Re: Celtics Post-Game Thread (Collection of past threads)

[cowens/oldschool]

If they try to turn it up a notch and run,they could burn themselves out as they're already supposedly trying to play hard on defense and have been stretches of late that at least have seen some good shutdown D.3/5 of the starting lineup is over 32,its not like we have 2 wings that are 25.They are what they are,I think they're playing their way into peak shape,and have their best basketball ahead.I would agree if we could get a running squad in there for a few stretches to blow open a lead with some combo of the young guys giving energy,that would be great and I'm all for that.

[Sam]

Cow, when did 32-33 become old in basketball terms? Nobody expects them to become a running team. Go over to Central park and watch middle aged people jogging. That's faster than these guys would need to move in order to push the ball, especially when it's a kid expending the energy for most of the actual pushing. Pushing the ball simply means getting it over the midline faster than the trudging way they've been doing it. The bigger guys could do it backwards (seriously).

Sam

[beat]

We could always have oxygen tanks on the bench too!

[cowens/oldschool]

[quote="Sam"]Cow, when did 32-33 become old in basketball terms? Nobody expects them to become a running team. Go over to Central park and watch middle aged people jogging. That's faster than these guys would need to move in order to push the ball, especially when it's a kid expending the energy for most of the actual pushing. Pushing the ball simply means getting it over the midline faster than the trudging way they've been doing it. The bigger guys could do it backwards (seriously).

Sam[/quot

agreed with the pushing the ball up,but Dave Cowens was out by 32,Bird missed the season with bone spurs at 32 then was never the same,but still great so you should know that for an athlete pushing himself so hard during peak years,by 32 and 33 things can catch up to you as may be the case with KG now.....my hope is they built up enough of their bodies during summer,but didn't kill themselves too much doing it,hopefully they'll get stronger as season goes longer,knock on wood

[Sam]

For each player who was gone or seriously diminished by age 32, one can point to many who were not. Cowens was someone who depended on leaping ability for a lot of his excellence, and Auerbach predicted he'd be done when the leaping ability waned. That happened. For the most part, leaping ability is not a factor with Pierce, Ray or Perk; and it may be less influential with KG nowadays. Backpedaling a little faster or trotting down the floor, as Rondo does the hard work in evading defenders to bring the ball up, is something many grandparents could do.

The guy bringing the ball up doesn't always go in a straight line, as Eddie House has discovered on many occasions. While that guy is involved in evasive action, the other four guys can trot down in a straight line and be in position when the ball reaches the halfcourt. And, even then the ball IS pushed in a straight line, it usually goes off on some tangent once it reaches the halfcourt, once again giving teammates a chance to be in position.

In some ways, pushing the ball us is a little like a no-huddle offense. The offensive team doesn't sprint up to the huddle; they just persistently move up to the line of scrimmage. Even if the defense is physically back in time, they're less comfortable, less prepared, and less in sync with the team defenses of today.

PUSHING THE BALL HAS LITTLE OR NOTHING TO DO WITH SPEED OR EXPENDITURE OF EXCESSIVE ENERGY, just as fast-breaking doesn't have as much to do with speed of foot as with the speed at which the ball moves.

Sam

[Sam]

Examples:

Shaq at age 32: 20.0/9.2 Championship
Laimbeer at age 32: 12.1/9.6 Championship
Pippen at age 32: 19.1/5.2/5.8 Championship
Jordan at age 34: 28.7/5.8/3.5 Championship
Cousy at age 32: 18.1/4.4/7.7 Championship
Erving at age 32: 21.4/6.8 Championship
DeBusschere at age 32: 16.3/10.2 Championship
D. Nelson at age 32: 11.5/4.2 Championship
Sam Jones at age 34: 21.3/4.9/3.0 Championship
Russell at age 33: 12.5/18.6/4.6 Championship
Havlicek at age 35: 17.0/4.1/3.7 Championship
Parish at age 32: 16.1/8.5 Championship
Jabbar at age 39: 17.5/6.7 Championship

Sam

[beat]

Sam

couple more for you

Hakeem Olajuwon C 7-0 255 January 21, 1963 Last Championship at 32

Paul Silas played all 82 reg season games and all 17 playoff games for the Championship Seattle team from 1979 at age 35.

