HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: halpin@sw.stratus.com (Jim Halpin)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
Subject: Re: Bulls Will Lose Some More.
Date: 9 Apr 92 14:04:19 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

In article <1992Apr8.082342.1915@inland.com>, bloom@inland.com writes:
> ... Phil 
> Jackson's strategy has been clearly stated in the newspapers.   With 
> nothing at stake, he is giving the bench much more playing time to 
> develop their confidence for the playoffs and is trying to get a lot 
> of rest for the starting 5 so they can build to another peak in the 
> playoffs.


Let's see, in their loss to Boston last Sunday:

	Pippen played 43 min compared to his 38.8 Min/g average
	Jordan 40 min, compared to 39.1 min/game
	Grant 38 min, 35.6 min/g
	Cartwright 25 min, 23.4 min/g
	Paxson 25 min, 24.6 min/g

Yup, that's it! That the reason for the loss! Resting those starters! Thanks
for clearing that up for us un-informed non-Bulls fans! :-)


-- 
!	Jim  Halpin
!	halpin@turkey.sw.stratus.com
!	Vote for the 90's Elvis, he's still out there somewhere! :-)
From: dasaxe@milton.u.washington.edu (Daniel Perreault)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
Subject: Re: Laker Injuries
Date: 9 Apr 92 19:03:32 GMT
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle

In article <31471@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> kprashan@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (hyderabadi) writes:
>In article <1992Apr8.184648.12540@talon.ucs.orst.edu>, navarrer@bionette.CGRB.ORST.EDU (Roy Navarre -- Botany and Plant Pathology) writes:
>>
>> Gidi take a hike.
>> [...lots of blah blah bl;ah deleted..]
>
>> Where is this franchise going? They have serious problems. What is one instant
>> cure-Shaq. How else are they going to turn things around?-in time over several
>> years.
>>
>> Roy
>
>
>Shaq is NOT the instant cure you think he is. The Lakers need
>GUARDS. The #1 priority is a PG, enabling them to move Threatt to
>shooting guard. Scott's productivity has deteriorated in the past 3
>years. It is good to have a great center, but other priorities are
>more important. Divac is good enuf to carry them to the
>championship.
>
>On the matter of making-the-playoff vs getting-into-lottery, IMO
>their first goal should be to make the playoffs. The team goes out there
>to win games, not to conspire to get a good draft pick. Anyway,
>the way they played against the Sonics, the lottery may yet be their
>fate. O how important that win in Houston was!!
>
>
>
>__________________________________________________________
>| Prashanth                    |                         |
>| U. of California @ San Diego | prash@bhaskara.ucsd.edu |
>##########################################################

yes the Lakers have serious problems, but Shaq is most definitely not the
solution to their problems, Divac is suitable for a center.  I agree  that
they need apoint guard, plus the lottery is not a sure bet for the first       
playoffs, what a fool, why should they just lose to ultimately get burnedthe pls
in the lottery?  Resolved, that the Lakers went to the finals with Divac     c, 
and that was because they had Magic, ALRIGHT FOOL!, so that means
that the Lakers should draft the best point guard they can, not Shaq.


Vaught
(note, this is a friend of mine using my account, so please address followups
 to Vaught and send them to dasaxe@u.washington.edu)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
From: parks@binah.cc.brandeis.edu
Subject: BOXSCORE: det77phi76.08apr92
Reply-To: parks@binah.cc.brandeis.edu
Organization: Brandeis University
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1992 15:37:49 GMT

