if you think walker won't be good, that's one thing. but to call his future irrelevant in considering a trade for a guy who is a declining defender with no balls skills is not using your melon, particularly when followed with a cliche about 'a dime a dozen at his position' when the guy you want to trade for also plays such a position. raja bell just signed with the spurs for $1M. raja's name is keith bogans.
Right, so you're trading a guy who might be a rotation player in 3-4 years for a guy that can be a rotation player now. You do realize why this is good for us, right?
you think he'll be a 'rotation player'. i don't. i think he could be a starter. i think he could be a star. he could sure as heck be alot more than raja bell in his old age, who would be a useful but limited minute role player for the Cs. meanwhile, you simply assume walker won't play minutes for the celtics this year. i'm not making that assumption.
look i get it -- you don't think walker will ever be truly good. i have no problem with that. just trying to point out that making trades strictly on the basis on what a player can do for you that day is shortsighted. i'd sure like to have joe johnson and i bet the suns would sure like to have rondo. you can trade walker for bell in your fantasy, and i can tell michael jordan to stick it in mine. but kindly stop trying to convince me otherwise.