Unseld was 32 when the Bullets won in 1978

beat

[Sam]

Thanks Beat. I maintain that any minor slowdown in terms of age should be at least compensated for by increase chemistry after the amount of time the Three Amigos have spent together. For some reason, they just don't seem in sync, and I'm convinced it's got little or nothing to do with age.

Just as it doesn't make a lot of sense for Rondo to have two more years of experience than in the championship year and yet to appear more inconsistent as a catalyst.

And, by the way, I've noticed that Rondo now shoots free throws from in front of his head, which seems to be a major change that should result in better aim, a softer shot, and (hopefully) improved depth perception—a major problem. If he has, indeed, major a significant switch in style, I can live with his struggling somewhat while he perfects it. If he's taking the number of practice free throws he should be, at least doing it with an improved stroke ought to pay dividends.

Sam

[beat]

Sam

A couple of things I want to watch with all foul shooters is the routine before the shot.

I a college game yesterday (at Maui) the announcer said how this kid always bounced the ball 3 times, got the grip he wanted, eyed the target and let go. PERIOD and usually SWISH!! a very good shooter and foul shooter.

I really haven't watched R allen but I assume he always does the same thing every time.

As much as TV will allow I want to keep track of what our guys do when on the line and see if they repeat it every time.

beat

[KellyGreen17]

In regards to Rondo's free throw shooting, I noticed a difference during the Knicks game as well. He was sort of twisting to the right before his release. I read (I believe it was the Globe) that Rondo denied making a change in his shooting and insisted that there was a fly on his shoulder the first time he did it, and then I guess he just stuck with it since he seemed to do the same thing on all his attempts. I also read in the Herald that Rondo was practicing free throws after practice this week and was frustrated enough with himself to throw the ball against the wall. Apparently KG and Ray got a good laugh out of it. Rondo says he is working on his mechanics, trying to shoot with more arc.

[bigpygme]

Sam - "The team, as a whole, has not identified a default style of play. " "I think they still need a lot of time to gain an identity; and they may also need something to alert them to the urgency of the matter"

Outside -- "The same old plod, pound, stand, thrust, miss, complain, retreat act is what's old—not the players." I'd print that up and put it on the locker room wall. I'd confront them with it, challenge them with it. I'd keep benching guys until I find someone who's willing to run. And like you guys point out, I don't mean just fast-breaking, I mainly mean pushing the ball up to take advantage before the defense is set. It leads to easy baskets, and easy baskets are crucial for this team."

dboss - "I do think that part of the problem is the time it takes to integrate players into the "TEAM" and helping the new players understand their roles if in fact they have been clearly spelled out.
Daniels is the type of player that has adjusted well although I think he is being under-utilized given his versatility...
Rasheed's contribution on the glass and defensively is needed more than his long range bombs... [need to] help Sheed make the transition as a player."

Beat - "Just never understood walking the ball up the floor period. We have a deep bench let's use it. ... sometimes the offense totally goes into a funk and uptempo would solve a lot of those issues if we could ever make a commetment to it."

I pulled these points out to raise the question of leadership in resolving these collective problems - not floor leadership. Coaching leadership.
Help me out here, guys - maybe i really am misunderstanding the role of the coach on a pro ball club. But shouldn't he be addressing, in practices and discussions, what the default style of play is, whether we push the ball or not, or run or not? Doesn't the job of establishing roles and deciding minutes and getting the most out of his available talent fall to him? [I'm particularly thinking of Sheed's bombs, Quis' minutes, Shelden's role, etc.] How is the team taking advantage of Rondo's speed and why is he waiting for everyone else to gewt downcourt? What about calling for an ocassional fast break ... how about a better job of setting Ray up, or Eddie ... what happened to the hell-bent defense they played not so long ago ...

I see leadership from Doc as central to any resolution of all of these issues and points so sensibly raised from my fellow posters. I think Doc needs to do something more than just tell the press "We've just been playing awful" - like the players simply need to do the same thing, but execute it better, and it will all be all right.
The same thing, but better, will NOT be all right ... and i concur that it's not principally about age, not at all.

my two cents, interested in other thoughts.

