[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Sons of Gene
The truth of the matter is with Banks (who is Ainge's guy and will be
given every opportunity to sputter), Atkins, and a possible Sign and Trade
for Barry (might do it that way), Danny isn't going to add a PG via
However, I can quickly solve the Celics PG problem.
Draft Sebastian Telfair
with the lottery pick - Livingston not likely to be available, where the Celtics
would be drafting. Telfair is Isiah evil and that's good for on-the-court play.
Really he's like a slightly taller TJ Ford with a shooting touch.
A non-lottery choice of a point, probably means someone like Ray Felton,
a bigger version of TJ Ford. And except for his poor shooting, he is
everything you want in a point. Jameer Nelson is very good but short, and
unlike Banks, a true PG. The guy from Wisconsin, 6-3 Devin Harris,
could be a sleeper. There's the possibility he could develop into a Gilbert Arenas
type of player. He seems to be rising in the draft and 11 - 17 is
where he'll likely be taken. Who else: Ben Gordon is like Joe Dumars;
TJ Parker could be of interest; Marcus Moore is big and can pass; Duhon seems
destined for the second round.
Here's a second round sleeper for you: Blake Stepp from Gonzaga:
He's a stepp slow, but can pass, shoot, run a team, and at 6-4 would be the
tall PG that Ainge seeks. I think he goes somewhere in the 30s.
Best foreign PG available is Saraunas Jasekivicius, who you could sign as
a free agent. The other draftable International PGs seem to be a a raw bunch
> Kestas and Tammo brought up Marcus Banks, Chucky Atkins and our point
> guard situation.
> I have to agree with all the points you've made. Chucky, who I really
> like so far, is a defensive sieve. No question. When you're torched by
> Milt Palacio, you know you can't play defense. And we all remember
> Kenny's play against Chucky in the playoffs.
> I also agree that the reason Chucky has looked SO good isn't because of
> his play (which has been very good in its own right), but rather because
> everyone else playing point guard the last few years has been so
> terrible. Chucky plays like a point guard. We had forgotten what that
> looked like. In this case, the positives of his offensive play outweigh
> the negatives of his defensive play. Why? Because a good offensive point
> guard makes everyone better offensively. That's what Chucky is doing.
> And it's not rocket science, by the way. What he has done is pretty
> simple stuff. He's not Magic Johnson.
> As for Marcus, I also agree that he has been given a lot of slack on
> this list. I think Chucky has illustrated just how far from a natural
> point guard Marcus really is. Point guard is like quarterback. You can
> have all the tangibles in the world, but they don't mean a thing unless
> you have the intangibles. If you could build a quarterback, he'd look
> like Ryan Leaf. If you could build a point guard, he'd look like Marcus
> Banks (OK, he'd be a little taller - but the quickness, speed,
> athleticism are all ideal). The things everyone misses with point guards
> are the natural instincts for the position. Marcus doesn't have them.
> And, as Tammo pointed out, his defense has been vastly overrated. He
> shows flashes when he's a real disruptor, but he's just as often getting
> rubbed off on screens and trailing his man. Most troubling of all, he
> hasn't progressed at all in the areas he needed to improve.
> What does all this mean? It means the Celtics, barring a miraculous leap
> by Marcus in the offseason, still don't have their long-term answer at
> point guard. It means that position becomes a priority in free agency
> and the draft. I'm cooling on Brent Barry, just because he's not that
> much of an improvement on Chucky and will come at mid-level money or a
> little more for four years. And he's 32. If the option was Marcus
> Banks/Mike James or Brent Barry, I'd be all for it. If the option is
> Chucky or Barry, I'll just stick with Chucky.
> Chucky also allows you to burn another draft pick on a point guard to
> develop. Maybe that late first-rounder turns into Chris Duhon or someone
> like that. Maybe the lottery pick turns into Shaun Livingston. Who
> knows? But that's a crucial position. Ideally, though, you'd be able to
> grab a big guy with the early pick. Whatever. Anyway, the point is - we
> still don't have our long-term answer at point guard.
>** --------- End Original Message ----------- **