# Boston Celtics 2002 - 2003



## Bad Bartons (Aug 23, 2002)

I would like some input on the upcoming season for the Celtics.
They had their most successful season since an ugly pale dude from French Lick was burning up the league.
Usually when a team makes it to the Eastern Conference Championship series it is a good idea to return the same team to the floor the next year. Look at what the Lakers have been doing the last 3 or 4 years with basically the same team.

We have a cheap owner who is not interested in fielding the best club he can get. He is not commintted to trying to win. He is more interested in the bottom line and the money in his pocket. If the Celtics fail to succeed in the next few years then much of the blame can be placed on him. He is wealthy. And the Celtic organization continues to make him money. Yet he continues to put the luxury tax ahead of building a winning team. Paul Gaston is a perfect example of a man who was born on thrid base but thinks that he hit a triple. The luxury tax has not even been enacted. No one knows what it will do. I think it should be obvious to Gaston that a winning team generates more money than the luxury tax will cost. The decision to let Rodney Rogers go was purely financial. It was a bad decision. It also looks as though the Celtics will lose another very important part of their championship run: Erick Strickland. He was a bargain last year and the Celtics expect him to play for cheap again. He will not sign for the minimum and should not be expected to. I think he will probably end up in Indiana where I can see him sticking it to the Celtics whenever the Pacers play the Celtics.

So the Celtics front office made a bold move and traded for Vin Baker and Shammond Williams and gave up Kenny Anderson and Vitaly Potapenko and Joe Forte. This move puts a great deal of power and pressure with Baker. He needs to step in and produce and take the Celtics to the next level. I think that there is no reason for him not to succeed in Boston. Even if he does very well the deal has left the Celtics open at the Point. Boston has the weakest point guard situation in the NBA. Point guard is important in the regular season but it is crucial in the playoffs. The Celtics are hoping that late in the signing period that one of the many remaining vet point guards fall into their lap for the minimum. Even if Tim Hardaway does end up in Boston he is going to be very behind in learning the system that they play and it will take him time to adjust to his new city. 

Why should Boston fans be opptimistic for the upcoming season?
1. They still have the BEST 3 in the NBA in Paul Pierce. If Paul avoids injury then his mere presence will at least put the C's back in the playoffs.
2. Antoine Walker is very solid. If Toine can learn to shoot less threes and handle more of a true point responsibilty then the Celtics can get away with not having great play from a true point guard. I think that the relationship that develops between Walker and Baker is going to be the key for the Celtics. If Walker can pass up the long ball and instead send the ball into the low post for Baker and high percentage shots then the Celtics will be tough to beat. With Baker, Battie, E. Williams and Walker banging the low post and Pierce, Brown, S. Williams, Delk, and Walker launching from the perimeter and Pierce and Brown slashing to the hole the Celtics will be a tough team for anyone to guard. If Walker gets stingy with the ball and hoists too many bad threes then Boston is in trouble.
3. Baker is talented, he has a good character, he is out to prove himself, and he is home.
4. Kedrick Brown showed flashes of brilliance last year. He held his own in a game that he started against Vince Carter. He is solid defensively, he is a phenomenal leaper, he rebounds and blocks shots very well from the 2 spot and he has the capability to be dangerous from the outside although he was shakey in his first season due to being nervous. Kedrick Brown has huge upside. If he plays in just half the games the way he played against Carter then it would be a huge lift for the Celtics and it would take a lot of the pressure off Paul on both ends of the floor.
5. The Celtics have some good role players. I love Walter! Walter Mc Carty still could be a very good player in the NBA. He has shown what he is capable of (like in the Philly series). He just needs to play more consistently for an entire season and avoid injuries. Walt is a super athlete who plays with great intensity. He is capable of guarding 2 through 5. He has a good three point shot. He is a great community giver and an all around good guy. He also came cheap at the vet minimum. Delk is capable of putting up big numbers from the offensive end on any given game. But he too needs to be more consistent and shoot a higher percentage from the perimter. Many of his looks will be wide open as teams try to contend with Paul, Antoine, and Baker. He needs to hit shots. Eric Williams is over paid but he is the kind of selfless do anything for the team kind of player that winning teams need. He is a tenacious defensive player who takes charges. He is a tough player to defend because he can pound it in the low post or take it outside. And once a gain he is another great character guy.
6. The Boston Celtics are the greatest sports franchise in the history of sports. It was wonderful seeing all the old champions coming out of the wood work for the playoffs. Russell is back with the team. Cousy showed up from time to time. Heinson is always there. Having Bill Russell come into the locker room to give a pep talk to the team is a huge advantage that no other team has.

So overall there are alot of reasons to be optimistic going into the upcoming season.

