I don’t want you to think I’m reading too far into things… but the last sentence of the this quote seems ominous to me.
Via The Boston Globe:
“It’s a goal of mine not to have KG play 81 games and to not have Paul Pierce play 81 games,’’ Ainge said yesterday. “And to not play 36 minutes a game for 81 games. That’s not my objective at all, or our organizational objective. KG could have played [Tuesday] night. We look for opportunities to give him time off.
“This has nothing to do with wear and tear, especially in Paul’s situation.’’
Why does he have to qualify it, “Especially in Paul’s situation?” Is KG’s thigh bruise (wink wink nudge nudge) not just a thigh bruise?
It seems as if KG’s injury might be a little more serious than the Celtics are trying to let on. If seeing KG — semingly out of nowhere — being forced to sit a game out due to injury didn’t sound off the alarms in your head, maybe the insinuation that his injury might have something to do with wear and tear might.
If this were only just a bruise, does Ainge come out and say that the injuries have nothing to do with wear and tear… “especially in Paul’s situation”? Shouldn’t it be “especially in KG’s situation” too? After all, it’s only a bruise, damn it!
Or is it something worse?