RE: looking ahead

["Orion" <jlyell@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Gene, I don't see how you can say Forte is better that Strickland and Delk.
He has shown nothing and at this point could be seen as 'El busto #2",
especially how Tony Parker played. Unless it is strictly for salary reasons
I don't expect him to be kept. Can we really take a chance on both him and
cook. I thin his shortcomings of being too short for the 2 guard and not a
good enough shooter, and not a floor leader for the pint make him just
another player. Only time will tell.

Rogers has the problems he has had elsewhere. Too small for the 4 spot, too
slow for the 3 spot. Jersey and Kidd and Williams beat us on the boards
badly, and were much quicker and aggressive.


I am not sure I agree with Kenny & Battie. if we could have pulled off that
Van Exel deal this would have improved us. Kenny has limited range and is no
longer a real outside threat.  Battie is Battie. Awesome one game MIA the
next 4. Would not be bad at the 4 spot but we need a physical 5. I wonder
what difference V would have made, if any.


John










-----Original Message-----
From: owner-celtics@igtc.com [mailto:owner-celtics@igtc.com]On Behalf Of
gene kirkpatrick
Sent: Sunday, June 02, 2002 5:03 AM
To: celtics@igtc.com
Subject: looking ahead


Some ideas about players #3 thru #12:

Kenny and Battie are signed and deserve to continue their roles as starters.
Battie, in particular, should continue to improve as our veteran big man.
Williams is an enigma.  He's been a favorite of mine, but my early season
opinion was that if he got twenty minutes a game, we would be in trouble.
Well, yes and no.  We had something building when Joe Johnson started and
showed flashes of all-around play, but I think that O'Brien and Wallace were
not on the same page regarding rookies and veterans.  Wallace drafted for
long term development and contribution while O'Brien clearly favors vets.
I'm with Wallace, because finding a Kobe or a Kidd or Parker or a Kedrick ??
means a 12 year ride.  Alas, we chose a faster ride and it took us to the
championship round in the East.  OK, I digress.  Williams gives us a lot,
but we won't go further without Kedrick taking over there.

Off the bench:  Rogers is very helpful.  I think he developed both an inside
game and a defensive presence that had not been required of him before.
Plus, he has the presence that allows him to play without undue deference to
Antoine and Paul.  Delk is just another small two guard.  He's not bad, but
if he's all we keep from the trade, then we gave away Joe Johnson.  I
wouldn't want to make the decision on Strickland.  If he could restrain his
offensive bluster, he would be a keeper, but he's still a back-up point.  I
suspect he's a luxury since we must develop a starting point guard.  McCarty
and Blount can be number ll and 12, I guess; somebody has to be.

Vitaly.  Anybody's guess with his injury.  I would trade him unless we plan
an offense that actually uses our big men, both decent scorers.

Forte is better that Delk and Strickland, but it would take a year of
playing him to show that.  I expect our penchant for vets will cause us to
lose him, too.

And Kedrick.  I saw the flashes, too.  Maybe he can develop.  If he doesn't,
I lay the fault at the coaches not the drafter.

So, McCarty and Blount and Delk and Strickland, plus Vitaly and Forte are
expendable.  That would have us fill in with cheap veterans and hope that
Kedrick and Cook develop into special players.  Let the bargaining for a
rebounder begin.

Gene
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup