Cs Season TIcket Holder Conference call with Doc
keltsfan at comcast.net
Thu May 27 17:28:36 CDT 2004
I don't think Kendrick is quick or athletic enough to be a power
forward. He would have tremendous difficulty covering these forwards
15-20 feet from the basket.
From: celtics-bounces at igtc.com [mailto:celtics-bounces at igtc.com] On
Behalf Of Mark Piotrowski
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2004 3:12 PM
To: celtics at igtc.com
Subject: Cs Season TIcket Holder Conference call with Doc
> >>Doc drove over to talk with Blount last weekend (since both live in
> FL) and >>he said he still wants to be with the Cs for whatever
> that's worth > >this is actually a bit of a surprise to me. I guess
> I'd just marked >Blount down as gone. I have to say that i'd at
> least entertain the notion >of resigning Blount at 3 years, $14 mil
> -- that's basically the same money
> >he'd get as the MLE elsewhere. I wouldn't break the bank, but
> >a decent center.
>Yeah, that one was a surprise to me too, which was why I flagged it,
>despite all the people here brushing him off as a bum. And I'm still
>not sure I believe it. Came up in response to a general question if Doc
>had already spoken to all the players (yes) with Blount being named in
>particular. I agree with you that Blount is a decent center, but not
>worth breaking the bank over. Especially if Kendrick is still targeted
>to be the starter in a year or two.
Agreed on Kendrick. So maybe we could offer Blount more money, but
shorter deal or with a team option -- like 2 years $11 mil, or 12
mil. -- so he's not here when KP is ready. 2 years would be when
Chucky Atkins' deal is up too.
Based on the very limited minutes I saw him play, KP looked to be
6-10, maybe 6-11. Does anyone else think he might end up our PF of
the future rather than Center? I guess he could still put on a few
inches at 19.
> >A Davis-LaFrentz-Blount front line would be nice.
>Davis as in Ricky? Yeah, except I think Davis is the SG and Pierce is a
>SF, so it would be Pierce-LaFrentz-Blount.
Yeah -- brain freeze, I meant to write PP with Davis at SG. My point
was taht I think Davis should be starting. I think he would be
happier and more productive in that role and Jiri could really anchor
the 2nd unit offensively. Davis actually played more mins than
Welsch and I think Welsch would be an excellent 6th man -- subbing
for RD or PP, whoever's in foul trouble or lagging.
> >>Sees the value in playing someone just to rebound, because we can
> get >>offense from others and you HAVE to rebound to win >
> >I REALLY like this -- i hope that means that if Blount leaves Rivers
> >give Hunter an actual chance to grab the starting PF spot. I still
> >Hunter can be a decent starting PF -- esp. on a team with offense at
>I agree with Doc's point, but not wholeheartedly with yours about
>Hunter. For a bunch of reasons. Including that it's not so much a
>matter of the points Hunter does or doesn't provide personally that are
>a big part of the problems on offense, but how his weaknesses let other
>teams play everyone else.
what would you say those weaknesses are Kim? I think carroll threw a
lot of junk around, but am interested in what you see on the court.
I guess I think that given the opportunity, Hunter can fix the
weaknesses that let players slack off to other folks. I really think
Carroll's now-your-starting playing 30 min, now-you're-still-starting
but playing 8 mins. had an effect on Hunter's confidence and it led
him to pressing too hard, rather than playing hard.
I think given a reasonable offense Hunter could easily make teams pay
for double teaming PP or Davis by consistently knocking down the 8-10
foot jumper -- like Gary Trent does for Minn.
(the other) mark _______________________________________________
The Boston Celtics Mailing List
celtics at igtc.com
More information about the celtics