Re: anyone see Chanel 68 sportstalk last night?

[RACE --- <race@midusa.net>]

smishra wrote:
> 
> If there is any truth to this, then I would say trade him to the Bucks for
> Baker. I have been one of his biggest backers but he is begining to bore me
> with his tantrums. We know Baker wants to be here and though Walker is
> versatile but Vin Baker is an all star..in addition if Walker leaves after
> his third year then we will lose big time. Now I won't take Van Horn at 3
> even if we trade for Baker, I would still go Battie if available otherwise
> take Mecer at 3. With the 6th pick I would roll the dice and go for Foyle
> or Cato if we take Mercer with our 3rd otherwise tradeup to get Van Horn.
> I can be happy with either of the following lineups:
> - Walker, Battie, Van Horn, Wesley, Minor, Williams, Radja, Ellison,
> Barros, Brown
> - Baker, Foyle,  Williams, Mercer, Wesley, Minor, Radja, Ellison, Barros,
> Brown
>                                                                     -
> Mishra
> ----------
> > Last night on Channel 68, Butch had Michael Holley from the Globe on and
> > they were talking about the draft.  Holley said that there was no way
> that
> > the celtics would draft Ron Mercer.  He said that there really were
> > problems between him and Walker.  I got the feeling that he knew
> something
> > that we don't about the situation but that he couldn't say what it was.
> >
> > They were talking mainly about getting Van Horn at 3, and then McGrady at
> > 6, but i can't see this happening.  Van Horn is an NBA small forward, and
> > we already have two of those in Walker and Williams.  Plus it would still
> > leave us without a big guy. The more i think about it, the more i like
> the
> > idea of taking McGrady at 6.  It's very risky, but the reward could be
> > huge.  With the other pick, we need to go big, with either Foyle or Cato.
> 
> > Since #3 is too high to take those guys, here's what i think we should
> do:
> >
> > Assuming that Philly is taking Battie, I think the thing to do is set up
> a
> > trade with the third pick similar to the one that Milwaukee and the
> > T-Wolves did last year.  We take Mercer or Van Horn for a team that
> really
> > needs him, and that team takes a player that we really want (Foyle or
> Cato)
> > and we trade and get that team's first round draft pick next year out of
> > the deal.
> >
> > That way, we'd get the player of the future (McGrady), a big man (Cato or
> > Foyle), and another first round draft pick for next year, which would
> leave
> > us in a similar situation to this year where we have 2 first round picks.
> >
> > Jeff

How about this group:

Baker, Walker, Battie or Cato or Foyle, Williams, Wesley, Fox, Brown,
Minor (trade  #6 pick and Ellison, Rajda and other cap troubles - for a
semi-veteran swingman and a first round pick next year.)

This gives us a fairly good core.  We might pick up another strong free
agent veteran for a supporting role.  And potentially two lottery picks
again next year.

With this group we could set goals not in terms of playoffs but in terms
of home court percentage overall, within conference percentage home and
away, within division percentage home and away.

What do people feel reasonable goals for these various categories would
be?

david rhaesa
salina kansas