Re: You're not going to believe this

["Donald Liles" <dliles@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Perhaps I am just too tired this morning, or perhaps Kestas should be writing for the 
onion. I read this post this morning and I had to go to a couple sites just to make sure 
it didn't happen. I enjoyed the shawshaq comment as well, very funny.
Perhaps you should consider writing for the onion?




Date sent:      	Thu, 13 Feb 2003 17:35:32 -0500
To:             	celtics@igtc.com
From:           	Kestas <kkv@dartmouth.edu>
Subject:        	Re: You're not going to believe this

At 03:23 PM 2/13/2003 -0500, you wrote:
>Ok, so we don't want to spend the money to keep Mark Blount, now he
>is worth a guard and a draft pick. This is absolutely ridiculous. If
>they want to deal Shammond or heck pretty much anyone else other than
>Pierce in my opinion fine, but get something back for it.

Here's a transcript of the BDT's statement on the Blount/Shammond Williams 
and #1 pick trade, read by GM Chris Wallace over the phone to a local radio 
station from an undisclosed location where he's currently scouting:

We are ecstatic to be able to obtain a player of Mark Blount's stature. As 
his dominating performance in the Shaw's Summer League a few years ago 
showed, Mark is on the verge of entering his prime. His averages of 3.1 pts 
and 2.7 rbs. earned him the nickname "The Shaq of the Shaw's League", or 
simply "Shawshaq".  Mark would have been picked in the Top 5...err, make 
that Top 3, ahead of even Bruno Sundov,  in the last year's draft had he 
been eligible. We turned down some incredible offers for Mark last season 
before we had to let him go to make room for Vin Baker.
[CW's extemporaneous comment: Just to give you an example, Seattle was 
offering Vin Baker - a four-time All-Star! - for Mark, but the league nixed 
the trade with some lame excuse about salaries not matching or somesuch. If 
you ask me, I think they were just trying to protect Seatle from being 
fleeced. Ha, we got 'em anyway, even if it cost us Joe Forte, who's going 
to be a very good player in this league. Anyway, speaking of Vin Baker...]

This move will enable Vin to play his natural position - which is shooting 
guard, as the two midrange jumpers that he made the Seattle game made 
obvious. Vin's strong rebounding at center (4 rpg) will be more than 
adequately replaced by Mark's 3.4 rpg, which, if you extrapolate his 
performance over 48 minutes, is double-figures rebounding. This "Shawshaq 
redemption" [CW giggles: that's pretty clever of me, don't you 
think?]  also enables us to present some major matchup problems in the 
backcourt while Paul Pierce is out. In addition to a 6-9 PF, 6-10 SF, and a 
7-2 C, we will have a 6-11 SG launching threes. The benefits don't end 
there. This trade will give Kedrick - of whom we still think very highly - 
more time to develop his game [CW's extemporaneous comment: that is, learn 
to make more than 1 out of every 13 three-point attempts, which should 
happen some time before Walker and Pierce retire, if we don't trade him for 
a protected 2nd round pick and a bad contract first. Oh, did I say that out 
loud? Back to the statement.]  The fans of the championship-driven Boston 
Celtics will discover very quickly what kind of player Mark Blount is. 
Welcome back, Mark, we missed you! [you can hear them hugging in the 
background].

Kestas