Kevin Love per Wojnarowski

[Fafnir]

It's more than a little bit of a strawman. It's a total strawman. It's satire.

You guys are staking yourselves to the position that Kevin Love isn't worth max money, and I don't believe you. I think that you're being contrarian because Kevin Love is an imperfect, known quantity and you aren't willing to give up the dream that some asset we already have in hand is going to provide a better opportunity.

While there's no telling who'll be available, how our picks pan out, etc, I do prefer flexibility to paying a high price for Love.  I trust Danny to do more than just that one move, but we need more than Love, and I'm not sure how we get there if most of our best assets go out for him.

I also think it's hard to characterize this as contrarian when at least a large minority of the blog seems to agree, including a lot of posters who don't typically take contrarian positions.

My issue is that if you don't think you can build around Love + Rondo, I'm really not sure you think you can build around anyone who's not an MVP caliber player.

My question is if you have Rondo/Love and their new contracts, what's left?  How much flexibility do you have?  Of the remaining draft picks, is there any chance of them falling in the top 5-7?  Now you're banking on the Nets to lose because a Celtics team of Rondo/Love isn't cracking the top 15, IMO.  What roster assets/contracts do you have to move besides draft picks?

My concern is if you build around Rondo/Love, you could be painting yourself into a corner fast without much room to budge.  I don't think that core (along with Green) gets you through the eastern conference.

I've been thinking for a while that this is going to be a multi-year rebuild.  It's not going to be an overnight thing like '07.

Rondo + Love shouldn't eat all your cap space if you manage it right, and the team should still have 5 or so first round picks plus those swap rights with BKN.

If having 2 all-stars paid roughly market wages caps you out you've messed up your cap elsewhere on the fringes.

If you can't build around anyone other than LeBron/Durant, then you'll never stop rebuilding.

[DarkAzcura]

It's more than a little bit of a strawman. It's a total strawman. It's satire.

You guys are staking yourselves to the position that Kevin Love isn't worth max money, and I don't believe you. I think that you're being contrarian because Kevin Love is an imperfect, known quantity and you aren't willing to give up the dream that some asset we already have in hand is going to provide a better opportunity.

While there's no telling who'll be available, how our picks pan out, etc, I do prefer flexibility to paying a high price for Love.  I trust Danny to do more than just that one move, but we need more than Love, and I'm not sure how we get there if most of our best assets go out for him.

I also think it's hard to characterize this as contrarian when at least a large minority of the blog seems to agree, including a lot of posters who don't typically take contrarian positions.

My issue is that if you don't think you can build around Love + Rondo, I'm really not sure you think you can build around anyone who's not an MVP caliber player.

I think you can build around Love+Rondo; I'm not sure if you can build around Love+Rondo at two max or near-max salaries under the current CBA.  It's hard to build around two near-max salaries without at least one of them being an MVP caliber guy, especially if you're not doing it by inflating your own payroll re-signing a guy you had on his rookie deal.

Of course all bets are off if Danny's really angling to trade Rondo as well and build around Love + our young guys + cap space.  Doubly so if he manages to do it while keeping our high pick this year.  Doubtful but I wouldn't put it past him to try.

Actually there really isn't much else to build on once you have Rondo and Love together as long as Bradley and Green are still here. We still have the assets to bring in Asik and allow Houston to sign Carmelo. We can bring in Pierce to serve as a 6th man or starter on short minutes.

Rondo, Bradley, Green, Love, Asik with Pierce as a 6th man with Olynyk, Bayless, and Hump serving as energy guys...honestly I'll take them in a fight against Indiana. Ideally I'd like to see a better guard to back up Rondo and Bradley than Bayless.

Our main problem this year was no consistent scoring from any single player and no rim protection. The C's passing, rebounding, shooting, and perimeter defense were actually pretty good. The C's just had two major holes in their roster...like huge, huge, grand canyon holes...most likely designed that way on purpose. The C's just have to fill in those gaps, which Kevin Love and Asik could do in spades.

[Fafnir]

It's more than a little bit of a strawman. It's a total strawman. It's satire.

You guys are staking yourselves to the position that Kevin Love isn't worth max money, and I don't believe you. I think that you're being contrarian because Kevin Love is an imperfect, known quantity and you aren't willing to give up the dream that some asset we already have in hand is going to provide a better opportunity.

