Author Topic: Less Baby, more Harangody?  (Read 10183 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Less Baby, more Harangody?
« Reply #30 on: January 01, 2011, 08:16:41 AM »

Offline housecall

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2559
  • Tommy Points: 112
If ive ever had a problem with Doc its been his failure sometimes to pull the trigger on certain players at the right time of a game.

Re: Less Baby, more Harangody?
« Reply #31 on: January 01, 2011, 08:22:44 AM »

Offline clover

  • Front Page Moderator
  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6130
  • Tommy Points: 315
If Luke was asked to do as much as we ask from Baby, Luke would be exposed. Major overreaction.

Did the OP check that Luke was 1-5? That's 20% shooting.



I believe Baby was expressly asked not to do too much:

http://bostonherald.com/blogs/sports/celtics/

Re: Less Baby, more Harangody?
« Reply #32 on: January 01, 2011, 08:26:13 AM »

Offline Spilling Green Dye

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1928
  • Tommy Points: 115
Interesting topic, but I don't think you sit Davis for Harangody ever.  For starters, Davis does get down on himself if he's playing poorly, and so its key not to show him that you've lost confidence him.  Instead, keep the routine and keep getting him minutes.. its the only way he can reliably work out of the funk he's in.  We need Davis off the bench in the playoffs more than we need Harangody, so lets get Davis as good as we can.

However, I have been preaching 2 things for quite some time now.  1)  Davis should not be getting 20+minutes if everyone is healthy (which they aren't).  Ideally I think he should be around 12 minutes a game if we were at full depth.  2)  Davis' game is even more predicated on the play of those around him than anyone else.  He's a good complimentary player, but would not look good at all as soon as he's surrounded by average/good talent, as opposed to great talent (like we had with Rondo & Kg in there too).  This is the primary reason I don't think he should ever be a starting PF for the Celtics, but fortunately its the reason I think we can re-sign him rather cheap (around $4mil/yr) this coming off-season.

So in the end, no, don't play Harangody over Davis.  

Re: Less Baby, more Harangody?
« Reply #33 on: January 01, 2011, 09:56:05 AM »

Offline thirstyboots18

  • Chat Moderator
  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8791
  • Tommy Points: 2584
If ive ever had a problem with Doc its been his failure sometimes to pull the trigger on certain players at the right time of a game.
I was thinking about this last night, because I was one of the ones who said 'Quis and Harangody should have been in because they were  playing well.

Davis has been playing well all year, and Doc usually lets his starters try to find their way out of a slump, turn it around, so to speak...Maybe that is what he was doing. Finding out who he could rely on in a pinch. If the situation comes up again he might or might not do the same thing, seeing that Davis lost his composure and forgot to play team ball.  At least now Doc has precedent performance to base his judgement on.  And hopefully Davis has learned something from this, too.
Yesterday is history.
Tomorrow is a mystery.
Today is a gift...
   That is why it is called the present.
Visit the CelticsBlog Live Game Chat!

Re: Less Baby, more Harangody?
« Reply #34 on: January 01, 2011, 10:40:04 AM »

Offline moiso

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7682
  • Tommy Points: 447
Harangody is going to stick for 10 years in the league but he's not ready to take minutes from Baby yet.  Maybe next year when we can't afford Baby due to JO's contract.

Re: Less Baby, more Harangody?
« Reply #35 on: January 01, 2011, 11:40:23 AM »

Offline MBz

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2203
  • Tommy Points: 30
If ive ever had a problem with Doc its been his failure sometimes to pull the trigger on certain players at the right time of a game.
I was thinking about this last night, because I was one of the ones who said 'Quis and Harangody should have been in because they were  playing well.

Davis has been playing well all year, and Doc usually lets his starters try to find their way out of a slump, turn it around, so to speak...Maybe that is what he was doing. Finding out who he could rely on in a pinch. If the situation comes up again he might or might not do the same thing, seeing that Davis lost his composure and forgot to play team ball.  At least now Doc has precedent performance to base his judgement on.  And hopefully Davis has learned something from this, too.

