play of JR Giddens, who 
channeled his inner Rodman and rebounded and defended like a madman, leading the Celtics to victory.

A victory that would have been denied without his presence.

Meanwhile, Rondo did his best to befoul a golden opportunity, after
Devin Harris, THE MAN AINGE TRIED TO TRADE RONDO FOR and who was cleaning all of Rondo's digital clocks in their head-to-head matchup, went down with a groin twinge, Rajon almost shot the Celtics into oblivion.

But JR Giddens, obviously poorly used by Doc Rivers in the past, was there to make things well. 
Ray  


      


From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Wed Oct 14 17:34:12 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 10:34:12 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: JR Giddens Unleashes His Inner Rodman To Save The Celtics From
	Rondo
In-Reply-To: <35023.66760.qm@web110112.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <507695.18596.qm@web65603.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

Wrong again, Ray.

Giddens played with tremendous energy and had by far the best game of his Cs career. But as you noted, he plays like Rodman--which is good if you're 6'8" and not so good if you're 6'4".  He's still clueless on offense...

Rondo, on the other hand, single-handedly brought the team back from a 14 point deficit, absolutely dominating the game from the middle of the 3rd quarter onwards.  He either assisted or scored every basket in the 4th quarter, except for one Baby shot (assisted by Hudson).  If Rondo's allowed to be our best player, what you're going to see is a lot of near triple doubled performances.

Rondo and Harris were pretty equal in their matchup.  Harris had the clear scoring advantage during their time on the court together (10 to 1), but Rondo had the better floor game by far.  When are people going to learn not to judge a point guard on the way he can score points, especially when those points are put up on a bad team?  Harris is another in the long sad line of scoring point guards on bad teams, just like Marbury, Baron Davis, Monta Ellis, Gilbert Arenas, etc...

Ryan 
--- On Wed, 10/14/09, Way Of The Ray <wayoftheray at yahoo.com> wrote:

> From: Way Of The Ray <wayoftheray at yahoo.com>
> Subject: JR Giddens Unleashes His Inner Rodman To Save The Celtics From Rondo
> To: "Celtics Moronic Stuff" <celticsstuffgroup at yahoogroups.com>, "Celtics Fans Are Idiots List" <celtics at igtc.com>
> Date: Wednesday, October 14, 2009, 8:03 AM
> It was a glimpse in to the post
> Pierce-KG-Allen future and a scary one at that.
> 
> If Rajon Rondo is allowed to be the best player on your
> team, you'll
> be hearing a lot of the following from NBA Commissioner
> David Stern in
> the years to come: "With the First... Second... Third...
> pick in the NBA Draft, the Boston Celtic select..."
> 
> But fortunately, for one night, the Celtics were saved from
> the horrendous shooting of Rajon Rondo because of the
> magnificent play of JR Giddens, who 
> channeled his inner Rodman and rebounded and defended like
> a madman, leading the Celtics to victory.
> 
> A victory that would have been denied without his
> presence.
> 
> Meanwhile, Rondo did his best to befoul a golden
> opportunity, after
> Devin Harris, THE MAN AINGE TRIED TO TRADE RONDO FOR and
> who was cleaning all of Rondo's digital clocks in their
> head-to-head matchup, went down with a groin twinge, Rajon
> almost shot the Celtics into oblivion.
> 
> But JR Giddens, obviously poorly used by Doc Rivers in the
> past, was there to make things well. 
> Ray? 
> 
> 
> ? ? ? 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics
> 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Wed Oct 14 17:39:33 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 10:39:33 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Hudson vs. House
In-Reply-To: <56a297000910140156y5d8c5970pe5aa03633e1ec828@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <30562.48342.qm@web65604.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

Okay, I can buy that.  Hill's 6'8" and does have a stabilizing effect.  And he may have more experience running an NBA offense.  

But Hill is also 8 years older than Daniels.  I think Daniels is potentially more explosive and a better defender right now.  

Whatever the case, I think their potential impact on our 2nd unit would have been very similar.  The age difference points me towards the younger guy, especially given the rest of the age on this team.  It's important not to get too old, and Hill may have pushed us over that line.

Ryan 

--- On Wed, 10/14/09, Noah Evans <noah.evans at gmail.com> wrote:

> From: Noah Evans <noah.evans at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Hudson vs. House
> To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" <celtics at igtc.com>
> Date: Wednesday, October 14, 2009, 3:56 AM
> Hill's combination of size and
> ball-handling makes him much harder to
> pressure bringing the ball up the floor(he can out dribble
> bigger
> players and look over the little guys) and he has 10+ years
> experience
> running an offense and getting other people involved. MD
> *may* reach
> that level someday and certainly has fresher legs but Hill
> would have
> a been a wonderful stabilizing influence on our second
> unit.
> 
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 7:57 AM, Kim Malo <kmalo17 at verizon.net>
> wrote:
> > At 10:02 PM 10/13/2009, Alex Goldblatt wrote:
> >>
> >> Yep, that's "the point"... :))
> >>
> >> "can bring the ball up" isn't really the same as
> playing the point and
> >> I'd rather his minutes went at the Ray / Paul
> backup slot" -- Kim
> >> Let me ask you guys something: would you rather
> see a backup point - or
> >> capable players being able to play the point "by
> committee"?? I brought up
> >> this subject with Kim, but got no response yet:
> >
> > Didn't see it.
> >
> > I'd rather see a backup point, which I would think was
> obvious. Doesn't mean
> > the committee doesn't help bring the ball at times up
> under different circs,
> > but the whole team offensive flow almost always works
> best when the offense
> > is initiated consistently out of more of a pure PG
> skillset and mindset.
> >
> >> if you play a certain
> >> position as a team, you spare player's cycles ?no
> matter what. Same
> >> obviously applies to pretty much any position on
> the floor.
> >>
> >> Btw, I have a HUGE soft spot for Hill: he's always
> been one of my
> >> favorite,
> >> incredibly intelligent player that I'd love to see
> coaching/GM'ing some
> >> day.
> >> It's a shame we did not get him - right guy on the
> right team. With all my
> >> respect to MD, he's a few levels below Hill from
> the bball IQ stand point
> >> (no offense).
> >
> > What do you mean by BBIQ? I wondered about that when I
> saw you insist Hudson
> > has none, which I disagree with. ?Daniels is not a
> few levels below Hill in
> > BBIQ, he's got a fairly nice one. What he's a few
> levels below him in is
> > experience. Experience can effect what BBIQ tells you
> and your ability to
> > implement the results, but it isn't a strict one on
> one correlation. ?BBIQ
> > is an intangible; it's your ability to analyze and
> synthesize the game
> > mentally. It's not so much about making the right play
> as understanding in a
> > multifaceted way exactly why that was the right play.
> You may not even be
> > able to execute it - Scal's a good case there. He
> clearly sees quite well
> > what the situation calls for in basketball terms,
> especially on defense, but
> > just can't always physically make it happen. ?But
> because he has a high BBIQ
> > he's still a more effective team defender as he
> seamlessly rolls and
> > switches than someone like Tony Allen, who has
> athleticism and instincts but
> > not a lot of BBIQ.
> >
> > Kim
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Wed Oct 14 17:46:38 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 10:46:38 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Speaking of point guards...
In-Reply-To: <0KRH00BMO03PFXAX@vms173015.mailsrvcs.net>
Message-ID: <939958.18615.qm@web65616.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

Yeah, forgot all about ML--who can blame me?  God, I watched every game of that 15 win season too...

Yeah, Antoine is *the* example of what a bad coach and permissive culture can do to an impressionable basketball player.  Antoine has great BBIQ, but as you say his ego neutered it..

Ryan
--- On Tue, 10/13/09, Kim Malo <kmalo17 at verizon.net> wrote:

> From: Kim Malo <kmalo17 at verizon.net>
> Subject: Re: Speaking of point guards...
> To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" <celtics at igtc.com>
> Date: Tuesday, October 13, 2009, 3:40 PM
> At 01:33 PM 10/13/2009, Ryan W
> wrote:
> > Ultimately, I think it'll be a huge boon to his
> career, and really speed up his development in the long
> term, unlike situations where young players 'own' a team
> before they even learn how to play the game--for instance,
> think of how different Antoine's game would have developed
> had he come onto this year's team as a 19 year old.?
> Conversely, think where Rondo might have been headed had he
> come to a 15-win non-veteran team coached by Pitino.?
> It makes one shudder to think.
> 
> Antoine's a good example for your case, because you're
> right, I've always thought a lot of his problems as an NBA
> player have roots in his coming to the league to a team with
> an overly permissive coach (I think you're forgetting that
> his first coach was ML, who thought the sun shone out of his
> butt and treated him in front of everyone else as if it did
> - even Pitino would have been better). He's not a bad
> person, and except as applied to his own game, where ego
> gets in the way, has a very high BBIQ.
> Kim 
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics
> 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From pdelevett at yahoo.com  Wed Oct 14 18:00:41 2009
From: pdelevett at yahoo.com (Peter Delevett)
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 11:00:41 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Rondo
Message-ID: <916474.60573.qm@web110102.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

>>Patrick wrote: "The days that Rondo "coasts" for lack of a better term allowing that opposing PG to gain and set the momentum, often makes those games much harder than they necessarily have to be."

I'm not especially worried about Rondo, because intensity has always struck me as one of his hallmarks on the court, and because he's got those 3 HOFers to kick him in the ass if he starts to lollygag. However, I would argue that the situation Patrick's talking about is exactly why the Celtics should have a real PG in reserve, someone who could push Rondo a bit. I can't imagine he's looking over his shoulder at House or Lester. 





      


From renrile at qualcomm.com  Thu Oct 15 16:50:02 2009
From: renrile at qualcomm.com (Enrile, Roy)
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 09:50:02 -0700
Subject: Thoughts on past two games
In-Reply-To: <35023.66760.qm@web110112.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <35023.66760.qm@web110112.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <0938E4C6C3C7CF48BB2F343EC9CF1618150140F9A6@NASANEXMB02.na.qualcomm.com>

-Against both the Nets & Raptor 7foot PF/Centers, Baby was pretty much focusing on all inside shots & crashed the boards as well as much as Giddens was.  He's not getting blocked much taking guys off the dribble from midrange or from pickNrolls, then doing his college bread&butter doubleclutch layups/new jump hooks.  Looks feisty on D this year, getting some steals/fullcourt dribble layups & some clean shotblocks with his hand well above the rim.

-Lester got lots of minutes at the 2 with Rajon & the 1 by himself (even some minutes against our old friend Banks , who he's built like), and showed that he has more of a knack/IQ for halfcourt scoring than Banks, Bassy, Orien in their primes.  He was hitting catchNshoot longrange J's, off the dribble midrange J's & a bunch of poised layups against NBA bench players.  Doesn't seem as laterally quick on D to me as Rajon/Gabe/Banks types.  Seems humble & hard working listening to coaches/vets so apparently Danny thought he + Eddie are better signings than Starbury & his mental probs.

-Daniels has the same bodytype/size/mobility as Penny/young Brian Shaw out there at PG.  Could become a weapon to have a big PG doubleteaming on the star swingmen of the league.  Both he & Hudson were able to beat their man then kickout for J's.

-Giddens has the consistent above average form & elevation on his catch & shoot jumper (which makes him more than a just a TA style dribbledrive swingman).  He's rebounding hard but not showing point forward skills that Paul/Marquis have though.  He's more the Caron Butler type.

-Sheldon Williams is smart, strong & fundamentally sound blocking guys out.  Should be solid this year but not outstanding like Leon/Baby. Pulls away from offensive rebounding contact as if it's his habit to be careful not to hurt people.  Doesn't seem to have the engine & meanstreak that outstanding physical PF's like Powe, Oakely had.

-KG took a very slight contact to the back of his bad leg & I was surprised that he was limping in pain for a few mins.  But he still was hitting a bunch of Rajon alleyoop plays before & after that.


From alex.goldblatt at gmail.com  Fri Oct 16 02:28:34 2009
From: alex.goldblatt at gmail.com (Alex Goldblatt)
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 22:28:34 -0400
Subject: Hudson vs. House
In-Reply-To: <30562.48342.qm@web65604.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
References: <56a297000910140156y5d8c5970pe5aa03633e1ec828@mail.gmail.com>
	<30562.48342.qm@web65604.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <3f0c87180910151928g74938ae9wf80504fa5d724edc@mail.gmail.com>

Kim: "Didn't see it.
I'd rather see a backup point, which I would think was obvious. Doesn't mean
the committee doesn't help bring the ball at times up under different circs,
but the whole team offensive flow almost always works best when the offense
is initiated consistently out of more of a pure PG skillset and mindset."

> Not sure if you really paid attention: old news.. :) Where you've been
while watching 'Fatoine bring it up the court sleepwalking for years?..
Seriously: name me teams having pure point on the roster - I'm not even
asking for the backup ones, but starting points?... As a former PG with 40+
years playing this game, I can name all of them on just 2 of my hands - not
breaking a sweat. Thus - the problem.

Kim: "What do you mean by BBIQ? I wondered about that when I saw you insist
Hudson has none, which I disagree with.  Daniels is not a few levels below
Hill in BBIQ, he's got a fairly nice one. What he's a few levels below him
in is experience." ... "Scal's a good case there. He clearly sees quite well
what the situation calls for in basketball terms, especially on defense, but
just can't always physically make it happen."

> People drafted a guy by the name KBrown at the #11 pick because they
mistaken the GAME with the physical ability. Let me put it this way: as long
as this game is 5-on-5, BBIQ will prevail. At this level it all comes down
to the percentage game, and if you screw it all up - you don't belong. This
is not NCAA when you have the whole bunch of kids showcasing for the big
payoff - this one is 100% for winnig it all. And the C's are just all about
that. Hudson has the mentality of scorer at any price - therefore he simply
does not fit, no matter what. Can he get a brain? Maybe - but it will come a
few years from now. That makes him irrelevant to what this team really
needs.

On the flip side, current situation dictates that you'll have someone
bringing the ball against the smaller, faster guards up the half court. And
this is not MD - forget about it. House does it well though - irrelevant to
the initiating the play sequense. That's why he'll be the backup.

AG

From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil  Fri Oct 16 10:46:35 2009
From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 06:46:35 -0400
Subject: Hudson vs. House
In-Reply-To: <3f0c87180910151928g74938ae9wf80504fa5d724edc@mail.gmail.com>
References: <56a297000910140156y5d8c5970pe5aa03633e1ec828@mail.gmail.com>
	<30562.48342.qm@web65604.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
	<3f0c87180910151928g74938ae9wf80504fa5d724edc@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <200910161046.n9GAkeeJ014798@apollo.afrc.af.mil>

House does it (bring the ball up) well though - irrelevant to the initiating the play sequence. That's why he'll be the backup. - AG

You really think he does? I've always seen that if you pressure him even a little in the back court you can take an easy 8-15 seconds off the play clock (sometimes a lot of that before he even gets over half court). The pressure of the shot clock isn't imaginary - people start to rush, make bad decisions, get out of their flow/rhythm, and often take hurried, contested shots.

Heinsohn says a lot of stuff just to say it sometimes and repeats mantras over and over, but in this instance he's dead on accurate - you get the ball up the floor and into your offense as fast as you possibly can every time - don't let the defense set up and keep as much of the shot clock for execution of your offense versus dribbling the ball.


From ellie.cutler at yahoo.com  Fri Oct 16 11:38:54 2009
From: ellie.cutler at yahoo.com (Ellie Cutler)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 04:38:54 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: House bringing up the ball
In-Reply-To: <3f0c87180910151928g74938ae9wf80504fa5d724edc@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <595919.21470.qm@web63101.mail.re1.yahoo.com>

are you serious??? Faster, younger PGs lick their chops when House brings up the ball.? The minute the opposing coach decides to put on a fullcourt press, our O is seriously disrupted.? Hudson is much better at this, and will only get more so with experience.?? He has shown PG instincts w/some nice court vision and passing.? And, he shows a willingness to be coached.? With his natural scoring ability, I expect him to grow a lot this year.?? Doc has played him at 1 and 2, with some success at both positions.?? Of course all bets are off re: minutes once the season starts, but I'm hoping Doc will let the kid play.

