Steven Hunter trade

grizzfan1204 · Post #1 » by **grizzfan1204** » Sat Aug 8, 2009 3:50 pm

Was a $3,696,000 TE created for Denver yestesrday when they traded Steven Hunter to Memphis for next to nothing?

Dunkenstein · Post #2 » by **Dunkenstein** » Sat Aug 8, 2009 4:20 pm

grizzfan1204 wrote:Was a $3,696,000 TE created for Denver yestesrday when they traded Steven Hunter to Memphis for next to nothing?

Since Denver took back no player contracts, you should be correct in your assumption. Though getting back a protected first round draft pick should be considered more than "next to nothing". Plus Memphis got "cash considerations" as well.

grizzfan1204 · Post #3 » by **grizzfan1204** » Sat Aug 8, 2009 4:39 pm

Dunkenstein wrote:
grizzfan1204 wrote:Was a $3,696,000 TE created for Denver yestesrday when they traded Steven Hunter to Memphis for next to nothing?

Since Denver took back no player contracts, you should be correct in your assumption. Though getting back a protected first round draft pick should be considered more than "next to nothing". Plus Memphis got "cash considerations" as well.

Thanks for the quick reply...I was referring to Memphis giving up next to nothing.

FGump · Post #4 » by **FGump** » Sat Aug 8, 2009 9:48 pm

Dunkenstein wrote:
grizzfan1204 wrote:Was a $3,696,000 TE created for Denver yestesrday when they traded Steven Hunter to Memphis for next to nothing?

Since Denver took back no player contracts, you should be correct in your assumption. Though getting back a protected first round draft pick should be considered more than "next to nothing". Plus Memphis got "cash considerations" as well.

Actually Denver didn't get the first round pick. They gave it, as a bribe to Memphis to do the deal. Along with a big pile of cash.

Post #5 » by **Schad** » Sun Aug 9, 2009 12:04 am

FGump wrote:
Dunkenstein wrote:
grizzfan1204 wrote:Was a $3,696,000 TE created for Denver yestesrday when they traded Steven Hunter to Memphis for next to nothing?

Since Denver took back no player contracts, you should be correct in your assumption. Though getting back a protected first round draft pick should be considered more than "next to nothing". Plus Memphis got "cash considerations" as well.

Actually Denver didn't get the first round pick. They gave it, as a bribe to Memphis to do the deal. Along with a big pile of cash.

Rumour has it that, if the pile of cash exceeds 6'8", the Grizzlies will use it as a late-game defensive replacement for Zach Randolph.

Post #6 » by **Three34** » Sun Aug 9, 2009 12:05 am

Don#t make me do my overly defensive Memphis act again. Because I will.

grizzfan1204 · Post #7 » by **grizzfan1204** » Sun Aug 9, 2009 2:17 am

the bottom line is our bench sucks

coolness · Post #8 » by **coolness** » Mon Aug 10, 2009 7:49 pm

Sham wrote:Don#t make me do my overly defensive Memphis act again. Because I will.

If it is defending the financial moves then cool.

If it is defending against the Zach's defensive replacement comment, I would like to hear it.