St. Paul recorder., 1963-01-04

Like chamberlain ana HuSSell,
Bellamy is a terrific box office
attraction. Without him the Pack
ers last year would have folded
financially like a punctured ac-
cordian. He is the teams bread
and butter player.
Are the Zephyr bosses truely
grateful for all this? 1t hardly
seems so. First of all, Bellamy,
despite his super-human efforts in
1961-62, had to bargain hard and
long for an estimated 5000 con-
tract for 1962-63, meager in COM
parison to his contributions to the
team, playwise and moneywise.
But the Zephyrs quibbling over
the salary terms was but an indica-
ton of a further stroke Of ingrat-
itude. Recently, Gen. Manager
c'Frantic") Frank Lane and NC
Mahon, both of whom were far
from the scene when Bellamy was
helping the team to survive its
first year in the NBA, took it
upon themselves to level unfair
criticisms at Walt for what they
indicated was his failure to match
his 1961-62 scoring output. Both
said they were puzzled because
Walt had dropped slightly off his
per-game scoring pace Of 30 points
to about "a in the first month of
play. Since both are newcomers to
the NBA, their alarm in this re-
spect is to some extent under
standable. But the manner in which
they have attacked Bellamy is not
only untind and ungraceous, but
intolerable.
These gentlemen, who really owe
their jobs to Bellamy, went about
attacking the Zephyrs' star in an
underhanded manner. Instead of
expressing confidence in Bellamy's
ability they proceeded to lambast
him in the press, while subtley
expressing puzzlement. Why, Lane
even went so far as to say it
would be all right with him If
Mcmahon had benched Bellamy
prior to a recent game.
This was the faux paus of the
whole deal.
What kind of a basketball team
is it that permits general man.
ager to quarterback the team, as
Lanes statement seemed to indi-
cate he was attempting? Why
should Lane feel that he should ad-
wise his coach on Bellamy?
Is Lane attempting to dictate
to Mcmahon? What's behind it
all?
Apart from the unfair criticism,
Lane and Mcmahon, in admitting
that they couldn't understand Bel
lamy's scoring difficulties, were
also displaying ignorance of NBA
basketball strategems. Every dis
cerning fan knows that Walt is
bo;ncr JO,,kIa foo oron5 ,1nYoaroif fy,II1y
this season and that that is the
reason he is not attempting more
shots. Another strategy used by
opposing coaches is to clog up the
time-limited free-throw lane to
force Big Walt outside where he
usually picks up two and occas-
ionally three defenders. The result
is that he is forced to feed off
more often than normally.
A more studious coach would
have discerned this to be the cause
of Bellamy's scoring difficulty
and, instead of popping off in pub
lie, work patiently and confidently
with the hard-pressed player to
devise a counter strategy to halt
the ganging up on Walt. This has
been done before, particularly in
the cases of Chamberlain and Bay
lor.
The zephyrs bosses, however,
seem to be preoccupied with try
ing to make Dischinger the new
darling of the team. Although
Terry, with the assistance of Bel
lamy has been playing outstand-
ingly of late, is recalled here that
he noticeably failed in a few of his
home games and no one popped off
about it.
Regardless of what Mcmahon,
Lane and others say about Bel
lamy, however, right thinking and
observing fans will continue to
praise and regard him as one of
the truly great stars of the NBA.
They may wonder, though, if
well deserved salary in
crease is not the real basis for all