Naivete isn't a felony?

[Eggcentric@xxxxxxx]

< Putting out the story that Baker has an alcohol problem before 
confronting the player was an act of total desperation. Bluntly put, 
all in the Celtics camp have played the fool. > -Michael Gee, Herald

So for now, Vin's problem is alcohol.

Like all other diseases, unless you cure the root causes of alcoholism, 
the disease will not permanently go away.  Alcohol is no doubt a 
debilitating disease but difficult to pin down, convince its victim of 
its negative effect on his/her life, or to cure.  Further, in this case,
it is not even listed among the NBA's banned substances.

But let's get right to the nitty gritty of the Baker drama as it 
now stands - not from a universal humanitarian point of view, but 
strictly from that of a Celtic fan.

QUESTION #1
If a player like Artest is suspended for a game without pay, is that
1/82nd of his season salary which is deducted from him ALSO 
DEDUCTED from his team's CAP/LUXURY TAX?  

My guess is that while it saves the owners a few dollars in payroll, 
it does nothing to reduce the team's cap/luxury tax figures. Otherwise,
why couldn't any team displeased with any player for any reason merely
suspend him and save the salary plus luxury tax?  Anyone here know 
the exact ruling on such an issue?  

QUESTION #2
Both Baker and Shammond were rumored... hell let's just spell it out ...
widely reported to be  "distractions" for Seattle.  Did Chris Wallace 
pay attention to any of these reports? Or equally as important, did 
he consider how these two would fit in with Obie's team before 
dealing his only bargaining chip (Kenny's expiring salary) for them?  
And truly, as has been reported, was his only other option at the 
time merely Croshere and fodder?  If so, why not wait till the 
trading deadline to rid ourselves of Kenny et al for something a
bit better than Vin and Shammond?  

QUESTION #3
Remember that guy (ex-Seattle assistant coach) who is suing 
Baker for not paying him for his services in lobbying Wallace to 
trade for Vin?  What is Baker's liability in all of that? What is 
Wallace's liability in all of that?  NAIVETE is not a felony, but 
just maybe there is more to this trade than meets the eye.  
Makes you wonder -  why would Wallace do such a trade over
the protests of Obie and the informed Bball community? 

QUESTION #4
Is Josh right when he screams  "Bullshit? "  If from the get-go, Baker 
was given more support, minutes, and opportunity by Obie would 
we now be viewing his skills as not quite so diminished, and his 
addictions as not quite so in need of diminishing?

QUESTION #5
Conversely (to question #4), even if Baker had performed better, 
would we not still view this as a franchise-busting trade considering 
our lack of cap space, his incompatible skills, age, and contract?

QUESTION #6
Does Obie's statement in Springer's morning column strike a 
dissonant chord?

"We have a very close-knit basketball team. Everybody to the man in 
our organization cares a great deal for Vin. He's a wonderful guy. He's 
a gentleman. He's a sweet man. Whatever issues he has to deal with, 
he will get the full support of everybody in the Boston Celtics."
 
Full support?  What has Obie done so far to support Baker?  Has he 
attempted even once to incorporate Vin's remaining skills into our 
sorry offense?  Did he bother to even get in touch with Baker when 
Vin hospitalized himself with alleged heart palps prior to our game 
with Seattle?  Seems Obie gave up on Vin even before he arrived. 
Since then, Obie has dissed Baker in every subtle yet cruel way.  
Same with his treatment of Wallace's boy, Kedrick.

A lot more than alcohol is involved here.  It is shocking that 
Wallace and Obie could be on such different pages concerning 
our team's personnel.  While Wallace and Papile continue to bring 
in all the wrong stuff, Obie continues to exercise his veto powers. 

Lost somewhere in the abyss is Vin Baker. 

Eggy