The 'jilted lovers' thing is an okay analogy, as sports provoke really strong passions, like politics and religion, but in the end, I think war analogies work best for sports (which is why they are so frequently used, by both fans and players).
People are p---ed off because it's as though one of your soldiers, who you regarded as as brother, as family (another common sports analogy) with whom you've been to battle, fought tooth and nail with, experienced the incredible highs and lows with, suddenly, while the war is still raging, decides screw you guys; I'm going to switch sides to our mortal enemies and try to take you out, and oh by the way, for half the money. The analogy works because it feels most like treason (although jilted lover works if you like that better). In either case, it feels like an enormous betrayal of trust. But it's not a bad or irrational thing to think that way. We are indeed passionate about our team. I think it's an entirely normal response. Weird to me, from a fan's perspective, is the bloodless, measured, milquetoast response to Ray's defection approach.
...
If DA traded him to Mia I doubt people would react like this, and if you as a soldier have already been told by your superiors that you're leaving your brothers in arms to join some other side, the talk about brotherhood, family etc. would mean very little to you.
My take on all of this is that it is ok to be p---ed if you would be p---ed if Ray was traded to memphis too, if not cause "it is just buisness" than it is hypocritical to feel betrayed now when your soldier decides he will use his buisness side of equation and choose him next destination.
I know I m oversimplifying it a lot since his destination is cHeat, but I ask all of you calling him Judas would you be calling Danny Judas if he traded him to Mia for lets say N. Cole and 1st rounder?
If the answer is no than there is something wrong in your calculations:)
The thing about sports is that a lot of what we fans think and talk about is not coolly rational. What makes being a fan fun is the attachment we have with our team, and the emotional charge that comes with it. Speaking for myself, I approach it with a 'What is best for the Celtics?' point of view. The players, naturally, have more of a what's in my own (and my family's) best interest. And the two don't always coincide (or the Celtics would have all the best players in the league ;^) . So, if Danny traded a player, my rationale for judging Danny would be 'Did what Danny did benefit the Celtics?', and not, 'Is what Danny did best for the player?'. My standard for a player is similarly, 'Is what the player did of benefit to the Celtics?' I'm a fan. I have that luxury. So, if it's good for my team, that's what I want.
Now, Ray can go anywhere he chooses to, and one would understand that if the money and playing opportunity were vastly superior elsewhere that it'd be a perfectly rational decision for him to do so. Clearly, Ray had been repeatedly dangled as trade bait. None of us would like that if we were in his shoes (and yet, it's part of Danny's job to explore every opportunity to improve the team, so I don't blame him for doing so.) It's clear that Ray had his reasons for leaving, and among those reasons, it seems to me, is revenge. There were others, of course, like great winter weather, a better chance for a championship, and probably others. But at the end of the day, I think his overriding reason for leaving was revenge for what he perceived as slights. If the Celtics offered him twice the salary AND a no trade clause, his biggest organizational problems were then already addressed. Don't dismiss the bunker mentality that teams have; the us against the world mindset, and particulary the us against our enemy the Heat that we would have had. To use the war analogy again, we are trying to kill them (kill their season at least), and they're trying to kill ours. The brotherhood and brother in arms aspect was in the locker room and does not nearly as much extend to the front office, so once you excluded the troubling aspects of the front office by being offered double the salary and the no trade clause, the the FO is out of the equation except if you wish to exact revenge on them, and that appears to have been Ray's greatest consideration (among the several).
So, bottom line, he chose to take half the money to go to our enemy even after being offered a no trade clause. Entirely his prerogative to do so, just as it's mine to regard him as a traitor for doing it. Ray's overriding goal and mine are not the same. I want what's best for the Celtics, and Ray wants what's best for Ray. I'm okay with that. And I hope he fails there.
Topic: Ray Allen's message in the Boston Globe (Read 61188 times)