(Sorry if this was already covered; I didn't see any other threads on it.) First of all, I'm NOT one of those who nearly slit my wrist that we didn't pull the trigger on a "major" trade at the deadline. That said, Chad Ford said we had this offer on the table and KP turned it down: 1. Vince Carter, Nets The Nets were very close to moving Carter at the deadline. How close? One source told me the Nets agreed to send two future firsts (Dallas' and Golden State's) along with Carter to the Blazers for Raef LaFrentz. The Blazers, however, turned them down. Expect the Nets to pick up the trade talks again this summer. They need to clear Carter's salary off their books. http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=ford_chad&page=TradeWatch-090224 That can't be right; there had to be more that NJ was asking for. If not, that seems like a total no brainer deal for us??? WTF?
It is very hard for me to believe he wouldn't have pulled the trigger on that one! That probably came from the NETS camp trying to save face!
OR - as some would say on this forum, to make KP look like a douche bag Tru dat. There's NO WAY that offer (as is) was turned down by any halfway capable GM.
are you surprised? thats ok... all the pritchard supporters will see the next 4 games why he threw this team under teh bus this season. but hey... wait till next year.
There's no way Pritchard turned that deal down! Especially when the future picks would've been coming from Golden State (almost always a lotto pick) and Dallas (approaching lotto territory in the next few seasons, in my opinion). United-States-Dollars-Owed-To-Vince-Carter-Over-The-Next-3-Years aside, that would've been an absolute steal for us, talent-wise!
Also from the article (of people likely to be traded in the summer): 4. Steve Blake and Travis Outlaw, Blazers Blake and Outlaw are in a similar position to Stackhouse. Together they are slated to make $7.6 million next season. However, their salaries are not guaranteed for the season. That means a team could trade for Blake and Outlaw and, if they chose to waive them, would cut $7.6 million from their salaries. Both players have big roles on the Blazers, but Kevin Pritchard could be inclined to trade them if the package was sweet enough.
MIXUM, here's the thing I wonder about you: Do you root for the Blazers to win tonight so you can enjoy watching them improve, or do you root for them to lose so that you can be "right" in your eternally pessimistic posts here?
I don't know if KP turned that trade down or not but I told everyone all along that KP doesn't want anything to do with VC. He was just trying to get someone to bit on another offer he had out IMO. I do think that would be even enough for almost anyone to take even if they didn't want VC at all. I hope it was true and Thorn is fuming about not being able to get rid of VC. If that is true Thorn and NJ are going to have a hard time getting rid of VC this summer.
One more thing should this site ban trolls? I tried the ignore and it didn't work because you would end up seeing almost all his posts anyway. I don't c re if people are negative if they are really trying to add something to the discussion but just trying to get everyone upset with bullshit just isn't right. I would go back to BBF if there was enough posters but most of the good posters are here so I'm stuck with trolls I guess.
While I appreciate your disdain for Thorn, it would be truly hard believe that KP doesn't do that trade blind-folded and with both hands tied behind his back. VC, like him or not, would have been good for this team for the next couple of years.
i'm starting not to visit here as much as i used too. this guy is making this place a total negative nancy, gripe, whine, bitch fest board.
I don't think VC would have been that much for the Blazers but maybe. I know I would do that trade in a heartbeat and not look back. I was just saying I didn't think when I heard about the VC to Blazers rumors that there was anything to them at least not on KP and the Blazers side. I think KP was using them to try and get someone better for RLEC.
The ignore feature is better than nothing, but it does have its flaws. I don't like to put people on ignore, because it makes the threads harder to read and understand. Besides, I want to hear peoples opinions and not filter our just those that I agree with. That said, I think certain posters have completely crossed the line with their constant negativity. There is a difference with stating your opinions, and essentially trolling. It has certainly reduced the amount of time I spend on this board. So I am stuck between using the ignore feature, which I don't like, and putting up with trolls. Thus far I would rather put up with the trolls, but either option is annoying. If I was a regular at a bar or restaurant, and another regular was always there shouting and getting into fights...I wouldn't want to just "ignore" him, nor would I want to listen to him and put up with him. I would hope the bar manager would 86 him for the good of the establishment. Why doesn't that happen here?
