Thank the Lord Otis traded Ariza!

[mhectorgato]

Um... okay I will try in the future to be tighter and not so "looser". Now if only writing something without any evidence to support your case made it true you would actually have a point. In order to evaluate a trade you have to look at what Ariza gave to LA as well. they loved him over there before he got injured. So injury is all you got although on the dance for you well may be looser. Although in my defense friends and family do say I can do a mean MJ dance impersonation.

Factoring in the consistently inconsistent use of JJ, it's my thought that Ariza had he stayed (assuming no foot injury), he would have still not have been a rotation player. Our transaction yielded us 2 rotation players.

That alone for me says short term of the trade has worked out in our favor. This line of reasoning has nothing to do with his injury.

Had he not injured his foot, then the LAL would be just as happy with this trade as we have been. In the short-term, both teams would have gotten rid of almost end of bench players in exchange for rotation players.

[maginno]

It helps in understanding another poster's viewpoint if he's a fan or just someone who simply observes the team.

You've been in MULTIPLE thread with me where that has been asked and answered. I don't know how old you are but I gather its too young for Alzheimer's disease.

Forgive me but it SEEMS

Like you are just trying the same old tired tactic of questioning peoples status as fan simply because they don't agree with you. Unfortunately for you theres no reason for anyone to take issue with Ariza's trade unless they were magic fans. IN fact maybe they are even better fans than you since they bought into managements statements last year that Ariza was part of the future on the team.

OF course things can change but Evans is no big deal and Cook is garbage playing the PF so even at its best for a lateral move there isn't much to win anyway. The fact that LA was willing to give up those two just to get Ariza says Ariza had more value on the open market than any one of those.

[mhectorgato]

You've been in MULTIPLE thread with me where that has been asked and answered. I don't know how old you are but I gather its too young for Alzheimer's disease.

Forgive me but it SEEMS

Like you are just trying the same old tired tactic of questioning peoples status as fan simply because they don't agree with you. Unfortunately for you theres no reason for anyone to take issue with Ariza's trade unless they were magic fans. IN fact maybe they are even better fans than you since they bought into managements statements last year that Ariza was part of the future on the team.

Sorry to burst your short sighted bubble, there are people who I disagree with, but I think are fans of that Magic. Again you've read me wrong.

For all we know you could be a Heat fan (as you indicated you're from SFL) that's just here while they are having a bad season.

OF course things can change but Evans is no big deal and Cook is garbage playing the PF so even at its best for a lateral move there isn't much to win anyway. The fact that LA was willing to give up those two just to get Ariza says Ariza had more value on the open market than any one of those.

From any team's viewpoint:
1 player with inconsistent playing time <<< 2 rotation players

therefore from our standpoint:

this move >> lateral move.

Had we traded for a player who was utilized as much as Ariza was, then it would be lateral.

Since these 2 players are making considerable contributions every game, they are a part of team's success.

Had Ariza been here and would be used as he was earlier, he'd have hardly any impact in the team's success.

That's why we did good in the short term, regardless how LA loves him or how his injury went down or how he fits better in that system than here.

Regardless of how you feel about Cook and Evans, no matter how you look at it, when you boil it down to:

2 players' worth of on court production > 1 player w/inconsistent playing time.

It worked out well for us. I really don't care how Ariza is loved by LA, as the fans here seem to love Cook.

Besides, had Ariza stayed and been so inconsistently, there's no reason to believe that he wouldn't have exercised his player option and opted out. And because of our cap situation, it would be another player to have to replace with limited options.

[maginno]

-= original quote snipped =-



Factoring in the consistently inconsistent use of JJ, it's my thought that Ariza had he stayed (assuming no foot injury), he would have still not have been a rotation player. Our transaction yielded us 2 rotation players.

Bleh. Cook is a rotation player because Otis screwed up and got no real help at PF. Due to roster limits enough injuries can make ANYBODY a rotation player. Again there is no short term win in a trade unless the team wins a championship. No matter what - the facts are trades are judged over more than a few months. Fact not fiction. IF Cook is in the rotation next year it will be because the Gm is a scrub. Thats why La was so happy to unload him.

I wouldn't even dispute that Evans has value. thats not the point. The point I responded to was about winning the trade because of him being injured. Its absolute nonsense especially since its a temporary injury from all accounts. It will take AT LEAST until deep into next year to make an intelligent determination on that and possibly even longer.