In the future I would love to see Larry Bird's group of investers buy the Celtics. Just thinking of Larry Legend running the show gives me goose bumps. I love O' Brien and his coaching style. Harter was a nice addition to the coaching staff. Wallace does a good job. And I really do like the team that the Boston Celtics are going to put on the floor for the next few years.

This board has been dead for a while. The season is approaching and in my world every day is a good day to discuss the Celtics.


----------



## GoCocs9188 (Jul 19, 2002)

Thanks for getting some life into this board.

I am really excited about the Celtics next year. I really want them to fill their final roster spot.

The Celtics really do have the ability to make the Championship. They have Two superstars, great team chemistry, and great role players. I am one of the few who think that they have improved from last season. They now have a post game which is going to get Pierce, Walker, and maybe even Kedrick brown more space to work with. They now have a much more athletic bench because of the addition of Shammond Williams and the move up of Kedrick Brown. Their offense has changed from last year which was inconsitent at best. I think they have also improved because of improvment of some of their players, especially Tony Battie who started to really look good, and he will likely be even better now with the addition of Vin Baker because he will get to play some PF. ( Walker may get more rest now). And Kedrick Brown who may turn out to be a very good spark off the bench.

The only thing I am gonna miss about Kenny is his crafty dribbling, but if we sign Tim Hardaway were getting more crafyy dribbling for a cheaper price. 

I am very excited about this season, and I think the games between the Nets ( who have improved) should be a lot of fun like last season, I think possibly a new rivarly could be born if Kidd stays in NJ.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

First of all welcome guys...the board has been dead for a while and hope that with new members (like you) the board will wake up.

Now back to the topic.

After reading those two posts, I can't wait for the season to start.
The Celtics have improved very much, not only by getting players, but by getting RID of players.
I still think that K. Anderson is still overated by you guys, I really don't like him (hmm-I wonder how many times I have said that before). All KA did is bring up the ball, and if I am not mistaken A. Walker could do that, he is a great ball handler that will continue to do it for the C's forever.

I can't wait to see who the celtics will pick for the 12th man, and personaly I hope that we can get Strickland.

ITS THE YEAR TO BE HERE (As NESN would say)


----------



## robyg1974 (Jul 19, 2002)

I'm not sure if ANY team hurt themselves as much this offseason as the Celtics hurt themselves. Fellas, they traded for Vinny Baker. You can put a positive spin on it for now, I understand that sports fans need to believe that their team is going to be good, but sooner or later, you guys will realize what a short-sighted quick fix this is. It was done for luxury tax reasons, plain and simple, it wasn't done to make this team better. If the Celtics were interested in building on last year's success, they would've maintained the status quo, but they didn't do that.

The Cavs, Nuggets, and Bucks all also got a whole lot worse this offseason, maybe even worse than Boston got. But it's close.

I'm guessing that Boston slips down to either the #7 or #8 seed, they look like about a 42-40 team to me, fellas. Too bad. It took them over ten years to make it back, and they go and shoot themselves in the foot again by trading for the godawful contract of Vin Baker.

Who is this team's starting PG? Erick Strickland won't sign for the minimum, what an insult to that guy. Travis Best won't sign for the minimum, either. Jesus, the BEST CASE SCENARIO at this point is ROD STRICKLAND! Or Tim Hardaway! Or even that little twerp Rafer Alston! Who do they have on their roster who can play PG? Shammond Williams? Give me a break, the guy lost his backup guard to Earl Watson last year. JR Bremer? The dude didn't even get drafted, and that was just two months ago!

And Vin Baker, jesus, don't even get me started on Vin Baker. I don't want to hear how great he did against the East, that dude SUCKS.

42-40, and that's with another outstanding coaching job by Jim O'Brien and huge years from Paul Pierce and Antoine Walker.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>robyg1974</b>!
> ...
> 
> 42-40, and that's with another outstanding coaching job by Jim O'Brien and huge years from Paul Pierce and Antoine Walker.



The last sentance is what will bring us the championship...

But lets say that Baker gives us this:

12 PPG
7 RPG
...
Those numbers are almost better then Kennys and Pots' toghether, so we basicly got a player that can do the same thing our TWO players did.

PG-Will be an issue but not a big one, Walker can and will be leading the ball most of the time, all we need is a PG that can defend, if someone needs to shoot we got S-Will. and Delk for that.


