RE: Look For The Celtics To Re-Sign Rogers

["Wright, Cecil" <Cecil.Wright@JUSTICE.GC.CA>]

The really funny thing is that the re-signing of Rogers is universally seen
as a top priority for the team.  It has been stated by MANY fellow
listmates.

But we need the little general, WWR, to confirm it for us.  As Greg said
earlier, thank you for the many wonderful contributions you have made to the
list.  I'll give you props for surfing the net long enough to find some good
info, but Shawn is right, in that you got no clout man.  A little birdy
indeed.

That's no better than Peter Gammons.

Cecil Wright, Nova Scotia Community Coordinator
Community Mobilization Program
Department of Justice Canada
Duke Tower - Suite 1400
5251 Duke Street
Halifax, NS  B3J 1P3
Tel: (902) 426-5950
Fax: (902) 426-8532
Email: cecil.wright@justice.gc.ca 
Web: www.crime-prevention.org


-----Original Message-----
From: Shawn Niles [mailto:shizzjr@hotmail.com]
Sent: April 09, 2002 9:47 AM
To: wayray@ix.netcom.com; celtics@igtc.com
Subject: Re: Look For The Celtics To Re-Sign Rogers


You're such an idiot, ray. Always spouting off at the mouth. Always saying 
you have these contacts but never saying who they are. maybe it's just 
because you make stuff up and then say "a little birdy told me". Bullcrap.

That reminds me, my "inside source" just told me we will trade for duncan 
over the summer, there's a loophole in Shaq's contract that will let him 
come play for the celtics while the lakers continue to pay his salary, and 
we will trade mark blount for tracy mcgrady. Don't bother checking up on 
it... my sources are good.


>From: Way Of The Ray <wayray@ix.netcom.com>
>To: celtics@igtc.com
>Subject: Look For The Celtics To Re-Sign Rogers
>Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2002 00:40:42 -0400
>
>A little birdy tells me that the Celtics will re-sign Rodney Rogers.
>
>There are two major reasons why re-upping Rogers is a high priority
>Bostoon brain trust.
>
>The first is that it's a PR Disaster, if the trade ends up being a
>lottery
>pick and another first for Delk. Especially if the C's are eliminated
>early in
>the playoffs. An early elimination, no upcoming draft pick, no Johnson,
>and
>no Rogers does not exactly engender a lot of positive rapport from the
>fans,
>the press, or the season ticket buyng public.
>
>Secondly there's a lot of luxury tax flexibility at the moment. It's
>still
>an open question as to when a luxury tax will go in to effect. Then,
>there's the possibility of some tax leeway for clubs over the limit,
>whatever
>that limit may be. Teams that are over the limit, but make an effect to
>conserve
>their finances (i.e. non-Portland/New York clubs) may in fact take part
>in
>the redistribution of tax penalties. Things are not exactly set in stone
>at the moment
>and the finer points of system are still being finalized..
>Ray


_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com