Ellie

--- On Thu, 10/15/09, Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com> wrote:

From: Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Hudson vs. House

< House does it well though - irrelevant to
the initiating the play sequense. That's why he'll be the backup.

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



      

From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil  Fri Oct 16 11:50:30 2009
From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 07:50:30 -0400
Subject: House bringing up the ball
In-Reply-To: <595919.21470.qm@web63101.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
References: <3f0c87180910151928g74938ae9wf80504fa5d724edc@mail.gmail.com>
	<595919.21470.qm@web63101.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <200910161150.n9GBoY9i008603@poseidon.afrc.af.mil>

Sorry Ellie, but all empirical past evidence shows that unless there are injuries, fouls or other "out of his control" issues Doc will likely not use a rook overly much. To his credit however that usually gets better each successive year - in fact, I credit Doc that he has significantly improved his handling of minutes every year usually (with some exceptions) giving the rookies about what they deserve (at least based on our sample - obviously not including practice which we don't see) on the court for time.


-----Original Message-----
From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Ellie Cutler
Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 7:39 AM
To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List
Subject: House bringing up the ball

are you serious??? Faster, younger PGs lick their chops when House brings up the ball.? The minute the opposing coach decides to put on a fullcourt press, our O is seriously disrupted.? Hudson is much better at this, and will only get more so with experience.?? He has shown PG instincts w/some nice court vision and passing.? And, he shows a willingness to be coached.? With his natural scoring ability, I expect him to grow a lot this year.?? Doc has played him at 1 and 2, with some success at both positions.?? Of course all bets are off re: minutes once the season starts, but I'm hoping Doc will let the kid play.

Ellie

--- On Thu, 10/15/09, Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com> wrote:

From: Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Hudson vs. House

< House does it well though - irrelevant to
the initiating the play sequense. That's why he'll be the backup.

AG
/>
_______________________________________________
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


From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Fri Oct 16 16:51:58 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 09:51:58 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: House bringing up the ball
In-Reply-To: <200910161150.n9GBoY9i008603@poseidon.afrc.af.mil>
Message-ID: <980582.92487.qm@web65608.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

Actually, I think the empirical evidence is split.  Doc *does* play rookies significant time, especially when they're ready to play.  Look at the following rookie players who've played 1000 minutes in their first season:

Tony Allen 1262 minutes
Al Jefferson 1051 minutes
Ryan Gomes 1,376 minutes
Rajon Rondo 1831 minutes

There were a couple other guys close to the 1000 minutes threshold as well.

Glen Davis 940 minutes
Leon Powe 720 minutes

So, while many have been critical of Doc when it comes to playing rookies (myself included), he does have a pretty steady track record of giving playing time to rookies who have 'it.'  And you know what, he also has a pretty solid track record of giving no playing time to rookies who don't 'get it.'--like Gerald Green, JR Giddens, Justin Reed, Gabe Pruitt, etc.

Of course, there are special cases, like Perk and Delonte West, one who was way too young and one who was way too injured.  And then there's Allen Ray who got 740 minutes in 2006-2007, but was never heard from again.  But for the most part Doc has played only worthy rookies a good amount of minutes.

Ryan

--- On Fri, 10/16/09, 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: House bringing up the ball
> To: celtics at igtc.com
> Date: Friday, October 16, 2009, 6:50 AM
> Sorry Ellie, but all empirical past
> evidence shows that unless there are injuries, fouls or
> other "out of his control" issues Doc will likely not use a
> rook overly much. To his credit however that usually gets
> better each successive year - in fact, I credit Doc that he
> has significantly improved his handling of minutes every
> year usually (with some exceptions) giving the rookies about
> what they deserve (at least based on our sample - obviously
> not including practice which we don't see) on the court for
> time.
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com
> [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com]
> On Behalf Of Ellie Cutler
> Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 7:39 AM
> To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> Subject: House bringing up the ball
> 
> are you serious??? Faster, younger PGs lick their chops
> when House brings up the ball.? The minute the opposing
> coach decides to put on a fullcourt press, our O is
> seriously disrupted.? Hudson is much better at this, and
> will only get more so with experience.?? He has shown PG
> instincts w/some nice court vision and passing.? And, he
> shows a willingness to be coached.? With his natural
> scoring ability, I expect him to grow a lot this year.??
> Doc has played him at 1 and 2, with some success at both
> positions.?? Of course all bets are off re: minutes once
> the season starts, but I'm hoping Doc will let the kid
> play.
> 
> Ellie
> 
> --- On Thu, 10/15/09, Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
> From: Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Hudson vs. House
> 
> < House does it well though - irrelevant to
> the initiating the play sequense. That's why he'll be the
> backup.
> 
> AG
> />
> _______________________________________________
> 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
> 


      


From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Fri Oct 16 17:11:35 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 10:11:35 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Hudson vs. House
In-Reply-To: <200910161046.n9GAkeeJ014798@apollo.afrc.af.mil>
Message-ID: <621895.22438.qm@web65604.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

House *is* alright bringing the ball up...if the other team doesn't guard him while he does it (like Wed. against the Raptors).  The problem is, when they start guarding him...that's when he's in trouble, and that's when Daniels, Pierce, or Allen circle back to bring the ball up for him.  

Tommy's absolutely right though--the loss of flow engendered by House at point has wide-ranging negative consequences for the offense as a whole.  How many times last season did the 2nd team come in and completely lose the rhythm of the game?  

And let's not forget the degeneration of House's offensive game when he's saddled with point guard duties.  

All factors, such as the offensive health of the 2nd unit, and House's inability to dribble against pressure and his own offensive efficiency at 2 guard, point towards putting someone else at 2nd string point, something which Doc, Danny, and pretty much everyone except AG agrees with.

I gotta agree w/Ellie; I think Hudson has showed enough to be trusted at the point guard spot in the regular season, at least in spurts.  He's got a good head, he has good BBIQ and is a quick learner, he's a competitor, he can score and create his own shot, he can dribble the ball against pressure, he can find the open man, run a pick-and-roll, hit a standstill jumper, and most importantly defend his position and steal the ball when possible.  He's also got a good haircut.

Daniels, however, will be the backup point guard for the most part this season.  He can handle it against pressure, can see over the top of the defense, has good PG instincts, and he allows House to run around and spot up for 3s.  Hudson will play when we either a.) need quickness at point guard; or b.) need Daniels at small forward.   

Ryan

--- On Fri, 10/16/09, 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: Hudson vs. House
> To: celtics at igtc.com
> Date: Friday, October 16, 2009, 5:46 AM
> House does it (bring the ball up)
> well though - irrelevant to the initiating the play
> sequence. That's why he'll be the backup. - AG
> 
> You really think he does? I've always seen that if you
> pressure him even a little in the back court you can take an
> easy 8-15 seconds off the play clock (sometimes a lot of
> that before he even gets over half court). The pressure of
> the shot clock isn't imaginary - people start to rush, make
> bad decisions, get out of their flow/rhythm, and often take
> hurried, contested shots.
> 
> Heinsohn says a lot of stuff just to say it sometimes and
> repeats mantras over and over, but in this instance he's
> dead on accurate - you get the ball up the floor and into
> your offense as fast as you possibly can every time - don't
> let the defense set up and keep as much of the shot clock
> for execution of your offense versus dribbling the ball.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics
> 


      


From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil  Fri Oct 16 17:17:06 2009
From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 13:17:06 -0400
Subject: House bringing up the ball
In-Reply-To: <980582.92487.qm@web65608.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
References: <200910161150.n9GBoY9i008603@poseidon.afrc.af.mil>
	<980582.92487.qm@web65608.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <200910161717.n9GHH9Lo021821@poseidon.afrc.af.mil>

Disagree. Entirely different circumstances and just showing minutes don't tell the whole story. There's 3936 minutes per position in an NBA season or 19680 minutes overall. Allen, Gomes and Jefferson can/did split time at more than one position (PG - Allen; SG - Allen; SF - Allen, Gomes; PF - Gomes/Jefferson; and C - Jefferson - were in play/were played at some time by one of those players). 1000 minutes then is not necessarily a large sample when first round rooks can average over 2000 minutes per season (Rondo came close as he should have).

The four guys you mention below - Allen, Gomes, Jefferson and Rondo - who were their main competition? Other rookies/walk-ons-undrafted free agents, vets that were hurt all the time forcing his hand? When given a choice - not circumstances dictating - he played them at that point when all other options were off the table and then usually played them a lot more when the season was well determined in the losing column. Gomes specifically - the fan base screamed for him to get minutes....I'll bet if you looked at the breakdowns, his minutes ONLY skyrocketed after Jefferson's ankle sprain that season and Doc was forced to play him. Luckily for Gomes he flourished therefore cementing a rotation spot the rest of the season he may not have realized otherwise.

Look, I'm not advocating Doc go play Hudson 15 min a game just to get him time, but his past clearly has been to slowly develop rookies only giving them increased minutes at the end of season or when he's forced to by injuries, etc. The Davis Powe examples are more in line with your hypothesis given we did not have any real backup PF alternatives, but had one or the other "had it" wouldn't then that one of the two have assumed the majority of those minutes from the other?? The split would seem to indicate more tryout (or "who's hot tonight?" expirimentation) than set rotation.

With this team as constituted - I doubt highly Hudson will get minutes outside preseason unless injuries or other factors make playing him a necessity.



-----Original Message-----
From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Ryan W
Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 12:52 PM
To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List
Subject: RE: House bringing up the ball

Actually, I think the empirical evidence is split.  Doc *does* play rookies significant time, especially when they're ready to play.  Look at the following rookie players who've played 1000 minutes in their first season:

Tony Allen 1262 minutes
Al Jefferson 1051 minutes
Ryan Gomes 1,376 minutes
Rajon Rondo 1831 minutes

There were a couple other guys close to the 1000 minutes threshold as well.

Glen Davis 940 minutes
Leon Powe 720 minutes

So, while many have been critical of Doc when it comes to playing rookies (myself included), he does have a pretty steady track record of giving playing time to rookies who have 'it.'  And you know what, he also has a pretty solid track record of giving no playing time to rookies who don't 'get it.'--like Gerald Green, JR Giddens, Justin Reed, Gabe Pruitt, etc.

Of course, there are special cases, like Perk and Delonte West, one who was way too young and one who was way too injured.  And then there's Allen Ray who got 740 minutes in 2006-2007, but was never heard from again.  But for the most part Doc has played only worthy rookies a good amount of minutes.

Ryan

--- On Fri, 10/16/09, 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: House bringing up the ball
> To: celtics at igtc.com
> Date: Friday, October 16, 2009, 6:50 AM
> Sorry Ellie, but all empirical past
> evidence shows that unless there are injuries, fouls or
> other "out of his control" issues Doc will likely not use a
> rook overly much. To his credit however that usually gets
> better each successive year - in fact, I credit Doc that he
> has significantly improved his handling of minutes every
> year usually (with some exceptions) giving the rookies about
> what they deserve (at least based on our sample - obviously
> not including practice which we don't see) on the court for
> time.
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com
> [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com]
> On Behalf Of Ellie Cutler
> Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 7:39 AM
> To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> Subject: House bringing up the ball
> 
> are you serious??? Faster, younger PGs lick their chops
> when House brings up the ball.? The minute the opposing
> coach decides to put on a fullcourt press, our O is
> seriously disrupted.? Hudson is much better at this, and
> will only get more so with experience.?? He has shown PG
> instincts w/some nice court vision and passing.? And, he
> shows a willingness to be coached.? With his natural
> scoring ability, I expect him to grow a lot this year.??
> Doc has played him at 1 and 2, with some success at both
> positions.?? Of course all bets are off re: minutes once
> the season starts, but I'm hoping Doc will let the kid
> play.
> 
> Ellie
> 
> --- On Thu, 10/15/09, Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
> From: Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Hudson vs. House
> 
> < House does it well though - irrelevant to
> the initiating the play sequense. That's why he'll be the
> backup.
> 
> AG
> />
> _______________________________________________
> 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


From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Fri Oct 16 17:48:02 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 10:48:02 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: House bringing up the ball
In-Reply-To: <200910161717.n9GHH9Lo021821@poseidon.afrc.af.mil>
Message-ID: <600910.36485.qm@web65616.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

--- On Fri, 10/16/09, Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil <Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil> wrote:
> Disagree. Entirely different
> circumstances and just showing minutes don't tell the whole
> story. There's 3936 minutes per position in an NBA season or
> 19680 minutes overall. Allen, Gomes and Jefferson can/did
> split time at more than one position (PG - Allen; SG -
> Allen; SF - Allen, Gomes; PF - Gomes/Jefferson; and C -
> Jefferson - were in play/were played at some time by one of
> those players). 1000 minutes then is not necessarily a large
> sample when first round rooks can average over 2000 minutes
> per season (Rondo came close as he should have).

1000 minutes is an indication of 'playing a role' pretty consistently over the course of a season.  Of course the circumstances were/are different--that's the nature of sports.  I was just showing that Doc does play rookies--in fact, he seems to play the rookies that end up being good...even when he has good teams.  In 2004-2005, the Cs won the Atlantic Division, and Doc was still able to get 1000 minutes out of Tony and Jefferson.  Likewise, Doc almost got 1000 minutes out of Baby in our championship season.  The point being: if a rookie's good, Doc'll find a way to get him on the court for a good chunk of time...


> 
> The four guys you mention below - Allen, Gomes, Jefferson
> and Rondo - who were their main competition? Other
> rookies/walk-ons-undrafted free agents, vets that were hurt
> all the time forcing his hand? When given a choice - not
> circumstances dictating - he played them at that point when
> all other options were off the table and then usually played
> them a lot more when the season was well determined in the
> losing column. Gomes specifically - the fan base screamed
> for him to get minutes....I'll bet if you looked at the
> breakdowns, his minutes ONLY skyrocketed after Jefferson's
> ankle sprain that season and Doc was forced to play him.
> Luckily for Gomes he flourished therefore cementing a
> rotation spot the rest of the season he may not have
> realized otherwise.

Of course, there are stories behind the stories of this and that.  What I'm saying is that Doc plays the good rookies a good amount of time and has done so every year he's been our coach.  Sure, Gomes *might* have gotten extra minutes when Jefferson went down, or because the season was lost.  But then you'd think that the same would have applied to Gerald Green--it didn't.  Even when the season was decided, Doc still insisted that he hadn't earned it.  And he was right. 

> 
> Look, I'm not advocating Doc go play Hudson 15 min a game
> just to get him time, but his past clearly has been to
> slowly develop rookies only giving them increased minutes at
> the end of season or when he's forced to by injuries, etc.

No--I don't think that's clear at all.  Baby was playing minutes (ahead of Powe) early in his rookie season in 2007-2008 in meaningful games.  TA was starting early in 2004.  I think Doc prefers veterans to rookies, and also has a pretty strict rule about rookies earning their playing time, but he has given early season roles to rookies before...when it made sense to do so.  

> The Davis Powe examples are more in line with your
> hypothesis given we did not have any real backup PF
> alternatives, but had one or the other "had it" wouldn't
> then that one of the two have assumed the majority of those
> minutes from the other?? 

Not necessarily; Doc is a big fan of competition.  And the beauty of the Powe/Davis situation is that they have complementary skills which Doc could mix and match to best effect, while also using the minutes competition (since only one could play) to motivate both to play better in their limited minutes.  Both 'had it' but due to the makeup of the team, there was only one role for each player.

