|
Post by DERRENMATTS on Nov 13, 2005 1:18:20 GMT -5
Get a load at what Mark Blount is saying: celtics.bostonherald.com/celtics/view.bg?articleid=111922He has a couple of nice games and he's thinking already that he's some hot shot. Hope his comments in this article are coming out worse than how it was coming out of his mouth. He's going to be in some people's doghouse if he doesn't watch what he says. And we all know what happens to Blount when he's moody--yep, 1 rebound in 30 minutes.
|
|
|
Post by BCHISTORIAN on Nov 13, 2005 3:14:41 GMT -5
never stopped hating blonut
|
|
|
Post by VI_CelticsFan on Nov 13, 2005 6:40:26 GMT -5
What a dumb***. Trade him now.
|
|
|
Post by Celtic17 on Nov 13, 2005 13:44:06 GMT -5
What a dumb***. Trade him now. Sooner does sound better. Let Al and Perk have his minutes.
|
|
cfoo
Welcome To Celtics Green!
Posts: 1
|
Post by cfoo on Nov 13, 2005 16:24:49 GMT -5
Wow. Blount lol. Please no more.
|
|
|
Post by Roadrunner on Nov 13, 2005 18:08:04 GMT -5
Blount has a good point. In summary, he is saying that Celtics need to wear down Duncan on both ends of the court. By not feeding the post, Duncan doesn't have to play defense, and can conserve his energy for the offense.
Nothing malicious about his statement. If anything, just a tad frustrated.
|
|
|
Post by Celtic17 on Nov 13, 2005 18:45:49 GMT -5
Runner- It's the ME part of it that bugs me. Also, this should be kept in-house. The media doesn't need to filter this for us.
PP was the one that more sence here, IMO.
|
|
|
Post by BCHISTORIAN on Nov 13, 2005 22:14:52 GMT -5
like doc said - blonut got the most shots in the first quarter.
|
|
|
Post by Roadrunner on Nov 13, 2005 22:50:36 GMT -5
C-17, I "exalt" you for the part about the media. That should stay in-house. However, his quote could have been taken out of context. The media likes to "stirr up the pot."
|
|
|
Post by DERRENMATTS on Nov 14, 2005 2:57:31 GMT -5
Yeah, that's what I'm wondering. It could be that the article made his comments out to be worse that it is.
But we should keep this in check. We need to monitor Blount's happiness level. When it starts dipping, so will his production and effort on the court.
|
|
|
Post by meltinjohn on Nov 15, 2005 0:37:07 GMT -5
This is why Blount I think will be moved to get a potential player to let Gomes and Jefferson have their minutes. Blount is playing better now, his value is higher to some extent. Maybe now is the timew to start shopping him. Seattle needs a center. Maybe Danny can give Reed, Scala and Blount for Collison and Petro. They'd probably look to throw in Vitaly though.
|
|
|
Post by freshnthehouse on Nov 15, 2005 2:16:05 GMT -5
Id love to move Blount for a vet big man with an expiring contract. Someone that can play 10-12 minutes a game. This would def open up more minutes for Perk and Al, plus it would get rid of another long contract. It may effect us negatively this year, but extra PT for Perk and Al will bode well for the future.
|
|
|
Post by Celtic17 on Nov 15, 2005 14:11:41 GMT -5
I would like for Reaf, Blount, Al and Perk to get us to the playoffs. Knees, attitude, ankles and foul trouble will tell the tale... Remember, the baby, in the bath-water.
|
|
|
Post by meltinjohn on Nov 15, 2005 16:34:37 GMT -5
For the short term, losing Blount may hurt a little seeing Perkins gets in foul trouble but I think we'd be fine really. Gomes can produce anyways. Seeing Seattle may not give Collison and Petro, Id like to see lets say Olowakandi go for Blount and then Kandi can be resigned in the offseason and gone in a trade much like Antoine was which could bring a possible 1st into it vs the walker trade where we got crap + 2 2nd round picks. A 1st is more valuable. I'd like to see Orien and Blount go for Hudson (experienced backup) and Olowakandi.
|
|
|
Post by freshnthehouse on Nov 15, 2005 16:57:05 GMT -5
Hudson is def. not the answer. He is way overpaid and hes not a real PG. I'd rather have Blount than Hudson. They have about identical contracts, but at least Blount is a big man.
|
|