08-23-2021, 11:31 AM
(08-22-2021, 08:11 PM)F Gump Wrote: That's fine, but if not Rondo, then who is
1 readily available
2 can be an actual playable secondary creator, rather than just a spare that isn't ever playable, and
3 will NOT cost something in talent that we'd rather keep instead
Given the criteria, players who have bothersome flaws in one area or another are probably going to be part of most (if not all) of our choices. And imo "nothing" is the worst answer. So if not Rondo, then who?
Sometimes, having nothing is better than the something you can get. I sure am hungry and thirsty, but I'll pass on the poison and hemlock.
You go ask Dirk again, if he thought having "something" in Rondo. was in hindsight, better than having nothing. (and Rondo actually still had some stuff) Just a simple "yes" or "no", not a "well, we were thinking....", but yes or no. He'll tell you "nothing" was the better option, as will just about everyone on that roster, I bet, if they are being gut level honest, and not trying to avoid throwing a guy under the bus. So yeah, "Nothing" isn't the worse option between "nothing" and Rondo.
"There are no friends on the court." - Luka Doncic