Michael in Denver

[beat]

mike

I posted this on another thread but it holds meaning to your point

Nothing beats a well run play by players who care to practice it.
Watch teams during time outs, do any players really listen.

To me an ISO is lazy mans coaching 101 basketball and not the way it's meant to be played.

I don't think many coaches are nearly prepared as they should be and I include Doc in that statement too, guess it's a sign of the times.

beat

Triple pick 69................probably the last one ever run.

I'm not saying all x's and o's but allowing our players the best possible chance to succeed.

I don't think Doc has "lost" the team I look at it more as the team has lost themselves a bit. And I do think age is a small factor as we are not in as good a shape as we should be overall and apparently are satisfied playing our way into it.

My 2 cents too.

beat

[Sam]

Michael,

Doc seems to be what I call a "cautious coach." He's called a "players' coach" partly because he has a lot of faith in not "over-tinkering" lest he interfere with savvy veterans' abilities to set themselves and the team straight. That's exactly what he did when the Three Amigos coined the team, and it paid off in a championship.

We, as fans who have probably played at levels where coaches were uick to micromanage because they knew a lot more than we did, may expect quicker coaching reactions than are prudent at the pro level when a team full of veterans is involved.

Yes, they're certainly having problems, but Doc would be ill-advised to over-react and, in effect, undermine the chemistry that was very largely present two years ago.

Remember, this was a very different team after KG left last season, and they have to get used to him again. And it's not the same KG either, as even he's getting used to himself. They're feeling each other out to some extent, and sometimes only players can do that and coaches can't legislate their second-to-second interactions.

If Doc were to act too quickly and extensively, an argument could be made that it could mess up a chemistry which, if it can be restored to what it was in 2007-08, could pay huge dividends.

Sam

[bigpygme]

nice to hear some wise counsel from two guys i p-articularly respect around here - thanks.

and perhaps more will weigh in, that too would be most welcome.

[cowens/oldschool]

For each player who was gone or seriously diminished by age 32, one can point to many who were not. Cowens was someone who depended on leaping ability for a lot of his excellence, and Auerbach predicted he'd be done when the leaping ability waned. That happened. For the most part, leaping ability is not a factor with Pierce, Ray or Perk; and it may be less influential with KG nowadays. Backpedaling a little faster or trotting down the floor, as Rondo does the hard work in evading defenders to bring the ball up, is something many grandparents could do.

The guy bringing the ball up doesn't always go in a straight line, as Eddie House has discovered on many occasions. While that guy is involved in evasive action, the other four guys can trot down in a straight line and be in position when the ball reaches the halfcourt. And, even then the ball IS pushed in a straight line, it usually goes off on some tangent once it reaches the halfcourt, once again giving teammates a chance to be in position.

In some ways, pushing the ball us is a little like a no-huddle offense. The offensive team doesn't sprint up to the huddle; they just persistently move up to the line of scrimmage. Even if the defense is physically back in time, they're less comfortable, less prepared, and less in sync with the team defenses of today.

Sam you can show me all the stats you want,we can still be a winning team,we are right now,my point is to win if we try to emulate the Showtime Lakers ain't gonna happen,we're too old to play and push that kind of style and Doc knows this.We can do more up tempo and more movement would be great,but show me any great team that runs all the time right now,I can only think of two the Nuggets and Suns,teams run on certain oppurtunities.....thats just the way it is now.

PUSHING THE BALL HAS LITTLE OR NOTHING TO DO WITH SPEED OR EXPENDITURE OF EXCESSIVE ENERGY, just as fast-breaking doesn't have as much to do with speed of foot as with the speed at which the ball moves.

Sam

Sam you can show me all the stats you want,if we try to push like the Showtime Lakers we'll burn out,ain't happenin,we're too old.We can still win and more uptempo and movement would be great,but to emulate the fastbreak and push the ball like the C's of the 60's or 70's just wouldn't work with this present team.....now if Big 3 were all 24-26 or 27 I could see it,but not now,doesn't mean we still can't win.That type of Showtime style does take alot of energy,if we tried that plus with the energy this team uses to defend we would burn out.

