re: Kenny vs Milt

[bird <birdwl@earthlink.net>]

> From: Alexander Wang <awang@MIT.EDU>
>
> I've mentioned this before, but Kenny has a decent year in 99-00. Last 
> year
> he stunk but injuries were a factor. Obviously he's not Jason Kidd, but
> it's not exactly fair that he's vilified as a shoot-first, pass-second
> point guard while most would prefer our "shoot last, but pass even less"
> third-stringer Milt Palacio.

Your comparison of Kenny and Milt is absolutely correct, but one thing 
might be missing: Milt has the (ubiquitous) "upside" whereas Kenny may not.
   Once the situation goes bad for KA, he seems not to recover (Joisey, 
where he felt the team was going in the wrong direction; Portland, where 
they clearly lost faith in him as time went on).  Kenny hasn't turned 
anything around without changing teams, and though I hope he does in 
Boston, if I were a betting man, I wouldn't put money on it.

> But my point is that Palacio is hardly a passing
> point guard, and his own offense is much inferior to Kenny's. The
> expectations are much lower because he's a CBA type with a small contract
> as opposed to #2 pick Kenny with the $50M contract.

Sure, that's true, but Milt might grow into a different type of player, 
where Kenny seems to play, with the exception of his (one) good year with 
the Nets, his (one) good year with the Blazers and his (one) good year 
with the C's, the same as he's ever played.  Doesn't he shoot closer to 
40% from the field than 50% (too lazy to go look right now; correct me if 
I'm wrong)?  And is Palacio's offense actually "much inferior" to Kenny's?
   I'm not so sure.

> I really think that if Kenny was some 30 year old CBA
> type that signed with us for the minimum, but played exactly the same, we'
> d
> be raving about him. It stinks that he plays so poorly for his contract 
> and
> his pedigree (and what we had to give up to trade for him), but that
> doesn't mean the team would be better off cutting him.

I'm not one of those that would favor "cutting" Kenny Anderson.  It sounds 
like something a fan of the sort that populates the Celtics newsgroup 
would favor, but that any respectable NBA executive would dismiss out of 
hand (i.e. sounds good in a sports bar, not so good in reality).  And it's 
true that Kenny's cap albatross status needs to be divorced from his 
actual performance, but I guess I'm seeing a similar thing now as I saw in 
his last couple of years in Portland: Kenny Anderson on a downturn from 
which he may not dig himself out of.  Cutting him is a drastic step that 
the team is very unlikely to do, trading him requires a team that either 
has money to burn, foolish management (or perhaps very specific needs that 
KA can address).  However, I can't help but look forward to the year that 
his contract finally expires.  Kenny at his best is an asset to a team and 
a fine point guard.  How often is Kenny at his best, though?

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