RE: Speaks for me

["Noah P. Evans" <ishbak@conknet.com>]

> Course now, the one problem that the argument that the owners are in
> control of how much they spend.  What would the Celtics fans on this
> list say if Gaston does just that and trades Walker cause he wants to be
> responsible.  Oh yeah, I think we have already seen the uproar that idea
> has caused.  Hhhhmmmm, maybe the owners aren't worse than the players
> are after all Noah.

I don't think you understand my argument. I'll reiterate my point, what
service do the owners provide? According to your (correct) answer financial
backing and investment. What does their investment do to the game? Changes
it in order to be marketable. Okay now on to the players, what service do
they provide? They play basketball. I like basketball and I dislike the
changes made for marketability, so I support the players over the owners.
It's hardly a matter of morality or who is "worse" --they're equally bad
greedwise-- but a matter of pragmatism. That is why I say I could care less
about Gaston, I don't, but still support the players. You can get rid of the
owners and still have basketball(albeit in a significantly altered form,
better or worse, who knows?) but you can't get rid of the players and still
have the same level of basketball.

> Do you support trading Walker for two second round
> draft picks to be financally sensible?

That has *nothing* to do with my argument. I *hate* the money in basketball.
That's why I wish Gaston and his "financial sensibility" would go away.

> That is a force that
> is beyond the control of the Owners.  And it is the demand of us fans.
> And the players play that for all it is worth without a care for us.

Not really. The owners can do anything they want. They just wouldn't make as
much money.

Noah