Money real reason no trade made

[maginno]

-= original quote snipped =-



A) Otis recently said that the 1st and JJ where virtually untradeable. Not that I agree, just regurgitating Otis' standpoint.[/qupte]


I know you don't agree With Otis there but Like I said no logical reason. What's jj averaging now? 15 seconds per game over the last 20?

B) Virtually any other team would have been in the running for Gasol. It appears that Memphis went right to LAL due to past relationships.

One would imagine that Memphis could have gotten more than they did for Gasol if they shopped him hard enough.

We needed a big. We should have been the one shopping hard. As I recall There were rumors coming out of there before he was traded. Its alot harder to give away something for nothing when someone is knocking at your door before you do offering you more. Have you seen the Denton report where Otis actually states amazement that he got a PF (Cook) and that people want him to get another one? Unbelievable fellow. Getting or not getting Gasol isn't the point. You put yourself in position to offer the best package and you shop it. When Otis decided in a heartbeat to give Shard the world and the moon he knew then and there all he had was 30+ battie.

[mhectorgato]

We needed a big. We should have been the one shopping hard. As I recall There were rumors coming out of there before he was traded. Its alot harder to give away something for nothing when someone is knocking at your door before you do offering you more. Have you seen the Denton report where Otis actually states amazement that he got a PF (Cook) and that people want him to get another one? Unbelievable fellow. Getting or not getting Gasol isn't the point. You put yourself in position to offer the best package and you shop it. When Otis decided in a heartbeat to give Shard the world and the moon he knew then and there all he had was 30+ battie.

I agree regarding the shopping part and the deadline.

As I mentioned before, that was one of the reasons I was "ok" with the overpaying ... because we had about 12 million in expirings to trade before the deadline to fill a need that we could not otherwise because of the cap issues.

I'm still giving Otis the benefit of the doubt until this coming off-season. But this doesn't mean that I'm extremely confident we'll be able to effectively fill several areas of need.

[spinedoc]

If you was making points I would tell you. Over the last year its been Otis can do this. We can make this trade easily. This player can be signed for this. Rashard can do this. Hedo not close to Rashard. Its like were always talking about needing to concede and I'm sitting here wondering why your asking people to concede points that are invalid.

The NJ board was funny because you kept asking them to concede. Although you back tracked on almost every point you made. Not keeping Darko is very important in that argument. As there no argument the Magic could get VC if they gave him Rashard Lewis money. The question is could they get VC and keep Darko. Really the Magic didn't have close to enough money to sign Darko and have a legitimate shot at VC.

Uh,.... thank you? Yeah, your right Richboy, I've failed to make a valid point since joining realgm, whatever. What I'm wondering however is what makes you so different? You talk about all these things that we could have done differently, like get Nocioni, or not extend Jameer, yada yada, meanwhile waiting a year to use our capspace. And then you go on to talk about getting a cheaper player while keeping Darko, wouldn't that use the same amount of money that we spent on Lewis? And would we still be in first place in our division this year?, not likely. I've seen some of your plans for this team, and you have a lot of nerve telling me how invalid my arguments are.

As far as my involvement on the NJ board, your right I never argued the obvious that we could get VC by renouncing Darko. Thats because I believe then, as I do now, that we could have cleared enough room for both. Vince moreso than Lewis however, because Seattle was clearly on a rebuild at the time, the Nets weren't. They would have taken back players in a sign and trade unlike Seattles' unwillingness to do the same. If we could have gotten 4M more in capspace, we could have done both, which would have been fairly easy to do even if it meant that we had to include a draft pick to move a player like Arroyo. A serviceable pg with an expiring contract would have been a welcome to teams under the cap, especially if we threw a second rounder or two at them if need be. Apparently Darko wasn't worth any of that effort however, and he ended up getting played by Otis, not that big of a deal. Hey, now you get to put in on your master list of Otis screw-ups.

[mhectorgato]

Uh,.... thank you? Yeah, your right Richboy, I've failed to make a valid point since joining realgm, whatever.

Acceptance is the first step of the healing process

[spinedoc]

-= original quote snipped =-



Acceptance is the first step of the healing process

lol, after talking with Richboy I feel like I need some therapy. He'll probably think thats an invalid point too.

[maginno]

I'm still giving Otis the benefit of the doubt until this coming off-season. But this doesn't mean that I'm extremely confident we'll be able to effectively fill several areas of need.

I can see with that. At least your not dodging, weaving and twisting rationale to escape the points against Otis.

[Potterman]

The way I see it is our record currently speaks for itself. We already made one big trade involving "a hell of a player" (Stan Van Gundy after the Kings game on hindsight in the Lakers trade) to get Cook and Evans who now both appear to be panning out very well.

