Re: We don't need a draft pick?

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

Bill wrote:

Today's Herald indicates that the Celts are on the verge of making a trade 
with Utah for Byron Russell, giving up McCarty, Randy Brown, and this 
year's #1.  It goes on to suggest that Russell would be useful even if he 
leaves as a FA because he could help the team win a playoff game or 
two.  Further, the team would not mind giving up the pick because of the 
luxury tax.

Huh?  How will this team improve with no draft pick.  Are they going to 
rely on Russell's salary to being in fresh blood?  Would the luxury tax 
limit that plan?

---end---

I'm at my wit's end with Wallace. I have no problem giving up a draft pick
to help the team this year, but Bryon Russell??? Another 6-7 swingman???
Look, if they make that same trade for Oakley or someone like him, I'll have
no complaints-even if it doesn't work out. But does Bryon Russell really
help this team? This is just a salary dump-dumping the first-round pick.
Because they obviously wouldn't resign Russell. This is what the Celtics
have been reduced to-dumping first-rounders on low fixed salaries to avoid
the luxury tax??? 

This is the third time we've seen reports of Wallace considering giving away
a pick just to ease a salary burden. There was the Kenny-and-three-picks
deal to Dallas, the McCarty-and-a-pick deal to Chicago, and now this. What a
crock.

Mark