Re: Not All Bad

["Josh Ozersky" <jozersky@xxxxxxxxxx>]

I hope that's not true.  It would be a real mistake.  I
would sign Hunter to a two-year cheapo deal and
trade him down the road if he doesn't pan out.  As
for Carroll, he is too dumb:  that's exactly what it is.
Just like Obie, he's blindly loyal, ultra-conservative,
and not smart enough as a coach to think on his feet
or change the plan once its been drawn up.   Walter
in theory stretches the defense for Pierce; therefore
that's what he does.  And walter plays hard on D,
although he's really only of use in pressure, or
jumping wildly in front of an inbounder.  I can't
remember the last meaningful defensive play he made.
I used to like Walter a lot.  But saying that Carroll
must know something we don't is like saying that
we must have had a good reason for invading Iraq, or
why would we have done it?  The proof is in the stats
and the standings.

Josh

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dan Forant" <dforant1@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <Celtics@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, April 04, 2004 7:45 PM
Subject: Re: Not All Bad


> It's getting to be an old story. The one about Carroll to being too dumb
to
> start or give more minutes to Hunter. There has to be a reason. The
obvious
> question is why? One would have to be Merlin to predict what would have
> happened with Hunter in there. Hunter and McCarty may be 2 peas in a pod.
> Less than mediocre talent. We know McCarty is. Hunter's days as a Celtic
may
> be numbered with the draft and trading coming up so there's only a few
weeks
> left to study this anyway.
>
> DanF
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Josh Ozersky"
>
> > 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