Re: McCarty Threatens The C's - Knowing What 6/17

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

I'd never give McCarty more than a one-year vet's minimum type deal. I want
him to stay motivated. If he wants more than that, try to find it somewhere
else. Walter McCarty isn't exactly irreplaceable.

I'm not a big Speedy Claxton fan. He had a couple of decent games in the
Finals, but he looked positively clueless for long stretches against Dallas.
In San Antonio's Game 6 win against the Mavs, it was Claxton's utter
ineffectiveness that led Popovich to finally use Kerr (who hadn't played
much at all in the series to that point). Claxton is an OK backup point
guard, but you'll never be satisfied with him as your starter. Think a poor
man's Travis Best.

Does that mean I'm sold on Marcus Banks? Not at all. I've never seen the guy
play. I'm realistic enough to know that a guy playing two seasons at UNLV
isn't going to be a secret in NBA circles. So why do the Celts rate him so
much higher than others seem to? Maybe the Celtics are right and the
consensus is wrong. I hope so, but who knows? As for the other point guards,
as someone else said, they all seem to have a fatal flaw that raises red
flags. The only one of the bunch I'd throw a party about is Ford, and he'll
be long gone. 

Andy Katz's latest ESPN.com story indicated yesterday that Hinrich is a
mortal lock for the top eight. If Washington takes a point guard, and Golden
State and Orlando take point guards, that would seem to help the Celts. They
don't appear to have any great interest in Ridnour or Gaines, the two who
figure to benefit by the early run on PGs. If Barbosa gets up in the top 15,
that helps even more. That would ensure that one of the
Pavlovic/Lampe/Wade/Sweetney group gets to the Celts. Of course, if they
have a deal in place to take Banks at 16, then that wouldn't matter.

Still, I can't shake a bad feeling about this draft. It feels so much like
2001. Back then we had multiple picks, we were surprised by a player we had
promised to pick much higher than was projected, and eventually came to
believe all the Celtic-generated hype around that guy. Instead of trading
up, we sat still because we were convinced we could get multiple good
players. The "best players available" turned out to be swingmen. My fear is
we reach for Banks, who instead of being Baron Davis turns out to be Antonio
Daniels. Or we take the "best players available" and come away with a pair
of swingmen like Pavlovic and Hayes or something like that.

I hope I'm wrong. In truth, I have no problem with the best player available
strategy. But you actually have to take the best player available. That's
what the team failed to do in 2001 and it's what worries me this year.

One more thing... for Mark P., on Kedrick's agent: The only thing the
Celtics got in return for their guarantee was the promise that Kedrick
wouldn't work out for other teams. That's it. The Celts were afraid that if
he worked out for other teams, Kedrick would zoom up the charts and get
snatched in the top nine picks. (We should have been so lucky!) Remember,
they were convinced that he was top-three talent (just like Johnson, Blount
and Sundov!). But there never was any promise from the agent to steer anyone
else here. That has to go down as one of the dumbest draft moves of all
time.

Mark