Re: this team sucks/but will change

[Alex Wang <awang@mit.edu>]

Hi Joe,

I actually like what Toronto did. Before this season, who would ever want
to go to Toronto? They were in Canada and they sucked. Ok, they are still
in Canada, but it may be possible to attract decent free agents now that
they are (possibly) a playoff team. And who did they give up? Camby, who
hasn't proven he's worth his new contract in New York. This may be similar
to the problem we'll have with Battie. And for Willis, two late first round
draft picks. And if these two guys have a long-term, positive effect on
Vince Carter, they could be very well worth it. Honestly though, do you
think Toronto would have had a better future if they had added two role
playing rookies and extended Camby?

Anthony Mason is definitely someone that I would consider for Mercer.
It makes sense for the Hornets, who have an overloaded front line as well
as a shortage of quality youth to carry them when Campbell and Coleman 
get old. As for the Celtics, it is instant gratification but it'll also
possibly position us to add to the team by free agency because we won't 
be burdened by large extensions to Battie and Mercer. 

And to be honest, I wouldn't mind some instant gratification after
the what the Celtics have been through, while we wait for Walker and
Pierce to mature. Post players like Mason, who don't necessarily 
depend on quickness, tend to have good lifetimes (as the continued 
strong play of Willis, Oakley, Ewing, etc. demonstrate). 

Alex

--

> Hi Zhi Zhir/Friends:
> 
> Mercer and Battie for a Anthony Mason etc. makes sense because we'd have a st
 *arting
> lineup of genuine bad-asses who can also adroitly whip the ball out of any do
 *uble
> team. But personally I think we are giving up too much potential (two former 
 *top 6
> lotto picks after all) to buy such instant gratification. Speaking as a New Y
 *orker
> at heart (I used to write for Unicef), I actually always greatly preferred Ma
 *son to
> Oakley when they both played in the Apple. Besides, I believe Oakley was cont
 *racted
> to earn well over 10 million this year, so he'd laugh in Pitino's face if we
> offered him 1.7 million for the privilege of immediately taking part in
> 4-times-per-week workouts as soon as the season ends for our (hopefully) 22nd
 * best
> team in the NBA.
> 
> Personally, I think Toronto sold their souls to the devil by trading for two 
 *35-36
> year old guys (Willis and Oakley) to improve their 1999 record. I'd much rath
 *er
> have the Celtics' future than swap it for Toronto's present.
> 
> I can't believe I'm in my office past 10:00 pm writing procrastination posts 
 *to the
> Celts list. I'm over my head with work out here. I want to stick my head in t
 *he
> paper shredder.  Sob, sob...
> 
> 
> ****
> 
> Alex Wang wrote:
> 
> > Hart,
> >
> > The nine-man rotation that you give wouldn't be a bad direction
> > for the Celtics. In fact, in another three years when the young
> > players mature, it could be pretty impressive. I see a couple of
> > potential problems though:
> >
> > First, the salary structure. The Walker/Mercer/Pierce rotation at
> > 2 and 3 is probably going to end up being a $200M rotation.
> > You have another $11M/year invested at point guard.
> >
> > Second, a lack of inside scoring. I think Oakley is best suited to
> > be a complementary forward to a scoring center (like he has been
> > to Willis and Ewing). He doesn't have much of an inside offensive
> > game; he gets most of his points from open midrange jumpers off
> > double teams. I don't know if I feel comfortable having Vitaly
> > carrying so much of an inside scoring load. While Walker
> > could post up at the small forward position to some degree, using
> > him exclusively inside would be a misuse of his talents.
> >
> > Third, I doubt we can obtain a quality veteran power forward for the
> > middle class exemption, because we are obviously a young developing
> > team with no contending chances. My guess is that the exemption is
> > spent on a veteran scorer at 2 or 3.
> >
> > My preference is to see Mercer and Battie traded for a power forward
> > that can rebound, defend, and draw double teams. Both of these guys
> > are in their contract extension years which is trouble for the Celtics
> > because the Celtics don't have infinitely deep pockets. Trading Mercer
> > for an inside player would turn the whole offense from a mostly jump
> > shooting one into an inside oriented one.
> >
> > Alex
>