Re: Re: Today's Insider

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

Tammo wrote:

Which brings me to this question.  Am I the only one who is hearing totally
different things from Ainge and the owners than I'm hearing from Wallace?
They seem to be on totally different pages.

--- --- ---

I agree. Wallace is a scout now. Nothing more. Ainge and Pagliuca (did he
mention he played at Duke?) are the decision makers, and I don't get the
feeling Wallace is in on many draft strategy meetings. This is a good thing.
I wonder how involved Obie is in the process.

On Podkolzine... Ford's Insider story today says teams aren't concerned
about the medical condition. It can be corrected with a minor procedure that
is scheduled for August. None of the GMs he cites in the story believe
there's any way the guy slips out of the top 10, but none of the GMs in the
top 10 have given him an absolute promise that he's their guy. I know the
agent believes he could be a No. 1 overall pick next year, but I think
that's awfully risky. Even leaving aside the injury questions, which are
sure to pop up-he had ankle problems throughout this past season-teams would
have a full year to pick him apart. Right now he has the advantage of
newness. He's attractive because of things you can gauge in a short amount
of time-size and athleticism. But what if he's under the microscope for a
year? You'd start to hear the "sure, he's big, but... " chorus. I just think
he'd be nuts not to stay in the draft.

On promises... The GMs would tell you that if the guy worked out for other
teams, he'd shoot up the charts and might not be available at their pick.
That was Wallace's argument on Kedrick-that if this guy had worked out for
other teams, he'd have been a top-three pick and never would have been
around for the Celts. Of course, the agent was more realistic-what were the
chances Kedrick would go that high? He was an unknown JC kid. Maybe - and
it's a big MAYBE - he would have wowed someone in the top nine. But if he
doesn't make the deal, maybe he doesn't wow anyone, maybe someone slides to
the Celts that they can't pass up (or maybe after Joe Johnson slides to
them, they decide they don't need another swingman), and suddenly he's
drafted where he should have been-late in the first round. Anyway, I agree
that in REALITY, the player is the one who benefits most from these
promises. But GMs will tell you they've made a tremendous coup because their
guy would have rocketed up the charts and been picked much earlier if they
hadn't made the deal. History, at least the history we're aware of, says the
player is the real winner.

On the Kings-Anthony trade... I think the Kings would be nuts. I love
Anthony, but Stojakovic is the better fit for the Kings. He brings the
needed size and shooting at the small forward spot to free up Webber in the
post. He doesn't need to dominate the ball to get his points-he works great
in a motion offense. Anthony, as much as I love him, is more "American" in
that he needs to initiate a lot of offense to be most effective. He's not
really a shooter. He's at his best creating shots for himself or teammates
off of post-ups or penetration. Does that sound like a great fit with
Webber? I don't think so. Does that mean the trade won't happen? No, just
that I think it's a mistake if it does. And I didn't even mention Bobby
Jackson, who would be a terrible loss.

Mark