RE: Re: interesting NBA notes

["Berry, Mark S" <berrym@BATTELLE.ORG>]

I understand what you're saying Alex, but you can't wait for the perfect
solution. Isn't the idea to improve? Nazr Mohammed would be an improvement
over any of our centers, and if it doesn't cost us Pierce, Walker or any of
our three draft picks, don't you have to consider it? This doesn't preclude
you from trying to upgrade again two years from now-in fact, it strengthens
your position because you'd have a young, established big man to dangle as
part of a sign-and-trade for Player X. Let's look at a possible scenario:
Nazr tells the Hawks he isn't going to return and would like to sign with
Boston for something around the mid-level exception figure. The Hawks
believe they are a playoff contender and need a backup center to replace
Nazr. So the teams work out a sign-and-trade involving Vitaly, who takes
over Nazr's role as backup center in Atlanta. Granted, Atlanta downgrades in
terms of talent, but they're getting something when Nazr could walk and
leave them with nothing. The Celtics do the sign-and-trade because they want
to get Nazr without adding significant salary. Two years from now, maybe
Nazr and Paul Pierce get you Tim Duncan or Eddy Curry or Kwame Brown or some
other stud center who is on the market. But for those two years, the Celtics
have a better option at center than Vitaly/Battie/Blount.

As for the comment about not taking a Haywood type because it takes two
years to pan out... that's the kind of thinking that keeps you from landing
a Jermaine O'Neal. If you can draft a center at No. 20 who in two years is a
legit NBA starter, you've absolutely struck gold.

I'm not advocating trading a No. 1 pick for Nazr (unless it had serious
conditions placed upon it), as in the pick-for-Vitaly trade. I'm just saying
there's a better option out there, the Celtics have some attractive pieces
that would entice him to consider Boston, and it only makes sense to explore
it. Maybe they have, but the fact that Nazr hasn't even visited Boston leads
me to believe they haven't.

I just think we're close to that point when waiting for our three draft
picks to improve and taking our chance with next year's lottery have ceased
to be the best methods for improving this team. To take a real leap
forward-like Toronto did-we need to add some bulk up front to complement the
flash we've put together on the perimeter. Look at the rest of the
East-Atlanta has passed the Celtics; Washington will if Jordan comes back;
Detroit may have passed the Celts with Rodney White, Cliff Robinson and
maybe Nazr Mohammed; New Jersey has made a huge improvement with Jason Kidd.
The Celts did great in the draft, but it's the other areas where teams are
passing the Celts by.

Mark 

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Alexander Wang [mailto:awang@MIT.EDU] 
Sent:	Tuesday, July 10, 2001 4:27 PM
To:	Berry, Mark  S; 'celtics@igtc.com'
Subject:	Re: Re: interesting NBA notes

I'd rather have this team built right than have it built quickly. Before 
this draft, we had a team with quite a few holes: basically the 3-12 spots 
on the roster. That's a bit harsh, but if you define a hole as "below 
starter quality", then everyone but Walker and Pierce counts. We also had 
three draft choices but a bad cap situation relative to the luxury tax. I'm 
happy we spent the draft choices on our best talents rather than a center 
like Haywood. Realistically, those mid to late first round centers don't 
give you anything for at least two years anyway, by which time a swingman 
like Johnson and Brown could conceivably be a star-quality player who can 
bring something much better than Haywood in a trade.

As for Mohammed, I'd think that O'Brien has a decent idea of whether he's 
worth trading for. Maybe they've looked into it and balked at the price. 
Not everything appears in ESPN insider.

We managed to play .500 ball with our starting center (Battie) and starting 
point guard (Anderson) out. Anderson may very well be finished, but somehow 
I doubt we're going to get worse at our point guard position than we did 
last year. I like Palacio but he's probably a third string talent, and if 
he can't improve on his play from last year, my guess is we can find 
another CBA guy who can. Hopefully, given another year of development for 
our young stars, we'll improve on that .500 record. I think that Mark's 
right, we're going to get mauled inside on a lot of nights. Speculation 
about Mohammed aside, I don't think anyone's going to give us an upgrade 
over our current centers in a trade or sign-and-trade without demanding 
something more than Vitaly or Battie - probably a first round draft pick, 
for a slight upgrade.

Next year, you'll hopefully be getting that sophomore jump from Johnson and 
Brown. You get another shot at the draft. Maybe you make a trade if either 
of these guys has developed enough to increase their value by that much.

And the year after, you get under the luxury tax again enough to add a free 
agent.

So there's room for improvement over the next few years, if we're patient. 
If you start getting desperate to improve your team now, you might make 
trades like your #1 pick for Potapenko. While I'd like to see improvement 
at both the center and PG position, I doubt it's possible without giving up 
quality talent or draft picks. I'd rather that didn't happen.

Alex