Re: OUTLAW

["Cecil Wright" <cecil@hfx.andara.com>]

I made an error when I said Outlaw has a better ft%.  It should say a better
fg% (.552 - .533).

Sorry.

Cecil
-----Original Message-----
From: Cecil Wright <cecil@hfx.andara.com>
To: kjgoo <kjgoo@worldnet.att.net>; Celtics@igtc.COM <Celtics@igtc.COM>
Date: Sunday, April 12, 1998 1:16 PM
Subject: Re: OUTLAW


>McDyess gives considerably more of a scoring threat, however, you're right.
>Outlaw has been overlooked.
>
>mpg- fgm -  fga - fg% - fta  - ftm - ft% - rpg - stl   - blk   - ppg
>35.9- 525 - 290 -.552 -294-168-.571- 7.8 -106 - 169  - 9.5
>
>Outlaw has 12 steals more than McDyess ( 106 - 94)
>Outlaw has a better rebounding stat (7.8 - 7.7)
>Outlaw has more blocks (169 - 127)
>Outlaw has a better ft% (.552 - .533)
>Outlaw averages 6 mpg more (35.9 - 29.9)
>
>I'd say that if McDyess were given an additional 6 mpg the only advantage
>for Outlaw would be in fg%.  But he should be considerably less expensive
to
>sign.
>
>Cecil
>-----Original Message-----
>From: kjgoo <kjgoo@worldnet.att.net>
>To: Celtics@igtc.COM <Celtics@igtc.COM>
>Date: Sunday, April 12, 1998 11:20 AM
>Subject: OUTLAW
>
>
>>With all of the fuss over available free agents, why hasn't anyone
>>mentioned Charles Outlaw?  I believe he's free again this summer (having
>>signed a 1 yr, $1M exception contract with Orlando) and that Orlando is
>>limited to the 20% (or is it 30%) raise.  I still don't understand why
>>the C's didn't go after Outlaw instead of Massenburg.  Come to think of
>>it, apart from peripheral athletic abilities (e.g., vertical leap) I'm
>>not sure what McDyess gives you that Outlaw doesn't.
>>
>>Michael Gooen
>>
>
>