michaelf@ISM780.UUCP (02/06/86)
To finally put to rest the myth that the
Lakers could be the greatest, team of all time, they are
now playing what could be termed as lousy. An article in
a recent L.A. Times had Coach Riley saying the team was
11 and 8 since December and 8-10 on the year when
trailing at halftime. That last stat is a biggie. They're
talented but do they have heart?
Another thing that bothers me. In a recent
loss to the Knicks, Kareem had 40 points. He also had
only three rebounds.
To be fair to Laker fans it should be noted
that Magic has been hurt lately (sore knee) and Rambis
has been playing sporadically but it's a team game and
injuries are part of it. Where's that great depth?
Besides, any team being touted as one of the greatest of
all should not be so dependent on any one player.
Currently, the Celtics have been without their million
dollar superstar Kevin McHale and have rattled off 13
wins in a row. I am not insinuating anything here. Or am
I?
On a college note, North Carolina still looks
very strong after beating Georgia Tech in the Omni. Mark
Price, it should be pointed out, was about 6 for 20, missed
a free throw that would have tied it in overtime and fouled
out to end the game. He's only about 6-1 and he is talked
about as one of the nation's best? In big games, I've seen
him wilt twice now. I'd sooner take Michael Jackson of
Georgetown or Duke's Johnny Dawkins. IF Price makes it into
the NBA, he'll disappear into obscurity real soon.
Those Orange guys from Syracuse look good. Great
starters and great depth. They'll do well in the NCAAs this
year.
Oklahoma and Kansas are wearing out the nets
nets whenever they play. They probably score in the
hundreds more often than any other college team. Memphis
State reminds me of the great Louisville teams, a dozen
dynamic athletes at full tilt. Georgetown cannot be
overlooked. Ewing-less, they can still hang tough with
anyone.
Can someone out there tell me Danny Ainge's
shooting percentage on the year?billm@haddock.UUCP (02/07/86)
->To finally put to rest the myth that the
->Lakers could be the greatest, team of all time, they are
->now playing what could be termed as lousy. An article in
->a recent L.A. Times had Coach Riley saying the team was
->11 and 8 since December and 8-10 on the year when
->trailing at halftime. That last stat is a biggie. They're
->talented but do they have heart?
->Another thing that bothers me. In a recent
->loss to the Knicks, Kareem had 40 points. He also had
->only three rebounds.
->To be fair to Laker fans it should be noted
->that Magic has been hurt lately (sore knee) and Rambis
->has been playing sporadically but it's a team game and
->injuries are part of it. Where's that great depth?
->Besides, any team being touted as one of the greatest of
->all should not be so dependent on any one player.
->Currently, the Celtics have been without their million
->dollar superstar Kevin McHale and have rattled off 13
->wins in a row. I am not insinuating anything here. Or am
->I?
These "best teams of all times" arguments are for the birds.
The only thing that really counts is whether they win, whether
they play well, and whether their problems can be coached around,
in that order. It would be nice to see another team in the NBA
finals (Houston ?).
->On a college note, North Carolina still looks
->very strong after beating Georgia Tech in the Omni. Mark
->Price, it should be pointed out, was about 6 for 20, missed
->a free throw that would have tied it in overtime and fouled
->out to end the game. He's only about 6-1 and he is talked
->about as one of the nation's best? In big games, I've seen
->him wilt twice now. I'd sooner take Michael Jackson of
->Georgetown or Duke's Johnny Dawkins. IF Price makes it into
->the NBA, he'll disappear into obscurity real soon.
I echo those comments about John Salley. I can't believe GT
had a significant lead (>= 10 pts.) in that game at halftime and
lost. The real player on GT is Bruce Dalrymple. He always draws
the toughest defensive assignment and in the big games seems to play
quite well. The freshman Hammonds has the heart of a lion; he'll be
awesome by his junior year.
->Those Orange guys from Syracuse look good. Great
->starters and great depth. They'll do well in the NCAAs this
->year.
Them again ? It would be nice to see someone other than Georgetown
and St. Johns at the top of the Big East (best basketball conference
around). Seikaly has some way to go; I've never seen him have a good
game against a decent (at least) center. Against Mark Bryant of Seton
Hall (who, by the way, is from NJ), he seemed to be afraid of playing
instinctively and with reckless abandon.
->Oklahoma and Kansas are wearing out the nets
->nets whenever they play. They probably score in the
->hundreds more often than any other college team.
