Can't count on Scal

Red2 · Post #1 » by **Red2** » Wed Oct 21, 2009 8:50 pm

it seems that every time scal starts playing well he gets hurt. He's like tony allen in that regard. I'm on record as saying we should have traded scal if we could- not because he stinks but because he is a time bomb waiting to go off with his next concussion. This injury happens to be his ankle but at some point he's going get his head banged and he will be out for a few weeks. This would appear to open the door for JR giddens on the second unit since I don't think you can play Baby, Rashee and Shelden Williams together. that front court is way too slow and you'll get killed at the SF position. I guess you could play daneils at the 3 and giddens at the 2 but either way I think JR is going to benefit from Scal's injury.

Hemingway · Post #2 » by **Hemingway** » Thu Oct 22, 2009 12:30 am

Who really cares if he goes out for a few weeks here or there? I mean, we go weeks with out playing him when he is healthy. I think he has constantly shown to be able to play within his small role and has stepped up when needed. Last season I don't think we lost when he started. Just sayin'.

celticfan42487 · Post #3 » by **celticfan42487** » Thu Oct 22, 2009 12:36 am

He played well?

When was that, 2 nights in 03 for New Jersey?

Hopefully he's cut for someone like Daniels.

gocelts · Post #4 » by **gocelts** » Thu Oct 22, 2009 1:54 am

DONT EVER COUNT OUT SCAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Scal was our first big man off the bench last year in the playoffs!!!!!!!!!

all jokes aside im not suprised hes actualy "stuck" this long...i mean, he's contributed every season in some manner. When you compare him to bad players in this league who simply rot at the end of the bench or stop showing up, and consider every team has "one of those guys", im OK with our guy being Scal.

Post #5 » by **ParticleMan** » Thu Oct 22, 2009 1:55 am

um... and when exactly have we ever counted on scal?

gocelts · Post #6 » by **gocelts** » Thu Oct 22, 2009 1:58 am

ParticleMan wrote:um... and when exactly have we ever counted on scal?

09 playoffs ! ! ! ! How else could "Jackie Moon" become a Celtic fan buz word!

Scalamental · Post #7 » by **Scalamental** » Thu Oct 22, 2009 2:12 am

He's looked pretty good thus far in the preseason.

hairybyrd · Post #8 » by **hairybyrd** » Thu Oct 22, 2009 5:10 am

intangibles

GuyClinch · Post #9 » by **GuyClinch** » Thu Oct 22, 2009 6:47 am

Scalabrine never played well. He brought down expectations SO LOW that a few games of less then total suckitude and people were thinking he "played well." <g> He is terrible rebounder for a guy 6'9" and has no inside game. He is slow and can't cover guys one on one and he has suspect strength.

Sure he can shoot from the outside (some) and plays good team D. That's just not enough to equate to "playing well" at the NBA level. I don't think he ever even reached Walter McCarty levels of play..

hairybyrd · Post #10 » by **hairybyrd** » Thu Oct 22, 2009 3:29 pm

GuyClinch wrote:Scalabrine never played well. He brought down expectations SO LOW that a few games of less then total suckitude and people were thinking he "played well." <g> He is terrible rebounder for a guy 6'9" and has no inside game. He is slow and can't cover guys one on one and he has suspect strength.

Sure he can shoot from the outside (some) and plays good team D. That's just not enough to equate to "playing well" at the NBA level. I don't think he ever even reached Walter McCarty levels of play..

LoL...Scalabrine's "suckitude"...genius.

Here's my take on things: Scal is only popular because of his red hair. If he had blonde or brown hair I don't think he would hold the same appeal. If Scalabrine was black he would probably be considered the worst player in league history. I wouldn't say Scal fits the mold of "token white guy" but he definitely benefits from this likeable exterior. Its gross. Just because he has red hair and people think he's Irish, he's popular, when guys like TA, for example, who have actually been impressive at times, are considered to be lacking some skill that Scal apparently has. Sure, Scal is a smart player, I wouldn't take that away from him, but very rarely does he combine smarts and skill to produce something of value. It's usually his smarts and lack of skill that produce something entirely mediocre. The traditional counter-argument for Scal's "suckitude" is his locker room presence or his basketball IQ or his intangibles. Never is Scal's value directly related to what he does on the court. Compared with the other Celtics, Scal is analyzed not like a basketball player but like a coach, and I never understood why.

There's gotta be a Scal fan reading this somewhere and I would love to hear your take on Scal's "suckitude" or lackthereof.

Dirty Water · Post #11 » by **Dirty Water** » Thu Oct 22, 2009 5:07 pm

hairybyrd wrote:
GuyClinch wrote:Scalabrine never played well. He brought down expectations SO LOW that a few games of less then total suckitude and people were thinking he "played well." <g> He is terrible rebounder for a guy 6'9" and has no inside game. He is slow and can't cover guys one on one and he has suspect strength.

Sure he can shoot from the outside (some) and plays good team D. That's just not enough to equate to "playing well" at the NBA level. I don't think he ever even reached Walter McCarty levels of play..

LoL...Scalabrine's "suckitude"...genius.

Here's my take on things: Scal is only popular because of his red hair. If he had blonde or brown hair I don't think he would hold the same appeal. If Scalabrine was black he would probably be considered the worst player in league history. I wouldn't say Scal fits the mold of "token white guy" but he definitely benefits from this likeable exterior. Its gross. Just because he has red hair and people think he's Irish, he's popular, when guys like TA, for example, who have actually been impressive at times, are considered to be lacking some skill that Scal apparently has. Sure, Scal is a smart player, I wouldn't take that away from him, but very rarely does he combine smarts and skill to produce something of value. It's usually his smarts and lack of skill that produce something entirely mediocre. The traditional counter-argument for Scal's "suckitude" is his locker room presence or his basketball IQ or his intangibles. Never is Scal's value directly related to what he does on the court. Compared with the other Celtics, Scal is analyzed not like a basketball player but like a coach, and I never understood why.

There's gotta be a Scal fan reading this somewhere and I would love to hear your take on Scal's "suckitude" or lackthereof.

If he's mediocre, that means Scal is in the middle of the talent level of the NBA. 50% of the league is better than him, while 50% of the league is worse. I'll take that.

hairybyrd · Post #12 » by **hairybyrd** » Thu Oct 22, 2009 11:15 pm

^If he's mediocre that means I must have been exaggerating and he's awful. Scal wouldn't make the D-League All-Star team.