> The split would seem to indicate
> more tryout (or "who's hot tonight?" expirimentation) than
> set rotation.

Yeah, and as I've shown, in a situation where both players 'have it' and there's only one spot for them, he'll use that situation to the benefit of the team.

> 
> With this team as constituted - I doubt highly Hudson will
> get minutes outside preseason unless injuries or other
> factors make playing him a necessity.

We'll see--as I said in the other post, he has a role when the other team has a quick point guard, think of guys like Lou Williams or Nate Robinson or Aaron Brooks; or when we need Marquis at 3.  And, yes, there will be injury opportunities which will open up playing time.  But, unlike last season when TA's injury opened up (at least in theory) playing time for Bill Walker, I think Doc will actually be comfortable playing Hudson where he was otherwise uncomfortable playing Walker.  

Pat, you talk about how injuries *made* Doc play certain rookies, but what I see is that Doc *only* plays rookies when they earn it, no matter what injuries might dictate.  Doc could have used an injury excuse to get Gerald Green on the floor--he didn't.  He could have used an injury excuse to play Walker when TA went down last season--he didn't.  And the refrain was the same each time--they haven't earned it yet.  I think Lester has 'earned it' with his preseason play and so when the situations arise or when the inevitable injury occurs, I think Doc's going to be very comfortable going with him.  

You might have missed it, but on the last game broadcast, Mike was noting how strange Doc's comfort level with Lester was...he was talking about how Doc usually gives rookie points a very hard time, but surprisingly Doc really, really likes Hudson.  I think there's something to that, especially given Hudson's age (25).  He's a grown-ass man, older than Perk, Rondo, and Baby.  That alone might throw off Doc's standard operating procedure with rookies.  Some of the mental handicaps which plague rookies (such as low confidence, or a lack of awareness of the game, or undeveloped BBIQ) don't seem to affect Hudson because he's so old relative his rookie status.

Ryan


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Fri Oct 16 17:55:23 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 10:55:23 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: backup point guard
In-Reply-To: <200910161046.n9GAkeeJ014798@apollo.afrc.af.mil>
Message-ID: <819723.36266.qm@web65615.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

Here's Doc's latest word on the backup point guard situation (courtesy of Tom Halzak via Celticsblog):


Marquis does a little of what Steph did. The difference is it was pushing it a little having Steph in, when Eddie was on the floor, because they really were two point guards (height-wise) and so the other team always had some kind of match up advantage.

Where with Marquis and Eddie and whoever the 2 is on the floor, we have a natural line up on the floor, it?s a 1,2, and a 3. Marquis can guard the 2 or the 3 and it?s a better fit.

The other thing is Marquis helps is they rarely (put) pressure on him. It was interesting, Jersey the first game, they actually put the point guard on Marquis, because they were trying to pressure the ball.

And when Marquis would bring the ball up, there were few (opposing) threes in the league who are going to ?turn the ball? full force, this and that. You just don?t see that a lot, minus Scottie Pippin.

(They thought) ?we have to put some kind of pressure on the ball, we have to put our point guard on him.? Then Marquis got the great post position right after that. So he?s just a smart player.


      


From douglas342 at aol.com  Fri Oct 16 18:10:31 2009
From: douglas342 at aol.com (douglas342 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 14:10:31 -0400
Subject: Walker (not, not that one)
Message-ID: <8CC1CA3157E806B-38A8-901@webmail-d083.sysops.aol.com>

I must have been on mental vacation.  I saw that Bill Walker was 
injured, but didn't catch the nature of the injury, prognosis, how long 
out, etc.  Can someone enlighten me?  Thanks.


From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Fri Oct 16 18:23:45 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 11:23:45 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Walker (not, not that one)
In-Reply-To: <8CC1CA3157E806B-38A8-901@webmail-d083.sysops.aol.com>
Message-ID: <41421.45977.qm@web65610.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

Doug:  

Walker suffered a minor meniscus tear, and he'll be out between 4-8 weeks, putting him back in action around the 1st of December, at the latest.  If I had to guess, I'd assume he'll start the year in Portland and work his way into shape there, and then probably get a call up sometime in January, assuming there aren't any other injuries which might precipitate a quicker callup.

Ryan

--- On Fri, 10/16/09, douglas342 at aol.com <douglas342 at aol.com> wrote:

> From: douglas342 at aol.com <douglas342 at aol.com>
> Subject: Walker (not, not that one)
> To: celtics at igtc.com
> Date: Friday, October 16, 2009, 1:10 PM
> I must have been on mental
> vacation.? I saw that Bill Walker was injured, but
> didn't catch the nature of the injury, prognosis, how long
> out, etc.? Can someone enlighten me?? Thanks.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics
> 


      


From Eric at ericalbert.net  Fri Oct 16 18:36:11 2009
From: Eric at ericalbert.net (Eric Albert)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 14:36:11 -0400
Subject: House bringing up the ball
Message-ID: <20091016183625.29EA0E1C070@ignite.igtc.com>


>Ryan W <ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com> wrote . . .
>
>Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil <Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil> wrote . . .
> 

Just want to say that I'm really enjoying this debate. Knowledgeable list members arguing their points strongly and respectfully, and (mirabile dictu) supporting their arguments with data. Great stuff!

-- Eric


From davidp4660 at cox.net  Fri Oct 16 19:25:14 2009
From: davidp4660 at cox.net (davidp4660 at cox.net)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 15:25:14 -0400
Subject: Walker (not, not that one)
In-Reply-To: <8CC1CA3157E806B-38A8-901@webmail-d083.sysops.aol.com>
Message-ID: <20091016152514.PPXB7.362522.imail@eastrmwml41>

Only supposed to be 6-8 weeks.  Torn meniscus is what I heard.
---- douglas342 at aol.com wrote: 
> I must have been on mental vacation.  I saw that Bill Walker was 
> injured, but didn't catch the nature of the injury, prognosis, how long 
> out, etc.  Can someone enlighten me?  Thanks.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics


From douglas342 at aol.com  Fri Oct 16 21:54:32 2009
From: douglas342 at aol.com (douglas342 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 17:54:32 -0400
Subject: happy birthday to me!
Message-ID: <8CC1CC260E1DBA5-41C8-965C@webmail-d094.sysops.aol.com>

Today the folks I work with called me out and gave me a cake and a 
brand new Celtics cap!  Living in LA, I will wear it proudly, 
especially in front of my #2 assistant, a huge Laker fan.  And next 
June, I'll wear it even more proudly.


From regmanw6 at yahoo.com  Fri Oct 16 22:07:06 2009
From: regmanw6 at yahoo.com (R Howe)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 15:07:06 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: happy birthday to me!
In-Reply-To: <8CC1CC260E1DBA5-41C8-965C@webmail-d094.sysops.aol.com>
Message-ID: <710025.58723.qm@web56705.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

Happy BDay
I hope that hat gets a lot of milage.
Go C's

--- On Fri, 10/16/09, douglas342 at aol.com <douglas342 at aol.com> wrote:

From: douglas342 at aol.com <douglas342 at aol.com>
Subject: happy birthday to me!
To: celtics at igtc.com
Date: Friday, October 16, 2009, 5:54 PM

Today the folks I work with called me out and gave me a cake and a brand new Celtics cap!? Living in LA, I will wear it proudly, especially in front of my #2 assistant, a huge Laker fan.? And next June, I'll wear it even more proudly.

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



      

From alex.goldblatt at gmail.com  Fri Oct 16 23:37:56 2009
From: alex.goldblatt at gmail.com (Alex Goldblatt)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 19:37:56 -0400
Subject: Hudson vs. House
In-Reply-To: <621895.22438.qm@web65604.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
References: <200910161046.n9GAkeeJ014798@apollo.afrc.af.mil>
	<621895.22438.qm@web65604.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <3f0c87180910161637p5353ff2bg6a532015f826bef8@mail.gmail.com>

Yep, exactly right. That leaves Eddie playing the backup 1 spot - I believe
there is still a confusion between the ball distribution/calling plays and
the actual position on the floor...

I do disagree with the Hudson's assessment, but this does not really matter.
What really matters is reminding how it all played out when we've got the
#17. Interesting enough to see people totally dismissing what Eddie actually
brings to the table. Hudson might be OK, but - please - spare me from
pushing him forward as a real option to play the backup point on the
championship team... this is an insult to my intelligence... :)

AG

On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Ryan W <ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com> wrote:

> House *is* alright bringing the ball up...if the other team doesn't guard
> him while he does it (like Wed. against the Raptors).  The problem is, when
> they start guarding him...that's when he's in trouble, and that's when
> Daniels, Pierce, or Allen circle back to bring the ball up for him.
>
> Tommy's absolutely right though--the loss of flow engendered by House at
> point has wide-ranging negative consequences for the offense as a whole.
>  How many times last season did the 2nd team come in and completely lose the
> rhythm of the game?
>
> And let's not forget the degeneration of House's offensive game when he's
> saddled with point guard duties.
>
> All factors, such as the offensive health of the 2nd unit, and House's
> inability to dribble against pressure and his own offensive efficiency at 2
> guard, point towards putting someone else at 2nd string point, something
> which Doc, Danny, and pretty much everyone except AG agrees with.
>
> I gotta agree w/Ellie; I think Hudson has showed enough to be trusted at
> the point guard spot in the regular season, at least in spurts.  He's got a
> good head, he has good BBIQ and is a quick learner, he's a competitor, he
> can score and create his own shot, he can dribble the ball against pressure,
> he can find the open man, run a pick-and-roll, hit a standstill jumper, and
> most importantly defend his position and steal the ball when possible.  He's
> also got a good haircut.
>
> Daniels, however, will be the backup point guard for the most part this
> season.  He can handle it against pressure, can see over the top of the
> defense, has good PG instincts, and he allows House to run around and spot
> up for 3s.  Hudson will play when we either a.) need quickness at point
> guard; or b.) need Daniels at small forward.
>
> Ryan
>
> --- On Fri, 10/16/09, 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: Hudson vs. House
> > To: celtics at igtc.com
> > Date: Friday, October 16, 2009, 5:46 AM
>  > House does it (bring the ball up)
> > well though - irrelevant to the initiating the play
> > sequence. That's why he'll be the backup. - AG
> >
> > You really think he does? I've always seen that if you
> > pressure him even a little in the back court you can take an
> > easy 8-15 seconds off the play clock (sometimes a lot of
> > that before he even gets over half court). The pressure of
> > the shot clock isn't imaginary - people start to rush, make
> > bad decisions, get out of their flow/rhythm, and often take
> > hurried, contested shots.
> >
> > Heinsohn says a lot of stuff just to say it sometimes and
> > repeats mantras over and over, but in this instance he's
> > dead on accurate - you get the ball up the floor and into
> > your offense as fast as you possibly can every time - don't
> > let the defense set up and keep as much of the shot clock
> > for execution of your offense versus dribbling the ball.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>

From alex.goldblatt at gmail.com  Fri Oct 16 23:40:59 2009
From: alex.goldblatt at gmail.com (Alex Goldblatt)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 19:40:59 -0400
Subject: happy birthday to me!
In-Reply-To: <710025.58723.qm@web56705.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
References: <8CC1CC260E1DBA5-41C8-965C@webmail-d094.sysops.aol.com>
	<710025.58723.qm@web56705.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <3f0c87180910161640y21981bck33fb2593d6e2689e@mail.gmail.com>

Hmmm.. that actually makes wishing you good health even more relevant...
:)))

Happy BD!!!

AG

On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 6:07 PM, R Howe <regmanw6 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Happy BDay
> I hope that hat gets a lot of milage.
> Go C's
>
> --- On Fri, 10/16/09, douglas342 at aol.com <douglas342 at aol.com> wrote:
>
> From: douglas342 at aol.com <douglas342 at aol.com>
> Subject: happy birthday to me!
> To: celtics at igtc.com
> Date: Friday, October 16, 2009, 5:54 PM
>
> Today the folks I work with called me out and gave me a cake and a brand
> new Celtics cap!  Living in LA, I will wear it proudly, especially in front
> of my #2 assistant, a huge Laker fan.  And next June, I'll wear it even more
> proudly.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>

From snoopy at celticsbeagle.net  Fri Oct 16 23:57:30 2009
From: snoopy at celticsbeagle.net (Snoopy the Celtics Beagle)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 19:57:30 -0400
Subject: happy birthday to me!
In-Reply-To: <8CC1CC260E1DBA5-41C8-965C@webmail-d094.sysops.aol.com>
References: <8CC1CC260E1DBA5-41C8-965C@webmail-d094.sysops.aol.com>
Message-ID: <20091016235742.98BC3E1C070@ignite.igtc.com>

Does this mean we get to give you 342 "birthday spanks"?  :)  Though, 
stuck living in "Smell-A" we should just give you a cookie instead.

Happy Birthday!

At 05:54 PM 10/16/2009, douglas342 at aol.com wrote:

>Today the folks I work with called me out and gave me a cake and a 
>brand new Celtics cap!  Living in LA, I will wear it proudly, 
>especially in front of my #2 assistant, a huge Laker fan.  And next 
>June, I'll wear it even more proudly.


From jahillsr at comcast.net  Sat Oct 17 01:58:17 2009
From: jahillsr at comcast.net (Jim Hill)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 21:58:17 -0400
Subject: happy birthday to me!
Message-ID: <000001ca4ecd$4be87c30$e3b97490$@net>

Happy Birthday Douglas342 !  It's great that your co-workers think so highly
of you to make you a target, err.  help you celebrate your passion for your
Celtics!

 

<Jim

 

>Today the folks I work with called me out and gave me a cake and a 

>brand new Celtics cap!  Living in LA, I will wear it proudly, 

>especially in front of my #2 assistant, a huge Laker fan.  And next 

>June, I'll wear it even more proudly.

 


From pmm at igtc.com  Sat Oct 17 02:28:41 2009
From: pmm at igtc.com (Paul M Moriarty)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 19:28:41 -0700
Subject: happy birthday to me!
In-Reply-To: <8CC1CC260E1DBA5-41C8-965C@webmail-d094.sysops.aol.com>
References: <8CC1CC260E1DBA5-41C8-965C@webmail-d094.sysops.aol.com>
Message-ID: <49C98C5B-EE95-4E32-BCE9-CACDFAB43C6C@igtc.com>

Happy Birthday!

Now please share with us the secret for getting not one, but two  
assistants!

- Paul -

On Oct 16, 2009, at 2:54 PM, Douglas342 at aol.com wrote:

> Today the folks I work with called me out and gave me a cake and a  
> brand new Celtics cap!  Living in LA, I will wear it proudly,  
> especially in front of my #2 assistant, a huge Laker fan.  And next  
> June, I'll wear it even more proudly.
>
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics


From kmalo17 at verizon.net  Sat Oct 17 02:28:35 2009
From: kmalo17 at verizon.net (Kim Malo)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 22:28:35 -0400
Subject: happy birthday to me!
In-Reply-To: <8CC1CC260E1DBA5-41C8-965C@webmail-d094.sysops.aol.com>
References: <8CC1CC260E1DBA5-41C8-965C@webmail-d094.sysops.aol.com>
Message-ID: <0KRN004KA08HNYF0@vms173001.mailsrvcs.net>

HB and congrads on the new headgear Douglas.

At 05:54 PM 10/16/2009, douglas342 at aol.com wrote:
>Today the folks I work with called me out and gave me a cake and a 
>brand new Celtics cap!  Living in LA, I will wear it proudly, 
>especially in front of my #2 assistant, a huge Laker fan.  And next 
>June, I'll wear it even more proudly.


From ellie.cutler at yahoo.com  Sat Oct 17 11:00:29 2009
From: ellie.cutler at yahoo.com (Ellie Cutler)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 04:00:29 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: happy birthday to me!
In-Reply-To: <49C98C5B-EE95-4E32-BCE9-CACDFAB43C6C@igtc.com>
Message-ID: <700678.54496.qm@web63101.mail.re1.yahoo.com>

LOL!

