SB Nation User Blog: jontookem

Who cares about unanswered questions?!?!??

jontookem — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 18:58:46 -0000

As Media Day has come and gone, as the first day of pre-season has kicked off, we are left with many of the same questions we had before the 2009 Draft:

Who will be our back up for Pierce?
Who will be our back up for Ray?
Who will be our back up for Rondo?
Is KG really okay?
Is there a possibility that ‘Sheed could start?
Will our aging vets make it until June of 2010?

Here are my answers:

It doesn’t matter.
It doesn’t matter.
It doesn’t matter.
It doesn’t matter.
It doesn’t matter.
It doesn’t matter.

Here is what does matter:

We will have a healthy starting 5 come late October.
We have Rasheed Wallace as a possible 6th Man. Let me say that again: Rasheed Wallace will most likely be our 6th Man for this season. Can you say Bill Walton circa 1986? Yeah, me too.
We have a capable swingman in Quisy that can not only handle the ball, but slash to the hoop to compliment Eddie’s perimeter game AND play solid defense.
We re-signed Baby which will turn into one of the best signings of our off-season.
We have depth in our front-court (no more thanking every deity in every denomination that Scal “isn’t” in foul trouble like we did in the ORL series)
We still have options within Billy Walker, JR Giddens, and Lester Hudson to fill random holes.
Rondo put on 11 pounds of muscle and his attitude is just screaming WIN WIN WIN to prove he’s worthy of many years and zeros on his next contract.
And most importantly, as of right now, our aging vets (Ray, Pierce, and KG) look fresh, happy, and ready to take f*ckin names at the door.

Why we should ALL be pumped about the Sheed signing.

jontookem — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 13:26:02 -0000

I’ve been a Sheed fan for a long, long time. I’ve always been drawn to players that play a little bit out of the norm in their position. I like point forwards. I like front-courts with ridiculous shooting range. I like rebounding point guards. It makes it even better when these players can play lockdown defense. Not only do these players become nightmares for match-ups, but they are great to watch because they keep us on our toes– what will they do next?

I also like vocal, intense, and loud players. They keep things on the floor interesting and fun, and again, keeps you wondering what they will do next.

Sheed fits the bill for making it on my list of players that I like. Better yet, Sheed fits the bill for making the Celtics a stronger team.

Pretty giddy about this signing.

Think about what we just got for the MLE (roughly $5.6 – 5.8 million per year): a player that had a critical role in helping upset the Lake Show in 2004, a guy that can defend the 4 and 5 positions, a solid interior defender, someone who can really stretch the floor out all the way to the 3-point line which will make more room for penetration, a team player that would rather have the offensive weight on others’ shoulders, a good passing big man, and best of all… we get another player with a high basketball IQ. Remember that when Sheed left Portland he went to Detroit (well, to ATL for 1 game and then to DET!) and got planted into a system: he had a defined role and played with other guys who had defined roles. Larry Brown had a system in Detroit and that’s what made Sheed and his Pistons successful.

Guess what? Boston has a system! Guess what else? Sheed will have a defined role! THINK ABOUT THIS: we are getting a quality starter to be our 6th man. And we’re not talking a 6’-1” 6th man, we’re talking about a 6’-11” / 230 lbs. We have a 6th starter that has size, skill on both ends of the court, championship experience, and veteran presence.

Happy birthday, Celtics fans!

We already have the best defensive front-court in KG and Perk, and now you throw in Sheed. Sheed can play single coverage against any big in the NBA– including Dwight and Shaq. Sheed can play defense on the post. Sheed can rotate on defense. Sheed can guard the pick-n-roll. And better than this? The dude can shoot. I’m sure that Detroit fans suffered through multiple ulcers while watching him launch jumper after jumper instead of posting up on the block… but you can’t argue with his numbers: 36%, 40%, and 30% from the wings and center of the 3-pt arc, and a shooting average of 40% from the outside perimeter. And yes, he’s also an efficient post up player when he wants to be.

I’m freakin’ giddy.

Let’s think about some line-up possibilities:

Rondo, Ray, Pierce, KG, Sheed — A quick, athletic lineup.
Rondo, Ray, Pierce, Sheed, Perk — This isn’t even our best starting lineup and yet it’s still better than 29 other teams (if KG needs minutes on the bench, we have Sheed to fill that role quite easily).
Rondo, Pierce, KG, Sheed, Perk — I can’t really think of too many situations where we might see this (to match-up against a team that plays big, maybe final minutes when there’s foul trouble or injury), but holy crap this is scary. Think about the kind of defensive set up Coach T could make with these 5 guys!?? What about a 2-1-2 zone: Rondo and Pierce on the perimeter, Sheed and Perk on the blocks, and KG playing free-safety. Whoa. Either way, I’m sure if you’re an opposing player coming out of a timeout and you see these 5 guys come off the bench, you’d be a bit freaked out. Again, who knows when this lineup will be put in place, but I can’t wait to be surprised.
House, Ray, Pierce, KG, Sheed — 4 guys on the floor that can hit a 3 and 1 more that can hit from 18 feet. You also have 3 strong defenders in case you miss a shot and don’t have timeouts and therefore have to play this long-range shooting unit through another play.
Pruitt (or other backup PG), House, Bill Walker, Scal, Sheed — This could be a fun lineup to watch because you just have an odd mix of players at once, but for the most part, guys with some good basketball IQ. Imagine seeing Pruitt, House, Walker, Scal, and Sheed playing with each other? Awesome.

