How to have our cake and eat it too ( maybe ) - Page 2 - Basketball Forum : Professional and College Basketball Forums
BasketballForum.com is the premier basketball Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
User Tag List

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-12-2002, 06:18 PM   #16 (permalink)
 

Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,160
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally posted by NCBullsFan
Hey Ztect, don't let FJ drive you away.
Umm I don't want to drive anyone away - I would just like someone to engage in an intelligent discussion and state their case if it is alternate in a respectful manner instead of subjecting the board to such scorching repartee such as : " This blows"


Quote:
On the RealGM boards, you are one of the best at scouring the internet for useful information.
I agree. .

Quote:
Every board needs some folks who increase the grumpiness factor.)
Perhaps so. It takes all types - just like obviously intelligent posters such as yourself who bring up excellent points and well researched hypotheses but then let themselves down by obsessing on how to take everyone down who disagrees with you and in the process using tone and style that is irritating and needling (whether it is purposefull or not).

If you feel compelled to speak up for Z ( who I am sure can speak up for himself ) and tisk tisk and finger wag to buy into something that had nothing to do with you ( other than to reassert yourself and your positions in your prior Dunleavy diatribes ) , I can do the same - and in doing so , mention to you that I found your tone and manner to Jammer and others in the Dunleavy thread was smart arsed and disrespectful - as it is in this thread yet again.

If you can manage to drop the me v everybody / Devils Advocate obsession which comes throuigh load and clear in your posts , you are an intelligent and enjoyable person to converse with . Disagree all you want - just try not to be so smug and obsessive in the process. Its annoying. Even when points have been conceded to you in debate - you still labour the issue. See what I mean ? I hope so.

Quote:

I have learned a valuable lesson on this board. Pick on Dunleavy at your own risk. If you offer too little justification, you get accused of being a troll (FJ), and if you are too persistent in presenting justification, you get accused of being an IRS agent (Dickie).
If you are into learning lessons on the board try this one on . People will only give you the same amount of decency and leeway in how they receive you as you yourself are prepared to give them .

That's all.

Peace

BTW , I will come back to you after I go and find some more research on the issues you raised as to the trade above.

With regard to GSW's position I had tried to make some assumptions on the Real GM factor salary system and had arrived at their payroll higher than your/hoophypes $47M - I had them at around $50M as I had overestimated Twan's salary by around $2M. In any respect if the tax limit is at the lower end of the range at $52M /$53M - that's still $5M -$6M to spend on 5 players. It can be done but it is getting up there. By having salary cap dumpers in DA and Don Reid by trade deadline next year , they can be a player ( a cap cleanser ) and maybe pick up a good role player and a 1st round pick + long term they are rid of Fortson's contract and Sura's contract in the summer of 2003 when we both agree (I think ) as to roughly how much cap space they would have to target free agency signings ( their cap should be approx 34M in my example )

You may be right on the other issues- but I am not convinced about DeClerq ( I thought his team option was last summer which guaranteed him a further 2 years as it was a bone of contention at the time that he would not be cleared out by the summer of 2003 - I will check with Howard Mass and come back to you on this ) and in addition I am not convinced about FA sign and trade points you raise , in that from memory in the Reef/Pau trade last year I thought the deal was not ratified ( even though it was announced at draft ) until much later - I can't remember what the exact issue was - but it is my belief that the deal can be done conditional upon it being fomrally ratified when time dictates allow .

Maybe if I can find some proof of this ,this may once again create some merit in discussing this trade ( If that is OK with you of course )

Last edited by Machinehead; 06-12-2002 at 06:41 PM.
Machinehead is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 06-12-2002, 07:48 PM   #17 (permalink)
 

Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 593
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
in response to FJ's lecturing...

i'm not sure what was said in the other thread, but Z Tech's post in this thread isn't worth getting riled up about. What is it, the not so smiley smiley faces gettin to ya?

That said, it is very true that egotistical tirades get very little accomplished. It is posible to use the agrivation or frustration that one might have for whatever reason towards researching your point more. But frankley such research becomes tedious and only more frustrating.

The open exchange of ideas should aim at opening our minds to possibilities. And debating a point is a time tested form of such an exchange. Keep it clean, and enjoy other people's perceptions and expectations.

my piece,
for peace.
settinUpShop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2002, 07:53 PM   #18 (permalink)
A!
Photobucket
 
Chops's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2002
Location: UCLA
Age: 33
Posts: 9,434
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
FJ, Larry Hughes is a RFA, but he still cannot be traded on draft day. If we are going to involve our picks, then that means that we have to wait a month for free agency to start until we can trade them off. I for one do not want some unhappy draftee sticking around for a month.......
Chops is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2002, 09:57 PM   #19 (permalink)
 

Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,160
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Re: in response to FJ's lecturing...

Quote:
Originally posted by settinUpShop
i'm not sure what was said in the other thread, but Z Tech's post in this thread isn't worth getting riled up about. What is it, the not so smiley smiley faces gettin to ya?
I think that in the interests of constructive argument , "YUCK" and a half assed Duke analogy does not really do anything for the integrity of thread .



Quote:
The open exchange of ideas should aim at opening our minds to possibilities. And debating a point is a time tested form of such an exchange. Keep it clean, and enjoy other people's perceptions and expectations.
Exactly my point which is why I made comment in the first place
Machinehead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2002, 10:08 PM   #20 (permalink)
 

Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,160
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally posted by KC
FJ, Larry Hughes is a RFA, but he still cannot be traded on draft day. If we are going to involve our picks, then that means that we have to wait a month for free agency to start until we can trade them off. I for one do not want some unhappy draftee sticking around for a month.......
I already made this point above in response to NC - in terms of the deal being delayed before it can be ratified - but then there is the issue of the draft pick's $ counting on cap once they are drafted - regardless of whether they are signed or not ( I am not sure on this and am seeking answers )
Machinehead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2002, 10:10 PM   #21 (permalink)
 

Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,231
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Re: Re: in response to FJ's lecturing...