[mhectorgato]

Bleh. Cook is a rotation player because Otis screwed up and got no real help at PF.

Doesn't change that Cook is being used more often than Ariza.

Due to roster limits enough injuries can make ANYBODY a rotation player.

That can be said about any team. But there have been no injuries that have pushed up Cook but not Ariza. It's effectively the same situation - the only major injury is Battie.

I wouldn't even dispute that Evans has value. thats not the point. The point I responded to was about winning the trade because of him being injured. Its absolute nonsense especially since its a temporary injury from all accounts. It will take AT LEAST until deep into next year to make an intelligent determination on that and possibly even longer.

I agree, I think we won because we have 2 players contributing vs 1 hardly. That's completely seperate from his injury.

Again there is no short term win in a trade unless the team wins a championship.

Looking at it logically:

Production from 2 rotation players received in the trade > Production 1 sporadically used player we sent out.

Or we can use numbers (again on the assumption that Ariza would continue to be used sporadically, as JJ has been all year long), using player's averages while with the Magic this season:

35.3 mins per game, 13.5ppg, 5rpg > 10.5 mins, 3.3ppg, 2.2rpg

Based on this, we "won" - for me, and quite a few others, that means we got back more than we gave out - this trade short term, regardless if we win the championship or not.

added:
And yet another way to look at it: Would we have won as many games with Ariza and his limited usage vs having Cook and Evans giving production every game?

I certainly don't think so.

[TheGlyde]

-= original quote snipped =-



Bleh. Cook is a rotation player because Otis screwed up and got no real help at PF. Due to roster limits enough injuries can make ANYBODY a rotation player. Again there is no short term win in a trade unless the team wins a championship. No matter what - the facts are trades are judged over more than a few months. Fact not fiction. IF Cook is in the rotation next year it will be because the Gm is a scrub.

Disagree.

Cook's shooting from the PF position is a solid weapon if he is on his game and is a good fit beside Dwight, if he is hitting his shot he should get minutes with the team no matter who we have at PF.

Thats why La was so happy to unload him.

Who exactly was so happy to unload him? the message board fans? we are judging a players worth now by what a message board thinks of him?

Or do you have some knowledge about the Lakers GM being 'so happy to unload him' after he had started 2 of the first 6 games he played for them this year... You could make the same argument about the Magic GM being 'so happy to unload Ariza', and it would have no weight on the argument.

I wouldn't even dispute that Evans has value. thats not the point. The point I responded to was about winning the trade because of him being injured. Its absolute nonsense especially since its a temporary injury from all accounts. It will take AT LEAST until deep into next year to make an intelligent determination on that and possibly even longer.

'From all accounts?' which accounts? It's been reported that Ariza has something structurally wrong with his foot, Ariza himself didn't deny this.

http://www.hoopsworld.com/Story.asp?story_id=6386

There was an odd quote in a New York paper saying you have something structurally wrong with your foot. Is there anything to that? Have you ever had foot problems - or is that just sour grapes?

"I don't think there's anything wrong with my foot. I was born a certain way and that's how my foot is."

So it's structurally a little different than someone else's but it hasn't been a problem?

"No, it hasn't been a problem."

Heres the quote from the New York Paper mentioned above:

Trevor Ariza, who, despite being only 22, is a physical wreck waiting to happen. The whispers out of Orlando are that the ex-Knick has structural foot problems that will eventually catch up with him.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baske ... tml?page=1

So that qualifies as this being temporary 'from all accounts'?

Of course, despite what Ariza said, it had already 'been a problem' as he missed time because of his foot it with us last year, and since that quote he has gone down and missed a big chunk of time with the Lakers... I'd say thats a problem.

[craig01]

-= original quote snipped =-



Cook is a rotation player because Otis screwed up and got no real help at PF. Due to roster limits enough injuries can make ANYBODY a rotation player.

IF Cook is in the rotation next year it will be because the Gm is a scrub. Thats why La was so happy to unload him.

It will take AT LEAST until deep into next year to make an intelligent determination on that and possibly even longer.

1st point is true. However, some players may never be rotational players a la Auggie, Garrity, Gortat. Definitely a shortfall of depth.

2nd point is unknown. Hell, Cook may prove to be very productive in a limited gunslinger type role.

3rd point is true. Nobody can say that the trade favors anyone at this point. The Magic are getting production because their players are playing.

