draft "defense-first" kind of player.

[kevin from singapore <bostonceltics17@yahoo.com>]

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

>Lest this response be completely negative or sarcastic, 
>I've got to say that I agree with this: drafting players that can 
>play good defense is a really good idea.  
>The team might be able to use another scorer, 
>but if it solidified its team defense, the Celtics would improve greatly.  
>Good call.    Players who could give the team defense and some scoring, 
>as well, would be better still. 

thanks for the "good call" remark. It sort of gave me a lift or
"umpff." (like a Seles or Venus grunt when hitting a return)

Looking at the posted wingspans data, I must say the Richard Jefferson
guy is impressive. 6-7 with 7-4 wingspan (I think)? Most (if not all)
net sources said Jefferson is a very good defensive demon. I think
right here someone posted Jefferson shut down PG Frank Williams in
some important game. I would go for him if he's available. Of course
jefferson has got to be a better prospect than Bruce "no offense"
Bowen to interest me.

Tinsley's measurement was "disappointing", 6-0? But then again,
sometimes, heart and skills counts can more than make up what's lost
in height (examples like a young Tim Hardaway or Brevin Knight). 

My strategy with our 10 or 11 pick, if Tinsley is available is to call
up Golden State ask them if they want Tinsley bad enough to move up to
10 or 11 to get him. If yes, we can do like this:

Boston sends 10 pick to Golden State
Boston sends Kenny Anderson to Bulls

Golden State sends 14 pick to Celtics
Golden State sends 2002  #1 pick (protected) to Celtics
Golden State sends Mookie Baylock to the Bulls

Bulls trades Kenny Anderson to Golden State for Mookie Baylock

Summary:
Celtics get 2001 #14 pick + 2002 # 1 pick (top 3from Warriors). 
Celtics gives up Kenny + #10 pick.
Why do it?
moving from #10 to  #14, might not be a big difference as we are
having the #11 already. I think #14 still can be a good valued pick,
if pick wisely.
With Kenny, addition by subtraction. 
We get another pick in 2002.

Golden State get #10 pick + Kenny Anderson. 
Gives up Mookie + 2002 #1 pick (protected)
Why do it?
With #10, they might NOT draft Tinsley or a PG at all, with all the 7
footers (Woods/Haywood/Dalembat/A Jones/Ken Johnson) still available.
In other words, they have more options to chose from.
In Anderson, they get a veteran who wants to play and capable on his
day. With just 2 years remaining on his contract, he is not a cap hog.
Moving want-away Mookie is addition by subtraction.

Bulls get Mookie (01/02 is last year of contract)
Bulls gives up --- NOTHING!!!
Why do it?
It's obvious! Bulls gives up NOTHING to get a 1 year player (former
All-Star if i remember correctly) who can be dealt come Febuary
dateline for more draft choices or salary cap purposes. Moreover,
Bulls are dying for more veteran players, and Mookie still can play.
It would make Brand happy.

This trade idea have not been checked with realgm.com. 

just an idea
kevin