Oklahoma's coach went neanderthal after last years NCAA regional final
loss to Memphis State. I seriously wonder if they'll ever make it
that far when Billy Tubbs actually has to switch defenses and create
offensive strategies other that run at 100 MPH.
Kansas would seem to have a better shot. They have good offense,
good defense, and a good recruiter and bench-coach. The game they
had against Duke in this seasons' Big Apple Classic final was a
class effort, even in defeat.
->Memphis State reminds me of the great Louisville teams, a dozen
->dynamic athletes at full tilt.
Andre Turner and William Bedford for All-American !!!!
->Georgetown cannot be overlooked. Ewing-less, they can still hang tough with
->anyone.
One wonders, however, how long they can hang in against a team with
quality and aggressive big people. Perimeter shooting, I'm afraid,
can only carry you so far.
->Can someone out there tell me Danny Ainge's shooting percentage on the year?
Statistics courtesy of the Boston Globe (2/4/86, games through 2/2/86).
For Danny Ainge,
G FG FGA PCT. FT FTA PCT. PTS AVG REB(o-t) AST ST BLK
__ ___ ___ ____ __ ___ ____ ___ ____ ________ ___ __ ___
42 203 375 .541 66 73 .904 485 11.5 23-137 236 63 5
Editorial Comment:
The above are good statistics no matter how one cuts it...
I ponder, however, their true value. Bird and Ainge certainly get
(more than) their amount of press, but Dennis Johnson and Kevin McHale
are the two best players the Celtics have. Bird and Ainge have all
the offensive capability one would want in NBA players, but when their
offense is off so are they.
On the other hand, Johnson and McHale have much more well-rounded games.
They typically draw the toughest defensive assignments on the
opposition, so that when their offenses are off they can still be of
value to the team on the court.
Bill Mathews {decvax ! cca | yale | ihnp4 | cbosgd}!ima!billm
{bbncca | harvard | zurton | cfib | mit-ems | wjh12 }!ima!billm
{uscvax | ucla-vax | vortex}!ism780!billm
Interactive Systems, 7th floor, 441 Stuart st, Boston, MA 02116; 617-247-1155milos@inmet.UUCP (02/10/86)
> (more than) their amount of press, but Dennis Johnson and Kevin McHale > are the two best players the Celtics have. Bird and Ainge have all > the offensive capability one would want in NBA players, but when their > offense is off so are they. >Bill Mathews {decvax ! cca | yale | ihnp4 | cbosgd}!ima!billm >Interactive Systems, 7th floor, 441 Stuart st, Boston, MA 02116; 617-247-1155 The air must be awfully thin up there on the 7th floor -- that's the only explanation I can come up with for a pea-brained statement which excludes Larry Bird from membership in the best-two-players-on-the-Celtics club. Say what you will about Ainge, but when Larry's "O" is off, he'll still carry the club with his rebounding, passing, and defense. And have you noticed that the C's have extended their winning streak to 13 with McHale watching from the sidelines. And in one of those games, DJ was among the missing, too (zero points, zero shots attempted, half his usual minutes). Bob Milosavljevic Intermetrics, Inc. ihnp4!inmet!milos
ofut@gitpyr.UUCP (Jeff Offutt) (02/13/86)
> Price, it should be pointed out, was about 6 for 20, missed > a free throw that would have tied it in overtime and fouled > out to end the game. He's only about 6-1 and he is talked > about as one of the nation's best? In big games, I've seen > him wilt twice now. I'd sooner take Michael Jackson of > shooting percentage on the year? Well, I have to put in a good word for Price. If you're talking about the Georgetown game last year, well, he's a great shooter and when great shooters get off their mark, they look bad. In the NBA, most teams can afford an off-night for a great player. In college ball, particularly Georgia Tech) you don't have enough talent to afford that. If you're talking about this year, don't forget that Price hasn't been in one piece for several weeks. In the Duke game here in Atlanta on 1/21, Price played with a _very_ painful sprained ankle. After just spraining my ankle playing B'Ball, I can't figure how he did that. The guy was badly limping! In the UNC game here (2/4), probably one where you saw him "wilt", he was still limping from the sprain. And in the first half, Dawkins gave him a good knee to the thigh (a flagrant foul which, by the way, was called a charge on Price) that would have put anybody else out of the game. The second half, which he played most of, the guy was barely able to run down the court! But, as Dick Vitalle said "I'd rather have Mark Price with one leg than most guys with two legs." The foul shot? Well, there's no excuse for missing a foul