Kim wrote:
No, and in fairness have enough hoops sense to understand how much this weak
spot on the team hurt them and the benefits they should see from having an
actual inside game. Walker especially IMO. Someone a day or so ago brought
up a point that probably doesn't get enough attention about that, BTW, when
looking at the difference Vinnie makes over VP or RR. Hands. Vinnie for all
his possible faults does have good, soft hands that can actually catch a
pass, particularly a less than perfect one. It was a major problem with VP
and to an admittedly lesser degree RR. They could be in the paint, you could
pass to them, but it was far from automatic they would catch the pass well
enough to control it and do something good with it. With VP, doing that much
was actually a pleasant surprise.
If nothing else, I think just the fact that they were consulted probably
will help them accept the situation and ease chemistry adjustments, even if
they do have reservations. It's good management psychology, saying that this
is a partnership not a master/flunky relationship (whether or not that is
really true).
--- end ---
Here's my problem with the "Walker and Pierce are on board, so that makes it
OK" argument: I'm sure they looked at it like Vitaly and Forte were useless.
Kenny was never on either guys' Christmas card list. So they look at it as
getting rid of three guys they didn't have any strong feelings for, and
bringing back a big guy. They don't look at the salary. They don't look at
how it handcuffs the team for four years. They don't look at film of the guy
shrinking against competition in the Western Conference.
I'm sure they also feel like Vin will just slide right in as the third
option and everyone will live happily ever after. They will take their 45
shots a game and Vin can get the scraps.
There's a reason they're players and not GMs. Remember, Antoine was lobbying
to draft Nazr Mohammed at the 10th spot they year Pierce was chosen. He was
unhappy with the pick and said so. I specifically remember a quote along the
lines of "Pierce is a good player, but we need a big guy..."
First, I didn't say that "walker and pierce are on board so that makes it
OK". I gave reasons they might be OK with it. There are plenty of reasons
that they might not, starting with the effect on Walker's next and not so
distant contract renewal and available funds to pay it. He's smart enough
and that's near and dear enough to his heart that I bet even a 'don't look
at anything' player might have considered that.