While there's no telling who'll be available, how our picks pan out, etc, I do prefer flexibility to paying a high price for Love.  I trust Danny to do more than just that one move, but we need more than Love, and I'm not sure how we get there if most of our best assets go out for him.

I also think it's hard to characterize this as contrarian when at least a large minority of the blog seems to agree, including a lot of posters who don't typically take contrarian positions.

My issue is that if you don't think you can build around Love + Rondo, I'm really not sure you think you can build around anyone who's not an MVP caliber player.

I think you can build around Love+Rondo; I'm not sure if you can build around Love+Rondo at two max or near-max salaries under the current CBA.  It's hard to build around two near-max salaries without at least one of them being an MVP caliber guy, especially if you're not doing it by inflating your own payroll re-signing a guy you had on his rookie deal.

Of course all bets are off if Danny's really angling to trade Rondo as well and build around Love + our young guys + cap space.  Doubly so if he manages to do it while keeping our high pick this year.  Doubtful but I wouldn't put it past him to try.

If you think you can't build around two guys paid like all-stars, then truly you do require an MVP caliber player or all-stars on rookie deals.

Only MVPs produce a ton of surplus value if you're paying them on their third contract unless the FA market really misses the boat.

[fairweatherfan]

My issue is that if you don't think you can build around Love + Rondo, I'm really not sure you think you can build around anyone who's not an MVP caliber player.

I think you can build around Love+Rondo; I'm not sure if you can build around Love+Rondo at two max or near-max salaries under the current CBA.  It's hard to build around two near-max salaries without at least one of them being an MVP caliber guy, especially if you're not doing it by inflating your own payroll re-signing a guy you had on his rookie deal.

Of course all bets are off if Danny's really angling to trade Rondo as well and build around Love + our young guys + cap space.  Doubly so if he manages to do it while keeping our high pick this year.  Doubtful but I wouldn't put it past him to try.

If you think you can't build around two guys paid like all-stars, then truly you do require an MVP caliber player or all-stars on rookie deals.

Only MVPs produce a ton of surplus value if you're paying them on their third contract unless the FA market really misses the boat.

Yeah I mentioned that in a ninja edit.  It's just that we don't really see elite teams built this way - either they get a third guy too, or they have some rookie contract stud(s), or they're the Spurs who basically are on a higher plane than everyone else.  Especially under this new CBA.

But hey, I'll be excited too if we get Love, just to see how it pans out.  It'd sure be nice to have a young elite big man here again.  It just doesn't seem plausible enough as a route to legit contention.  Even in the East.

[Fafnir]

My issue is that if you don't think you can build around Love + Rondo, I'm really not sure you think you can build around anyone who's not an MVP caliber player.

I think you can build around Love+Rondo; I'm not sure if you can build around Love+Rondo at two max or near-max salaries under the current CBA.  It's hard to build around two near-max salaries without at least one of them being an MVP caliber guy, especially if you're not doing it by inflating your own payroll re-signing a guy you had on his rookie deal.

Of course all bets are off if Danny's really angling to trade Rondo as well and build around Love + our young guys + cap space.  Doubly so if he manages to do it while keeping our high pick this year.  Doubtful but I wouldn't put it past him to try.

If you think you can't build around two guys paid like all-stars, then truly you do require an MVP caliber player or all-stars on rookie deals.

Only MVPs produce a ton of surplus value if you're paying them on their third contract unless the FA market really misses the boat.

Yeah I mentioned that in a ninja edit.  It's just that we don't really see elite teams built this way - either they get a third guy too, or they have some rookie contract stud(s), or they're the Spurs who basically are on a higher plane than everyone else.  Especially under this new CBA.

But hey, I'll be excited too if we get Love, just to see how it pans out.  It'd sure be nice to have a young elite big man here again.  It just doesn't seem plausible enough as a route to legit contention.  Even in the East.

See I think Boston would have plenty of flexibility to get a third guy. They'll have draft picks and no other albatross deals other than Wallace. Meanwhile the cap keeps going up and going up fast.

I get not wanting to give up Wiggins/Embid/top 3 guy for Love.

But once we're drafting 5th/6th or worse its a no brainer to try and package the pick for Love. Most hits at that slot in the draft aren't as good as he is.

[Jon]

It's more than a little bit of a strawman. It's a total strawman. It's satire.