det 89, phi 71   08apr92

det (45-32)      min  fgm fga  3m 3a ftm fta or tr  as  pf st to bk tc ej  pts
woolridge,orlando 14    1   5   0  0   0  0   0  0   1   0  0  1  0  0  0    2
rodman,dennis     38    6   9   1  1   0  0   5 16   2   4  0  3  1  0  0   13
salley,john       26    3   5   0  0   0  0   0  1   3   2  1  2  0  0  0    6
dumars,joe        38    8  18   0  1   0  1   2  5  10   2  0  1  0  0  0   16
thomas,isiah      33    6  13   0  1   2  4   2  2   4   1  1  1  0  0  0   14
aguirre,mark      32    9  14   2  3   2  4   1  5   4   2  1  1  2  0  0   22
laimbeer,bill     28    4   8   0  1   2  3   0  9   0   1  2  0  1  0  0   10
walker,darrell    23    0   3   0  0   2  2   2  3   4   2  1  0  0  0  0    2
sellers,brad       2    0   0   0  0   0  0   0  0   1   0  0  0  0  0  0    0
mccann,bob         2    1   3   0  0   0  0   0  0   0   0  0  0  0  0  0    2
blanks,lance       2    0   0   0  0   0  0   0  0   0   0  0  1  0  0  0    0
bedford,william    2    1   1   0  0   0  0   0  1   0   0  0  0  0  0  0    2
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
det totals       240   39  79   3  7   8 14  12 42  29  14  6 10  4  0  0   89
FG, 3P, FT averages:     .494   .429   .571       team rebs 11, team TO's 1
procedure technicals 1

phi (33-43)      min  fgm fga  3m 3a ftm fta or tr  as  pf st to bk tc ej  pts
barkley,charles   43    9  19   0  2   4  4   4  8   1   2  0  1  0  1  0   22
gilliam,armon     41    4   8   0  0   2  2   4 11   2   2  0  4  2  0  0   10
bol,manute        16    0   1   0  0   0  0   1  6   0   0  0  2  2  0  0    0
dawkins,johnny    32    4  12   0  2   0  0   0  4   7   4  1  4  0  0  0    8
hawkins,hersey    44    9  15   2  3   5  5   1  3   4   2  4  2  0  0  0   25
anderson,ron      34    1  10   0  0   0  0   2  4   0   3  0  0  0  0  0    2
grant,greg        16    1   5   0  1   0  0   0  1   3   1  0  0  0  0  0    2
williams,jayson    7    0   3   0  0   0  0   1  1   1   1  0  0  0  0  0    0
wiggins,mitchell   3    0   1   0  0   0  0   0  0   0   0  0  0  0  0  0    0
payne,kenny        3    1   3   0  0   0  0   0  0   0   0  1  0  0  0  0    2
oliver,brian       1    0   0   0  0   0  0   0  0   0   0  0  0  0  0  0    0
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
phi totals       240   29  77   2  8  11 11  13 38  18  15  6 13  4  1  0   71
FG, 3P, FT averages:     .377   .250  1.000       team rebs  3
procedure technicals 1

det   16  31  19  23  -   89
phi   22  10  21  18  -   71

attendance 14261, time 1:48, officials: DGarretson,DVaden,MWunderlich
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
From: dgh2@quads.uchicago.edu (Doug G. Huffer)
Subject: Re: Oh that Larry Bird
Reply-To: dgh2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 21:35:34 GMT

In article <1992Apr9.193110.14648@ll.mit.edu> nates@ll.mit.edu ( Nate Smith) writes:
>In article <ku8mf8INN5k7@utkcs2.cs.utk.edu> schulman@hydra2b.cs.utk.edu (NEIL WAYNE SCHULMAN) writes:
>>>>Drafted 1st round 6th pick 1978, staying in college, probably wouldve been
>>>>the first pick in '79.
>>>You mean that the Lakers would have taken Bird instead of Magic?
>>
>>>I doubt it.
>>>--Gidi
>>I think there is a very good chance.  But as anyone should admit, either one
>>would have been a great choice, Bird being a super forward, and Johnson a 
>>guard.  But as with anything else, it depends on what the franchise needs,
>>did the lakers need a super forward?
>>Neil
>
>be 11-13 instead of 11-16.  who knows.  i think magic then would go to some
>other team (not boston-  who had #2?) and the USSR would still be here and
>somebody named George Bush would be President and other weird stuff...?????
>
>- nate

Checking the nbastats databases, I find that the Chicago Bulls had
the number two draft pick in 1979 (well actually I knew that much - 
that coin flip is more then infamous in Chicago), and drafted ....

