http://realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/63738/20091231/wizards_open_to_making_moves/ It's time for KP to earn his money.
I would be down for Jamison.....Butler is injury prone and Agent Zero's contract is terrible even though he is a great player when healthy. Nobody else on that team is worth trading for.
exciting stuff, but Butler wont be cheap. And with all the injurys do we even have the pieces to do something? I bet its Bayless or no deal, and at this point I couldnt do that. Maybe something like Fernandez, Webster, and Outlaw?
Jamison would be nice - a big man who can spread the floor but also will take it inside with some drives and has experience.
I still desire Caron Butler. I just wonder exactly how available Butler is. Anyone may be technically available, but they may be very expensive.
I saw this Wizards information elsewhere too, I think on ESPN. Everyone knows now about their change of mind. So we would have to overpay, competing against every other team. A skilled GM creates a trade where no player was available until he talked the other GM into it. At the end of the process, the other GM puts word around the league for any other quick offers, but our GM has an "in" by then and will often get a bargain. Going only after the best-known players, like Hedo, produces failure from too much competition. The GM needs to have the skill to discover talent that others don't see. Pritchard has yet to pull a rabbit out of a hat. It's time for him to earn his money.
This doesn't sound likely. Once a GM has been persuaded to trade a player, I doubt he's going to suddenly become so desperate to trade that player that he doesn't wait around very long. And if the deal is a bargain, once the deal is nosed around for other offers, other GMs will bid the price up. What "in" exists? The deep bond with the first guy to call you about a player? Essentially, there's no reason for a GM not to explore the open market, which is why outright bargains are rare. You can, of course, take on risk, have it pan out and retroactively dub it a bargain...but it's rare that industry-wide recognized value goes cheaply. The Pau Gasol deal is noteworthy precisely because he seemed to be proven value that somehow didn't generate a market...that's very rare.
Really? So many trades in history have been quickies. The giving GM is secretive and doesn't want his players knowing what's up, and he pulls the trigger before word gets out to them. So he puts out word to other GMs that he's been talked into a trade, waits a week or so while they stumble to react, and if nothing better appears, he goes for it. Many trades have been like that for decades. Often it's more important to the giving GM to get rid of the problem than to maximize his return, especially if the getting GM convinces him that the offer has an expiration date. You seem to think that this is like a store or a stock market, with objective prices and a patient seller, and lots of time to mull over a decision. Much of a GM's success hinges upon his personal relationships with those with whom he negotiates, which is why Pritchard is hurt in the long term by his 1) warning to other GMs about Miles, 2) trying to screw the Jazz by front-loading the Milsap offer, and 3) in general all Pritch-slaps, like his attempts last February with LaFrentz to get something for nothing and embarrass someone.
Examples? If the player in question is a "problem," then it doesn't make sense that the "giving GM" needs to be persuaded. Problem players are pretty much announced as available for a long period. Yes, I think that the NBA trade market is largely an efficient market...that is, everyone basically has the same information about who's available, similar medical information on players and similar scouting information. I don't really buy the idea that many deals are done hush-hush, based on personal relationship bonds and/or charm. These guys are all trying to do their jobs as well as possible, not trying to make friends. Sounds more like wishful thinking from a fan with an axe to grind, to be honest. I don't think very many GMs think to themselves something like the following: "Well, let's see...I can get the best deal for my team by trading with Portland but, man...I hate that Pritchard fella. Thinks he's so big. You know what I'm going to do? I'm going to hurt my team and my own professional standing by taking a worse deal from someone else! That will show him, and perhaps teach him some manners."
