Re: Garnett?

[Alexander Wang <awang@MIT.EDU>]

At 12:37 AM 10/26/00 -0400, Jim Hill wrote:
>NBATalk has weighed in on this "punishment" to the Timberwolves and say
>Garnett is gone in a trade.  They think Chicago has the best trade package
>to offer(Brandt, Artest, Crawford etc.. as well as cap space).
>
>Anyone have any thoughts on if the Celtics can consider getting into the mix
>with players and picks?

I think the whole concept is bogus. The last thing you want to do when you
just lost your draft picks for the next five years is go into rebuilding
mode. I really doubt that the Timberwolves would do something so drastic
and unpopular especially after they've been going through such misfortune.
And I doubt they were expecting first round draft picks to push them over
the top anyway. It hurts them in trades, and maybe ten years down the road,
but in the near future they'll survive.

Of course if Garnett's available, everyone in the league including the
Celtics would probably be interested. I wouldn't have believe a few years
ago that his $126M contract would look so reasonable. I mean, that''s
basically what we're paying Walker, Vitaly, and Battie. I think that
Garnett was #2 on Pitino's "wish list for my system".

Alex