PDA

View Full Version : How can a rival GM screw your team for many years?



ldawg
01-26-2011, 10:51 AM
Teams that don't want to trade with a rival or a team within the conference often don't get the best trade that helps their team in the long run. Looking back at the Garnett and Pau trade. Everyone had the Wolves trade to be a good trade and Memphis own to be a bad trade but was it? Lakers wanted Garnett but was spun away for the Celtics because they were in the same conference and the gm hated Lakers. Bynum>Jefferson what if Love and Bynum played togeher now?
Grizzles on the other hand were not winning and Pau wanted out and they needed to shed money. They had a chance to see Marc play and they wanted him. Even if it meant making the Lakers better or trading within the conference it did not matter. It did not matter because they were not wining anyway, what did they had to loose? By Memphis not making the trade they were hurting themselves and helping Spurs, Mavs, Orlando, Boston who were in position to win. Griz are on the right track while Mini traded away the player they traded for and are now in a tail spin. Over and Over gm cross out teams in the same conference and accept a lesser trade only to prolong the rebuild process, if you are not winning so why does it matter who you trade with? Are you not suppose to make the trade that helps the team or full fill the goal of making the trade?

Niro
01-26-2011, 12:10 PM
what

Knickrocketsfan
01-26-2011, 12:30 PM
Teams that don't want to trade with a rival or a team within the conference often don't get the best trade that helps their team in the long run. Looking back at the Garnett and Pau trade. Everyone had the Wolves trade to be a good trade and Memphis own to be a bad trade but was it? Lakers wanted Garnett but was spun away for the Celtics because they were in the same conference and the gm hated Lakers. Bynum>Perkins what if Love and Bynum played togeher now?
Grizzles on the other hand were not winning and Pau wanted out and they needed to shed money. They had a chance to see Marc play and they wanted him. Even if it meant making the Lakers better or trading within the conference it did not matter. It did not matter because they were not wining anyway what did they had to loose? By not making the trade they were hurting themselves and helping Spurs, Mavs, Orlando, Boston who were in position to win. Griz are on the right track while Mini traded away the player they traded for and are in a tail spin. Over and Over gm cross out teams in the same conference and accept a lesser trade only to prolong the rebuild process you are not winning so why does it matter? Are you not suppose to make the trade that helps the team or full fill the goal of making the trade?

What is the point of that statement, Perkins was not traded

iliketurtles24
01-26-2011, 12:49 PM
????

John Walls Era
01-26-2011, 12:53 PM
:cricket:

ackar
01-26-2011, 12:58 PM
Um no

XerxestheGreat
01-26-2011, 01:18 PM
Is this Glenn Beck? Cause none of this makes sense

smith&wesson
01-26-2011, 01:52 PM
Garnet was traded for all jefreson and a bunch of fillers.

and it was a good trade because mini got alot of value back, its no ones fault that they cant get it together. they have alot of good young talent now and are still a losing team.

usually teams dont like to trade with in theyre own conference because they dont want that player to come back and haunt them because you play more games against teams in your conference, and you may end up facing your old best player in the play offs.

heyman321
01-26-2011, 01:58 PM
Yesterday I ate a cheeseburger and then my stomach started hurting afterwards so I went to the bathroom to puke. Then I figured it was just bad beef. But that doesn't make sense, because you can eat rare beef. So then i concluded that it must have been those damn expired buns that fast food joints overstock for so long. Then I played old school Mario Kart 64 on the N64 until I fell asleep.

tangent12
01-26-2011, 02:26 PM
... I like turtlez.

Sox72
01-26-2011, 02:36 PM
My head hurts from trying to read that.

kyle9178969
01-26-2011, 03:01 PM
/thread

210Don
01-26-2011, 03:18 PM
i dont know but i cant believe we gave scola to the rockets for trash smh...

-Kobe24-TJ19-
01-26-2011, 03:18 PM
... I like turtlez.

me too

hgtiger32
01-26-2011, 03:24 PM
lol dude, u gotta come up with a better/cleaner thread

Steelers23_06
01-26-2011, 03:38 PM
lol dude, u gotta come up with a better/cleaner thread

...to your sig. look likes there is a gonna be ALOT of dead packers haha
(btw thread sucks)

topdog
01-26-2011, 04:14 PM
The deal had nothing to do w/ the LA-Minny rivalry. If I remember correctly, Bynum was not offered, LO was. McHale wanted a rebuilding package and he liked what young Boston could offer including salary relief and a dunk champion.

