RE: Holley on who may be going. . .

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

Whew!!

Howdy all! I've just caught up on the last week and a half of posts. One
thread I'd like to pick up on is what Holley had to say about who might be
leaving and who is likely staying. (As usual, we must take whatever crumbs
of info we get with a grain of salt. . .) 

Five players merited the "low" rating, of which three are hardly worth
shedding a tear over (Schintzius, Bowen and Garnett - who I assume is
already gone after being cut before the last game). The other two are
interesting picks, however: Holley on Dana Barros - Chance of returning:
Low. (Remember Bulpett on Dana Barros: A-minus - Pitino has to wonder if
"he can replace Barros' positives.") Holley on Tony Battie - Chance of
returning: Low.

I also noted with interest that Holley thought that Kenny was very likely
to stay (he gave him a "high" rating on likelihood of returning).
Certainly, this campaign has done nothing to add luster to the trade value
attached to Kenny's name, so moving him now would be akin to selling while
his stock is down. Will Pitino gamble on Kenny coming round? Or is his
contract just that unmovable? These factors are not mutually exclusive and,
If we can believe what Holley has to say, perhaps both will play a role in
keeping Anderson in shamrocks. Ironically, the stirring play of Dana Barros
and Damon Jones over the last part of the season could actually result in
Dana being deemed expendable/movable. I can immediately think of two teams
(other than the Clips - who in any case were apparently NOT interested at
the trading deadline) who might be interested in Barros as a pointguard:
Seattle and Detroit. 

Seattle, because (as some have already noted) they are interesting in
experimenting with Payton at off guard for significant minutes next season.
Barros' size would not present a defensive liability down the stretch of
close games since Hersey Hawkins could be inserted and Payton simply be
switched back over to PG. Obviously, some people on this list would be
excited at the prospect of possibly acquiring Vin Baker in exchange for
Battie, Barros and cap fodder (don't count me in on that possibility - I've
never liked Baker's Charmin-soft game) but from what I've read Seattle is
counting on building around both Baker and Payton. . . Don McClean is
available though!?!

Detroit might show interest in Barros for the same reason we were so happy
to get Potapenko - he would fill a gaping void on their current roster. Joe
Dumars is gone after this season, Lindsey Hunter has never been the answer
at the point (Gentry reportedly would like to give him minutes between SG
and PG), and Grant Hill can't be expected to distribute the ball as well as
everything else and still have enough for crunch time. Gentry practically
raved over Barros' play during our last outing against the Pistons, calling
him - I believe - one of the currently most underrated players at the
position. Similarly, Pitino was ga-ga over the energetic, physical play of
forward Jerome Williams (no wonder, after the way he abused Wallah et. al.
for 21 pts, 14 rbs, 7 steals). But unless Williams is getting a significant
bump in salary from his roughly 750K the numbers for a swap would not add
up. 

Enter Tony Battie and Bison Dele, whose salaries thrown into the mix would
even things out. Dele has all but worn out his welcome in Motown (a signee
of Collins, Dele has been recently criticized by Hill for playing soft) and
Gentry is very high on Laettner. The ever mercurial Dele (aka Brian
Williams) has had problems whenever he has been cast in the role of the
enforcer but has flourished when teamed with tough-guys Mutombo and Rodman.
Potapenko's physical presence here could conceivably allow Dele to flourish
as a PF/back-up center. Detroit would solve its PG problem with Barros, add
by subtraction in the case of Dele, and substitute Battie for Jerome
Williams. Boston would shore up its rebounding at the PF/C spots with
Jerome Williams' energy and physical play and Dele's size and touch  - at
the admitted cost of Battie's speed, shot-blocking, and potential - but NOT
at the cost of Mercer.

A while back (at least for you all) some one asked who we would trade if we
could and what we thought of the VP deal. With regards to the latter, put
me on record as ecstatic about acquiring Potapenko. As to the former, if I
had the ability to trade any player I'd have to admit that I'd rather part
with Walker and then possibly Anderson. (Note I said trade, not cut, so the
players must have some market value - hence Wallah's not included). That's
just my opinion and I won't bore you with all the reasons. 

Why not? Because it ain't gonna happen: Walker is a base year compensation
player (or so I've read) and from what I can figure out that means we could
only accept back a player making significantly less than 'Toine. And don't
forget the fact that Pitino just loves this guy's competitive instincts.
Given that Walker is going to be here another six years, he needs to move
to the 3-spot which - to my mind - should be accomplished by shifting
Pierce to the 2-spot (at least at game start) and making Mercer the
cornerstone of the second unit where his open court skills could be
maximized. 

Who IS going to be moved? Here we venture into the land of Pitinocchio
speak and media spin. Logic would seem to dictate that either of the point
guards, and possibly Mercer and/or Battie. They're the one's with both the
trade value and the contracts to bring equal value in return. Quite a few
have posted urging patience, but I fear that Pitino's own "playoff pledge"
has canceled that as an option. 

Its good to be back!

Best wishes

Tom Murphy