No Subject

[bird <birdwl@earthlink.net>]

>  From: "Jim Meninno" <jam@london.com>
>
> From: "bird" <birdwl@earthlink.net>
>
> > Yeah, this is absolutely true.  Moiso should have been worth more.  He 
> had
> > a bust of a first year, but lot's of guys do (Baron Davis and Jason 
> Terry
> > spring to mind from recent history) and then turn out to have productive
> > careers.
>
> I didn't mean to say that Moiso should have been worth more, but rather 
> they
> should have got someone with that pick that was worth more.  You can run
> down a list of guys who had poor rookie years and turned into decent
> players, but I doubt any of them were quite as lost as Moiso was for his
> entire first year.

Sorry for the confusion, Jim.  I meant that Moiso should have been worth 
more because he was an 11th pick in the first round, not because he's 
Jerome Moiso, if you see what I mean.  So, in other words, right, they 
should have gotten someone with that pick who was worth more.  Moiso was a 
gamble, and I still think not a terrible one -- it just didn't pan out.  
Moiso, as a player, never showed me anything beyond being just lost and 
uncoordinated.  Will Moiso turn out to be a good player in the NBA?  
Possibly, but my judgement right now is no, he won't.  He seems to have 
athletic skills, but not basketball ones.  Who knows, though?  I saw him 
for a brief flash in games last year, so I could be wrong.

The Celtics did get very little in the 2000 Draft, as you say.  After that 
turns out to be the case, though, they've got to just make the best of it,
  which, with this trade, it seems like they did.  One wonders why the 
Sixers made the trade to begin with, though ... .

(The Celtic "Tird",
  Celticus "tirdius")