The Lakers have a player injured, and the forecast for his return isn't any time soon.

Does Cook end up being a bust? Nobody knows. Does he have potential to be effective in a limited role here? Yes, he does.

Does Evans stay here next year? Nobody knows. Does he have the potential to provide the intangibles that a reserve player needs to? He certainly does.

Does Ariza stay healthy and with the Lakers next year? Nobody knows. Does he fulfill the potential as the all around player many believe him to be? Nobody knows.

Judging this trade now is premature by either side.

[maginno]

inno"]

Sorry to burst your short sighted bubble, there are people who I disagree with, but I think are fans of that Magic. Again you've read me wrong.

Well thats on you this time Gato because I am right - You are too young for Alzheimer's disease. You have been in MANY debates with me and in MANY of those threads I've stated I am a Magic fan. Its come up so often I don't find your claim very credible.

this move >> lateral move.

Had we traded for a player who was utilized as much as Ariza was, then it would be lateral.

Its lateral in the sense that it doesn't make the team much better anyway you slice it. You aren't going to sell me on this being a much worse team without Evans. We were doing pretty well without him and we still would be and given that you could be left with nothing but cook after the offseason it would be worse. Evans is no big deal to the Magic. He's here among a weak crop of Sgs so he is utilized. You will claim of course otherwise but he didn't even cement himself into his role now until relatively recently and it doesn't take much to see him "uncement" himself either . thats the absurdity of trying to call things within a few months. Cook still comes and goes .

Like i said before you can keep trying to float short term wins. there is no such thing in trades as short term. The goal is winning a championship and that ain't happening this year so you have to take a longer view. November it will be a surprise to no one if none of them are in the rotation.

and no you are off again. I don't think Ariza should not have been traded but I don't find anything particularly compelling about Evans and certainly not Cook. I would have preferred to see what Ariza, JJ and the exception would have wrought but well Otis has made it known he wasn't willing to put those things on the table so we'll just wait to see JJ walk.

If Evans is the answer at SG spot andyou get back everyone you want to get back you still end up with a blown draft pick anyway as a result because JJ will sit on the bench forever. Packagin him with an exception and Ariza would have been far more appealing than floating him out there by himself with bench burns.

[Shishnizzle]

oops I mispelled a word but your still the loser in this argument.

[maginno]

Judging this trade now is premature by either side.

And with that I can wholeheartedly agree. Barring a permanent injury of Ariza though I'd put my money on Ariza being with LA alot longer but yes that is crystal balling so your point still stands.

[maginno]

Cook's shooting from the PF position is a solid weapon if he is on his game and is a good fit beside Dwight, if he is hitting his shot he should get minutes with the team no matter who we have at PF.

Well if you subscribe to the idea that everyone on the team has to chuck balls sure I don't and neither does the rest of the NBA and good luck on him being on his game when you need it most.. We need rebounding inside presence and defense out of the PF slot. Cook is no answer except for a team without true PFs. You will learn that soon enough

Who exactly was so happy to unload him? the message board fans? we are judging a players worth now by what a message board thinks of him?

Did you bother to read any analysis of the trade coming out of LA before making a rather Arrogant assumption about LA board members abilities? So are you claiming that fans here on this board are incapable of making sound judgments about a team that they watch? Please do tell us all that everything posted here is suspect because we are all forum members? Or is that just something you claim for other boards? They got rid of two players for one player and an exception as far as I can remember and since you didn't read up on this before slamming Laker board fans care to extend your criticism to the LA times that actually covers the team

http://lakersblog.latimes.com/lakersblo ... quire.html

Seems quite happy about the trade to me

'From all accounts?' which accounts? It's been reported that Ariza has something structurally wrong with his foot, Ariza himself didn't deny this.

http://www.hoopsworld.com/Story.asp?story_id=6386

Sorry you will find this condescending no doubt but you are after all calling me out on a perfectly easy to read post so I must ask -

do you know how to read?

There are none ZERO reports that Ariza is permanently injured at this time and that s precisely what I said was from all accounts not a "permanent injury - his injury at this time. Now onto your New York article. Do you detect the source there or can't your read that its "sources out of Orlando" that indicate that he has a structural problem that will lead to becoming a physical wreck. Scroll up. I already said that came out of Orlando and has not been confirmed.

