Re: So what exactly did Heinsohn say?

[Kestutis.Kveraga@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (Kestutis Kveraga)]

--- Egg wrote:
<an impressive battery of press clippings omitted>

Oh no, has the local Press upset you by backing up what I had vehemently 
been shrieking and squeaking in fifty different sharps and flats?  Or do
you merely feel they, too, are idiots for thinking as they do?  

Due to my naivete,  I had originally hoped that I might balance/add a bit 
of color to the IGTC list by stabbing at all the <''perceived<'' falsehoods 
I was reading about Ainge.  I felt if I merely spoke truths as I knew
them to be and honestly attempted to back up such assertions 
(recently downgraded to innuendo) it might add a bit of input, a 
dissenting voice to this pro-Danny list.  Cheesh, do you think I failed?  
Not the first time in my life, I assure you, and probably not the last. 
--- end of quote ---

Egg, 
let's say you're right,  and Ainge is all that you (and the PR firm) have
implied him to be.  However, you have to consider how it all appears from a
naive fan's perspective - Ainge is articulate, smart, fan-friendly and has
clearly improved the Celtics' talent and salary structure while making the team
younger. That's the public Ainge we see. The public Obie we saw was a gruff,
obstinate, unimaginative coach who insisted on playing an ugly offensive style
and an increasingly unpopular/ineffective defense, and was fiercely loyal to
players most of us consider flawed or downright stupid. What are we to think if
the press are refusing to report anything, instead choosing the
passive-aggressive strategy of bemoaning Obie's departure and dropping
innuendos about Ainge's supposed unsuitability to rebuild the Celtics? Why do
you expect us to believe when there's no evidence? 
Kestas