Another GM Says It's No Biggie With KP - Business As Usual

Discussion in 'Portland Trail Blazers' started by ABM, Jan 12, 2009.

Moderators: 6

Moderators

  1. BrianFromWA
  2. Chris Craig
  3. Darkwebs
  4. Ed O
  5. PtldPlatypus
  6. SlyPokerDog
Page 2 of 2
  1. The_Lillard_King

    The_Lillard_King Westside

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    12,405
    Likes Received:
    310
    Trophy Points:
    83
    If most of the NBA had a collective yawn . . . wouldn't some (besides Cuban) come to the defense of the Blazers when they get blasted by a owner and the player's association.

    I don't see the collective yawn happening behind close doors. I see a lot of "who does that son of bitch think he is" with no comment to the press. And although this type of email might be common in business, it is not common among big ego NBA owners.

    But does it hurt Blazers future negotaitions . . . I don't think the Blazers are blackballed or anything. I think many GMs will want to make sure they are gettin a good deal and might be less likely to engage in a flyer type trade with the Blazers, but I agree a GMs job is to improve their team and taht is what they will focus on.

    The whole thing just sounds like sour grapes from the Blazers with very few feeling sorry for the Blazers and some upset with the Blazers.

    (also, I would hate to enter into negotiations with anopther business partner that I know is sue happy or threatens lawsuits . . . no thank you)
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2009
    The_Lillard_King, Jan 12, 2009
    #21
  2. Minstrel

    Minstrel Top Of The Pops Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    26,226
    Likes Received:
    14,407
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    User Interface Designer
    Location:
    Hello darkness, my old friend
    Why? Isn't "coming to the defense" pretty much the opposite of "yawning?"

    I don't see why, if most of the NBA didn't care, anyone would bother trying to defend the Blazers. They'd just ignore it.
     
    Minstrel, Jan 12, 2009
    #22
  3. Masbee

    Masbee -- Rookie of the Year

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,856
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Why would they? They are not that interested one way or the other. That is what collective yawn means. Best to stay out of it really.

    Am I missing something?

    We have two attributed quotes from owners. One pro Blazer's, one anti.

    Then we have a bunch of unnamed quotes floating in the media, many as part of articles by known loose-with-the-facts douche's like Canzano, others as part of articles that contain glaring errors or known misquoting of the e-mail.

    I am not really sure how much stock we should put in such muckracking.

    Maybe it is a true reflection of the state of affairs.

    Just as likely it is complete horseshit.
    A couple of the quotes are not really believable.

    I think my guess as to the state of affairs is at least as likely as that painted by the hysterical media.

    Prove otherwise. You know, with facts.

    And based on the actions of Ainge and Wallace we can confidently guess that any "relationship" between those teams was LONG AGO damaged. You think this e-mail made any difference with those guys? They had already declared war on the Blazers. You think not sending the e-mail would have made them call a truce? Fat chance.

    So, any true quotes that may come out of those two organizations are to be discounted.
     
    Masbee, Jan 12, 2009
    #23
  4. BrianFromWA

    BrianFromWA Editor in Chief Staff Member Editor in Chief

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2008
    Messages:
    26,096
    Likes Received:
    9,073
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Of course I'm speculating. But I'm not the only one. Blog writers such as Canzano, on-air radio and TV, people supposedly "in the know" have brought this up since August. But 28 other teams didn't do what the Grizzlies did. Even if you accept the Celtics pre-season tryout as legit (even though Boston journalists and beat writers wrote that at the time that there was no way one of the guaranteed contracts was getting waived, so Miles wouldn't have a reason to be trying out), no one felt the need to sign Miles over the next 6 months. Until multiple offers to get Outlaw were shot down by the Blazers.

    My question was, "is it too early to say 'I told you so?'" I would submit that there is more than one poster on here who claimed that the Blazers would be sued. They haven't. For Billy Hunter's bluster and the hundreds of articles saying "we'll file a grievance"...to my short google search I still haven't heard that they've heard the grievance about Marbury's suspension in Nov., and that was actually was filed, unlike in this situation.

    I don't know, maybe because it opens the others up to litigation now, and they don't have the "we didn't know" excuse. (I'm not a lawyer, so I'll stop there) You are willing to say that perhaps I know more about you on the blackmail thing, but not willing to say that Miller potentially does? How do you know what leg the Blazers have to stand on? I sure don't. But we (the collective posting population) have gone from IKPIT to "the guy's an idiot who'll get us sued" in less than a week.