Look– who knows what Sheed is going to be giving us. But we should all feel better and be able to sleep comfortable at night knowing that we just added one of the best possible free agents from this summer at an absolute steal.
People were ready to get into bed with Hedo, Ariza, Artest, and Jason Kidd. There wasn’t too much made over Sheed because of his mediocre season and probably worries that age is catching up with him. But that’s where other teams had problems and the Celtics had an opportunity: most teams were looking for starters to sign during this off-season: Hedo, Ariza, Artest, Charlie V, Ben Gordon, Odom, and Kidd can all be starters with either a big price tag and/or a long-term deal. And Sheed? No one wanted to sign a soon-to-be 35 year old big man that’s on the decline. But again, herein lies the opportunity for the Celts: they didn’t need a starter. They needed a reliable 6th man as a guy that could potentially start for other teams, but would be willing to come off the C’s bench– check. The Celts needed length off the bench– check. The Celts needed a player that wouldn’t be a liability on either end and instead contribute on both ends– check. The Celts wanted a veteran– check. Most of all though, the Celts needed a veteran that would take the MLE in hopes of signing him on the attraction of playing with a REAL contender– check.

Sheed is going to add to the intensity of our Celtics team. In both Portland and Detroit, players revered him as a great teammate– a guy that would rather be the second or third option instead of the first. A guy that wants to play with a team that wants to play as a team. A guy whose history of technical fouls stem from his high intensity and emotions during the game. A guy that bought all of his teammates replica WWF heavyweight championship belts after the Pistons title in 2004– a reminder that they were champions and that they wanted to defend and repeat.

By tomorrow, Sheed will be a Celtic– very sweet words during this off-season.
I think I might even be purchasing a Sheed t-shirt jersey in the near future: the second highest honor I can give to a Celtic player (besides owning a Pierce and Rondo jersey).

An open letter to Danny: why you messed up.

jontookem — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 00:04:22 -0000

Missed this FanPost from yesterday but I'm promoting it to the Front Page today. Enjoy. -Jeff

Feelings aside, it makes sense why you didn’t give an offer to Leon Powe, and allowed him to walk out of the Garden doors toward the path of free agency. Financially, you need to save every penny that you possibly can in order to chase down guys like ‘Sheed. Logistically, you need to save every coveted roster spot for a player that can offer on-the-court contributions toward the ultimate goal of raising the 18th banner in the 2009-2010 season.

I understand all of these reasons.

I am not a GM. I don’t work in a front office. I am not handling someone else’s millions of dollars... but that doesn’t mean I can’t be critical about this decision.

Remember last year when you kept Sam Cassell along for just over $1 million to wear a suit instead of a uniform? Remember when you signed Patrick O’Bryant to a 1-year contract and offered him a roster spot? Remember how you’ve kind of stuck with this guy named Gabe Pruitt that can’t really shoot, pass, or drive sober? Yeah I remember how all of these guys took a roster spot on the Boston Celtics at the start of the 2008-2009 season.

When building your teams, you’ve made calculated risks. You have the cornerstones of the franchise, 3 to be exact: between Pierce, KG, and Ray Allen, you have almost $56 million locked up between these 3. That means you have to find deals elsewhere. You orchestrated a trade a few years ago that allowed one of the top point guards in the league to play in green at a mere $3 million. You’ve stuck with and developed a center that is the most underrated defensive big man in the league at a cheap $4 million. Your starting lineup is filled with blockbuster future-hall-of-famers and emerging all-stars that is easily one of the top 2 starting lineups in the association.

From there, you are looking for deals to build your bench because you don’t have any financial flexibility. You’re looking for value. You’re looking for low-risk situations: can we pay someone little and have them thrive and flourish in our system? Can you find someone that does what is asked of them consistency and well enough to help the team win? Can you find the right personality and player that others either overlooked or discounted for various reasons?

But you’re looking too far to build your bench. You’re looking too far to find true value. You’re looking too far to find the best low-risk situation. Leon Powe is quintessentially what you need for your bench: he is value, he is low-risk, and he is so much more.