Happy birthday, fellow celts lister! I have friends in LA also, luckily they are transplanted New Englanders and hate the Lakers.? Are you like Bill Simmons and follow the Clippers (you prob. could get tx to that one Clip/Celts game)?

Ellie

PS - I haven't seen anybody totally dismiss what House brings to the table, which is some of the best shooting in the league! Every team needs a sniper who can bring it in the playoffs.

--- On Fri, 10/16/09, Paul M Moriarty <pmm at igtc.com> wrote:

From: Paul M Moriarty <pmm at igtc.com>
Subject: Re: happy birthday to me!
To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" <celtics at igtc.com>
Date: Friday, October 16, 2009, 10:28 PM

Happy Birthday!

Now please share with us the secret for getting not one, but two assistants!

- Paul -

On Oct 16, 2009, at 2:54 PM, Douglas342 at aol.com wrote:

> Today the folks I work with called me out and gave me a cake and a brand new Celtics cap!? Living in LA, I will wear it proudly, especially in front of my #2 assistant, a huge Laker fan.? And next June, I'll wear it even more proudly.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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



      

From douglas342 at aol.com  Sat Oct 17 16:25:58 2009
From: douglas342 at aol.com (douglas342 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 12:25:58 -0400
Subject: happy birthday to me!
In-Reply-To: <700678.54496.qm@web63101.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <8CC1D5DA4F6E383-3CF0-11261@webmail-m013.sysops.aol.com>

For about ten years I had a 1/10th interest in Clipper season tickets, 
and every year until last year I managed to get the Boston game. Last 
year, though, the Cs became trendy and my third pick was too late. This 
year I finally gave up my share in the seats. Ironically, the fellow 
who took over my share got 2nd pick this year and could have taken 
Boston, but he was late to the "draft" and was given a Laker game. 
Bummer!

BTW, the group that had these tickets has had them since the Clippers 
moved to LA, so now the seats are dead center court, about 8 rows back 
- just superb seats.


-----Original Message-----
From: Ellie Cutler <ellie.cutler at yahoo.com>
To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List <celtics at igtc.com>
Sent: Sat, Oct 17, 2009 4:00 am
Subject: Re: happy birthday to me!



LOL!

Happy birthday, fellow celts lister! I have friends in LA also, luckily 
they are
transplanted New Englanders and hate the Lakers.? Are you like Bill 
Simmons and
follow the Clippers (you prob. could get tx to that one Clip/Celts 
game)?

Ellie

PS - I haven't seen anybody totally dismiss what House brings to the 
table,
which is some of the best shooting in the league! Every team needs a 
sniper who
can bring it in the playoffs.

--- On Fri, 10/16/09, Paul M Moriarty <pmm at igtc.com> wrote:

From: Paul M Moriarty <pmm at igtc.com>
Subject: Re: happy birthday to me!
To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" <celtics at igtc.com>
Date: Friday, October 16, 2009, 10:28 PM

Happy Birthday!

Now please share with us the secret for getting not one, but two 
assistants!

- Paul -

On Oct 16, 2009, at 2:54 PM, Douglas342 at aol.com wrote:

> Today the folks I work with called me out and gave me a cake and a 
brand new
Celtics cap!? Living in LA, I will wear it proudly, especially in front 
of my #2
assistant, a huge Laker fan.? And next June, I'll wear it even more 
proudly.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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


From BDodgers at aol.com  Sat Oct 17 18:39:28 2009
From: BDodgers at aol.com (BDodgers at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 14:39:28 EDT
Subject: Report: Marbury plans 2010-11 return
Message-ID: <c1d.71487ca0.380b6960@aol.com>

 
Report: Marbury plans 2010-11 return
ESPN.com news  services

_Stephon Marbury_ 
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=509)  says he has "shut everything down" and  has no plans to play this 
season, but expects to return to the NBA in 2010-11,  the _New York Post_ 
(http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/knicks/marbury_rips_knicks_coach_says_he_jdyocVkmhjz
ZQDyjyIqzIP)  reported. 
Marbury, who played part of last season with the _Boston Celtics_ 
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/clubhouse?team=bos)  after his messy divorce from the 
_New  York Knicks_ (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/clubhouse?team=nyk)  ended 
with a buyout, went unsigned as a free agent this  offseason after turning 
down Boston's $1.3 million veteran minimum offer. 
"I'm resting, doing what Michael Jordan did, enjoy life, do things I 
haven't  done in 16 years, keep building my empire," Marbury said, according to 
the Post.  "I wasn't going to Boston for that money. It was a prudent business 
decision to  take off this year." 
Marbury said he plans to attend the Knicks' home opener on Oct. 31, 
according  to the report. But he says he's surprised anyone else wants to pay to 
see the  Knicks. And he made it clear that the bad blood between him and the 
team -- and  coach Mike D'Antoni -- has not yet been forgiven or forgotten. 
"I'm just talking as a fan and New Yorker who grew up loving the Knicks: 
Why  would I give you my money to watch them?" Marbury said, according to the 
Post.  "This is atrocious. Guys coming down court, just raising up 
3-pointers from  anywhere. The coaching is horrible. What kind of coaching is this?" 
Marbury also predicted that _Cleveland Cavaliers_ 
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/clubhouse?team=cle)  superstar _LeBron James_ 
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=1966)  won't join the Knicks as a free agent 
next  summer, according to the report.  
"LeBron isn't coming to a rebuilding team," Marbury said, according to the  
report. "Why would he come to a rebuilding team? It makes no sense. Is this 
 franchise built to win a championship or to make  money?"

From douglas342 at aol.com  Sat Oct 17 19:15:28 2009
From: douglas342 at aol.com (douglas342 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 15:15:28 -0400
Subject: Report: Marbury plans 2010-11 return
In-Reply-To: <c1d.71487ca0.380b6960@aol.com>
References: <c1d.71487ca0.380b6960@aol.com>
Message-ID: <8CC1D75525F7D65-2B20-12B08@webmail-d044.sysops.aol.com>

Why do I have a major problem with teh idea that Marbury is building an 
empire? Sorry, but he strikes me as typical of athletes who can burn 
through amazingly large sums of money through inexperience and lack of 
financial savvy.


-----Original Message-----
From: BDodgers at aol.com
To: celtics at igtc.com; Celticsstuffgroup at yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sat, Oct 17, 2009 11:39 am
Subject: Report: Marbury plans 2010-11 return




Report: Marbury plans 2010-11 return
ESPN.com news services

_Stephon Marbury_
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=509) says he 
has "shut
everything down" and has no plans to play this
season, but expects to return to the NBA in 2010-11, the _New York 
Post_
(http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/knicks/marbury_rips_knicks_coach_says_he_
jdyocVkmhjz
ZQDyjyIqzIP) reported.
Marbury, who played part of last season with the _Boston Celtics_
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/clubhouse?team=bos) after his messy 
divorce from
the
_New York Knicks_ (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/clubhouse?team=nyk) 
ended
with a buyout, went unsigned as a free agent this offseason after 
turning
down Boston's $1.3 million veteran minimum offer.
"I'm resting, doing what Michael Jordan did, enjoy life, do things I
haven't done in 16 years, keep building my empire," Marbury said, 
according to
the Post. "I wasn't going to Boston for that money. It was a prudent 
business
decision to take off this year."
Marbury said he plans to attend the Knicks' home opener on Oct. 31,
according to the report. But he says he's surprised anyone else wants 
to pay to

see the Knicks. And he made it clear that the bad blood between him and 
the
team -- and coach Mike D'Antoni -- has not yet been forgiven or 
forgotten.
"I'm just talking as a fan and New Yorker who grew up loving the 
Knicks:
Why would I give you my money to watch them?" Marbury said, according 
to the
Post. "This is atrocious. Guys coming down court, just raising up
3-pointers from anywhere. The coaching is horrible. What kind of 
coaching is
this?"
Marbury also predicted that _Cleveland Cavaliers_
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/clubhouse?team=cle) superstar _LeBron 
James_
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=1966) won't 
join the
Knicks as a free agent
next summer, according to the report.
"LeBron isn't coming to a rebuilding team," Marbury said, according to 
the
report. "Why would he come to a rebuilding team? It makes no sense. Is 
this
franchise built to win a championship or to make money?"
_______________________________________________
The Boston Celtics Mailing List
celtics at igtc.com
http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics


From joefan11111 at aol.com  Sat Oct 17 21:14:13 2009
From: joefan11111 at aol.com (joefan11111)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 17:14:13 -0400
Subject: Report: Marbury plans 2010-11 return
In-Reply-To: <8CC1D75525F7D65-2B20-12B08@webmail-d044.sysops.aol.com>
Message-ID: <1BB8575F.3020.4921.A8C8.88825069B3A0@aol.com>

Thought the same thing when I read that empire building stuff
and wondered how?his sneaker line was selling and if as he 
claimed Ainge actually?offered him a contract this year.? 
Starbury is either?crazy like a fox or just stir crazy?but I think 
we know which it is. What?team would want him.

Does anyone here know what Hudson?s contract status is.
The Celtics website which seems to be up to date?still has him 
listed as an unsigned draft?pick.I thought we had locked him in.?

10 days to kickoff!!!!!

On Oct 17, 2009, at 3:15:28 PM, douglas342 at aol.com wrote:

From:   douglas342 at aol.com
Subject:    Re: Report: Marbury plans 2010-11 return
Date:   October 17, 2009 3:15:28 PM EDT
To: celtics at igtc.com
Why do I have a major problem with teh idea that Marbury is building an?
empire? Sorry, but he strikes me as typical of athletes who can burn?
through amazingly large sums of money through inexperience and lack of?
financial savvy.


-----Original Message-----
From: BDodgers at aol.com
To: celtics at igtc.com; Celticsstuffgroup at yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sat, Oct 17, 2009 11:39 am
Subject: Report: Marbury plans 2010-11 return




Report: Marbury plans 2010-11 return
ESPN.com news services

_Stephon Marbury_
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=509) says he?
has "shut
everything down" and has no plans to play this
season, but expects to return to the NBA in 2010-11, the _New York?
Post_
(http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/knicks/marbury_rips_knicks_coach_says_he_
jdyocVkmhjz
ZQDyjyIqzIP) reported.
Marbury, who played part of last season with the _Boston Celtics_
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/clubhouse?team=bos) after his messy?
divorce from
the
_New York Knicks_ (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/clubhouse?team=nyk)?
ended
with a buyout, went unsigned as a free agent this offseason after?
turning
down Boston's $1.3 million veteran minimum offer.
"I'm resting, doing what Michael Jordan did, enjoy life, do things I
haven't done in 16 years, keep building my empire," Marbury said,?
according to
the Post. "I wasn't going to Boston for that money. It was a prudent?
business
decision to take off this year."
Marbury said he plans to attend the Knicks' home opener on Oct. 31,
according to the report. But he says he's surprised anyone else wants?
to pay to

see the Knicks. And he made it clear that the bad blood between him and?
the
team -- and coach Mike D'Antoni -- has not yet been forgiven or?
forgotten.
"I'm just talking as a fan and New Yorker who grew up loving the?
Knicks:
Why would I give you my money to watch them?" Marbury said, according?
to the
Post. "This is atrocious. Guys coming down court, just raising up
3-pointers from anywhere. The coaching is horrible. What kind of?
coaching is
this?"
Marbury also predicted that _Cleveland Cavaliers_
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/clubhouse?team=cle) superstar _LeBron?
James_
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=1966) won't?
join the
Knicks as a free agent
next summer, according to the report.
"LeBron isn't coming to a rebuilding team," Marbury said, according to?
the
report. "Why would he come to a rebuilding team? It makes no sense. Is?
this
franchise built to win a championship or to make money?"
_______________________________________________
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


From ellie.cutler at yahoo.com  Sun Oct 18 00:39:40 2009
From: ellie.cutler at yahoo.com (Ellie Cutler)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 17:39:40 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Report: Marbury plans 2010-11 return
In-Reply-To: <1BB8575F.3020.4921.A8C8.88825069B3A0@aol.com>
Message-ID: <353781.20462.qm@web63101.mail.re1.yahoo.com>

one year unguaranteed, I think.

I think Stephon had a great idea to sell sneakers in his market at an affordable price, unlike the air jordan etc. lines.? Good for him.? And yes, I do think he's gone a bit looney.? Taking a? year off at his age - who would sign him a year from now? 

Ellie

--- On Sat, 10/17/09, joefan11111 <joefan11111 at aol.com> wrote:

From: joefan11111 <joefan11111 at aol.com>
Subject: Re: Report: Marbury plans 2010-11 return
To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" <celtics at igtc.com>
Date: Saturday, October 17, 2009, 5:14 PM

Thought the same thing when I read that empire building stuff
and wondered how?his sneaker line was selling and if as he 
claimed Ainge actually?offered him a contract this year.? 
Starbury is either?crazy like a fox or just stir crazy?but I think 
we know which it is. What?team would want him.

Does anyone here know what Hudson?s contract status is.
The Celtics website which seems to be up to date?still has him 
listed as an unsigned draft?pick.I thought we had locked him in.?

10 days to kickoff!!!!!

On Oct 17, 2009, at 3:15:28 PM, douglas342 at aol.com wrote:

From:???douglas342 at aol.com
Subject:? ? Re: Report: Marbury plans 2010-11 return
Date:???October 17, 2009 3:15:28 PM EDT
To: celtics at igtc.com
Why do I have a major problem with teh idea that Marbury is building an?
empire? Sorry, but he strikes me as typical of athletes who can burn?
through amazingly large sums of money through inexperience and lack of?
financial savvy.


-----Original Message-----
From: BDodgers at aol.com
To: celtics at igtc.com; Celticsstuffgroup at yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sat, Oct 17, 2009 11:39 am
Subject: Report: Marbury plans 2010-11 return




Report: Marbury plans 2010-11 return
ESPN.com news services

_Stephon Marbury_
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=509) says he?
has "shut
everything down" and has no plans to play this
season, but expects to return to the NBA in 2010-11, the _New York?
Post_
(http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/knicks/marbury_rips_knicks_coach_says_he_
jdyocVkmhjz
ZQDyjyIqzIP) reported.
Marbury, who played part of last season with the _Boston Celtics_
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/clubhouse?team=bos) after his messy?
divorce from
the
_New York Knicks_ (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/clubhouse?team=nyk)?
ended
with a buyout, went unsigned as a free agent this offseason after?
turning
down Boston's $1.3 million veteran minimum offer.
"I'm resting, doing what Michael Jordan did, enjoy life, do things I
haven't done in 16 years, keep building my empire," Marbury said,?
according to
the Post. "I wasn't going to Boston for that money. It was a prudent?
business
decision to take off this year."
Marbury said he plans to attend the Knicks' home opener on Oct. 31,
according to the report. But he says he's surprised anyone else wants?
to pay to

see the Knicks. And he made it clear that the bad blood between him and?
the
team -- and coach Mike D'Antoni -- has not yet been forgiven or?
forgotten.
"I'm just talking as a fan and New Yorker who grew up loving the?
Knicks:
Why would I give you my money to watch them?" Marbury said, according?
to the
Post. "This is atrocious. Guys coming down court, just raising up
3-pointers from anywhere. The coaching is horrible. What kind of?
coaching is
this?"
Marbury also predicted that _Cleveland Cavaliers_
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/clubhouse?team=cle) superstar _LeBron?
James_
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=1966) won't?
join the
Knicks as a free agent
next summer, according to the report.
"LeBron isn't coming to a rebuilding team," Marbury said, according to?
the
report. "Why would he come to a rebuilding team? It makes no sense. Is?
this
franchise built to win a championship or to make money?"
_______________________________________________
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



      

From bgoudreau at verizon.net  Sun Oct 18 10:32:43 2009
From: bgoudreau at verizon.net (Robert Goudreau)
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 06:32:43 -0400
Subject: prediction
Message-ID: <52A0562E535845C28D5363AB61A530A2@gail8c0dd2bec0>

OK I'll bite....
66 and 16

Goody

From jozersky at optonline.net  Sun Oct 18 13:27:43 2009
From: jozersky at optonline.net (jozersky at optonline.net)
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 13:27:43 +0000
Subject: prediction
Message-ID: <1185145458-1255872267-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-209103606-@bda657.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>

65*17
------Original Message------
From: Robert Goudreau
Sender: celtics-bounces at igtc.com
To: celtics at igtc.com
ReplyTo: The Boston Celtics Mailing List
Subject: prediction
Sent: Oct 18, 2009 6:32 AM

OK I'll bite....
66 and 16

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


Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry


From ellie.cutler at yahoo.com  Sun Oct 18 17:48:47 2009
From: ellie.cutler at yahoo.com (Ellie Cutler)
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 10:48:47 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: prediction
In-Reply-To: <1185145458-1255872267-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-209103606-@bda657.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>
Message-ID: <446804.11306.qm@web63107.mail.re1.yahoo.com>

I like Rasheed's promise of 72 wins,? so put me down for 72/10.