shot. But the expression on his face when he saw that they discounted his basket told it all. His "concentration" was shot. An interesting anecdote: A few days ago, Bobby Cremmins (our coach) introduced Price to Larry Bird. Price seems to have immense respect for Bird. Price stuck out his hand and Bird said something like "I'm not gonna shake your hand. You missed the free shot!" Would you say that to somebody you didn't respect? Will Price make it in the NBA? I don't know. Maybe maybe not. When you can toss in 3-pointers at a better than 40% clip you don't have to be tall. When you get _knocked_ down three or four times without losing the dribble (as UNC did last year in a last second attempt for a "win-by-fouling" then you can handle most of the physical pressure of the NBA. But there's a lot more to going from an NCAA all-star to an NBA rookie than that. If he only learn to slam dunk like Spud Webb.... -- Jeff Offutt School of ICS, Georgia Tech, Atlanta Georgia, 30332 ...!{akgua,allegra,amd,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo,ut-ngp}!gatech!gitpyr!ofut
lww@rti-sel.UUCP (02/15/86)
Though I like to watch D.J. and McHale is probably the most difficult off ensive player to stop (next to Kareem's skyhook of course) I don't how you see Bird not being the best Celt (most agree he's the best all-around player in the league) unless of course you're an NBA ref which would explain everything. To best illustrate my opinion (which is the best any of us could hope to do) I forward two points-- 1) McHale's quotation following the Celts victory over the Laker's coupla weeks ago from SI (paraphrased) 'Everyone should be required to play with Larry Bird' 2) During the Celts 105-103 victory on Super Bowl Sunday, over the Sixers the Celts were in the midst of a third quarter comeback led by Walton and Bird, Bird all alone on the receiving end of a fast break pass stopped near the three point cirle, took the pass, spit in old man CHOKES face, backed up three steps and buried his second consecutive three pointer. This feat in and of itself wasn't super Bird-like but more like typical Bird and taken in context of a high-pressure game and everyone expecting him to make it and him all-alone in frontcourt makes it more impressive. But it wasn't until the camera panned to the bench that the full impact of Bird on the NBA became obvious. There watching was D.J. and Robert Parrish, each an all-star several times, shaking their heads in disbelief. Bird is interesting in that despite his huge salary, that after, what seven years? he still has the drive to give 110 percent everytime he gets on the court. Sure he has his bad shooting games occasionally, but I've never seen the rest of his game suffer as a result and I have seen those games where even the other aspects of his game are enough to lead his team to victory. Attitude? Well Bird may be what some people call arrogant, even he has said he disdains all his competition, but perhaps one almost has to be to be the best. It helps to guard against an emotional letdown I suppose, which must occur over the course of the too-long NBA season. "My God look at the size of that thing" "We'll never get it on the album cover"
billm@haddock.UUCP (02/15/86)
->The air must be awfully thin up there on the 7th floor -- that's the only
->explanation I can come up with for a pea-brained statement which excludes
->Larry Bird from membership in the best-two-players-on-the-Celtics club.
->Say what you will about Ainge, but when Larry's "O" is off, he'll still
->carry the club with his rebounding, passing, and defense. And have you
->noticed that the C's have extended their winning streak to 13 with McHale
->watching from the sidelines. And in one of those games, DJ was among the
->missing, too (zero points, zero shots attempted, half his usual minutes).
->Bob Milosavljevic
->Intermetrics, Inc.
->ihnp4!inmet!milos
Okay ... you got me! First, I will apologize to all you Larry Bird
lovers out there. Yes, he is a great OFFENSIVE player capable of
doing great things with a basketball. Yes, he has those intangibles
that a coach and most fans like to see in a competitive ballplayer.
Yes, he recently won the NBA 3-point title and underscored the fact
that he is a great shooter.
What I was trying to address is that basketball (and all other sports)
is composed of THREE things: offense, defense, and those intangibles.
Great players seem to possess ALL those things, in varying components.
It is not "pea-brained" to see more in a basketball game than the
number of points scored. It is not "pea-brained" to also look at the
defensive play, and at who plays at the end of the game.
Go Georgetown !
