Interesting Post Tonight May Be The Answer To The Problem

LACELTFAN may have uncovered something in his post tonight "On Paper On Hardwood" when he wrote that on paper Celtics look unbeatable but sometimes it does not transcend to the court and actual play. Call it team chemistry.

If you remember back there was an article posted on Boston.Com where Doc talked about last year where a younger player called a team meeting to discuss the problem some of the younger players were having with some of the Vets and that Doc said no good came from that meeting.....hummmmmm.

Could it be that there is Team Turmoil on Team Celtics? Perhaps some of the younger guys got on KG
Pierce for them coming down on the younger guys and this has carried over to this year? Perhaps the team is divided where younger guys are playing their way and vets another? Changing of the guard?

I am only suggesting this as a possible cause because there is no team chemistry at all..non zilch and no one on the Celtics has given a good enough answer as to why after 13 games we have no
unity on the court as Bob Ryan pointed out tonight. "Doc has 2 maybe 3 guys on both 1st and 2nd unit going at it at both ends of the court"!

I know the article exists it was written sometime August/Sept my guess.
Worth checking out if some one is familiar with the search engine.

112288

112288

Rondo called for the meeting last spring, just before the playoffs started, I believe. He himself didn't speak, but it sounded as though Baby and Perk may have had some words to say. The gist was that the older players were too hard on the younger players and, reading between the lines, they were taking all the shots.

It seems as though this year the Big Three are deferring to the Ugly Two on offense more than last year, letting them get more involved. That's where the chemistry thing comes in. If Rondo wants to be the quarterback of the offense, they're giving him free rein. But then it comes down to the final minutes of the game and the guys who've been doing it for years are looking to let the young guys take charge, well, the young guys are going to need some time. Let them lose games in November and December if that's what it takes to win in May and June.

Chemistry and communication. They may need another meeting.

I ran across the following quote about the Celtics of the 1950s while researching the early years of basketball. It's from Colonel Dave Egan, a sports columnist for the Boston Record and one of the unsung heroes of the first ten precarious years of the Celtics' existence. Egan popularized the game and praised the team. Red called him "my boy", and said, "I'd be dead without him."

Egan: "This is not a team of ballerinas and prima donnas and temperamental, selfish stars. They are young and hungry and full of heart, and they play the rambunctious, enthusiastic, blood-and-thunder basketball which only the young and hungry and only the hearty can play."

Gimme that old time religion, gimme that "blood-and-thunder" basketball.

spikeD wrote:I ran across the following quote about the Celtics of the 1950s while researching the early years of basketball. It's from Colonel Dave Egan, a sports columnist for the Boston Record and one of the unsung heroes of the first ten precarious years of the Celtics' existence. Egan popularized the game and praised the team. Red called him "my boy", and said, "I'd be dead without him."

Egan: "This is not a team of ballerinas and prima donnas and temperamental, selfish stars. They are young and hungry and full of heart, and they play the rambunctious, enthusiastic, blood-and-thunder basketball which only the young and hungry and only the hearty can play."

Gimme that old time religion, gimme that "blood-and-thunder" basketball.

Nothing wrong with blood and thunder basketball Spike, but I feel obliged to point out that they also didn't win a championship in the first ten years of their existence.

That's not the point, LACelt. They didn't win a championship because they were missing the rebounder and defensive presence. But the point is that they made FAR more out of what they had than the current team even remotely conceives as doing. The point is that they absolutely never quit, from the first minute to the last.

I love it...blood and thunder basketball. The point is not that there's nothing wrong with it. The point is that there's everything right about it.

If the current team could simply play "blood and thunder" basketball for only the first few minutes of the game, they'd be leading the league going away.

Dave Egan knew his stuff. Just don't say that within 10 feet of a picture of Ted Williams. Oops, I just did.

Sam

I've got nothing against blood and thunder Sam, but this time we will have to agree to disagree. You miss my point, I think. There isn't one single answer to the Celtics turning it around. No quit is important but so it focusing and many other things. You put your finger on one, you've got to have the "talented" personel that gel. Perk put his finger on another in an interview recently. You've got to practice at the level you want to play in the game. I would love to see more of a sense of urgency with this team, some more blood and thunder...

LAC,

What are we disagreeing about? As I frequently state in my posts, I believe there are many factors that can contribute to reduced effectiveness. But lack of blood and thunder is certainly one of them.

