|
|
Post by DERRENMATTS on Dec 28, 2007 16:48:53 GMT -5
Seems ironic to ask since we are a league best 24-3, but what are we missing? What piece would make us even better?
IMO, we need a low post scorer--a guy we can hand the ball over to and say, "go get em, big fella".. We are too perimeter oriented for our own good. Lucky for us that we have such good shooters that we haven't been made to look the fools so far. Pierce, RAllen, House, and Posey have been pretty consistent for the most part, and if one or two of them are off, the others have been picked up their load.
But the element of going inside and attacking from inside of 10 feet has been missing and I have to think that at some point, this is going to cost us games.
I don';t think its absolutely necesssary to bring in a low post scorer, nor do I think we cannot win the title without a post scorer. I just think our chances will be even greater if we did have a big man on the inside to counter our perimeter attack.
Some might think we already have post players in place. But I think we can do much better.
KG: because he doesn't have the bulk to push his way inside, he resorts to his patetent fadeaway (which is quite accurate)
Perk: doesn't have enough footwork, doesn't have enough mobility to manuever, doesn't have the nose for the basket, and doesn't have the touch to finish softly off the glass. But to his credit, his right hook somehow finds its way through the hoop.
Baby: too short, not enough length on his reach, and doesn't have enough lift--but does have the bulk to get to the front of the rim.
Powe: 2nd best footwork (KG is the best) on the team. He would be our low post scorer if he could get playing time. Not sure what's holding him back (aside from Doc). His negative is his height. If he was 6'11", (and not 6'7") he'd be quite the weapon.
I look at Andrew Bynum over in LA, and I think he's going to be a load to handle in 2 years, and it makes me want to go out and get a low post scorer to counter him. I look at Big Al over in Minnesota and imagine how impossible it would be for any team to handle us if we had an interior player like him.
True inside players are nearly extinct nowadays, and to actually have one on the team will be a huge benefit.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roadrunner on Dec 28, 2007 23:21:14 GMT -5
A consistent 4th scorer, outside of Rondo.
|
|
|
|
Post by freshnthehouse on Dec 29, 2007 4:53:49 GMT -5
A backup post scorer a la late 90s Antoine Carr would be nice, but not too necessary. What we need the most is a heady back-up PG. Again its not necessary for all matchups, but there will be times when a vet PG would be a nice complement to RR.
|
|
|
|
Post by FLCeltsFan on Dec 29, 2007 8:47:00 GMT -5
I think we need a back up PG for when Rondo is out. This will be important in the playoffs.
|
|
|
|
Post by Global Celtic on Dec 29, 2007 11:50:25 GMT -5
Derrenmatts, I totaly agree with you about getting a low post bruiser. Perk rebounds and sets screens but he doesn't complements KG tendency to fade away. With Big Al or someone near his level we would be unstopable.
|
|
cfoo
Welcome To Celtics Green!
Posts: 1
|
Post by cfoo on Dec 29, 2007 12:12:04 GMT -5
I agree we need more of a low post game. I disagree that Garnett isn't a low post scorer. He is one of the best lowpost players around and can score in the post. He just has other facets to his game. He's more of a finesse player due to his size. The question is do we need a bruiser inside and someone who can really crash the boards, get dunks and easy baskets and has low post moves to get it done close to the rim. Perk fits that mold imo, but he needs to work on his technique. Or do we need another lowpost guy that relies on his quickness and assortment of moves. Glenn Davis out of anyone on our rosters really gives us something inside offensively outside of Garnett. But we need more than that.
|
|
|
|
Post by DERRENMATTS on Dec 29, 2007 15:38:01 GMT -5
I think all of your opinions are on the mark. We do need a consistent 4th scorer (as I have also said prior to the season staring), a backup PG, etc. An explosive power player like Antoine Carr back in his Hawks days would be incredible, but I think we have that in Baby.
CF, while I would consider KG a post scorer (meaning he can play with his back to the basket), what I'm talking about is a low post scorer who consistently attacks the basket (going towards the basket). KG does go to the middle of the paint, and he will battle in the trenches, but for the most part, he sets up too far from the paint and he resorts to his fall back jumper.
|
|
|
|
Post by moreese on Dec 29, 2007 20:04:03 GMT -5
Derrenmatts, You said "Seems ironic to ask since we are a league best 24-3, but what are we missing? What piece would make us even better?"
You are right, it is ironic, and more importantly it's inaccurate. It is a monster myth that we cannot score in the paint. Pierce, Rondo and Tony Allen are all highly above average at getting to the rim. You are right, we don't have a traditional low post scorer, but that doesn't mean we can't score in the paint. Here's some numbers to back this up:
3rd in fg% - you don't sit at the top 3 of this category by being a perimeter only team.
7th in FT attempts: again you don't get to the line this much by just shooting jumpers.
2nd in 3PT% - if you are going to be a perimeter first team, this makes it ok.