	David Greenwood out of UCLA

Bill Cartwright was picked third by the Knicks
Gee, Larry Bird or Magic Johnson being drafted by the Bulls, 
but then we would have never gotten Jordan, oh well ;-)

Actually Magic has said that if the Bulls would have won the coin flip,
he would have probably not gone pro, but rather stayed in school.  Who
knows, one can only guess... 
 

Doug G. Huffer				Go Bulls! 
dgh2@quads.uchicago.edu 		Go Maroons!
From: rsmith@strobe.ATC.Olivetti.Com (Russ Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
Subject: Re: Larry Bird, a real pro
Date: 9 Apr 92 16:05:45 GMT
Organization: Olivetti ATC; Cupertino CA, USA

In article <ku8o7aINN5k7@utkcs2.cs.utk.edu> schulman@hydra2b.cs.utk.edu (NEIL WAYNE SCHULMAN) writes:
>but Bird is still (well almost) as good as a few years back.  His
>decline occurred after his injury in 1989 (or 88).  You have to keep
>into consideration that in the games he does not do well, it's
>probably because of his constant back problems.  I'm sure that if he
>is 100%, the Celts are going all the way.  Nevertheless, he is still
>keeping his stats up there: 20.5ppg, 9.5rpg, 6.5apg, 47% FG, 93% FT,
>and 41% three-pointers.  Regardless of your claim being true or not

I'm no Celtic fan or really a Bird fan but even if I was I would say the
same thing, so what? Bird's past is irrelevant to his performance this
year and his value to the team this year. If he was 100% is irrelevant 
as he's obviously not and never will be again. When you look at his per
game stats, you are ignoring the fact that he's no longer an "everyday 
player". He can't play a whole season, so you have to allow for the fact
that he's only going to be available for some of the games, not all of
them. This significantly lowers his value to the team. His per game numbers
are better than parish's, but Parish is still playing virtually all the
games, and Larry can't. Quality is important, but so is quantity and I
would rather have a guy who plays at near All star level for a full season
than a guy who plays at All Star level for part of one.

>court?  And who is monogamous with their wife???)

Real relevant to the discussion at hand, and do you really know who is and
isn't "monagamous with their wife" in the NBA?
>Neil



Russ Smith
*******************************************************************************
"If this were at all legible, you would see what I'm talking about"

                            Chevy Chase in Fletch 
******************************************************************************
From: mrmoore@vaucanson.EBay.Sun.COM (Mike Moore)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
Subject: Re: Warriors - Philly Draft Pick (was: Barkley, etc.)
Date: 16 Apr 92 16:22:17 GMT
Reply-To: mrmoore@vaucanson.EBay.Sun.COM
Organization: Sun Microsystems
NNTP-Posting-Host: vaucanson.ebay.sun.com

> they out bid several other teams for Shack. And can you tell me who 
> Golden state drafted with the ONE first round pick they received????

It was the 16th or 17th pick - I don't remember which one.
With those picks, the Warriors got 6'8" Victor Alexander
from Iowa State and 6'9" Chris Gatling from Old Dominion.

Mike Moore
From: lor@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (edward.lor)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
Subject: Re: Larry Bird *IS* GREAT!
Date: 13 Apr 92 18:24:13 GMT
Organization: AT&T

In article <kujfhaINNq0j@utkcs2.cs.utk.edu> schulman@hydra3f.cs.utk.edu (NEIL WAYNE SCHULMAN) writes:
>>Oh, so monogamous with his wife is a prerequisite to play in the NBA?
>>
>>What if he had no wife at that time? Boy, he didn't get marry until last
>>summer.  Are you going to bash all the people who choose to stay single at 
>>a certain age?
>>
>>This is not soc.singles or alt.romance!

>You made a few good points, but the last one intrigues me.  Since I am one who 
>likes basketball and some morals, I am inclined to ask, do you have any?  No,
Who defines morality here? You think monogamous is good? You think staying 
single and not abstaining from sex are bad? That's fine,  but you can't impose 
your morality on other people. 