----------



## Celtz Fan 1 (Sep 5, 2002)

honeslty, jus wait and see, roby g ure a real ******* first off, and 2nd if vin baker puts up even 14 and 7 he will take wut u sed n shove it up ure ***...Pierce is one of the top 3 players in the league, and walker top 10, get used to it, they r good, they are gettin travis best now which will give them more youth and once baker gets goin with battie and e willz down lo, well u kno ill jus stop cuz u obviously do not know basketball

Careful. I know your knew but lets not put down other posters to get your point across. truebluefan


----------



## robyg1974 (Jul 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Celtz Fan 1</b>!
> honeslty, jus wait and see, roby g ure a real ******* first off, and 2nd if vin baker puts up even 14 and 7 he will take wut u sed n shove it up ure ***...Pierce is one of the top 3 players in the league, and walker top 10, get used to it, they r good, they are gettin travis best now which will give them more youth and once baker gets goin with battie and e willz down lo, well u kno ill jus stop cuz u obviously do not know basketball


Hey, way to take this post personally FOR NO APPARENT REASON! Settle down, Beavis!


----------



## CelticsRule (Jul 22, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>robyg1974</b>!
> 
> 
> And Vin Baker, jesus, don't even get me started on Vin Baker. I don't want to hear how great he did against the East, that dude SUCKS.



i dont understand how they got so worse kenny anderson is overrated he had one good game in the playoffs and people thought he was a good pg the celtics pg doesnt even have to bring the ball up walker can do that and so can pierce hes been doing it in the WC's and baker is bigger than 3/4 of the centers in the east so i think he'll do ok probably averaging 7-12 points and 6-9 rebounds


----------



## robyg1974 (Jul 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>celticsrule0873</b>!
> 
> i dont understand how they got so worse kenny anderson is overrated he had one good game in the playoffs and people thought he was a good pg the celtics pg doesnt even have to bring the ball up walker can do that and so can pierce hes been doing it in the WC's and baker is bigger than 3/4 of the centers in the east so i think he'll do ok probably averaging 7-12 points and 6-9 rebounds


Trust me, Boston fans will learn to hate Vin Baker soon enough. And get used to him, because he's not going anywhere for FOUR YEARS (maybe FIVE, I can't remember when his contract is up). At LEAST Kenny Anderson's contract expires after the 2002-03 season, the same can't be said for Vinny!


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>robyg1974</b>!
> 
> 
> Trust me, Boston fans will learn to hate Vin Baker soon enough. And get used to him, because he's not going anywhere for FOUR YEARS (maybe FIVE, I can't remember when his contract is up). At LEAST Kenny Anderson's contract expires after the 2002-03 season, the same can't be said for Vinny!


You are right, you can't say that for Vinny, because he is a million times a better player then Anderson ever is/was/gonna be. The only problem I had with the Baker trade was that
a) We gave up Forte
b) We could have gotten a draft pick from Seattle.

With Baker playing it will finaly feel like we have more players on the court then just two.

Baker-Is gonna rebound from his drpression
Walker-Is a true captain and leader
EWill-A very good defender that comes up with great plays at important times
Pierce-Our other captain and main go to guy
SWill, Delk, and Bremer-Three guys that will get us into the playoffs.


----------



## jvanbusk (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>aquaitious</b>!
> 
> 
> You are right, you can't say that for Vinny, because he is a million times a better player then Anderson ever is/was/gonna be. The only problem I had with the Baker trade was that
> ...


I don't think you realize how important having atleast a decent starting PG is. Kenny Anderson, as much as you may not like him, was a legitimate starting NBA point guard. The three guys that you listed above are either back-up's at best or in Delk's case a SG in a point guards body. I also think it's somewhat foolish to say that Baker is a million times better than KA. Baker hasn't had too much success in a few years now. Your PG situation is not looking to bright, this is why I feel the C's are just a bit below where they were last year. Maybe not to 42-40 that roby predict's, but moreso around 45 wins instead of up around 50-55.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

Walker can always be the point guard. Is there anyone in the league that can lead the ball better then he can? (As a PF).
If not we have a great coach that will MAKE all three of those guys play better basketball. You'll see. Just believe me.


----------



## GoCocs9188 (Jul 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>jvanbusk</b>!
> 
> 
> I don't think you realize how important having atleast a decent starting PG is. Kenny Anderson, as much as you may not like him, was a legitimate starting NBA point guard. The three guys that you listed above are either back-up's at best or in Delk's case a SG in a point guards body. I also think it's somewhat foolish to say that Baker is a million times better than KA. Baker hasn't had too much success in a few years now. Your PG situation is not looking to bright, this is why I feel the C's are just a bit below where they were last year. Maybe not to 42-40 that roby predict's, but moreso around 45 wins instead of up around 50-55.