Now follow on now. Your Hoopshype does little too flesh out any fact regarding his present injury. Ariza is asked point blank if any structural problems in his foot have been a problem. He says no. So it doesn't get you anywhere and citing it as a source is deceptive on your part. You actually have to skip over what is said and use your imagination to claim you think that means that doctors have told him it is a problem but he's in denial because if they haven't confirmed it as a problem then you have no point.

So at this point by ALL accounts (I'll say it this time) its strictly a rumor that any abnormality in his feet is going to lead to recurring or permanent damage.

Of course, despite what Ariza said, it had already 'been a problem' as he missed time because of his foot it with us last year, and since that quote he has gone down and missed a big chunk of time with the Lakers... I'd say thats a problem.

Okay I get it now. You really DONT know how to read. Ariza isn't saying that he doesn't get injured. He's saying that the structure of his leg is not the problem. You are being perfectly silly if you think that you know where his injuries come from without having any facts to support it. Do players with normal legs get injured? Do they ever get injured multiple times with completely text book structured legs? So can you follow the logic now? If player gets injured more than once does it automatically mean that it comes from a deficient structure?

Now could it be there is an issue? certainly. but claiming that him being injured comes from that when nothing of the sort has been confirmed outside of "whispers out of Orlando" is just a poor way to of processing rationally very akin to the kind of rumor mongering conclusions people routinely draw based on little or no hard facts. Unfortunately sometimes things turn out true but thats not a logical way of drawing conclusions and inevitably at some point leads to horrible opinion and decision making down the road.

[MagicFan32]

At this point how can anyone say Otis screwed up? At the time there were rumors he knew of Arizas injury problems. Right now we have two rotation players...the Lakers have a guy not playing.

[TheGlyde]

Well if you subscribe to the idea that everyone on the team has to chuck balls sure I don't and neither does the rest of the NBA and good luck on him being on his game when you need it most.. We need rebounding inside presence and defense out of the PF slot. Cook is no answer except for a team without true PFs. You will learn that soon enough

Well can I ask you, do you know how to READ? Or do you just like to put words in people's mouths? Where did I say Cook was 'the answer', where did I say we do not need rebounding and an inside presence? I said he is a good fit beside Dwight, and should get minutes if his shot is dropping. He can stretch the defense and fits the mold of the team well, no he shoudn't start or have extensive minutes, but be in the rotation if his shot is dropping? definately.

Did you bother to read any analysis of the trade coming out of LA before making a rather Arrogant assumption about LA board members abilities? So are you claiming that fans here on this board are incapable of making sound judgments about a team that they watch? Please do tell us all that everything posted here is suspect because we are all forum members? Or is that just something you claim for other boards? They got rid of two players for one player and an exception as far as I can remember and since you didn't read up on this before slamming Laker board fans care to extend your criticism to the LA times that actually covers the team

http://lakersblog.latimes.com/lakersblo ... quire.html

Seems quite happy about the trade to me

Sure he's happy about it on paper, before a game had been played for any player on their new team, but you described LA as being 'happy to unload Cook', The LA writer however says it 'won't hurt', and you are saying that I am using my imagination to skip over what is actually said?

He's not 'so happy' to unload Cook, saying losing him won't hurt is a huge difference. Yes I have read articles, out of Orlando and our of LA, opinions differed, and the only group I knew of that was basically unanimous in saying they were 'happy to unload' Cook was the message board community.

Sorry you will find this condescending no doubt but you are after all calling me out on a perfectly easy to read post so I must ask -

do you know how to read?

There are none ZERO reports that Ariza is permanently injured at this time and that s precisely what I said was from all accounts not a "permanent injury - his injury at this time. Now onto your New York article. Do you detect the source there or can't your read that its "sources out of Orlando" that indicate that he has a structural problem that will lead to becoming a physical wreck. Scroll up. I already said that came out of Orlando and has not been confirmed.

Now follow on now. Your Hoopshype does little too flesh out any fact regarding his present injury. Ariza is asked point blank it any structural problems in his foot have been a problem to his injury. He says no. So it doesn't get you anywhere and citing it as a source is deceptive on your part. You actually have to skip over what is said and use your imagination to claim you think that means that doctors have told him it is a problem but he's in denial because if they haven't confirmed it as a problem then you have no point.

So at this point by ALL accounts (I'll say it this time) its strictly a rumour that any abnormality in his feet is going to lead to or recurring or permanent damage.