Geez, I happen to think that divorce is evil. Larry Bird had one. So he
is immoral in my book, right?

Are you trying to define morality for all other people?

-- 
                                          Edward Lor
                                          lor@cbnewsk.att.com
From: ecol@cc.usu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
Subject: Re: Tark takes over Spurs
Date: 16 Apr 92 15:57:41 MDT
Organization: Utah State University

Bill King writes:

Any word on salary?
Might the TArk take a pay cut?


Well, USA Today writes that the deal is believed to be
a three year $400,000 a year job, with incentives that 
could boost his pay to $700,000.  He received $220,000 
a year a UNLV with benefits that boosted it to about
$600,000.  So it is a pay cut if he doesn't do well
and a raise if he does do well.

Marv
From: terra@reed.edu (Terra Goodnight)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
Subject: Re: Women
Date: 10 Apr 92 18:49:18 GMT
Article-I.D.: reed.1992Apr10.184918.11653
Organization: Reed College, Portland OR

In article <1992Apr10.043120.4192@gn.ecn.purdue.edu> lavellin@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Joseph Lavelline) writes:

Why this is on r.s.bb.p, I'll never know:

Joe sez:

>Some girls like to buy new shoes and others like driving trucks and 
>wearing tatoos.

OK, I buy 2 or 3 pairs of shoes a month, I drive a truck (ok, a Toyota pick-up,
but In California that's a truck.)  I'm even considering getting the Clippers
mascot (yeah, I know they don't have one, but if they did I'd get it) tattooed
on my ankle.  Hey, I could always get the Charlotte Hornet, now there'd be a 
cool tattoo!

Wow!  What a concept, I'm Joe Lavelling's ideal woman!  Boy am I a happy girl
right now!
Maybe we can go to some WWF matches together & remark at the similarity to
professional basketball!!

Terra Goodnight
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
From: bewillia@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Maj. Devon McKnight)
Subject: Grow up, smartypants (Was re: YEAH! Smartypants!)
Summary: This is rec.sport.basketball.pro, not rec.im.in.mensa.and.youre.an.idiot or rec.i.dont.wanna.be.in.mensa.so.there.
Organization: Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 92 14:29:42 EDT

	Guys, guys. You're both acting very childish. Let's try to stick to the
matters at hand (remembering, of course, that this is r.s.b.p. and not, say, 
rec.im.smarter.than.you.so.nyah.) and keep petty epithets and IQ-dropping to
yourselves.
	I have an IQ of 157, last time I was tested, and it does not have any
bearing whatsoever on any of the discussions that I have entered in. If my IQ
was 30, Larry Bird would still have been picked #6 in 1978, and Magic #1 in 
1979. And it doesn't change any of the other facts, either. It is completely
and utterly irrelevant.
	You two have an awfully interesting way of showing that you have IQ's
of genius level. I always thought that displays like that were reserved for
people of sub-average level.
	Keep the discussions to basketball, not whether somebody's in MENSA or
in the Rotary Club, or the Teamsters, or the Royal Air Force, or whatever.

Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
From: bis@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu (Bis)
Subject: Re: CELTICS---AWESOME!!!!
Organization: Bis Information Services
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1992 04:43:23 GMT

In article <167CBCDB0.EIVERSO@cms.cc.wayne.edu> EIVERSO@cms.cc.wayne.edu writes:
>>	The refs tried their best to give the Pistons the game at the end. With
>[...]
>>left, drove into the paint, and was blocked by both Lewis and Pinckney, but no
>>whistle this time! Replays showed that block was clean also!
>
>Yeah right! What a sore winner! Complaining about the refs, and then
>pointing out how they didn't make the call against Boston!
>
>Had it gone the Pistons way, Joe would have made 2 at the line and the game
>would have gone into OT.

