why dont we try to sign Chris Mihm instead of Vin Baker? He's 8 years younger, he's bigger and hasnt reached what I believe is a very decent potential. If we are rebuilding-why are we spending that kind of money on a player who is high risk/ and a high likelyhood of a limited timeframe left in the NBA? I know Vin can still be a good player at times, but to me it doesnt mesh with what we should be doing--getting YOUNGER at every opportunity. Maybe Boston matches, but as of right now Boston has 16 guys under contract. Maybe we flip them a second round pick and sign Chris to a similar contract that Doleac got, 4 years 13mm. There are similarities but Chris is definitely the better player IMHO. We don't need Vin Baker and he makes very little sense for us.

Frankly I don't want either player. Niether one is an upgrade over what we already got unless some trade goes down. As we stand now, we already have Mohammed, KT, Sweetney, and Deke at C and PF, and Mihm or Baker are not really upgrades over any of those players.

Baker can play and hes only 1-2 yr contract. Mihm is a much bigger investment over the length of contact and theres still no real proof that he can play.

Chris Mihm has proven he can be a nice 20 minute player and still has nice upside. Again we are not talking big money 3 years 13mm is chump change in this league. If you believe Vin Baker is going to be the difference between making the playoffs and not--then fine but I don't see it. Baker will be 33 when the season starts and thats an OLD 33. If they are willing to throw 3mm at Baker==throw it at a guy who is 25 who has bonafides and upside. Mihm is similar to doleac but hes better inside and doesnt come with baggage.

Why not. sometimes briggs you talk about players for months and they blossom a few weeks later.

At that price, I wouldn't mind trying.
Danny would match just to bother us though.