Okay I get it now. You really DONT know how to read. Ariza isn't saying that he doesn't get injured. He's saying that the structure of his leg is not the problem. You are being perfectly silly if you think that you know where injuries form him come from without having any facts to support it. Do players with Normal legs get injured? Do the ever get injured multiple times with completely text book structed legs? So can you follow the logic now? If player gets injured more than once does it automatically mean that it comes from a deficient structure?

Now could it be there is an issue? certainly. but claiming that him being injured comes from that when nothing of the sort has been confirmed outside of "whispers out of Orlando" is just a poor way to processing rationally.

The hoopshype source was quoted to confirm that he indeed has a structural difference, for no other reason.

But hey, its okay, it's all a big coincidence, joining dots between a) acknowledged structural difference, b) advice that this structural difference could lead to problems and c) said problems occuring is 'perfectly silly' thats logical.

No-one knows the full situation except Trevor and his doctor, but we have these snippets, rather than draw the logical conclusion we should just turn a blind eye to what we do know and assume that the structural difference has nothing to do with it and he is just plain unlucky, very logical.

You know as well as I do you could effectively argue the other side if you so chose, you often sum up all the circumstancial evidence against Otis over moves he has made or not made and despite not knowing the full situation, you join the dots and draw your 'logical conclusion' and claim that anyone defending Otis is illogical.

Here we are joining the dots on Ariza and you are calling that illogical. You can't have it both ways.

The guy admits to his foot being structurally different, the word out of Orlando is that the structural difference is a problem and will cause injuries, and what do you know, he has injured the structurally different foot - not the other foot, the structurally different foot - twice in consecutive seasons, but yes, its purely co-incidental and just bad luck...

[maginno]

At this point how can anyone say Otis screwed up? At the time there were rumors he knew of Arizas injury problems. Right now we have two rotation players...the Lakers have a guy not playing.

And who is? I agreed with Craig that at this point no side can make the claim that its proven one way or another. otis screwup hardly depend on that issue though

[maginno]

No-one knows the full situation except Trevor and his doctor, but we have these snippets

Exactly. Lets see if you can keep on a logical track because this is certainly true - With one caveat. Some people are implying that Orlando also knows and that LA was kept in the dark about it - even though source sin New York knew - or else why would they make the trade?

rather than draw the logical conclusion we should just turn a blind eye to what we do know

Ouch fell right off the track. What we do know is that we don't have the information yet to draw a conclusion

and assume that the structural difference has nothing to do with it and he is just plain unlucky, very logical......Here we are joining the dots on Ariza and you are calling that illogical. You can't have it both ways.

full on train wreck now. NO. We should simple not assume since we don't have the information yet to make a definitive statement. Plenty of Player shave had multiple injuries. its a sport with a lot of contact. Don't have to be particularly unlucky. Injuries happen frequently and some player s even with no abnormalities are labeled injury prone.

Joining dots isn't part of logical thinking when we already admit there are dots we don't have. In your world its logical to draw assumptions after admitting that "no one knows". Thats terribly silly. If you don't have the information to draw conclusions why draw them at all? Jiminy is this so hard to grasp?

What has been presented?

1. That there were "whispers" out of Orlando that he is a train wreck waiting to happen. Whispers that didn't surface until he was being traded even after he was injured here last year. Did we hear this before with other injuries? Nada. Instead we have Otis on record saying he wanted to keep Ariza after the injuries here . So I guess he didn't know either even after team doctors would have looked at the injuries

2. trevor was asked if its a problem. answer no

3. There is nothing else outside of the whispers that tell us Trevor is lying . At best for your case he doesn't dishonestly deny there is a difference in the leg but he also says that to his knowledge (and if he knows about any structural differences he would know that too) it s not an issue.

4. Trevor has been injured in the past but so have many other players in this league.

5. Every report about Trevors injury has him coming back and nothing has yet surfaced out of all the reports and doctor assessments that has confirmed anything in his leg or foot are career threatening.

So Again. IS IT POSSIBLE THER IS AN ISSUE? Yes. Is it logical to CONCLUDE that there is? NO

If you can't understand the logic of that approach to this I cannot help you. Its not a matter of what eventually turns out to be true or not. Its a matter of thinking properly and not drawing conclusion based on whispers and connecting dots while admitting we don't have all the dots to connect.

SO continue to advance assumptions and guesses as logic. Anyone who knows anything about logic knows that such "logic" is in fact illogical.

