Pop's idea about a Trade Committee

Moderators: bisme37, Dirk, KingDavid, cupcakesnake, bwgood77, zimpy27, infinite11285, Clav, ken6199, Domejandro

Ruzious
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 47,909
And1: 11,582
Joined: Jul 17, 2001
       

Pop's idea about a Trade Committee 

Post#1 » by Ruzious » Wed Feb 13, 2008 3:35 pm

<Sorry if this subject has been discusse.>

Given the travesy of the Memphis/Lakers trade, has it come to the point that a Trade Committee be a good idea - basically for the same reasons trades are vetoed in fantasy leagues?

If Memphis ends up basically giving up Mike Miller to a contender, would that change your mind?

And would their be a taint if the Lakers win the NBA championship - with Gasol having a huge contribution?
User avatar
sule
RealGM
Posts: 14,359
And1: 34,212
Joined: Nov 11, 2006
     

 

Post#2 » by sule » Wed Feb 13, 2008 3:55 pm

it would give way to bias towards the teams who have representatives on the trade board
NetsForce
Banned User
Posts: 20,711
And1: 29
Joined: Dec 27, 2006

 

Post#3 » by NetsForce » Wed Feb 13, 2008 3:56 pm

Yeah It's a great idea, I think they should get some of our RealGM trade experts to be on that committee.
ljp24
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,489
And1: 22
Joined: Nov 12, 2007

Re: Pop's idea about a Trade Committee 

Post#4 » by ljp24 » Wed Feb 13, 2008 3:56 pm

Ruzious wrote:<Sorry if this subject has been discusse.>

Given the travesy of the Memphis/Lakers trade, has it come to the point that a Trade Committee be a good idea - basically for the same reasons trades are vetoed in fantasy leagues?

If Memphis ends up basically giving up Mike Miller to a contender, would that change your mind?

And would their be a taint if the Lakers win the NBA championship - with Gasol having a huge contribution?


ARE YOU SERIOUS?

All this freaking years, NBA fans cried about no trades around the deadline, you get two major ones and you're complaining?

You can't please everyone.
GJense4181
Banned User
Posts: 9,627
And1: 3
Joined: Mar 30, 2004
Location: Ann Arbor

 

Post#5 » by GJense4181 » Wed Feb 13, 2008 3:57 pm

What does it mean when they submit a trade for league approval, then?
User avatar
wetsthebed
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 33,421
And1: 2,242
Joined: Jul 11, 2005
Location: asl?
       

 

Post#6 » by wetsthebed » Wed Feb 13, 2008 3:58 pm

I hate it in fantasy leagues, and I'd hate it in the NBA. If both sides agree to a trade, it should go through.
Image
User avatar
snaquille oatmeal
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 16,815
And1: 4,819
Joined: Nov 15, 2005
Location: San Diego
   

 

Post#7 » by snaquille oatmeal » Wed Feb 13, 2008 4:00 pm

how about a commitee to disallow teams from entering the lottery draft if they tank the season.
Forum permissions
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot trade for basketball reasons in this forum
You cannot but I can...five rings!
User avatar
revprodeji
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 22,388
And1: 8
Joined: Dec 25, 2002
Location: Freedom consists not in doing what we like, but in having the right to do what we ought
Contact:

 

Post#8 » by revprodeji » Wed Feb 13, 2008 4:39 pm

No commitee. If both teams agree then that is fine. An owner should have the responsability to fire a bonehead if he has one. But if that bonehead has a vision to rebuild a team then give him a shot.
http://www.timetoshop.org
Weight management, Sports nutrition and more...
User avatar
JellosJigglin
RealGM
Posts: 15,490
And1: 9,518
Joined: Jul 14, 2004

 

Post#9 » by JellosJigglin » Wed Feb 13, 2008 5:04 pm

If Memphis had traded Gasol to a lottery team for expiring contracts, no one would give a damn. Really all the crying is because it helped the Lakers.
Patterns
Banned User
Posts: 6,008
And1: 18
Joined: Sep 19, 2007

 

Post#10 » by Patterns » Wed Feb 13, 2008 5:06 pm

A committee would be beyond stupid. They'd just veto any trades that help a playoff team.
dingclancy
Analyst
Posts: 3,335
And1: 90
Joined: Feb 28, 2004
Contact:

 

Post#11 » by dingclancy » Wed Feb 13, 2008 5:11 pm

No one shouted foul when VC was traded to the Nets - and VC had more value than Pau and VC is also a better talent.

The reason why Pop is cryin is because the "No one will help the Lakers" world is shattered.
Image
jab
Starter
Posts: 2,321
And1: 3
Joined: Jul 25, 2004
Location: Detroit: Where only the strong survive cause the weak are eaten alive!

 

Post#12 » by jab » Wed Feb 13, 2008 5:28 pm

JellosJigglin wrote:If Memphis had traded Gasol to a lottery team for expiring contracts, no one would give a damn. Really all the crying is because it helped the Lakers.
User avatar
hermes
RealGM
Posts: 96,276
And1: 25,456
Joined: Aug 27, 2007
Location: the restaurant at the end of the universe
 

 

Post#13 » by hermes » Wed Feb 13, 2008 5:28 pm

edit, wrong thread

pops is just jealous he didn't get a steal like that
crucifixion
Freshman
Posts: 50
And1: 16
Joined: Feb 11, 2005

Re: Pop's idea about a Trade Committee 

Post#14 » by crucifixion » Wed Feb 13, 2008 5:28 pm

Ruzious wrote:And would their be a taint if the Lakers win the NBA championship - with Gasol having a huge contribution?