So what?  If they had gotten it right the first time, the Celts would
have bagged the game on the previous posession.  Furthermore, the
non-call at the end was not a clear foul, it was hard to tell.
Lewis's block was very clearly a clean block.  Dumars was even leaning
backward!  Any way you cut it, that game should not have gone into
overtime.

Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
From: rstewart@buck.megatek.uucp
Subject: Re: Laker Injuries
Reply-To: megatek!rstewart@uunet.uu.net
Organization: Megatek Corporation, San Diego, California
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 14:59:59 GMT

In article <31471@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> kprashan@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (hyderabadi) writes:
>In article <1992Apr8.184648.12540@talon.ucs.orst.edu>, navarrer@bionette.CGRB.ORST.EDU (Roy Navarre -- Botany and Plant Pathology) writes:
>> 
>> Gidi take a hike.
>> [...lots of blah blah bl;ah deleted..] 
>
>> Where is this franchise going? They have serious problems. What is one instant
>> cure-Shaq. How else are they going to turn things around?-in time over several
>> years.
>> 
>> Roy
>
>
>Shaq is NOT the instant cure you think he is. The Lakers need
>GUARDS. The #1 priority is a PG, enabling them to move Threatt to 
>shooting guard. Scott's productivity has deteriorated in the past 3
>years. It is good to have a great center, but other priorities are
>more important. Divac is good enuf to carry them to the
>championship.
>
>| Prashanth                    |                         |
>| U. of California @ San Diego | prash@bhaskara.ucsd.edu |
>##########################################################


Well looking at Divac lately, I thinkhe has some inside info on 
trades for Shaq. Divac has been makeing alot of 16-20ft shots, a few
good three pointers, and driving to the hole. So perhaps Divac is competing
with Perkins for the point position. (Perkins had once said that playing the
point would be his basketball dream. 

Now for you SoCal Lakers fans, any getting the feeling that coach Mike
will get the boot after that double 'T', and perhaps Chick's great
side kick, Stu will be the new Laker coach. He runs the big man training camp
in the summer, and always has something specific to say about the Lakers
playing when they are up or down. Often 5 to 10 playing minutes later
coach Mike will make the adjustment that Stu had been talking about. 
He also has a goo collection of ties, which seems to be a prerequisit.
Jerry Buss are you listening?????
]
-Rich
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
From: nates@ll.mit.edu ( Nate Smith)
Subject: Re: Oh that Larry Bird
Organization: MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 92 18:51:03 GMT

In article <1992Apr9.222141.23734@cbnewsk.cb.att.com> lor@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (edward.lor) writes:
>
>>i think magic then would go to some other team (not boston-  who had #2?) 

>Chicago. Then they would have been in the finals at least 10 years earlier.
>They probably wouldn't have had the chance to draft Jordan in 1984.
>
>-- Ed Lor

but by then the C's would have been down there and Red may have wangled it
so that Boston would get Jordan.  talk about parallel universes....:-)

- nate
From: oliver@athena.mit.edu (James D. Oliver III)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
Subject: Re: Tark takes over Spurs
Date: 16 Apr 92 04:53:04 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology

In article <1992Apr16.004214.3801@pencom.com> ughtas@pencom.com (Thomas A Stewart) wrote:
> The spurs might as well kiss Sean Elliott and the Admiral goodbye.
> I doubt that either one of them will want to work for such a scumbucket.

They'll only play for saints like Lute Olson and Larry Brown?

Fact is, despite Tark's dubious reputation, I bet he has greater respect
from his former players than either one of the above two.
--
____________________________
	Jim Oliver  
	oliver@athena.mit.edu /	joliver@hstbme.mit.edu
	oliver%mitwccf.BITNET@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
From: gidi@Hilbert.Stanford.EDU (Gidi Avrahami)
Subject: Re: Big Win for the Nets
Originator: gidi@Hilbert.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Brotherhood Of Breath
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 21:25:47 GMT


liang@saul.cis.upenn.edu (Chuck Liang) asks:
>  What's Atlanta and Miami's head to head record?  What are their
>conference records?

