Re: Just got off the phone

["Cecil Wright" <cecil@hfx.eastlink.ca>]

Nothing surprising.  Are we allowed to reply to this one???     :-)

Cecil




----- Original Message -----
From: "Josh Ozersky" <jozersky1@nyc.rr.com>
To: "celtics list" <celtics@igtc.com>
Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2002 11:27 AM
Subject: Just got off the phone


> with Chris Wallace.  He was waiting to hear from me!
>
> I'm going to put most of it into the column, but here's the salient
> facts:
>
> -- don't bet on signing Omar Cook right away.  The team may bring
> him in for a look, but they're mostly concerned with bringing Delk and
Rogers
> onboard.  They don't seem overly worried about losing a chance of picking
him
> up, for whatever reason.  Maybe because he's such an asshole.  I don't
know.
>
> -- Wallace had to get out of the luxury tax, and Joe was "the price of
doing
> business."  Couldn't give away the pick, couldn't use it, and nobody would
> take Randy Brown off our hands -- or Vitaly, contrary to reports.
>
> -- Joe's departure was made easier for Wallace, as he puts it, by the
team's
> belief in Kedrick Brown as a special player who has come an enormous way
> in just a few short years.  Johnson may or may not "max out" in terms of
his
> talent;
> Wallace says most guys don't, and if Joe doesn't, he won't be THAT much
> better
> than Tony Delk.
>
> -- We might re-sign Rogers.  Wallace doesn't believe Rogers will get
offered a
> lot
> of big money by teams as limited by the cap / luxury tax as we are.  He
> points
> out that only Dallas, Portland and maybe New York are unencumbered by it.
> Even
> the Lakers traded away Eddie Jones, Elden Campbell, Glen Rice, and other
good
> players because they could only afford two max-salary stars and a bunch of
> role-players.
> (They just happened to have the two best players in the league.)
>
> -- the 9 or 10 million we will clear when Kenny goes off the books still
won't
> bring
> us under the cap.  We are capped out for the foreseeable future.  "Paul
and
> Antoine
> were our free agents" was how Wallace put it.  The draft is key, however,
and
> Wallace
> stresses how in 2003 we "will be back in the multiple pick business" with
> Philly's choice.
>
> -- Wallace believes that though this year is being touted as the point
guard
> year, he
> thinks the following year may be even better, and has his eye on a couple
of
> guys he
> feels might be available where we're picking (esp. if we trade up).  He
points
> out, too,
> that none of the team who select a point guard this year will be likely to
> compete with
> the Celtics for a point the following year.
>
> --  Rookies won't get much run this year.  Making the playoffs is too
> important, and
> they don't know the game the way veterans do.  Kedrick, I gather, may be
> unleashed for his
> defensive athleticism, which Wallace said was much better than Johnson's;
but
> don't
> expect to see him brought online in the offense the way Delk and Rogers
will
> be.
>
> More to come in interview, though that's the substance.  I still think
giving
> up Johnson was a
> long-term disaster, but it sounds more like it was a financial necessity.
> Personally, if I
> owned the Celtics, I would rather have gone into a short-term cash hole
rather
> than lose
> a long-term asset.  But then I know something about basketball.  Maybe we
> blame ownership
> on this one and do our best to forget it.
>
> Josh