RE: Good morning, WayRay

[Kai_Brunnen_G@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]

Depends on your POV I guess.  If you look at this as a draft of futures, then 
it's a very deep draft. If you want immediate help, it's shallow.  I look toward the future
possibilities, so I see a great draft.  

Most of the International Players and collegians truly aren't ready for the NBA, but doesn't 
mean they can't have an impact in time. Most of them need more developmental
time. For the International Players, that's an added bonus, as you can let them
develop elsewhere and not have it affect your salary cap

For the Celtics to take a step forward next season, that really requires a trade of a 
rehabilitated Walker or a sign and trade deal.
Ray

> ** Original Subject: RE: Good morning,  WayRay
> ** Original Sender: Eggcentric@AOL.com
> ** Original Date: Sat, 31 May 2003 06:12:01 -0700 (PDT)


>
> Ray - I love your enthusiasm and input concerning the coming draft.  
> You are our little energizer bunny, constantly keeping us informed 
> and stoked to a feverish pitch. It is all pretty exciting.  Can't 
> wait to see how Ainge utilizes our draft picks as it should finally
> shed a bit of light on the direction of his ''mysterious'' game plan.
>  
> But so much for the gracious comments this early sunny morn. Blame 
> it on the Green Mountain coffee that I am just smitten to attempt to sink 
> the nebulous star that you keep calling the sun... i.e. the 2003 draft.  
> 
> I disagree with your assessment that this is a deep draft. After Milicic 
> and Pietrus, who are the NBA-ready foreign players?  Lampe, Podkolzin, 
> Diaw, Pavlovic, Varejao, SchortsianthanIsaidIwasb", Khryapa, etc., are 
> all question marks in progress.  And where is that terrific crop of PG's 
> when a 5-foot-10-incher (Ford) is considered the pick of the litter? 
> And how about so-so American center Kaman presently being considered 
> the sixth best draftee? Don't forget, Ray, that if all great truths begin 
> as blasphemes, allow me to modestly add here that after the unanimous 
> big three, implicit in this particular draft is little depth but lots and
> lots of gambling, grumbling, and praying.
> 
> I do not understand drafting 3-4 year projects. Perhaps I have just not 
> adjusted to the present, but If a player is that raw, that far away, 
> why should he even be considered in a draft, especially in the lottery?  
> Why should any team be expected to tie up several salary years on a 
> first-round project who will either eventually fade away or maybe 
> worse yet -  finally begin to fulfill his potential just in time to force 
> his team to re-up his contract at or near the max or lose him to free 
> agency?  How many successful young/raw draftees like my beloved 
> McGrady are still with their original team?  
> 
> Due to the unbalanced math of the CBA contract, enter the attractively-
> priced veteran minimum FA's. No wonder so many NBA teams would just 
> love to trade away their watered-down first rounders (beyond #3 or 4) 
> and instead add more proven, safer, and less expensive free agent 
> minimum types to their tightly-budgeted rosters.
> 
> Egg

>** --------- End Original Message ----------- **