The future of the Atlantic divsion (Butler now a Sixer)

[Don Che]

Zeke set us back 15 years

marbury trade
curry trade
jerome james/jared jeffies contract

even the tim thomas deal were all epically retarded.

[taowave]

You are "Idiotic" IF you think there is some universal law in trading.. Your argument is absurd on every level,and you did curve fit by presenting 2 idiot GM's who made horrific trades.

Here's a trade off the number 1 pick that seemed to work out OK..And Ainge moving the number 1 this year to Philly doesn't look do bad...

And I think Miami did OK trading 5 picks and getting a guy named LeBron..

Guys who understand value seem to win more often than not..

Back in 1980, the Celtics traded the No. 1 pick to the Golden State Warriors for Robert Parish and the No. 3 pick. And Boston then used the No. 3 pick to draft Kevin McHale.

No one said that. But a competent GM behaves according to my rule. The rule is not: you never trade first rounders. It is: you never trade future first rounders while being bad. GM basics. Not sure what you want to say with "curve fitter"? My number one rule applies always and I'm pretty consistent on this forever, there is no cherry picking from my side. You should read and notice the important little things before making strange comments about me. Looks idiotic.

[spree#8]

You are "Idiotic" IF you think there is some universal law in trading.. Your argument is absurd on every level,and you did curve fit by presenting 2 idiot GM's who made horrific trades.

Lol. WTF is wrong with you today? Don't you pay any attention anymore? "Curve fitting" would mean that I changed my mind about such a trade based on the outcome, which couldn't be further from the truth. Second: I only mentioned Isiah (and didn't present anyone else, so WTF are you talking about?), because I preach this rule since his days and you won't find many good GMs, that traded unprotected first round picks while their teams were really bad. Please, don't insult me.

[spree#8]

You are "Idiotic" IF you think there is some universal law in trading.. Your argument is absurd on every level,and you did curve fit by presenting 2 idiot GM's who made horrific trades.

Here's a trade off the number 1 pick that seemed to work out OK..And Ainge moving the number 1 this year to Philly doesn't look do bad...

And I think Miami did OK trading 5 picks and getting a guy named LeBron..

Guys who understand value seem to win more often than not..

Back in 1980, the Celtics traded the No. 1 pick to the Golden State Warriors for Robert Parish and the No. 3 pick. And Boston then used the No. 3 pick to draft Kevin McHale.

Oh, you changed your post. But you "fail": None of these "examples" have anything to do with my rule. Trading down on/for draft day? Sending picks out for LeBron, to sign him for a lower starting salary in a sign-and-trade with higher raises to be able to sign role players in addition to Wade/LeBron/Bosh? Has nothing to do with what I was speaking about. BTW: it looks like you search for examples to "curve fit" your argument.

The important words: future, unprotected, first round picks, while being bad. Looking at your examples, I just take it you misunderstood (even though I'm saying the same thing for 11 years on this site) or wanted to have an argument?

[gradyandrew]

S
Meanwhile, Markelle Fultz is shooting left-handed, Jimmy Butler isn't shooting much at all, Jae Crowder looks like he aged five years over the summer, and Irving is playing unselfishly (by his standards). Danny Ainge and Brad Stevens might be warlocks.

Shakes, here's the quote from his latest (not mid September) article.

What's so hard about understanding, you don't trade a top ten player and Irving is a better guy to build around than LeBron? I'm saying, an organization should do everything they can to keep one of those special few that can outperform a max contract. Of the two, Kyrie is a better guy to build around, because of age and contract length. No contradiction there.

[gradyandrew]

Spree, you think I'm coming out of the blue by saying that the last straw was when Irving found out he was included in a potential PG13 trade? I thought that was pretty well established, at least as much as anything in the NBA is.

[gradyandrew]

Shakes, according to your research the Knicks traded 3 of 6 draft picks and then traded two of those actual players, so 5 of 6 total before the 2012 season. So yeah, we traded "multiple 1st round picks" and had success.

[taowave]

Lol.. of course I curve fit..I had to in order to show you how ridiculous your rule is..

Spree, to categorically state that you don't trade first rounders is insane..

To use 2 of the worst GM's ever as your statistical evidence is beyond absurd..

You are either a good trader or you aren't.Its very simple...at least for me.

Again,would you have moved Melo and the number 8 for Kyrie??? Or do you stand by your Golden rule?

Oh, you changed your post. But you "fail": None of these "examples" have anything to do with my rule. Trading down on/for draft day? Sending picks out for LeBron, to sign him for a lower starting salary in a sign-and-trade with higher raises to be able to sign role players in addition to Wade/LeBron/Bosh? Has nothing to do with what I was speaking about. BTW: it looks like you search for examples to "curve fit" your argument.

The important words: future, unprotected, first round picks, while being bad. Looking at your examples, I just take it you misunderstood (even though I'm saying the same thing for 11 years on this site) or wanted to have an argument?

[spree#8]

Lol.. of course I curve fit..I had to in order to show you how ridiculous your rule is..

Spree, to categorically state that you don't trade first rounders is insane..

To use 2 of the worst GM's ever as your statistical evidence is beyond absurd..

You are either a good trader or you aren't.Its very simple...at least for me.

Again,would you have moved Melo and the number 8 for Kyrie??? Or do you stand by your Golden rule?

You don't want to understand, right? I never said that. For the last time: unprotected, future, first round picks, while being bad. 4 criteria. 4.

[taowave]

And I quote

you never trade future first rounders ]while being bad

of course you can,you just assume you are coughing up the number 1 and ask for an appropriate compensation.its called getting edge.No edge,no trade

What happens in the case that the GM feels the upcoming draft sucks??

Stay put??

Makes no Sense..

[shakespeare]

Hilarious thread.