[Sam]

Cow,

I guess we simply disagree what the term "push" means. What I am suggesting is LIGHT YEARS from the concept of any fast break, whether run by teams of the 60s or 70s or even a kindergarten team. Basically, I'm talking about little more than walking quickly instead of walking slowly in order to start their halfcourt possessions a few seconds earlier. If they can't do that on a consistent basis, fuggedaboutit. I AM SPECIFICALLY NOT TALKING ABOUT A FAST BREAK AND NOTHING REMOTELY RESEMBLING SHOWTIME. I meant it when I said that what I'm talking about could actually be done backwards. You know my walking disability? Even I could do what I'm talking about! Seriously!

Furthermore, there were instances when four of the Celtics were WAITING in the forecourt and Rondo was still in the backcourt, sauntering as he slowly dribbled the ball up toward the center line. Heinsohn grumbled about it. Are you telling me that Rondo couldn't move a little faster? And equally egregious is when the guy who brings the ball over halfcourt just stands there (sometimes pounding the ball and sometimes just holding it) for something like five seconds as everyone else on the team just stands and looks at him. Are you telling me they can't get into a play more rapidly. I'm sure I saw two 76er defenders playing a hand of poker while the Celtics were letting time ooze away.

Sam

[Sam]

Tonight, the Celtics beat the undermanned 76ers, 113-110. To many, the game will represent a continuation of the frustration they feel that the Celtics can’t more easily put away lesser teams. Perhaps I’m tilting at windmills (thanks to GC for that term), but I hope something more significant is happening.

Rather than to summarize the game proceedings in these post-game commentaries (which I think 112288 does admirably in his reviews), I often try to integrate what I believe are broader implications. Tonight’s reflections will mainly consist of a Tale of Two Players.

A fourth quarter like tonight's demonstrates that both Rondo and Pierce have the capacity to be nearly unstoppable catalysts. That doesn't mean they WILL be unstoppable catalysts all the time (or even most of it). But the goal of HARNESSING or CAPITALIZING ON potential is more readily attainable than the goal of DEVELOPING that potential. And, in this respect, last night we may have witnessed a turning point in a changing of the “catalytic guard” for the Celtics.

A lot of teams have a catalyst. However, few (if any) have two as potent as Paul and Rajon can be when they’re both at the top of their games. In the past, it was predominately a matter of KG and Pierce being the twin dynamos for this team. The balance may now be shifting to Rondo and Pierce, with KG, Ray and Perk being able accomplices and versatile offensive roles: KG at the elbow, outside and on the pick-and-roll; Ray on the perimeter and penetrating (he's actually slashing more than Pierce lately); and Perk at the high post, presenting opportunistic low post options, and chipping in with some offensive boards.

This year, KG has probably been somewhat of an unknown to his teammates (and to himself) as well as to us. It’s been uncertain how well he could recapture his dynamo stature of the past…how much he could be depended on in circumstances when he was nearly a guarantee in the past. Slowly but surely, and accompanied by more close-call games than we’d like to see, his dynamic stature may be shifting to Rondo.

What do I mean by a “dynamo?” Well, Pierce and Rondo, each in his own way, can be a bailout option. Each, in his own way can be a vigrous leader by INVOLVING others rather than encouraging them to stand around and watch. Each, in his own way, can be a timely force at either end of the floor (although Rondo seems to have regressed somewhat in that respect—hopefully temporarily). Rondo causes a lot of his damage by driving and dishing; Pierce by drawing doubles and dishing. The important thing is that the two of them have the capacity to enable others from different perspectives, which can be a coverage nightmare for opponents.

It takes time for the principals in such a transition to identify and internalize what kind of balance in the relationships is for the best. A coach doesn’t just say, “Hey Kev, I think you’re being more tentative this season. I’d like you to think of yourself as more of a complement to our double dynamos out there.” That’s not how it works. An evolution of that import must emerge gradually in order to be accepted gracefully, constructively and thoroughly by all involved parties.

I think that one reason Doc has given Pierce more ballhandling duties in recent games is to reignite the difference-maker in Paul…to renew his catalytic ethic. And I suspect (but do not know for sure) that Doc has been trying to accomplish something similar with Rondo, though by a different approach: unorthadox management of Rondo’s stints on the floor. Specifically by exposing Rondo to more situations in which he could succeed and fewer in which he could fail. More time with the second unit; ensuring that he wouldn’t be called upon to shoot freebies in the clutch; etc.