[maginno]

He's not 'so happy' to unload Cook, saying losing him won't hurt is a huge difference.

Nice selective quote. the writer said that cook was redundant. Do you know what that means? it means he was unnecessary to the team - a duplication not needed. LA Fans ware not justified in being happy about moving a piece that was unnecessary? They were not justified when they say he would brick very often and they didn't like his inconsistency? They were not justified in not liking his play at the PF? Wasn't this the guy that came over so soft and out of shape Stan refused to play him? That still is VERY inconsistent.

You might as well shut down this board since all the fans here know nothing about any of the players because they are board members. terribly arrogant statement . Realgm board member have some VERY knowledgeable BBall fans. the put down is unnecessary. Just a knee jerk to try and justify prematurely a trade that isn't going to make a whole lot of difference any which way to the Magic.

They were right. they saw more games with cook then yuhave ever seen.

[TheGlyde]

A day in the life of maginno, the defense lawyer

maginno: "Your honour, my client, while spotted at the scene of the crime moments before the victim was shot, and seen running from the house afterwards, was not seen pulling the trigger. Are we to join the dots and assume that everyone who visited the victim's house that day were there to shoot him?"

Prosecutor: "Your honour, his prints are all over the murder weapon"

maginno: "Is it possible he pulled the trigger? yes, is it logical to conclude that he did when no-one saw him pull the trigger? no. Are we to assume that everyone that has ever picked up a gun has then chosen to fire it at a person in anger? Thats terribly silly, Jiminy is this so hard to grasp?"

Prosecutor: "Your honour, we have threatening emails from him towards the victim on the day before the shooting."

maginno: "I'm sorry, but can't you READ? the email clearly states that my client would kill the victim if he did not stay out of his affairs. Do you have any evidence to suggest that between the time of sending the email and the victim being shot that he did in fact interfere in my clients affairs? of course not, so this letter has no bearing."

Prosecutor: "This is absurd."

maginno: "You cannot logically join the dots when important dots such as my client being seen pulling the trigger are missing, you openly admit that no-one saw him pull the trigger and yet claim that him doing so is the logical conclusion."

Judge: "Alright maginno, has the jury reached a verdict."

Jury: "We have your honour, we find the defendant guilty on all charges."

[mhectorgato]

Its lateral in the sense that it doesn't make the team much better anyway you slice it.

I've sliced it several ways, all have been ignored...

If we're getting more production from Cook + Evans than from Ariza, then by definition the team is better.

You aren't going to sell me on this being a much worse team without Evans.

Not trying to sell on the Evans vs no Evans. It's Evans + Cook vs Ariza.

We were doing pretty well without him and we still would be and given that you could be left with nothing but cook after the offseason it would be worse. Evans is no big deal to the Magic. He's here among a weak crop of Sgs so he is utilized.

If he's better than the other SGs, then it's an upgrade, especially since Ariza didn't get much playing time.

Again we take a player that wasn't being used and get a player that's better than any other we have at that position, and it's a lateral move?

This is again ignoring that production from Cook + Evans >>> production from Ariza.

You will claim of course otherwise but he didn't even cement himself into his role now until relatively recently and it doesn't take much to see him "uncement" himself either

As far as I know, as soon as he started starting, no one else started. This is quite unlike our revolving PG.

He's started 31 games in a row at the 2 guard.

What evidence do we have that he's not cemented at that spot?

With TheGlyde you say there's no evidence that he didn't have foot issues because there's no quote.

Yet here you throw out " it doesn't take much to see him "uncement" himself either" without a single piece of evidence.

I don't even recall a post game comment from SVG indicating displeasure from Evans.

Again He's started 31 games in a row for us.

Again, he took the starting position away from our other SG and there's not a question that he will continue to start.

thats the absurdity of trying to call things within a few months. Cook still comes and goes .

Still, the production of Cook + Evans >>> production we got from Ariza.

Like i said before you can keep trying to float short term wins. there is no such thing in trades as short term.

Well seeing how we got a player that will start 1/2 the season and a rotation player for a player that wasn't getting spotted playing time, to me, and many others, says that we got back more than we gave out.

Once again, logically speaking:

production from Cook + Evans >>> production from Ariza.

The goal is winning a championship and that ain't happening this year so you have to take a longer view.

There are long term and short term viewpoints. There are goals, and intermediary goals.

November it will be a surprise to no one if none of them are in the rotation.

