**Official Gm a Team trades/transactions Thread**

[dockingsched]

trade will be rejected if r0cdogg confirms his wishes to veto the deal


just a little fyi, i'll approve the trade. u can't accept a trade and then change your mind because some other gm says they would have given you a better offer. thats part of the negotiating process that u need to take care of before hand. the 12 hr period is for veto requests to come in, not to give involved gm's time to change their mind. once u say u accept a trade, thats it, its out of your hands. any other way simply isn't fair to the gm's u are playing with.

[KiDdFrESh]

trade will be rejected if r0cdogg confirms his wishes to veto the deal


just a little fyi, i'll approve the trade. u can't accept a trade and then change your mind because some other gm says they would have given you a better offer. thats part of the negotiating process that u need to take care of before hand. the 12 hr period is for veto requests to come in, not to give involved gm's time to change their mind. once u say u accept a trade, thats it, its out of your hands. any other way simply isn't fair to the gm's u are playing with.

You know what man... Honestly... I feel bad because apparently the Boston GM was supposeably unaware of the entire deal. But lets be honest here. I let it be known on the discussion thread that I was shopping Bynum and I shot down a ton of deals but rOcdogg did some nifty work and made a difficult trade work. Granted some might think he was "sneaky" but prior to that Boston never made me a direct offer. I still want KG but if this trade falls apart then Im going to have to go another route. Id feel awful just dealing with Boston directly now. So if this deal doesnt happen, chances are that Bynum wont go to either team and that sucks because I did want KG. The trade should still go through imo. You said it yourself dcash, "everybody approved" and well its your word against ours. Your the commish.

People just need to respect the game.

[dockingsched]

wasn't the full trade posted when boston gm accepted it? i'm a little confused about him not knowing the entire deal, let me know if there is something i'm misunderstanding.

which reminds me, quote the trade u are accepting! i should veto it on those grounds alone

[roc]

I don't want to veto the deal. I accepted the deal and will stick by that.

I also would assume that the principles in the deal can't request a veto and in this instance the Clips as well, since Boston started negotiations with them(according to his own post above) based off my posting of the 3 team deal.

[roc]

wasn't the full trade posted when boston gm accepted it? i'm a little confused about him not knowing the entire deal, let me know if there is something i'm misunderstanding.

which reminds me, quote the trade u are accepting! i should veto it on those grounds alone

Yes I posted the whole trade. I also told him before I posted it that it was a 3 way and I quote "I'm posting the deal right now. Sorry it took a bit of time as I was working this into a 3 way with KG heading to SA."

I'll admit I never said what exactly I was working on during our KG discussions but then, he never asked.

[dockingsched]

overlooked the roster size...

boston/sas/detroit trade rejected due to boston's roster size.

i have to be consistent with that rule since it was upheld in the bonner trade, r0cd0gg had already noticed that too, i just missed it.

1. cut rosters to 15 BEFORE making a trade

2. quote the trade u are approving

3. once you accept the trade, u cannot take it back. the waiting period is for vetoes, not changing one's mind.

last word on this, going to bed....its a lot more sneaky to try veto a deal cause someone swoops in with a better offer than it is for someone to work on a 3 way that all parties will eventually see very clearly.

[#1knickfan]

^^^ I understand why you made that choice but I think its really f*cked up that Boston is able to get away with that. His roster carelessness gave him a mulligan and it really isn't fair to the others involved.

With that being said I would have voted to veto the deal anyway. Bynum is a very promising young player but not Bogut AND Beasley level of promising.

[dockingsched]

i'm still up...i agree with you. i really hate what boston gm did, but the trade simply can't be approved due to his roster size.

guess gm's just gotta look at the roster of the person they are trading with and make sure they have the necessary roster cuts when posting a trade.

[roc]

overlooked the roster size...

boston/sas/detroit trade rejected due to boston's roster size.

i have to be consistent with that rule since it was upheld in the bonner trade, r0cd0gg had already noticed that too, i just missed it.

1. cut rosters to 15 BEFORE making a trade

You are right on this one so I have no problem with the ruling. We have to keep things consistent to keep things fair for all so...