I don't think this is all true. Last year the starting PG for the Pistons was Chucky Atkins. And he is definetly NOT a legitamate NBA PG. The Pistons depended on basically Jerry Stackhouse, Clifford Robinson, and Corliss Williamson off the bench for scoring. The Celtics will depend on Pierce, Walker, and hopefully Baker and Battie. I think the Celtics can be a better offensive team than the Piston's were last year when they won 50 games but not as good as defensive team as the Pistons were. I also think last year's Pistons were brilliantly coached like the Celtics will be this year. 

I think the Celtics should and will win as many games or more than they did last season.


----------



## jvanbusk (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>GoCocs9188</b>!
> 
> 
> I don't think this is all true. Last year the starting PG for the Pistons was Chucky Atkins. And he is definetly NOT a legitamate NBA PG. The Pistons depended on basically Jerry Stackhouse, Clifford Robinson, and Corliss Williamson off the bench for scoring. The Celtics will depend on Pierce, Walker, and hopefully Baker and Battie. I think the Celtics can be a better offensive team than the Piston's were last year when they won 50 games but not as good as defensive team as the Pistons were. I also think last year's Pistons were brilliantly coached like the Celtics will be this year.
> ...


Chucky Atkins was one of the biggest downfalls of the Pistons playoffs run. He and Damon Jones could not answer Kenny Anderson. Kenny continuosly burnt either man into the lane. Chucky Atkins isn't a prototypical PG, which is very true. But, the Pistons also didn't have too much success in the playoffs (almost losing to the Raptors). The three other teams in the semis, other than Boston had average to great PG's (Lakers, Kings, Nets). And Kenny Anderson is a decent PG. Putting Shammond Williams (from what I understand a 3RD STRING PG last year) in the starting line-up is not an upgrade over Kenny Anderson (either is Delk or Bremer for that matter). I'm not saying Boston is going to fall from the face of the earth. You still have a hell of a 1-2 punch. But, lack of PG play (and the fact that I don't buy into all the Vin Baker hype) is definately going to hurt, and that's why I feel you are not as good at this point as you were last year.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>jvanbusk</b>!
> 
> 
> Chucky Atkins was one of the biggest downfalls of the Pistons playoffs run. He and Damon Jones could not answer Kenny Anderson. Kenny continuosly burnt either man into the lane. Chucky Atkins isn't a prototypical PG, which is very true. But, the Pistons also didn't have too much success in the playoffs (almost losing to the Raptors). The three other teams in the semis, other than Boston had average to great PG's (Lakers, Kings, Nets). And Kenny Anderson is a decent PG. Putting Shammond Williams (from what I understand a 3RD STRING PG last year) in the starting line-up is not an upgrade over Kenny Anderson (either is Delk or Bremer for that matter). I'm not saying Boston is going to fall from the face of the earth. You still have a hell of a 1-2 punch. But, lack of PG play (and the fact that I don't buy into all the Vin Baker hype) is definately going to hurt, and that's why I feel you are not as good at this point as you were last year.


The Pistons didn't have a good point guard last year, and Kenny might have driven to the lane a few times, but what he did most of the time was that he stayed behined the three point line when Pierce was inside tripple teamed and waited for the ball to come to him, then he would dribble the ball 4 feet and shoot. 
But lets say Vin Baker is not gonna play good for Boston, and that the celtics fans disliked Kenny... two negatives cancel each other out so in the end we have the same team as last year.


----------



## jvanbusk (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>aquaitious</b>!
> 
> 
> The Pistons didn't have a good point guard last year, and Kenny might have driven to the lane a few times, but what he did most of the time was that he stayed behined the three point line when Pierce was inside tripple teamed and waited for the ball to come to him, then he would dribble the ball 4 feet and shoot.
> But lets say Vin Baker is not gonna play good for Boston, and that the celtics fans disliked Kenny... two negatives cancel each other out so in the end we have the same team as last year.


The main point I'm trying to get at is the PG situation is not as good as last year. It's not. Say you don't like him, but Anderson is better than the three that you have right now. This just doesn't make the C's a better team than they were last year.


----------



## STING (May 29, 2002)

Jvanbusk, In this situation the PG situation is not as big as most people make it out to be. Antione Walker might be the best ball handling power forward in the league, and it's my opinion that if he was 6'2" he would still be a star at PG with the skill he has. Not only do we have twon, but the talent we have at PG isn't non-existent, most of it has yet to be developed.:yes: 

We are not as screwed as you think


----------



## jvanbusk (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>STING</b>!
> Jvanbusk, In this situation the PG situation is not as big as most people make it out to be. Antione Walker might be the best ball handling power forward in the league, and it's my opinion that if he was 6'2" he would still be a star at PG with the skill he has. Not only do we have twon, but the talent we have at PG isn't non-existent, most of it has yet to be developed.:yes:
> 
> We are not as screwed as you think


I don't think you are screwed. 45 wins is solid  . Ah, I remember a few years back when all Boston fans would complain about how Antoine didn't play like a PF. How he wouldn't use a post game to his advantage. Now you want him to handle the ball? Boy, have times changed :grinning: . The talent you have at point guard may not be developed but at this point it is not what Kenny would bring to the team. I really can't see where the positive spin is considering that:

Kenny Anderson > Shammond Williams, Tony Delk, or JR Bremer. 

