Eddie Down the Stretch

[rmcc4444]

didn't bother me because it had little effect on the outcome of the game.  peirce and KG shooting is the story.

[thedawg]

Eddie was just playing well. The spacing was better and the movement offensively was quicker, both ball and player movement. The team responded better when Eddie was on the floor.

I don't think it had anything to do with Rondo's ankle. The team just played it's best ball when Eddie was out there.

I think Doc was being cautious with Rondo but throwing Eddie House in was something I have been waiting since Game 1 vs. Atlanta!  It is absolutely CRAZY to leave him out of the lineup as a reward for helping us so much in the season to get where we are today.  Sam-I-Am is simply not motivted enough to play for us while Eddie House is hyperactive when he comes in and fuels the team on both on defense and in offense.  He didnīt score many tonight but players do not score when they are sitting on the bench cheering the team on.  Doc Rivers.....shape up or ship out, please!  Leave Cassell on the bench the whole next game....see how it works!

[Hrvoje]

Eddie played well.

But, his jumper and miss late in the game when we were just 2 down, was key. After miss, they put 5 points so quickly, and that was it.

[Roy Hobbs]

Eddie had a poor shooting night, right?  I mean 25% is nothing to write home about.

Well, but that in perspective with Sam.  In the last three series, he's shot 16-for-61.  That's 26.2%.  As rusty as Eddie was, he was still as effective as Sam has been (how sad is that?)  He also done a ton of good things on the floor, in terms of stretching the defense, hustling, bringing energy, getting to rebounds, playing defense, and actually passing the ball (rather than holding / pounding it).

Eddie is a much better and more effective player than Sam is right now.  Despite the loss, Eddie should get time for the rest of the series.

(Also, Eddie's 2 assists last night are better than any of Sam's series averages for the four rounds of the playoffs.  That's right: Sam has averaged under 2 assists per game in each round.)

[nickagneta]

Eddie was in no way shape or form responsible for last night's lost, but do I have to be the voice of reason and state the obvious.

He was god awful.

His inability to handle simple ball pressure killed the Celtic offense when he brought the ball up as either Vujavic, Farmar or Fisher pressured him endlessly and on almost any possession that he brought the ball up, the Celtics started their offense with about 10seconds left on the clock.

What was Eddie doing taking shots with 2 minutes left in the game with the Big Threeon the floor and the sideline reporter already telling the audience that the players instructions from Doc were to get KG the ball? I didn't want an already proven to be struggling Eddie House taking any shots late in that game.

His defense was not good.

He may have done what many here accuse Sam of having the ability of doing and that was shoot the Celtics out of the game. Of his 6 misses 4-5 or ill timed or forced and were misses at crucial times.

Eddie was just not what this team needed, and his play was subpar.

Again Eddie didn't lose this game for the C's but let's not go singing Eddie's praises because I though he was bad. Real bad.

[Roy Hobbs]

I couldn't disagree with you more, nick.  How many possessions were affected by on the ball pressure?  Two?  He didn't have any turnovers, and had two assists, a number only surpassed once by Sam in his 19 playoff games.  His shots, while not falling, were all generally pretty good looks. 

He only took two shots down the stretch.  Should he pass up wide open shots in favor of passing to a struggling KG or Pierce (8-for-35 combined)?  I can see the complaint if he was shooting when covered, or early in the shot clock, but Eddie wasn't doing either.

Eddie's contributions might not look great on a stat sheet, but the fact is the team outscored the Lakers by 7 when he was in there.  In the 3:34 stint in the fourth quarter when Eddie was replaced by Rondo, the team was outscored by seven, which proved to be the difference in the game.

For a point guard who was so ineffective on both offense and defense, it puzzles me that the team was +7 in the second half with him, and -7 without him.  It baffles me that despite that 14 point swing, Eddie could be accused of possibly shooting us out of the game.  Could it be -- unlike with Sam -- that Eddie does other things on the court that help his team win?

[tanner]

I didn't have a problem with it.  The single best stretch in the game for the Celtics was when Eddie was inserted in the 3rd.  The spacing became a lot better and it got KG going on the block.  I was even hoping Doc stayed with him for the entire 4th.

[nickagneta]

I couldn't disagree with you more, nick.  How many possessions were affected by on the ball pressure?  Two?  He didn't have any turnovers, and had two assists, a number only surpassed once by Sam in his 19 playoff games.  His shots, while not falling, were all generally pretty good looks. 

He only took two shots down the stretch.  Should he pass up wide open shots in favor of passing to a struggling KG or Pierce (8-for-35 combined)?  I can see the complaint if he was shooting when covered, or early in the shot clock, but Eddie wasn't doing either.

Eddie's contributions might not look great on a stat sheet, but the fact is the team outscored the Lakers by 7 when he was in there.  In the 3:34 stint in the fourth quarter when Eddie was replaced by Rondo, the team was outscored by seven, which proved to be the difference in the game.

For a point guard who was so ineffective on both offense and defense, it puzzles me that the team was +7 in the second half with him, and -7 without him.  It baffles me that despite that 14 point swing, Eddie could be accused of possibly shooting us out of the game.  Could it be -- unlike with Sam -- that Eddie does other things on the court that help his team win?

