Reply With Quote
The Baseline Sees All: Boston Celtics
SportingNews
Elsewhere in our web of basketball knowledge, you'll find comprehensive team previews by experts intimately acquainted with what makes these NBA teams tick, where they've been, and what might be next for them. So why another set of previews? Because sometimes, it's worth listening to your crazy uncle about that broken leg before you take a second trip to the doctor's office.
I don't see banners unfurling on this Celtics team. I see lots of uncertainty, possible decay, and maybe even conflict. But that doesn't mean they don't rank high.
You'd prefer a tidier explanation, I know. But look, the common illusion being spread around is the Celtics can pick up where they left off last spring, but with Kevin Garnett fully recovered, and important new additions Rasheed Wallace and Marquis Daniels. There's a lot to sort out there; it's not a recipe for reaching higher ground, it's a blue collar soap opera where everyone glares, yells, and flexes a lot.
Fact One: The Big Three are aging. No, Garnett, Paul Pierce and Ray Allen haven't crapped out yet by any stretch of the imagination. Allen, in particular, had his best season in a while in 2008-09. But Garnett, as much as he smashes up a game these days, isn't the KG of old, and this surgery could be a sign of impending decline — not a distraction that his will alone can overcome. Garnett isn't the athlete, or all-around presence, he once was. The energy and at ude is still there, but this team has to deal with the possibility that their spiritual center might not always be the cure-all he's been for years in the league.
Same goes for Pierce, who didn't exactly step up and dominate in KG's absence. Pierce still creates his shot, and has gotten smarter than ever about both offense and defense. Again, though, who are we to say when the downward slide begins, or how precipitous it might be? Might not the most subtle slide make an enormous difference? Look, The Big Three are still a force to be reckoned with. But do they have that extra spark, or can they can get that extra space (or call) night-in, night-out? This team is based around three aging superstars. That could be a problem.
Fact Two: Last spring was kind of a blur. Rajon Rondo had been an All-Star candidate this past season, and won a ring the year previous as a game-manager. In the playoffs, though, he took over, registering triple-doubles and leading the team, while at the same time displaying a predilection for rough play and disappearing for long stretches. Rondo is still clearly a work in progress, but he's about to hit the free-agent market, albeit as a restricted. Don't think about that too much. But do think about this: Rondo has gone from pleasant surprise to immense young talent on the rise. Boston needs to give him that due.
The question is, how to make sure he get his touches, respect, and just plain room to move within the current Celtics system with these old guys back for blood? If anyone had any sense, things would never be the same after that series with the Bulls. It would be time to re-examine the way Boston did business, and make sure Rondo now was on equal footing with the old dudes. Otherwise, it's a waste, a step backward, and bad news come free agency. I know there's been lip service, but these things are easier alluded to than done.
To a lesser degree, the same goes for Kendrick Perkins. Perkins is an absolute beast of a rebounder and shot-blocker, exactly the kind of no-frills, but undoubtedly present, center that a team needs in the middle these days. With other teams going small or athletic at the position, Perkins is an ass-kicker who understands the game. He doesn't command (or demand) nearly the attention Rondo does, but still, how do you integrate an increasingly vital youngster into a team dominated by three big-name vets.
Fact Three: I don't see how Rasheed Wallace suddenly bolsters this team up beyond belief. Seems to me that, if the Celts could effectively merge the rising youth force with a realistic assessment of where the vets are at, they'd have a contender on their hands right there. And I get that Wallace provides much-needed three-point shooting, length, and size, and savvy off the bench. Still, he can't be that big a priority, nor should this acquisition be seen as anywhere up there with the other big moves around the league. Tied with Shaq getting Cleveland for most over-hyped offseason move.
Most Likely Breakout: The last thing this team needs is another breakout player. So for their sake, let's say none.
Most Likely Letdown: It all depends on what you're expecting from Sheed. And to some degree, this applies to the entire team. Yes, on paper, or in a vacuum, this team looks incredible. Hence, perhaps, the rationale behind Wallace's proclamation about besting the Bulls single-season win record. But someone's going to have to take a backseat (even if that role rotates), play the wall, or whatever phraseology you want to use for a player reduced to a supporting role. Juggling that will be hard, and just because they managed it with three guys in 2008-09 (along with a all-for-one philosophy to back it up), doesn't mean it's so easy with even more cooks over the cauldron.
Anyway, between Sheed's "last to the party" status, the bru-ha-ha surrounding his signing, and his diminishing powers, he seems like the most likely candidate to be seen as either underperforming, when in fact he's trying to fit in, or failing to fit in, when in fact he's underperforming.
Blog superstar: I would like to see Garnett interview random strangers off the street the way he's been so wrenchingly interviewed over the years, usually by John Thompson. Or maybe he could just turn the tables and get back at Thompson.
Signature game: We're talking game-within-a-game here, since the Celtics will be as much trying to get themselves figured out as they will trying to break down opponents. That puts them up alongside the Lakers, and to a lesser degree, the Magic and Cavs. That's what happens when every good team in the league decides to make major changes to their rosters. Let that be a viewing guide for all these squads: How solidly managed they look from game to game is always as important as if they win or not.
Why else you should care: Because by now, everyone is sick of hating Boston, and either wants reason to change that tune, or new ammunition for a tired cause.