Actually, now that I think of it, I wouldn't mind seeing the nutcase handle the ball more on the perimeter. This will lead to even more 3 point shots! :laugh: If that's possible.......


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

People expect Twan to do too much! He should not even try to be a PF, he is not an inside guy. So why try to change him? He likes to shoot the three...let him, he likes to handle the ball...let him. That would be like saying to AI start giving up the ball a bit more! Stop shooting, but he can't because he likes to score...let him. Let him be what he wants to be, because only he can change into what he wants to be, which is a reason I have full confidence in Baker.


----------



## jvanbusk (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>aquaitious</b>!
> People expect Twan to do too much! He should not even try to be a PF, he is not an inside guy. So why try to change him? He likes to shoot the three...let him, he likes to handle the ball...let him. That would be like saying to AI start giving up the ball a bit more! Stop shooting, but he can't because he likes to score...let him. Let him be what he wants to be, because only he can change into what he wants to be, which is a reason I have full confidence in Baker.


Hey, if 'Toine want's to shoot 11 threes a game that's fine by me.  If I were a Boston fan I wouldn't like this all too much.

(I realize I might have exaggerated a little, not too much though  )


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>jvanbusk</b>!
> 
> 
> Hey, if 'Toine want's to shoot 11 threes a game that's fine by me.  If I were a Boston fan I wouldn't like this all too much.
> ...


Imagin having Iverson on the Celtics? And Jason Williams?

Bill Walton:
"Williams for the threeeeee, he misses it, they stole the ball back, now its Iverson, oh he misses it, but Antoine gets the rebound and is taking matters into his own hands, he takes the three...no good.


----------



## jvanbusk (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>aquaitious</b>!
> 
> 
> Imagin having Iverson on the Celtics? And Jason Williams?
> ...


:laugh: That's funny stuff...


----------



## GoCocs9188 (Jul 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>aquaitious</b>!
> 
> 
> Imagin having Iverson on the Celtics? And Jason Williams?
> ...


haha.


----------



## GoCocs9188 (Jul 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>jvanbusk</b>!
> 
> 
> I don't think you are screwed. 45 wins is solid  . Ah, I remember a few years back when all Boston fans would complain about how Antoine didn't play like a PF. How he wouldn't use a post game to his advantage. Now you want him to handle the ball? Boy, have times changed :grinning: .


:laugh: :laugh:


----------



## mrsister (Sep 9, 2002)

I think point guards are more important for teams with players who can't create their own shot (like the Nets). Both Pierce and Walker can create their own shots. The problem I have with Walker is that he often misses after making great moves to the basket. So many times he would get by defenders and then botch the layup. I think that needs to be his focus more than anything. Pierce can drive to the hoop as well as any PG, and judging from the FIBA games, he's getting better at dishing, too. He almost had as many assists as the starting point guards (and yet his teammates accused him of being selfish). I don't think the PG situation is as crucial as it has been in the past. Prior to last season, I thought KA was detrimental to the team rather than helpful. Last season he finally realized he was a role player (though he won't admit it), and that helped the team tremendously. He just hit a few midrange jumpers and defended better. Other than that, he had two options - pass it to Pierce or pass it to Walker. I know it's a bit more complicated than that, but I didn't see KA doing anything brilliant.

The Lakers have a decent PG in Derek Fisher, but he hasn't always been healthy, and they've still done fine because they have two outstanding players who can dictate play on their own. The Celtics don't have quite as dominating players, but they're pretty close. The Nets, on the other hand, need Jason Kidd because they don't have any other players anywhere near the level of Pierce, Walker, Shaq, or Kobe. Kidd is the playmaker. There's no doubt Kidd would make the Celtics better, but he's not essential for them to still be a decent team. Without Kidd, the Nets were abysmal. 

Also.. although I liked Rogers, he was still a sixth man. I think Baker can be more than a sixth man. I think it's actually good that he's not a three point shooter because now we'll have someone who will stay near the basket to rebound.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

Nice post, but here is the thing where you are wrong



> Originally posted by <b>mrsister</b>!
> 
> Also.. although I liked Rogers, he was still a sixth man. I think Baker can be more than a sixth man. I think it's actually good that he's not a three point shooter because now we'll have someone who will stay near the basket to rebound.


The Celtics crew (Coaches) will make Baker a three point shooter.


