RE: Offseason thoughts

[Alexander Wang <awang@MIT.EDU>]

At 05:33 PM 4/20/01 -0400, OzerskyJA wrote:
>1.  would Wallace trade Walker?  Walker is so bound up into the 
>concept of this team's future, and justly, that I don't see this happening
>unless a top-five NBA player is involved.  If we could trade Antoine
>and our lotto picks for Kobe Bryant or Steve Francis, I would do it.
>But do you see that happening?  I'm still amazed that the team entertained
>offers for Antoine on the order of Theo Ratliff or Dale Davis,
>one-dimensional
>2nd tier stars who can't score at all.  Wallace doesn't have the clout to
>make a deal that stupid, so he won't.  (Nor do I think he would if he could.)

Actually, according to the report, we weren't entertaining offers of
Ratliff -- we offered Antoine, and were rejected. Now there's a big
difference between Ratliff and Dale Davis, in my opinion. Walker for Davis
is as dumb as you indicate because Davis is 32 years old and not much of a
shotblocker. Ratliff is generally one-dimensional, as you say. But when the
one dimension is shot blocking, and you lead the league in it -- well,
there's great value in that. A tremendous shot blocker like Ratliff can
really change the entire offense of the other team. He was the defensive
anchor of a very good defensive team. And he's only 28 years old and he
does average 12.4 ppg and 8.3 rpg.

>2.  I don't see us bringing back Bryant Stith, not if it costs us the
>exception.
>Stith is a leader, etc. but he doesn't score as much as we need him to; I
>would 
>rather use that money for a rugged rebounder / low post scorer, such as Nazr
>Mohammed, Robert Traylor, or somebody of that ilk.  It really makes me
>nervous
>that nobody in the front office or the coach ever addresses the fact that we
>are getting killed on the boards.  A big part of this is Blount's fault, and
>Battie's injury;
>but it's not like either of those guys are Fortsonesque rebounders anyway.
>We need
>somebody who knows how to box out, and has the body to do it with.  I
>actually
>think Bryant Reeves would be a good fit on this team for that reason, if he
>didn't 
>have such an outlandish contract.  If we did make that deal you mention
>below, I 
>would be very happy with it.  I think we really need to see what we can do
>with 
>Vancouver.  Their assets are really what we need right now, including their
>high pick.
>And don't underestimate the appeal of getting two talented young players for
>four or
>five years at rent-controlled prices.

I don't think there's anything we can offer to pry away Vancouver's high
pick, or the high picks of any of these teams, short of trading Pierce.
Realistically, why would they ever make that trade? High picks are the best
source of cheap talent. The only thing that would pry them away would be a
proven, high-quality veteran that would help them get better right now --
like Antonio Davis for Jonathan Bender. We don't have anyone like that.
Offering multiple lower picks is not going to get the job done. These teams
just don't need more lower-lottery talent in quantity; they've generally
been building that up for years. They either need superstar quality talent
or proven veterans.

With that said, multiple lottery picks might be able to snag a good young
talent -- someone who's already in the league and is available because of
disgruntlement. The big opportunity last year was Jermaine O'Neal. It still
burns me that Portland took Davis over our offer, because that's solely a
result of the distortion that Paul Allen's wealth causes. I remember how
Peter May was talking about what a dumb offer that was; must be nice to
have no accountability in your profession. Anyway, this year, who are the
possibilities? If Bibby refuses to sign an extension with the Grizzlies,
that would put pressure on them to deal him, but then again they could
still wait a year. He'd be a perfect fit, in my opinion, and worth trading
two low lottery picks.

Vin Baker? Hm, I think Anderson and Eric Williams for Baker and Ruben
Patterson might work out salary-wise. Baker's contract is scary though. Of
course, the vital part of this is predicting whether Baker is going to
continue to decline, or whether a change of environment would revive him. I
suppose someone who watches a lot of Sonics basketball might have a guess;
I have no clue. But Anderson only has 2 years on his contract left, and
realistically, given Pierce's extension and the luxury tax, I wouldn't be
surprised if they just keep Anderson for the duration. 

Alex