Cheap Reference

[gene kirkpatrick]

Enjoyed the long post and generally agreed with it.  I was a bit in shock with the trade for Allen, but I had come to where I didn't have a favorite at all for #5.  I surely didn't want Jeff Green, whom I thought we selected for ourselves.  I had developed doubts about Brewer, who had been my choice earlier.  So, without a strong favorite I was more amenable to the idea of Allen.  Once there, I began to like the idea of adding a great player for a three to four year stint.  He may not be enough to spur us to a championship, but, with the development of Al and Rondo, he takes us a long way toward contention (and in my mind we gave up little).  This group needs to win and see themselves as a contender.  Allen can take us that far.

So, I see it as more than a quick fix (though I can't deny that pressures may have pushed our button); I think it takes us to the realm of contention.   I hope for another quality big this year, but it will take the Ratliff $$ plus a body (Green or Gomes) to make it happen.  We may have a partial answer in Glen Davis; we'll see.  I really like our team now.  I think Perk can be a big part of the answer.  Beyond that, there's just a lot of hope.  But radical trades (meaning Al) would be based in a lot of hope, too.  We will have done a lot if this team makes a strong move this year and stamps itself as a force, like Chicago of last year.   I place more hope in keeping the core of Al, Rondo, and Paul than in finding a savior in size 18 sneakers.  A key move this year, another next year and we'll be there.  Gene

sabino <sabinoceltic at earthlink.net> wrote: >>>...The optimists expected a real breakout last season, with the maturing of several of the youths.  Alas, they was injured along with Paul and Wally.  Give us a relatively healthy squad this year, and with the addition of Allen & Davis, a decent vet at pg, and we'll be back on track--say, 46 or so wins minimum.  We're also the conservatives, in that we hesitate to swap a developing star (Al) for a older, proven star (Garnett).  Short term fixes bother us conservatives.  We are more content with evolution than revolution.  Now, where's my McCain button?  Gene <<<

Gene, just curious; since you are hesitant to trade developing stars for older stars, how did the Allen trade sit with you?  Generally speaking, I can say I was in the same camp as you; and to be frank, I was not against trading in the #5 pick for a vet.  I did not like trading #5 for a 32 year old SG though.  I would have been content to grow the thing slowly.  In the past, when Danny talked about trading for vets, he specifically said he didn't want guys on the wrong side of 30.  I wholeheartedly agreed with that.  

What's done is done, but having traded for your 32 yr old SG, and not yet having addressed your two most pressing needs in a big and a vet PG, well, it seems to me that Ainge has indeed opted for the short term quick fix.





       
---------------------------------
Ready for the edge of your seat? Check out tonight's top picks on Yahoo! TV.