RE: Re: Sorry it has come to this....

["James A. Hill" <jahill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>...we easily could have added Best, Oakley, and Nailon.  ...The only thing
we would have needed to do was dump Kenny's salary, which given his season
last year and this is his last year of a contract seems feasible.

That's what was unrealistic.  To do that you would have had to trade
Anderson to a team under the salary cap.  I don't believe that was remotely
possible.  Who would want him and what else would we need to give them in
trade to get them to do it?

This was a cap move with potential upside.

Move Anderson and preserve a salary slot, move laker boy out of the Locker
room and his influence on Brown, move VP who may not play this year but
showed he wasn't the right center for this current team anyway.  Pick up a
former all star big man who wants to come to Boston, (What other player in
the league has said that out loud?) has strong family support in the area
and will be either a contributor, re-tradable due to the fact he is a big
man in a league without many good ones or who will retire if he doesn't turn
his life around.  Plus, Bakers contract expires around the time a decision
has to be made about max'ing out K. Brown if he's good enough.  And we got
S. Williams, who the braintrust tried to get a couple years ago.

The only way to move Anderson was to trade relative salaries in order to
"reserve" the salary used above the cap.

Name one team that would take on Anderson in exchange for another guy at the
same contract level that you would want over Baker.

As to Best and Oakley, they became FA's this offseason.  Best is the #2 PG
in Miami so far so how much better would he be?  I'm not sure but I wanted
to bring him so I agree with you there.  I think he made a mistake by not
signing here.

So to get Best and Oakley they would have to have been traded for before
their contracts expired, meaning last winter, but those contracts didn't
match up anyway and why would Chicago want Anderson at $9 Mil?

So that why I made the statement.  Not to just be flip, but because your
scenario wasn't possible either with the salary rules.

<Jim

-----Original Message-----
From: Sean Giovanello [mailto:vze238de@verizon.net]
Sent: Friday, November 01, 2002 10:43 AM
To: James A. Hill; Celtics (E-mail)
Subject: Re: Re: Sorry it has come to this....


****
If we had drafted Shaq, Kobe, Duncan, traded for Kidd etc... We'd have a
better team also.  Both are unrealistic happenings.
****

If we hadnt taken on a third max contract for a guy who is surrounded by
serious questions and has not performed like a max guy in years, we easily
could have added Best, Oakley, and Nailon.   The one if would have been
Oakley, because he might have taken less to go to the Wiz.   Regardless, we
could have added three solid veterans to this who would have helped out.
There is nothing in that that even remotely ties into Shaq Kobe or Duncan.
The only thing we would have needed to do was dump Kenny's salary, which
given his season last year and this is his last year of a contract seems
feasible.



>
> From: "James A. Hill" <jahill@leasingservice.com>
> Date: 2002/11/01 Fri AM 09:30:12 CST
> To: "Celtics \(E-mail\)" <celtics@igtc.com>
> Subject: Re: Sorry it has come to this....
>
> This loss was more of a failure by the captains to pass the ball when they
> were doubled then anything else.
>
> >If we had let Rogers go, dumped Kenny for some stiffs, and then signed
> Travis Best, Charles Oakley, and picked up Lee Nailon >when he was
waived -
> would this be a better team?   Hell yeah.
>
> If we had drafted Shaq, Kobe, Duncan, traded for Kidd etc... We'd have a
> better team also.  Both are unrealistic happenings.
>
> Let's be honest, OB is not a stupid guy, to have gotten to where he is he
> must know something about basketball.
>
> So why is he refusing to give the team a chance to win?  Does he want out
of
> his contract so bad he will tank the season?
>
> Why won't he adjust his game plan/team to match up against the team he is
> playing?
>
> Does OB really think Walker can play PF against a Chandler/K. Brown sized
> PF?  Both had blocks on our scorers when coming from the weakside in help
> defense.  Walker doesn't block out the PF to keep this from happening
> because he isn't playing PF on offense.  No one is.  He also isn't playing
> team D at PF either.  Why is OB putting him and the team in a position to
> fail?
>
> Does OB really believe that that having anyone pull up at the top of the
arc
> and fire a 3 with 16 sec still on the clock and nobody in a position to
> rebound makes any sense at all?
>
> Why run a complicated D, during a game at the beginning of the season,
when
> apparently no one on the team knows how to play it?  Why not have the
> defense evolve during the course of the season?  There aren't many MBA
> candidates on this team, so build your D and O around who you have and run
> plays based on what page of the play book they have made it to.
>
> Does OB believe he can win with just one rebounder under the basket,
usually
> just one of the two PF we play at center?
>
> Blame Gaston if it makes some of you feel better, blame the Baker trade
> after two whole games, like a hurt Vitaly would be contributing more right
> about now. What were some of you thinking when Delk couldn't make a layup
> time-after-time last year? And now after 2 games?  Things change all the
> time, players get hot and cold during a season and even a game, except our
> coaching staffs game plan stays stagnant. It doesn't adjust.
>
> I say it's the coach and how he coaches.  The question is why he is
coaching
> this way and why he doesn't put the guys in position to win by making
> adjustments based on what's going on out on the court.
>
> Inquiring minds want to know.
>
> <Jim