Camden wrote:We've got KG4Ever suggesting D'Angelo Russell and potentially three (!) first-round picks for Dejounte Murray, and then JasonIsDaMan says he'd counter with Russell and three second-round picks for Murray, Doug McDermott, and their second-round pick, which happens to be higher than any of the picks Minnesota would be sending out. You have to love the contrast there.
I thought I did a good job of explaining it. Not for nothing, it's OK to tell a team that overvalues its own player to go piss up a rope. Murray is not worth 3 firsts. Very few are, and he's not one of them. My trade also gets them out from under McDermott. And they're still free to do JP/#9 for Ayton S&T, or something like it.
I have no interest in trading for Dejounte Murray, but your proposal is borderline disrespectful and illogical. The Spurs would be giving up the younger, better lead guard on a below-market value contract for two more years and all they're getting back in return is an expiring contract and three second-round picks? That's atrocious. Not to mention, San Antonio would also be giving up the highest overall pick in your offer. How does any of that make sense?
Disrespectful? Really? Okay, a few things
1. The people who run the Spurs are adults, so after a good cry and a pint of Haagen-Daz, I'm sure they'll be fine.
2. I acknowledged in my first post on this thread that they weren't actually shopping Murray, and like I said, you are not required to make a deal with a team simply because they call you and say that is what the trade will be. There was a Ricky Gervais movie that came out a while back called "The Invention of Lying" where he got at least one woman to sleep with him because he said they had to to save the world. It wasn't a documentary.
3. If I was on this board everyday and/or had the time to review all of the threads, are you THAT confident I couldn't find something you posted that could be construed as "disrespectful"?
4. Last but not least, and at the risk of conjuring up "The Troubles", there was a time when this board was in a REALLY dark place, with much of it being disrespectful to not only very successful people, but also entire races of people, all under the cover of anonymity. I'm not saying you were the worst, but I don't remember you having a big problem with it either. It is good to know that your line is the Wolves winning a trade.
I wouldn't say disrespectful, maybe a little, but definitely an odd offer. I think this just shows how massively overpaid Dlo is. We're talking about two PGs, both close to their prime, both made an all star team. You could say that Murray is on a better contract, but San Antonio could probably re-sign Dlo for something pretty similar to Murray's contract. I think we also need to consider that players on certain teams look a little better than they really are because of great coaching and great organizations. San Antonio and golden state are both in this category.
Thank you. That being said, it can sometimes get old to read EVERY postseason thread on this board (at least the ones the deal with sports) that EVERY OTHER PLAYER is better than the ones the Wolves have, each season they don't win a championship, which is each season. If the Spurs called me, my first thought would be "How does my team PRESENTLY CONSTRUCTED win this trade BASED ON MY CURRENT ASSETS AND LIABILITIES. I'm not giving 3 picks for DMurray. I would trade Beasley or Beverly if that was offer, but if they want DLO, I'm offering to even up the money and the picks I WANT TO OFFER. Full stop.
Jason - It's never disrespectful or in appropriate to post what you'd be willing to do - whether it's a trade, free agency or the draft. There have been a number of one-sided deals in the NBA over the years. Those deals obviously started with an offer that most would have considered way too low, but the other side ended up saying yes to that proposal or something similarly low. We heard recently what Golden State initially wanted from the Wolves for a DLO/Wiggins swap. I thought that what GS was apparently asking for was ridiculous. Apparently so did Rosas because it pissed him off. Rosas eventually got a better deal, which I still think was too much to give up.
In any event, bottom line is that you have nothing to apologize for or explain. I disagree strongly with any suggestion that your idea was disrespectful. It's what we do on this message board; we offer up ideas and discuss them - hopefully in a respectful way.
lipoli390 wrote:Jason - It's never disrespectful or in appropriate to post what you'd be willing to do - whether it's a trade, free agency or the draft. There have been a number of one-sided deals in the NBA over the years. Those deals obviously started with an offer that most would have considered way too low, but the other side ended up saying yes to that proposal or something similarly low. We heard recently what Golden State initially wanted from the Wolves for a DLO/Wiggins swap. I thought that what GS was apparently asking for was ridiculous. Apparently so did Rosas because it pissed him off. Rosas eventually got a better deal, which I still think was too much to give up.