And, as I mentioned in the game-on thread last night, I believe this tactic may be igniting a spark within Rondo. His fourth quarter leadership last night was irrepressible. Moreover, I notice that he’s now shooting free throws in front of his head, rather than beside it. That pushing (rather than throwing) motion should result in a softer shot. Any change in style requires time to take effect, but I believe it will do so. It may even have had a bearing on that clutch turnaround jumper last night, which I believe he would have missed at least 95% of the time when employing his former shooting style.

So let’s see what the next few games bring. Will the concept of twin turbines at point guard and point forward signal, at last, an identifiable and reliably effective offensive style of play for which I’ve been hoping throughout this new
season? And will a better flow on the offensive end bring with it fewer transition opportunities for the opposition and a more inspired defensive effort by the Celtics?

All of this may be too idealistic. But, when I saw Pierce and Rondo operating together last night…actually appearing to decide which of them would be the springboard for each fourth quarter possession…it seemed to make sense to me.

We’ll see.

Sam

[pete]

Hi All,

This was the first game that I saw the start of this team getting back on track. We had a lot of players in double figures, some defensive stops in the fourth, that looked like the team I remember. We survived a barrage a 3 pointers, 80% were being contested. Hand it to the Sixers, they made some incredible shots, and we still hung on to win.

KG cutting in the lane for a finger roll, was a positive sign for me. Some nice stuff between Rondo & Daniels as well.

We have a long way to go, but I actually felt something click. Something I have not felt in the last 6 games or so.

Pete

[Sam]

Pete,

Let's hope it carries over to Friday so we can start calling it an actual trend.

I hope your family has a great Thanksgiving.

Sam

[RosalieTCeltics]

When they do it a few games in a row I will be able to relax a little! That was a good game for the starters. PP played his heart out, as did Ray and Garnett, but Pierce is the one who wouldn't let go.

My biggest problem with this team is it's perimeter defense. I am afraid that the word is out that anyone can shoot three's on the Celtics. Look at the stats, every team we have played recently shot off the charts in three pointers.

That is my only negative, which I feel they will eventually correct. I was afraid of this Phillie team before they even played. They played well last night, Kopono should be a Celtic! He would have cost too much, but I have always liked his outside game. He is fearless.

A win is a win is a win as they say. I will take it and move on to Toronto.

[cowens/oldschool]

Sam

Didn't get to see the game,but appreciate your post game coverage,I like the concept of getting Rondo used to doing something at crunch time and as much as I want the ball in Pierces hand at crunch time we still need more options and Ray is like Chris Mullin in the sense that he is a bonafide all star with a great perimeter game,but no go to move to create an effective shot for himself or others in crunch time.

On our disscusion on uptempo and movement,I have seen those instances where someone,ussually Rondo is standing dribbling at the top of the key and 5 seconds or so go before anybody even starts to do anything.Welcome to the 09-10 version of the Celtics catching their breath.The good news is we can still win with this group,we can win being ugly,I have no problem with us winning in a less energetic style,as long as we win.

cow

[Sam]

Cow,

The things I'm talking about can take place during the first minute of a game. Don't tell me they're "catching their breaths" without having even broken a sweat yet. And what about the numerous instances I mentioned when four teammates are waiting in the halfcourt for Rondo to trudge up with the ball?

No, this has absolutely nothing to do with energy deprivation because what I'd like to see has virtually nothing to do with expending greater energy and usually needn't involve one running stride. It's a matter of commitment, focus and persistence.

Happy Thanksgiving to you and your family.

Sam

[gacracker]

All of this may be too idealistic. But, when I saw Pierce and Rondo operating together last night…actually appearing to decide which of them would be the springboard for each fourth quarter possession…it seemed to make sense to me.

We’ll see.

Sam

Boy, Sam, this seems very idealistic to me... the notion that Rondo and Pierce were operating together last night... that wasn't my sense at all. IMHO, these two are not even close to being on the same page, much less wearing the same color uniform. Seems to me that Rondo was not even looking for Pierce.

Rondo tried to inbound the ball with time winding down and had to call a timeout because his first two options were covered. I heard TommyH exclaim... "What about Pierce?" Exactly! Rondo did not appear to even consider that option.

