[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Okafor



OK, I don't follow college hoops, so I don't know the reality of what they're talking about, but doesn't the reported history of real back problems with Okafor concern any of the people - not you specifically, Mark, I just finally picked a post to respond to with the question - pushing so hard for us to get him? One time could be brushed off, but if there's a real history of them at his age and with his game, seems to me real cause for concern about exactly what we'd be getting and for how long with that pick.
Kim


-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Piotrowski <markp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Apr 7, 2004 1:38 PM
To: Celtics <celtics@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Okafor

I was thinking about this at lunch the other day.  I agree that 3 picks 
won't get it done. Do you think the following would get it done?

Assuming Orlando gets the #1 pick and is willing to trade it, i'd think 
they'd want:

(1) 2-3 #1 picks
(2) 2-3 players (at least 1 starter)
(3) a 4-for-3 (us giving 3, taking 4 players) or 3-for-2 deal to give 
them added roster flexibility, and
(4) for us to take on a crappy contract (Garrity)

In that case we might actually be in a stronger position than Utah -- 
who don't have many players to trade back to Orlando even though their 
picks might be slightly better than ours.  Of course Ainge won't get 
the credit for adding talent top-to-bottom that may allow us to get 
Okafor, but that's a different story.

IMO the best case scenario would be us including a signed-and-traded 
Blount + 3 #1 picks + McCarty + (and here's where it gets dicey) either 
Banks or Welsch (assumign they'd rather not have Davis (whom i'd rather 
keep)).

Everything up to Banks/Welsch I'm willing to give up, and would be 
willing to take back Garrity (4 years), Lue, Steven Hunter and probably 
one other player.  I would push strongly for Gooden (who seems to be 
the odd man out ridiculously enough).

But I'm completely torn on if i'd give up either Banks or Welsch or 
which one.  I believe that the C's should have a 3-man 2/3 rotation of 
Pierce/Davis/Welsch each playing 30-33 min.  But if I had to give up 
one of them I might give up Welsch -- but very, very reluctantly.

I'm almost more reluctant to give up Banks -- mostly b/c I still think 
we don't know what we have with him.  Though I suspect Orlando may want 
him more since they've said they'd like to upgrade the PG position 
most.  With Welsch at least, I think we can project him out to 
realistically max out at a Scottie Pippen-lite talent level -- 17 ppg, 
5 asst, 5 reb.  Which is really good, really really good.  But I would 
be willing to risk giving that up to get Okafor, esp. considering we'd 
still have potential all-star starters in Pierce & Davis.

But with Banks we still don't know.  Could he become the next Gary 
Payton?  Tony Parker?  Tim Hardaway?  Or Dee Brown, Darrell Armstrong, 
etc.

To me this is the greatest mistake the C's have made in the last 10 
years -- regardless of skill level, either giving up on players before 
you know what you've got (Billups, Bowen, Johnson, Songaila, Blount 
(the first time)), getting players that won't get much better (Baker, 
Potapenko (for the #8 pick),) or sticking with players in roles greater 
than their talent level (McCarty, Delk (who should have been a perfect 
6th man)).

I guess if pressed i'd agree to:

Scenario 1 -- Blount agrees to sign-and-trade:

Welsch, Blount, McCarty, 3 #1 picks --->  Okafor, Gooden, Garrity, 
Gaines & Hunter

Scenario 2 -- Blount won't agree to sign-and-trade:

Welsch, Hunter (who I'd give up to get Gooden), Stewart (to add to 
their capspace next summer) & Mihm --> Okafor, Gooden, Garrity, Gaines 
& Hunter

Boston - Scenario 1
PG: Atkins / Banks
SG: Pierce / Gaines
SF: Davis / Garrity / (IR-J. Jones)
PF: Gooden / B. Hunter / Mihm (IR-Stewart)
C: Okafor / LaFrentz / Perkins / (IR-S. Hunter)

Boston - Scenario 2
PG: Atkins / Banks
SG: Pierce / Gaines
SF: Davis / Garrity / J. Jones
PF: Gooden / LaFrentz / McCarty
C: Okafor / (LaFrentz) / Perkins / (IR-S. Hunter)

Orlando - Scenario 1
PG: #1 pick / Lue
SG: McGrady / Stevenson
SF: Weslch / Bogans / (McCarty) / 2nd Round pick (pick #31)
PF: Howard / DeClercq / McCarty / #1 pick
C: Blount / Pachulia / #1 Pick

Orlando - Scenario 2
PG: #1 pick / Lue
SG: McGrady / Stevenson
SF: Weslch / Bogans / 2nd Round pick (pick #31)
PF: Howard / B. Hunter / DeClercq / #1 pick
C: Mihm / Pachulia / Stewart / #1 Pick



(the other) mark


On Apr 7, 2004, at 6:51 AM, Dan Forant wrote:

> Certainly I would do all 3 picks for Okafor but that wouldn't satisfy. 
> Other
> player(s) would have to be involved, that's where it gets too expensive
> depending on who the other players are.
>
> DanF
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <Bos3332@xxxxxxx>
> To: <celtics@xxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2004 10:50 PM
> Subject: Okafor
>
>
>> I think we need to do whatever it takes to get Okafor. I believe a 
>> front
>> court of Okafor and Raef would be great. If we can keep Bount/Mihm and
> Hunter
>> would be great depth. I think we really need to get Okafor, I would 
>> do all
> 3 draft
>> picks for Okafor.
>>
>> Tony