RE: Holley on who may be going. . .

[Josh Ozersky <josh_ozersky@yahoo.com>]

Holley knows little more than we do, it seems to me,
and his conjectures were only slightly more
responsible than some on the this list.  I don't think
Detroit would ever part with Jerome Williams, though
if they did there were few people who would relish a
trade for him more than I.  But I wouldn't give up
Tony Battie.  I really think Battie is a key to the
celtics future, much more so than Ron Mercer, who for
all his grace and athleticism is a limited player who
needs to be a major offensive option to be effective. 
Fast shotblockers with soft jumpers don't grow on
trees however, and if you can get one locked up at a
reasonable salary you have a major insurance policy in
case of missed steals, blown assignments, etc.  As for
the Bison Dele trade, the less said about it the
better.  The guy is despised by his teammates in
detroit -- a soft, undependable headcase with Derrick
Coleman's attitude and Dino Radja's talent.   Pee Yuu.
 Has anybody been watching the Portland/Pheonix
series?  Really entertaining!  Both those teams really
can pass the hell out of the ball -- the Celts should
be forced to watch them.

Here's hoping somebody crushes the Jazz.

Josh Ozersky

P.S. Tom, I wish you wouldn't do this groupthink thing
of calling Pitino by snide names -- the guy is
certainly the most candid executive in the NBA, and an
interview with him is infinitely more revealing than
almost any GM.  If he has to dissemble for trade
purposes occasionally, so what?  And you know what --
Andrew DeClerq IS a jump shot away from being an
outstanding player -- see Doleac, Michael.

--- Thomas Murphy  wrote:
> 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
> 
> 

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Free instant messaging and more at http://messenger.yahoo.com