Bonzi Wells for Wesley Person. What if he's only 20% a problem and 80% an asset? You leave out all gray space between the 2 extremes of problem and non-problem. A GM may "kind of" want to dump a player, but not be totally eager about it. Depends upon the offer. Often, the GM can live with keeping the guy forever if offers aren't good enough. That's probably why we have half our roster, like Outlaw and Blake. The world is not black and white, it's gray, in between, as for how badly we want to trade various players. But if a GM gets an offer for someone he had given up on trading, he (or his owner) may jump at it. Personal conversations are not an efficient market. Personal compatibility lubricates a conversation. If a GM hates talking to another, it will decrease both the quantity and quality of negotiations. The product may be damaged, such as the likelihood of a trade happening. For example, let's say that your lack of social skills makes me treat you more roughly in this thread and you get your feelings hurt and run away crying. Now, you have lost the argument. Do you want that?? Noooo!!!! "You catch more flies with sugar than with salt." It behooves you to avoid a thrashing from my logic and come out of this dusty skirmish with your dignity intact, by having some personality. Being nice works. By your logic, Pritchard can yell, cuss, abuse, and Pritchslap the GM with whom he's hoping to make a trade, and it won't affect the outcome. That's the Law of the Jungle.
Honestly, can you tell me that you don't think KP has earned his money thus far? I guess time will tell, but I feel like the guys KP has brought in has built up our depth to the point where anyone can step up and fill-in without a significant dropoff in performance. I know we haven't won any titles, but that's how some of the best teams are built, like San Antonio during their supreme years. The performance of our 2nd rounders, like DC and JP, is clear proof of this. Oh, and wait 'til Mills gets his chance.
McGee seems kind of nice, but at this point I'd probably take Haywood on a 3 month rental if they were willing to give him up -- it might even be nice to have his bird rights if Joel's injury is going to push his availability out more than a year.
Seriously?? I'd like to say the same about you by your response. I probably have a different perception than you, living in SA for the last 21 years, growing up here, gaining understanding for basketball here, and reading the daily media. But until I see your reasoning, we'll have to agree to disagree, cuz SA relied on TD. More than I'm sure you realize. Other than that, they're a team built with role players surrounding TD, filling in and doing everything possible to keep the team at the top. One guy goes down, another guy steps up and fills in. The main guy does his thing, and you have smart BASKETBALL players step up and fill in every remaining role. Not saying Portland is on SA's level, but the general build to the team, Portland is trying to mimic SA.
Oh and as far as Portland is concerned, they're trying to find their TP. I know it for a fact. My examples of this is J-Bay and P. Mills. My proof, well, some message board jerk-off ain't worth revealing my knowledge over. Oh and you clearly don't understand nor appreciate the work KP has put in if you're going to flame with this post.
The Spurs were mostly built with a rotisserie of veteran role players, not rookie scale young guys that are playing for their next contract and guys that aren't very defensive minded. I agree SA found guys to step up and fill roles, but I disagree that the current Blazers role players are much like the SA role players that rotated through that franchise for the past 10 years or so. You think I'm flaming you? I disagree that KP has assembled a roster that resembles the San Antonio championship teams. nothing more nothing less.
Okay. Illustrate how that was an example of a trade where the "giving GM" was secretive and only opened bidding up furtively for a week before taking the original offer. Well, you were the one who used the words "getting rid of the problem." That made it sound like the "taking GM" was almost doing the poor "giving GM" a favour. Sure, players can be partially problems, partially assets. Those types of players are generally pretty available, too. You have to do a good job of persuading someone to trade a player who's really not a problem. That doesn't really make sense. I'd like it to make sense, so I could either agree with it or refute it, but it just seems like some random phrases strung together. Personal conversations can happen in efficient or inefficient markets...one is not indicative of the other. It's a bit like saying, "Sergio Rodriguez isn't a basketball player. He had tapas the other day. Tapas is not basketball." It's English (other than the Spanish name and word), but doesn't actually mean or say anything. Posting here isn't my job. If it were, I wouldn't have let you hurting my feelings get in the way of my crushing your poorly constructed arguments. I still find myself skeptical that GMs are more interested in good manners and compatibility with other GMs than in succeeding at their fairly lucrative jobs.
Rookies or not, SA found random players to step up and fill open roles. Several of these role players were SHIT before SA rode them for everything they could provide. That's my point. You can argue over the semantics, but I'm not gonna argue at that level til the Blazers bring another one home. If you can't understand my general point, then keep arguing. I won't argue back at that level, don't have that time to waste. But your original point, that it's KP's time to earn his money, is FUCKING BULLSHIT. Compared to his peers in this game, far as I'm concerned, he's in the top as far as GM's. Prove it otherwise.