I’ll spare you of his past (at least until the end of the post). You know his past better than all of us. But let’s revisit what his past has taught him: perseverance, dedication, faith, persistence, optimism, and 240 pounds of sheer muscle. Sheer. Muscle. He’s blown out his knees before and recovered each time. Why not this time? He’s only 25 years old-- he’s not 35 and on his way out. Powe has time and age on his side to recover from this injury.

When you asked Powe to bump bodies underneath, he did it. When you asked Powe to draw contact and get to the line, he did it. When you asked him to improve his free throw shooting, he did it. When you asked him to body up and box out, he did it. When you asked him to work on his agility to become a better rebounder, he did it. When you asked him to work harder to understand the team’s defensive schemes by watching additional tape and talking with Coach T, he did it. When you asked him add a few low post moves that could be your go-to options when getting the ball, he did it. When KG got hurt and you asked him to shoulder even more front-court responsibility, he did it. Not only did Leon do all of these things, but he did them well.

Damn it, Danny. How is this even an issue? All you have to do is offer him a 1 year contract at the league minimum... wait to see how his rehab goes through February toward the trade deadline... if he’s not far enough along, you cut him or trade him. You let him go and free up your roster spot. If he’s far enough along, then you’ve got yourself superb front court help from a guy that not only knows the system but is GOOD. Powe is a quality, quality PF off the bench. For a cheap $800,000 you could get a guy that would help you win playoff games. You would have a guy that you trust to put in when games mattered-- if KG or Perk need a breather in the playoffs, you would trust having Powe in the game. That’s it-- bottom line.

What is so risky about this? If you were willing to keep on Sam Cassell and Patrick O’Bryant at the start of the season, why not keep Leon? Get rid of Gabe Pruitt and give his roster spot to Leon.

There is nothing that risky about this at all. For $800,000 you take a chance on a guy that helped you win the franchise’s 17th championship and would resign for the future TO BE your bench. He wants to be in Boston and Boston wants him here.

And you know, Danny, you know that Leon would have taken your 1-year contract at the league minimum.

Doc Rivers from the ESPN OTL video that ran last year: "As a coach, I guess you should never cheer for a player... and I clearly cheer for him."

Well, we all cheer for him, Doc... and we wish we had the chance to continue to cheer him on for the 2009-2010 season.

Be sure to check out Fresh Start for Oakland (Powe’s mentoring program for undeserved youth in Oakland) and his basketball camp site.

Leon's story from ESPN last year:

Boston Celtics: Leon Powe (via Stacer5)

Why the starting 5 needs to stay in place.

jontookem — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 22:14:07 -0000

I’m guilty. I’m guilty like most of you. Upon hearing the news of the King of Pop passing away last week, I turned to my digital library. I made the MJ-RIP playlist in iTunes. I then loaded all of my MJ songs into my iPod shuffle (red, second generation clip one– none of this voice activated crap) so that when I went running, Jack-O could be with me in spirit.

When all of the lawsuits and rumors were flying around about MJ’s sleepovers with little boys at Neverland Ranch, I sort of put the music aside. But with his recent passing, it’s like he’s been absolved. Of everything. All of the weird stuff (his plastic surgeries, molestation charges, dangling his baby over a balcony, etc.) has taken a back seat so that his music can live on. We are remaking his legacy with every mention of his music and not the stuff that landed him on the front pages of tabloids.

Like I said before, I’m, just as guilty: As I write this post, I’m listening to MJ.

This gets me thinking about how our memory tends to play tricks on us. We convince ourselves of certain truths and therefore create a reality that isn’t always true to form. We make our world what we want it to be.

It’s not entirely a bad thing… but it can be dangerous. Our nostalgic tendencies fog our ability to properly assess a situation, and thus creates greater difficulty in an already difficult decision making process.

On the eve of when 2009 off-season free agency commences, I’m trying to see through the Rondo-Ray-Pierce-KG-Perk lineup that we fell in love with in the 2007-2008 banner year and in the electrifying start they had in the 2008-2009 season before the Christmas Day massacre and the KG injury in February. This starting five has so much personality and character that it’s hard not to be enamored by them. But more importantly, I whole heartedly believe that it is the BEST starting 5 in the association from top to bottom and all-around.

