Re: [Celtic_Pride] "What you see is what you get."

["j.hironaka" <j.hironaka@unesco.org>]

At 15:16 01/07/01 -0400, Jim Metz wrote:

>    I am a bit depressed today over the Peter May column in this AM's
>"Globe."
>    Peter quoted Wallace in very strong terms, that we were not going after
>any
>free agents, that 4.5 million couldn't be spent without risking the luxury
>tax.


Yes, I read that article too and had the same feeling JB. Obie also said in 
that article that "it will be a major surprise to me'' if they sign a free 
agent. Alex Wang raised the thread of sign-and-trade earlier, and I think 
that would be the route that sophisticated teams will increasingly go this 
summer, with the support of agents.

One thing though, the May article says that the Celts are at 44 to 45 
million after they sign the three rookies, and that the luxury tax won't 
kick in until the 55 million range. So basically this is about Boston's 
fear of being near or over the cap not this season, but for the following 
one (2002-03) when the first year of Pierce's new extension would kick in 
while Kenny Anderson is in his final year. That's what it is about. Once 
Kenny's contract runs out, this clears more than 8 million from the cap.

But add a 4.5 million exception this summer, then add Pierce's new contract 
minus his old one, and you ought to still be just at or under the 55 
million range in 2003 according to my math. Unless they are re-signing 
McCarty too. ;-)

So if Gaston is using the luxury tax as an excuse to justify being more 
than 10 million UNDER that league figure while also profiting from the 
affirmative action payouts he'll receive from all the billionaire owners, 
that's really so lame. They really think they can con fans with their fuzzy 
ass math.

Especially if you have a  guy in Nazr who averaged over 9 boards (11.6 in 
his last ten games) and probably WANTS to come to Boston, a team whose 
rebounding achilles heal could cost 10 additional losses next year. I don't 
know what Nazr adds phyiscally to what Boston already has, but I will say 
we shouldn't count on Battie or Potapenko putting up 11.6 boards. Who knows 
if he could do it over a full season, but those numbers would put Nazr 
among the league-leaders and he's only 24.

Joe

p.s. Buried at the end of the May article was an explanation of why Boston 
didn't want Diop to slide to ten (they would have likely taken a pass). 
Also, I really think the Nets screwed up the Eddie Griffin trade. Among 
other things, they would have gotten more talent than Brandon Armstrong 
(who?) and Jarron Collins in return had they received Boston's 21st and 
11th pick. They were hoping for Radman at #13 but it wasn't meant to be.

Peter May, Sunday Globe:
"By the way, in case you were curious, had Joe Johnson gone No. 8 to 
Cleveland and Rodney White gone to Detroit at No. 9, the Celtics would have 
picked Vladimir Radmanovic at No. 10. They were totally turned off at last 
Monday's workout by DeSagana Diop. (One executive said Diop's body fat 
content was 22 percent.) Boston still would have taken Kedrick Brown at No. 
11, of course. That was the only lock in the entire first round. The Nets 
were hoping that Radmanovic would be available at No. 13 when Houston made 
the first of its three picks. He wasn't; the Sonics took him at 12. So the 
Rockets, selecting for Jersey, took Arizona's Richard Jefferson."

***