You guys are staking yourselves to the position that Kevin Love isn't worth max money, and I don't believe you. I think that you're being contrarian because Kevin Love is an imperfect, known quantity and you aren't willing to give up the dream that some asset we already have in hand is going to provide a better opportunity.

While there's no telling who'll be available, how our picks pan out, etc, I do prefer flexibility to paying a high price for Love.  I trust Danny to do more than just that one move, but we need more than Love, and I'm not sure how we get there if most of our best assets go out for him.

I also think it's hard to characterize this as contrarian when at least a large minority of the blog seems to agree, including a lot of posters who don't typically take contrarian positions.

My issue is that if you don't think you can build around Love + Rondo, I'm really not sure you think you can build around anyone who's not an MVP caliber player.

I'm with Faf.

If people don't think Love/Rondo is a great START to a championship team, then I'm not sure what will satisfy them short of Durant coming to Boston.

Exactly.  I think Celtic fans of the past 20 years have learned a valuable lesson that emulating the Walker/Pierce teams of perpetual mediocrity is not the way to go.  However, I think people are underselling how difficult it will be to replicate our Big Three success. 

As Wyc has pointed out, the Garnett/Allen 2007 business was a once in a lifetime type of deal.  Similarly, tanking it out isn't always the way to go.  You rarely get a James/Durant, more commonly get a Olowokandi/Brown, and most likely get a Wall/Irving--which is nice, but not a player who is going to single-handedly turn around a franchise.  And that's 1/2 picks. 

So at this point, I think it's just trying to make the best deals possible.  And assuming that the Wolves don't want Sully, Olynyk, and the majority of our picks over the next 5 years in exchange for Love, we should still have a fair amount of assets to help bolster a core of Rondo and Love. 

While that is no guarantee of a championship, it does debatably put us "one star" away from being a top-tier contender.  It will certainly take a lot of luck for us to find that other star.  It'll have to happen through either eternal development (Olynyk), getting lucky later in the draft, or having another superstar become available either via free agency (unlikely will Rondo and Love extensions) or trade (more likely). 

But that's the reality of the NBA.  You need to be lucky.  The Celtics were lucky to have high picks in the drafts they got Russell and Bird, just as they were lucky that Garnett and Allen happened to be available in a year when the C's had the assets to get them.  But by getting Love and retaining some of their assets, the Celtics can put themselves in the best possible chance to contend when lucky situations come along. 

[Donoghus]

My issue is that if you don't think you can build around Love + Rondo, I'm really not sure you think you can build around anyone who's not an MVP caliber player.

I think you can build around Love+Rondo; I'm not sure if you can build around Love+Rondo at two max or near-max salaries under the current CBA.  It's hard to build around two near-max salaries without at least one of them being an MVP caliber guy, especially if you're not doing it by inflating your own payroll re-signing a guy you had on his rookie deal.

Of course all bets are off if Danny's really angling to trade Rondo as well and build around Love + our young guys + cap space.  Doubly so if he manages to do it while keeping our high pick this year.  Doubtful but I wouldn't put it past him to try.

If you think you can't build around two guys paid like all-stars, then truly you do require an MVP caliber player or all-stars on rookie deals.

Only MVPs produce a ton of surplus value if you're paying them on their third contract unless the FA market really misses the boat.

Yeah I mentioned that in a ninja edit.  It's just that we don't really see elite teams built this way - either they get a third guy too, or they have some rookie contract stud(s), or they're the Spurs who basically are on a higher plane than everyone else.  Especially under this new CBA.

But hey, I'll be excited too if we get Love, just to see how it pans out.  It'd sure be nice to have a young elite big man here again.  It just doesn't seem plausible enough as a route to legit contention.  Even in the East.

See I think Boston would have plenty of flexibility to get a third guy. They'll have draft picks and no other albatross deals other than Wallace. Meanwhile the cap keeps going up and going up fast.

I get not wanting to give up Wiggins/Embid/top 3 guy for Love.

But once we're drafting 5th/6th or worse its a no brainer to try and package the pick for Love. Most hits at that slot in the draft aren't as good as he is.

At 5/6, I'm certainly much more inclined to give Love a shot.  Especially if the alternative is Vonleh or Gordon. 

[D.o.s.]

It's more than a little bit of a strawman. It's a total strawman. It's satire.