----------



## Big John (Sep 11, 2002)

*Bye Bye Kenny*

The C's will miss Anderson on offense but not on defense. In some ways the loss of Strickland will hurt more than the loss of Anderson. 

JR Bremer can play, BTW. Tough kid. I saw him in the Shaw's summer league, and I think he may surprise some people. They can also use Antoine at the point. The question is who will guard the other team's point guard if Antoine fills that role.

The fact is that there aren't that many great point guards in the league anymore. Kidd and Bibby, that's about it. Maybe Steve Francis. Stockton was great but he's 40. I thought Miller and Davis were decent until I saw them in the World Championships. I would just as soon add an enforcer to fill the 12th spot unless they can convince Tim Hardaway to play for the minumum. Forget about guys like Damon Jones and Greg Anthony.

Just my $.02 on the Baker trade, but unlike the majority of commentators I like it. The C's now have Baker, Walker and Battie at the 4 and 5, which is an upgrade over Rogers-Walker-Battie. Rodney is a smart player who knows how to use his bulk, but quite frankly he has lost a step. My prediction is that he will be used by NJ to back up Mutombo but will not take that many minutes away from Martin and Jefferson (barring injuries, suspensions etc.). Yes, kidd will make Rogers better, but Kidd makes everyone better.

The question is not how much Baker will score (12-14 ppg would be fine), but how much more Pierce, Walker and Delk will score with a legitimate 6-11 low post threat on the floor. Teams will certainly find it much harder to double and triple team Pierce. The other big question is whether Baker will come to camp in shape and work his butt on defense. If he does, he's a great pick up.


----------



## Celtz Fan 1 (Sep 5, 2002)

excellent point bout baker, i hope he shows up in shape and ready to b an impact player and do his thing but alos open it up for Pierce and Walker to score more~!


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

I heard that he is working out real hard, praticing Jumpers working out and other things aswell. I posted something about him earlier, you can do a search.


----------



## Bad Bartons (Aug 23, 2002)

*point guard situation for Boston*

I have gone on record in saying that the point guard situation in Boston is the worst in the NBA. I still believe this. I think it would have been wonderful for Gaston to get Travis Best and risk a small penalty in the luxury tax. This is not going to happen. Recently the Celtics have gone on record as saying that they are not going to fill their final roster spot with a point guard but rather a big man. They are going to give up on getting a talented cheap point guard and go for an unproven big banger. They had a big Argentinian player (6'10" 265 pounds) in for a workout. This may be a good idea. It is always good to have big guys like Vitaly that can come in for a few minutes at a time and lean on the other teams big guys to help tire them and to take some fouls if necessary. I am always in favor of size.
However, I want to reiterate my feelings on the 12th roster spot for the Celtics. It should go to Erick Strickland. He is a solid 1 or 2 who takes charges and hits open threes. He was a bargain last year and overproduced based on his salary. He is familiar with the team, the town and the system. I think the Celtics will lose him and the team will regret it. If they were replacing him with Travis Best it would be a smart move. But to replace him with an unproven foreigner when what we really need is a guard is a bad idea.


----------



## Big John (Sep 11, 2002)

*Point Guard Panic*

They have already lost Erick Strickland. He signed with Indiana.

Frankly I think that the Celtics' "point guard panic" is a creation of the media-- or maybe someone's agent. Kenny Anderson is no great loss. Almost anyone would be an improvement on defense, and the last thing the Celtics need is having Kenny around edited-aqua and moaning in the last year of his contract.

I would not mind if the C's, as insurance, signed Hardaway or Rod Strickland for the veteran's minimum, assuming that there would be no adverse impact on the team's chemistry. The other available PG choices are a waste of a roster spot.

Delk, Williams and JR Bremer are all better than Anderson defensively, and they can all shoot better than Anderson. I'm confident that Obie can teach at least one of them to run the offense.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

*Re: Point Guard Panic*



> Originally posted by <b>Big John</b>!
> They have already lost Erick Strickland. He signed with Indiana.
> 
> Frankly I think that the Celtics' "point guard panic" is a creation of the media-- or maybe someone's agent. Kenny Anderson is no great loss. Almost anyone would be an improvement on defense, and the last thing the Celtics need is having Kenny around *****ing and moaning in the last year of his contract.
> ...


I agree, maybe adding size isn't such a bad thing. We definitly need it if we are gonna keep up with the East...not to mention the West.


----------



## Big John (Sep 11, 2002)

Not just size but toughness: someone like Vitaly who, for all his clumsiness as a player (did you ever see a player have more difficulty simply catching the ball?) was perfectly willing to go at it with Kenyon Martin. Say, what is Charles Oakley doing these days?