*Although* I'd rather see 65/17 or so with less minutes for the veterans and some decent playing time for Hudson & Sheldon Williams rather than go for the gold in the regular season only to arrive at the playoffs with burned out/injured KG & Ray Allen and a Hudson who never played any meaningful minutes.

Ellie



      

From jbrainin at verizon.net  Sun Oct 18 18:15:57 2009
From: jbrainin at verizon.net (Jonathan Brainin)
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 14:15:57 -0400
Subject: Prediction
In-Reply-To: <446804.11306.qm@web63107.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
References: <446804.11306.qm@web63107.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <347F2CF3-DC0E-4614-ADF0-DAE55862245D@verizon.net>

Put me down for 65-17.  We have to get at least a little bump from the  
"Stephon Marbury is not with the team anymore" factor. 
  


From davidp4660 at cox.net  Mon Oct 19 00:17:47 2009
From: davidp4660 at cox.net (davidp4660 at cox.net)
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 20:17:47 -0400
Subject: Prediction
In-Reply-To: <347F2CF3-DC0E-4614-ADF0-DAE55862245D@verizon.net>
Message-ID: <20091018201747.Y5SYJ.610038.imail@eastrmwml36>

Bump up or bump down?  :-)
---- Jonathan Brainin <jbrainin at verizon.net> wrote: 
> Put me down for 65-17.  We have to get at least a little bump from the  
> "Stephon Marbury is not with the team anymore" factor. 
>   
> 
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics


From bceltics33 at verizon.net  Tue Oct 20 13:15:39 2009
From: bceltics33 at verizon.net (The Commish)
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 09:15:39 -0400
Subject: Fantasy Basketball
Message-ID: <43f1fb1e0910200615u6efb7330mb9af90a2dc04c04b@mail.gmail.com>

Hello Everyone,

There are two fantasy basketball leagues that have space available.  The
first league's draft is tonight at 9:00p EST.  The second league is the
Celtics' Stuff Hoops League and the live draft is set for this Thurs, Oct 22
at 9:00p EST.  They are both run through Yahoo Fantasy Sports.

If anyone is interested in becoming a manager, or wants put their fantasy
skills to work, please email me directly for sign up information..

Thanks!
Anne
The Commish
Celtics' Stuff Fantasy Hoops

From alex.goldblatt at gmail.com  Tue Oct 20 14:18:34 2009
From: alex.goldblatt at gmail.com (Alex Goldblatt)
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 10:18:34 -0400
Subject: Fantasy Basketball
In-Reply-To: <43f1fb1e0910200615u6efb7330mb9af90a2dc04c04b@mail.gmail.com>
References: <43f1fb1e0910200615u6efb7330mb9af90a2dc04c04b@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3f0c87180910200718s3d6ff890n49de91b7593a8757@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Anne,

Do you play head-to-head  format or roto? Can you send me the link to check
the rules?

Thanks in advance,
AG

On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 9:15 AM, The Commish <bceltics33 at verizon.net> wrote:

> Hello Everyone,
>
> There are two fantasy basketball leagues that have space available.  The
> first league's draft is tonight at 9:00p EST.  The second league is the
> Celtics' Stuff Hoops League and the live draft is set for this Thurs, Oct
> 22
> at 9:00p EST.  They are both run through Yahoo Fantasy Sports.
>
> If anyone is interested in becoming a manager, or wants put their fantasy
> skills to work, please email me directly for sign up information..
>
> Thanks!
> Anne
> The Commish
> Celtics' Stuff Fantasy Hoops
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics
>

From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Tue Oct 20 16:34:23 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 09:34:23 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Fantasy Basketball
In-Reply-To: <3f0c87180910200718s3d6ff890n49de91b7593a8757@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <700946.60576.qm@web65604.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

Wait--the guy that hates stats plays fantasy basketball??  

Ryan

--- On Tue, 10/20/09, Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com> wrote:

> From: Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Fantasy Basketball
> To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" <celtics at igtc.com>
> Date: Tuesday, October 20, 2009, 9:18 AM
> Hi Anne,
> 
> Do you play head-to-head? format or roto? Can you send
> me the link to check
> the rules?
> 
> Thanks in advance,
> AG
> 
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 9:15 AM, The Commish <bceltics33 at verizon.net>
> wrote:
> 
> > Hello Everyone,
> >
> > There are two fantasy basketball leagues that have
> space available.? The
> > first league's draft is tonight at 9:00p EST.?
> The second league is the
> > Celtics' Stuff Hoops League and the live draft is set
> for this Thurs, Oct
> > 22
> > at 9:00p EST.? They are both run through Yahoo
> Fantasy Sports.
> >
> > If anyone is interested in becoming a manager, or
> wants put their fantasy
> > skills to work, please email me directly for sign up
> information..
> >
> > Thanks!
> > Anne
> > The Commish
> > Celtics' Stuff Fantasy Hoops
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From kmalo17 at verizon.net  Tue Oct 20 17:42:22 2009
From: kmalo17 at verizon.net (Kim Malo)
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 13:42:22 -0400
Subject: Fantasy Basketball
In-Reply-To: <700946.60576.qm@web65604.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
References: <3f0c87180910200718s3d6ff890n49de91b7593a8757@mail.gmail.com>
	<700946.60576.qm@web65604.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <0KRT00DGHQJ2AF2O@vms173011.mailsrvcs.net>

Now, now, taunting is a technical. You can send me the fine money ; )
Besides which fantasy is really about trading and shopping (ugh, 
sorry, but I hate shopping), not stats. It uses stats, but only 
certain limited ones in a very fixed way as a scorecard. Doesn't tell 
you much about the game or require a deep understanding of real life 
stats (that's a general comment, not a pot shot at you Alex)
Kim

At 12:34 PM 10/20/2009, Ryan W wrote:
>Wait--the guy that hates stats plays fantasy basketball??
>
>Ryan
>
>--- On Tue, 10/20/09, Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > From: Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com>
> > Subject: Re: Fantasy Basketball
> > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" <celtics at igtc.com>
> > Date: Tuesday, October 20, 2009, 9:18 AM
> > Hi Anne,
> >
> > Do you play head-to-head  format or roto? Can you send
> > me the link to check
> > the rules?
> >
> > Thanks in advance,
> > AG
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 9:15 AM, The Commish <bceltics33 at verizon.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hello Everyone,
> > >
> > > There are two fantasy basketball leagues that have
> > space available.  The
> > > first league's draft is tonight at 9:00p EST.
> > The second league is the
> > > Celtics' Stuff Hoops League and the live draft is set
> > for this Thurs, Oct
> > > 22
> > > at 9:00p EST.  They are both run through Yahoo
> > Fantasy Sports.
> > >
> > > If anyone is interested in becoming a manager, or
> > wants put their fantasy
> > > skills to work, please email me directly for sign up
> > information..
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > > Anne
> > > The Commish
> > > Celtics' Stuff Fantasy Hoops


From douglas342 at aol.com  Tue Oct 20 20:21:35 2009
From: douglas342 at aol.com (douglas342 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 16:21:35 -0400
Subject: Fantasy Basketball
In-Reply-To: <0KRT00DGHQJ2AF2O@vms173011.mailsrvcs.net>
References: <3f0c87180910200718s3d6ff890n49de91b7593a8757@mail.gmail.com><700946.60576.qm@web65604.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
	<0KRT00DGHQJ2AF2O@vms173011.mailsrvcs.net>
Message-ID: <8CC1FDA0E3A8B1E-3A78-2359@webmail-d023.sysops.aol.com>

I joined a fantasy league a couple of years back and rapidly realized I 
only care about the Celtics.  That some dude from Oklahoma was 5th in 
rebounds didn't matter one bit, nor did I care to follow it all.  I 
made a trade my first week and never signed on again after about the 
third week.  I assume I finished last.  I just didn't care.  I was to 
busy bringing the banner to Boston.





-----Original Message-----

From: Kim Malo <kmalo17 at verizon.net>

To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List <celtics at igtc.com>; The Boston 
Celtics Mailing List <celtics at igtc.com>

Sent: Tue, Oct 20, 2009 10:42 am

Subject: Re: Fantasy Basketball



















Now, now, taunting is a technical. You can send me the fine money ; )?



Besides which fantasy is really about trading and shopping (ugh,

sorry, but I hate shopping), not stats. It uses stats, but only

certain limited ones in a very fixed way as a scorecard. Doesn't tell

you much about the game or require a deep understanding of real life

stats (that's a general comment, not a pot shot at you Alex)?



Kim?

?



At 12:34 PM 10/20/2009, Ryan W wrote:?



>Wait--the guy that hates stats plays fantasy basketball???



>?



>Ryan?



>?



>--- On Tue, 10/20/09, Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com> wrote:?



>?



> > From: Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com>?



> > Subject: Re: Fantasy Basketball?



> > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" <celtics at igtc.com>?



> > Date: Tuesday, October 20, 2009, 9:18 AM?



> > Hi Anne,?



> >?



> > Do you play head-to-head  format or roto? Can you send?



> > me the link to check?



> > the rules??



> >?



> > Thanks in advance,?



> > AG?



> >?



> > On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 9:15 AM, The Commish 
<bceltics33 at verizon.net>?



> > wrote:?



> >?



> > > Hello Everyone,?



> > >?



> > > There are two fantasy basketball leagues that have?



> > space available.  The?



> > > first league's draft is tonight at 9:00p EST.?



> > The second league is the?



> > > Celtics' Stuff Hoops League and the live draft is set?



> > for this Thurs, Oct?



> > > 22?



> > > at 9:00p EST.  They are both run through Yahoo?



> > Fantasy Sports.?



> > >?



> > > If anyone is interested in becoming a manager, or?



> > wants put their fantasy?



> > > skills to work, please email me directly for sign up?



> > information..?



> > >?



> > > Thanks!?



> > > Anne?



> > > The Commish?



> > > Celtics' Stuff Fantasy Hoops?

?



_______________________________________________?



The Boston Celtics Mailing List?



celtics at igtc.com?



http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics?












From alex.goldblatt at gmail.com  Tue Oct 20 20:47:02 2009
From: alex.goldblatt at gmail.com (Alex Goldblatt)
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 16:47:02 -0400
Subject: Fantasy Basketball
In-Reply-To: <8CC1FDA0E3A8B1E-3A78-2359@webmail-d023.sysops.aol.com>
References: <3f0c87180910200718s3d6ff890n49de91b7593a8757@mail.gmail.com>
	<700946.60576.qm@web65604.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
	<0KRT00DGHQJ2AF2O@vms173011.mailsrvcs.net>
	<8CC1FDA0E3A8B1E-3A78-2359@webmail-d023.sysops.aol.com>
Message-ID: <3f0c87180910201347t3beaac76g60d527d3302fefe@mail.gmail.com>

Actually, I do like the fantasy... It has nothing to do with the real game
or stat analysis, as Kim said. This is just a way of having fun while
talking bball... There are only two parts that you really need to know: what
are the strength for various players, and follow pretty much everything
happening in the league - which I do anyway.

I usually play head-to-head though: a bit more competitive than roto.

Thanks for the invite, will check.

AG

On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 4:21 PM, <douglas342 at aol.com> wrote:

> I joined a fantasy league a couple of years back and rapidly realized I
> only care about the Celtics.  That some dude from Oklahoma was 5th in
> rebounds didn't matter one bit, nor did I care to follow it all.  I made a
> trade my first week and never signed on again after about the third week.  I
> assume I finished last.  I just didn't care.  I was to busy bringing the
> banner to Boston.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: Kim Malo <kmalo17 at verizon.net>
>
> To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List <celtics at igtc.com>; The Boston Celtics
> Mailing List <celtics at igtc.com>
>
> Sent: Tue, Oct 20, 2009 10:42 am
>
> Subject: Re: Fantasy Basketball
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Now, now, taunting is a technical. You can send me the fine money ; )
>
>
>
> Besides which fantasy is really about trading and shopping (ugh,
>
> sorry, but I hate shopping), not stats. It uses stats, but only
>
> certain limited ones in a very fixed way as a scorecard. Doesn't tell
>
> you much about the game or require a deep understanding of real life
>
> stats (that's a general comment, not a pot shot at you Alex)
>
>
>
> Kim
>
>
>
>
>
> At 12:34 PM 10/20/2009, Ryan W wrote:
>
>
>
> Wait--the guy that hates stats plays fantasy basketball??
>>
>
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
> Ryan
>>
>
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
> --- On Tue, 10/20/09, Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
> > From: Alex Goldblatt <alex.goldblatt at gmail.com>
>>
>
>
>
> > Subject: Re: Fantasy Basketball
>>
>
>
>
> > To: "The Boston Celtics Mailing List" <celtics at igtc.com>
>>
>
>
>
> > Date: Tuesday, October 20, 2009, 9:18 AM
>>
>
>
>
> > Hi Anne,
>>
>
>
>
> >
>>
>
>
>
> > Do you play head-to-head  format or roto? Can you send
>>
>
>
>
> > me the link to check
>>
>
>
>
> > the rules?
>>
>
>
>
> >
>>
>
>
>
> > Thanks in advance,
>>
>
>
>
> > AG
>>
>
>
>
> >
>>
>
>
>
> > On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 9:15 AM, The Commish
>>
> <bceltics33 at verizon.net>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
>>
>
>
>
> >
>>
>
>
>
> > > Hello Everyone,
>>
>
>
>
> > >
>>
>
>
>
> > > There are two fantasy basketball leagues that have
>>
>
>
>
> > space available.  The
>>
>
>
>
> > > first league's draft is tonight at 9:00p EST.
>>
>
>
>
> > The second league is the
>>
>
>
>
> > > Celtics' Stuff Hoops League and the live draft is set
>>
>
>
>
> > for this Thurs, Oct
>>
>
>
>
> > > 22
>>
>
>
>
> > > at 9:00p EST.  They are both run through Yahoo
>>
>
>
>
> > Fantasy Sports.
>>
>
>
>
> > >
>>
>
>
>
> > > If anyone is interested in becoming a manager, or
>>
>
>
>
> > wants put their fantasy
>>
>
>
>
> > > skills to work, please email me directly for sign up
>>
>
>
>
> > information..
>>
>
>
>
> > >
>>
>
>
>
> > > Thanks!
>>
>
>
>
> > > Anne
>>
>
>
>
> > > The Commish
>>
>
>
>
> > > Celtics' Stuff Fantasy Hoops
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> 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
>

From BDodgers at aol.com  Tue Oct 20 21:35:01 2009
From: BDodgers at aol.com (BDodgers at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 17:35:01 EDT
Subject: Expert predictions: Boston Celtics
Message-ID: <c31.65f9a7b5.380f8705@aol.com>