Which is why I've been saying "short term".

and no you are off again. I don't think Ariza should not have been traded but I don't find anything particularly compelling about Evans and certainly not Cook.

Well there's alot more compelling stats from Cook + Evans than there were for Ariza.

I would have preferred to see what Ariza, JJ and the exception would have wrought but well Otis has made it known he wasn't willing to put those things on the table so we'll just wait to see JJ walk.

Has nothing to do with what happened or our discussion.

If Evans is the answer at SG spot andyou get back everyone you want to get back you still end up with a blown draft pick anyway as a result because JJ will sit on the bench forever.

Has nothing to do with what happened or our discussion.

Packagin him with an exception and Ariza would have been far more appealing than floating him out there by himself with bench burns.

Has nothing to do with what happened or our discussion.

Back to your opening comment:

Its lateral in the sense that it doesn't make the team much better anyway you slice it.

For the last time, because you keep running around the point:

For the short term:
Production from Cook + Evans >>> Production from Ariza.

Evans, no matter what you've thought of him, has been our starting SG for 31 games in a row, and there's nothing - short of him getting injured - to indicate that will be changing anytime soon.

So, even if you factor our Cook:

Production from Evans >> Production from Ariza.

[maginno]

A day in the life of Judge Glyde.

Prosecutor: We have a murder suspect your honor?

Judge Glyde: Proceed

Prosecutor: Your honor the witness said he saw a black man shoot the victim.

Judge Glyde: Gun recovered?

Prosecutor : Yes sir

Judge Glyde: Forensics?

Prosecutor: Not in yet your honor. We don't think it will be necessary

Judge Glyde: Then what s your evidence against this suspect?

Prosecutor: Your Honor. He's black. He lives in the neighborhood and he owns a gun. Furthermore they had an argument in years past.

Judge Gyle: guilty as charged.

Defense: Objection your honor . the testimony of forensics is not in yet to determine if it s the same gun.

Judge Glyde: Over ruled. He's black, He owns a gun, he had motive and he lives in the neighborhood. Connect the dots counselor.

Defense: but your honor. common sense would determine that we at least get forensics to rule

Judge Glyde: Forensics? common sense. listen counselor . This is my court. I know how to connect the dots and If I say he's guilty he's guilty. Even if forensics disagrees it won't make any difference. Moving on to sentencing. Recommendations?

Prosecutor: Death

Judge Glyde: Done


Thanks for the drama break Glyde. You couldn't break the logic of waiting until you have proper evidence to draw a conclusion so you had to divert to something else.

[maginno]

gato no one needs run away from any point you ever make. all your "slices" have been answered.

A) the point of contention in this thread isn't even whether or not Evans is a good player for the Magic. Its in who won the trade because Ariza is injured. Read the thread and stop wasting my time.win implied several times in this thread is who got the better value. When Ariza was healthy they were getting plenty

B) You've said several times that short term its a win situation. I have said multiple times that you do not evaluate a trade based on a few months term. Trading is one of the ways you build a team toward building a championship team so you look at it from a longer term than a few months. If you cannot get the pure logic of that I cannot help you.

Your point about two people in the rotation is a function of trying to look at the short term because even you admit they might not be in less than a year plus its also based on the fact that we are alot weaker at the positions they play than the Lakers are. of course if you move scrubs to a weaker team (we'd get our rear ends kicked pretty good in the West) they have a better chance at being in the rotation.

How can we foresee the possibility of Evans becoming uncemented as a starter? easy. its not a position he's held very long. You want to make the illogical argument that a player thats been a starter for a relative short term CANNOT revert his play to be a backup again ? Go for it. I have no idea whether he will be but it wouldn't be surprising either way given the short record.

and sorry you don't get the sign off on what is or is not a part of my position. As long as you are debating me my position will be a part of what the discussion is. You will just have to learn to live with that or debate someone else.

I've always felt that getting a real PF should have been a priority and that trading for players should always be evaluated based on need. So I am perfectly within my rights to point out that a better trade could have been made if you trade both JJ and ariza. You don't get the common sense so you don't even see how getting Evans and keeping him has alot to do with what happens with JJ and lends to the rationale that he should have been packaged and traded if you were even going to consider bringing yet another guard to bury him on the bench. again if you can't see how that relates to the kind of trade you do I can't help you but sorry it WILL be and IS a part of any discussion you have with me.