Re: Oh great!

["Cecil Wright" <cecil@hfx.eastlink.ca>]

Does anyone else question why I have chosen to banish this guy?  Now he's
friggin Strom Thurmond and Jesse Helms.

Cecil

----- Original Message -----
From: Alex Wang <awang@mit.edu>
To: <celtics@igtc.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 1999 6:21 PM
Subject: Re: Oh great!


> Dan F. writes:
> > Baloney!! This argument of Dana's personal problems are like the
> > Government's theories of the homeless. If Dana even comes close to
having a
> > game similar to the Indy game I would be surprised. If you throw up
enough
> > some will go in, law of averages were on his side. If he's all we've got
> > fine, otherwise he's worthless. I like the cut, it will help in his
> > transition out of basketball.
>
> Dana Barros is a career 46% shooter from the field, 41% from three point
> land. I'd say that his relatively poor shooting of late is probably
> the exception, rather than the norm. I think when Dana's shot is going
> down, he's just a much more effective point because the defense has to
> focus on him, creating opportunities for his teammates. If he can just
> shoot as well as he has done throughout his career, he'll be fine as
> the backup point guard, at least on the offensive end.
>
> Alex
>