    The report I originally read (since confirmed as false) did not have "cash considerations" in it. It said it was Livingston for a conditional 2nd. I agree, if MIA paid Livingston's salary, gave MEM their chunk of tax payment, and the diff b/w 1/23rd and 1/24th, it's fine. Going under the assumption I was, that they take Livingston's contract, lower the tax pool, and increase the # of teams divvying up that pool, it seemed to be a net loss.


    :) Of all my faults, I'd say "misunderstanding of arithmetic" would be one of the least. Change to "misunderstanding of what Wallace is trying to do", and "misguided ability to trust in what you read from the media", and I have no problems with it.
     
    BrianFromWA, Jan 12, 2009
    #24
  5. The_Lillard_King

    The_Lillard_King Westside

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    12,405
    Likes Received:
    310
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I din't know where to put this so I will put it here . . . was thinking in the car (I can do that every once iun a while):

    If a team decides to take a chance on Miles because they figure they got nothig to lose . . . either Miles works out and contributes to the team, or he is garbage and no use. If he is garbage and no use, no big deal because you recop the $$ from the luxury tax.

    Would that be wrong for a team to sign Miles under that consideration? Because that is the reality of the sitaution, you can take a chance on Miles without it costing a thing . . . why not?
     
    The_Lillard_King, Jan 12, 2009
    #25
  6. BrianFromWA

    BrianFromWA Editor in Chief Staff Member Editor in Chief

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2008
    Messages:
    26,096
    Likes Received:
    9,073
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I don't personally see a problem with it, but here's where I think Miller may have been smart...

    They didn't send this email to Boston in August, or in October while everyone was filling their rosters. They didn't even send it after MEM picked him up the first time. NO ONE in 4 months (other than MEM now) even hinted they might be signing him. Some others that were signed (just in DEC):

    Juwan Howard
    Malik Hairston
    Dee Brown
    Fred Jones
    Dikembe Mutombo
    Jeremy Richardson

    Not exactly a murderer's row of talent. If someone was looking for a cheap, low-risk high-reward SF project, I don't understand the logic that brings Miles as your answer. Boston, IMO, actually gave him a decent chance with a few decent minutes in preseason, and showed everyone the level Miles could play at. No one wanted to take a chance on him, even with a 10-day, until MEM. I think that the email just put into the minds of people that they'll have to either play him legitimately (which Miles and his agent should like) or be really prepared to defend why you didn't play him more than 1 minute in 2 games.

    So now, he's either radioactive to those on the up-and-up (who didn't want him before, anyway) or a big "eff you, sue me" from those who would sign him. Since Wallace is the only one in the latter category, maybe the email paid off.
     
    BrianFromWA, Jan 12, 2009
    #26
  7. oldmangrouch

    oldmangrouch persona non grata

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2008
    Messages:
    12,403
    Likes Received:
    6,325
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Personally, I hope the Blazers hire the meanest pitbull of an attorney that they can find and push this as hard as they can.

    The whole "preseason games count" ruling strikes me as one hell of a smoking gun.

    Would sitting out a preseason game have counted towards Miles' suspension? Would it count toward his pension rights? Do "T's" or fragrant fouls called during preseason count toward possible suspensions? NO. This is the first time in history that the NBA has recognized preseason games as more than glorified pick-up games or workouts. They are going against their own established business practice.
     
    oldmangrouch, Jan 12, 2009
    #27
  8. The_Lillard_King

    The_Lillard_King Westside

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    12,405
    Likes Received:
    310
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Because Miles is going to cost the organization literally zero. The other vets mentioned you still have to pay the vet's minimum. With Miles you pay the minimum and Allen cuts you a check right back . . . kind of like 100% rebate or 300% rebate.
     
    The_Lillard_King, Jan 12, 2009
    #28
  9. drexlersdad

    drexlersdad SABAS

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    4,825
    Likes Received:
    255
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    NEW New Hampshire
    i was hoping PA's lawyers could argue that, especially if mem doesnt play him for 10 games by themselves, and maybe they would wipe those 6 out.
     
    drexlersdad, Jan 12, 2009
    #29
Page 2 of 2

Share This Page