No Subject

1) whomever said something about drafting the best athlete theory is
missing the point.  The theory is: drafting for the best player available
over drafting the player who fills a teams biggest need.  If anyone used
the best athlete available they would never even have a chance.  Charlie
Ward certainly would have been selected first as he is probably the best
athlete in the NBA today.  As far as Iverson, he is a great athlete but
more importantly he has great potential to become a huge star in the NBA
and that is why he was #1.

2) How can anyone who claims to be a Celtics fan say that Walker will be a
small forward in the future.  I think and I assume others do to, that the
most impressive part of his game to date has been his rebounding,
especially offensive.  There is no reason to believe that Mercer and
Walker couldn't be on the floor together for 40 minutes a game.

3) I would definetly pick Duncan #1, but what I've said is that I think
Mercer will be a more dominant pro player, and I strongly believe it is
better to build around a smaller multi dimensional player and then fill in
the pieces after that.

4) Yes, you could build a team around Pippen and win a championship.
Everyone says he can't and hasn't won one without Jordan well has Jordan
won without Pippen? Does that mean you can say Jordan can't win without
Pippen.

5) I love optimism but I prefer realism.  If we are talking trades, lets
not throw in names that won't be traded, such as Kittles.  Kittles is
having a tremendous rookie year, seems a perfect fit with Calipari and is
just a rookie, he won't be traded.

Christopher R. Gee