Re: Holley on who may be going. . .

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

Thanks for the stats and contract info Alex. 

>Here are some stats to evaluate the proposed Detroit trade:
>
>Jerome Williams: His three year, $10M extension kicks in this
>offseason so he will evidently be a base-year compensation player.
>(Were there any changes to this rule in the new CBA?)
>His season stats: 23 mpg, 7.3 ppg on 50% fg, 7.0 rpg (3.2 offensive).
>He's listed on NBA.com as 6'9" and 206 lbs, which I thought was a
>typo. But the Sporting News team report calls him undersized at
>6'9" and 220. The offensive rebounding stat is impressive though. 
>He's also averaging 12.0 ppg (64% fg) and 10.5 rpg (4.9 offensive)
>as a starter (10 games) for Detroit. Does anyone know how his post 
>defense is?

Despite scanning transaction records from late January and February I
hadn't been able to find Jerome Williams contract status. Where were you
able to find it? I'm not sure Williams would be a base-year compensation
player however since his extension may well fit under Detroit's salary cap
for 1999-2000. I'm not aware of any changes to that rule in the new CBA,
but I haven't been able to get my hands on the actual text. Does this
reading of the situation accord with your understanding of base-year comp
under the old CBA?

>Welcome back, Thomas.  I just wanted to add my thoughts to the discussion 
>you started.  First, a couple of points I have to disagree with.  One, I 
>don't think many people consider Dana Barros a starting point guard. 
Sure, 
>we all thought he played his little heart out at the end of the year, but 
>Gentry saying he thinks he's "underrated" doesn't equal him wanting Dana
to 
>start for them.  The other is that I doubt Buffalo Brian would be that
hard 
>to move for them.  I don't know what his contract is, but unless it's
really 
>astronomical, his size would make a number of teams take a look.  
>Particularly, as you say, those with a physical presense at power forward.
 
>Also, I think he and Vitaly would be a pretty slow 4/5 combination to try
to 
>play an uptempo system.

Thanks for the comments, Jim. I'd agree that many don't consider Dana to be
a starting PG and from what Holley had to say that observation would appear
to extend to Pitino as well. But then many teams did not consider Vitaly to
be a starting center either, so I guess my point is that Barros' trade
value is limited to a select number of teams that are either desperate for
help at the point (like Detroit) or have other options they would like to
explore vis-a-vis the point (like Seattle). The only other teams I can
think of that might be interested and able to offer something of value back
(Houston - O. Harrington, Charlotte - A. Mason) already have point guards
with comparable skills. With regards to the Bison, you may well be right
regarding their ability to move his contract, although I think Detroit
would be very hard pressed to get "equal value" (i.e., a potential starter)
since I would expect that most other teams would be looking (correctly) to
pick him up as bench relief. And, as I noted earlier, nearly 5mil a year
(third year of his 7 year, $45M contract) is a lot to pay for bench depth.
The Bison/Vitaly combo would be slow for a Pitino team, and so I would
expect that they would not spend much time together on the court, with JW
getting the starting nod and Dele subbing for Vitaly.

>Now, I'm always asking this question, so forgive me if I'm redundant.  Do 
>you think the Celtics need to make a trade like this, from a basketball 
>standpoint, in order to make the playoffs next year?  Personally, I think 
>they will be fine with the people they have, given an intense conditioning

>and practice schedule.  I'm of the opinion that every major trade they
make 
>sets them back a number of months.  A second round guard here, a free
agent 
>exception there would be fine, but the only way I'd trade any of the key 
>players (Kenny, Ron, Paul, Antoine, Vitaly and now Battie) is if the 
>contract situation forced it.  Otherwise, the thing this team needs most
is 
>continuity.  I even think I'd prefer to keep Barros and Minor, at this 
>point, unless there was genuine talent on offer for them.

Good question, and one that ultimately hinges on how Pitino-the-coach would
use the players. I'm of the opinion that the Cs will have trouble making
the playoffs as long as Walker is playing a majority of his minutes at PF.
If Pitino made this trade and then proceeded to continue playing 'Toine at
PF, then I'd say "no" - the Celts don't need a trade like this. If,
however, this trade (finally?) made Pitino comfortable playing Walker at SF
then I'd say it is a good trade that would help the Celts make the
playoffs. I agree that wholesale personnel turnovers are not what this team
needs right now, but I'm not convinced that Pitino views either Battie or
Dana as key or core players. I do feel that the Celts need more depth at
center and power forward, but this is in part a reflection of how Pitino
uses his current players; that is, Pitino refuses to give Riley minutes and
 instead plays Battie way out of position at center and Walker at PF. For
whatever reasons, Pitino has shown that he is very reluctant to start
Battie at PF (Pitino even started Wallah there one game in Walker's
absence) or to use Riley as anything but an emergency back-up. In sum, only
*IF* (that big word again) the addition of JW and the Bison enabled Pitino
to shift Walker to SF would such a trade makes sense - otherwise, why
bother? Perhaps all that's needed is the return of Popeye to physical
health (although presumably this would still leave Battie backing up
Vitaly. . . ) but I doubt that Pitino is going to let his "playoff pledge"
hinge on Popeye's twice-operated-on left knee.

>Interesting comments.  Has there actually been any
>suggestion of a Pistons/Celtics swap?  

Thanks Josh. I haven't seen any suggestion of a Pistons/Celtics swap in the
papers. The only place I saw it suggested was (dare I say it?) here from
WayRay. What really got me thinking however was the Holley article since I
found it surprising (shocking, frankly) when Holley reported that Kenny is
a virtual lock to stay and Dana - of all people - was on the way out. Then
I recalled Gentry's comments regarding Dana, Ray's speculation, and Pitino
raving about Jerome Williams as a "gamechanger". When I thought about it
further I couldn't think of another team other than Seattle that might be
"hot" for Dana.

>I agree, keep the team intact.  Start Tony Battie and
>move Mercer to the 2nd unit, or at least try such a
>plan out.  

I'm with you 100% on that one, Josh. Let's hope Pitino finds some way to
make it happen.

Best wishes

Tom Murphy