RE: Josh Is Sure Cocksure About Banks

["Wright, Cecil" <Cecil.Wright@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

And what's with the Parker is bigger stuff?  Not from any sites I've seen.  In fact Banks is 20 pounds heavier in one site and 40 in another.  Of course, there's not much chance of them being as accurate as Ray, now is there?

Cecil  

-----Original Message-----
From: Shawn Niles [mailto:shizzjr@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: September 17, 2003 2:31 PM
To: wayray@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; celtics@xxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Josh Is Sure Cocksure About Banks


And despite all that you say, if it was the Nets or Heat or Hawks or really 
anyone else that had drafted Banks, you'd be praising the guy up and down.


>From: wayray@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Reply-To: wayray <wayray@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>To: celtics@xxxxxxxx
>Subject: Josh Is Sure Cocksure About Banks
>Date: 17 Sep 2003 13:00:05 -0500
>
>I think the comparisons falter when you compare Banks in terms of NBA 
>readiness to Parker, because Parker could hit outside shots, was more of a 
>pure PG than Banks,
>better in a half-court offense, and is bigger.  Since Banks lacks those 
>above attributes,
>I'm not sure he'll have as similar immediate impact as Parker did. Not that 
>Banks won't likely make some All Rookie team, but Parker is the better 
>player and thus a better
>rookie impact.
>
>And for all the rah-rah stuff about Banks from certain listers, there's 
>still the downside
>of  poor outside shooting, high turnovers, low assist to turnover ratio and 
>half court
>troubles.
>Ray

_________________________________________________________________
Get 10MB of e-mail storage! Sign up for Hotmail Extra Storage.  
http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es