But then I have to call a time-out and check myself: am I being too nostalgic? Am I allowing myself to only remember the good stuff (and believe me: the good stuff was good)? Am I willing to push the bad stuff to the outside of the plate? Some things that are out there in the nebulous of Celtic Universe that I am trying not get absorbed into:

Sitting on Ray Allen might mean missing something BIG: his expiring contract is so valuable in this tumultuous economic environment at all owners and GMs seem to be working around instead of with. We could get a handful of players back if a deal were struck where Ray was packaged with a young PG that many teams out there are drooling for.
Speaking of the young PG: Rondo’s diva-esque attitude that seems to be eating up headlines all over the place in the last few weeks. Is he really that much of a pain in the ass to play with? I doubt it’s as bad as the reporters are saying. In a time when every writer wants to write the right story in fear of becoming a second class citizen in an ever-changing field (journalism), integrity gets deliberately ignored and writers just write as if they have a source when they have none. Besides, if a guy is really hard to deal with, you change your strategy with him. Here’s an idea: go make Rondo live with KG on an island for 4 weeks– he’ll come back a changed man. And, this would make for GREAT summer reality television.
Age. Ray, Pierce, and KG aren’t getting any younger.
Wyc and Danny floating the idea of being able to sign a max contract guy in the 2010 off-season frenzy. This has serious ramifications: at that point the only unmovable guy is KG (no one will take on a salary that large at his age), so what will Pierce have to take in order to stay in Boston and retire a Celtic? Will that mean no money for a guy like Rondo? What happens to Perk’s future after 2011? A max-contract guy in 2010 means no money for others. Scary, but also a little exciting at the same time.

Am I being too nostalgic about Rondo-Ray-Pierce-KG-Perk (RRPKP)? Do I want these guys to stay together because of what they’ve done in the past instead of thinking forward about what they CAN do in the future?

Here is the honest answer: YES and NO. I want them to stay together for lots of reasons that deal with the past and the future.

So I go to 82games.com for some help. In their sortable 5-man units in the NBA, RRPKP played a total of 1074 minutes together in the 2008-2009 campaign… and that’s with KG missing 1/3 of the season and the playoffs. That’s the most in the NBA. How do you create strong court chemistry, team camaraderie, and speed up the development of young/raw talent (Rondo/Perl)? Put them on the floor together for as many minutes as possible. RRPKP also had the highest +/- rating amongst all possible 5-man units in the entire NBA that played with each other for at least 100 minutes during the 2008-2009 season: they had a +260 rating. To give you an idea of how effective they were on both defensive and offense (with this +260 rating), Lebron and his Cavs were second with a rating of +187. That’s a 73 point swing if you’re doing the math alongside me. They also collected the most wins in 2008-2009 with 37 as a starting 5 (Spurs were second with 33). And yes, I remind you that KG was hurt for the last 1/3 of the season.

As for RRPKP’s efforts individually, here’s just a tasting:

RONDO- Remember that the really really really smart folks over at Wages of Win marked Rondo as the team’s most valuable player because he had the largest rating for wins produced on the entire roster: through mathematical reasoning with various statistics, Rondo is established as being accountable for 29.9% of the Celtics 62 wins during the ’08 season. His actual wins-produced-per-48mins rating was 6th in the ENTIRE league. We lived and died by the phrase “As Rondo goes, so go the Celtics.” True, true. Oh yeah– he’s 23 years old. Put him on that freakin’ island with KG (we could call it, “Growing up with KG”).

RAY- Unfortunately for you Ray fans out there, this might not end well for you. I love Ray Allen on this team. I really do. But for his price tag, I’d rather have a slightly over mediocre shooting guard that plays good defense, a reliable back up for Pierce, and a good big man off the bench. You can get all 3 for $18 million. But if we keep Ray, here are the quick upsides: stone cold shooter, makes CLUTCH shots over and over again, efficient scorer, knows the system, and he plays well with the other 4 guys in the lineup. I like the idea of him staying in the lineup because I like thinking about the consistency and chemistry he already has with the other 4 guys… plus, if he is moved odds are a young PG is moving with him and we just can’t have that.

PIERCE- One of the most durable players in the game and a ’08 second-team ALL NBA forward, he will be even more effective when KG is back in the lineup and Pierce is not asked to carry so much on his aging shoulders. Less responsibility means more production. A few extra minutes of rest each game means more production in the playoffs. I think we can see a similar performance next season– efficient and reliable scorer and a great defenseman. Plus, he’s a match up nightmare for most teams except Cleveland and Orlando.

KG- Two things: he will eat children if it means another ring and his surgery was a success. I can’t wait to see #5 back on the court this year.

PERK- A maturing center that is earning his money and then some… He had a specific role this year: play defense and score on the low-low post if given the chance. He bought into the role and Perk exceeded ALL of our expectations: he became the anchor of our defense when KG went down. Look at what he did against Dwight Howard in Orlando and then look at what Dwight Howard was able to do in Cleveland. Perk is a beast.

Rondo-Ray-Pierce-KG-Perk need to come back because they are the best starting 5 in the game. With the passing of the draft and no moves being made, I think we can actually believe that Ainge will be looking to free agency to improve our depth and bench… and not touch the core. Danny: go find us a back up PG, a back up swing man, and a reliable back up center.

It’s ok to be nostalgic… as long as it still makes sense. In this case, Rondo-Ray-Pierce-KG-Perk still make sense.