Sam

LACelt

The Colonel used a couple of other words that are relevant to, or critical of, the way the Celtics are playing this season: "rambunctious" and "enthusiastic".

This team doesn't seem to be enjoying what they're doing. They are making hundreds of thousands of dollars per game. Why is it such a chore? They need to start having fun out there. Forget Ubuntu. What's the Swahili word for fun?

Udamisi

Spike---I'm with you all the way on this one. I do believe that there is something going on here. Rondo has his contract now and feels secure in acting whatever way he wants. I think that Ray is making his own offense, no thanks to Rondo, and the same with Pierce. KG is a different story, I think Rondo wouldn't dare take him on. The old time Celtics fought the opponents not themselves. It may have take a while to win a ring, but when Russell came, as they say, it is all history. Good point, well taken here. Just watch the distribution of the ball in the next few games. Time will tell.

Sam

Udamisi? Really? Don't tell me you're multilingual, too.

Rosalie

I'm with you all the way, too. Where shall we go?

It seems that when Bob Cousy and Bill Russell retired, the reason they gave was, in so many words, it wasn't fun anymore. Obviously, it wasn't because they were losing, they couldn't enjoy it anymore.

These guys are too young to quit, to smart not to know what's going on, and good enough to do something about it. I already feel bad for the Knicks (not).

RosalieTCeltics wrote:Spike---I'm with you all the way on this one. I do believe that there is something going on here. Rondo has his contract now and feels secure in acting whatever way he wants. I think that Ray is making his own offense, no thanks to Rondo, and the same with Pierce. KG is a different story, I think Rondo wouldn't dare take him on. The old time Celtics fought the opponents not themselves. It may have take a while to win a ring, but when Russell came, as they say, it is all history. Good point, well taken here. Just watch the distribution of the ball in the next few games. Time will tell.

Rosalie, how much of the Celtics current problem do you think revolves around Rondo? It's a fair question, I think... Obviously, in the final analysis, teams lose, not players, but some individual players contribute more than others. I'm curious what you think?

It is interesting to note that when the Celtics are playing well, it is when Rondo is completely involved in the offense, dishing off, driving to the basket and passing to the open man, or even taking one of his patented layups that he is noted for. When they Celts are not playing well, it is when Rondo has completely disappeared from the offense and makes crazy passes and turnovers, so it is fair to say that he is an important cog in this wheel.

I will not, however, go so far as to blame everything on Rondo. The veteran's are shooting terrible, Garnett has one good game, and then two
so, so games, Ray's outside shot is not hitting right now (although he has turned his game into one which he will force the ball inside more and take the layups, and 12-15 footers instead), and Wallace, well, I think that has been addressed enough. So, if they were hitting their shots, the whole offense would open up more and I think they would find themselves on the winning side of the score much more often.

To me, when I watch Rondo being so aggressive and passing the ball, I know that the Celtics will probably win that game. I have a problem with him taking too many shots, especially outside, as this is not his strong suit yet. Hopefully, he will continue to grow and his shot will improve. He is a tough kid, but I am not sure he is a life long Celtic.

You are right, No one is having fun. It is written on KG's face every night and I will not repeat the words he is muttering as he is moving down the court!

Perhaps as I stated in my beginning thread...Team Turmoil... or is it Team Celtics. Maybe the new guard id trying to take over and not working with the Vets.

All I can say is Something Got To Give!!!!!!!

Spike,

Not multilingual in that language. But I google a lot. Beats sitting around and drooling.

Sam

I think our answer to the Celtic's woes are somewhere in between today's ESPN article, "What's wrong with the Celtics" (which pretty much states everything we'ver been arguing ad nauseum here for weeks) and say my blind enthusiasm that they can still go 98-0.

I did not watch the Knicks game but just looking at the numbers, Pierce 6-7 from the arc, break even with the offensive/defensive rebounds stats, FT @ 77%!!! WTF!! 37 FT attempts!! Come one guys, these numbers are very good in victory.

One of the key stats someone mentioned that was paramount to victory was the enabling stat, assists to fg made. In victory, (and btw, thanks for breaking it down by W/L...ingenious!!) they are @65%. In defeat, <60%. You would think this would be a much larger difference, but alas, victory is won in inches not miles.