Sam was not the answer either. And Eddie isn't the reason for the loss. And I don't care what the +/- says, he played bad. The pressure effected more than 2 runs up the floor. And comparing his work as being good using a woeful Sam as the comparison is kinda ridiculous.

Eddie had to play well because he played ever so slightly better than a horrible Sam Cassell doesn't exactly sound like singing the praises of an All-Star.

Eddie shouldn't have been shooting because others should have been. Pierce shouldn't be throwing cross court passes to Eddie so that Eddie can take a shot he hasn't hit in a month. When was the last time Eddie hit a 15-19 foot shot. All his shots made recently have been threes.

Sorry but Eddie's +/- in this game was horribly deceptive and saying that he played well because he happened to play better than Sam Cassell has been playing is comical, IMO.

[Roy Hobbs]

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.  Eddie missed a couple of open jumpers.  That was the negative.  Even then, his shooting ability spaced the floor, and his two threes were big momentum changers, if temporarily.

On the positive end, he hustled, rebounded, passed, and played decent defense.  For all his ineffective defense you claim, Derek Fisher and Jordan Farmar shot a combined 0-for-4 in the second half.

Of the top ten reasons why we lost this game, Eddie House doesn't make the list.

[nickagneta]

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.  Eddie missed a couple of open jumpers.  That was the negative.  Even then, his shooting ability spaced the floor, and his two threes were big momentum changers, if temporarily.

On the positive end, he hustled, rebounded, passed, and played decent defense.  For all his ineffective defense you claim, Derek Fisher and Jordan Farmar shot a combined 0-for-4 in the second half.

Of the top ten reasons why we lost this game, Eddie House doesn't make the list.

1000% agree. No question.

I just do not think he was nearly a big of a positive as you said.

And I did say to open my original post in this thread that:

Eddie was in no way shape or form responsible for last night's lost

There's blame to go around a plenty in a bunch of other areas before even having to think of talking about Eddie's performance. And if Eddie has to be used extensively in games 4-7 he will be a major factor the Celtics win, I truly believe that.

But I also truly believe that we as a whole are so desparate to see Eddie do well so that we will never have to see Sam ever again that we aren't being as objective as we should with our opinions.

I was a big supporter of bringing Sam aboard and I was so wrong it wasn't funny. Eddie would have been so much more ready to at a higher level if Sam was never in the equation. But I don't think Eddie was very good last night.

[Hrvoje]

Thats what you get when two smart people with different views meet. Or ones who pretend to be smart. 

[Roy Hobbs]

Thats what you get when two smart people with different views meet. Or ones who pretend to be smart. 

Lol.  I like arguing with nick, because we have sharply divergent views at times, but 1) we tend to manage to keep it respectful, and 2) we usually can reach some sort of common ground.

[payjo]

That stretch where we had two bigs in the high post along with two great perimeter shooters (Eddie and Ray) was a look I can't remember seeing. Did we create this last night or merely dust it off after not using the set for a few months?

[nickagneta]

Thats what you get when two smart people with different views meet. Or ones who pretend to be smart. 

Lol.  I like arguing with nick, because we have sharply divergent views at times, but 1) we tend to manage to keep it respectful, and 2) we usually can reach some sort of common ground.

TP Roy me too.

[CT34]

I couldn't disagree with you more, nick.  How many possessions were affected by on the ball pressure?  Two?  He didn't have any turnovers, and had two assists, a number only surpassed once by Sam in his 19 playoff games.  His shots, while not falling, were all generally pretty good looks. 

He only took two shots down the stretch.  Should he pass up wide open shots in favor of passing to a struggling KG or Pierce (8-for-35 combined)?  I can see the complaint if he was shooting when covered, or early in the shot clock, but Eddie wasn't doing either.

Eddie's contributions might not look great on a stat sheet, but the fact is the team outscored the Lakers by 7 when he was in there.  In the 3:34 stint in the fourth quarter when Eddie was replaced by Rondo, the team was outscored by seven, which proved to be the difference in the game.

For a point guard who was so ineffective on both offense and defense, it puzzles me that the team was +7 in the second half with him, and -7 without him.  It baffles me that despite that 14 point swing, Eddie could be accused of possibly shooting us out of the game.  Could it be -- unlike with Sam -- that Eddie does other things on the court that help his team win?

Sam was not the answer either. And Eddie isn't the reason for the loss. And I don't care what the +/- says, he played bad. The pressure effected more than 2 runs up the floor. And comparing his work as being good using a woeful Sam as the comparison is kinda ridiculous.

Eddie had to play well because he played ever so slightly better than a horrible Sam Cassell doesn't exactly sound like singing the praises of an All-Star.

Eddie shouldn't have been shooting because others should have been. Pierce shouldn't be throwing cross court passes to Eddie so that Eddie can take a shot he hasn't hit in a month. When was the last time Eddie hit a 15-19 foot shot. All his shots made recently have been threes.

Sorry but Eddie's +/- in this game was horribly deceptive and saying that he played well because he happened to play better than Sam Cassell has been playing is comical, IMO.

Wow you said Eddie House played bad?  I guess you only take into account shooting the basketball and not the other aspects of the game?  I'm still trying to see how bad Eddie House played.  If you want to talk about bad play you need to start with Paul Pierce and end with Paul Pierce.  Even some of the fouls that Pierce had was stupid and cost the team.