My post was meant as a compliment for the respect I have for you. This thread was in opposition to what I've believed you to be. Sorry, didn't see the humor (my bad). Based upon your other (numerous) posts I felt this was a continuation of your recent line of thinking... Again, my apologies...but I bet I wasn't alone in how I viewed this (though most won't have the stones to admit that now).
Sorry if the humor wasn't clear. I tried to be upfront that the thread was meant to be light-hearted, with the "
" face, the "just kidding", and the acknowledgment that you can't cherry pick.
As for the greater issue, though, the one of "letting it go": I don't understand why only those who were big fans of the trade should be allowed to comment. There's a thread suggesting that the Celtics "made out like bandits". Should I not post in that thread, because I want to wait and see? When somebody says that Krstic is as good of a defensive rebounder as Perk, should I just ignore historical reality and let it go?
I think this is the second thread that I've started tangentially related to the trade; the other was the "Krstic is being overrated" thread. If you actually read the opening post in that thread (and many other posts I've made), you'll see that I appreciate a lot of the contributions Krstic is making right now. However, I think that people who argue that he is at least as good at defense and defensive rebounding as Perk was are wrong.
I've always argued that the trade was good for the Celtics "on paper", but that I have some concerns about chemistry / cohesion, defense, and rebounding. To me, each of those remains an open issue right now, and so no, I don't anticipate biting my tongue on the subject. At the same time, when one of the new guys play well, I generally tend to compliment him (like I did with Krstic against Philly and Milwaukee, and indeed, like I did in the first post in this thread).