 
Expert predictions: Boston Celtics
 

ESPN.com


Predicted Finish For Boston Celtics: 2009-10
 
    ANALYST COMMENT PREDICTIONS     
J.A. Adande, ESPN.com | _Adande's picks_ 
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/preview2009/news/story?page=Predictions0910-Adande) 
The Celtics get Rasheed  Wallace's range and length, and should get his 
best behavior. They won't  run out of gas or frontcourt players like they did 
last season.    
Atlantic: 1

East: 1
Jon Barry, ESPN | _Barry's picks_ 
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/preview2009/news/story?page=Predictions0910-Barry) 
The addition of Sheed and the  return of Kevin Garnett make this the best 
defensive team in the league.  They aren't concerned with getting the best 
record. They just want to be  healthy for the playoffs. This is the last run 
for these guys.    
Atlantic: 1

East: 2
Chris Broussard, ESPN The Mag |  _Broussard's picks_ 
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/preview2009/news/story?page=Predictions0910-Broussard) 
Each member of the Big  Three is at least 32 years old and they have a 
combined 38 seasons under  their belt. That's great experience, but also lots of 
mileage. They can  get their second ring ... if Father Time doesn't get 
them first.   
Atlantic: 1

East: 3
Chad Ford, ESPN.com | _Ford's picks_ 
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/preview2009/news/story?page=Predictions0910-Ford) 
The Celtics still have the Big  Three, the question is: Who's in it? Last 
season, Rajon Rondo -- not KG,  Paul Pierce or Ray Allen -- was the Celtics' 
best player. With KG coming  off knee surgery and Allen starting to show his 
age, can Rondo lead the  Celtics to the promised land?   
Atlantic: 1

East: 3
Jemele Hill, ESPN.com Page 2 |  _Hill's picks_ 
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/preview2009/news/story?page=Predictions0910-Hill) 
Perfectly appropriate the  Celtics and the Incredible Hulk share the color 
green because the East  isn't going to like the Celtics now that they're 
angry. Age and health are  concerns, but Sheed will turn back KG's odometer and 
Daniels was a real  steal. There is nothing this team doesn't have.    
Atlantic: 1

East: 1
John Hollinger, ESPN.com | _Hollinger's picks_ 
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/preview2009/news/story?page=Predictions0910-Hollinger) 
The big, obvious question  is KG's knee, but it's not the only one. Ray 
Allen and Paul Pierce aren't  kids, either, and Rajon Rondo's extension talks 
could get touchy. C's will  win division regardless, but can't see them 
surpassing Cavs and Magic.    
Atlantic: 1

East: 3
Jalen Rose, ESPN | _Rose's picks_ 
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/preview2009/news/story?page=Predictions0910-Rose) 
The return of KG and all he  brings to the table at both ends will be the 
key for the Celtics. Pierce  and Allen are both clutch and they need to 
re-sign Rondo ASAP. Wallace can  play power forward and center and is a matchup 
nightmare.    
Atlantic: 1

East: 3
Chris Sheridan, ESPN.com | _Sheridan's picks_ 
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/preview2009/news/story?page=Predictions0910-Sheridan) 
The pregame player intros  this season include a scoreboard shot of Rasheed 
Wallace and Marquis  Daniels with the title "RE-LOADED." How about 
"OVERLOADED" or  "SUPERLOADED"? Sheed says 73-9 is possible. I say 69 is their max.  
  
Atlantic: 1

East: 1
Marc Stein, ESPN.com | _Stein's picks_ 
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/preview2009/news/story?page=Predictions0910-Stein) 
The Celts have the manpower to  ask very little of Kevin Garnett during the 
regular season and nurse him  to full strength -- or as close as he can get 
-- for the playoffs. If  that's how Boston's season plays out, watch out.   
 
Atlantic: 1

East: 3
David Thorpe, ESPN.com | _Thorpe's picks_ 
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/preview2009/news/story?page=Predictions0910-Thorpe) 
Thanks to KG's injury, this  team never got a fair chance to defend its 
crown. Now, the Celtics have  some new weapons to bolster their terrific core. 
Most importantly, they  will still defend at an elite level, which will 
translate into a ton of  wins. Rasheed Wallace must be a good follower.    
Atlantic: 1

East: 1

AVERAGE  RANKING             Atlantic:  1.0 | _Standings_ (http://sports
.espn.go.com/nba/preview2009/news/story?page=Predictions-Standings0910#atlantic)
            East:  2.1 | _Standings_ 
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/preview2009/news/story?page=Predictions-Standings0910#east) 




From BDodgers at aol.com  Tue Oct 20 21:35:48 2009
From: BDodgers at aol.com (BDodgers at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 17:35:48 EDT
Subject: Sources: Ref agreement closer
Message-ID: <c2f.5a749b1d.380f8734@aol.com>

 
Sources: Ref agreement closer
 
By Marc  Stein and Chris Sheridan
ESPN.com

The NBA's locked out referees appear to be inching close to a return to 
work  after an unexpected meeting Tuesday in New York between commissioner 
David Stern  and Lamell McMorris of the referees' union, ESPN.com has learned. 
Sources close to the process told ESPN.com on Tuesday that the referees are 
 planning to vote on a fresh proposal from the league office this Friday 
after  quiet progress in negotiations, which comes weeks after both Stern and 
McMorris  separately withdrew from the highly contentious negotiations that 
preceded the  lockout. 
"A lot is happening behind the scenes," one source said. 
"Things look promising," said another source. 
It was not immediately known how quickly veteran referees would be ready to 
 call games even if a deal could be struck this week. Multiple sources 
close to  the process said that the veterans could be back at work in time for 
the start  of the regular season, but opening night is a week away with three 
games next  Tuesday, and replacement referees have worked the entire 
exhibition season. 
Yet it was an undeniably positive sign that the executive board of the  
referees' union -- McMorris included -- met face to face with Stern on Tuesday  
at the league's offices in Manhattan. 
Marc Stein covers the NBA for ESPN.com. Chris Sheridan covers the NBA  for 
ESPN Insider.

From BDodgers at aol.com  Tue Oct 20 21:36:55 2009
From: BDodgers at aol.com (BDodgers at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 17:36:55 EDT
Subject: Will Pierce pay Horford for bet?
Message-ID: <d3c.451e0dc0.380f8777@aol.com>

 
 
Will Pierce pay Horford for bet?
 

 
_Al Horford_ (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=3213)  
was on _Atlanta's 790 the Zone_ 
(http://media.790thezone.com/Podcasts/1345/al_horford_And_marvin_williams.mp3)  today, and  he said that during the 
2008 playoff series between the Hawks and the Celtics,  _Paul Pierce_ 
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=662)  made a $10,000 bet with 
him, one which  Pierce lost and has yet to pay up on.  
_Marvin Williams_ 
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=2797)  was also on the radio with Horford and  said the bet was that Atlanta 
wouldn't win a game in the series. They won three.  ESPN affiliate site 
Hoopinion _has a transcript of the  interview_ 
(http://www.hoopinionblog.com/2009/10/does-paul-pierce-owe-al-horford-money.html) . 
It's tough to say whether Pierce will pay up now that it's out in public, 
but  the larger issue here might be a player publicly discussing a bet placed 
on the  results of a playoff game.


From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil  Wed Oct 21 10:56:58 2009
From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil)
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 06:56:58 -0400
Subject: Will Pierce pay Horford for bet?
In-Reply-To: <d3c.451e0dc0.380f8777@aol.com>
References: <d3c.451e0dc0.380f8777@aol.com>
Message-ID: <200910211057.n9LAvBOU020926@artemis.afrc.af.mil>

If it had been for a lobster bake vs a southern bbq I probably wouldn't have cared (even if said bet actually ended up costing more cuz it included both teams, their families, and entourages); however in light of the Donaghey ref scandal how is this different? A player has WAY more impact on a game than a ref. I know it can be argued (Shoeless Joe Style) that by Pierce losing the bet so badly that it's much ado about nothing, but the gambling is the point. Is this different than Pete Rose the manager betting on his own games?

Discuss.

-----Original Message-----
From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of BDodgers at aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 5:37 PM
To: celtics at igtc.com; Celticsstuffgroup at yahoogroups.com
Subject: Will Pierce pay Horford for bet?

 
 
Will Pierce pay Horford for bet?
 

 
_Al Horford_ (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=3213)  
was on _Atlanta's 790 the Zone_ 
(http://media.790thezone.com/Podcasts/1345/al_horford_And_marvin_williams.mp3)  today, and  he said that during the 
2008 playoff series between the Hawks and the Celtics,  _Paul Pierce_ 
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=662)  made a $10,000 bet with 
him, one which  Pierce lost and has yet to pay up on.  
_Marvin Williams_ 
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=2797)  was also on the radio with Horford and  said the bet was that Atlanta 
wouldn't win a game in the series. They won three.  ESPN affiliate site 
Hoopinion _has a transcript of the  interview_ 
(http://www.hoopinionblog.com/2009/10/does-paul-pierce-owe-al-horford-money.html) . 
It's tough to say whether Pierce will pay up now that it's out in public, 
but  the larger issue here might be a player publicly discussing a bet placed 
on the  results of a playoff game.

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


From wayoftheray at yahoo.com  Wed Oct 21 12:01:55 2009
From: wayoftheray at yahoo.com (Way Of The Ray)
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 05:01:55 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Good Reality Check: NY Game Highlights Several Celtics Weaknesses
Message-ID: <13516.14694.qm@web110115.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

The Celtics performance against the Knicks was enlightening for what it 
revealed in the way of Celtics weaknesses.

- Celtics still need a backup PG.  

No doubt about that. House has never been able to run an offense; Daniels
is much better in the role of a 2/3; Lester Hudson, sufficing as a Mini-Micro or middle class Nate Robinson this pre-season, including accolades from Peter Vecsey, is not a substitute for a real veteran PG.

- Celtics have difficulty guarding smaller, quicker guards

So far, Hudson has been their best defender against these type of players.

- Celtics lack a low post scorer.

Exactly, with Powe gone, so is the inside offense. Sweetney could fulfill
that role, but first he has to make the team and then shed 30 pounds at least.

- Rivers showed poor in-game management skills and inability to
adjust his lineup

The King Of Lineup Combos seemed to have forgotten how to innovate against the Knicks, whom with their athletic, small lineup made the Celtics look old and slow, especially Perkins and Wallace. Perhaps, Rivers was trying to see how a big, unathletic lineup would match up against a quicker one, but more likely, just another instance of Doc's poor in-game management skills. What he should have done is sat Perkins, moved Garnett to Center (and used Wallace solely there rather than see any time at PF) and added Daniels to the starting lineup. 

- Celtics could really use a 6-8 and above athletic forward

As I've said in the past, someone like David Lee would be great on
this team. Josh Smith, he's a knucklehead, but his athleticism would  
be a terrific addition to the frontcourt.

Trade proposal: Ray, Rondo and Perkins, et al. for Joe Johnson, Josh Smith and Mike Bibby. Toss in a third team to bring back a decent center. Would
the Hawks have any interest?

Ray




      


From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil  Wed Oct 21 12:20:48 2009
From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil)
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 08:20:48 -0400
Subject: Good Reality Check: NY Game Highlights Several Celtics Weaknesses
In-Reply-To: <13516.14694.qm@web110115.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <13516.14694.qm@web110115.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <200910211221.n9LCL9Ed010879@artemis.afrc.af.mil>

I'm not sure why Ray makes my blood boil so. It just happens.

First, there is no perfect team. Every team has a weakness, even Ray's fantasy team I'm sure. 

The Celtics don't lack a low post scorer. They lack an offense built around low post scoring. BIG difference. Pierce, Garnett, Sheed, even Rondo have all in the past shown a decent to excellent low post game (throw in Perk's REALLY high low post percentage if you want, but since Ray despises all things Perk I won't include it). Our offense however is not designed to go inside out as the primary option. It happens, sometimes a lot during a certain game, but our offense is primary a perimeter option first design.

Doc isn't going to make huge changes to the starting lineup. And why should he? It is mix of personnel that allows for multiple styles, has defensive capabilities that few teams in the league can match and can (as mentioned) work an offense inside or outside. They do have an Achilles heel against the small athletic types - I'll agree there, but when they slow it down and grind it out using their strengths against said lineups (not allowing that team to dictate tempo) MOST times they win. Most importantly they establish that tempo not on offense (Ray's Achilles heel BTW is that he forgets defense exists), but on defense.

Trade proposal - can we trade WOTRay for Doctor 90210, Paris Hilton's Chihuahua, and a reality series to be named later? 

Now I know what it is - Ray's Perk hatred is what rubs me the wrong way. "Decent center" he says.

Gimme a break.


-----Original Message-----
From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Way Of The Ray
Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 8:02 AM
To: Celtics Are Idiots List; Celtics Stuff
Subject: Good Reality Check: NY Game Highlights Several Celtics Weaknesses

The Celtics performance against the Knicks was enlightening for what it 
revealed in the way of Celtics weaknesses.

- Celtics still need a backup PG.  

No doubt about that. House has never been able to run an offense; Daniels
is much better in the role of a 2/3; Lester Hudson, sufficing as a Mini-Micro or middle class Nate Robinson this pre-season, including accolades from Peter Vecsey, is not a substitute for a real veteran PG.

- Celtics have difficulty guarding smaller, quicker guards

So far, Hudson has been their best defender against these type of players.

- Celtics lack a low post scorer.

Exactly, with Powe gone, so is the inside offense. Sweetney could fulfill
that role, but first he has to make the team and then shed 30 pounds at least.

- Rivers showed poor in-game management skills and inability to
adjust his lineup

The King Of Lineup Combos seemed to have forgotten how to innovate against the Knicks, whom with their athletic, small lineup made the Celtics look old and slow, especially Perkins and Wallace. Perhaps, Rivers was trying to see how a big, unathletic lineup would match up against a quicker one, but more likely, just another instance of Doc's poor in-game management skills. What he should have done is sat Perkins, moved Garnett to Center (and used Wallace solely there rather than see any time at PF) and added Daniels to the starting lineup. 

- Celtics could really use a 6-8 and above athletic forward

As I've said in the past, someone like David Lee would be great on
this team. Josh Smith, he's a knucklehead, but his athleticism would  
be a terrific addition to the frontcourt.

Trade proposal: Ray, Rondo and Perkins, et al. for Joe Johnson, Josh Smith and Mike Bibby. Toss in a third team to bring back a decent center. Would
the Hawks have any interest?

Ray




      

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


From cecilw45 at hotmail.com  Wed Oct 21 13:15:59 2009
From: cecilw45 at hotmail.com (Cecil Wright)
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 10:15:59 -0300
Subject: Good Reality Check: NY Game Highlights Several Celtics Weaknesses
In-Reply-To: <200910211221.n9LCL9Ed010879@artemis.afrc.af.mil>
References: <13516.14694.qm@web110115.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BLU102-W2779CCE0E1F025113B1D5D9BF0@phx.gbl>


Patrick...Ray used to make my blood boil...until I learned to say the following...EARNEST BROWN...SERENITY NOW!!!!

 

Anyhow, the other thing that the Rayster either doesn't understand or conveniently fails to mention, is that this is a preseason game which does not matter an iota in the standings.  If it had, I believe that incompetent nincompoop, Doc, would have played Messrs Pierce, Garnett, etc, down the stretch when there was only a point or two difference.

 

As it was, I certainly enjoyed what I saw out of MD.  Talk about exploiting weaknesses and mismatches!!

 

And the team is really in bigtime trouble if the only inside game we had, AT ALL, was what Leon provided in 17.5 mpg when he wasn't injured last year.  Not sure if all of BBs points last year came by way of the J but I doubt it.  And I actually thought that Perk played very well in KGs absence.  He's not gonna make anyone forget the name Jabbar offensively but there was a visible improvement IMHO.

