Interesting Post Tonight May Be The Answer To The Problem

Totally in agreement with you there. I am tired of watching our players complain everytime they get a foul called on them. Let's face it, the ref's already hate Perk and Wallace, how Garnett gets away with what he does is beyond me. I have even tired of watching Ray and Paul complain. Just shut up, play the game and stop bit.......

jeb65 wrote: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.

I'm with you there Jeb more action less talk....
..One of the problems with the hard foul is that any team can do it, better to play a style of team defense that other teams have trouble copying.

I am sorry, but if you have 4 Hall Of Famers on your team and you are not getting calls against scrubs like the Eddie Curry, something is wrong.

The Refs in the NBA are by far the worst officials in any professional sport. I cannot believe how much better the average NCAA ref is.

I think the officiating in the pre-season with the replacement refs was miles better than any game since.

Kleen

Stevie Wonder could see that. But...it is how it is. Accept it and work within the existing parameters. Or cry and whine and make it worse.

LAc

I am just fed up with layups. Foul em hard and make them shoot free throws.

Sam wrote:Dbrown,
... 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

i think these ARE key questions for the offense - and a stagnant offense has too often been a problem. I'd like to see Wallace square himself up a little closer in instead of so much long-ball, but that's apparently not what's being coached. In fact, coaching seems to me to be at the root of these questions of the "how-to get these guys open" questions, with enough time to execute right ... the only guy who doesn't need time is Eddie, he only needs a half-tick and it's on its way. I also agree with Rosalie and some others about Rondo being a key and driving force in the questions about the offensive equation.

And swarming energetic "enthusiastic" team defense, the way we know they know how to play it, is IMO a better answer than the "we need more hard fouls" theory. That defense has led to the offensive flow in the well played games we've seen, so D is part of the answer for the sometimes anemic O we've been seeing ...

Finally, maybe it's just me but i think that to go with the Captain playing point in the 4th quarter is a (coaching) mistake too, not that Doc's asked me. i think you ought to dance with the one what brung ya. let a point (RR, Quis, or House in that order) bring it up and distribute, and let PP (and the others) work off of that. why change the offensive flow entirely from what it had been the first 7/8ths of the game? (i just don't understand it ...)

and i loved "Udamisi" ! play like you love it !!

regards all,
Michael in Denver

Michael,

Spike deserves the credit for raising the point about bringing joy to the game. I just googled the word when Spike asked about Swahili.

It would be interesting to hear Doc's rationale for making Pierce the de factor PG for a few minutes, although Daniels was also in there some of that time. You can be sure Doc had a reason. Was he going for size in order to make it easier for Pierce to operate down low or to improve their rebounding potential? Was it a combination of size and better free throw percentage on the floor? Was it a matchup thing? Maybe someone heard or read Doc's comments on the matter.

Sam

thank you - credit to spike for the "joy" idea, for sure. certainly did not intend to overlook that contribution. still, "... the wisdom to Google the things i don't know" fell to you! (smile) ...

and certainly if Doc has said something about this decision to have PP bring up the ball as the 4th quarter goes along, hopefully they'll present the info for us all.

I haven't read anything about Doc wanting/not wanting PP to bring the ball up, but I did read the below in the Globe today:
*Coach Doc Rivers said he wants Marquis Daniels to handle the ball more as the backup point guard. Eddie House has been doing the majority of the ball-handling but Rivers wants the two to reverse roles and Daniels to play more

The only time I've really noticed Paul playing point is late in the 4th when points are needed, or if Doc is experimenting with a big lineup. It doesn't really bother me too much when Paul is handling the ball. It does bother me when Ray Allen is bringing the ball up, or when Doc leaves Eddie in the game for almost the entire 4th quarter and leaves Rondo sitting on the bench. Ray is a great basketball player, but he should never be in charge of calling plays. I can't even remember how many times this season that he's tried to force the pass from the top of the key into Perk down low. It's not always Ray's fault, as Perk isn't exactly known for having great hands, but a lot of times it's just a pass that he shouldn't even be thinking about, let alone actually trying.

i like the idea of Marquis bringing the ball up a LOT - he's capable and can easily do the job, it frees House or Ray to shoot and it just generally makes the most sense. I'm surprised Doc has had to come this far in the year to make this decision, though - we've needed this shift for a while ! i don't know what he's been watching ...
There's another piece in today's Globe, says S Williams is getting his minutes in the 1st half b/c Doc doesn't trust him to get it done later in the game. IMHO Shelden should be in there for back up later in the game as well as earlier. Looks like that's where Baby is going to get his minutes from, from Doc's decision to keep SW on the bench later in the game. I think SW should keep some of the minutes that i think he's earned with solid play, until BB can show why he ought to be taking those minutes. But that's just me ...
Doc frankly puzzles me ...

Michael in Denver