RE: Blount??

["Orion" <jlyell@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I agree Blount should be jettisoned and considering resigning him is
ignorant. There are other big men available at a comparable price that
provide much more added value. He never showed anything that supported he
was close to becoming productive player.  Maybe he's just a jump shot away?

McCarty's still a perplexing individual, How many 6'10" guys can dribble,
run, and shoot like Walker, and not be more of a consistent contributor? One
year he hit something like 6 3's in the first game and I am not sure if he
made 6 the rest of the year.

Somewhat similar to John Wallace who has never really been able to display
what he did at Syracuse.


Last years finish was somewhat of a fluke with Miami, Philly, Orlando, &
Milwaukee having off years.  They will get better with the draft, trades and
free agency. Philly has been very active, but IMO should have held onto Jiri
Welsch, unless a deal for Fortson is still in the works. If this team is
wanting to stay at that level they will have to pay the luxury tax and
acquire a few key role players. if we sit pat we could drop right out of the
playoffs.


A key decision is do we move Anderson to get some youth or wait until his
contract expires to go after Duncan? Would we really have a shot? Chicago
had huge cap room and could get any top name free agents.


Could Chris Gatling be a cheap, effective, acquisition?





John



-----Original Message-----
From: owner-celtics@igtc.com [mailto:owner-celtics@igtc.com]On Behalf Of
Kim Malo
Sent: Sunday, June 30, 2002 9:04 AM
To: celtics@igtc.com
Subject: Re: Blount??


X-Unsubscribe: unsubscribe celtics

At 09:07 PM 6/29/02 -0400, Bos3332@AOL.com wrote:
>Will Blount be a restricted Free Agent? If so could we talk him into going
to
>Europe for a season or two, get more playing time and improve his game?
This
>way we could Songalia and still have the rights to Blount. Is there anyway
of
>having this scenario work? Let me know, just an idea?

Blount apparently qualifies (2 years in the league)
http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#33
but I don't think it does what you think. All it lets us do is match
offers. We'd still have to pay him and tie up a roster spot with him.

Me, I wouldn't. Most of the time Blount was on the court he played like he
just couldn't be bothered/didn't care, and given how tenuous his position
was I think that's a really bad sign. Young players should at least be
willing to show some energy and enthusiasm, especially when they aren't
getting playing time and aren't guaranteed a future roster spot. I may not
love Walter, but frustrating as he is I'd rather keep him than Blount
because he at least gets that much and tries.

Kim