(01-15-2023, 06:16 PM)dirkfansince1998 Wrote: [ -> ]You are almost there. Now you just need to make the connection between different trade values and the level of player you get. Maybe the guy that goes for three firsts is on a different level than the guy that goes for two or even one.
Apply that logic and compare SD/Wood and Holiday/Middleton. Take a look at their contracts. Take a look at trades that involved them.
All you've done is hated and trolled. ZERO constructive input. You want me to search through hundreds of posts to find your suggestions? Ha! Hard pass. Either you can briefly share it or you're full of shit. You've proven nothing but the latter if you don't show your cards. Name names, not your theoretical BS.
(01-15-2023, 07:22 PM)Ghost of Podkolzin Wrote: [ -> ]All you've done is hated and trolled. ZERO constructive input. You want me to search through hundreds of posts to find your suggestions? Ha! Hard pass. Either you can briefly share it or you're full of shit. You've proven nothing but the latter if you don't show your cards. Name names, not your theoretical BS.
Do you think your post will lead to a constructive reponse. Of course not. And I have zero interest to continue a petty shouting match.
(01-15-2023, 08:05 PM)dirkfansince1998 Wrote: [ -> ]Do you think your post will lead to a constructive reponse. Of course not. And I have zero interest to continue a petty shouting match.
My post or my response to your trolling. Please point me in the direction where I wasn't asking you for a constructive response... the easiest thing in the world is to deconstruct someone's idea without providing your own. I'm here to banter around ideas, not to defend the most inconsequent supporting statement to my ideas. You have (and cannot) reply with an opposing idea to banter, just trolling. You are unwilling to lay your cards down as I have done. I believe the kids call that hating.
(01-15-2023, 11:40 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]In case anyone needs more evidence that the Mavs are run by a gang of idiots:
https://twitter.com/BobbyMarks42/status/1614638321157677057?s=20&t=ifgyf4FIa8S6ltybdirsUg
I mean does Pinson have said veto power because of the type of contract he signed? IIRC he signed his QO? Which means he automatically gets veto power in any trade. Nerlens had a similar clause as well.
This isn't new nor is it a failure for the Mavs. Now you can debate the decision making of turning Theo restricted in the first place but its obvious he's a valued locker room guy on a cheap contract.
(01-15-2023, 11:46 PM)DanSchwartzgan Wrote: [ -> ]Are you under the mistaken impression they ‘gave’ him a no-trade clause or did you want them to sign him for two years. His right to veto comes from signing a one year deal that ends with Bird or EB rights. Nothing more.
Nope, I'm of the opinion that having him on the roster in the first place is suspect and that allowing him to be on the roster in such a way that he gets any say in his future, even on a technicality, is doubly suspect.
I would not have gone that way, and no, I didn't think they "gave" it to him. I still think it's idiotic.
(01-15-2023, 11:50 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]I would not have gone that way, and no, I didn't think they "gave" it to him. I still think it's idiotic.
He's a 15th man locker room guy. It was obvious his addition last year was a big boon to team chemistry.
He was asked to play 20+ mins tonight in a game where the Mavs were missing 5 players all playing his position. He's of course not good enough for that. Curious why his presence is sparking your ire so much. Especially when he's on a 1 year deal worth essentially the min.
His value in any trade is minute at best.
(01-15-2023, 11:55 PM)SleepingHero Wrote: [ -> ]He's a 15th man locker room guy. It was obvious his addition last year was a big boon to team chemistry.
He was asked to play 20+ mins tonight in a game where the Mavs were missing 5 players all playing his position. He's of course not good enough for that. Curious why his presence is sparking your ire so much. Especially when he's on a 1 year deal worth essentially the min.
His value in any trade is menial at best.
Not arguing with any of that.
I didn't realize his contract would give him a no-trade back when he
signed it (realized it the second I saw that tweet, obviously, despite you and Dan assuming I'm stupid) but I assume the Mavs did, and I say again - dumb!
Not worth it, imo. What if you need to add a tiny salary to some bigger deal? What if you need a roster spot and end up having to cut him and eat the money, rather than just ship him out?
99% chance none of that comes into play, but for Pinson?
They're paying Pinson to be a cheerleader and irritant and to stand up all game and block people's view. Like he did during the playoffs last year. Good work if you can get it.
(01-15-2023, 11:11 PM)Ghost of Podkolzin Wrote: [ -> ]My post or my response to your trolling. Please point me in the direction where I wasn't asking you for a constructive response... the easiest thing in the world is to deconstruct someone's idea without providing your own. I'm here to banter around ideas, not to defend the most inconsequent supporting statement to my ideas. You have (and cannot) reply with an opposing idea to banter, just trolling. You are unwilling to lay your cards down as I have done. I believe the kids call that hating.
You put yor idea out on the internet to get responses. I offered my opinion and disagreed. I don´t have to offer my own offseason/trade ideas when it would be complety off topic and not related to the ongoing discussion. People (including me) were discussing your proposal. Leading to a discussion about the value of players like Wood or SD. And you choose to double down and defend the inconsequent supporting statement you made. Once again I disagreed. And I gave a detailed and constructive response why I do think that the level/tier/value of the mentioned players is an important part of the discussion. That you choose to dismiss. I quote "Who gives a shit". Well...other posters gave a shit because I wasn´t the only one that was responding. Not on you to decide what is relevant for others even if you don´t like the responses.
