TT '09 - VINCECARTER4PRES wins!

[vincecarter4pres]

I know my trade wasn't a homerun by any means, might not even be a base hit, but I don't see how sammydavis' abortion of a concept trumps mine?

[sammydavis]

I know my trade wasn't a homerun by any means, might not even be a base hit, but I don't see how sammydavis' abortion of a concept trumps mine?

Don't question the judges, buddy, at least none of them (so far) have noticed that you included not one, but two ineligible players in your trade.

If the whole concept has to work 'right now' as it has been pointed out numerous times, then Moon is off limits. And if the semifinals are all about working WITHOUT expirings or rookie deals then Kurt Thomas is even more off limits.

I could've put together a small trade involving Bell+Moute for an expiring and probably have won easily but seeing your invalid trade I decided to go with a bigger and uglier one that's controversial enough to make the judges angry. I hoped at least one judge notices what I consider your honest mistake and addresses it in his judgment... and didn't want to point it out this directly, but you ranting about how my trade trumps yours ...


BUT I don't want to advance based solely on this, so I politely ask the judges to keep scoring as if both our trades were valid to see who gets to the finals. Thanks!

[vincecarter4pres]

I know my trade wasn't a homerun by any means, might not even be a base hit, but I don't see how sammydavis' abortion of a concept trumps mine?

Don't question the judges, buddy, at least none of them (so far) have noticed that you included not one, but two ineligible players in your trade.

If the whole concept has to work 'right now' as it has been pointed out numerous times, then Moon is off limits. And if the semifinals are all about working WITHOUT expirings or rookie deals then Kurt Thomas is even more off limits.

I could've put together a small trade involving Bell+Moute for an expiring and probably have won easily but seeing your invalid trade I decided to go with a bigger and uglier one that's controversial enough to make the judges angry. I hoped at least one judge notices what I consider your honest mistake and addresses it in his judgment... and didn't want to point it out this directly, but you ranting about how my trade trumps yours ...


BUT I don't want to advance based solely on this, so I politely ask the judges to keep scoring as if both our trades were valid to see who gets to the finals. Thanks!

I had one ineligible player in my deal Moon, I had to include Kurt Thomas to balance the deal and I saved Milwaukee around 2 mill this season and 11 next.
BTW, your backhanded snithcing and ratting is no better then being a blatant one, it's actually worse. The funny part is, both judges realized and mentioned it and it obviously effected their scores on my trade, so you fail again.
My trade can be done about a month and a half into the season, and it has already been established that that does not disqualify a proposal, it just effects the feasability points dramatically, which it obviously did for me.
Your trade on the other hand, it's just a joke that you got a single feasability point. If for some reason Houston decided to swap Tmac for Redd and sacrifice all their cap space, for what reason on God's green earth are they also absorbing Gadzuric and his just unsightly and hideous contract and the oft-injured and overpaid Charlie Bell?!
There is just no way in hell they would, that's the reason.
That equals zero feasability.
Everyone else has been bitching at the judges non stop. I have had my gripes but kept my mouth shut, but I had to say something on this one, this is just a sham.

[sammydavis]

I had one ineligible player in my deal Moon, I had to include Kurt Thomas to balance the deal and I saved Milwaukee around 2 mill this season and 11 next.

Except KT is ineligible:

Anyone who is not on an expiring or rookie-scale contract is available

So please do not pretend he is eligible. The whole scenario concept was NOT to include expirings and rookie scale deals, which you obviously failed.

BTW, your backhanded snithcing and ratting is no better then being a blatant one, it's actually worse. The funny part is, both judges realized and mentioned it and it obviously effected their scores on my trade, so you fail again.

I don't consider my previous post backhanded in any way, and it was not my intention to get you disqualified at all (see my last sentence). However, you did NOT pass the requirements of the trade and NEITHER judge mentioned the KT mistake. If you think they did, please quote them. All they mentioned was they liked KT in CLE, but there was not a single word about KT being ineligible which is my whole point. So you cannot have any feasibility points deducted for KT. Moon, yes, but your low score just reflects what the judges think is a bad fit for CLE.

Your trade on the other hand, it's just a joke that you got a single feasability point. If for some reason Houston decided to swap Tmac for Redd and sacrifice all their cap space, for what reason on God's green earth are they also absorbing Gadzuric and his just unsightly and hideous contract and the oft-injured and overpaid Charlie Bell?!
There is just no way in hell they would, that's the reason.
That equals zero feasability.

This I completely agree with. I saw your trade, saw 2 ineligible players in it, one of which could (I do not say should!) mean a disqualification, and decided to post the first trade that came into mind however bad it was. I even described my thoughts afterwards, totally aware that my trade should not even be in the ballpark but at least it was valid and didn't fail the scenario's main point.