Tao. Spree never said those words. You, I believe, are taken his words out of context. Spree and I are saying the same thing and that's why I know he never said it. If you're a lottery team, the last thing in the world you should do is trade your first rounders. In doing so, whatever franchise robs themselves from the opportunity of adding talented college players to their roster.

That's the scenario and only scenario he described.

[shakespeare]

What's so hard about understanding, you don't trade a top ten player and Irving is a better guy to build around than LeBron? I'm saying, an organization should do everything they can to keep one of those special few that can outperform a max contract. Of the two, Kyrie is a better guy to build around, because of age and contract length. No contradiction there.

1) Kyrie Irving demanded a trade; Cavs obliged. Cleveland didn't wake up one day and say let's trade our All-NBA point guard. He was under contract, so they didn't have to trade him. But, at the same time, they listened to offers and probably felt like the Celtics offer was too good to pass on. Example: Cavs offered Kyrie for Klay Thompson. Warriors declined. Cavs felt like Klay was enough. Pacers offered Paul George; Cavs declined, probably feeling like George wasn't enough. Cavs agreed to Celtics trade: Thomas, Crowder, Brooklyn's first round pick, Celtics second round pick and Ante Zixic. And you still believe they lost the trade, but how? Cause Boston has a better record than Cleveland? Boston had a better record than Cleveland last year, too. Yet, Cavs destroyed them in the playoffs.

2) Are you listening to what you're saying? I agree: No one should up and trade a talent like Kyrie Irving if he never demanded to be traded. That said, I'm confused to why you also say Cavs should've traded LeBron James, who hadn't demanded to be traded. Isn't he a Top 10 player in the league? You're contradicting yourself. In all due respect, that's what I don't understand.

3) How can Cleveland build around a disgruntled star that demanded to be traded?

[taowave]

I know exactly what you and Spree said.

And I am saying a competent GM, dilgently explores his options. There are no hard fast rules, only general guidelines.

As an example,I would have traded Melo and our pick for Irving. There are different set of circumstances and variables for each trade scenario,and they have to be factored in.

Hilarious thread.

Tao. Spree never said those words. You, I believe, are taken his words out of context. Spree and I are saying the same thing and that's why I know he never said it. If you're a lottery team, the last thing in the world you should do is trade your first rounders. In doing so, whatever franchise robs themselves from the opportunity of adding talented college players to their roster.

That's the scenario and only scenario he described.

[shakespeare]

Tao. I feel you. But give me an example of an actually NBA trade that occurred. You're telling me what YOU would've done. Tell me what an actual GM did.

[taowave]

Shakes, Cleveland did as good a job as humanly possible. To lay both sides of the coin.

Does LeBron stay or go?
Does IT fully recover and re-up??

Rarely do you get the chance to hedge both sides of the bet,but Cleveland prepared themselves for the doomsday scenario or the home run scenario..

1) Kyrie Irving demanded a trade; Cavs obliged. Cleveland didn't wake up one day and say let's trade our All-NBA point guard. He was under contract, so they didn't have to trade him. But, at the same time, they listened to offers and probably felt like the Celtics offer was too good to pass on. Example: Cavs offered Kyrie for Klay Thompson. Warriors declined. Cavs felt like Klay was enough. Pacers offered Paul George; Cavs declined, probably feeling like George wasn't enough. Cavs agreed to Celtics trade: Thomas, Crowder, Brooklyn's first round pick, Celtics second round pick and Ante Zixic. And you still believe they lost the trade, but how? Cause Boston has a better record than Cleveland? Boston had a better record than Cleveland last year, too. Yet, Cavs destroyed them in the playoffs.

2) Are you listening to what you're saying? I agree: No one should up and trade a talent like Kyrie Irving if he never demanded to be traded. That said, I'm confused to why you also say Cavs should've traded LeBron James, who hadn't demanded to be traded. Isn't he a Top 10 player in the league? You're contradicting yourself. In all due respect, that's what I don't understand.

3) How can Cleveland build around a disgruntled star that demanded to be traded?

[shakespeare]

1) If LeBron plans to leave, which I don't beieve will happen, he would've left if Kyrie Irving hadn't demanded to leave. Am I wrong?
2) Doctors said Thomas will be just fine. Again, the injury doesn't require surgery to heal.

[taowave]

I would,but Spree will just add a new constraint and present the 2 worst traders in history to validate his point.

You guys didn't like the Parrish trade which involved swapping the number 1 pick for the number 3, which turned out to be McHale.

Here is an article that supports your cause....

http://www.basketballinsiders.com/nba-p ... ades-ever/

The moral of the story is to make the picks protected unless you are getting a talent like Kyrie..Or maybe,dont trade number 1's for guys over 28..Im sure we can paint any picture we like

Tao. I feel you. But give me an example of an actually NBA trade that occurred. You're telling me what YOU would've done. Tell me what an actual GM did.

[taowave]

If IT doesn't re up or is not 100 percent,do you think Bron stays? Kyrie more or less insured Bron and the Cavs were the best in the East.

Thomas has a torn labrum. Doctors were mixed as to what the best course of action was.I said from the beginning if IT was healthy,the Cavs won the trade..

1) If LeBron plans to leave, which I don't beieve will happen, he would've left if Kyrie Irving hadn't demanded to leave. Am I wrong?
2) Doctors said Thomas will be just fine. Again, the injury doesn't require surgery to heal.

[shakespeare]

Tao. I can't see LeBron leaving Cleveland. It's one of those things I need to see to believe.

[taowave]

I think he basically tolerates Gilbert.
Ild like to see him finish in CLE,but I think it's LA.

Hopefully IT will be back on the floor as good as ever..

Tao. I can't see LeBron leaving Cleveland. It's one of those things I need to see to believe.