Re: Croshere

["Berry, Mark S" <berrym@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

A couple of thoughts on Joe's points:

1.	This trade definitely means losing Rodney Rogers. It is, in effect,
Kenny and Rogers for Tinsley and Croshere (of course, there's still the very
real possibility of losing Rogers for nothing).

2.	The team won't be bidding "a la carte" from the 2003 free agent
pool. If that were the case, I'd never advocate this trade. The Celtics,
even when Kenny's contract comes off the books, will not be significantly
under the cap. They will be well under the luxury tax threshold, but not the
salary cap. Chris Wallace made this point very clearly a few months ago,
stating strongly that they would not be players for major free agents in
2003. Of course, being well under the luxury tax limit is significant in
that it opens opportunities for sign-and-trade deals for big salaries that
wouldn't mean a luxury tax. But speculating on something like that is really
tricky. Trying to build through cap room is sketchy enough. Trying to build
through "luxury tax room" is silly.

3.	I don't see how it weakens the team defensively. Tinsley is an
upgrade on Kenny and Croshere is at least as effective defensively as
Rogers. In fact, his height may give him some advantages. I'd say if
anything, this helps the defense, once the new guys adjust to the system.

4.	Your fourth point is the most significant, and the overriding reason
why I'd do the trade, even with the salary risks. Draw up a list of point
guards under 25 years of age that you can say are potential 10-year
starters. Miller, Baron Davis, Steve Francis, Tony Parker, and...? Tinsley
may be the least talented of that group (although I'd say he's comparable to
Parker), but he's in the group.

The Pacers reportedly had been talking about a Tinsley-Harrington  package
in efforts to trade for Andre Miller. That's the kind of value Tinsley has.
The Celts not only would address a major need with a legitimate talent, they
would increase their talent base for future deals. Right now, beyond Walker
and Pierce, they have virtually nothing of real value (that's also why I
think they should trade Kenny for value while he has some rather than just
letting his salary come off the books).

Anyway, I'm in favor of this deal, but don't expect it to happen.

Mark


--- --- ---

Joe H. wrote: (and it's nice to see you again, Joe)

Incidentally, I believe Croshere's contract runs through 
2007, at over 7 million dollars per year.

FWIW, this trade may imply:
1) losing Rodney Rogers for lux tax reasons
2) also losing the cap room to bid "a la carte" from the 
2003 FA pool for a better fit, timed with Kenny's release 
or paycut
3) possibly weakening the team's defensive performance, 
which was the main discernible difference between last 
season and previous ones. 
4) adding without great cost a possible ten year starter 
in Tinsley, joining a young core of starters or potential 
starters (Kedrick) at all five positions.

Naturally, Boston could have had Tinsley in the first 
place without the burden of Croshere's salary. And should 
this trade go through, Joe Forte heads toward 
Michael "The Vegetable" Smith status in terms of Auerbach-
influenced draft blunders.

I'm glass-half-full as far as Chris Wallace's impact on 
this team, specifically in light of all the bad trades 
that never happened thanks to him (anything involving 
Antoine). Not to mention the 57 wins last year.

But looking at the latest Dream Team roster, I did note 
that Boston could have easily shown up with 1/3rd of the 
roster:

1) Paul Pierce
2) Andre Miller or Shawn Marion (Potapenko trade)
3) Ben Wallace (invited to camp but released by Pitino)
4) Jermaine O'Neil (for last year's three first rounders)

That's in addition to Antoine Walker, of course.

What's past is past, but adding Ben Wallace alone IMO 
could put Boston in the finals every year through this 
decade. Imagine having the leading rebounder and shot 
blocker on next year's team. He's one of the guys I most 
admire in the NBA.

So merci buckets, Rick Pitino for cutting Wallace in 
favor of Eric Riley (or was it Duh-wayne Shintzius?).