RE: Guidelines For The Celtics Draft

[kai_brunnen_g@ix.netcom.com]

> ** Original Subject: RE: Guidelines For The Celtics Draft
> ** Original Sender: Hironaka <j.hironaka@unesco.org>
> ** Original Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 10:19:42 -0700

> > > 8. Ousmanne Cisse is the next Bo Outlaw. Might be a nice
> > > selection at 22.
> 
> I've never seen Cisse play even one minute (he missed the McDonald's
> game, which is the only televised game I know of) but I assume you have
> seen him locally. In this case, though, I'm missing the point of the
> definitive "next Bo Outlaw" comment. In retrospect, that would seem to be
> precisely the type of prospect well worth a 10th or 11th pick in the
> minds of any GM. 

The Bo Outlaw types don't have that appealing lottery flash about them,
as it's difficult to use a lottery selection on what amounts to be a complimentary
player. Even Shane Battier, who proved his mettle against college rather than
high school players, isn't regarded that highly.

If that's how good you project he's eventually going to
> be, then I'd love to see the "next Bo Outlaw" as part of the Celtics
> lineup. An ideal pick for a winning franchise. An ideal Celtic. On paper
> he sounds like a destroyer...somewhere between Outlaw and Rodman in terms
> of game impact.

High School player remember. Weak competition. Let's see him him do it on
the college level against players his own size, before labeling him a destroyer. 
Draft pick 22 however is a good place to take a chance on someone that
could blossom. 

> 
> It is debatable, but I think at this stage that any impact defender is a
> far greater need than a third scorer, and could have a bigger influence
> on whether we finish over or under .500.

Eddie Griffin is a more surer bet than Cisse in that department.

> Also, I'm not reading anything whatsoever into Wallace's or Papile's
> comments for public consumption.

They keep indicating trade and the need for veteran players and
to make the playoffs. I'd trade, but up in the draft, unless they're
going after Bibby or Shareef.
Ray
 
> Joe
> 
> p.s. My hunch is we might actually begin hearing offers from Issel to
> waive the remaining lotto protection on next year's pick in exchange for
> our giving the 11th pick this year (not that I favor it). It depends on
> how many more top players declare and thin out next year's draft (which
> also will not benefit from anywhere nearly as heralded a prep senior
> class). In Denver, you are talking about an actual 40-win team that
> probably feels it is just a wise lotto pick away. This is kind of a
> repeat of the Potapenko phenomenon. You had a Boston team perceived to be
> getting wailed on inside and coming off 36-wins, whose coach had a
> perfect record of dramatic W-L improvements in his second season. Pitino
> also had added the steal of the 97 draft in Pierce (rookie-of-the-month)
> to their 36-win nucleus. Even though the team was going through growing
> pains (abbreviated training camp etc), I don't think Poultrino or Wallace
> imagined for a second that Boston would be lotto bound when they offered
> a naked first round pick to Cleveland for their backup center. Doh!
> 
> ***


>** --------- End Original Message ----------- **

>