 

I am excited by this team and can't wait for the opening whistle.  But my last question to Ray is why would the Hawks want Rondo and Perkins with all their wart infestation which you love to point out?  They can't do this or that but we would be willing to trade our best players for them?

 

Cecil
 
> From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil
> To: celtics at igtc.com
> Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 08:20:48 -0400
> Subject: RE: Good Reality Check: NY Game Highlights Several Celtics Weaknesses
> 
> I'm not sure why Ray makes my blood boil so. It just happens.
> 
> First, there is no perfect team. Every team has a weakness, even Ray's fantasy team I'm sure. 
> 
> The Celtics don't lack a low post scorer. They lack an offense built around low post scoring. BIG difference. Pierce, Garnett, Sheed, even Rondo have all in the past shown a decent to excellent low post game (throw in Perk's REALLY high low post percentage if you want, but since Ray despises all things Perk I won't include it). Our offense however is not designed to go inside out as the primary option. It happens, sometimes a lot during a certain game, but our offense is primary a perimeter option first design.
> 
> Doc isn't going to make huge changes to the starting lineup. And why should he? It is mix of personnel that allows for multiple styles, has defensive capabilities that few teams in the league can match and can (as mentioned) work an offense inside or outside. They do have an Achilles heel against the small athletic types - I'll agree there, but when they slow it down and grind it out using their strengths against said lineups (not allowing that team to dictate tempo) MOST times they win. Most importantly they establish that tempo not on offense (Ray's Achilles heel BTW is that he forgets defense exists), but on defense.
> 
> Trade proposal - can we trade WOTRay for Doctor 90210, Paris Hilton's Chihuahua, and a reality series to be named later? 
> 
> Now I know what it is - Ray's Perk hatred is what rubs me the wrong way. "Decent center" he says.
> 
> Gimme a break.
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Way Of The Ray
> Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 8:02 AM
> To: Celtics Are Idiots List; Celtics Stuff
> Subject: Good Reality Check: NY Game Highlights Several Celtics Weaknesses
> 
> The Celtics performance against the Knicks was enlightening for what it 
> revealed in the way of Celtics weaknesses.
> 
> - Celtics still need a backup PG. 
> 
> No doubt about that. House has never been able to run an offense; Daniels
> is much better in the role of a 2/3; Lester Hudson, sufficing as a Mini-Micro or middle class Nate Robinson this pre-season, including accolades from Peter Vecsey, is not a substitute for a real veteran PG.
> 
> - Celtics have difficulty guarding smaller, quicker guards
> 
> So far, Hudson has been their best defender against these type of players.
> 
> - Celtics lack a low post scorer.
> 
> Exactly, with Powe gone, so is the inside offense. Sweetney could fulfill
> that role, but first he has to make the team and then shed 30 pounds at least.
> 
> - Rivers showed poor in-game management skills and inability to
> adjust his lineup
> 
> The King Of Lineup Combos seemed to have forgotten how to innovate against the Knicks, whom with their athletic, small lineup made the Celtics look old and slow, especially Perkins and Wallace. Perhaps, Rivers was trying to see how a big, unathletic lineup would match up against a quicker one, but more likely, just another instance of Doc's poor in-game management skills. What he should have done is sat Perkins, moved Garnett to Center (and used Wallace solely there rather than see any time at PF) and added Daniels to the starting lineup. 
> 
> - Celtics could really use a 6-8 and above athletic forward
> 
> As I've said in the past, someone like David Lee would be great on
> this team. Josh Smith, he's a knucklehead, but his athleticism would 
> be a terrific addition to the frontcourt.
> 
> Trade proposal: Ray, Rondo and Perkins, et al. for Joe Johnson, Josh Smith and Mike Bibby. Toss in a third team to bring back a decent center. Would
> the Hawks have any interest?
> 
> Ray
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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
 		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
New! Faster Messenger access on the new MSN homepage
http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9677406

From alex.goldblatt at gmail.com  Wed Oct 21 14:05:53 2009
From: alex.goldblatt at gmail.com (Alex Goldblatt)
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 10:05:53 -0400
Subject: Good Reality Check: NY Game Highlights Several Celtics Weaknesses
In-Reply-To: <BLU102-W2779CCE0E1F025113B1D5D9BF0@phx.gbl>
References: <13516.14694.qm@web110115.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<200910211221.n9LCL9Ed010879@artemis.afrc.af.mil>
	<BLU102-W2779CCE0E1F025113B1D5D9BF0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <3f0c87180910210705j786e2daeh760fd41d074ab326@mail.gmail.com>

Some weird thread - but typical... I'd rate it as one of the top ones on my
list for Ray...

Breaking news: we have 'Sheed that actually has the low-post game and
actually is taller than 6'8...

Breaking news II: no trade will happen, I'm not even touching on
the proposed one that makes no sense...

Breaking news III: Hudson is the best defender... well, if discard his
gambling habits and lack of understanding of the basics of the team D
concept like switching - yeah, he's probably the best of them all...

Breaking news IV: keep up good work - you make so much noise on the list,
and make so many people happy having huge adrenalin injection right from the
early morning to wake them up and keep running in circles all day long...

AG

From Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil  Wed Oct 21 15:04:37 2009
From: Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil (Patrick.Ryan at dobbins.af.mil)
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 11:04:37 -0400
Subject: Good Reality Check: NY Game Highlights Several Celtics Weaknesses
In-Reply-To: <3f0c87180910210705j786e2daeh760fd41d074ab326@mail.gmail.com>
References: <13516.14694.qm@web110115.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<200910211221.n9LCL9Ed010879@artemis.afrc.af.mil>
	<BLU102-W2779CCE0E1F025113B1D5D9BF0@phx.gbl>
	<3f0c87180910210705j786e2daeh760fd41d074ab326@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <200910211504.n9LF4kL3017432@poseidon.afrc.af.mil>

I will give Ray one credit - small, quick PG defense is a concern. 

However it is a concern for 98% of the teams in the league. PG and C remain the hardest positions to fill and good play at either position automatically necessitates an adjustment to the entire team defensive philosophy. There is no single man-to-man defender in the league that can consistently stop the top echelon PGs. It requires good team defense - something luckily the Cs DO have.

The key for the Cs is to turn said PGs to the defensive "funnel" (The Cs play to the baseline as theirs for example) to allow help to occur in a timely manner and from the right direction. Rondo has shown a proclivity to not shade his man, instead playing "face up", allowing his quick hands to remain a nuisance for the steal. This fact is what often makes the entire defense break down as the PG then drives not the to "funnel" but through the heart of the D causing the breakdown.

I agree that is a concern and needs additional work.


-----Original Message-----
From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf Of Alex Goldblatt
Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 10:06 AM
To: The Boston Celtics Mailing List
Subject: Re: Good Reality Check: NY Game Highlights Several Celtics Weaknesses

Some weird thread - but typical... I'd rate it as one of the top ones on my
list for Ray...

Breaking news: we have 'Sheed that actually has the low-post game and
actually is taller than 6'8...

Breaking news II: no trade will happen, I'm not even touching on
the proposed one that makes no sense...

Breaking news III: Hudson is the best defender... well, if discard his
gambling habits and lack of understanding of the basics of the team D
concept like switching - yeah, he's probably the best of them all...

Breaking news IV: keep up good work - you make so much noise on the list,
and make so many people happy having huge adrenalin injection right from the
early morning to wake them up and keep running in circles all day long...

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


From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Wed Oct 21 16:21:06 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 09:21:06 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Good Reality Check: NY Game Highlights Several Celtics Weaknesses
In-Reply-To: <13516.14694.qm@web110115.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <512425.74571.qm@web65615.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

--- On Wed, 10/21/09, Way Of The Ray <wayoftheray at yahoo.com> wrote:
> The Celtics performance against the
> Knicks was enlightening for what it 
> revealed in the way of Celtics weaknesses.

Enlightening to you maybe.  All these so-called weakness have been here since day 1.  They were 'brought to light' because Doc didn't coach around them for some reason.

> 
> - Celtics still need a backup PG.? 

We'll never have a backup PG as long as House dons Celtic green.  Until then, we'll have to make due.  

> 
> No doubt about that. House has never been able to run an
> offense; Daniels
> is much better in the role of a 2/3; Lester Hudson,
> sufficing as a Mini-Micro or middle class Nate Robinson this
> pre-season, including accolades from Peter Vecsey, is not a
> substitute for a real veteran PG.

Agreed about House; Daniels is better at 2/3, but he's also much much better than House at point, so he sacrifices for the better of the team.

Hudson is a good player for this team.  He's not a real point guard, but he can *really* defend his position, which is an upgrade over House.  

Hudson can create his shot too--if you remember the end of the game last night, everyone sat on the perimeter while Daniels tried to penetrate and create.  What happened?  The Knicks shut down Daniels with the double team, and we kicked it around the perimeter for 3 pointers we ended up missing.  Another player with an ability to break down the defense would have been ideal.  Instead, Doc went with Giddens over Hudson...

> 
> - Celtics have difficulty guarding smaller, quicker guards
> 
> So far, Hudson has been their best defender against these
> type of players.

First, Rondo is our best defender against these types of players.  That said, it was all the more confusing why Doc wouldn't matchup with the Knicks when they played two points in the backcourt (Nate Robinson and Chris Duhon).  Perfect time to use Hudson in a regular season role (as defender of quick, speedy point guards), and perfect time to help him hone his PG skills--with quality crunch time minutes against NBA starters.  Instead, Doc decided to find out if Giddens can defend PGs.  Good news?  He can.  Bad news?  He still can't score.  

> 
> - Celtics lack a low post scorer.

KG/Perk/Sheed/Baby are all capable of getting buckets down low, as are Paul/Marquis/Walker/TA if we give them low post opportunities.  As Patrick pointed out, just because we choose not to use our low post game doesn't mean we don't have one.

> 
> 
> - Rivers showed poor in-game management skills and
> inability to
> adjust his lineup

I'll wait until the regular season to bury Doc for bad rotations and in-game management skills.  But not playing Hudson when the Knicks went small in the backcourt was a mistake--historically it has been hard for us to defend two point guard lineups and Hudson's one unique skill to this team is his ability to play legitimate point guard defense.  Why not use him last night?  

> 
> The King Of Lineup Combos seemed to have forgotten how to
> innovate against the Knicks, whom with their athletic, small
> lineup made the Celtics look old and slow, especially
> Perkins and Wallace. Perhaps, Rivers was trying to see how a
> big, unathletic lineup would match up against a quicker one,
> but more likely, just another instance of Doc's poor in-game
> management skills. What he should have done is sat Perkins,
> moved Garnett to Center (and used Wallace solely there
> rather than see any time at PF) and added Daniels to the
> starting lineup. 

That's going too far--the Cs game out sloppy last night and let the Knicks and their free-flowing offensive strategy infect them, leading to a lot of shooting the first shot that showed. 

And, God, Perkins had nothing to do with it at all.  If we wouldn't have been tricked into chucking jump shots early in the shot clock, we could have gotten the ball to Perk in the post, where he absolutely dominates Lee.  


> Trade proposal: Ray, Rondo and Perkins, et al. for Joe
> Johnson, Josh Smith and Mike Bibby. Toss in a third team to
> bring back a decent center. Would
> the Hawks have any interest?
> 

Without Rondo, our team is going nowhere and all your concerns about our team being too old actually become viable points then.  Rondo IS the team.

Ryan


      


From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Wed Oct 21 16:27:47 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 09:27:47 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Will Pierce pay Horford for bet?
In-Reply-To: <200910211057.n9LAvBOU020926@artemis.afrc.af.mil>
Message-ID: <747635.50345.qm@web65609.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

First, I don't care one way or the other.

Second, Horford is a punk bitch.  

Third, didn't Pete Rose only bet on games he wasn't managing?  

Fourth, doesn't money have to exchange hands for a crime to occur?  As long as Pierce doesn't pay up, nothing criminal has happened.  

A lot of things get said on the court which have no bearing on reality.  This was one of them.  It's pretty funny that Horford has started bitching 2 seasons later.

Ryan

--- On Wed, 10/21/09, 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: Will Pierce pay Horford for bet?
> To: celtics at igtc.com
> Date: Wednesday, October 21, 2009, 5:56 AM
> If it had been for a lobster bake vs
> a southern bbq I probably wouldn't have cared (even if said
> bet actually ended up costing more cuz it included both
> teams, their families, and entourages); however in light of
> the Donaghey ref scandal how is this different? A player has
> WAY more impact on a game than a ref. I know it can be
> argued (Shoeless Joe Style) that by Pierce losing the bet so
> badly that it's much ado about nothing, but the gambling is
> the point. Is this different than Pete Rose the manager
> betting on his own games?
> 
> Discuss.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com
> [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com]
> On Behalf Of BDodgers at aol.com
> Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 5:37 PM
> To: celtics at igtc.com;
> Celticsstuffgroup at yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Will Pierce pay Horford for bet?
> 
>  
>  
> Will Pierce pay Horford for bet?
>  
> 
>  
> _Al Horford_ (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=3213)?
> 
> was on _Atlanta's 790 the Zone_ 
> (http://media.790thezone.com/Podcasts/1345/al_horford_And_marvin_williams.mp3)?
> today, and? he said that during the 
> 2008 playoff series between the Hawks and the
> Celtics,? _Paul Pierce_ 
> (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=662)?
> made a $10,000 bet with 
> him, one which? Pierce lost and has yet to pay up
> on.? 
> _Marvin Williams_ 
> (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=2797)?
> was also on the radio with Horford and? said the bet
> was that Atlanta 
> wouldn't win a game in the series. They won three.?
> ESPN affiliate site 
> Hoopinion _has a transcript of the? interview_ 
> (http://www.hoopinionblog.com/2009/10/does-paul-pierce-owe-al-horford-money.html)
> . 
> It's tough to say whether Pierce will pay up now that it's
> out in public, 
> but? the larger issue here might be a player publicly
> discussing a bet placed 
> on the? results of a playoff game.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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
> 


      


From gk_tyler at yahoo.com  Wed Oct 21 23:42:47 2009
From: gk_tyler at yahoo.com (gene kirkpatrick)
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 16:42:47 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: question
Message-ID: <965775.25995.qm@web39607.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Is Delonte dressed out, or even present?


      

From pdelevett at yahoo.com  Thu Oct 22 03:48:24 2009
From: pdelevett at yahoo.com (Peter Delevett)
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 20:48:24 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: anybody know why Davis didnt play tonight against Cavs?
Message-ID: <881446.93593.qm@web110103.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>




      


From tsb33 at windstream.net  Thu Oct 22 03:56:28 2009
From: tsb33 at windstream.net (TroySusieBrady)
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 23:56:28 -0400
Subject: anybody know why Davis didnt play tonight against Cavs?
In-Reply-To: <881446.93593.qm@web110103.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <881446.93593.qm@web110103.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <015401ca52cb$a23520f0$6401a8c0@troyscomputer>

lower back injury, not serious.

-----Original Message-----
From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On Behalf
Of Peter Delevett
Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 11:48 PM
To: celtics at igtc.com
Subject: anybody know why Davis didnt play tonight against Cavs?






_______________________________________________
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: 8.5.423 / Virus Database: 270.14.20/2444 - Release Date: 10/20/09
18:42:00



From ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com  Thu Oct 22 04:58:55 2009
From: ubiquitous_am_i at yahoo.com (Ryan W)
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 21:58:55 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: question
In-Reply-To: <965775.25995.qm@web39607.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <82298.81470.qm@web65602.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

He was dressed and present, but not available to play until his doctors clear him.

