Re: thinking it through

["Dan Forant" <dforant1@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Gotta like your optimism. The Nets have been a sleeping top team for awhile
now, just needing a few additions to round it out. Now they have them. We
need at least 2 other guys to step up big time and a trade for a point
guard. Even with that we're going to need another injury free year from our
starters with a full out assault on playing minutes again. While I'm not an
Anderson fan, my belief is we got the short end of the trade, losing him and
Rogers.

DanF

----- Original Message -----
From: "Josh Ozersky" <josh_ozersky@yahoo.com>
To: <celtics@igtc.com>
Sent: Sunday, August 18, 2002 6:15 PM
Subject: re: thinking it through


> Dan wrote:
> >>Josh, with all due respect, you can't be serious
> when you say the Nets aren't the better team. The
> facts just don't support it. Maybe you just over
> analyzed to the point of blurring the facts. Even
> prior to the trades they had the edge. If you can sell
> this to the list you can sell anything.
>
>
> Dan, maybe you're right and it's just wishful
> thinking, but I don't think the Nets are that good.  I
> don't think they're as good as the Sixers, or the
> Bucks, or even Charlotte.  What are "the facts?" the
> number of wins they had last year?  Their and their
> opponents FG%s?  None of these things are conclusive,
> and they mean exactly dick when it comes to predicting
> next year.  I don't think we're a lot better than
> them, but we're definitely on the same plane -- or, in
> my book, a little higher.  I still believe that if
> they hadn't been allowed to cheat by abusing Paul
> Pierce, or if Kenny or Antoine had given even average
> efforts in the last couple of games, we would have won
> that series.  Rogers' contribution was negligible for
> my money.
>
> Josh
> HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs
> http://www.hotjobs.com