truebluefan

Im so sorry they were late in getting here. This one was my fault. Mr Brewer was prompt in answering but being away for the holidays i must have delelted them for he reminded me just now. So i need to get better organized! Anyway, here are the questions answered!


JASON CAFFEINE
Is Grant Hill better on or off the team? (money-wise and court-wise)

There is no doubt in my mind that Grant Hill is better on this team. Let's face it, like it or not, the Magic made a commitment to him, and in an NBA world of guaranteed contracts, once you commit to a guy, it's difficult, monetarily, to move past that. So, if you're talking about money, they're stuck with him. It's better to have him struggle through tendinitis and play than have the guy retire and still have him on the cap.
As far as on the court, there's no question the team is better with Hill on it. He's rusty and all, but he is the Magic's best rebounder. He can pass. He does all the little things that some players on this team don't do -- takes charges, contributes when he is not shooting well, things of that nature. Of course, it's a big adjustment having him back on the court, but over time that will change. Grant is unselfish. He makes Mike Miller better because Miller now gets the third-best defender instead of the second-best player. And he is a tremendous teammate.
You cannot trade Grant Hill because of his ankle. You could try to buy him out, but that would be an embarrasing PR disaster, plus Hill would still be on the cap for five more years.
Keep him and pray that he can get right. The Magic are stuck. That's all they can do with Hill.
And as a final side note, I do not buy into anyone who tries to look back and say signing Grant Hill was a bad move. This has been a freak situation. No one could see this coming. He had a broken ankle, but so many guys return without any problems from broken ankles. And remember that Tim Duncan had had knee surgery that summer, too. He returned, as Grant was expected to. In hindsight, they never should've signed him. But you couldn't have predicted that three years ago. It's frustrating, but if the Magic had come out of August 2000 with, say, T-Mac and Eddie Jones, it would have been considered a big-time failure. Just something to consider.


DAMIAN NECRONAMOUS

Let's have a professional opinion ...
Why is Kobe better than T-Mac?
And why is T-Mac better than Kobe?

Ah, yes, the BIG question. We'll start with Kobe over T-Mac first. Kobe has that hunger. He has the killer instinct that T-Mac doesn't always show. He is a better ballhandler, but then McGrady is not asked to run his team. In the triangle, Kobe basically acts as a quasi-PG. McGrady can handle the ball, but he is not as refined as Kobe is. Kobe is better because he has been through more, because he got to team with Shaq and win three titles (can't take those from him, and he's had some big playoff games to earn those rings, too). Kobe is a better defender, and a more active defender. He averages almost twice as many steals per game than T-Mac, which is incredible. He doesn't have a back problem, either.
T-Mac is better than Kobe because he is longer and he is a more explosive leaper. Don't get me wrong, Kobe can really get up, but not like T-Mac. Tracy is a much better shooter from long-range, though I would give Kobe the edge on the midrange game. They both can really shoot. You can't be under 6-10 and average 25-plus points per game in this league without having a nice all-around offensive game. Tracy has more tools to use than Kobe in that area. Up until this season, Tracy was a better rebounder, but Kobe has bulked up and actually averages more boards. I'll say that McGrady is a more willing passer, though Kobe gets more assists per game. And Tracy's biggest advantage: His upside is larger than Bryant's. Kobe still has a lot of room to go, but Tracy has even more room.
Those two will battle for a long time, and it will be fun. But don't forget others, like Paul Pierce, who aren't that far behind. I really think, if all these guys can stay healthy, we could look back in 30 years and consider this a golden era of swing-man types.

THE RIFLEMAN

A question for Doc Rivers:
Armstrong's play this year has been up and down, mostly down. He seems to not be able to even defend well anymore. With that said, the Miller, TMac, Hill line up seems to produce and Vaughn is a good one on one defender, why not sit Armstrong until he "heals" enough to at least defend the opponents?

Well, obviously, we don't have Doc here to answer that question. And obviously, a lot has changed since your question, with Vaughn starting now and Grant rests his ankle. Darrell Armstrong has come around, too. I think he's played good ball over the last 10 games. His defense has come around, too. About Jacque Vaughn: He wasn't playing because he had struggled mightily. He was lost in the Magic's system early on, and he wasn't defending either. If Vaughn couldn't get on the floor when Darrell was so bad early on, then that has to tell you how bad Jacque was at the beginning. I do think Rivers is starting to realize that he has to use Jacque. He can do some things, especially when it comes to driving to the basket.

TMACIZGOD
how about this, and let's be truthful:
how much weight has shawn kemp really lost? What's he at right now?

[]b]T-MACIZGOD (really?). OK, sorry for the joke. Kemp has really lost about 35 pounds so far and he is in the 290 range. He'll say he's less than that, about 275, but get real.[/b]

JBKOBLENZ

Pat Burke is a twenty-eight-year-old rookie. What do you think about him?

Obviously, Pat Burke has been figured out, and we are starting to realize why he played overseas for so many years. He can still shoot it, but he has lost some confidence. All jokes aside, I do think Burke is an NBA player, but a good 11th or 12th guy. The Magic must get him playing with energy and confdience again. He can help them.

