CobyWhite0 wrote:BeatDaCavs420 wrote:Im convinced some posters in this thread would rather see this trade fail just so they can say "Told ya so!". That is not a fan to me. That's a person with a agenda
1000% correct, as the post just above yours proved beyond a shadow of a doubt:
"the Bulls are a worse team record wise after the trade than before it. As long as that continues to be true, of course Orlando won the trade."
One can live with that logic, until one sees how 100% disingenuous it is:
"If that changes, then we can have a more interesting discussion."
If you buy that the Bulls are a worst record after the trade, it means OF COURSE the Magic won the trade, don't you have to also 100% buy that OF COURSE the Bulls won the trade if we wind up with a better record team wise after the trade?
Sorry for mentioning COMMON SENSE, but you can't have it both ways.
Worst record = bad trade, of course
If that changes (BETTER RECORD), we can have a more interesting discussion.
Sorry, but this is a person who obviously and blatantly has a double standard. If he didn't, "if that changes" would mean the Bulls won the trade, using his "worse record = OF COURSE Orlando won the trade".
Sorry but this is BS. Disingenuous, double-standard, losses matter but wins don't.
What the actual F?
You have tortured logic so badly with this post that the UN is considering indicting you for war crimes.
I fully supported the trade. I wanted to trade for Vuc a month or more before it happened. At the beginning of the season I was supporting the idea of this type of upgrade trade. That said, if the trade functionally makes the team worse, then I am wrong and don’t have a leg to stand on. I have no issue admitting that. If the team improves, then it’s an interesting discussion because some only consider moves that directly lead to a title as a good idea whereas I think that baby steps forward are a good idea.