So my point to you all is this. We are still trying to figure things out as a team. We are not in a position to trade for a player reguardless of our glaring weaknesses.

As things stand if we traded our "expirings" you all have left several important issues out of the equation...what happens to our not so bulky bench of great players? Do you really think adding a player like Wilcox/any PF here in a 4 - 2 player trade will help us in the long run when we are already struggling for depth and being forced into a tight nine man rotation?

I'll agree there may have been something on the table that would have tempted me if this was NBA Live 08 where I play God over my team emotions offense and defense. But this is not Live 08 when you are talking about 09 - 10 - 11 seasons being tied to a player who may or may not pan out and your left wondering what could have been.*

*Grant Hill.

[maginno]

Do you really think adding a player like Wilcox/any PF here in a 4 - 2 player trade will help us in the long run when we are already struggling for depth .

What? IF the difference is not having JJ's slot who never plays and lets say Dooling in what parallel universe wouldn't having a true solid PF not be a help in the long run. You must have been trying to say something else because so far in this thread I THINK everyone agrees that we could do with a PF.

[Potterman]

-= original quote snipped =-



What? IF the difference is not having JJ's slot who never plays and lets say Dooling in what parallel universe wouldn't having a true solid PF not be a help in the long run. You must have been trying to say something else because so far in this thread I THINK everyone agrees that we could do with a PF.

Can you say Battie? You know I agree with the whole PF arguement but I don't agree with how you guys see the addition by subtraction working in our favor in this case. You take away Dooling and Redick and that's a hustler and a bonifide sharpshooter and replace it with a PF and what are we left with? An even bigger hole at guard(s) spot and absoloutely no defense at the PG spot. Honestly do you want to suck or win as much as you can this year?*

Again lets say a team wants oh Garity (good for us), Dooling (bad), Evans (bad), Arroyo (ok). That's four expiring contracts for one high paid decent player at the 4 and we MAY get back a MODERATE big and if we are lucky some PG/SG combo. Next thing you know Battie is Healthy and we have a logjam at PF next season and Mhec has to change his signature to Battie/Wilcox/Fran/Gortat/Agustine one mediocre PF combo.

Again on paper it sounds nice. But I really don't think there was a trade that was equal value both long and short term for us. Maybe I am wrong though...maybe I am right.


*Not meant as an attack on your personality I just don't see eye2eye with your thinking.

Edit - For the record. To me this isn't about defending Otis or managements commitment to spend money. It's about making a trade that makes sense both short and long term wise. I believe in the end we share the same objective.

[maginno]

Next thing you know Battie is Healthy and we have a logjam at PF next season and Mhec has to change his signature to Battie/Wilcox/Fran/Gortat/Agustine one mediocre PF combo.

Gortat and augustine much less Fran are in no danger of creating a logjam and you will probably disagree but at Battie's age laying off a year is only going to speed his decline. AS for JJ being a sharpshooter. If you don't move a guard then you have no room for him to ever peel off the bench so all of that simply doesn't matter. Equally not personal but I don't think that argument has much going for it.

[craig01]

I'd like to see Battie as the 3rd or 4th big.

Then, you'd have solid depth up front.

[mhectorgato]

I'd like to see Battie as the 3rd or 4th big.

Then, you'd have solid depth up front.

1. Dwight
2. Lewis
3. Battie
4. Foyle

Or if you will:

1. Dwight
2. Lewis
3. Foyle
4. Battie

[Potterman]

-= original quote snipped =-



Gortat and augustine much less Fran are in no danger of creating a logjam and you will probably disagree but at Battie's age laying off a year is only going to speed his decline. AS for JJ being a sharpshooter. If you don't move a guard then you have no room for him to ever peel off the bench so all of that simply doesn't matter. Equally not personal but I don't think that argument has much going for it.

I agree that there shouldn't be a log jam unless we willingly make one which would seem to me to be what we could have potentially created. - A log jam of zero talent.

Again this go's back to me saying that we want was to make a move to seemingly make a move when there may have been nothing available to us. Another big question mark is chemistry what do we do if we get our legit PF? Do we start him and bench Hedo...Lewis? Or do you think that's for the coach to decide. (If so why even get him?)

Also the argument of something for nothing still isn't true for us. Everything has a price and for LA it was contracts for big contracts (Gasol for expiring and picks). Anybody realize LA will also be in cap hell? So will Cleveland...So will Boston...just so you know there can only be one champion so why make a move unless we give ourselves a legit shot.

In other words a serviceable PF does not a contender make. Is it a positive step well of course it is but we still have FA, future trades, and picks that still leave us plenty of options in the future.Your PF may be in this years draft and your SG/PG may be this years best pickup. And no I am not trying to be Mr. Positive try more realistic.