No Hunter But no Green.

[BitterJim]

Chicago saw enough in Hunter to sign him for the rest of the year. If Hunter was on roster in Feburay he would have trade value for us to get a player like Green but better. Keeping Green and DNP's over Hunter was not wise. Hopefully Hunter will prove me right but yes with 3 rooks next year hard to see hunter staying but he did have more trade value than green.

We couldn't even give Hunter away in a trade before the season started. He and Green both have zero trade value. They can barely even act as filler in a trade, never mind having actual value to the other team. The better player this year is all that matters (for depth purposes, if nothing else)

[Roy H.]

Keeping Green and DNP's over Hunter was not wise.

Isn't it more like:

Keeping Green and DNP's over Hunter [and even more DNPs] was not wise significant in any meaningful basketball sense.

[Celtics4ever]

Quote
Chicago saw enough in Hunter to sign him for the rest of the year. If Hunter was on roster in Feburay he would have trade value for us to get a player like Green but better. Keeping Green and DNP's over Hunter was not wise. Hopefully Hunter will prove me right but yes with 3 rooks next year hard to see hunter staying but he did have more trade value than green.

He hasn't proved anything other than Ainge was right.  Averaging 3.5 MPG and zero points.

http://www.espn.com/nba/player/stats/_/id/2983727/rj-hunter

We couldn't even give Hunter away in a trade before the season started. He and Green both have zero trade value. They can barely even act as filler in a trade, never mind having actual value to the other team. The better player this year is all that matters (for depth purposes, if nothing else)

Nice I think spikelovethecelts =Ron Hunter or something.  JK

[chilidawg]

Green provides veteran depth in case of injury.  Hunter would have provided nothing, and had less trade value.  How is this so hard to understand?

[spikelovetheCelts]

Chicago saw enough in Hunter to sign him for the rest of the year. If Hunter was on roster in Feburay he would have trade value for us to get a player like Green but better. Keeping Green and DNP's over Hunter was not wise. Hopefully Hunter will prove me right but yes with 3 rooks next year hard to see hunter staying but he did have more trade value than green.

We couldn't even give Hunter away in a trade before the season started. He and Green both have zero trade value. They can barely even act as filler in a trade, never mind having actual value to the other team. The better player this year is all that matters (for depth purposes, if nothing else)

Somebody took a flyer on Hunter. He is on an NBA roster meaning he has value. Everybody knew Danny was cutting one loose. Why make a trade. Also cutting Green would have looked bad to other Vets. We also did not know how good Brown was. I was just thinking about this so i posted to get others thoughts and I have. I see your point it all has to go with how do you define "value" as well.