You guys are staking yourselves to the position that Kevin Love isn't worth max money, and I don't believe you. I think that you're being contrarian because Kevin Love is an imperfect, known quantity and you aren't willing to give up the dream that some asset we already have in hand is going to provide a better opportunity.

While there's no telling who'll be available, how our picks pan out, etc, I do prefer flexibility to paying a high price for Love.  I trust Danny to do more than just that one move, but we need more than Love, and I'm not sure how we get there if most of our best assets go out for him.

I also think it's hard to characterize this as contrarian when at least a large minority of the blog seems to agree, including a lot of posters who don't typically take contrarian positions.

My issue is that if you don't think you can build around Love + Rondo, I'm really not sure you think you can build around anyone who's not an MVP caliber player.

I'm with Faf.

If people don't think Love/Rondo is a great START to a championship team, then I'm not sure what will satisfy them short of Durant coming to Boston.

Exactly.  I think Celtic fans of the past 20 years have learned a valuable lesson that emulating the Walker/Pierce teams of perpetual mediocrity is not the way to go.  However, I think people are underselling how difficult it will be to replicate our Big Three success.   

See this is interesting -- Love/Rondo feels a lot closer to Walker/Pierce than it does building blocks to a new Big 3 to me. I would imagine the people who're all in on trading the farm for Kevin Love feel the opposite.

[Fafnir]

It's more than a little bit of a strawman. It's a total strawman. It's satire.

You guys are staking yourselves to the position that Kevin Love isn't worth max money, and I don't believe you. I think that you're being contrarian because Kevin Love is an imperfect, known quantity and you aren't willing to give up the dream that some asset we already have in hand is going to provide a better opportunity.

While there's no telling who'll be available, how our picks pan out, etc, I do prefer flexibility to paying a high price for Love.  I trust Danny to do more than just that one move, but we need more than Love, and I'm not sure how we get there if most of our best assets go out for him.

I also think it's hard to characterize this as contrarian when at least a large minority of the blog seems to agree, including a lot of posters who don't typically take contrarian positions.

My issue is that if you don't think you can build around Love + Rondo, I'm really not sure you think you can build around anyone who's not an MVP caliber player.

I'm with Faf.

If people don't think Love/Rondo is a great START to a championship team, then I'm not sure what will satisfy them short of Durant coming to Boston.

Exactly.  I think Celtic fans of the past 20 years have learned a valuable lesson that emulating the Walker/Pierce teams of perpetual mediocrity is not the way to go.  However, I think people are underselling how difficult it will be to replicate our Big Three success.   

See this is interesting -- Love/Rondo feels a lot closer to Walker/Pierce than it does building blocks to a new Big 3 to me. I would imagine the people who're all in on trading the farm for Kevin Love feel the opposite.

I guess you could see it that way, the issue I have with that comparison is that Walker was a legitimately bad player to have on your team. Empty numbers with horrible efficiency.

[BleedGreen1989]

My issue is that if you don't think you can build around Love + Rondo, I'm really not sure you think you can build around anyone who's not an MVP caliber player.

I think you can build around Love+Rondo; I'm not sure if you can build around Love+Rondo at two max or near-max salaries under the current CBA.  It's hard to build around two near-max salaries without at least one of them being an MVP caliber guy, especially if you're not doing it by inflating your own payroll re-signing a guy you had on his rookie deal.

Of course all bets are off if Danny's really angling to trade Rondo as well and build around Love + our young guys + cap space.  Doubly so if he manages to do it while keeping our high pick this year.  Doubtful but I wouldn't put it past him to try.

If you think you can't build around two guys paid like all-stars, then truly you do require an MVP caliber player or all-stars on rookie deals.

Only MVPs produce a ton of surplus value if you're paying them on their third contract unless the FA market really misses the boat.

Yeah I mentioned that in a ninja edit.  It's just that we don't really see elite teams built this way - either they get a third guy too, or they have some rookie contract stud(s), or they're the Spurs who basically are on a higher plane than everyone else.  Especially under this new CBA.

But hey, I'll be excited too if we get Love, just to see how it pans out.  It'd sure be nice to have a young elite big man here again.  It just doesn't seem plausible enough as a route to legit contention.  Even in the East.

See I think Boston would have plenty of flexibility to get a third guy. They'll have draft picks and no other albatross deals other than Wallace. Meanwhile the cap keeps going up and going up fast.