Everyone else has been bitching at the judges non stop. I have had my gripes but kept my mouth shut, but I had to say something on this one, this is just a sham.

It's a shame you are still talking about my trade and not about yours. There must be a reason the judges scored both trades the way they did. If you think you should've scored more, you can disagree. I just wanted to point out that you could've scored a lot less had the judges taken the KT ineligibility into account.

If you are not allowed to do something and still do it do you really expect to get away with it without anyone taking notice or just get minor penalties because of it?



There are several judges left to post their scores so you can still advance. And if you will, you will certainly deserve it. But not by overlooking and ignoring your mistake instead of admitting your wrong.

Good luck still, may the best win this tournament!

[vincecarter4pres]

I send an expiring, but I get back a much bigger one and save the Bucks 2 mill this year in pure cap, guaranteeing them to stay below the lux. You actually add salary and bring them precariously close to it, if not over it.
Whatever, your trade is just horrid, and I was speaking to the judges anyway, it didn't matter, they already judged it and I doubt I was going to effect any of the other 2 or 3 judges with my comments, I am just stunned you got any feasability points either.
Boobie obviously let his bias get in the way on this one too, taking his personal opinion into it way too much...

[ecuhus1981]

TIMEOUT!





I am going to attempt to contact dcash4, cellardoor, klomp44 (where's he been this whole time?) and deviljets7, to see if we can get more judges to rule on these two assignments. I know yesterday night was the deadline, but I'd really like to have more than two judges per round.

I'll let everyone know as soon as I know more...

[CellarDoor]

I'll get mine in in a few. I didn't realize everything had been posted.

[CellarDoor]

Going with VC4P, though I don't think it matters as I think he already lost. I read Ecuhus' stipulations and semantically, there's no issue with KT. It doesn't say you "cant" use them anywhere. Also, I tend to agree that Sammy shouldn't be a backseat judge.

VC4P
Originality: 7
Feasibility: 2
Effectiveness: 5

Sammy
Originality: 5
Feasibility: 2
Effectiveness: 1

Poopdamoop/RTM...trading Martin to get rid of deals is throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Additionally, a deal where your long term asset coming back is Carroll is a loss.
Pdm
Originality: 7
Feasibility: 3
Effectiveness: 2

RTM
Originality: 8
Feasibility: 6
Effectiveness: 5

[dockingsched]

got your thread on the lakers board. i'll get my scores up by today.

[InBoobieWeTrust]

Boobie obviously let his bias get in the way on this one too, taking his personal opinion into it way too much...

Which part of my grade on yours are you contesting?

Originality? People have been sending Redd to Cleveland for years at this point.

Feasibility? It would never happen, especially with Redd coming off an injury, on that contract. I think it's pretty safe to say that the Redd to Cleveland ship has sailed, and the Cavs aren't interested in the guy because pairing up a failed back-court and immensely downgrading the perimeter defense on a Mike Brown team isn't something that would happen. And not even speaking from my mindset, speaking from the mindset of the CAVS' front office, Michael Redd is not a guy they'd be willing to send Z away for, especially since a buy-out would be unlikely in this scenario.

Effectiveness? As I stated earlier, there's a reason the Cavs aren't and wont be going after Redd, it's because they don't want him on the team because he doesn't necessarily make the team better.

Sorry if you don't like my scores, but they are what they are and as it stands Sammy got like, one more point than you, and that's just because Redd to Cleveland has been beaten to death ten times, whereas Redd to Houston has only been beaten to death three-four times. (relative, of course). TBH, both trades we're pretty uncreative/lame/unoriginal.

And if you notice, since you're arguing feasibility, I gave Sammy 0 feasibility, so you're bashing my scores but then agreeing with them? Please. Everyone's scores are based off of personal opinion/perception of what the teams need. My opinion and perception (and it'd be hard to counter them) is that Cleveland wants nothing to do with Redd or his contract, hence, your trade is bad, at least to me.

[ecuhus1981]

got your thread on the lakers board. i'll get my scores up by today.

Cool.

[deviljets7]

vincecarter4pres vs. sammydavis
vincecarter4pres: MIL trades: Michael Redd and Kurt Thomas for Zydrunas Ilgauskas, Daniel Gibson and Jamario Moon.
Redd to CLE has been beaten into the ground quite a bit here and honestly, the fit is especially questionable now with Mo Williams as the point. Moon's trade restriction is also an issue.

