[no subject]

At some point, Obie just got worn down attempting to incorporate those
which he felt were unincorporatable (is that a word?) Davis, Mihm, Stewart,
etc.  into what was quickly becoming a less and less smooth-running 
defensive machine, still with little offense.  When Ainge informed him he 
no longer wanted to put up with the Harter defense taking precedence over 
offense, well that folks, was all she wrote.  Obie felt that all he had 
worked so hard on building had not been appreciated or even understood.  
Ainge felt that all he was working so hard on building would never be built. 

But there are many other factors as well responsible for Obie's actions.
How would you like it if the owners and CEO who hired you to manage 
their company, came all dressed up in their hands-on, come-to-play 
sweats on practice days not only to observe and second-guess your 
every decision but to undermine you by physically/orally demonstrating 
their "better way" to your players?  How can you insult a coach 
in front of his charges and not expect some reaction from the coach.  
Of course Wyc, Pag, and Ainge, each a bit short on people skills, never 
anticipated that the players might take Obie's side.  

All of this has seemingly led to the present circumstance where 
Danny is now claiming it doesn't matter if we make the playoffs. It is 
a far cry from him originally stating he wouldn't care if we lost a FEW
more games this season while allowing the rookies a bit more playing 
time. But then what else can he say with a record of 23-31.   If our
Numero Uno announces he has written off this season (while still 
denying it is a makeover year), why should the coaches, players, or 
fans care about each game?  This is not good, and not the stuff
of healthy management.

I am not sure why so many have hitched their wagons to Ainge's vision of 
our new additions automatically improving exponentially in the next few
years while assuming players like Chicago's Curry, Crawford, Chandler, 
Hinrich, etc. will merely stand in place.  And how about lowly 16-34 
Washington with the recent return of Stackhouse and Arenas, rookies 
Hayes and Blake, and Kwame Brown the most improved big in the league? 
And then there's NY with their big budget and the oft criticized Isiah,
about to pull off another dramatic trade.  Won't they Knicks only get better 
and better?  

So what do you think, Gene?  Is Ainge the answer or has he set us back 
at least three years by returning to ground zero vs. patiently adding piece 
by piece to upgrade and gradually alter the style of ground sixty? 
Were we really that bad or has he destroyed a team which wasn't quite 
bad enough to be destroyed?  Will the anticipated maturity of our green 
thoroughbreds, two first-rounders, and a mid-level FA prove more 
beneficial to us than the similar moves of twenty-eight other teams 
prove beneficial to them?  
 
If not, is that next ring even further away than it was a year ago?

Egg