Of all the dumb things done in the ML Carr and Pittino eras, two stand out: drafting Eric Montross ahead of Eddie Jones (how could they possibly have thought that Montross would be anything more than a journeyman backup center) and letting Ben Wallace go in 1996 when they could have signed him for the minumum.

Well , not re signing Fox, not re signing David Wesley, giving all that money to Travis Knight... those were pretty bad moves too. At least I can forgive them for letting Fortson go, because he didn't want to be in Boston and now I guess he doesn't want to be in Golden State if Antawn Jameison starts ahead of him at PF.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Big John</b>!
> Not just size but toughness: someone like Vitaly who, for all his clumsiness as a player (did you ever see a player have more difficulty simply catching the ball?) was perfectly willing to go at it with Kenyon Martin. Say, what is Charles Oakley doing these days?
> 
> Of all the dumb things done in the ML Carr and Pittino eras, two stand out: drafting Eric Montross ahead of Eddie Jones (how could they possibly have thought that Montross would be anything more than a journeyman backup center) and letting Ben Wallace go in 1996 when they could have signed him for the minumum.
> ...


I heard that we wanted to sign Oakley but then refused.

That was pretty nice, letting Ben go, how about blowing a chance to have Andre Miller, or Keeping J. Johnson? Wesley woulndn't be bad either, or Fox, Strick could have done a thing or two, Rodney isn't bad, or how about Forte? I don't think that our owners have ever heard of DEVELOPING players. They just draft them and judge them by one game, or by 22 minutes of play time (Forte).


----------



## Big John (Sep 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>aquaitious</b>!
> 
> 
> I heard that we wanted to sign Oakley but then refused.
> ...


Oh, you can keep Andre Miller. He was exposed at the World Championships as a very overrated player. Mediocre defender and ball hog. As for Joe Johnson, the mistake was drafting him, not in letting him go. His upside is that with 2-3 years of seasoning he can become the equivalent of Walt Williams. But why wait? Any team that wants Walt Williams can have him right now for the veterans' minimum. Forte just did not get along with his teammates ( the Lakers jersey was not a cool thing to do), and he is one of those NBA "tweeners" who does not have the skills to play the point. He may develop into a decent shooting guard, but the Celtics have Pierce and Delk at that position. They did Forte a favor by trading him.

The player they MUST develop is Kedrick Brown. Brown has the skills and athleticism to be an all-star small forward.

The decision to let Rogers and Strickland go was purely financial, it was not a basketball decision. Unfortunate, but there you have it. FYI, it was reported to today that the C's have indeed signed Wolkowyski to fill their 12th roster spot.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Big John</b>!
> 
> 
> Oh, you can keep Andre Miller. He was exposed at the World Championships as a very overrated player. Mediocre defender and ball hog. As for Joe Johnson, the mistake was drafting him, not in letting him go. His upside is that with 2-3 years of seasoning he can become the equivalent of Walt Williams. But why wait? Any team that wants Walt Williams can have him right now for the veterans' minimum. Forte just did not get along with his teammates ( the Lakers jersey was not a cool thing to do), and he is one of those NBA "tweeners" who does not have the skills to play the point. He may develop into a decent shooting guard, but the Celtics have Pierce and Delk at that position. They did Forte a favor by trading him.
> ...


Maybe Andre wanted some attention. He's a young player he wants fame, he wants money, he wants the attention. Maybe he was even forced by the coach to be a ball hog.

Forte was developed, by the celtics crew, into a very good point guard. It wasn't easy for him to convert from shooting to passing. We all saw it in the summer league, he could pass and was a good ball handler. But they traded him for cap space.

Johnson would be a great player for us, he could play SG, while letting PP play SF.


----------



## Big John (Sep 11, 2002)

*George made me do it!*

Miller was forced by Karl to be a ball hog? Then Karl's coaching at the world championships was even worse than I thought.

As for Johnson and Forte, let's wait and see. My prediction is that Johnson will average 20 minutes and 7-8 points or so with Phoenix, and that Forte will continue to ride the bench or IR in Portland, just as he did in Boston.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

*Re: George made me do it!*



> Originally posted by <b>Big John</b>!
> Miller was forced by Karl to be a ball hog? Then Karl's coaching at the world championships was even worse than I thought.
> 
> As for Johnson and Forte, let's wait and see. My prediction is that Johnson will average 20 minutes and 7-8 points or so with Phoenix, and that Forte will continue to ride the bench or IR in Portland, just as he did in Boston.


Maybe he was forced, who knows!

I think that Johnson will be a very good player, its just that he is too soft. He doesn't know how to dunk, he had great chances for ally-oops (I was like "OH MAN WHAT A PLAY") then I see him lay it up. (Then I go "HOW DUMB IS HE?)
Forte will be nothing in Seattle, he'll be the 3rd shooting guard and the 4 point guard, but I have a feeling that he won't be playing any PG in the next season.


