Re: the future of the center spot

["Berry, Mark S" <berrym@BATTELLE.ORG>]

Here's the thing about your strategy... Teams never trade a great big man
unless they're forced to do it. Either the player forces the hand with his
behavior, or the contract situation forces it. And when they do make those
trades, they almost always try to get a serviceable big man in return. For
example, if Duncan hypothetically tried to force a trade, do you think San
Antonio would be more interested in a Paul Pierce package or a Jermaine
O'Neal package? As great as Pierce is, I'd almost guarantee that a package
built around Jermaine O'Neal would be more valuable to the Spurs because of
the scarcity of impact big men. When Mourning forced his way out of
Charlotte, Miami won the bidding war not just because of Glen Rice, but
because of Matt Geiger, who was considered a promising young center at the
time. The Celtics don't have any big people to give in return in that
situation. It's the age-old adage... "You don't trade big for small."

Also, like it or not, the Celtics are irrelevant. The Pistons had cap room
and the hometown advantage, but Chris Webber didn't seriously consider going
there because the team wasn't competitive. I'm sorry, but the Celts are in
that same group of teams as the Pistons, and there aren't any Boston-born
all-star big men hitting free agency anytime soon. The Celtics have to make
win and make this an attractive place to play. There are many, many teams
ahead of them in that regard.  

You think hinging all your hopes for success on landing Tim Duncan, Alonzo
Mourning or Jermaine O'Neal-when every other team in the league will be
after them as well-is less risky than trading for an untested big man in the
draft? I absolutely disagree. The easiest way to get those big guys is
through the draft, and that's exactly because they are unproven. When they
get in the league and prove themselves, they become untouchable. Indy gave
up an all-star power forward (Dale Davis) for Jermaine O'Neal before O'Neal
had ever gotten off the bench. It was an expensive, gutsy move-exactly the
kind you have to make if you dare to be great.

So, I'd say the Celtics are on the right track as far as stockpiling talent,
but they need to find some serviceable big men not only to help them win
now, but to give them chips when they finally decide to make that big play
for a star big guy. The chance won't come around often, so they better be
ready when it does.

Mark



---Thomas Murphy wrote:---

I don't know if I'm responsible for this latest spate of Duncan related
posts (having briefly mentioned Duncan as one example of centers who would
be coming onto the market in a few years) but at least in my case I wouldn't
limit attention to Duncan alone. A quick scan of the salaries at realgm.com
shows that a number of big men apart from Duncan become available (or can
exercise options to do so) after 2003, for example:

Alonzo Mourning,
Jermaine O'Neal,
Dale Davis,
PJ Brown,
Elden Campbell.

What Joe has to say about Duncan would go for these guys as well - if we can
offer a wining situation with a chance at a championship then we might be
able to attract one of these folks to bolster one of our weak power
positions either directly or through sign and trade (or perhaps two - one
through sign and trade, the other through an exception). I think each of
these guys would represent a boost to the team and some (Mourning or O'Neal)
could well represent the final piece of the puzzle. There is no need to pin
all one's hopes on Duncan (once again!). What we need is player development
and team progress in order to put us in position where such a trade would no
longer be merely a pipe dream.

I think the strategy of drafting three highly talented, multiskilled but
smaller men, developing them, and then attempting to pluck a mature big man
talent is both a safer and (if it pans out) a quicker way back to the top
than packaging all our picks for a high school big man. The latter strategy,
while it does have the merit of attempting to address our greatest weakness
directly, puts all of our eggs in one (long-shot) basket. If it pans out -
great! - you have a Jabbar to carry your franchise for 15 years (providing
that he doesn't opt to leave). But the likelihood of that occurring is it
seems to me quite low. By pursuing the former strategy Wallace has not only
spread out the risk associated with a rookie bust (through injury, attitude,
whatever), but he is also playing the odds that tell us that smaller men pan
out more frequently and more quickly than all but the rarest of big men.
Those same smaller players can make us much more competitive much more
quickly thereby increasing our desirability as a landing spot for
disgruntled, veteran but still talented big men heading into the latter
stages of their careers. This strategy is also safer insofar as you have a
'pick' of big men knowing full well their track records, problems and
strengths. For example, the Lakers have virtually made it a franchise
tradition of cherry-picking top center talent - Chamberlain, Jabbar and
O'Neal - thereby bypassing the arduous (and statistically risky) task of
developing such talent. The problem with this strategy is that Boston is not
LA. Hence the importance of developing both our assets individually and our
team as a whole (and not wasting cap dollars on marginal improvements of the
current team) - because weather and tradition alone are not going to get it
done. If things break right then two more years of development and
improvement.should put us in a position to make a big move to try and win it
all.

---end---