Re: Response to me

["Berry, Mark S" <berrym@BATTELLE.ORG>]

That's what I mean about the opposing views on this trade. You see it as
"Joe Johnson, lottery pick and future all-star, plus another first-round
pick" for Tony Delk. I see it as "Joe Johnson, draft mistake and career role
player, plus a low-value first-round pick they were trying to give away
anyway" for Tony Delk, Rodney Rogers and a legit shot at a deep playoff run.
It all depends on what you think of Joe Johnson. He's only a long-term asset
if he pans out long-term. I think that is very much a question mark. In
fact, I think this trade is a pretty good indication of the Celtics'
feelings about it. When they made the same assessment of Moiso, they dumped
him for what they could get. Same thing here.

Like I said before, my frustration came earlier when I formed the opinion
that they had botched the draft. It was a great, deep draft, they had three
picks, and they blew it with at least two of them (jury is out on
Kedrick-but I'm optimistic). For me, this was a good salvage job of a bad
draft pick and a much-needed boost for a team with a shot in the East.

Mark

--- --- --- 

Josh O. wrote:

I liked reading Mark's post because it lifted my gloom temporarily.
I knew he would like this trade.  But riddle me this, Batman --
even if you like Rogers and feel he brings something important
to the team, can you see trading a long-term asset for only two
months of his services?  We can't even sign-and-trade him at
the end of the season.  So it's like we're trading Joe Johnson and
a first round pick for Tony Delk.  Madness.