Another one, since we are rocket launchers, is one I'm still working on re: 3 pointers. My theory, which is still evolving and formulating, is when 2 or more players greater than 40%, we're going to win. Still just a hunch. Right now, it's @ 80%, which if you are a poker player, that's AA vs. any other pair, approx, and there isn't a poker player in the world that wouldn't go all-in with percentages like that, chip leader or short stacked. Obviously, other factors figure in. But one guy hitting threes is not enough to guaruantee victory. Two hitting threes and victory comes in @ 80%. Not too shabby.

Let's build on this one heading into Wednesday. This team will figure it out.

BLOOD N' THUNDER--to the DEATH-This team needs to put aside any differences between younger players and veteran factions for the sake of effectiveness on the court. If we are now divided, that makes the opposition's task that much easier. We need to bloody the other team with an in your face defense that brings tears of pride to Thibbedeaux's eyes instead of the way we're playing now which brings just tears. Make the paint something you don't need map quest or a travel agent to find. If someone on the other team wants to visit the tin, exact a heavy toll with a thunderous block, or send him crashing to the hardwood with a hard foul. Let's put the fear of God into the other team, at least the fear of the Celtics! Blood N' Thunder, Blood N' Guts-On the Gut check, we've been found with insufficient funds in our account recently!- Pick it up Fellas' before we have to earn our reputation all over again!-MD.

Dbrown,

I thought you'd like the breakout of wins versus losses.

The problem with a stat such as the 80% win percentage when two or more players shoot more than 40% from three-point land is what do you do with it? Being "hot" isn't an element of premeditated strategy; it's more a function of execution. I'm sure that, if the coaches could say, "Okay, guys, tonight we're planning to have two of you hit 40%+ from the arc," they'd say it every game.

The real question, if it is somehow ordained that three-pointers will routinely play a pivotal role in the Celtics' victory chances (the thought makes me want to puke), is how to ensure that they'll be more likely to shoot at least a reasonable percentage every night. How can Sheed get more time to square himself when he shoots? How can Eddie get better looks? How can more effective picks help to free Ray on his curls; and are time-consuming curls the best way to free him? Is it more productive for Pierce to be a trailer or a wing man in transition?

Sam

Md Celt

I have thought "Lord god put that guy on his ass!" about 1000 times as teams shot easy layups against us. Scalp a few guys and the word will get out.

jeb65 wrote:Md Celt

I have thought "Lord god put that guy on his ass!" about 1000 times as teams shot easy layups against us. Scalp a few guys and the word will get out.

With all due respect Jeb, you don't have to start playing football, when your defense isn't playing good basketball. I understand the concept of : make the guy pay for coming straight to the hole and it has it's moments but I think that if you're playing effective swarm, shifting defense...(it's hard, you've got to be in great shape), you can keep the "clobbering" down to a minimum. I think that it's effective in a limited way-"clobbering" that is,(certainly worked well in 84) but more important is just playing good old fashioned team defense.

LACelt

Yeah I guess I cut my hoop teeth watching those 80's teams but I still think a hard foul can send a we won't be f@$$**&^d with message.

Maybe we can meet in the middle on this one.

Jeb,
I think that you're right that there is a place for a "message" when a team is running through you're defense. Can't use it very often, IMHO, but I agree there is a place for it. Would like to see C's defense step up the team defense concept a little more though....

Jeb

Gotts dis with ya bro on this one. The refs as a whole don't care for us much anyway. Why up raise the stakes with "message" fouls. Play tough defense period but at least attempt to be above the frey. Good solid basketball on both ends of the court sends a much better message than knocking someone on their butt because we got beat and can't do anything else. We don't need more T's, we don't need suspensions, we don't need to anger other teams or have a bigger black eye in the league by doing so. We need to look in the mirror and just play better.

If we committed a McHale type foul today that player would be sitting for multiple games. It's not the 80'd anymore.

I know what your saying but don't like the idea.

Just my opinion.

beat

Looks to me like message fouls are long overdue, the kind that put folks on their asses.

Lets start next practice scrimmage... and see what happens.

That should get some blood flowin', some animated discussions out in the open.

Might be some damn good therapy!

GC

Beat and the fellas

I aint talking about killing somebody just giving a good hard foul. I hear what you say on the refs. I think we as a team need to shut up and play and quit throwing balsa wood on the fire.