If you put your idea out on the internet you shouldn´t be suprised that people might disagree or choose to focus on aspects that you deem irrelevant. Especially when it is a very broad topic that has been discussed over and over again. It´s not like any of the ideas are completly new. Posters will be inclined to look at the more controversial statements that aren´t an "old story".
And I am sorry to tell you that demands will never get a response from me. If you want to call me a troll or hater feel free to do so. But I am not jumping just because somebody tells me to do it or throws a couple of insults in my direction. Doubling down with more insults isn´t going to change that. Call it petty, stubborn or whatever you can come up with. I give you a lot of credit for creativity when it comes to the insults. But I am not going to honor personal attacks with a constructive response.
(01-16-2023, 12:00 AM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ](realized it the second I saw that tweet, obviously, despite you and Dan assuming I'm stupid
Lets tone down the temp a bit here. Wasn't assuming anything. Just figured you overlooked a small fact and tried to point it out in earnest. Not trying to paint you as anything. You're anything but stupid! Your post came off in such a way that you either overlooked the contract or weren't aware of the rule.
We now both know you are aware of the rule and you just don't like it. Ok no biggie.
(01-16-2023, 12:00 AM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]Not worth it, imo. What if you need to add a tiny salary to some bigger deal? What if you need a roster spot and end up having to cut him and eat the money, rather than just ship him out?
If we need to add a tiny salary to some bigger deal, the Mavs conveniently have Frank on basically the exact same contract that they can throw in at any time. Frank's also an 11th guy. He's no one we should lose sleep over.
Also just because Theo is on this deal doesn't preclude him from being able to be cut. He can be waived at any point this season, the Mavs just take his salary hit as dead money against the cap. His salary is so small that it shouldn't be a huge issue should they REALLY need the roster spot. Since he has a 1 year deal that dead money is gone come July.
(01-16-2023, 08:21 AM)Kammrath Wrote: [ -> ]https://twitter.com/TheNBACentral/status...1506607104
Saw that Stein says the Jazz are on the verge of being big sellers. He mentioned the Cavs, Hawks and Jazz have discussed a three team trade that would send Beasely to Cleveland and Collins to Utah. Hawks are reluctant to add picks to trade.
I haven't see if Stein mentions other names in that trade. To be honest, a guy like Beasely makes more sense than Hardaway does for them...depending on what they are giving up.
(01-16-2023, 08:26 AM)Chicagojk Wrote: [ -> ]Saw that Stein says the Jazz are on the verge of being big sellers. He mentioned the Cavs, Hawks and Jazz have discussed a three team trade that would send Beasely to Cleveland and Collins to Utah. Hawks are reluctant to add picks to trade.
I haven't see if Stein mentions other names in that trade. To be honest, a guy like Beasely makes more sense than Hardaway does for them...depending on what they are giving up.
In the same piece he backs up Jake Fischer's reporting that Miami is interested in D. Russell for Lowry swap. Both that and the Cleveland/Beasley rumor wipe out the two reported destinations for Hardaway in recent weeks.
Love how some outlets have Atlanta getting picks for Collins and some have them giving picks for Collins. You are correct that Utah would need to add salary to do Beasley for Collins, but Stein doesn't name a name. It can be someone making as little as Agbaji up to someone making as much as Rudy Gay. If they make as much as THT, it throws Atlanta into the Luxury Tax.
If Utah has Collins, do they keep Markannen? Has LM become a someone who would command two draft choices if you trade for him.
(01-16-2023, 12:04 AM)dirkfansince1998 Wrote: [ -> ]You put yor idea out on the internet to get responses. I offered my opinion and disagreed. I don´t have to offer my own offseason/trade ideas when it would be complety off topic and not related to the ongoing discussion. People (including me) were discussing your proposal. Leading to a discussion about the value of players like Wood or SD. And you choose to double down and defend the inconsequent supporting statement you made. Once again I disagreed. And I gave a detailed and constructive response why I do think that the level/tier/value of the mentioned players is an important part of the discussion. That you choose to dismiss. I quote "Who gives a shit". Well...other posters gave a shit because I wasn´t the only one that was responding. Not on you to decide what is relevant for others even if you don´t like the responses.
If you put your idea out on the internet you shouldn´t be suprised that people might disagree or choose to focus on aspects that you deem irrelevant. Especially when it is a very broad topic that has been discussed over and over again. It´s not like any of the ideas are completly new. Posters will be inclined to look at the more controversial statements that aren´t an "old story".
And I am sorry to tell you that demands will never get a response from me. If you want to call me a troll or hater feel free to do so. But I am not jumping just because somebody tells me to do it or throws a couple of insults in my direction. Doubling down with more insults isn´t going to change that. Call it petty, stubborn or whatever you can come up with. I give you a lot of credit for creativity when it comes to the insults. But I am not going to honor personal attacks with a constructive response.
You brought up your little theoretical comparison of Din/Wood vs Jrue/Middleton, not I. You created a worthless argument only you were arguing. In the future you can save my time by arguing batman vs superman in the mirror and leaving me out of it. Thank you.