Quote:
Originally posted by F.Jerzy


I think that in the interests of constructive argument , "YUCK" and a half assed Duke analogy does not really do anything for the integrity of thread .





Exactly my point which is why I made comment in the first place
Yuck was a summary, since the proposed trade IMO opinion didn't really warrant such a verbose retort. Your tirade really isn't worth any effort either. Sorry for not recognizes your innate "genius".

So, actually I'm going to sleep instead.

Personally, developing continuity by allowing kids like Fizer and Craw to grow and develop chemistry with their teammates is more help than exchanging players like cards in a poker game.

Moreover I've no prejudice against Dukies, though I do believe many people become infatuated with players that they've seen repeatedly and that have been hyped repeatedly.

Both Dunleavy and JWill have liabilities, and neither IMO may be the best player for the Bulls.

I'll debate this some other time, but right now I'm going to sleep.

Good night.
ztect is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2002, 10:21 PM   #22 (permalink)
 

Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,160
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Re: Re: Re: in response to FJ's lecturing...

Quote:
Originally posted by ztect


Yuck was a summary, since the proposed trade IMO opinion didn't really warrant such a verbose retort. Your tirade really isn't worth any effort either. Sorry for not recognizes your innate "genius".

So, actually I'm going to sleep instead.

Personally, developing continuity by allowing kids like Fizer and Craw to grow and develop chemistry with their teammates is more help than exchanging players like cards in a poker game.

Moreover I've no prejudice against Dukies, though I do believe many people become infatuated with players that they've seen repeatedly and that have been hyped repeatedly.

Both Dunleavy and JWill have liabilities, and neither IMO may be the best player for the Bulls.

I'll debate this some other time, but right now I'm going to sleep.

Good night.
Sleep?

Good idea.

Might get some myself .

If I have any difficulty I will make sure to read some of your boring as bat point guard research about some Neville No Name Loser from Pig Knuckle Arkansas that has no chance of being drafted by nobody... or some other spellbinding repository of useless information you feel compelled to litter the RealGM boards with.

Be asleep in 30 seconds guaranteed .

Thanks ZTect - you are an insomniac's best friend !

Last edited by Chops; 06-12-2002 at 11:54 PM.
Machinehead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2002, 10:36 PM   #23 (permalink)
 

Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 29
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
i think chicago should trade there #2 pick (jay) and somebody else for odom it would proved lots of scoring and that what i think let me know if u think they should do some thing else

5- curry
4-fizer
3-chandler
2-odom
1-rose

Last edited by antmo12; 06-12-2002 at 10:44 PM.
antmo12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2002, 10:53 PM   #24 (permalink)
 

Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 510
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Since the Clippers are already offering Odom and at least the #8 pick for the first or 2nd pick in the draft, and getting a very cold reception, why would we think about the #2 and for Odom. 2 years ago I was on Sportstalk for the draft, last year RealGM, this year I'll be here. Next year, I wonder.
Songcycle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2002, 11:00 PM   #25 (permalink)
 

Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 29
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
b/c it will give chi a lot of scoring and a big line up
antmo12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2002, 11:04 PM   #26 (permalink)
 

Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 510
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The Clippers are already offering Odom and the #8 pick and possibly the #12 also to get the first or second pick Why should we offer the #2 pick and something else for just Odom when the Clippers are being told no for Odom and the #8 and more?
Songcycle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2002, 11:25 PM   #27 (permalink)
 

Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 29
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
don't u need some body else to match odom money wise
antmo12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2002, 11:42 PM   #28 (permalink)
 

Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 510
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Not really, we are somewhat under the cap.

Here is Odoms salary

http://www.hoopshype.com/salaries/la_clippers.htm

Here is the rookie wage scale

http://www.realgm.com/src_rookiescale.php

It is very close and we will be under the cap somewhat. I am not advocating the trade at all, but the Clippers have pretty much made it known that Odom and the #8 are the least they would pay for Jay Williams and if the Bulls wanted it could be done with no complications whatsoever salary cap wise as before the draft, rookie salaries don't count at all until the draft itself. The Bulls would have taken Odom #1 over Brand if they liked him and they don't. Not just the injury, but the issue of reliability which Odom fllunks. He has talent, but is not the sort of player the Bulls will bet the #2 pick on. Baron Davis, Andre Miller, maybe. Odom, never.
Songcycle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2002, 12:07 AM   #29 (permalink)
 

Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 29
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
i can understand that and all thats why i don't want him on the clippers and i would give chi whatever else they wanted if it made since like him and both draft picks or somebody else off the cli
antmo12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2002, 05:53 AM   #30 (permalink)
 

Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,231
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Re: Re: Re: Re: in response to FJ's lecturing...

Quote:
Originally posted by F.Jerzy

If I have any difficulty I will make sure to read some of your boring as bat point guard research about some Neville No Name Loser from Pig Knuckle Arkansas that has no chance of being drafted by nobody... or some other spellbinding repository of useless information you feel compelled to litter the RealGM boards with.
Nothing is really more boring than all your pontificating and sanctimonious moralizing.


though it's a good thing gm's pay attention to players from small schools like Ben Wallace, Scottie Pippen, Devan George, and don't rely just on the college game of the week for their scouting.
ztect is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:15 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.1
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.1.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 2002 2013 BasketballBoards.net.