10 reasons why Celts will still lose

[Eggcentric at aol.com]

> Who are you, and what have you done with our "the glass is an eighth full" 
> Gene?
> -- Eric
> 
Did you mean 7/8ths full?

I never thought I would be differing with Gene over his pessimism.
But here are the main reasons why I think the Celts will do a bit
better than he thinks going forward.

The Celts' attendance percentage figure of 86.2% (including 
aggressive promotions, specials, packages, freebies to charitable
organizations, embarrassing two-for-ones, and ghosts in the seats)
is higher than only seven other NBA teams.   

This percentage is about 8-9% less than Wyc et al estimated
when they bought the team on a shoestring.   Aside from the
drop-off in attendance, their ongoing burden has been that they 
neither own the Garden nor its lucrative concession revenue.

I'm pretty sure that Wyc/Steve/Danny/Doc did not expect 
that we would lose quite this many games and thus turn off 
the casual "take in one or two games per season" fan.   

While astute listees here might feel it has all been for 
the best, to the less sophisticated fans we run into at 
neighborhood parties or the workplace, we stink!

The poor attendance is why Paul returned as soon as he did,
and why Danny has been manning the phones in an attempt 
to pick up a decent vet.    But how can he pull the trigger on 
such a deal when he is unwilling to trade Pierce and has so 
overrated his beloved children... i.e. his draftees?
The very chillikins he is willing to trade won't bring us squat.
And Theo's contract doesn't expire at the end of this season.
Wally, forget it.   Right now, Blount and the mercurial Davis
would command more in return.

And so the only way remaining to improve Wyc's bottom 
line (aside from planting stories with the local press of how
the fans are sooooo enjoying this team despite its record)
is for us to start winning a few games. And that is what I think
we will do.

Egg