Re: BSG Report on Walker Trade

[bird <bird@pixi.com>]

>From: GAllen@dhhs.state.nh.us
>
>First of all, I'd like to thank Josh for posting this report.  I doubt that
>anyone else on this list shares Mr. Odegaard's view regarding the post.

Well, since you _asked_, I'll say that I agree with Greg O. on this 
point.  I appreciate Josh trying to send interesting articles to the 
list.  I don't really appreciate it when they're 100K long, 
especially when most of the content is html code, or .gif files, or 
base64 encryption, or what-have-you.  It's an amazing waste of 
bandwidth.  Josh could have sent a pointer to the link where the 
article was located, or sent the list _just_ the text of the article.

>That said here are my thoughts on BSG's speculations:

I agree with your substance here.  Trading Walker for Croshere leaves 
us without any leadership on the team (as Gene mentioned), as well as 
what Walker might bring on the court next year.  Don't get me wrong, 
though: I'd like to see Austin "Powers" Croshere in a C's uniform 
next year, but I'd also like to see Walker in one.  A two "tweener" 
forward tandem creates many a defensive matchup problem for opposing 
teams.  The effect on our own "chicken outbreak" is minimal, since 
the Celts' defense is like a sieve to begin with.

The thing with "trade talk" is its inherent futility: nobody really 
knows what's going to happen, no matter how much they might try to 
make you believe they are "in the know."  It's all a little game to 
see who can grab the most "prestige."  (Incidentally, one of the 
problems I see with the BSG (I thought that Chinese restaurants were 
supposed to be cutting _down_ on the BSG, weren't they?) article was 
its assumption that McGrady is ending up in Chicago, when the latest 
reports are that he's in love with Orlando, too.)  It's all just 
speculation until contracts are inked, though.

Regards,

Bill