Re: Walker for Olowokandi

["Icarus" <skmishra@sprintmail.com>]

-----Original Message-----
From: Alex Wang <awang@mit.edu>


>Chris Mathew writes:
>I wouldn't say it's crazy to consider trading All-Stars for unproven draft
>picks. We can't say whether Olowokandi for Walker is good or not; we have
>really no way of accurately evaluating the talent of these draft picks
>(other than what we have seen or heard, which is nothing compared to what
>the pro evaluators know).

Even the shrewdest of talent evaluators has been proven wrong at times, as
happened in the case of Chauncey Billups or Antonio Daniels. On the other
hand Walker is a young all star with loads of potential it will be
absolutely crazy to trade Walker for Olowokandi.

>All that I've heard of Olowokandi is that
>he's got the body of a dominant center, is strong and agile, good jumper,
>great wingspan, but very raw in skills and untested in good competition.

Olowokandi doesn't have a jumper period let alone a good one. I remember Bob
Hill  analyzing his game on the draft day and he was saying that Olowokandi
exposes the ball, which in NBA will result his shot getting blocked plus he
has to work a lot on his footwork.  He is strong, agile and has a great wing
span but he has to learn to play the game.

>And consider last year's draft: you could have traded almost any of last
>year's All-Stars for Tim Duncan (a player unproven in the NBA) and come
>away looking pretty smart. Krause was considering trading Pippen (all-NBA)
>for Van Horn.

Tim Duncan accomplished quite a lot in college, and even though his college
did not win the NCAA championships he carried his team on his back. In
addition he could have been number 1 pick in any of the last three years.
Tim Duncan is an exception rather than the rule.

Olowokandi on the other hand is an unknown entity, so much, so that draft
prognosticators based on his game did not rank him in the top 5 initially.
His draft ranking went up once the NBA GM's attached higher weightage to his
physical ability rather than his basketball skills.

In Pippen for Van Horn case, Krause was trying to get something in return
because he knew that Pippen would bolt out of Chicago once he is free.

> If Olowokandi is a top five center down the line, someone who
>can dominate on both sides of the floor (and I have absolutely no idea if
>this is the case; I trust Pitino to evaluate that) I would say he is easily
>worth trading Walker for.

I think right now Walker is a sure thing, he is our best player and we
should keep him. I hope Pitino doesn't go into his Trader Rick mode. It
disrupts team chemistry,  brings uncertainity and doesn't necessarilly
imp[rove the team even if one aquires a better player.


>Of course trading for Olowokandi would be taking a risk and no one can
>guarantee anything. Signing Walker to a $100M contract would also be a
>big risk.

If you look at the risks involved:
In Walker's case, even if he doesn't turnout the player that he can be, he
still will be an above average player with an inflated contract. If
Olowokandi turns out to be a bust we don't have anything. I don't think I
like the relative risk.

> Most people on the list seem to be pretty averse to risk but
>Pitino is not, so this trade certainly seems possible, depending on what
>Pitino thinks of Olowokandi's upside.


I am averse to taking risk because after many years we have a pretty good
talent base and if we try and nurture it we have a pretty good shot at the
17th NBA title in due time. The worse thing that one can do is attempt to
speed up the process and make mistakes in doing so.

Regarding Pitino not being averse to risk it  worries me because he has made
his share of mistakes and so far has been able to wiggle out of it. He may
not be be as lucky if he continues to do so.
                                                                           -
Mishra