Not "if" but "when" Wallace is suspended for one game

campybatman · Post #1 » by **campybatman** » Mon Feb 1, 2010 10:48 am

Wallace has fourteen technical fouls and Perkins has eleven. I understand if you've reached sixteen technical fouls during the regular season, it's an automatic one-game suspension. I wonder what happens thereafter.

Wallace has always been a very talented player who's apt to frustrate you at some point. If you know this, you really can't complain about him, can you. Hey, buyer beware... Boston signed him as is.

As far as his play this season... Am I shocked? No. Am I disappointed or dissatisfied? I shouldn't be but I am. I thought Rasheed would be rejuvenated by playing with Garnett and joining a team that prides themselves on playing defense and putting the team first. But you can't rejuvenate a person who's old and set in his ways. This person has to want to try to change for any change to come about. Wallace is content with being bullheaded. He knows damn well he could better serve his team by going inside offensively than playing outside on the perimeter. But you can't tell his And One ass a damn thing--he does what he wants.

It's sort of troubling to know one player can become this detrimental to your team at any given time. Like Dave Chappelle said... When "Keeping It Real" Goes Wrong.

http://www.bostonherald.com/blogs/sport ... eed-limit/
http://www.mlive.com/pistons/index.ssf/ ... ly_sh.html

BillessuR6 · Post #2 » by **BillessuR6** » Mon Feb 1, 2010 11:37 am

I don`t think he has been that bad actually. I feel he is just being misused greatly by Rivers. I understand that he wants him to space the floor but he is much more valuable in the post. How many times did we go to him last night? Maybe once...

And I don`t buy the argument that he doesn`t want to play in the post. We just don`t call plays for him down low. If we did he would be posting up much more...

Defensively I also think he has been pretty good, especially on big guy. He has troubles defending quicker guys but that is understandable.

But there are two things that bother me with him:
1. Shot selection- he takes stupid, quick, low % shots. Though I guess he has to take those since he basically doesn`t get the ball on offense otherwise. If he got more touches down low, he would also be much more under control from the outside, IMO.
2. Laziness- maybe you could call it lack of athleticism or speed but that is my biggest problem with him. It just seems he doesn`t have any energy...

BRUNiNHO91 · Post #3 » by **BRUNiNHO91** » Mon Feb 1, 2010 4:42 pm

He shows up in every big game, so I ain't complaining. There is one thing that can motivate him, and that is THE PLAYOFFS. If he brings it in the playoffs, I'll be thrilled. It's hard to motivate a team that has a bunch of cocky players with a ring under their belts..these guys have nothing to prove anymore..they are all writtin in concrete as great players..

CeltsfanSinceBirth · Post #4 » by **CeltsfanSinceBirth** » Mon Feb 1, 2010 4:47 pm

We all knew his reputation. However, watching him get T'd up because of the huge bullseye one his back is still frustrating. Time for Sheed to grow up and shut up when it comes to referees. I don't care about him getting techs for when things get chippy like he did with Gasol, but in terms of yelling "And 1" - no, we can't afford to lose him for those small outbursts.

return2glory · Post #5 » by **return2glory** » Mon Feb 1, 2010 9:08 pm

Wallace can use the time off, so I wouldn't mind Wallace missing a few games. More time for Davis. And Shelden could use about 5-10 minutes.

Also if we keep Ray, Ray should be given a few games off to get some rest. That is when Daniels comes back. Doc needs to Rest Ray because his legs aren't there. That's why it's important for Daniels to come back soon.

irie · Post #6 » by **irie** » Mon Feb 1, 2010 11:35 pm

There's no point in saying "he needs to stop talking to the refs" because he's not going to. You're only going to frustrate yourself by wishing for the impossible.

Post #7 » by **canman1971** » Mon Feb 1, 2010 11:37 pm

Wallace missing a game will have no bearing on this team. He doesn't show up every night anyway, so they'll survive.

campybatman · Post #8 » by **campybatman** » Tue Feb 2, 2010 1:55 am

thebirdman wrote:But there are two things that bother me with him:
1. Shot selection- he takes stupid, quick, low % shots. Though I guess he has to take those since he basically doesn`t get the ball on offense otherwise. If he got more touches down low, he would also be much more under control from the outside, IMO.
2. Laziness- maybe you could call it lack of athleticism or speed but that is my biggest problem with him. It just seems he doesn`t have any energy...

1. The problem is, Rivers doesn't see Wallace as an inside threat, or he's resigned to the fact that Wallace refuses to play inside. No, he views Wallace as another shooter like Ray and House. I presume he's saying that shooting is the strength of his game (which it isn't) and that's where he should emphasis his offense. But Ray and House are shooting guards, Wallace is a power forward with talent to be a traditional power forward but he insist on being anything but a power forward. Hence, the problem... Apparently, Wallace and Davis are shooters as oppose to power forwards, bangers. Garnett is a finesse player, so he isn't a banger either. So you're placing too much pressure and reliance on Perkins--your lone post player. Williams is decent but he seldom plays nowadays.

Wallace is the reincarnation of Antoine Walker on this team. There isn't a more apt comparison as far as former Celtic players go. Sadly, Wallace is like House, he's an one dimensional player. If he isn't on, you're in trouble. What bothers me... Wallace at his age is still a better player than House and can offer you much more than what he gives you. That's my main gripe...

He shook his head in frustration when Wallace missed a 3-point attempt midway through the fourth quarter, his sixth straight miss from behind the arc, but Rivers insisted afterward that he didn't want his shooter to stop shooting.

http://sports.espn.go.com/boston/news/story?id=4676520

2. I wouldn't refer to Wallace as lazy as much as I see him as being an uninterested or unmotivated player. The regular season means probably little to him, and he's averaging in the mid twenties in minutes (much below his career average) and plays a reserve role on this team. He's no longer a starting worthy player in this league. You only hope that come the playoffs, Wallace's attitude and intensity changes. Because he's still an important part of this team no matter how minimal his contributions seem on paper.

crm0922 · Post #9 » by **crm0922** » Tue Feb 2, 2010 5:12 am

After 16 you get suspended every other tech, so 18 20 etc. Should be interesting.

C

irie · Post #10 » by **irie** » Tue Feb 2, 2010 5:38 am

yeah so he'll probably miss 4 games due to techs. oh, well.

NetsForce · Post #11 » by **NetsForce** » Tue Feb 2, 2010 5:52 am

Rasheed won't play in the low post no matter what you do... It was hard enough to get him to play down there in his prime / when he was actually good down there, nowadays he's like the kids I play pickup basketball with he just wants to chuck 3's all game long...

campybatman · Post #12 » by **campybatman** » Tue Feb 2, 2010 8:12 am

crm0922 wrote:After 16 you get suspended every other tech, so 18 20 etc. Should be interesting.

C

Indeed. Interesting.

I wonder, if Wallace should retire, will it be a sad day for NBA referees. I've to believe they'll miss him deep down.

Hemingway · Post #13 » by **Hemingway** » Tue Feb 2, 2010 2:20 pm

Anyone else wish they would just get rid of the rule that suspends players after so many (16?) Ts? I wish they would just let them go. I know the NBA wants a "cleaner image" and they probably have algorithims that prove it to be more profitable but if there were more Ts and more fights and more dirty play, they miht just get higher ratings. People love the violence in football and hockey.