----------



## Big John (Sep 11, 2002)

Well, maybe Johnson will be a good player in 2-3 years. The jury is out. But I was not sorry to see him go. He looked lost out there.

I agree with you about Forte.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Big John</b>!
> Well, maybe Johnson will be a good player in 2-3 years. The jury is out. But I was not sorry to see him go. He looked lost out there.
> 
> I agree with you about Forte.


 He did seem lost sometimes, but I think that he could have helped out Pierce and Walker alot, now we have to wait and see if Baker will be able to fullfill what Johnson should have. The only thing I am concerned about is in three years with 3 guys we'll be over the cap! , And if Baker starts to play really well he'll be traded away, or it might be Walker. I hope its not Walker.


----------



## Big John (Sep 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>aquaitious</b>!
> 
> 
> He did seem lost sometimes, but I think that he could have helped out Pierce and Walker alot, now we have to wait and see if Baker will be able to fullfill what Johnson should have. The only thing I am concerned about is in three years with 3 guys we'll be over the cap! , And if Baker starts to play really well he'll be traded away, or it might be Walker. I hope its not Walker.


Well, without getting too technical, the way the cap works you have to take back the same (or nearly the same) in salary, so you can't really trade your way out from under the cap in the year the trade is made. What you can do, of course, is trade for guys whose contracts expire the following year. Fortunately, the cap keeps going up. 

They would have been in almost the same boat if they had re signed Rogers. Rogers' deal would have eaten up 5 mil or so a year for multiple years, and Vitaly's contract also had 3 years left for about 5.5 M a year. So they would have been unable to sign a significant free agent even after Anderson's 9.9 M came off the books at the end of next year. Plus, they would have to pay the luxury tax for 2002-2003.

What good is cap space if you have a crummy team and no decent free agent wants to sign with you? The Lakers have no cap room either. Cap room is great for chat boards like this one, because then everyone can speculate about what a great team such and such a franchise might have "next year." I would rather win now.

Look at it this way: in 5 more years the C's will REALLY be sitting pretty, when Baker's deal expires.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Big John</b>!
> 
> 
> Well, without getting too technical, the way the cap works you have to take back the same (or nearly the same) in salary, so you can't really trade your way out from under the cap in the year the trade is made. What you can do, of course, is trade for guys whose contracts expire the following year. Fortunately, the cap keeps going up.
> ...


In 2007 we can finally sign someone! Yippy! :laugh:


----------



## Bad Bartons (Aug 23, 2002)

I think that too much is made about being under the cap.
Everyone gets excited about who they might sign from the huge free agent market coming up. Look at the success that the past championship teams have had by keeping their core together. The Lakers are not talking about clearing cap room to sign Kidd or Duncan. They are talking about winning. The 80s Celtics and Lakers were not teams that cleared their roster so they could sign big free agents. The Bulls operated with a solid core that they changed slightly each year. 

Look, you could sign 12 vet minimums and lose most your games so you would have cap room for Duncan and Kidd. Would Kidd and Duncan sign with your team. Heck no!
The best players do want to get paid but they really want to play for a winning team.

So how does all this relate to the Celtics?
The Celtics are tied up in cap space for the next few years but who cares?! You can look at it in a better more positive way: they have three very talented players who know that they will be in Boston for awhile. Security is important. So is appreciation in terms of getting paid. The Celtics have been rewarding their top players with top salaries. If Baker works out then everyone crying about the lack of salary cap space will shut up. If he does not then the Celtics still have two top level go to guys. Many teams are hurting for ONE top level go to guy.
I think Baker will have a very good year. And if Pierce and Walker avoid injury the Celtics will again be one of the top contenders in the NBA.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Bad Bartons</b>!
> I think that too much is made about being under the cap.
> Everyone gets excited about who they might sign from the huge free agent market coming up. Look at the success that the past championship teams have had by keeping their core together. The Lakers are not talking about clearing cap room to sign Kidd or Duncan. They are talking about winning. The 80s Celtics and Lakers were not teams that cleared their roster so they could sign big free agents. The Bulls operated with a solid core that they changed slightly each year.
> 
> ...


My only worry is that in 2004 or 2005 and up until 2007 we will be over the cap with only 3 players. So how do we sign the other 9? If we don't wanna go over the cap?


----------



## Big John (Sep 11, 2002)

*Larry Bird Exception*

They can re sign their own players under the "Larry Bird" exception even though it means going over the cap. I think that provision is still in the collective bargaining agreement.

Well, it's better than playing 3 on 5.


----------

