Re[2]: why trade Battie?

[mberry@journalink.com (Mark Berry)]

I think we've all seen lately that this team needs some offense off the bench. 
Pitino has gotten as much as he can out of the group by disguising their 
weaknesses with full-court pressure that leads to easy baskets. But teams are 
figuring that out. The Celts need some legitimate players off the bench, and 
Rogers, although no all-star, certainly is capable of being an effective 
offensive player and rebounder off the bench.

Battie is a nice role player, but the point about his contract status is right 
on. He's not worth locking up to a long-term deal, unless it's for peanuts.

Also, I don't think Rogers would be the only addition to this team. I expect a 
major trade involving Mercer for either a front-court starter or a point guard 
(with Anderson also on the move).

I just think we all have a tendency to fall in love with Celtic players without 
enough reason. Battie and Bowen have had their moments, but honestly, are they 
so indispensible that we're ready to crucify Pitino for dealing them? I mean, 
everyone wants changes, but no one wants to give up anything. First, we cried 
that we shouldn't give up Walker, Pierce or Mercer, but when we trade Declercq 
and a draft pick for a young starting center, people still complained. Now, when 
talk of a trade involving two marginal bench players comes up, we cry some more.

Look, we can forget the Joe Barry Carroll for Parish/McHale days. If we're going 
to improve, it's going to be a slow process that will involve sacrificing some 
players to acquire other players. Until this team at least reaches the playoffs, 
let's not get too attached to the players we have.

And don't forget, we're forced to trade to improve because M.L. saddled us with 
Pervis, Dana and Minor at outrageous long-term prices. Plus, Pitino's plan was 
slowed when Larry Brown got cold feet on the Radja trade (the physical thing was 
an excuse to back out). And when he did, it made Dino untradeable. Don't forget 
these things, because it's all relevant to the moves we're going to see in the 
next couple of seasons.

I'm not as pessimistic as some on the list have become. I think the team is just 
a few moves away from a playoff berth and a few years from really contending. 
But don't pretend it's going to happen with the current roster. 

Mark


_______________________________________________________________________________


Subject: Re: why trade Battie? 


From:    Alex Wang <awang@mit.edu> at Internet


Date:    4/6/99  2:08 PM






> I can't imagine why Pitino would trade Battie and
> Bowen, and I'm still not sure this really happened. 
> Battie is a much more skillful version of walter, with
> much much better shot blocking ability.  I really like
> him at 4 a lot, and I think we could move him into the
> starting lineup, move Ron into a 6th role, and be in
> business.  Throwing in our best defender is even
> sillier.  For a guy who nobody wants anyway?  I don't
> get it at all.

I think the main reason is because Battie is a salary cap
nightmare in the making. Seriously, he is just good enough
to demand some sort of hefty contract but doesn't really 
fit in the Celtics starting lineup plans for the future.
Rogers on the other hand is someone that no one wants, as
you say, and would have to re-sign for cheap (if the Celtics
like him). Rogers is also the age that Pitino is looking for.

The other option would be to renounce him and try to use the
salary cap space to play in the free agent market. To actually
get below the cap would require more moves though.

Bowen is not really a big loss but he could always be resigned
after this season using an exception. But if Pitino is going
to move Walker to 3 and Pierce to 2, there isn't much playing
time for Bowen. If Pitino wants to try the free-agent market,
Bowen will be renounced (and probably signed to the minimum 
after the deals are done). 
 
> btw, how about some props for this 12 page article I
> wrote?  Where's all the love?
 
It was definitely very entertaining.

Alex