Is it worth the (Kevin) Gamble?

[Steve Ouellette]

I am far from a Kandi fan, but he is a former No. 1 overall pick who has started 400 NBA games and averaged, at one point, 12 and 9. He's also big enough to match up with anyone this side of Shaq if need be. 

The odds of Jones ever averaging 12 or 9 are less than nil, only slightly lower than his chances of starting an NBA game. This is an undrafted free agent who was a trade throw-in and couldn't even work his way into the Summer League rotation. His "potential" seems to lie entirely in the fact that he hasn't played enough to prove that he can't play.

As a starter or key member of  the rotation, Kandi is a horrible choice. As a third string center who will only play as an insurance policy, he's a fine choice. As long as they don't let him take too many of those godawful hook shots.

Steve O

---- "Ryan wrote: 
> I'll answer in order.
>  
> I'd say more 70-30 that Ratliff starts over Perkins - leading me to my next
> answer:
>  
> We lose the very development time we bemoan not getting to see if Jones
> potential IS worth keeping him around.  Face it, if you're down to your
> third center you're usually in a world of hurt anyway - so would you rather
> plug in a washed up never was like Kandi or a maybe could be like Jones? For
> a 60 win team like the Heat - it's Kandi - you try to hold serve.  If it's a
> 30 something win team like the Cs to me it's Jones to see what you may or
> may not have. 
>  
> In looping right back to question #1, Doc has continually skewed toward
> veterans when he has the choice (unlike late last year when he had no
> choice); even though we have a young team. He often pulls them after one
> mistake if they do start meaning they are never able to grow, learn from
> those mistakes and work past them in a game environment. 
>  
> Like it or not the following are our Core: Pierce, Wally, West, Perk,
> Ratliff, Bassy, Allen, Green, AJ, and Gomes. Scal, Kandi, Jones, Pitts,
> Rondo, Powe, Ray (I'm missing someone...aaaaaggh) are the rest to choose
> from - not exactly the Showtime Lakers. Why take potential time from Powe
> and Jones for the likes of Scal and Kandi? There's no reason. We win or lose
> with the core, not the bench. If a major injury takes out any of those core,
> Kandi or Scal are not the type of depth that win you games - THAT'S the key
> difference! We don't have the core depth to make up the loss that a Miami or
> a San Antonio has.  When the Heat loses Shaq they have Mourning. If they
> lose Twan they have Haslem. Etc, Etc.  
>  
> Lastly, Kim has summed this Kandi v. Jones issue all up WAY better then I
> can - so "what she said."
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>  
> What are the odds that Doc starts Ratliff over Perkins?  If he were a good
> coach, i would say 0%, but with doc it is 50-50.
>  
> rmn
>  
>  
> What's to lose? It's a poor risk perhaps, but not a bad gamble,  
> considering the stakes.
>         JB
> 
>  
> 
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics