2015-16 Fake Trade Thread

[Braggins]

You asked about Biz and you don't have to post every five seconds about trading up and if you do I will post my opinion about not trading up. So yes if you continually post the exact same thing over and over I will continue to say I think it is a poor idea over and over.

Its the fake trade thread... Ill post as many trades as Id like. Someone specifically asked for trade ideas with NY...

Im just telling you that I know your opinion and there is no point in repeating it to me over and over. You can continue wasting your time doing so if it makes you feel better.

The point of the thread it to post fake trades and for others to comment. You keep posting the same terrible trade over and over again. That is your right and my right is to say it is a bad trade.

Ugh, you are annoying.

Thats the first time ive posted this trade and you were the one that brought my weeks old Sacramento proposals up again because I disagreed with one of your trades.

I have no problem with you disagreeing with my trades, but if you are just repeating the same very well known opinion as your disagreement every time then you are wasting your time. I already assume you disagree with every trade I make that involves moving up, and for the exact reason that youve stated 1000 times. Its not necessary, but again, if it makes you feel better or more right to repeat it over and over then go ahead i guess.

[BeesWax]

If NY want to accumulate assets we need to hope Mudiay really impresses the 76ers in his workout. If he can jump to three and bump Russell to 4 that could be a huge spot for us to trade up. If we can get the guy in that top four that really fits us and can be a big piece here we have to make a move. Trading Zeller or a future first to get Russell would be a good move because of his fit and skill set.

[BeesWax]

Its the fake trade thread... Ill post as many trades as Id like. Someone specifically asked for trade ideas with NY...

Im just telling you that I know your opinion and there is no point in repeating it to me over and over. You can continue wasting your time doing so if it makes you feel better.

The point of the thread it to post fake trades and for others to comment. You keep posting the same terrible trade over and over again. That is your right and my right is to say it is a bad trade.

Ugh, you are annoying.

Thats the first time ive posted this trade and you were the one that brought my weeks old Sacramento proposals up again because I disagreed with one of your trades.

I have no problem with you disagreeing with my trades, but if you are just repeating the same very well known opinion as your disagreement every time then you are wasting your time. I already assume you disagree with every trade I make that involves moving up, and for the exact reason that youve stated 1000 times. Its not necessary, but again, if it makes you feel better or more right to repeat it over and over then go ahead i guess.

Same trade to a different spot in the draft for the same player. Same trade. Reading the same poor trade over and over is the annoying part. I would not have to make the same argument if you could come up with something new or a good idea.

[Braggins]

Mudiay is also in play for the Lakers at 2 and there is an outside chance that Porzingis jumps someone at 2/3.

[BuzzCity]

If NY want to accumulate assets we need to hope Mudiay really impresses the 76ers in his workout. If he can jump to three and bump Russell to 4 that could be a huge spot for us to trade up. If we can get the guy in that top four that really fits us and can be a big piece here we have to make a move. Trading Zeller or a future first to get Russell would be a good move because of his fit and skill set.

I think NY would be thrilled if Russell fell to them bc they'd jump all over drafting him...I believe all the trade talk involving #4 is if the big 3 have been drafted...Russell could make an impact immediately, which is what they want

[BeesWax]

If NY want to accumulate assets we need to hope Mudiay really impresses the 76ers in his workout. If he can jump to three and bump Russell to 4 that could be a huge spot for us to trade up. If we can get the guy in that top four that really fits us and can be a big piece here we have to make a move. Trading Zeller or a future first to get Russell would be a good move because of his fit and skill set.

I think NY would be thrilled if Russell fell to them bc they'd jump all over drafting him...I believe all the trade talk involving #4 is if the big 3 have been drafted...Russell could make an impact immediately, which is what they want

That is very possible but in terms of value for us to move up we need Russell. If they want multiple play now assets or think a guy high on their board is there at 9 maybe they move. Zeller and the 9 could help them right now at two spots and we could take back a contract to help them keep space to sign someone. I agree they likely jump on Russell but you never know with Phil and how he thinks guys fit his system.

[Braggins]

The point of the thread it to post fake trades and for others to comment. You keep posting the same terrible trade over and over again. That is your right and my right is to say it is a bad trade.

Ugh, you are annoying.

Thats the first time ive posted this trade and you were the one that brought my weeks old Sacramento proposals up again because I disagreed with one of your trades.

I have no problem with you disagreeing with my trades, but if you are just repeating the same very well known opinion as your disagreement every time then you are wasting your time. I already assume you disagree with every trade I make that involves moving up, and for the exact reason that youve stated 1000 times. Its not necessary, but again, if it makes you feel better or more right to repeat it over and over then go ahead i guess.

Same trade to a different spot in the draft for the same player. Same trade. Reading the same poor trade over and over is the annoying part. I would not have to make the same argument if you could come up with something new or a good idea.

I havent included Lance in any of these deals yet, so no, this isnt the same trade. Its not even close to any of the trades Ive been proposing. So, you are 100% wrong on that account. Also, it isnt for the same player. Russell is obviously the target at 4. I posted other players as possibilities at 4 because if all we had to give up was Lance and a pick, id still move up to 4 if Russell is gone to secure selecting Hezonja/Porzongis. So, you are wrong again.

More people have agreed to my recent trades than yours. Not that it matters, but you keep insisting on calling my trades terrible even though you havent posted any that anyone has gotten behind.

[BeesWax]

Ugh, you are annoying.

Thats the first time ive posted this trade and you were the one that brought my weeks old Sacramento proposals up again because I disagreed with one of your trades.

I have no problem with you disagreeing with my trades, but if you are just repeating the same very well known opinion as your disagreement every time then you are wasting your time. I already assume you disagree with every trade I make that involves moving up, and for the exact reason that youve stated 1000 times. Its not necessary, but again, if it makes you feel better or more right to repeat it over and over then go ahead i guess.

Same trade to a different spot in the draft for the same player. Same trade. Reading the same poor trade over and over is the annoying part. I would not have to make the same argument if you could come up with something new or a good idea.

I havent included Lance in any of these deals yet, so no, this isnt the same trade. Its not even close to any of the trades Ive been proposing. So, you are 100% wrong on that account. Also, it isnt for the same player. Russell is obviously the target at 4. I posted other players as possibilities at 4 because if all we had to give up was Lance and a pick, id still move up to 4 if Russell is gone to secure selecting Hezonja/Porzongis. So, you are wrong again.

More people have agreed to my recent trades than yours. Not that it matters, but you keep insisting on calling my trades terrible even though you havent posted any that anyone has gotten behind.

Lots of people have said don't trade up. So you were wrong. This is the same trade with more assets added in to make it even worse. So you were wrong again. You did not say it was only to move up for Russell but added in two other players who may be there at nine making it for the same garbage. Wrong by you again.

We all know you want to sell the farm to acquire Hezonja and we all know I think it is stupid as possible to do so. Why don't we both stop posting the same mess over and over and end this here. I am never going to get on board with trading assets to acquire an equal talent and you are going to hype your boy so what is the point now.

[Braggins]

Same trade to a different spot in the draft for the same player. Same trade. Reading the same poor trade over and over is the annoying part. I would not have to make the same argument if you could come up with something new or a good idea.

I havent included Lance in any of these deals yet, so no, this isnt the same trade. Its not even close to any of the trades Ive been proposing. So, you are 100% wrong on that account. Also, it isnt for the same player. Russell is obviously the target at 4. I posted other players as possibilities at 4 because if all we had to give up was Lance and a pick, id still move up to 4 if Russell is gone to secure selecting Hezonja/Porzongis. So, you are wrong again.

More people have agreed to my recent trades than yours. Not that it matters, but you keep insisting on calling my trades terrible even though you havent posted any that anyone has gotten behind.

Lots of people have said don't trade up. So you were wrong. This is the same trade with more assets added in to make it even worse. So you were wrong again. You did not say it was only to move up for Russell but added in two other players who may be there at nine making it for the same garbage. Wrong by you again.

We all know you want to sell the farm to acquire Hezonja and we all know I think it is stupid as possible to do so. Why don't we both stop posting the same mess over and over and end this here. I am never going to get on board with trading assets to acquire an equal talent and you are going to hype your boy so what is the point now.

Dude, Im sorry, but you are a straight up moron. How is Lance + future 1st for Calderon and pick swap at all similar to Zeller + 1st for Thompson + Stauskas and swap? Or, Zeller for Frye, or Zeller for Landry, or any of the other trades ive brought up as possibilities for moving up. The only common demoninator is that they have us moving up. Do you just view every trade that involves moving up as exactly the same regardless of the pieces involved? Also, how is Lance and a 1st more assets than the trades involving Zeller and a 1st. Im pretty sure this NY trade involves giving up less value than any Ive proposed.

Im sorry you cant handle any post that suggests anything pisitive about Hezonja.

Im done responding to you. You are the first person on this board Ive actively disliked.

[BeesWax]

I havent included Lance in any of these deals yet, so no, this isnt the same trade. Its not even close to any of the trades Ive been proposing. So, you are 100% wrong on that account. Also, it isnt for the same player. Russell is obviously the target at 4. I posted other players as possibilities at 4 because if all we had to give up was Lance and a pick, id still move up to 4 if Russell is gone to secure selecting Hezonja/Porzongis. So, you are wrong again.

More people have agreed to my recent trades than yours. Not that it matters, but you keep insisting on calling my trades terrible even though you havent posted any that anyone has gotten behind.

Lots of people have said don't trade up. So you were wrong. This is the same trade with more assets added in to make it even worse. So you were wrong again. You did not say it was only to move up for Russell but added in two other players who may be there at nine making it for the same garbage. Wrong by you again.

We all know you want to sell the farm to acquire Hezonja and we all know I think it is stupid as possible to do so. Why don't we both stop posting the same mess over and over and end this here. I am never going to get on board with trading assets to acquire an equal talent and you are going to hype your boy so what is the point now.