Ryan

--- On Wed, 10/21/09, gene kirkpatrick <gk_tyler at yahoo.com> wrote:

> From: gene kirkpatrick <gk_tyler at yahoo.com>
> Subject: question
> To: "celtics" <celtics at igtc.com>
> Date: Wednesday, October 21, 2009, 6:42 PM
> Is Delonte dressed out, or even
> present?
> 
> 
> ? ? ? 
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics
> 


      


From awbecb at att.net  Thu Oct 22 18:50:02 2009
From: awbecb at att.net (Alden Brosseau)
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 11:50:02 -0700
Subject: The Boston Celtics Mailing List Digest, Vol 17, Issue 257
Message-ID: <FD95920C6DA44EA1867B93DB14F59A4A@Alden>

Kim gets my vote as "favorite-person-to watch-a-game-with."  A  few other posters may be as knowledgeable and one or two as perceptive, but it's her good-humored maturity that makes the list tolerable.  Too bad some of the highest-volume posters sound like spoiled children to be shunned like the plague. 

awb

From douglas342 at aol.com  Thu Oct 22 18:57:38 2009
From: douglas342 at aol.com (douglas342 at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 14:57:38 -0400
Subject: prediction
Message-ID: <8CC2160A8F3D24E-E70-1A89E@webmail-d083.sysops.aol.com>

I usually wait until after the last exhibition game, but...



I hold out hopes for a title this year (SI picks the Cs), but for the 
regular season I can't avoid the fear of injuries, so put me down for a 
very modest 60 wins.


From shizzjr at hotmail.com  Thu Oct 22 19:17:51 2009
From: shizzjr at hotmail.com (Shawn Niles)
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 15:17:51 -0400
Subject: prediction
In-Reply-To: <8CC2160A8F3D24E-E70-1A89E@webmail-d083.sysops.aol.com>
References: <8CC2160A8F3D24E-E70-1A89E@webmail-d083.sysops.aol.com>
Message-ID: <BAY111-W214A17562E7A32F8F861ADA5BE0@phx.gbl>


68-14 for me.
 
> To: celtics at igtc.com
> Subject: prediction
> Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 14:57:38 -0400
> From: douglas342 at aol.com
> 
> I usually wait until after the last exhibition game, but...
> 
> 
> 
> I hold out hopes for a title this year (SI picks the Cs), but for the 
> regular season I can't avoid the fear of injuries, so put me down for a 
> very modest 60 wins.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics
 		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
Windows 7: It works the way you want. Learn more.
http://www.microsoft.com/Windows/windows-7/default.aspx?ocid=PID24727::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WWL_WIN_evergreen2:102009

From kmalo17 at verizon.net  Thu Oct 22 21:58:06 2009
From: kmalo17 at verizon.net (Kim Malo)
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 17:58:06 -0400
Subject: The Boston Celtics Mailing List Digest, Vol 17, Issue 257
In-Reply-To: <FD95920C6DA44EA1867B93DB14F59A4A@Alden>
References: <FD95920C6DA44EA1867B93DB14F59A4A@Alden>
Message-ID: <0KRX00BYKRP2G3R5@vms173001.mailsrvcs.net>

At 02:50 PM 10/22/2009, Alden Brosseau wrote:
>Kim gets my vote as "favorite-person-to watch-a-game-with."  A  few 
>other posters may be as knowledgeable and one or two as perceptive, 
>but it's her good-humored maturity that makes the list 
>tolerable.  Too bad some of the highest-volume posters sound like 
>spoiled children to be shunned like the plague.

Of course you've never actually had to HEAR me while watching a game, 
alternating between yelling at refs, players, etc and too intensely 
focused on watching and analyzing to say anything ; )
Thanks for the compliments though ; )
Kim


From jahillsr at comcast.net  Thu Oct 22 22:42:12 2009
From: jahillsr at comcast.net (Jim Hill)
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 18:42:12 -0400
Subject: Prediction '09-'10
Message-ID: <000601ca5368$e5e33f60$b1a9be20$@net>

64-18 for Jim Hill

Thanks Snoopy!


From BDodgers at aol.com  Fri Oct 23 05:41:04 2009
From: BDodgers at aol.com (BDodgers at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 01:41:04 EDT
Subject: Chemistry Test
Message-ID: <d60.5baab2f2.38129bf0@aol.com>

 
Chemistry Test
Can Rajon Rondo keep Boston from blowing up? 
 (http://search.espn.go.com/ric-bucher/) By Ric  Bucher
ESPN The Magazine

This article appears in the November 2 issue of ESPN The Magazine. 
The notion hit _Rajon Rondo_ 
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=3026)  like an unseen back pick. He'd suffered  accusations 
before, but knowing them to be false, he'd run past without  bothering to argue or 
defend. After all, if they couldn't get his name right  (RAH-zhan), why 
should they be expected to get anything else?  
How teammates felt about him, though, that was different. His first sports  
memories are of pick-up games in East Louisville, his first motivation the  
disappointment of the near-teens who had to pick 6-year-old Rajon in a 
package  with older brother William. He'd outgrown all that; at least he thought 
he had.  Then he sat in Doc Rivers' office this past June, the gloom of a 
failed title  defense hanging heavy, as the coach asked: "Do you think your 
teammates like  playing with you?"  
Rondo couldn't imagine any answer other than yes.  Maybe teammates didn't 
like him, a stoic among extroverts, a kid who questioned  damn near 
everything. But not like playing with him? Hadn't he started for a  champion in his 
second season, with a pass-first game criticized for not  including enough 
shots? And last season, hadn't he out-dueled Rookie of the Year  _Derrick 
Rose_ (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=3456)  in a tense, 
seven-game playoff and been  voted second-team all-defense?  
"I thought so," was all Rondo could muster. 
Rivers didn't press. He knew the question would get Rondo thinking,  
analyzing. Because that's what he does. It's the secret to his success and,  
maybe, the reason behind Rivers' insinuation. No one is harder on Rondo than  
Rondo. And when the young playmaker rewound the season, he paused on a few  
sidelong glances and not-quite-heard whispers. Just like that, the playground  
ghosts were back. Rondo had chalked up the disappointing season to 
complacency  after a title or capitulation following Kevin Garnett's knee injury. He 
never  imagined that anyone would see him as the problem. "That," he says, 
"was like a  stab in the back." 
Off-season trade rumors exiling him to Memphis gave  further voice to the 
ghosts. Even as GM _Danny Ainge_ 
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=3622)  denied it on local airwaves, he managed to  slip in that 
Rondo "had to grow up." Then the C's opened training camp without  offering 
him a long-term deal, leaving the star to ponder his worth as a  restricted 
free agent next summer.  
Funny thing, though: As his value to the team seems  depressed, he's being 
asked to do more for it. Before last season, skeptics  couldn't see how the 
second-year point guard could keep three future Hall of  Famers happy. Now, 
mercurial newcomers _Rasheed Wallace_ 
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=883)  and _Marquis Daniels_ 
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=2200)  will demand attention, and a  rehabilitated 
KG must be reintegrated. It would be tricky even if he weren't  wondering 
who was and wasn't with him. Asked about it, Rondo's already rigid jaw  
tightens. Then: "We don't have to be best buddies to win a championship." 
His trajectory, on paper, is the hoops equivalent of  an indie film that 
becomes a blockbuster. Picked 21st in 2006, Rondo played  little as a rook 
before becoming a starter the following season, defying  yearlong doubts to 
lead the Celtics to their 17th title. Last season, he shot  better than 50% and 
logged five triple-doubles, including three in the playoffs.  Dunkin' 
Donuts, ubiquitous in Boston, is actively using Rondo, not KG or _Paul Pierce_ 
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=662)  or _Ray Allen_ 
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=9) , to be its rep. 
Red Bull too. His Facebook  fans -- pushing 60,000 -- number almost twice 
that of 2008 Finals MVP and fellow  career Celtic Pierce. 
But while a hit with those who view him from afar,  he has a harder time 
connecting eye-to-eye. At Kentucky, Rondo was rumored to be  frustrated by 
coach Tubby Smith's ball-control system, and when he left after  his sophomore 
year, it was with Coach's blessing. This summer, when he passed on  a chance 
to work out with Team USA, people said it was because he took the late  
invite as a snub. (Rondo says he had committed to being in the wedding party of 
 best bud and teammate _Kendrick Perkins_ 
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=2018) .) And only now is he promising to stop  
warming up with his laces untied, claiming he was unaware coaches saw it as  
disrespectful. Whatever the specific realities, his nonconformism can be seen as  
arrogance, disinterest or both. "He lets you interpret what you want," says 
 brother William. "You want a nod or smile, but he gives you nothing." 
That was fine with Rivers the day he sat down his point guard. "I didn't 
have  that meeting for him to talk," the coach says. "He needed to hear about 
some  things."  
Things like his late arrival to the first game against the Magic in the  
conference semis, his body language and loss of focus, his speaking up at the  
wrong time -- or not speaking up enough. Still, Rivers is very clear. "This 
 isn't a Rondo issue, it's a young-player-chasing-a-contract,  
celebrity-and-endorsements issue," he says, "What he can't forget is the  basketball 
chase."  
 
RONDO'S STOCK WITH THE TEAM IS DEPRESSED JUST WHEN THEY'RE ASKING HIM TO DO 
 MORE THAN EVER. 

But if that's the only worry, there isn't one. This  summer, Rondo made 
three visits to the _Mark Price_ 
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=3822)  Shooting Lab outside Atlanta, going double  sessions for 
several days to address the weak link in his arsenal, his jumper.  As a bonus, 
a disdain for the weight room -- he's afraid bulking up will slow  him down 
-- was pounded out of him by fighting through one too many _Dwight Howard_ 
(http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=2384)  picks. He has 
also pledged to stop  reaching for back-taps, trying to tip away the ball 
from dribblers from behind;  the all-or-nothing tactic too often leads to 
opposing points or a foul. Of  course, the Celtics have wanted him to 
concentrate on these deficiencies since  he arrived in town. "If you say two plus two 
is four, he asks why," says  William, who lives with Rajon. "Same on the 
court. He'll say, 'Yes, we ran that  play this way and it worked, but who says 
we can't run it this way and get the  same result?'" 
If Doc lays a plan for a pick-and-roll D, Rondo thinks it's okay to 
challenge  it. And he'll keep challenging until he likes the answer. "It's a point 
guard  mentality," says Pierce. "They think they're smarter than everyone. 
Sometimes he  outsmarts himself." 
All of it sounds familiar to Doug Bibby, Rondo's Eastern High coach. Bibby  
says it took the freshman Rondo four days to pick up a gimmicky system that 
some  seniors hadn't mastered after four years. But he well understands the 
 double-edged sword that is Rondo's unshakable faith in knowing what has to 
be  done -- even if it's not what anyone else believes has to be done. 
"When he  feels he sees something," says Bibby, the cousin of Hawks point guard 
Mike, "the  situation can turn into a confrontation." 
He's never backed down, never shown weakness. Amber Rondo made sure of 
that.  A divorced, single mother to William, Rajon and sister Dymon, Amber 
raised her  kids in a development near downtown Louisville, College Court, where 
gunfire is  not uncommon. She always asked for the third shift at the 
factory so she could  shuttle her kids to practice, sleeping in the back of the 
blue-and-white family  van until it was time to return home for dinner, before 
heading to work. All  three were star prep athletes, and all checked in 
with Amber during games, often  before they did with their coach.  
When the Rondos were young, there was never any guff from William about  
dragging Rajon, five years his junior, wherever he went. Amber, though, 
couldn't  order anyone to pass her scrawny kid the ball or stop them from picking 
on him.  "There was no crying," William says. "He learned how to get it 
done. He got the  suck-it-up mentality early." They wouldn't pass him the ball? 
He stole it. Block  his shot? He ran by them. Knock him down? No tears, 
ever. 
He became a master of control very early and today jokes about being OCD,  
obsessive-compulsive, but there's something to it. As a kid, his Christmas 
toys  were barely unwrapped before he had them lined up on his bed. These 
days, he  knows if someone has been sitting on the couch by the tilt of a 
pillow. His  game-day ritual includes five showers and a precise pretip schedule 
for brushing  his teeth, putting on his socks, peeing and tucking a small 
jar of Carmex into a  sock. 
The obsessiveness shows most, though, after he commits some on-court 
blunder.  "He doesn't want to be bothered, because he's processing what he did 
wrong,"  Bibby says. "By the time you rip him, he's figured it out." Problem 
is, in the  NBA three plays have transpired during the processing, three plays 
during which  Rondo is in his own penalty box and Boston is playing a man 
down. "You're  playing mad," Rivers has told him more than once. "Get past 
mad. It's killing  you, and that's killing us." 
Before Game 1 of the Magic series, Rondo left his house outside Boston at 
his  usual time, 5 p.m., for the 35-minute drive to the arena. Rolling his 
black  velvet Bentley onto the highway, he hit a wall of unexpected traffic. 
"At first  I'm thinking, I'm going to miss my routine," he says. "Then it 
was, I'm going to  miss the team meeting." Doc was halfway through his pregame 
talk when Rondo  arrived. His routine in shambles, so too was his first 
half. He missed his first  six shots as the Magic built an 18-point halftime 
lead. Rivers lit into him at  the break, and Rondo nearly finished with a 
triple-double. But the Celtics lost  the game, homecourt advantage and, maybe, 
the series -- all because Rondo was  late. 
 
AFTER THE SEAON, RIVERS TRIED TO GET INTO RONDO'S HEAD. THAT'S BOTH EASIER  
AND MORE COMPLICATED THAN IT SOUNDS. 

It's been months since Rondo and Rivers talked about that game, months 
since  Rondo was asked the question. But what Doc torched still smolders. Rondo 
needs  15 seconds to find the words for how the question made him feel. 
"Wasn't good,"  he says. What he won't say is that he loves being a Celtic, but 
his house speaks  for him. In the Boston suburb of Lincoln, his dream house 
-- No. 9, of course --  sits at the end of a narrow and winding quarter-mile 
road that climbs through a  thick hillside grove. Inside, there's a 
three-shot montage of his daughter  Ryelle, but beyond that, Celtic Pride is the 
predominant decor. A painting of  the 2008 title celebration hangs on the 
dining-room side of a dual-facing  fireplace. The other side is "the 
championship room." An enormous photo of the  team standing in front of the Roman 
Coliseum hangs above the mantel. The  inscription reads "Ubuntu: A Person Is a 
Person Because of Other People."  There's a title banner and a display case 
containing his ring. Photos of Rondo  -- driving past Kobe, mugging with 
teammates, staring from the pages of a  magazine -- all reveal the same flat 
gaze. He's wearing it now, sitting in one  of four leather chairs facing the 
fireplace. "If I part with the Celtics,  they'll realize what they passed on," 
he says. "A team that wants me, that's  where I want to be." His words echo 
off the green shamrocks. 
The Celtics' first exhibition game of 2009 is in tiny Hidalgo, Texas, a  
stone's throw from the Rio Grande. Rondo is close to awful with four 
turnovers,  which includes one in the backcourt to a Rockets double-team in the first 
 quarter. Rondo sinks into himself, trudging to the last seat on the bench 
as the  team huddles without him.  
But Rivers praises how he handled the adversity and, where Rondo once  
might've replayed each mistake in the locker room, tonight he's perched on the  
training table, an arm's length from Garnett. Pierce and Allen complete the  
loose circle. Everyone is leaning back, laughing and joking. Everyone 
except  Rondo. He's leaning forward, all in, the joy of being part of this 
exclusive  club leaking out in the form of a rare smile, not a ghost to be seen. 
Ric Bucher is a senior writer at ESPN The  Magazine.

From wayoftheray at yahoo.com  Fri Oct 23 13:50:19 2009
From: wayoftheray at yahoo.com (Way Of The Ray)
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 06:50:19 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Make Davis Happy And Improve The Celtics Or Trade Him For Stephen
	Jackson
Message-ID: <