In any event, bottom line is that you have nothing to apologize for or explain. I disagree strongly with any suggestion that your idea was disrespectful. It's what we do on this message board; we offer up ideas and discuss them - hopefully in a respectful way.
lipoli390 wrote:Jason - It's never disrespectful or in appropriate to post what you'd be willing to do - whether it's a trade, free agency or the draft. There have been a number of one-sided deals in the NBA over the years. Those deals obviously started with an offer that most would have considered way too low, but the other side ended up saying yes to that proposal or something similarly low. We heard recently what Golden State initially wanted from the Wolves for a DLO/Wiggins swap. I thought that what GS was apparently asking for was ridiculous. Apparently so did Rosas because it pissed him off. Rosas eventually got a better deal, which I still think was too much to give up.
In any event, bottom line is that you have nothing to apologize for or explain. I disagree strongly with any suggestion that your idea was disrespectful. It's what we do on this message board; we offer up ideas and discuss them - hopefully in a respectful way.
Thank you for respecting my disrespectfulness.
Lol. You can keep proposing extremely one-sided trades as often as you want, Jason!
Whoa, there's some major confusion here. Jason's proposal isn't disrespectful to anyone here and no apology is needed whatsoever. However, offering three second-round picks and an expiring contract for an All-Star guard who's not even 26-years old yet would fit the bill, in my opinion. That offer would be the equivalent to a smack in the face. I think San Antonio's front office would absolutely feel disrespected, especially considering they'd be giving up the highest pick in the deal.
I have no issue with anyone posting their ideas. On the contrary, I welcome it fully. That's healthy activity for the board, but so is pushing back on those ideas. That's all that happened here.
lipoli390 wrote:Jason - It's never disrespectful or in appropriate to post what you'd be willing to do - whether it's a trade, free agency or the draft. There have been a number of one-sided deals in the NBA over the years. Those deals obviously started with an offer that most would have considered way too low, but the other side ended up saying yes to that proposal or something similarly low. We heard recently what Golden State initially wanted from the Wolves for a DLO/Wiggins swap. I thought that what GS was apparently asking for was ridiculous. Apparently so did Rosas because it pissed him off. Rosas eventually got a better deal, which I still think was too much to give up.
In any event, bottom line is that you have nothing to apologize for or explain. I disagree strongly with any suggestion that your idea was disrespectful. It's what we do on this message board; we offer up ideas and discuss them - hopefully in a respectful way.
Thank you for respecting my disrespectfulness.
Lol. You can keep proposing extremely one-sided trades as often as you want, Jason!
.....and as long as I'm a Wolves fan, I will be proposing extremely one-sided trades that favor the Wolves.
Camden wrote:Whoa, there's some major confusion here. Jason's proposal isn't disrespectful to anyone here and no apology is needed whatsoever. However, offering three second-round picks and an expiring contract for an All-Star guard who's not even 26-years old yet would fit the bill, in my opinion. That offer would be the equivalent to a smack in the face. I think San Antonio's front office would absolutely feel disrespected, especially considering they'd be giving up the highest pick in the deal.
I have no issue with anyone posting their ideas. On the contrary, I welcome it fully. That's healthy activity for the board, but so is pushing back on those ideas. That's all that happened here.
...and as I said, if the Spurs feelings were hurt, it's nothing a good cry and some Haagen-Daz won't fix. All-stars are traded all of time for less than 3 firsts, and my offer does take back their worst contract and maintains their cap space to do a JP/#9 sign-and-trade with whomever.
After Connelly underwhelmed me with the draft, I am now more firmly on the trade for DeJounte Murray camp as I don't think those picks are as valuable as I had thought. Hope this deal happens.
Fine, I'm on board. But if Minnesota are throwing in a bunch of firsts, can they at least get San Antonio to throw in some relievers that are better than Duffy and Theilbar?
KG4Ever wrote:After Connelly underwhelmed me with the draft, I am now more firmly on the trade for DeJounte Murray camp as I don't think those picks are as valuable as I had thought. Hope this deal happens.
How about all four of our picks and DLO for Murray. :)