Dude, Im sorry, but you are a straight up moron. How is Lance + future 1st for Calderon and pick swap at all similar to Zeller + 1st for Thompson + Stauskas and swap? Or, Zeller for Frye, or Zeller for Landry, or any of the other trades ive brought up as possibilities for moving up. The only common demoninator is that they have us moving up. Do you just view every trade that involves moving up as exactly the same regardless of the pieces involved? Also, how is Lance and a 1st more assets than the trades involving Zeller and a 1st. Im pretty sure this NY trade involves giving up less value than any Ive proposed.

Im done responding to you. You are the first person on this board Ive actively disliked.

You previously wanted to trade Zeller or a future first to move up now you want to trade Lance and a future first to trade up. 2 is greater than 1 which is fundamental math. Both trades involve taking back a bad contract the other team wants to get rid of. In the one case you wanted to trade Zeller and a future first to get Nik and move up so two for two vs two for one is still easier to swallow than this.

You are not the first person on the board who has been this bad but you would be way up there and I have been here a long time.

[SWedd523]

Fundamental math rarely applies in the realm of the NBA where, more often than not, the single best player is the purpose of doing any deal.

The impact individual players have far outweighs the collective impact of two lesser guys. If we have to trade Zeller (or anybody else) and a pick, or even some future asset, then I'd be fine with it as long as the guy we get in return is better than the guys going out.

Hezonja is projected to be better than any of Zeller, Grant, Payne, or whoever else. So if you have the opportunity to make that deal, you suck it up and make the trade.


Now you guys can get back to your bickering

[Braggins]

Lots of people have said don't trade up. So you were wrong. This is the same trade with more assets added in to make it even worse. So you were wrong again. You did not say it was only to move up for Russell but added in two other players who may be there at nine making it for the same garbage. Wrong by you again.

We all know you want to sell the farm to acquire Hezonja and we all know I think it is stupid as possible to do so. Why don't we both stop posting the same mess over and over and end this here. I am never going to get on board with trading assets to acquire an equal talent and you are going to hype your boy so what is the point now.

Dude, Im sorry, but you are a straight up moron. How is Lance + future 1st for Calderon and pick swap at all similar to Zeller + 1st for Thompson + Stauskas and swap? Or, Zeller for Frye, or Zeller for Landry, or any of the other trades ive brought up as possibilities for moving up. The only common demoninator is that they have us moving up. Do you just view every trade that involves moving up as exactly the same regardless of the pieces involved? Also, how is Lance and a 1st more assets than the trades involving Zeller and a 1st. Im pretty sure this NY trade involves giving up less value than any Ive proposed.

Im done responding to you. You are the first person on this board Ive actively disliked.

You previously wanted to trade Zeller or a future first to move up now you want to trade Lance and a future first to trade up. 2 is greater than 1 which is fundamental math.

I know I said I wasnt responding anymore, but this logic... Wow... So Pj and Daniels would be more value than MKG. 2 is greater than 1. Pj + Daniels equals 2. MKG equals 1. It doesnt matter what the relative value of each piece is. Its just pure simple math. Great point man. Ill try to live up your standards of quality posting from here on out. And btw, i had trades involving Zeller and a 1st, they werent all either/or, so your flawless logic doesnt apply unfortunately.

Ok, sorry everyone for my part in derailing this thread. Im really done responding this time.

[Liver_Pooty]

Lol. Things got heated in a hurry

[BeesWax]

Lol. Things got heated in a hurry

Some people can't take criticism and resort to name calling to try to win an argument the lost a page ago.

[BigSlam]

I'm very bored of the bickering. It makes this thread almost unreadable so here's what's going to happen:

If it keeps going you are going to force me to lock the thread meaning that no other posters will be able to post it in either - and that is something you will own. That will be your legacy on this board. Shutting down a year round thread forever and ruining it for every other poster because not only can you not act like adults, you can't even fake acting like adults.

Or

I'll ban your account. Permanently.

Keep it up and you'll roll the dice.

Your choice.



Carry on.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[yosemiteben]

Somehow I feel like Brother Dave is responsible for this.

[Braggins]

Can we trade Al during the draft even though he won't have actually opted in or out of his contract?

[BeesWax]

No because until he opts in he is technically not on our team. The opt in date is also after the draft so he likely won't opt in until it would be to late.

[BuzzCity]

No because until he opts in he is technically not on our team. The opt in date is also after the draft so he likely won't opt in until it would be to late.

This sucks...but him and Henderson are smart enough to know we would probably package them in draft night trades if they were to opt in before

[BeesWax]

No because until he opts in he is technically not on our team. The opt in date is also after the draft so he likely won't opt in until it would be to late.

This sucks...but him and Henderson are smart enough to know we would probably package them in draft night trades if they were to opt in before

I am curious if there are limits to when you can make an opt in date. If there were not I would make the date before the draft so I could move a guy if I wanted.