I get not wanting to give up Wiggins/Embid/top 3 guy for Love.

But once we're drafting 5th/6th or worse its a no brainer to try and package the pick for Love. Most hits at that slot in the draft aren't as good as he is.

This is really the point I keep coming back to.

If we land in the top-3 tonight and people think Wiggins/Parker/Embiid are all going to be stars, then I totally understand not wanting to move the pick. Heck, I'm not even sure what I would do at that point.

But if we land 5-8, it's an absolute no-brainer to me.

[Roy H.]

My issue is that if you don't think you can build around Love + Rondo, I'm really not sure you think you can build around anyone who's not an MVP caliber player.

I think you can build around Love+Rondo; I'm not sure if you can build around Love+Rondo at two max or near-max salaries under the current CBA.  It's hard to build around two near-max salaries without at least one of them being an MVP caliber guy, especially if you're not doing it by inflating your own payroll re-signing a guy you had on his rookie deal.

Of course all bets are off if Danny's really angling to trade Rondo as well and build around Love + our young guys + cap space.  Doubly so if he manages to do it while keeping our high pick this year.  Doubtful but I wouldn't put it past him to try.

If you think you can't build around two guys paid like all-stars, then truly you do require an MVP caliber player or all-stars on rookie deals.

Only MVPs produce a ton of surplus value if you're paying them on their third contract unless the FA market really misses the boat.

Yeah I mentioned that in a ninja edit.  It's just that we don't really see elite teams built this way - either they get a third guy too, or they have some rookie contract stud(s), or they're the Spurs who basically are on a higher plane than everyone else.  Especially under this new CBA.

But hey, I'll be excited too if we get Love, just to see how it pans out.  It'd sure be nice to have a young elite big man here again.  It just doesn't seem plausible enough as a route to legit contention.  Even in the East.

See I think Boston would have plenty of flexibility to get a third guy. They'll have draft picks and no other albatross deals other than Wallace. Meanwhile the cap keeps going up and going up fast.

I get not wanting to give up Wiggins/Embid/top 3 guy for Love.

But once we're drafting 5th/6th or worse its a no brainer to try and package the pick for Love. Most hits at that slot in the draft aren't as good as he is.

This is really the point I keep coming back to.

If we land in the top-3 tonight and people think Wiggins/Parker/Embiid are all going to be stars, then I totally understand not wanting to move the pick. Heck, I'm not even sure what I would do at that point.

But if we land 5-8, it's an absolute no-brainer to me.

Yeah, I agree.  I'm intrigued by Randle and Smart (Vonleh and Gordon, less so), but I think the odds of them be as good as Love are very low.  I'd rather have a top-tier player on a max contract than a good-but-not-great player on a rookie deal.

[D.o.s.]

It's more than a little bit of a strawman. It's a total strawman. It's satire.

You guys are staking yourselves to the position that Kevin Love isn't worth max money, and I don't believe you. I think that you're being contrarian because Kevin Love is an imperfect, known quantity and you aren't willing to give up the dream that some asset we already have in hand is going to provide a better opportunity.

While there's no telling who'll be available, how our picks pan out, etc, I do prefer flexibility to paying a high price for Love.  I trust Danny to do more than just that one move, but we need more than Love, and I'm not sure how we get there if most of our best assets go out for him.

I also think it's hard to characterize this as contrarian when at least a large minority of the blog seems to agree, including a lot of posters who don't typically take contrarian positions.

My issue is that if you don't think you can build around Love + Rondo, I'm really not sure you think you can build around anyone who's not an MVP caliber player.

I'm with Faf.

If people don't think Love/Rondo is a great START to a championship team, then I'm not sure what will satisfy them short of Durant coming to Boston.

Exactly.  I think Celtic fans of the past 20 years have learned a valuable lesson that emulating the Walker/Pierce teams of perpetual mediocrity is not the way to go.  However, I think people are underselling how difficult it will be to replicate our Big Three success.   

See this is interesting -- Love/Rondo feels a lot closer to Walker/Pierce than it does building blocks to a new Big 3 to me. I would imagine the people who're all in on trading the farm for Kevin Love feel the opposite.

I guess you could see it that way, the issue I have with that comparison is that Walker was a legitimately bad player to have on your team. Empty numbers with horrible efficiency.

