Re: interesting NBA notes

["Thomas Murphy" <tfmiii@worldnet.att.net>]

Yeah, after having given the matter a little more thought I have to agree
with you Alex. Robinson (and his 36 and counting years) would be most likely
represent a monkey-wrench to what is shaping up as the Celts' current plan
to get more athletic, quicker, better at defending and attacking the
perimeter.

Sorry for thinking out loud and posting before digesting my thoughts ;?)

I still expect the Spurs to re-sign Robinson and Webber to Re-sign with
Sacto. I guess I got carried away with the excitement of visions of Webber
and Duncan versus Shaq (Webber played pretty soft in the last series -
perhaps what he needs is a go-to guy like Duncan to take the pressure off).
My guess is you get those two together and you don't really have to worry
which is the 5 and which the 4 - particularly with the elimination of the
illegal D.

On other topics: I can't say that I'm that disappointed that we are not
pursuing Nazr Mohammed. The Cs brass would presumably know more about him
than virtually any one else in the league. Add to that the fact that
Mohammed is not a shot-blocker (our worst deficiency) and that he has
struggled under less than optimum conditions - just like our own centers!
(Can you think of anything less optimum - short of not playing at all - for
a center than headless-chicken monkey-outbreak?). After the draft (which I'm
still excited about) I'm willing to go along with Wallace on Mohammed.

I've got to admit I'm glad we didn't have a convoluted draft-day trade - I'm
very interested to see what each of our draftees can do. I don't think
playing time will be a problem for the first year at least. I'd envision Joe
J getting time at the point as well as at SG (indeed that may be his
eventual 'position' if such a word has meaning on this team). Same for Joe
F. With Kedrick's leaping ability he'll be able to play the 3 with ease and
who knows if he doesn't sneak ahead of Moiso on the depth charts given his
all around game? It will be refreshing to be able to turn to the bench for
energy and points once again. Bring back the sixth man!

Cheers -TomM


----- Original Message -----
From: Alexander Wang <awang@MIT.EDU>
To: Thomas Murphy <tfmiii@worldnet.att.net>; Celtic list <celtics@igtc.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2001 10:30 AM
Subject: RE: interesting NBA notes


> All the Robinson sign-and-trade stuff doesn't make any sense. The Spurs
> would have to renounce Robinson to create the cap room to sign Webber, and
> wouldn't be able to sign-and-trade him. Now, they could sign-and-trade him
> to a team under the cap first (Detroit?), and take back less salary and
> still have some cap room. But they couldn't sign and trade him to a capped
> out team, because they'd have to take back salary that would eliminate the
> cap room, which is the whole reason they're having problems negotiating
> with Robinson.
>
> OK, but here's a far-fetched scenario. If Robinson really wanted to play
> for Boston, then his agent could arrange a three way trade with Chicago,
> who presumably wouldn't want a 36 year old center. They'd send him along
to
> us for a bunch of players. The problem here is that the facilitating team
> (Chicago) would be giving up their cap room at least until the contracts
we
> send back expired (Anderson would have to be included, I'd think, to get
up
> to Robinson's salary demand levels; or Walker!). They'd definitely want
> draft picks or good young talent if they were taking on Anderson's
> contract. And San Antonio would also want something like draft picks. So
> this would be a very expensive proposition talent-wise.
>
> Alex
>
> At 02:34 PM 7/11/01, Thomas Murphy wrote:
> >Thanks Mark for the insider notes . . . the one on Robinson/Webber is
very
> >interesting. I don't think the Cs can interest Webber, but I wonder what
> >would happen IF the Spurs did land Webber?
> >
> >I'd imagine Robinson would continue to look for his payday and SA would
want
> >to get something back for him. That being said I wonder if the Cs could
get
> >in on this action? Not that Robinson is a long term solution to our pivot
> >problems (i.e. don't trade a part of the core for him) but I'm sure we
could
> >part with some spare parts in a sign and trade to land him (after all SA
> >would lose him for nothing if he signs elsewhere). Too bad Kenny doesn't
> >have a higher trade value - his salary would certainly help in any sign
and
> >trade. The fact that his contract expires in only two years may actually
> >enhance his value at this point. Throw in one of our pivot projects
(maybe
> >SA would like Vitaly to bang Shaq around) and possibly a young prospect
like
> >Forte (or even better a sign and traded Stith) and you might have a deal?
> >Robinson would definitely help the Cs into the playoffs, but would that
be
> >enough to justify such a trade? Perhaps if you view it as a Charles
> >Oakley-type trade in order to get us over the hump. Plus who knows how
much
> >longer Robinson (who will be 36 this August!) could play in the watered
down
> >eastern conference? Would he last as long as Wallace's projected 4 years
> >needed to compete for the championship?
> >
> >Interesting speculation - we'll see soon!
> >
> >Cheers - Tom Murphy
>
>