Re: three way for Baker?

["Thomas Murphy" <tfmiii@worldnet.att.net>]

DJessen,

I haven't seen CeltSteve's post yet (I get the digest) but what you have to
say makes a great deal of sense from the Chicago standpoint. I just can't
believe that we would be able to get Baker (despite his shortcomings) for
essentially Mercer, Barros and cap filler - obviously a great deal for us.
Seattle is really getting the short end but I guess that's been the story
with Wally W all along. Thanks for the interesting insights.

All the best - Tom Murphy

----------
> From: DJessen33@aol.com
> To: tfmiii@worldnet.att.net
> Cc: celtics@igtc.com
> Subject: Re: three way for Baker?
> Date: Sunday, July 25, 1999 2:47 PM
> 
> Tom and all,
> I put Brand in the picture because I couldn't think of anything else the 
> Bulls could give up to be involved. After reading the today's Mays
comments 
> and some comments by CeltSteve, I understand better what may be going
down. 
> Chicago will use Mercer and Ellison as further cap reduction for a
further 
> superstar free agent signing in Krause's continuing effort to be proved
the 
> mastermind behind the previous Bull dynasty. Mercer will be resigned by
the 
> Bulls for the maximum after he is a free agent. Ellison goes bye-bye.
Celts 
> get Baker. Seattle gets Kukoc, Barros and Shintius. However, it doesn't
seem 
> to be enough for Seattle to me. 
> 
> Seattle-Kukoc, Barros, Schintius
> Celts-Baker
> Bulls-Mercer, Ellison
> 
> If you throw in Battie to the Sonics in addition, the Celts have given up
too 
> much. I don't think Seattle would want Artest. The bottom line is between
the 
> Bulls and Celts, who wants this trade the most as to who throws something

> else in. The Bulls do have two first round picks next year. This trade,
as 
> shown above, would be a steal for the Celts...
> 
> DJessen33