If it looks like a duck...

[Fafnir]

It's more than a little bit of a strawman. It's a total strawman. It's satire.

You guys are staking yourselves to the position that Kevin Love isn't worth max money, and I don't believe you. I think that you're being contrarian because Kevin Love is an imperfect, known quantity and you aren't willing to give up the dream that some asset we already have in hand is going to provide a better opportunity.

While there's no telling who'll be available, how our picks pan out, etc, I do prefer flexibility to paying a high price for Love.  I trust Danny to do more than just that one move, but we need more than Love, and I'm not sure how we get there if most of our best assets go out for him.

I also think it's hard to characterize this as contrarian when at least a large minority of the blog seems to agree, including a lot of posters who don't typically take contrarian positions.

My issue is that if you don't think you can build around Love + Rondo, I'm really not sure you think you can build around anyone who's not an MVP caliber player.

I'm with Faf.

If people don't think Love/Rondo is a great START to a championship team, then I'm not sure what will satisfy them short of Durant coming to Boston.

Exactly.  I think Celtic fans of the past 20 years have learned a valuable lesson that emulating the Walker/Pierce teams of perpetual mediocrity is not the way to go.  However, I think people are underselling how difficult it will be to replicate our Big Three success.   

See this is interesting -- Love/Rondo feels a lot closer to Walker/Pierce than it does building blocks to a new Big 3 to me. I would imagine the people who're all in on trading the farm for Kevin Love feel the opposite.

I guess you could see it that way, the issue I have with that comparison is that Walker was a legitimately bad player to have on your team. Empty numbers with horrible efficiency.

If it looks like a duck...

If Walker is a duck then Love is a Hawk, same species and position different animal.

If Walker was the best rebounding PF in the league and had a TS% over .500 then I'd say they were similar.

[D.o.s.]

semi-related: I would love to see the Timberwolves make it to the playoffs after trading Love to a team that misses them.

[mmmmm]

It is important to note that the budget is not really defined by the salary cap, since Danny is not likely to go under that.

The budget will more likely be defined by the luxury tax threshold, which after next year will likely be around 76-78-ish million or so.

I've gone through the math in detail elsewhere and assuming you start with bringing Asik & Lin over in the infamous TPE & non-guaranteed contracts (Bogans, Babb) deal to help Houston clear space, let Bradley go, then get Love for draft pick value, one of our two young PFs and expirings (Bass, Anthony) and there is probably room for re-signing Rondo, Asik & Love each via Bird rights next Summer and still stay under the LT 'hard' cap.     The following year Wallace comes off the books so you can afford to raises for Green & whichever of our young PFs we kept.    You'll need to get a stud SG out of the draft with the pick we keep in order to replace Bradley.

So, you can make it all work.   There is no Carmelo in this scenario, though, and no room in the budget for him (or a similarly priced player) unless, say, you trade Green & Wallace' contract space, maybe next year, for someone.  I haven't looked yet to see who might be available.

Absent such a deal, you'd be looking to try to contend with  Rondo, young SG stud, Green, Love & Asik as your starters with a maturing Sully/Olynyk (whichever you kept) as your 6th man.   

I'd rate that as probably enough to get in the playoffs next year, but not strong enough to contend until a year or two after.   You'd need the youngsters to mature into legit, solid NBA players quickly, similar to the way Rondo and Perk were able to contribute to the 2007-08 team.

That's actually not a bad team.  Depending on the SG, it could be pretty well balanced on both ends of the court.  If the SG is a good shooter, he, Love and Green would provide good spacing and weapons for Rondo to work with.

You would still have some future draft picks you could leverage to get additional help, of course.  And if you get lucky, the Nets implode for that 2016 pick.   I would try my best to NOT trade that particular pick.

So, I can see how it all could be made to work with (trading our #1 pick for) Love, but I'm waivering on my draft pick threshold for when I'd want to do it.    Right now, I'm inclined to say, "No" if we have a top-3 pick and "Yes" if it's 6, 7 or 8.   I think I'd want to wait to see who falls to #5, if that's our pick.

If we get a top-3 slot tonight, I'm leaning towards wanting to play it out more organically.  Unlike some here, I really like all three of Wiggins/Embiid/Parker and can envision building with any one of them.  But I'm not 100% opposed to trading for a star, either.