Fotis St wrote:Count again.... My vote is the 5th NO ... basketballwacko 4th No, mine 5th no... You made a mistake with basketballwacko count...
I honestly don't think I could have been more explicit in asking him what his vote is and if it was a formal no vote in this thread. Not really sure anything was unclear...
HartfordWhalers wrote:jbk1234 wrote:Charlotte gets cut out of this trade pretty quickly. I'm a no.
1 No.Texas Chuck wrote:I'll give this a KOTB: yes
1 Yes, 1 No.patman52 wrote:I think this works. Yes.
2 Yes, 1 No.RipPizzaGuy wrote:I'll give this a no.
2 Yes, 2 No.winter_mute_13 wrote:for KOTB purposes, I guess it's close enough. KOTB yes
3 Yes, 2 No.pacers33granger wrote:Forgot about the KOTB part. I'd have to say no from Sacramento's perspective.
3 yes, 3 No.kalenclayton wrote:As for the trade, I believe this is great for all parties. KOTB: yes
4 Yes, 3 No.basketballwacko2 wrote:Find a 4th team to take Lamb and I'm ok with it, although I think Monta is gonna have a very nice season for the Pacers. No way Bird does this because he's committed to Monta for at least one more full season.
I'll trim it down to this...
Is this a formal KOTB no?
4 Yes, 3 or 4 No.Fotis St wrote:Really good trade proposal.
KOTB vote No from Charlotte.
That either makes it 4/4 and next vote decides, or kills it after calling it a great trade.![]()