Re: Not All Bad

["Josh Ozersky" <jozersky@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Dan, what the hell are you talking about?  We gave up
those rebounds and free throws BECAUSE hunter didn't
play.  You're actually arguing for playing him!  2nd round
pick or not, his DNP probably cost us the game today.

Josh
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dan Forant" <dforant1@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <Celtics@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, April 04, 2004 6:27 PM
Subject: Re: Not All Bad


> Yep, we're crossing our fingers and hoping we can squeeze more juice out
of
> Hunter than may be there. 2nd round choices are what they are for a reason
> on average. It is amazing how many of us see each game a little
differently.
> Today the Celts shot 53% and lose. The offensive rebounds lost had
something
> to do with that. Not to mention the Wizards going to the line 14 more
times
> is incredible. The PF position is feeble, we haven't been doing bad
playing
> with 4 guys most of the time.
>
> DanF
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: <CeltsSteve@xxxxxxx>
>
> > In a message dated 4/4/04 2:09:04 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
> > cecil@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
> > It's unfortunate that the same patience which has been exercised with
> respect
> > to Banks does not appear to exist for Hunter.
> > Simply put, it's a matter of economics. Banks is a 1st round pick with a
> > guaranteed contract and is the PG of the C's future. Hunter is a second
> round pick
> > and plays a position that has an $8M (and rising) player as well as
> another
> > 1st rounder with a guaranteed contract who also is more a natural PF
than
> > Hunter is.
> >
> > The Wizards front court today was looong: Jeffries, Brown, and Hayward.
It
> > made sense  starting McCarty. The rebounding disparity today is more
> > attributable to allowing the Wiz to shoot 56% from the field. There
aren't
> many rebounds
> > to be had when that happens.