Re: no sure thing . . . Hunter

[Kim Malo <kimmalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

At 07:45 PM 7/20/2003 -0700, gene kirkpatrick wrote:
> I don't know, guys; this Hunter fellow is probably not even 6' 6".  And 
> he's over 250 pounds; must have lead feet.

He doesn't though Gene. Honest. I was there and saw him. I think people are 
going a bit overboard with some of the praise such as talk of him replacing 
Walker - he's definitely got rough spots and I disagree with Mark I think 
who said something about his always playing within himself - but he is VERY 
active and NOT slow. And he gets up there. Not Kedrick leaping, but not 
Walker not leaping either. The inevitable Sir Charles comparisons are 
closer there -if you take the young, unpolished Sir Charles- than with a 
lot of guys I've seen them made to. He's not as skilled, of course, but he 
hustles, can play, and offers something we don't already have on the bench 
that the entire world knows we need. That last should be key to the decision.

>   Just because he got a few rebounds in the summer league--what does that 
> prove?  A 56th choice has two and a half strikes against him anyway.

Not much in a vacuum, admittedly, it's what he shows in getting them. Look, 
last year's summer league, I noticed that when JR was on the floor was the 
only time our offense had the slightest sign of flow and how few mistakes 
he made in a setting MADE for error filled schoolyard play. it wasn't the 
assists or points he got, it was what he showed getting them. Ditto with 
Hunter. That 250 pounds is pure sculpted muscle - something like only 6% 
body fat, which is part of why no lead feet- that he knows how to use and 
has the drive to use beyond obvious height limitations. With enough room 
for improvement that paired with that drive you have to believe he will get 
better. The talent may be limited at summer league, but the hunger 
certainly isn't. He showed that he's got plenty of that hunger that is the 
biggest key with things like rebounding.

> Ha.  I'm delighted if we follow through and sign him, both because he 
> sounds like a stud inside man and because we need to launch out with 
> something other than retreads on the bench.  Cheers for Ainge if he makes 
> this work.  Gene

Me too. I figure at a minimum, even if we don't sign him because of 
ownership money issues, I like what picking him shows for the future about 
Danny's eye for what we need and picking people to fill those needs. He's 
not same old same old and IMO there's genuine upside vs that just being a 
buzzword.

Isn't it nice to have players coming in people are genuinely getting 
excited about, instead of just oh nooooos and who's that?
Kim