Trade & FA 2024-25:

[mvossman]

Am I being pedantic? Yes. But imo that is necessary at times. 

Did I "attack" you? Not intended to be that. I can see how you may have  seen it as personal, but it was not (and if i stepped over the line somewhere, did not intend it that way, and my apologies.) I did object to the comments, which i saw to be both objectively untrue (not hint they were an expression of an opinion) and somewhat deceptive in the context offered of what you replied to and quoted, and I still feel that way. 

You say I could have replied differently, but to do it  as you suggest, I would have had to seen a clue that you saw your statement as merely your own opinion and not fact. That was nowhere to be found, and I responded to what WAS written rather than trying to imagine what was not. That's on you, as is the fact that when I objected to what WAS written, you attack rather than say "Oops, i said that wrong", which would have avoided all that ensued when you tried to prove what you said was somehow right.

If you mean to say that I don't think the 2nds should be counted, then say that and try to justify its validity. (I disagree 100% and think that ignores very clear and ongoing NBA operations that are easy to see.) If you want to say YOU didn't see SD as an asset [at all, apparently], then say it that way rather than simply saying he wasn't as a blanket statement. Objectively that blanket statement is false, because of all the reasons I have already offered and more. But the main point is that there was no indication you were saying "this is just MY opinion" and that part is not on the reader.

Again, my apologies if you thought my comments were personal attack. That was not my intent at all. I didn't think what was said was true as stated, and that was what I was addressing.

I respect your mature response.

Could I have specified only one of the picks was a first?  Yes.  Could I have put the phase "I don't think" in front of Dinwiddie not being an asset?  Yes.  I thought those were implied, but I do see that it was not specifically worded and it could be read differently.  I generally try to be clear and specific in my posts, but sometimes you make a distracted post that doesn't perfectly dot the eyes.

As for the seconds, I'm not saying that second round picks have no value, but when we are talking about a trade that would require many, may firsts, their value seems inconsequential to me.  

As we have both pointed out a while ago, this is a pointless discussion as neither of us believe there is a reasonable path to a Giannis trade to the Mavs.  After reading the several childish responses from the OP, I put on ignore and don't intend to engage again.