2nd in ADJ FG% - we are the 2nd most efficient team in the game offensively, so if it ain't broke...well you know the rest.
There is no specific blue print to winning a title, Detroit proved this perfectly when they beat the Lakers in 2004 without having a post scorer in their starting lineup. Even the Spurs, who outside of Duncan (who is nicknamed mr. fundamental for a reason) they get most of their points in the paint through attacking by "perimeter guys" manu ginobili and tony parker. You don't need shaq or dwight howard to win a title, you just need to be the best. Right now through 27 games we are the best team, so it is working and you cannot look to restructure your team.
More importantly, if you do not have a low post scorer, this can be nullified by not allowing the other team to dominate on the block. This is what Detroit did in 2004, even though Ben Wallace and Rasheed Wallace really couldn't hurt you on the block, they were extremely tough on the defensive end. Garnett and Perkins are very similar, so while they might not hurt you offensively on the block, they have shown thus far that they are going to make it very tough for you to dominate there.
|
|
|
|
Post by DERRENMATTS on Dec 29, 2007 21:06:27 GMT -5
The Detroit Pistons are unique in that they broke a lot of rules on their way to becoming champions. They don't have a top 25 player in history on their team, they have no true superstar player, etc.
They won with timely scoring and a superior defense.
Yes, we can mimic their strategy, but we won't have to because we have 3 star players on the team.
Why I think we would be better off with a true low post scorer is because in the playoffs, possessions become increasingly important, and the tempo is slowed down quite a bit. We have shown good halfcourt patience and execution, but we have struggled in this area at times. Our offense can hit droughts when our perimeter shots aren't falling, and when this happens, it would be good to have another scoring avenue to go to--thus the low post option. A guy who can pound the inside, draw fouls on their big men, get to the line, and open up our perimeter game makes sense to me.
Our chances of winning the championship are pretty good as is. But having a low post scorer would incease those chances, IMO.
|
|
|
|
Post by DERRENMATTS on Dec 30, 2007 2:00:58 GMT -5
Another thing we are missing is a garbage player who will clean up misses and convert them into points. Paul Milsap was a good example of what we are missing.
At times, Baby fills this role for us. Ryan Gomes was this guy for us. A big body who can gobble up misses and put it right back up.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roadrunner on Dec 30, 2007 8:56:02 GMT -5
Another thing we are missing is a garbage player who will clean up misses and convert them into points. Paul Milsap was a good example of what we are missing. At times, Baby fills this role for us. Ryan Gomes was this guy for us. A big body who can gobble up misses and put it right back up. How about Powe, if he ever makes it off the bench? |
|
|
|
Post by runrondo on Dec 30, 2007 12:18:22 GMT -5
I think Doc has glued Powe to the bench..who knows when he'll be able to be let off...
|
|
|
|
Post by moreese on Dec 30, 2007 18:18:52 GMT -5
Derrenmatts you said:
The Detroit Pistons are unique in that they broke a lot of rules on their way to becoming champions. They don't have a top 25 player in history on their team, they have no true superstar player, etc...They won with timely scoring and a superior defense. Yes, we can mimic their strategy, but we won't have to because we have 3 star players on the team.
So Detroit won a ring with timely scoring and superior defense...isn't that what we do? In fact, I think we do it better. Not to mention, like you just said, we actually have 3 hall of famers on our team, and definitely a top 25 guy of all time in Garnett. So I hear what you're saying, but I was just expressing the fact that I think you're just filling up blog space, rather than addressing a legitimate NEED. Yes a low post player would not hurt us of course, but I'm just disagreeing with us needing one. I don't think we really need anything at this point. I'm convinced we are the best team in the game, however we just need to go prove it come playoff time.
|
|
cfoo
Welcome To Celtics Green!
Posts: 1
|
Post by cfoo on Dec 30, 2007 18:24:49 GMT -5
I agree. We don't "need" anything. I''m not sure if derren is saying we need this or could use this. Going out and filling holes to ensure a championship is a good thing I guess but I think if we play to our potential with what we have, we pretty much have that ensured anyways. We are of the same opinion Moreese.
|
|
|
|
Post by DERRENMATTS on Dec 30, 2007 21:55:56 GMT -5
A low post player isn't an absolute need, but if I'm Ainge and I want to increase my chances of winning the ttile this season, aside from bringing in a backup PG and an upgrade at Center, getting a low post threat would definitely be my target.
You just can't go wrong.
History suggests that having a low post player is a big part of winning championships.
Spurs: Tim Duncan, David Robinson
Lakers: Shaq
Heat: Shaq
Rockets: Olajuwon
Celtics: McHale
The Pistons have been strong for many years now, but consider this: they've only won the title once, and have been to the Finals only one other time. Could it be that they are missing that low post threat? If they had a low post threat, could they have made the Finals more often and been champions more than once? I think so.
|
|
