RE: The Boston Celtics Mailing List Digest V4 #381

[John Lyell <Jlyell@concentric.net>]

I believe Chauncy is listed at 6'3" but really closer to 6'1 or 6'2'. Just 
beacause he was drafted to be a point does not mean he ever will be 
successful at the position.  From my recollections he was more of a off 
guard in college, not really the floor leader.  I would take brevin Knight 
over Billups any day.  Knight was better in college, is a better point, and 
is better suited for the Celtics fast pace game.  As far as big point 
guards, how many current big points are headed for Springfield ?  I think 
it is just as likely, or rare,  for a John Stockton, Isaiah Thomas, or Nate 
Archibald to come along as it is a Magic, or Oscar Robertson.

On Monday, December 01, 1997 8:51 AM, Peter Delevett 
[SMTP:pdelevett@nopg.com] wrote:
> >Ok, so we draft Brevin Knight, this would give us automatically more 
wins? I
> >think not. Great Bobby Jackson has looked
> >good in Denver, and how many wins do they have?
> I agree - I would still take Chauncey over either Knight or Jackson. Both 
> can push it up the floor but are vertically challenged. (And please,
> Jamey, refrain from bringing out the old "size=talent" harangue. Small,
> fast PGs are a dime a dozen in the NBA -- case in point, we got Edney for 
> next to nothing. They are far too easy to defend and usually get
> clobbered in post-up situations. Anybody see Spud Webb, Michael Adams or
> even Muggsy Bogues, who have been among the most successful of the breed, 
> headed for Springfield? There are exceptions to the rule, but not many.)
> 6'4 PGs who have Billup's POTENTIAL (and here is the key word) are much
> more rare.
>
>
>
>
>            Peter Delevett
>             Staff Writer
>      New Orleans CityBusiness
>          pdelevett@nopg.com
>
>
>
>
>