Re: Rumors, speculation, and other affairs of the heart

["Lance Jacobson" <lancejacob@xxxxxxxxx>]

    Back to basics - Hey, new friend, i.e. astute business tycoon, just
    wondering...would you, a la Wallace, have fixed something that maybe wasn't
broken?
    Or would you surmise that the product you placed on the parquet floor in 2001-02
excelled             ONLY due to key injuries to the opposition (Hill, Jordan, Carter,
Mashburn, Camby, Radliffe,         etc., etc.).  Just curious if the Celts are for
real or not, better or worse with Baker. >>Eggy

Ah, another loaded question, just rife with opportunity to step in yolk.

Of course they're better with Baker.  Baker's better than Vitaly, right?  And Kenny
was replaceable for only $2M.  The Celtics record was better than the sum of their
talent last season, due mostly to injuries elsewhere and virtually none at home.

The crux of the problem is juggling those Monopoly dollars.  If the Celts paid Rodney
and brought back Vitaly and Kenny, they'd likely win 43 games or so, agreed?  They'd
have had their competition improve, while their top draft picks of '01 and '02 were
gone.  The development for the future depended on Kedrick and Forte, and EWill was
another year older and slower.

The Lux tax was setting in and they were already over the cap and it would cost them.
Even 12 players would push them over the feared threshold.  Bad news.

My biggest problem isn't with the Baker deal, it's the Baker deal AFTER the Rogers
deal, and this team's got very little young talent that can help out.  Their two draft
picks next summer are likely to be non-impact for the Celts either because they stink,
they don't fit, or we don't teach them.  You can choose the option.

To me, the issue isn't whether Wallace made the right move in August.  The issue is
why Wallace still had a job with the Celts after October 2001.  He's wasting assets
faster than Tammy Fay Baker, and shouldn't have been around for the next question that
you have to ask.

If you insist on focusing on that deal, I'd have moved Anderson and Vitaly for Baker
and little Earl Watson, signed Travis Best and kept Forte.  I'd also have gotten at
least a first and second pick out of Seattle, or had them pay a chunk of Vin's salary
for 4 years so I could still bring on some players.l

So, no, I'd not have done the deal as it stood.  We paid full retail for Vin Baker,
when plenty of decent, proven talent was going at discount prices.