I'm a 'newbie' but i've been reading this board for quite some time. And with all the talks about the inevitability of getting rice, there are some that says/thinks 'man if we get rice, why didn't we just give Dream more money so he would stay around?'. As much as i like dream, you gotta think and remember what he really wanted (i.e. good amount of money for long term). Signing dream to long term isn't feasible. I think rice for three years would be more productive than dream for three years. rice would only bt 37 by the end of his contract whereas dream would be how old? exactly. rice could be a very serviceable player. shandon anderson's D, imo, was waning. when he came in, his defense was superb. but ever since cuttino took over his playing time, anderson's D was par. getting rice for 3 years maybe nice. trading him would even be better. but all in all, i would rather have rice for 3 years than having dream for 3 years (which was at least the amount of time he wanted for his contract). thank ya for listening/readin the 'newbie' p.s.-'it doesn't make SENSE' not 'since'
