Re: Rebuilding

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

- ----------
> From: Nault <rnault@ptialaska.net>
> To: Mafiaso@aol.com
> Cc: celtics@igtc.COM
> Subject: Re: Rebuilding
> Date: Monday, June 02, 1997 5:55 AM
> 
> >Andthere is no way Van Horn could ever be compared to Gugs, I would love
to see >Gugs in Celtic Green, but not Van Horn who has yet to play an NBA
game or >show whether he can shoot the 3 or not or play some of the more
physical
> >players in the NBA for 82 games.  I really think it would be a mistake
to>draft Van Horn.  If we do draft Van Horn we need to trade him before it
is >exposed that he will not be able to hold up to the rigors of the night
to>night pounding.  I just feel he is too fragile and is going to be one
ofthose great college players who could not make it in the NBA.
> 
> 
> You have obviously not seen Van Horn play very much, if at all.  For one
thing he is a really good three point shooter.  Another thing you say is
that he is not physichal enough, this is not really true.  It is his style
to not be physichal, but when banging people around is needed he can do it.
Sure the guy could be an NBA bust, but then again so can Mercer, Foyle,
> Battie, Thomas, Billups, Tim Duncan, and every other player in the draft.

Tim



I agree, nobody,  even Duncan is a sure thing.  Battie is tall but a bit
light for the center position in the NBA unless you have some other
bangers.  I believe Van Horn may be suited better for the 3 position due to
his ball handling & shooting skills & being a bit slight for the 4
position.  I am definitely not saying we take him at 3, but we have to look
at him at 6. Van Horn has better skills then Gugliotta coming out of
college. Two teams gave up on Gugliotta before McHale saw the talent and
stole him.  As far a being able to play the physical game, it was Ron
Mercer who ran out of gas in the final as Miles Simon & Bibby scorched
them. 
>