Originality: 3
Feasability: 3
Effectiveness: 5

sammydavis: MIL Trades: Redd, Charlie Bell and Dan Gadzuric for Tracy McGrady, Brent Barry and Brian Cook.
I know you didn't think expirings such as Thomas can be used, but it's hard for me to give you much of a pass in the case. Redd/Bell for TMac works under the cap and adding Gadz for expirings is excessive and makes it a poor deal for Houston.

Originality: 3
Feasability: 1
Effectiveness: 4

RTM vs. Poopdamoop
RTM:SAC Trades: Andres Nocioni for Nazr Mohammed

It makes a lot of sense for both sides, though it wouldn't shock me if both turned it down for various reasons. The deal is simple, but that's not a bad thing. I have to take some points off b/c I've seen it on the board before, but otherwise a nice trade.

Originality: 2
Feasability: 7
Effectiveness: 7

Poopdamoop:SAC trades Kevin Martin, Nocioni and Beno Udrih for Josh Howard, JJ Barea, Matt Carroll and Shawne Williams.

While I have to give credit for creativity, this is a doomed trade. For Dallas, I don't think the upgrade from Howard to Martin is worth this much extra salary. Nocioni is a useful player, but with Shawn Marion already there, where does Nocioni fit?

As for the Kings. It's hard to endorse deals where you "devalue" your top player by grouping him together with bad contracts. This is especially the case when you're taking back a very poor contract (Carroll) and Howard is older than Martin. What direction are the Kings exactly going here. Yes they save money long term here and Howard's a fine player, but they don't get significant young talent or cap flexibility until 2011/12.

Originality: 5
Feasability: 2
Effectiveness: 2

[ecuhus1981]

I know I'm dragging my feet. I'll tabulate the scores this afternoon...

[ecuhus1981]

... or this morning!

I know that dcash4 said he would enter his scores, but I'm going to forge ahead without him. He was not the reason for he holdup, though; that was wholly due to my schedule and lack of initiative in getting this done. I'll do my best to keep the rest of this tourney moving as a good clip.

ANYWAY, here are the results:

vincecarter4pres (9.75) advances over sammydavis (8.25).

RTM (16.25) advances over poopdamoop (12.00).

Congratulations, vc4p and RTM, you're in the Finals!

Hopefully, I'll have a Finals assignment prepared tomorrow, (a recent FA signing buffaloed my last idea...), with a deadline shortly thereafter. Thanks to all of the competitors and judges, and good luck to the finalists!

[sammydavis]

Congratulations, vc4p and RTM, you're in the Finals!

Yeah, congrats guys, well done!

Thanks for the tournament, Ecuhus, it's been fun!

[ecuhus1981]

"Gosh, is this tournament ever going to get going again?"

Yes, I know. I apologize, guys. I have been covering for a co-worker on vacation, so I've had precious little time to issue a Finals Assignment. To be honest, as I alluded to in my earlier post, my original Finals idea was thwarted by free agency last week, so I'm brainstorming for a new one. If any of the judges have a good idea and feel inclined to make this Finals assignment for us, please let me know. Otherwise, I *should* have time this evening to finish it.

Thanks for your patience.

[vincecarter4pres]

Dude, I'm all for patience, but we're talking very close to a week here...

[ecuhus1981]

I know. I guess it's just been a combination of a hectic schedule (although I still make time for snarky comments on the T&T board...), and writer's block after the Iverson option disappeared. I seriously do not see another trade idea that is worthy of a Finals assignment.

So, with apologies to our two remaining competitors, here goes nothing...

FINALS ASSIGNMENT ("finally"!)

vincecarter4pres (1) vs. RTM (3)
Assemble an "International" Team

I know that this is a kooky assignment. Keep in mind that the goal is not to assemble the better team, but to make the most FEASIBLE, EFFECTIVE and ORIGINAL trade idea. You could go for a Nash-Ginobili-Kirilenko-Nowitzki-Biedrins team if you like, but if it is unfair for the other teams involved, it will not score well. Also, the more int'l players you can get on your team, the better; but DO NOT feel that you have to find 15 int'l players in order to turn in your assignment. I'd rather see a highly effective, feasible and original deal that netted a team 4 int'l starters and 5 int'l role-players, than a zany proposal that fills all 15 roster spots with foreign players.

As always, all current trade restrictions apply; if a player has BYC or PPP status, or if they were recently signed/traded/etc., you might want to steer clear of them.

Players who were born in the US are eligible, as long as they have represented another country in international competition at some point. Thanks to all for your patience, and happy trading!

[vincecarter4pres]

I like this idea, it's original and interesting, but one question, do we get to start with any team of our choice?

[ecuhus1981]

Good question, and yes, take any team you like.

Also, I know I'm the last person around here who should be spouting deadlines, but how does 9/25/09 at midnight sound?