Up to and including the games of April 14 :

                              conf    div
  New_Jersey    39 41 0.488   28 26   14 13
  Indiana       39 41 0.488   26 28   13 14
  Atlanta       37 42 0.468   22 31    7 19
  Miami         37 43 0.463   26 28   14 13

Head-to-heads:

              Ind  NJ   Atl  Mia
Indiana       ---  1-2  4-1  3-1
New_Jersey    2-1  ---  1-3  2-2
Atlanta       1-4  3-1  ---  2-2
Miami         1-3  2-2  2-2  ---

Indiana is at New Jersey tomorroe (Thursday) night.


--Gidi
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
From: jdt29225@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Jazzy J )
Subject: Moses -- for 3!
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 22:42:07 GMT


	One of the highlights of last nite's Sportscenter show had to be the
	review of the Milwaukee win over the Sixers (sans Barkley).  Among
	the highlights they showed was an inbounds pass to Moses Malone for
	3!  And he canned it!  Meanwhile, Dan Patrick's voice describing the
	action was classic.  In only a way he could say it, "To Moses...
	for 3?".  Then the boxscore came up.

	Jazzy J
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  "I am human and I need to be loved,            | Jazzy J                   |
|   just like everybody else does..." - The Smiths| jdt29225@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu | 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: ecol@cc.usu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
Subject: Re: Warriors (oops)
Date: 15 Apr 92 15:37:54 GMT
Article-I.D.: cc.1992Apr15.093754.54498
Organization: Utah State University

The Warriors fouled Malone an incredible 16 time not 26 as I
Posted earlier.
From: jmd@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (joseph.m.dakes)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
Subject: Barkley (Re: Sixers no playoffs-enter Shaq lottery)
Date: 16 Apr 92 14:14:25 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: AT&T

In article <1992Apr16.063426.9548@agora.uucp>, robart@agora.uucp (Robert Barton) writes:
>   What odds would you Philly fans give on Barkley being back next year?

Well, for those of you that missed it, Barkley blasted the Sixers
management this past week.  And the word is that was the last straw.

The Philadelphia Inquirer printed an article quoting an un-named
member of the Sixers management.  I read the article and it stated
that Barkley is only half a player because he doesn't play defense
and that all his talk about playing hard and giving his all is not
true.  Barkley assumes that it was GM Gene Shue who made those
comments and blasted him, Katz and the Sixers.  Charles called
Shue nothing more than Harold Katz' caddy.

I think that Charles is right.  I mean, what GM would trade away
a couple of first round picks for a part time center (Manute), trade
another first round pick for a solid player (Mahorn) and then release
him for nothing, and sign a stiff (Shackleford) to replace Mahorn?
Shue has been around the NBA for a long time and he knows what it
takes to get the job done.  If those decisions are  Shue's, he should
be fired.  But they weren't his decisions, they were Harold Katz'
decisions based purely on monetary reasons.  Instead of paying big
bucks for a young player and developing talent, Katz has gambled
away the future in hopes of a quick fix.  He, the Sixers, and all
us fans lost.  The only thing that can save this team from being
a doormat for the next few seasons is getting Shaq or Mourning in
the draft.

As for the original intent of this article, Katz would love to
get rid of Charles.  But as I said every time this topic comes
up, he is not just going to give him away.  The Sixers will want
a quality player and a first round pick for Sir Charles.  The
lottery teams are not going to give up the chance of getting a
NBA star for the next ten years on Charles, who says he is only
going to play three more seasons.  The top teams are not going
to have the high first round pick that the Sixers desire.  There
has been talk about a straight Barkley/Hakeem trade, but it's
just talk.  I think it all depends on where the Sixers land in
the draft.  If they get Shaq or Mourning, Barkley stays and the
Sixers are a contender right away.  If not, the Sixers package
Sir Charles with whoever else is of value and rebuild from the
ground up.


Joe Dakes
AT&T Microelectronics
555 Union Boulevard
Allentown, PA  18103
alux5!jmd
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro