Re: RE: Vin Baker

["JLyell" <jlyell@concentric.net>]

A lineup with Chauncey and EW looks more impressive in my
opinion.  In time, I know that Chauncey will be much better than Baker.  We
need to remember that Baker is not exactly a great power forward.

Only time will tell if Billups is the next Marbury or Kidd.  Baker is
already a proven commodity, Williams has not shown much of a compete game,
is a 3 with a 4's game which creates problems in the NBA, with his
inability to defend & hit the outside J. I hope we don't get stuck with
another overpaid underachiever, but I think Pitino will know, and if he is
not sold, E.W. will be outta here !

He is not top 5.  Why should we give up a young pg, a promising sf, a very
sharpshooter, and another high pick for an AVERAGE pf  and a sucky pg? 

I think you speak too highly of 2 guys who have proven nothing.  Who is the
sharpshooter you refer to ?  Other than Wesley & Fox, both of whom are
gone, we have no outside threats that can consistently shoot the jumper. 
You also call an all-star who gives you 20/10 a game average ?  If he is
average , than other than Antoine, the rest of the Celtics are in your
sucky category which is probably why we won the number of games we did last
year.

 



 


> 
>         Timothy Jordan
>         PatsRule90@geocities.com
>         http://members.aol.com/PatsRule90
>         
>         ** PATRIOTS IN '98 **
> 
> ----------
> > From: SKMISHRA.US.ORACLE.COM <SKMISHRA@us.oracle.com>
> > To: celtics@igtc.COM
> > Subject: Re: RE: Vin Baker
> > Date: Tuesday, July 22, 1997 6:47 PM
> > 
> > > I agree with you that Baker is a very talented player, but what will 
> > > Baker by himself be able to accomplish in Boston? Milwaukee is
unlikely
> 
> > > to give up Baker for Billups, Williams and deadwood. If they did,
then 
> > > what would we do for a point guard?  
> >  
> > Suppose for the sake of argument we give away Billups + Williams +
Barros
> + 
> > 1st rounder in 99 for Baker and Elliot Perry. We have the following
> lineup: 
> > PG: Brown , Perry 
> > SG: Mercer, Minor 
> > SF: Walker, ?? 
> > PF: Baker,  Andrew DeClercq 
> > C:  Knight, Ellison 
> >  
> > This is a good team with a bonafide star. we are weak at center and pg,
> the 
> > former we can have only serviceable one's but a good pg can be aquired.
> We all 
> > know that it is easier to aquire a star guard <unless he happens to be
MJ
> or 
> > maybe Penny Hardaway> then to aquire a PF or a center.    
> >  
> > > I think we need to be patient here. The nucleus is beginning to
develop
> 
> > > - let's see how it performs next season before making any judgements
as
> 
> > > to replacements/trades, etc.  
> >  
> > I don't see the value of patience here, we need to improve our team
right
> now. 
> > we need to go to playoffs the coming season. Coaches who wait for
talent
> to 
> > develop are losers in my book and you can lookup any number of
examples. 
> >  
> > > What do you think of getting de Clerq instead of Weatherspoon and
Cage?
> 
> >  
> > DeClercq is a good backup and I have watched him quite a lot since I
live
> in 
> > sanfrancisco. He gives us some atheleticism and rebounding but he is
> terribly 
> > foul prone and misses lot of easy put-ups. He is a hardworking guy
which
> is a 
> > big positive but I don't see him playing more than 15 minutes.
> Weatherspoon on 
> > the otherhand could have been a starter at PF but then our front line
> becomes 
> > small and I hate that. We need size and that's one reason why I like
> Baker. He 
> > can postup, rebound, block shots, play defense and vitually guarantees
20
> pts 
> > and 10 boards almost every game. This would specially be valuable,
> keeping in 
> > mind that we are not going to see even half of that kind of production
> from 
> > our center. 
> >                                       - Mishra
> >