Here's the captain playing his heart out, Mr. Clutch, a 27/6/6 game even bringing the ball up with Rondo MIA and sitting on the bench... body language very negative. Here's Pierce, playing some of his best basketball ever, dishing, making things happen, our MVP to date and the contrast between PP and RR could not have been more stark.

PP is all over RR's case and rightfully so. Rondo is nowhere close to being able to effectively challenge Pierce's leadership or even earn Pierce's respect. Pierce wants the ball in his own hands in the clutch... and you have to admire that confidence and swagger.

Rondo doesn't... nor should he when he can't trust himself to hit FT's. Rondo comes across as a talented but spoiled brat. Pierce comes across as the man.

Maybe Rondo needs to try harder to win/earn Pierce's (and our) respect. That should ease the transition in leadership that we all know is coming.

GC

[Sam]

GC,

Perhaps I was a little too oblique in my comments. That can happen.

I wasn't suggesting that Pierce and Rondo were having enjoying an orgy of interaction on the court. And I wasn't trying to equate Rondo's fourth quarter display with Paul's game-long stellar play (although who's the MVP has never mattered one iota to me because it's all about the team in my book).

My comments were mainly intended to suggest that, with KG currently (and possibly permanently) operating more as an important cog in the wheel than as a hub of the wheel, Rondo may be assuming at least some of the catalyst status that KG previously represented...and ideally representing a catalytic alternative to Pierce. That would once again give them twin engines (and diversified ones) rather than one.

In the fourth quarter, it almost seemed that Paul and Rondo were taking turns (whether or not intentionally) in either making big shots or setting up others; and I thought the two-pronged attack created a far more competitive situation than a more uni-dimensional catalyst would have represented.

I believe that what saved the Celtics in this game was not just Pierce and not just Rondo, but rather the fact that—in that pivotal quarter—the Sixers never knew from which of the two sources the impetus was going to come from. The element of unpredictability, rather than simply the heroics of one or the other, was (in my opinion) the element that was ultimately the defining one.

There was one possession that I felt perfectly exemplified their yin and yang act. Pierce was out on the perimeter, seemingly poised to do his own version of the drive-and-dish (which he would almost certainly have forced a few years ago.) Instead, as Rondo passed in back of him, Pierce simply held the ball out to defer to Rondo, who created the play instead.

As for cooperation between them, I particularly enjoyed the break on which
Rondo could have shot from underneath but instead made a perfectly
timed pass to a trailing Pierce for the authoratative jam.

I heard Tommy's rhetorical question, "What about Pierce?" Tom obviously thought Pierce was more open on the play than I did. When in doubt, Rondo did the correct thing and used the additional timeout they had rather than to try a risk pass. I fail to see any significant in that other than a sign of poise and maturity. There's no way in hell anyone could remotely induce me to infer some sort of disdain on Rondo's part for Pierce because of that play. None! Nada!

Perhaps you can point out to me some specific examples of precisely how how "PP is all over RR's case." It certainly seemed to be to be more a case of collaboration than confrontation during that quarter. And, after the game, I heard Pierce express his excitement that Rondo's clutch turnaround jumper could only help his confidence level. That didn't sound like being "all over RR's case" to me. It sounded more like a captain who was more interested in encouraging another "go to" guy on this team than in simply being "the man" himself.

In no way am I denying that Paul played his heart out. In no way am I denying that he played a "clutch" game. but, in the final analysis, I am infinitely more interested in recognizing the the potential for synergy between "the men" than in crowning "the man." As I said, I care about "the team." And, at a time when positive glimmers have not been recently abundant, this was definitely one as far as I'm concerned.

Sam

[gacracker]

GC,

Perhaps I was a little too oblique in my comments. That can happen.

I wasn't suggesting that Pierce and Rondo were having enjoying an orgy of interaction on the court. And I wasn't trying to equate Rondo's fourth quarter display with Paul's game-long stellar play (although who's the MVP has never mattered one iota to me because it's all about the team in my book).