Bill Mathews {decvax ! cca | yale | ihnp4 | cbosgd}!ima!billm
{bbncca | harvard | zurton | cfib | mit-ems | wjh12 }!ima!billm
{uscvax | ucla-vax | vortex}!ism780!billm
Interactive Systems, 7th floor, 441 Stuart st, Boston, MA 02116; 617-247-1155dink@ihlpl.UUCP (Warren P. Henderson) (02/15/86)
> 1) McHale's quotation following the Celts victory over the Laker's coupla > weeks ago from SI (paraphrased) > > 'Everyone should be required to play with Larry Bird' > > 2) During the Celts 105-103 victory on Super Bowl Sunday, over the Sixers > the Celts were in the midst of a third quarter comeback led by Walton and > Bird, Bird all alone on the receiving end of a fast break pass stopped near > the three point cirle, took the pass, spit in old man CHOKES face, > backed up three steps and > buried his second consecutive three pointer. This feat in and of itself > wasn't super Bird-like but more like typical Bird and taken in context of > a high-pressure game and everyone expecting him to make it and him > all-alone in frontcourt makes it more impressive. But it wasn't until the > camera panned to the bench that the full impact of Bird on the NBA became > obvious. There watching was D.J. and Robert Parrish, each an all-star > several times, shaking their heads in disbelief. As someone once said "Sure Larry Bird plays on a team of stars, but would they be stars without Larry Bird" My reply was "Sure, but would they be WINNERS too" > > Bird is interesting in that despite his huge salary, that after, what > seven years? he still has the drive to give 110 percent everytime he gets > on the court. Sure he has his bad shooting games occasionally, but I've > never seen the rest of his game suffer as a result and I have seen those > games where even the other aspects of his game are enough to lead his team > to victory. Most amazing part of his game is his attitude! > Attitude? Well Bird may be what some people call arrogant, even he has > said he disdains all his competition, but perhaps one almost has to be to > be the best. It helps to guard against an emotional letdown I suppose, > which must occur over the course of the too-long NBA season. I suppose that most people become somewhat arrogant when they become so public, Being told you are the very best so many times might be a major factor in His arrogance. Still He plays the game like it was suppose to be played. BALANCED so take in concideration that this comes from the mind of a CELTIC fan LAKERS vs CELTICS CELTICS in 7
plw@panda.UUCP (Pete Williamson) (02/18/86)
> > Okay ... you got me! First, I will apologize to all you Larry Bird > lovers out there. Yes, he is a great OFFENSIVE player capable of > doing great things with a basketball. Yes, he has those intangibles > that a coach and most fans like to see in a competitive ballplayer. > Yes, he recently won the NBA 3-point title and underscored the fact > that he is a great shooter. > > What I was trying to address is that basketball (and all other sports) > is composed of THREE things: offense, defense, and those intangibles. > Great players seem to possess ALL those things, in varying components. > > It is not "pea-brained" to see more in a basketball game than the > number of points scored. It is not "pea-brained" to also look at the > defensive play, and at who plays at the end of the game. > I really disagree. The thing that makes Larry great is HIS ENTIRE GAME not just his offense. There are far better offensive players in the league. Kareem of course. English, Dantley, and Thomas aren't bad either. But Larry is a pure basketball machine. No one matches him for overall basketball intelligence. No one matches him for overall competitiveness. No one plays better overall team basketball. His one on one defense is perhaps the weakest part of his game, but he more than makes up for that with his team defense. He always tries to run his man into the traffic by overplaying him on one side. He is a truly great defensive rebounder. I'd love to see a second set of cameras isolated totally on Bird. His play is truly a thing of beauty. The most impressive thing about him in my opinion is the total basketball arsenal he has. He can find a way to beat you on any given night: either by scoring inside, left handed, right handed, three point land, the FREE THROW LINE, rebounding, or his passing game. He never stops taunting his opponents either. Not because he's mean guy; because it is an intangible that just might make the difference between winning a game or losing one. And that is ALL THERE IS for Bird. Finally, he makes all his teammates better than they really are and he is THE REASON why the Celtics have been sold out. Sellout crowds generate dollars. Dollars if used wisely can keep a franchise competitve forever. Larry is the very BEST THERE IS. I'm sure glad he's in BOSTON !! -- Pete Williamson "By hook or by crook, we will !!" ... #2
lww@rti-sel.UUCP (02/19/86)
Bill, that is precisely why I ignored the stats and presented the reactions of his own peers. I believe that the other NBA players are the ones who really know the score. Remember the MVP award is voted by the players and Bird has the last two. I like Thompson but are you really a Georgetown fan? NCAA finals: Duke 79 UNC 65 (Michigan 73)