with the FSU Thugs up next, i just dont want injuries. win, fine. lose, fine. but get out healthy.

tell him one of your “net Buds” has Lefty’s autograph on the page showing Scott hitting a picture-perfect jumper to beat Davidson and Mike Malloy in the 1969 Eastern Regional.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/blackhistory2008/columns/story?id=3268786

By contrast, I was accused of “sound[ing] like” I believe that Lawson should play even if he’s still hurt. That accusation was not only erroneous, it was set up by an out-of-context quotation from a comment of mine in which I had said the opposite. Perhaps that is what you missed.

For the record, and with any luck for the last time: The idea that Lawson should sit to save him for the NCAAT is not without appeal. It seems to enjoy majority support here. It also certainly seems to be what Roy is thinking. And it may well be the case that, medically, there’s no choice; he sure looked like he was hobbling pretty badly today. If it IS a medical necessity, that’s the end of the argument. Of course you don’t play him, and neither I nor anyone else to my knowledge has suggested otherwise.

But the question is, as others have observed, more complicated than that. On the limited information publicly available, it’s less than clear what the phrase “medically ready to play” means. It’s too obvious for argument that Lawson was medically ready to play in the Duke game, when the injury was a lot fresher than it is now. The problem arose when, afterward, he experienced considerable pain and swelling. Pain and swelling can be treated, and do not per se, and without more, pose a threat to a player’s long-term abilities. Whether such a threat exists in Lawson’s case is a question I am in no position to judge, but I am likewise in no position simply to assume the threat is there. The principal point of difference between me and the majority here is how much to weigh medical readiness to play (which as I say cannot be precisely determined), versus how much to weigh the ramifications for the NCAAT (which also cannot be precisely determined). I place relatively more emphasis on the former. I do not believe this is a sin.

As wb3 notes, it comes down to a question of balancing the interests of having him play (thus increasing the risk of exacerbating the problem, but also increasing the chances that we win the ACC title), versus resting him (which I presume increases our chances in the NCAAT but at the cost of not having the ACC-POY on the floor for us as we seek that title). For most people here this seems to be an easy choice: The NCAAT is The Big Prize; we want The Big Prize; therefore Lawson sits. The reason it is not so easy a choice for me is that I see downsides to losing the ACCT — and in a sense losing it by choice — that others don’t weigh as heavily.

I’m going to the Legends Brunch tomorrow and will hopefully get to talk to Charlie. I’ll pass along your thoughts!

Also, right before I took the pic of Montross I went up to shake his hand and I didn’t think I’d get mine back. Guy has got a monster hand, even for a 7-footer!