How we assemble teams, evaluate players, and view trades.

jontookem — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 01:03:11 -0000

http://loscy.wordpress.com
--

As a kid, I actually never played Little League baseball. I didn’t go to Disneyworld either. I’m not entirely sure what that says about my childhood, but that’s besides the point.
When all of my friends talked about the best players in Little League, it was usually the same thing: he could hit homeruns, was a pretty good fielder, and he was also the team’s best pitcher. That’s a funny thing. In the majors, there aren’t any players that fit the bill of best hitters and best pitchers on the team. We just don’t see this anymore in the majors.

Much like our society at large, everything has become specialized. From the clothes that we buy to the food that we eat, certain places and certain people make certain items to be bought/sold all over the world. We have specialized because it is efficient: we reduce the amount of waste produced (in terms of time and money; not actual physical waste) and therefore companies maximize profits. We specialize because it’s the way to succeed.

Why am I talking about the social ramifications of specialization? Because we see specialization in sports. Strangely enough, we are seeing it in basketball. We are seeing grand similarities in how GMs and owners run their teams and how companies run their businesses in the marketplace.

Basketball is a much different sport than baseball and football, and therefore requires different kinds of athletes with different kinds of skill sets. In football, a wide receiver really gets paid to do a few things: run fast, catch a ball, and remember patterns. That’s it. Wide receivers don’t need to know how to tackle, or how to read the opposing offense. Baseball players are in a similar position: a pitcher gets paid to pitch. Even if you’re in the NL, no one is expecting a pitcher to be one of the best hitters in the lineup-- there’s a reason almost all NL pitchers hit 9th in the batting order. Outfielders don’t need to work on their agility/reaction time to go to their left and right like infielders. Outfielders arms get worked differently than infielders, which get worked differently than pitchers. Baseball players are very specialized. The best example? The designated hitter.

Those ideas make sense in baseball and football, but it’s much more difficult to hide your athletic flaws in basketball: you are what you are and everyone knows it... and everyone sees it. We are all witnesses to basketball players athletic capabilities and limitations. If you can’t jump, we see it. If you can’t dribble, we see it. Basketball players, in general, have to play all facets of the game because at any given point, they are put in a position to react to that kind of play. And more importantly, this can occur with high frequency during a given game.

You’d imagine then that to build a winning basketball team, you would need to just assemble a team by plucking the best possible players, teaching them how to work together, and to build chemistry around a game-plan. After all, this is the sport that demands all of its athletes to be competent in all aspects of the game. But somewhere along the way, basketball GMs started building teams like they were acquiring unique pieces to a puzzle: get a lockdown defender on the bench that can guard multiple positions and find a shooter that can create space in order to create his own shots. We’ve started treating basketball players like baseball and football players: we trade and acquire players for specific roles.

This has become most evident during this off-season as we hear rumors flying left and right about Rondo and Ray potentially getting moved. Fans have been conditioned to compartmentalize players to certain roles and can’t see past that. For instance, when we gauge a possible Rondo trade, we first think about what #9 gives us right now: good ball-handling skills, lightening quick speed, ability to penetrate and either create his own shots near the rim or dish, great court vision, the ability to say yes/no to his 3 veteran future hall of famers when they all want the ball, amazing athletic ability to block shots and rip down rebounds, and a perimeter defender that gambles with the house’s money but often wins. Then we look at what he doesn’t have: no jump shot, apparently a piss-poor attitude, stubbornness, inconsistency, and at times the tendency to make very bad decisions during crucial moments in a game. When you compare Mike Conley or Steve Nash to Rondo, we as fans can’t help but think that we are losing out. Conley and Nash don’t fill the role that Rondo currently fills. Conley’s vision isn’t as great, neither is his speed. Nash isn’t known as a stellar defender and he’s getting old. Neither Conley nor Nash fit the role that Rondo has created as the Celtics point guard.

That’s precisely the problem: we are trying to compare what one point guard does in one system against what another point guard does in a different system. If both players don’t possess similar skills, we feel that we on the losing end of the trade. What we fail to see at times is the larger picture and the possibility of what the team could become with a different player.

How did we get here? What happened to just throwing the best possible players on the floor and teaching them how to play with each other and how to stick to a game-plan? Bill Simmons brought up a similar idea in a podcast a few weeks ago when he talked about Orlando’s thought to just throw out 5 good players and hope for the best. Everyone claimed that they had a big man that wasn’t an offensive power, yet they advanced to the Finals. Everyone claimed that they gunned up too many threes, yet they advanced to the Finals. Everyone claimed that they didn’t have a go-to player that could close out a game, yet they advanced to the Finals. What the hell?

Is this really the only way we think a team can win? By assigning players to very specific roles? By assuming that each player can bring a skill or two and then find other players to compliment that? What happens when your lockdown defender from the bench gets hurt? Or better yet, when the opposing teams goes small/quick and both guards are far too fast for your bigger defender? What happens when your “pure” shooter can’t get open or gets ice cold for games at a time?