I understand letting your starters play their way out of a slump, but Big Baby isn't really a starter.  He's a fill in.  KG? Sure, let him shoot his way out of it.  He's a vet who has experience with those things.  Big Baby is a bench player, he is what he is.  He is not a starter on a championship caliber team.  I love Glen Davis, but he tried to do too much yesterday.  I thought Gody should have been playing more.  I understand he went 1-5, but he took good open shots.  Also, all of his misses were short.  He wasn't missing them badly, it just seemed like he hadn't been in a game in a while and needed some time to get some rhythm.  I thought Daniels should have been in at the end of the game.  He played a great game and was much more effective running the point than Robinson.
do it

Re: Less Baby, more Harangody?
« Reply #36 on: January 01, 2011, 12:17:32 PM »

Offline thirstyboots18

  • Chat Moderator
  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8791
  • Tommy Points: 2584
If ive ever had a problem with Doc its been his failure sometimes to pull the trigger on certain players at the right time of a game.
I was thinking about this last night, because I was one of the ones who said 'Quis and Harangody should have been in because they were  playing well.

Davis has been playing well all year, and Doc usually lets his starters try to find their way out of a slump, turn it around, so to speak...Maybe that is what he was doing. Finding out who he could rely on in a pinch. If the situation comes up again he might or might not do the same thing, seeing that Davis lost his composure and forgot to play team ball.  At least now Doc has precedent performance to base his judgement on.  And hopefully Davis has learned something from this, too.

I understand letting your starters play their way out of a slump, but Big Baby isn't really a starter.  He's a fill in.  KG? Sure, let him shoot his way out of it.  He's a vet who has experience with those things.  Big Baby is a bench player, he is what he is.  He is not a starter on a championship caliber team.  I love Glen Davis, but he tried to do too much yesterday.  I thought Gody should have been playing more.  I understand he went 1-5, but he took good open shots.  Also, all of his misses were short.  He wasn't missing them badly, it just seemed like he hadn't been in a game in a while and needed some time to get some rhythm.  I thought Daniels should have been in at the end of the game.  He played a great game and was much more effective running the point than Robinson.
I to agree with you, but maybe Doc thought Glen had earned the right to see if he could right himself...after all, who knows when this situation (hopefully it won't) come up again in a crucial game.  Now Glen can't say he wasn't given a chance.  This will come up at contract time.
Yesterday is history.
Tomorrow is a mystery.
Today is a gift...
   That is why it is called the present.
Visit the CelticsBlog Live Game Chat!

Re: Less Baby, more Harangody?
« Reply #37 on: January 01, 2011, 12:35:26 PM »

Offline mmbaby

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 881
  • Tommy Points: 53
Baby is certainly entitled to a few bad games like all the other players.
Plus I'm sure he's nervous about playing starter and has to learn that 'role' now. He's talented in so many roles that it's hard to get a handle on just one.
I think he was just nervous.
Harangody did look really good and I've always thought he looked like a born Celtic, but he is no where near the talent yet that Baby is.
The 'instant reaction' to get rid of him is sad and yet largely coming from a small sample of fans here, not the majority.

Re: Less Baby, more Harangody?
« Reply #38 on: January 01, 2011, 12:45:19 PM »

Offline thirstyboots18

  • Chat Moderator
  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8791
  • Tommy Points: 2584
Baby is certainly entitled to a few bad games like all the other players.
Plus I'm sure he's nervous about playing starter and has to learn that 'role' now. He's talented in so many roles that it's hard to get a handle on just one.
I think he was just nervous.
Harangody did look really good and I've always thought he looked like a born Celtic, but he is no where near the talent yet that Baby is.
The 'instant reaction' to get rid of him is sad and yet largely coming from a small sample of fans here, not the majority.
I don't think anyone wants to "get rid" of Glen Davis.  I do think that the people who took us to the party (got us the lead) yesterday should have been the ones we went home with.  And Davis has been a starter on the Celts before, and should realize that UBUNTU still works most of the time.  When Pierce is having a bad shooting night, he goes to work in other ways (defense, assists, etc.) and Davis has to do that too.  I do think it is a little bit immaturity that leads him to try too hard and suddenly stop trusting his team.  He doesn't have time during a game to get so far down on himself...it's over before he can recover.  The problem isn't just that he overreacts, the problem is that it costs the team when he does.  He has been great all year, and I do not want to see him regress.
Yesterday is history.
Tomorrow is a mystery.
Today is a gift...
   That is why it is called the present.
Visit the CelticsBlog Live Game Chat!

