Re: The buck stops here

["Berry, Mark S" <berrym@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Wow, Bulpett really held Wallace's feet to the fire, didn't he? I especially
like this brutal passage:

--- --- ---
The bottom line is that Wallace obviously believed Baker could at least
repeat his performance from last season and maybe even get better in a new
environment. And while the numbers don't speak to defense and the way Baker
has looked aesthetically on the floor, they are more than comparable. 
The 6-foot-11 veteran averaged 14.1 points and 6.4 rebounds in 31.1 minutes
a game last year in Seattle and is at 5.3 and 4.1 in 18.7 minutes this
season. Looked at on a per-minute basis, Baker is boarding better with the
Celts, and while the scoring is off, he's taking fewer shots. He is batting
.491 from the floor here after hitting .485 on field goals with the Sonics.
--- --- ---


I don't think Wallace himself could have written a more glowing assessment.
Not with a straight face, anyway. What a joke. This is Bulpett's idea of a
hard look at the Baker trade? Are you kidding me? Can you imagine how this
would be viewed in New York or Philly? 

Then there's this:

--- --- --- 

And while we're talking payroll, let's decipher the real costs here. The
Celts make out a little better financially this season with Baker and
Shammond Williams as opposed to Kenny Anderson, Vitaly Potapenko and Joseph
Forte. Next season is where things start to kick in, but when the salaries
of Potapenko and Forte are factored in, it'll cost the Celts about $6.5
million for Baker. The year after that, it's $8,433,750. And in the 2005-06
season, without Potapenko as counterbalance, Baker's full $15.75 million
will be felt. 
With Paul Pierce and Antoine Walker on maximum contracts, there was no way
the Celts were going to be able to compete for the premier free agents. What
they are passing on is maybe one of the better mid-level exception guys -
which they can still get if the new ownership is willing to spend.
--- --- ---

See, it's really not a big deal at all... It's practically nothing. If you
really look at it, we're almost getting him for free. In fact, if you
consider how many family members he brings to home games, he's probably
paying for his own salary. Seriously, is this the most ridiculous thing
you've ever read? 

Here's my favorite Wallace quote:

--- --- ---

``He's been a very significant player in this league at times in the past...
"

--- --- ---

That's like the baseball GM justifying his latest bad free agent signing by
saying the guy "is a career .300 hitter." So is Stan Musial, but I wouldn't
want to pay him $60 million and trot him out to first base every day. I hate
Chris Wallace. Really I do.

--- --- ---

And then there's this one. I can't believe he's bringing up the Pierce and
Walker "window" when he so obviously has slammed it shut with the Baker
deal. And yet he somehow tries to turn it around to actually justify the
Baker trade:

--- --- ---

``Now you've got to ask yourself how long does this window for Pierce and
Walker last? Does it last five years? Does it last eight? Are they the
Eastern version of (Utah's John) Stockton and (Karl) Malone and play to
2020? Who knows? So what I see my task as is to throw every resource we can
into making this thing better to maximize this window that those two are in.
That's not to say you don't look hard at the future, but you want to make
sure you have enough on hand to compete in the present.''

--- --- ---

I don't know who should be more embarrassed by this, Bulpett or Wallace.
What a load of crap.

Mark