I will now consider this matter resolved and see what else is on the market, no worries.

[Gremz]

Man and i was about to post an "all quiet on the western front" note earlier. I'll try to be as impartial to all parties when posting this, I've had instances before when i was quoted a trade with an individual which turned out to be a multi-team deal, i now always ask jusk in case. It's always important to do so in gauging what return each party gets.

Much love for Zong & TMac for dealing with my rookie shenanigans in that regard.

[#1knickfan]

^^^ I agree. I never agree to a multi-team deal without seeing the final deal for everyone. I don't want to take the chance that someone else gets a better deal for my players than I do.

[calderon13]

wasn't the full trade posted when boston gm accepted it? i'm a little confused about him not knowing the entire deal, let me know if there is something i'm misunderstanding.

which reminds me, quote the trade u are accepting! i should veto it on those grounds alone

Yes I posted the whole trade. I also told him before I posted it that it was a 3 way and I quote "I'm posting the deal right now. Sorry it took a bit of time as I was working this into a 3 way with KG heading to SA."

I'll admit I never said what exactly I was working on during our KG discussions but then, he never asked.

I accept that fact that you told me it was a 3 way deal with SPurs for the first time throughout the entire process right before you posted the deal but after i accepted the deal, just to see how the salaries worked out, i saw bynum there and thats when i withdrew my acceptance and I am saying it again that No offence to you Pistons but if i knew that Bynum was a part of then i would have never accepted the deal.

[Kosta]

Some advice, even if you agree to a deal through e-mail/msn/AIM, make sure you double check the players going in the deal before you reply here and accept it. (all it takes is for you to read the first guy posting the trade). And even beforehand, I don't know about everyone else, but I'm asking for every single detail with what teams and who's going where and I'm talking to every G.M involved in the deal. This way you can figure out of there's a way to cut out a party who might not have to be in the trade altogether and is just in there to scrape some value. However, this 3 way was clearly a trade that needed all 3 parties to fulfill everyone's needs.

And my final thought here is that you were getting a VERY good deal for a 32 year old Garnett, heck, I was offering you Horford, fillers and picks, but Bogut and Beasley? That's a great way to start your rebuild. As a competitive G.M, I'm actually glad this deal fell through...

[roc]

I have to admit that I am glad it fell through as well. I knew I was overpaying but got tunnel vision for Bynum/Odom.

To me something based around Bogut/Amir/Haslem would have been more in line with the value I was getting in return.

[Kosta]

I have to admit that I am glad it fell through as well. I knew I was overpaying but got tunnel vision for Bynum/Odom.

To me something based around Bogut/Amir/Haslem would have been more in line with the value I was getting in return.

I would say something like Beasley/Amir/Haslem, but not sure how high you're on Amir...Bogut to me is a very good young starting C and is still improving, so he's worth a whole lot more to me then Amir. But one thing is for sure, Bynum>Beasley in terms of value, so you would have to add something extra.

[Sports Arsenal]

The Rockets add John Lucas III to their roster, seeing as he is on no one else's and is a minimum contract player, playing with Oklahoma City Thunder

[roc]

The Pistons and Spurs have come to an agreement.

Beasley/Samb for Bynum/Bonner

Bynum $2,769,300
Bonner $2,978,000

Total = $5,747,300

Beasley $4,314,960
Samb $711,517

Total = $5,026,477 x 1.25 +$100,000 = $6,383,096 > $5,747,300

While I absolutely hate to give up the potential offensive juggernaut that is Beasley (and the shot blocking of Samb) I feel that Bynum will better fit my direction. Bynum is a legit young C and that is not easy to find. I could now have 2 of them but Bogut will be put on the block if this deal goes through.

Detroit accepts

[TMACFORMVP]

The Miami Heat would LOVE to pickup Stephen Lasme ($300,000)

[MJallday59]

The Orlando Magic waive Guard Sean Singletary

[xxSnEaKyPxx]

I learned last game to be careful when accepting trades. I accepted a few trades I knew were big, but didn't know the players involved. I'm not accepting any deal I don't know every detail of this year.