re: Trade em.

[bird <birdwl@earthlink.net>]

> From: Jim Metz <JBMetzEA@AOL.com>
>
> My draft strategy is simple: trade em.
> I want no part of a teenager with an attitude and millions of dollars in 
> guaranteed contracts.
> We have just finished four excruciating years of same.
> We have Moiso, Blount, Palacio and Sesar to develop, that's enough.

Uh, I don't think that's near enough.  Blount may grow into a decent 
backup center, and Palacio might, just _might_ be a great find for us, but 
Poodleboy's a bust so far, and we Sesar isn't even on the team yet -- what'
s to develop?  Anyway, the team needs an infusion of talent, and 
"teenagers" could give them exactly that.

It's not about blanket statements like "don't draft out of high school" or 
"we need veterans" -- it's about getting the best player available.  If 
that's a guy from the draft, great.  If it's an established NBA player, 
great.  I'm not going to advocate either without knowing what player(s) we'
re talking about.  I only see a few posts advocating this sort of 
pragmatic approach (folks like Mark B., Gene, and Joe "Zero"naka [I kid 
because I care, Joe] -- though I could easily have missed people who are 
doing just that.)  It's just that this sort of "stand pat, but look for 
veterans" approach scares me.   _Which_ veterans?  The ones you mentioned 
(Bibby, Ratliff, et al.) seem way out of reach, though I like your idea of 
acquiring Nazr or Jerome Williams -- it might be possible for one of them 
(most likely Nazr given his friendship with Antoine, I guess) to sign with 
the team.

> Our needs are a starting center, a starting point guard and a wing player 
> with shooting range and defensive tenacity. While there are draftable 
> players with those skills, most of them are a few years away from being 
> able to displayay them at the NBA level.

True, and some aren't.  Even if they were a few years away, sometimes you'
ve got to look long term.  In addition, I'm not sure we need a wing player 
of any sort of skills -- seems to me the two best players on the team are 
just that, and so any other swingman will get about 16 minutes a game.  
Ooops, forgot -- Walker's a power forward or a point guard.  Well, if the 
team's braintrust _insists_ on playing Walker out of position, I guess we 
could use yet another swingman-type.  However, I crave 2-3 big bodies with 
skills to not only clog the lane, but block shots, play tough D and score 
down low, as well.  I don't know if they can be garnered through the draft,
  but it seems possible.  At any rate, I don't think the team ought to 
trade picks.  Once we've drafted, it might make sense to dangle whomever 
we've gotten in order to get whatever we need, but not before, that just 
increases the possibility of shooting ourselves in the foot, so to speak.

> Give me one draft pick and I'd take a shot at Haywood or Loren Woods. I'd 
> take a shot at Tinsley or Jefferson, but this is not a situation for 
> another project player, let alone three.

Virtually all players are projects -- even established players need to 
integrated into the team.  People might think we are a season away from 
contending for a championship, but it's much more likely we'll contend for 
a playoff spot, and further develop over the next 2-4 years into a good (i.
e. 50+ win) team.  Sometimes, you've got to wait for the good things to 
happen, and though folks might think that we've waited long enough (I 
admit, it seems that way sometimes) it apparently isn't the case.  I don't 
know _who_ to draft, because I don't follow college ball all that well, 
but bottom line, trading picks probably won't be as effective as trading 
actual players.  It's all about getting the best talent.  Talent, talent, 
talent in the NBA the way location, location, location is (was?) to 
business.

Regards,

(The Celtic "Tird",
  Celticus "tirdius")
mailto:celtictird@yahoo.com