Re: URL: Clippers May Move Taylor (Time For Another Celtics Trade)

[Way Of The Ray <wayray@ix.netcom.com>]

My resolve is unshaken by your arguments, Brother Joe, because Taylor
offers the C's their first legitimate low post presence since Dino
departed in Pitino's coup d'etat. True, the rebounding has been
inconsistent, but after all, consistencey and the Clippers are generally
two words that don't meet in the same paragraph. Is Taylor worth the
maximum?
Was Antoine worth the maximum? Of course not, but these flawed athletes
are paid for their potential, and Taylor has the potential to be a
dominating 
low post presence, something the C's desperately need. 

Perhaps there's a way of using both Fortson and Taylor, say Danny Boy at
Center, or having Fortson come off the bench as the sixth man, backing
up Pot and Taylor. What would be wrong with that? whatever the case.
if the Clippers shop Taylor, I expect Pitino will check out what they
want for him....

Ray  


j.hironaka@unesco.org wrote:
> 
> Way Of The Ray wrote:
> 
> > http://www.ptconnect.com/sports/stories/990908/sclips.stm
> >
> > Good news for the Celtics, since David Falk may be called upon to
> > broker the deal. Taylor provides the C's with the low post offensive
> > presence, they currently lack.
> 
> Way, fill me in on this "good news". Why do you suppose Pitino would
> decide now to meet Falk's 70.9 million contract demand for Maurice
> Tayler, especially after he averaged a career high 5.3 rebounds in 32+
> minutes and tailed off to .461FG shooting for the season? The Celts
> statistically stand to gain 250% more rebounds by giving those valuable
> power forward minutes to Danny Fortson. Mo Taylor may be comparatively
> one heck of a smooth West Coast "power fairie" low-post scorer, but
> consistent rebounding is a prerequisite for that position whereas
> low-post moves represent a nice bonus. It's NEVER the other way around
> (at least for clubs that want to be among the top 28 teams). Taylor's
> ballyhooed big rebounding night (20 against the Grizzlies) illustrates
> just how inconsistently and indifferently he played for the bulk of the
> short season.
> 
> For me this situation kind of demonstrates that Master P isn't the only
> negotiator getting his clients alienated by making unrealistic and silly
> contract demands. For example, the key differences I see between Taylor
> and Gary Trent is that GT averaged respectable rebounding numbers (7.8)
> in fewer minutes and (I would say not coincidentally) played for a more
> successful team. He also shot .477 from the field in getting his 16 ppg.
> Trent was a true 1999 free agent who theoretically should have had a lot
> more negotiating leverage than 70-million-dollar-man wannabe's like
> Derek Anderson, Ron Mercer, Mo Taylor.
> 
> ----------