The other big offer on the table was for Amare but the Wolves didn't seem to want him and that one turned into Atlanta's 2 picks to Minny (Horford and Law I believe they turned out to be) Amare to ATL and KG to the desert.

topdog
01-26-2011, 04:15 PM
While we're sort of on the subject, can you imagine how screwed Orlando would have been if they kept McGrady and drafted Okafor?

BRICKCITYPIMP12
01-26-2011, 04:28 PM
Yesterday I ate a cheeseburger and then my stomach started hurting afterwards so I went to the bathroom to puke. Then I figured it was just bad beef. But that doesn't make sense, because you can eat rare beef. So then i concluded that it must have been those damn expired buns that fast food joints overstock for so long. Then I played old school Mario Kart 64 on the N64 until I fell asleep.



HAHA to be honest..yours ^ is still better and easier to read...lmao.

sep11ie
01-26-2011, 04:34 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0cnMHhf30iI

Anilyzer
01-26-2011, 05:28 PM
Teams that don't want to trade with a rival or a team within the conference often don't get the best trade that helps their team in the long run. Looking back at the Garnett and Pau trade. Everyone had the Wolves trade to be a good trade and Memphis own to be a bad trade but was it? Lakers wanted Garnett but was spun away for the Celtics because they were in the same conference and the gm hated Lakers. Bynum>Perkins what if Love and Bynum played togeher now?
Grizzles on the other hand were not winning and Pau wanted out and they needed to shed money. They had a chance to see Marc play and they wanted him. Even if it meant making the Lakers better or trading within the conference it did not matter. It did not matter because they were not wining anyway what did they had to loose? By not making the trade they were hurting themselves and helping Spurs, Mavs, Orlando, Boston who were in position to win. Griz are on the right track while Mini traded away the player they traded for and are in a tail spin. Over and Over gm cross out teams in the same conference and accept a lesser trade only to prolong the rebuild process you are not winning so why does it matter? Are you not suppose to make the trade that helps the team or full fill the goal of making the trade?

I would agree with that. I think if you're a GM, just like playing other game, you have to be able to look at the situation and base your actions on the best possible outcome.

The problem is that GMs, for example, or say, football coaches and stock market investors, will sometimes follow a "rule" that they don't completely understand, then they don't know when to break that rule. A rule like "never trade a star player within your own division" could be like that... I mean, you don't want to say the opposite "always trade a star player in your own division" but there could be times when it is the best decision.

If you could just have a set of rules (don't trade stars to division rivals, always draft the bigger player if the talent is equal, always go for young players when rebuilding, etc) then you could follow those rules and basically win the game all the time. But it's more complex than that.

Anyhow... McHale screwed over Minnesota with the Garnett trade; he gave away Garnett to Boston out of Celtic loyalty. Classic corruption.

ldawg
01-26-2011, 08:32 PM
Holly smoke my bad i meant Jefferson not Perkins. I was half sleep when i made this thread. Sorry about the thread but if you have common sense you will know where i was going.

ldawg
01-27-2011, 12:33 AM
That trade was one of the worst trade of the past decade. All because a gm wanted to help his old team and not do his job and construct the best deal he can.

Sixerlover
01-27-2011, 01:36 AM
lolwut

Sixerlover
01-27-2011, 01:37 AM
Teams that don't want to trade with a rival or a team within the conference often don't get the best trade that helps their team in the long run. Looking back at the Garnett and Pau trade. Everyone had the Wolves trade to be a good trade and Memphis own to be a bad trade but was it? Lakers wanted Garnett but was spun away for the Celtics because they were in the same conference and the gm hated Lakers. Bynum>Jefferson what if Love and Bynum played togeher now?
Grizzles on the other hand were not winning and Pau wanted out and they needed to shed money. They had a chance to see Marc play and they wanted him. Even if it meant making the Lakers better or trading within the conference it did not matter. It did not matter because they were not wining anyway, what did they had to loose? By Memphis not making the trade they were hurting themselves and helping Spurs, Mavs, Orlando, Boston who were in position to win. Griz are on the right track while Mini traded away the player they traded for and are now in a tail spin. Over and Over gm cross out teams in the same conference and accept a lesser trade only to prolong the rebuild process, if you are not winning so why does it matter who you trade with? Are you not suppose to make the trade that helps the team or full fill the goal of making the trade?

*starts slow clap* :clap: