Re: The Boston Celtics Mailing List Digest V7 #90

["Jason Manganello" <manganel@fas.harvard.edu>]

    I'm sorry, I don't post much, but in reply to this post, I just have to
say.... uh, what?

>
> Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 12:18:30 -0500
> From: "Berry, Mark  S" <berrym@BATTELLE.ORG>
> Subject: Help me!
>
>
> P.S. I do like the Tractor Traylor suggestion. Living in Ohio and a big
OSU
> fan, I saw Traylor play a lot at Michigan. His senior season he was a real
> terror. If it happens, you'll hear the "we traded one big, short PF for
> another big, short PF" but Traylor is no Danny Fortson. The guy I remember
> had really nimble, quick feet and great hands. He's also a legit 6-9, not
> 6-6 like Fortson.

    Not to criticize your basketball knowledge, but you have both their
heights listed wrong.  I've seen Traylor play and there is NO WAY he is
6'9".  He's listed at 6'8" and I think that's generous.  Fortson himself is
6'7", not 6'6".  Now NBA teams tend to inflate their players heights, but
having watched them both play, Traylor is no more than an inch taller than
Fortson.
    By the way, speaking of impressive college players, ever see Fortson
play in college?   He made the cover of SI one issue... did Traylor ever do
that?

>He was in the Pierce draft and I remember really hoping he
> would fall into the Celtics' laps. Anyway, he fell into George Karl's
> doghouse and hasn't been able to get out (something Karl is notorious for
> with big guys). The only big man Karl ever appreciated was Shawn Kemp,
which
> is one reason his teams always flame out in the playoffs. That run and gun
> stuff plays OK in the regular season, but you better be able to bang when
> the playoffs start. My point is, I think Traylor is better than he's shown
> (or has been given the chance to show)

    I'll accept this statement.  Considering how bad his stats are, he'd
almost have to be.

>and an upgrade over Fortson

    Based on what??  Fortson has had very little playing time to prove
himself in Boston.  Less playing time, I might add, than Traylor got last
season.  And yet, he has out-rebounded, out-scored and out-shot Traylor in
those fewer minutes.

>(Sean Marks may have been an upgrade over Fortson).

    Now this is an utterly ridiculous statement.  Can you explain to me HOW
he possibly could have been an upgrade?  Now that Fortson has started to get
minutes over the last 6 games (and by minutes, I still mean only 17 a game)
he is averaging 9 points and 8 boards a game.  He is an excellent
ball-player.
    Fortson once pulled down 24 boards in a single game.  Traylor's career
max?  10.  And he's only had that many ONCE.  An upgrade on Fortson?
Please.  They're playing essentially the same minutes and Fortson is almost
doubling his scoring and rebounds, while shooting a better field goal and
free throw percentage.
    I will, however, credit you with one 100% accurate statement: "Traylor
is no Danny Fortson."   Traylor could only wish.

                    -Jason A. Manganello