Chuck Hayes. My buddy CG loves Chuck Hayes and for good reasons: he’s a pretty hard-nosed player that can guard multiple positions, plays great defense, can do most of the fundamental duties of a big man (box out, rebound, take up space to congest the paint, etc.) except one thing: he can’t score. He cannot score. Again: he cannot score. Open layups are mostly do-able, but he cannot score. And I’m not talking can’t score when facing up or because he lacks post moves, he legitimately can’t score. Chuck can set a mean pick, but who’s going to guard him when he rolls? He cannot score. Don’t get me wrong, I’d pick this guy up for for $1 million dollars, but how on earth do you make it into the league without being able to make a shot that isn’t an open layup?

Daryl Morey, one of the leagues best GMs (according to me, so that is like solid gold), has talked about how he thinks a team wins in the NBA today: you have a franchise player (Yao), a player just below the franchise player level (T-Mac), and then a 3rd guy that is just below the level of just below the franchise player (Ron Artest). From there, you just surround players to fit certain roles that you know you need: a swingman defender (Shane Battier), a player that can do all of the intangibles that don’t appear in the box score (Shane Battier), players that can create their own shots (Aaron Brooks and Von Wafer), a post-presence (Hayes), a versatile big that can spread out the court (Luis Scola), and athletic guys that are decent at multiple tasks (Landry, Lowry, Cook).

Although this makes sense, there’s something inherently wrong with this method.

Then you have Mark Warkentien from Denver. Warkentien also picked up guys like Chris Anderson and Dahntay Jones for peanuts because he liked the way they played. There was no breakdown of crazy algorithms involving Bill James-like statistics to determine the value and validity of signing these players-- Warkentien and the owners signed the players they thought were good. They watched and listened to their scouts: these guys were good players. Anderson and Jones were an integral part to Denver’s success... both at a combined $1.9 million. By the way, Tony Allen alone made $2.5 million and was signed as a “defensive specialist” and to add a little bit of slashing offensive from the bench. Think about that.

I’m not saying that Morey is wrong and Warkentien is right. But somewhere in there between Morey and Warkentien lies a GM that uses the model of assembling a team by parts (Morey) and the model of assembling a team by who you just think are good players (Warkentien). Sam Presti of Oklahoma and Danny Ainge might be good examples. We know Ainge’s history. Think about what Presti has done in the last couple of years: drafted Durant, Westbrook, and Green. Presti has found three gems in the last couple of drafts that will be the cornerstone of the Thunder’s lineup for years to come. He also happened to draft three guys that get along, like playing with each other, are flexible in regards to position, and seem to have some integrity. They have not been afraid to try players at different positions to make it work. And with the 3rd pick in this year’s draft, they could steal Ricky Rubio from the crowed and take a chance on a player that seems to be encased in mystery. After Blake Griffin, you might as well take a chance on a kid that could turn out to be phenomenal (or a bust: but with high risk comes the possibility of high reward) because of the weak draft class. Presti seems to get players that he knows are unique and good, and then works to make IT work for the team. I think what Presti sees is what we all need to see: evaluating numbers and skills of a particular player is helpful, but we don’t always know what they will do when tossed into a new system. Maybe, just maybe, finding guys that are good players and force them to work into your system is how you create a winning team. Back to basics: find the best players possible, make them learn how to play with each other, and have them stick to a game-plan that maximizes the possibility of winning each night. It’s called creative management and good coaching. Crazy, I know.

I imagine that when Danny was chasing down Ray and KG, he wasn’t thinking, “Will these guys fit in with what we are trying to achieve?” No. Danny thought to himself, “Holy s••t, I could get KG and Ray alongside Pierce?” He got the best players possible and then let Doc and company figure out the rest. If you have a chance to get Lebron or D-Wade in 2010, you don’t sit there and think about what skills you want them to really accentuate on the team. You get them on the team and figure out along the way what works and what doesn’t work.

It will make me sad to see Ray and Rondo go, if they end up being moved this off-season. Not only did I just invest in an $80 Rondo jersey, but I’ll also say that he is by and far my favorite basketball player in years. I think that we have the top 2 starting lineups in the league (LA and Boston), and I’m smashing my head against my keyboard wondering WHY we would be thinking about tinkering with this core group. But, I also trust there’s a reason that Danny is the GM and I sit here and write about the Celtics. When it boils down to it, I’d rather see banner #18 than #9 handling the ball. But while rumors will continue to fly for the next couple of months, we need to really think about the arguments we are making about why certain trades will and will not work.

And for the record, I would have also made a damn good second baseman in Little League.

http://loscy.wordpress.com/

The default choice? Why Eddie should pick up his 09-10 option.

jontookem — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 15:15:13 -0000

There’s no such thing as ideal circumstances. Conditions in life rarely allow us to do exactly what we want, however we want.