My comments were mainly intended to suggest that, with KG currently (and possibly permanently) operating more as an important cog in the wheel than as a hub of the wheel, Rondo may be assuming at least some of the catalyst status that KG previously represented...and ideally representing a catalytic alternative to Pierce. That would once again give them twin engines (and diversified ones) rather than one.

In the fourth quarter, it almost seemed that Paul and Rondo were taking turns (whether or not intentionally) in either making big shots or setting up others; and I thought the two-pronged attack created a far more competitive situation than a more uni-dimensional catalyst would have represented.

I believe that what saved the Celtics in this game was not just Pierce and not just Rondo, but rather the fact that—in that pivotal quarter—the Sixers never knew from which of the two sources the impetus was going to come from. The element of unpredictability, rather than simply the heroics of one or the other, was (in my opinion) the element that was ultimately the defining one.

There was one possession that I felt perfectly exemplified their yin and yang act. Pierce was out on the perimeter, seemingly poised to do his own version of the drive-and-dish (which he would almost certainly have forced a few years ago.) Instead, as Rondo passed in back of him, Pierce simply held the ball out to defer to Rondo, who created the play instead.

As for cooperation between them, I particularly enjoyed the break on which
Rondo could have shot from underneath but instead made a perfectly
timed pass to a trailing Pierce for the authoratative jam.

I heard Tommy's rhetorical question, "What about Pierce?" Tom obviously thought Pierce was more open on the play than I did. When in doubt, Rondo did the correct thing and used the additional timeout they had rather than to try a risk pass. I fail to see any significant in that other than a sign of poise and maturity. There's no way in hell anyone could remotely induce me to infer some sort of disdain on Rondo's part for Pierce because of that play. None! Nada!

Perhaps you can point out to me some specific examples of precisely how how "PP is all over RR's case." It certainly seemed to be to be more a case of collaboration than confrontation during that quarter. And, after the game, I heard Pierce express his excitement that Rondo's clutch turnaround jumper could only help his confidence level. That didn't sound like being "all over RR's case" to me. It sounded more like a captain who was more interested in encouraging another "go to" guy on this team than in simply being "the man" himself.

In no way am I denying that Paul played his heart out. In no way am I denying that he played a "clutch" game. but, in the final analysis, I am infinitely more interested in recognizing the the potential for synergy between "the men" than in crowning "the man." As I said, I care about "the team." And, at a time when positive glimmers have not been recently abundant, this was definitely one as far as I'm concerned.

Sam

I wasn't suggesting that PP was all over Rondo's case in a disrespectful way. I think that it has to do with the business of accountability and winning ballgames and I think that PP has been quite mature about how he views Rondo and expectations I suspect are quite high coming from the captain that Rondo round out his game. I am not privy to what is said behind closed doors and Pierce has not been the type to air dirty laundry in public for which I give him credit. I can only infer from what I sense is going on behind the scenes.

PP and the team need for RR to mature for them to continue to have success and add to their individual and team laurels. It is fairly clear that Rondo is a work in progress regarding his FTs and mid range game. The Big Three are not works in progress. They are what they are, future HOFers. I have to believe that very pointed conversations have taken place trying to motivate Rondo to take that next step to round out his game.

Rumors are that Rondo feels that others have been too hard on him. He is playing as though he feels exactly that way. He has regressed IMHO.

I look at his body language both on and off the court and see pouting and sulking. I see him passing up shots he needs to take to keep the defense honest. I see him MIA for 3 quarters against the 76ers and then he hits a switch and decides to get involved in the game and sees himself the one who turned the tide in the Celtic's favor. I agree. He did. Rondo won the game in the 4th quarter when things were beginning to look quite bleak. I see some glimmers of hope there, maybe not as many as you see because your understanding of the game is far superior to mine.

My question.... where was Rondo the first 3 quarters while PP was taking care of business? No glimmers there that I can find.

Did his MIA status create the crisis from which he nearly singlehandedly rescued the team?

Did he not solve the problem that he in great part created by his lack of interest in the game the first 36 minutes?

Is this perhaps pathological?

My sense is that there is a huge power struggle going on between Pierce and Rondo about leadership issues and I frankly don't like Rondo's approach to assuming power. It smacks of ego issues on Rondo's part, a zero sum game approach, which are not healthy for the team.

My 2 cents!

GC

[Sponsored content]