TOMBOERWINKLE#1

The word on the Magic has been that they're a "soft" team, and the fact that they don't have a player who averages more than 7 rebounds per game at least lends some credibility to that claim. Orlando has one of the top players in the game, if not the top player, in T-Mac, a veteran superstar in Hill (hopefully he'll have an injury-free stretch) and a fairly solid roster. I'm not saying Orlando is BAD, defensively, but can Orlando become one of the elite teams without a significant upgrade of its defensive capabilities?

I think the Magic are limited and can't be an elite team with this roster, unless we rewidnd three years and command Grant Hill to stop playing in Detroit before he injured his ankle. If Grant were still on the top of his game, he and McGrady could mask their problems. I still like Grant's game when the tendinitis is under control, but he can't dominate in every phase of the game like he used to. So, now. You gotta have better big guys. The interesting thing is, they really don't need a dominant big man, I don't think. Give them a P.J. Brown type and a Dale Davis type, and the Magic are an elite team. And, mind you, those two guys are free agents this summer. The Magic's biggest problem defensively is the lack of a shotblocker. So many teams just kill them by running down the shot clock and getting to the basket. Most teams have a shotblocker to bail them out. The Magic do not. And obviously, you gotta have a glass cleaner.
If you gave them a 9-point, 7-rebound power forward and a 10-point, seven-rebound, two-block center, and this would be a great team. Either that or give them Shawn Kemp and a big man you could rebound like crazy and block shots.

HUNTERB14

What do you think Mike Miller's role will be for the team later on down the line?

I think Mike will grow into a more reliable No. 2 guy behind Tracy. Mike could average 18 points, seven rebounds and four assists. I don't know if I see a perennial all-star, but he could make an all-star game or two, maybe have a couple of seasons as a 20-point scorer. If he lives up to his potential, he should become one of the most respected shooters in the game. Yet he has enough skill and athleticism to do a variety of things. I like Miller and how he is playing this season. Of course, he is the only real tradable piece that the Magic have, so rumors will always be out there.
Who is the leader of this team (leasdership role on and off the court)?
There's still no doubt that Darrell is the standout leader on this team, but I see more leadership from McGrady and Hill. They have to become more dynamic leaders, too. Your best players have to police the team.

JEMEL IRIEF

How can the Magic have any chance of signing Tim Duncan after they promised Amaechi big money to keep him from signing with the Lakers only to not pay and cutting Horace Grant after talking him out of retirement?

Really don't understand the question here. I'll try my best, Jemel. I guess you're talking about loyalty issues here and a lack of frontcourt guys. Well, it's obvious that Amaechi wasn't worth the money. He can't get off the bench in Utah. The promise to Amaechi was predicated on the idea that he would play at the same level. With Horace, he lost a bitter fight with Doc that lasted more than a year. It didn't work out. We won't get into who's right or wrong there, other than to say it's terrible that Grant went out that way after all he did for the Magic over the years. With Tim Duncan, the Magic are trying to keep hope alive, but they are doubting that he wants to leave San Antonio. If he does, they think they could figure out a way to work a sign-and-trade deal to bring him here, but they are not gasping and prepping to make a big run at time like they were in 2000 because Duncan has given no indication that he wants to leave. If that changes, they'll try to get him, obviously.

OZZY

Hello Mr. Brewer. I was just wondering, why doesn't Orlando sign Soumaila Samake? I mean he is a big man that is athlete, and he has good upside. Plus he is a solid rebounder and can block shots.

Ozzy, don't think the Magic are going to sign another big man this year. They have luxury tax concerns and too many raw big men on the roster already. And Samake is raw. Promising, but raw. He is on their radar, though. If they get to him first, you could see a guy like Samake on their summer-league roster. But he is far from ready to be a consistent contributor in the NBA. Yet, it would be worth Orlando's money to sign him to a minimum contract and try to develop him next year.
Also I saw GM John Gabriel at a University of Minnesota basketball practice I was at, I heard him tell Dan Monson he was there because the Magic were in town to play the Wolves. I was just wondering have you heard anything about Orlando wanting Rick Rickert in the draft because that was obviously why he when to there practice.
Gabriel goes to the practices of a lot of prominent college teams each year, and he tries to see all of the prominent players, of course. Rickert fits the Magic mold. He's versatile. He can shoot. If he doesn't leave after this season, he'll probably be drafted too high for the Magic to get him. Even if he leaves this year, he might be drafted too high. We'll see.
And one more thing, where are all of Orlando's draft picks? I mean they made trades to Denver and Washington that were obviously lop-sided and got picks for them. For example were was the LA Clippers pick? Is it in the future or have they already used it?
Orlando has restored some of those picks. I'm in the process of doing a story to lead the NBA Confidential in a couple of weeks on what became of all these draft picks they either have or traded to acquire guys over the past few years. Be sure to look for that one in mid-to-late January for more insight. Off the top of my head, I don't have all the answers for you right now.

TRUEBLUEFAN

Since Horace Grant was let go this past week, are the Magic going to stay pat with the players they have? What are you hearing?

Yes, they're going to stay pat. They could sign a "small" to a contract later, but they have so many big guys. They all are either decent or raw or just can't play, but they have so many big bodies. And with Hill's troubles and McGrady's back and Armstrong's shoulder, they are actually thin on the perimeter.