Dave accepted an invitation to the Tidy Bowl by saying:
 DN> Don't tell me I don't know about those guys, I follow the Celtics
Certainly not close enough if you believe that Wesley is their ONLY talent 
(Which is what you said). Williams, Wesley, Walker AND Radja are a hell of a 
base and Rick Fox isn't scum, as well. Walker's playing out of position and 
while he's not able to compete defensively, he's more than holding his own on 
the offensive end. Put a guy like Duncan into the lineup and then you've got 
a foursome at forward that can rotate through the game and keep their 
opponents dragging to keep up with them. If Radja continues to be injury 
prone (and THAT's his problem, not some pschological mumbo-jumbo that you 
might think is involved), they've still got 3 good forwards and a guy like 
Brickowski would be an asset on a limited basis.
You see scum, I see a Celtics team that has a pretty damn good base to build 
on. Even their guards would benefit from a Tim Duncan, especially since 
they've got some long range bombers that need to come off screens or get 
passes from a double teamed center (Which isn't going to happen with what 
they have there now).
If they lose out on Duncan, Tony Battie would be a good alternate pick (So 
would Ron Mercer) and Chauncey Billips might be available when Dallas' pick 
comes up.
 DN> I have completely the opposite opinion.  With the right coach, this
 DN> team could aspire to such heights as the 25 win plateu.  THERE IS NO
 DN> CENTER, and with Dino Radja injured, as always seems to be the case,
 DN> there is little power up front period.
You're really NOT listening are you? This TEAM, as IT IS CONSTRUCTED, isn't 
that far away from the playoffs. Duncan would be allow them to be "one player 
away" and maybe, even good enough to make the playoffs. They've got several 
ABOVE AVERAGE 3 point shooters who would benefit enormously from Duncan's 
presence and his passing would be a great asset to the whole team. The only 
part of Duncan's game that is *lacking* is his free throw shooting and even 
at that, he's better than most centers when they enter the league. He's the 
most complete player that I've seen at center in a LONG time and as good as 
he is, he can't help but be better in the pros.
 DN> and Iverson you get more talent than about 3/4 of the Celtics team put
 DN> together.. They've got problems over there too, though.
You can have Iverson, thank you. I have no respect for the guy and none of 
that has to do with his stupid comments. He's too damn interested in himself 
than he is with the team and that isn't something that you see on the 
Celtics. There's a hell of a lot more to winning than talent and that's what 
makes this Celtics team ripe to make a bigger jump next year with a player 
like Duncan than Philly did this year with Iverson, Stackhouse AND Coleman.
 DN> Scoring was a lot higher back then.  113.3 ppg was bad, but it wasn't
 DN> the league's worst.
They were 19th in a 22 team league. They WERE bad.
 DN> The Celtic's, this year, are easily the worst defensive team in the
 DN> league, even worse than my Grizzlies, which is saying something.
That hole at center really hurts them. A guy like Duncan or Battie would cure 
a lot of ills.
 DN> lost so much, not by a longshot.  How hard they try is important in some
 DN> ways, but not when deciding which team is the worst, talent and
 DN> record-wise.
I bet that you're one of the people that were taken completely by surprise 
when the Cowboys went from 1-15 to 7-9, weren't you? That Cowboy team wasn't 
even close to their worst team ever but the record said it. If you judged 
them by their record and not how they DID, you'd have had no hope for them 
the next year (Shows how much a lot of hard work and drafting the right 
running back helped them). The Celtics aren't that far away from being set 
for a couple of years. I hold a hell of a lot more hope for their future than 
I do the Vancouver Grizzlies and the Grizzlies are losing in the worst 
division in basketball.
 DN> quite a bit next year.  But if we're talking about *this* year, they are
 DN> bad bad BAD, and should be recognized as such.
They're not a good team but they're not so inept that they're going to be the 
worst team that you've ever seen, even as Celtics teams go. There's a hell of 
a lot more to work with on this team than even the guys that finished up the 
78-79 season.
--- TrekEd 1.00
---------------