I didn't hear anyone complain when Detroit did almost the same exact thing and acquired almost the same exact quality of player Rasheed Wallace for an even WORSE package that Memphis got. And oh yeah, Pistons went on to win the championship that year.

dingclancy wrote:No one shouted foul when VC was traded to the Nets - and VC had more value than Pau and VC is also a better talent.

The reason why Pop is cryin is because the "No one will help the Lakers" world is shattered.


JellosJigglin wrote:If Memphis had traded Gasol to a lottery team for expiring contracts, no one would give a damn. Really all the crying is because it helped the Lakers.
User avatar
Magz50
Head Coach
Posts: 6,220
And1: 115
Joined: May 07, 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
   

 

Post#15 » by Magz50 » Wed Feb 13, 2008 5:40 pm

Omg...people are still thinking Pop was being serious??? are you kidding me? Pop was being his usual dry self. his humour is very understated, if you follow the Spurs you'd know that Pop wasn't being serious with this comment. It cracks me up how many people especially in the media have taken it for face value.
Jules Winnfield
Banned User
Posts: 1,157
And1: 1
Joined: Jul 17, 2006

 

Post#16 » by Jules Winnfield » Wed Feb 13, 2008 5:43 pm

dingclancy
Analyst
Posts: 3,335
And1: 90
Joined: Feb 28, 2004
Contact:

 

Post#17 » by dingclancy » Wed Feb 13, 2008 5:44 pm

Magz50 wrote:Omg...people are still thinking Pop was being serious??? are you kidding me? Pop was being his usual dry self. his humour is very understated, if you follow the Spurs you'd know that Pop wasn't being serious with this comment. It cracks me up how many people especially in the media have taken it for face value.


Well his proposal got Arenas and Cuban agreeing. He was even asked by reporters in reference to Chris Wallace challenge to other GM's to show their faces and criticize him - and he said "There it is" or something to that effect.
Image
Ruzious
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 47,909
And1: 11,582
Joined: Jul 17, 2001
       

 

Post#18 » by Ruzious » Wed Feb 13, 2008 7:03 pm

dingclancy wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



Well his proposal got Arenas and Cuban agreeing. He was even asked by reporters in reference to Chris Wallace challenge to other GM's to show their faces and criticize him - and he said "There it is" or something to that effect.

Exactly. I'm sure Pop was kidding about putting himself on the committee, he was not likely kidding about the rest.

And in regard to the posters comparing this to the VC and Sheed trades - this is a much different situation. In both of those cases, the players trade value was knocked way down because of off-court circumstances. They both had to go, and very few - if any - teams wanted them.

The Memphis situation is much more like Cleveland's situation when Ted Stepien owned them and made several bad trades of future 1st round picks. And the Association stepped in and implemented what was called "The Stepian Rule" - not permitting teams to trade their 1st round picks in consecutive years.

The moves by Memphis (and I'm including the Swift trade) indicates there's just as serious a problem with them as there was when Stepien was trading his picks. And with Miller on the block now - and who knows who else - I think there should be a discussion about how to prevent another debacle. I'm not sure a trade committee is a good answer, but maybe someone has a better idea.
maradro
Senior
Posts: 665
And1: 464
Joined: Nov 21, 2004

 

Post#19 » by maradro » Wed Feb 13, 2008 8:01 pm

Ruzious wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



And in regard to the posters comparing this to the VC and Sheed trades - this is a much different situation. In both of those cases, the players trade value was knocked way down because of off-court circumstances. They both had to go, and very few - if any - teams wanted them.

The Memphis situation is much more like Cleveland's situation when Ted Stepien owned them and made several bad trades of future 1st round picks. And the Association stepped in and implemented what was called "The Stepian Rule" - not permitting teams to trade their 1st round picks in consecutive years.

The moves by Memphis (and I'm including the Swift trade) indicates there's just as serious a problem with them as there was when Stepien was trading his picks. And with Miller on the block now - and who knows who else - I think there should be a discussion about how to prevent another debacle. I'm not sure a trade committee is a good answer, but maybe someone has a better idea.


that's the difference. pau had made some remarks about being traded, but he wasnt making ultimatums in the press and cheering the opposing team like VC did, nor did he have the reputation of a rasheed wallace, who had long out-stayed his welcome in portland. also, one of the most surprising things about this trade was that it was a young bigman traded in the same conference.

i also agree that a committee is probably the worst possible solution. i think the only solution is to have good owners committed to winning vs guys committed to making money. yeah its business, but while some teams make money and compete, others just make money. clippers, grizzlies, hawks, these teams are not serious operations because the owners have no intention of winning anything.
User avatar
Heat3
RealGM
Posts: 20,396
And1: 16,169
Joined: May 26, 2006
Location: Where all the children are above average.
Contact:
   

 

Post#20 » by Heat3 » Wed Feb 13, 2008 8:15 pm

Pop was joking. It is a dumb idea. No committee can have the best interest of a franchise at heart. Let's all conspire to keep one team from getting too strong or one team an opportunity to rebuild. Not a good idea at all.
Pat Riley wrote:There are only two options regarding commitment. You're either IN or you're OUT. There is no such thing as life in-between.

James Johnson wrote:The culture is REAL.

Image

Return to The General Board