RE: Globe: Celts want Chris Carr

[OzerskyJA <OzerskyJA@cmog.org>]

Maybe the team doesn't want to be in the position
of HAVING to make a trade, and this is a hedge
against one not coming off.  Of all the shortcomings
of the bench, the one I find most inexplicable is Eric
Williams' lack of scoring.  I think if they would just 
get him more isolations, they could milk him for 10-12
points a game.  It's really dumb to have him playing as
a jumpshooter.  This is the kind of thing I'm thinking of
when we say the team can improve without trades...

Josh Ozersky	
Marketing Communications Specialist 
Corning Museum of Glass

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Berry, Mark  S [SMTP:berrym@BATTELLE.ORG]
> Sent:	Friday, August 18, 2000 10:21 AM
> To:	'ozerskyja@cmog.org'; 'celtics@igtc.com'
> Subject:	RE: Globe: Celts want Chris Carr
> 
> Chris Carr. Ugh. Just another stiff to add to the growing collection who
> occupy the C's bench. Don't we have enough bad swingmen in Eric Williams,
> Calbert Cheaney and Walter McCarty (I'm not counting the second-half
> Griffin, because I'm hoping he can return to his early-season form)? If
> you
> took the best qualities of Williams, Cheaney, McCarty and Carr and rolled
> them together into one player, you still wouldn't have much. And the key
> to
> getting him is making it a long-term contract? Please, no.
> 
> The guy averaged 9 points on 40 percent shooting for the Bulls? And he's
> supposed to provide scoring when Pierce gets his annual month-long ankle
> sprain? Am I missing something here?
> 
> And the worst part of this news is it sounds like the move of a team not
> really planning on doing anything else. It has that "filling in the around
> the edges" feel to it. I hope that's not the case. It can't be, can it?
> 
> Mark