Wyc = Daddy Warbucks - I don't think so

[Sean Giovanello]

Well, if you look at the Celtics in terms of payroll, we are 20th.  We do
not spend with the big boys and do not try and clear cap space like the
rebuilders.  I have always understood this to be more indicative of a need
to put asses in the seats (so you cant get too bad - heh) and we wont take
on contracts via trade (and pay the tax).  Its a recipe, forgive me, to be
the Washington Bullets (for the Pete Shepard reference).

A team that didnt need to make revenue neutral or positive deals could have
signed a decent veteran F or G to play with Pierce and others.  Its not a
coincidence that the Celtics flourished when they brought back Toine - he
can play and made Paul and his mates better.   Even if it were only a
midlevel guy, I think it would have helped this team.  It also would have
been an easy enough deal to trade if need be or (and here is where I think
it hurts) if you then were willing to take on salary in a deal bringing in
a  very good player (and pay the tax) suddenly you can have two excellent
players (Pierce and whoever), plus the midlevel guy, plus the kids.  At that
point, you are likely winning a lot more than losing and dont end up making
panic deals.

On 2/2/07, Kim Malo <kmalo17 at verizon.net> wrote:
>
> At 08:09 AM 2/2/2007, Sean Giovanello wrote:
> >We could have used the mid-level to improve the team with a veteran.
>
> I said major factor. We've had so many needs one midlevel veteran
> would be incremental change at best.
> Kim
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> The Boston Celtics Mailing List
> celtics at igtc.com
> http://www.igtc.com/mailman/listinfo/celtics
>