Re: JB's good point

[Jim Metz <JBMetzEA@hotmail.com>]

on 5/4/01 3:37 PM, Hironaka at j.hironaka@unesco.org wrote:

> 
> Those are very reasonable points, actually. But we did get Paul Pierce with a
> 10th pick in what most people thought was a weaker draft than this one. As
> I've tried to demonstrate in the past, that wasn't some colossal fluke either.
> The best player on many NBA teams was drafted at or after the 10th pick
> (McGrady, Houston, Kobe...).

        ********************
    No doubt, that's true, and we may well have available such a player at
10 or 11, but I found it fascinating, as another poster wrote, that even
after we drafted Pierce and acquired Potapenko, we couldn't improve our
record. In fact, we got stung on the Cleveland trade, because Pitino
underestimated their impact. We had one of the most improved records in the
history of the game in Pitino's first year and lost all of that momentum. Of
course, Anderson and Pierce were injured that season.
    The real problem seemed to be the ego battles between Pierce, Walker and
Mercer, over who would get the shots. Acquiring a veteran all-star caliber
player should make any changes in the pecking order a little smoother.
    On the other hand, any team with Walker at point guard, might have
exactly those kind of problems. Why are Palacio and Anderson able to get
Vitaly 10-15 very efficient points, while Walker never looks for him?