I guess it comes back to the same question - do we field the absolute best team possible for the upcoming season, or do we balance our roster out so we don't face a huge decline in a couple of years time?
IMO, Davidson will prove to be more beneficial than a Brad Hill or Ryan Kersten type for the 07/08 season. I don't think too many would dispute that (though some may argue the difference won't be great). However, if you're looking at, say, 08/09 & beyond, who would you rather?
Davidson will be 33 before the season starts, Hill & Kersten both 21.
So my biggest concern, rather than acquiring & retaining local talent, is that we're just not signing/retaining *young* talent.
For example, had the 6ers chased an Adam Gibson straight from the 'tute, and said "look, we really think this guy is going to be superior to our local kid, Hill, we're going to chase him instead" and then actively did it, I don't think that's a problem. The inactivity in seeking & securing young talent is what bothers me.
But, again, if they genuinely believe they're going to pull off all the big signings that have been rumoured, and that with those signings, they'll be a real shot at winning the title, then I don't fault them for signing Davidson.
It's if we end up somewhere between good & mediocre (rather than exceptional) that I think there's an issue with passing up younger guys. For the past 4 seasons at least, I'd say we've hovered between good & mediocre.
That's just my theory on it, anyway.