Re: Less Baby, more Harangody?
« Reply #39 on: January 01, 2011, 01:02:31 PM »

Offline slamtheking

  • NCE
  • Walter Brown
  • ********************************
  • Posts: 32370
  • Tommy Points: 10100
I agree with the concept of the thread -- play the player that is producing better or take out the one that's playing as a detriment to the team.  overall, BBD is the better player right now but yesterday was a good time to give Gody more time on the court.  Gody played smarter and made things happen when he was in the game.   Gody may not have helped produce a win at the end, but he couldn't have done any worse than Baby in the closing minutes.  I wouldn't object to seeing a few more minutes go to JO or Gody while KG is out if BBD has some more head-up-his-butt games.

The same line of thinking applies to wanting to play Daniels over Nate in yesterday's game (and in more games going forward).   Daniels had the team running decently on O in the second half only to have Nate bring it to a screeching halt.


Re: Less Baby, more Harangody?
« Reply #40 on: January 01, 2011, 01:12:02 PM »

Offline mmbaby

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 881
  • Tommy Points: 53
Agree, slam!
If BBD has his head up his butt,  ;D, put in Harangody. I would have given my right arm to have had Ray removed from the final game 7 last season.

Re: Less Baby, more Harangody?
« Reply #41 on: January 02, 2011, 10:01:20 AM »

Offline Drucci

  • Global Moderator
  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7223
  • Tommy Points: 439
I loved what I saw from Luke against New Orleans. He held his own (for a rookie) against David West and Okafor and played with a TON of energy (his hustle after missing his own shot was great).

To me, you should play this kind of guy every night when you lack healthy bodies, and especially if Baby keeps his bad level of play. Don't wait to bench Baby if he plays like crap and give Harangody his chance, he deserves it and will make good things happen. Plus I'm sure he will get more confident as he gets more minutes and thus hits his open shots.

Re: Less Baby, more Harangody?
« Reply #42 on: January 02, 2011, 12:33:30 PM »

Offline slamtheking

  • NCE
  • Walter Brown
  • ********************************
  • Posts: 32370
  • Tommy Points: 10100
I loved what I saw from Luke against New Orleans. He held his own (for a rookie) against David West and Okafor and played with a TON of energy (his hustle after missing his own shot was great).

To me, you should play this kind of guy every night when you lack healthy bodies, and especially if Baby keeps his bad level of play. Don't wait to bench Baby if he plays like crap and give Harangody his chance, he deserves it and will make good things happen. Plus I'm sure he will get more confident as he gets more minutes and thus hits his open shots.
He reminds me of Ryan Gomes a little bit.  He hustles and makes things happen when he's on the court.  He's solid fundamentally too like Gomes.  He's not hitting on his shots, unlike Ryan, but I have no doubt his shots will start falling if he gets the time.

Re: Less Baby, more Harangody?
« Reply #43 on: January 02, 2011, 01:45:28 PM »

Offline Chief

  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21259
  • Tommy Points: 2451
If ive ever had a problem with Doc its been his failure sometimes to pull the trigger on certain players at the right time of a game.

tp
Once you are labeled 'the best' you want to stay up there, and you can't do it by loafing around.
 
Larry Bird

Re: Less Baby, more Harangody?
« Reply #44 on: January 03, 2011, 09:46:43 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 63315
  • Tommy Points: -25460
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
More Baby, less Harangody? ;)



I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER... AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!

KP / Giannis / Turkuglu / Jrue / Curry
Sabonis / Brand / A. Thompson / Oladipo / Brunson
Jordan / Bowen

Redshirt:  Cooper Flagg