And I’m okay with that. I’m okay with the fact that we have to make decisions based on the given situation, usually associated with so many variables. In most situations, people want to be given a choice. They want options. Choices make us happy because we are in the driver seat. There is a phenomenon, however, known as the paradox of choice: too many options (or even when there is more than 1 option) can cause us to over-analyze, stall on the decision-making process, and worse yet, create some high and unrealistic expectation of how happy our choice will make us.

Sometimes not having a choice is best… I’ll call it the default choice. Not having options can sometimes make you live with a decision and learn to make the most of it.

This is the situation I think Eddie House is in.
Eddie has a choice during this off-season: take the $2.8 million option and then look for a new contract next year in the crazy 2010 off-season, or pass on the Celtics $2.8 million and look for a new contract now. Eddie has a few more years left in him as a role player coming off the bench– maybe 5 years tops. He will be looking for 1 more big contract before he has to settle on some smaller one-year deals in the $1 million range.

Eddie just turned 31 this past May. House set a Celtics record for the best regular season 3-point FG% at .444, just besting Danny Ainge’s .443 from the ’86-’87 season (I was actually at the final regular season game when House was chasing this record: we tried to calculate his average after every shot but our cell phones only went to the hundredths when we needed it to go to the thousandths– it was entertaining). Eddie had arguably his most productive season of his career: he had a clearly defined role (playing off-guard, catching and shooting, and that’s pretty much it), played in 81 games (tying a career high), got plenty of minutes, and became our bench’s “energy guy”– Eddie was our catalyst for offense for the second unit.

Eddie's ability to move without the ball has been the real reason his shooting has been on: he's usually open when catching and shooting.

We’ve seen House evolve as a player while adorning #50 in green & white. Doc and Danny tried him at the point as Rondo’s back up for the start ’07-’08 season, and that wasn’t good for anybody. Since Sam Cassell, Gabe Pruitt, and Steph took over the reigns as back-up for Rondo since the trade deadline from the 2008 season, House has primarily played the off-guard position. This is, simply put, his most natural position on the court that allows him to be productive. His movement without the ball has improved ten-fold (I’m sure from working with Ray), and therefore his ability to get free has increased. He’s always had a quick release, which is an absolute must for a guard at his size (6’-1”). He really has one job on offense now, and it’s pretty simple: get open and launch bombs. Remember that from about mid-January to April in 2009, Eddie was shooting right around 50% from behind the arc (I just did the quick math in my head from the game splits: 103-209 3pt, give a take a few on each). Whoa. On top of the hot shooting, we continued to see the hustle in House: diving for loose balls, making the hard fouls… and dare I say, we even saw flashes of decent defense in the Chicago series.

As far as we know, Eddie is healthy. He keeps himself in pretty good shape– not too many concerns about wear & tear or age quite yet. So really, House is in the best position possible to go and sign elsewhere to lock up a few more years: just came off his best season in the NBA and is healthy. But herein lies the problem: I don’t think he will be seeing more money than $2.8 million, but he may be able to get some piece of mind in a longer term deal. The only concern around any team signing House right now, which is a big concern, is that no one knows how he will fare down the road. He’s been a streaky guy his entire career. If we pause to un-romanticize ourselves from House and the Celtics just for a second, then we’d probably realize that Eddie fits into an up-tempo system better than our system. The Knicks. The Suns. Golden State. Maybe even the Clippers. But unfortunately, these teams aren’t really in a position to pick up an undersized shooting guard (again, 6’-1”) that had a career year and could potentially see a drop in production over the next few years. Are any of these teams (I’ll even throw Milwaukee in there) really going to give a guy like Eddie $3-4 million for the next few years? No way. There is no way Eddie is going to see more money than he is seeing from the Celtics for the 2009-2010 season ($2.8 million). Again, Eddie might see an additional couple of years with an extended contract, but I don’t think that this is any more realistic than the money. There is no way people are going to sign a bench player for a 2-3 year contract when it will be taking away money for them to bid on the high profile players available in the 2010 free agency summer sweepstakes (Lebron, Wade, Bosh, Joe Johnson, Pierce (player option), Drik (player option), Kenyon Martin, Yao, T-Mac (I debated whether or not to include his name…), Marcus Camby, Michael Redd, Steve Nash, Amare, Shaq, Manu, and many others worthy of listing but I’m feeling lazy).

Here is another argument for him staying put for this upcoming season: he might not thrive in another organization like he thrives in Boston. Why on earth would Eddie want to go play somewhere else for 2009-2010? He needs to think about the future, of course, but he also needs to think about what is realistic for right now. Eddie won’t see more money, but if he can stay and be an integral part to the Celtics run for #18 then he will have 2 rings that he helped win on his resume. That could earn him a few years for a team looking to add a small piece after their big signings in 2010.

