Re: I Don't Think The Celtics Will Do The Fortson/Mercer Trade

[Way Of The Ray <wayray@ix.netcom.com>]

Joe,

Here are my problems with the trade:

Pitino doesn't want Williams' hard to deal contract or influence:

- We all complain about the long term cap crap deals, and you want the
Celtics 
to add another one in Williams.  Plus, Williams had been a bust in
Denver. 

- Pitino and Antoine are at war at the moment - He's not going to bring
in
one of Antoine's pal so he'll have even less control over the situation.


The C's aren't sure how Pot and Fortson we'll work out:

- Exactly.  Can they coexist together or will they both need to be down
low to be effective?

- Pot and Fortson could be a defensive liability. A 6-10 and 6-6 C/PF
combination 
is worrisome from a defensive perceptive. Two guys who aren't
shotblockers,
and possess a lot of beef, are not exactly what you envision for a
pressing 
system.


Battie's Time to Blossom: 

- Yes it is. How much will bringing him off the bench retard his
progress?

- The C's need his shotblocking and quickness in the starting lineup.


Mercer Traded for a future All-Star:

- I don't quite think Fortson fits into that category.


Battie and S. Walker will be fine at power forward:

- I believe if the club can acquire S. Walker without giving up Mercer,
it would be of benefit to the C's frontcourt. 


Mercer may bring in more value than Fortson:

- Sure why not.  As teams keep offering deals and Pitino turns them down
or
says they don't exist, Mercer's value goes up.  It's a group GM
mentality.
If GM's A, B, C, and D offer deals, then GM E figures he must get on in
the 
bidding, because the player up for bids obviously has a high value as
so many teams are interested in him. If Pitino is smart, he'll play the
bidders
against  one another.
Ray



      
j.hironaka@unesco.org wrote:
> 
> Way Of The Ray wrote:
> 
> > First of all, I don't think Pitino wants Eric Williams anywhere
> > near Antoine Walker.  I think he considers him to be a bad influence
> > on Walker, which is one of the reasons he gave him away in the
> > first place.  And as indicated by the Holley article and all
> > the contretemps this summer, the C's aren't exactly overjoyed
> > with Walker's presence at the moment any ways. Adding Williams
> > to the equation may make it even more of a volatile mix.
> >
> > Secondly, I think the C's question how successful a Pot/Fortson
> > duo will be, and thanks to the information provided once again in
> > the Holley column, it looks like the team is also down on Potapenko
> > at the moment.  So much for Coach Pinochio's usual blather
> > about Pot being a workout freak, etc. Maybe he is, but he appears to
> > have bulked up at the cost of his mobility, and now it's Jenny Craig
> > time for Pot Belly (Bob McChesney is swooning at the moment).
> >
> > Third, they seem to be high on Tony Battie.  Are they going to sign him
> > to
> > a hefty chunk of change and then bring him off the bench?  Maybe they
> > are,
> > since they seem keen on dealing Walker for a PF and need a scorer coming
> > off the bench, but I gotta think, that after Battie gets the big bucks,
> > he's going to feel he's a starter true and true. Remember what Pitino
> > said about bringing young players off the bench.
> >
> > Ray
> 
> Well, you lost me. It seems to me that the face value of this deal would be
> a new starting frontline that averaged nearly 27 rebounds per game (an
> unheard of 9.0 offensive rebounds per game) in just 31.0 minutes per game on
> average. This STILL leaves 51 additional minutes of PT to distribute among
> players like Tony Battie, McCarty and Adrian Griffin, depending on who is
> most effective that night. Add to that a nifty rebounding starter in Paul
> Pierce, and it's hard to imagine the Celts ever getting outrebounded based
> on talent.
> 
> Before you say anything, I'll admit that 27 freaking rebounds per games from
> three starters sounds unlikely and way too inflated. After all, it took Hall
> of Famers Bird, Parish and McHale at least 36mpg to reach a similar total on
> a good year. A "good year" back then meant an NBA championship. Superior
> rebounding differentials equal championships. It means you can play ugly and
> still manage to win.
> 
> As for "team chemistry", the only problem I'd  forsee will be finding a way
> to make up for the 7 more shots per game that Mercer attempted compared to
> Fortson, and getting everyone used to the idea of having a power forward who
> actually finished among the top ten players in the NBA in FG%.
> 
> In the end, I say who freaking CARES if Eric Williams comes in and rides
> Pitino's bench or moves onto our injured reserve list?  Frankly, I don't
> even mind if Denver insists on sending us the Jon Benet Ramsey family, the
> Menendez brothers, whomever. In this respect, aren't we exaggerating what
> kind of "bad influence" Eric Williams had in Boston and specifically on
> Antoine Walker's rookie year (I don't know, maybe I just need to have my
> memory jogged).
> 
> Williams seemed like a decent team player with solid Rodney Rogers type
> offensive skills. In fact, he's a rather polished, efficient bench scorer
> when healthy and has an explosive first step. Sure he came across as fun and
> upbeat whenever interviewed, but I still can't blame him if he feels Pitino
> basically blindsided him with the sudden trade. Now Williams is older, been
> through some tough times, possibly is more mature, and in any case entering
> the third year of his new contract.
> 
> If this is really what's bugging you Ray, then I think you are failing to
> see the forest for the trees (or whatever that expression is).
> 
> Joe
> 
> p.s. Whether it's right or wrong, one logical rationale for Pitino to not
> immediately showcase/project Tony Battie in the starting lineup is that he
> could end up costing more than he deserves based on his very modest career
> achievements to date.