Eddie plays for a competent front office and coaching staff that believe in him and thinks he is part of the puzzle to winning. These guys would chop their children’s arms off to put up banner #18, and Eddie fits in well. House is an emotional guy– he feeds off of the intensity and energy of others while symbiotically giving it back to his teammates. Is Eddie going to find another locker room like Boston? A team with 3 future hall of famers that are now officially tested and true veterans with a ring on their finger? A team that has 2 straight seasons of sell-outs, and counting? Fans that will freakin’ buy his jersey (I guarantee no one else has ever bought his jersey prior to coming to Boston). A team that is easily one of the contenders for a title? I mean come on, all I have to say is Kevin Garnett. House needs to be playing with a guy like KG. I just don’t think Eddie will be effective if he isn’t being intravenously injected with this type of hype, intensity, energy, and drive that is in infinite supply from his Celtics teammates.

Really, though… this economic climate and the uncertainty of the future financial landscape of the association is causing lots of problems for teams, but in this case with Eddie, it’s actually kind of a blessing for Boston. He’s not going to get more money elsewhere. For $2.8 million, I think that Danny and company played their cards just right: this is a great price tag for the value of House… instant offense from a guy who knows our system.

So luckily for the Celtics, they can’t really beat the value of House but hopefully they don’t have to. Sometimes the best choice is no choice. Here, I just don’t see a real choice for Eddie, which works out well to maintain some stability on the Celts bench. Eddie: it looks like a default choice for you.

A little sad.

jontookem — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 19:31:26 -0000

An old post that gives a good look back at the maturation of Paul Pierce.
May 11, 2009
--

Amidst the unyielding and celebratory exuberance after the game, I couldn’t help but be a little sad after Baby sunk that 20 footer to win the game– I had barely recovered from 30 seconds prior when Baby hit a 15 footer to give the Celts a 93-92 lead.

For so long we leaned on our captain, Paul Pierce, to be the guy that takes the most important shot when it mattered most. When the game was on the line, Pierce was our guy. He was our closer. The Truth.

With 1:07 left in the 4th, and the Celts up 91-90, Pierce tried to take control of the game. He dribbled at the top of the circle like he has done so often. He spun. He pumped faked. He faded away. He shot from about 14 feet. He missed. I can’t remember who was guarding him (Pietrus?), but he stayed with Pierce when he spun. He didn’t bite on the fake. He faded with Pierce to put a hand in his face.

On the final possession, with just 11 seconds left on the clock, most people expected the ball to be in Pierce’s hands. Pierce was 2-5 in the 1st Q, 3-3 in the 2nd Q, 3-3 in the 3rd Q, and 0-3 in the 4th Q. A cold 4th Q. When Pierce received the ball from Rondo, we all saw how this would play out: dribble, dribble, some hesitation/fake combo, and pop his mid-range 18-20 footer that is common in his arsenal.

Although this time, he didn’t shoot.
He found Baby wide open when the Magic rightfully doubled Pierce with lengthy Rashard Lewis and Defensive Player of the Year Dwight Howard. Baby was was the third option on that play (behind Pierce and Ray, who couldn’t get free), but also 2-3 FG in the 4th Q– a damn good third option.

Sometimes asking for help is the best way to empower others, and this is what Pierce did.
Pierce continues to show us that he understands what it takes to win. While everyone is praising Baby’s shot, we want to be sure to give props to Pierce’s ability to make a clean pass in order for Baby to catch and shoot with his feet already set.

Back in the day, fresh out of Kansas, as a rookie that saw plenty of playing time, Pierce had a decent jumper but could take the ball the rim quickly and finish strong. He was a finisher. He was a natural scorer. As his career progressed, and age/gravity became known variables to his abilities, Pierce changed his game to adapt. He worked tirelessly on that mid range jumper, and started smoothly executing pump fakes and hesitations.

Pierce wasn't the focus of the last play, but was certainly in the picture.

People have been very critical of Pierce during this playoff series, myself included at times. We criticize his iso plays and heroic antics. Winning teams win because players understand their roles: some score, some pass, some are defensive specialist, some are enforcers. Paul used to be the scorer. But with his dedication to defense that started last season and welcoming Ray and KG, we can see him letting go of his offensive control of this team. He has turned into a different kind of play maker.

Change is hard; with difficult habits, addicts find themselves still falling off the wagon. We’ll still see moments when Pierce tries to make the last big shot every, but he’s learning to let go. Change is hard. But more often than not, change is necessary.

You’re still a winner. Still a champ. Still ’08 Finals MVP. You don’t need to sink a buzzer beater to be a winner. You’ve willed your way to leading this team through 62 wins this season, plus 6 more this post season. And it’s not over yet. I am glad you didn’t take that final shot and trusted Baby’s open shot was better than yours in double coverage.

But, it still makes me sad that you didn’t take that shot.