Jump to content

  • Current Donation Goals

    • Monthly Donations
      Raised $440 of $700 target

Every Trade Deadline

capstone21

By capstone21
in Homecourt

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 49
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Admin
Admin

I know he's adament about not wanting to mess up chemistry but really if they're that fragile that they can't handle a bench player being brought in then what's the chances they're going to make it in

capstone21
capstone21

Not necessarily ... you don't mess with chemistry ...    I think the waiver route will be how we fill that last spot

PSSSHHHRRR87
PSSSHHHRRR87

I can take it or leave it... I really don't think we'll make a trade but instead, use that roster sport for flexibility for a 10-day contract. We aren't out of the woods yet. Injuries can still happen

SuperSavvyNation Newbie

SuperSavvyNation

Posted
Posted

It's not about having fragile chemistry. It's that the front office is saying one thing, ie "we like our players", and then performing an action that is completely against what they have been saying. It's not that the players have weak psyche, but you've got this trust issue that you could completely shit on with a move that only barely makes you a better team.

I'd prefer this team to build up goodwill with their players and show trust in them as opposed to bringing in a marginal player.

 

Come on, now.  That sounds a bit ridiculous and you are wayyyyy overstating things. It can be argued, and often is, that a front office that adds a piece is a front office that cares and is giving the team all the ammunition available to fuel a championship run. That's what matters. It's goofy to say that adding value to the court..and that's what we're talking about here.... would send a negative message to the players that they can't trust the front office.  

 

Even if it's a marginal piece. If that player adds something and can make a big shot in crunch time or grab an important rebound, no one is going to be upset.  And yes, if they are, then they are weak minded and looking at things from a closed minded perspective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Admin Newbie

Admin

Posted
Posted

I think he is more worried about trading one of the current core pieces for someone who will come in and play significant minutes... adding a bench player to help with the run is different

 

Yeah I definitely wouldn't want to do that. I would be hesitant to move Mack but Jenkins and a 1st for Reddick I could get behind all day.

It's not about having fragile chemistry. It's that the front office is saying one thing, ie "we like our players", and then performing an action that is completely against what they have been saying. It's not that the players have weak psyche, but you've got this trust issue that you could completely shit on with a move that only barely makes you a better team.

I'd prefer this team to build up goodwill with their players and show trust in them as opposed to bringing in a marginal player.

 

You don't think having Reddick instead of Jenkins could significantly improve our team this year? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Admin
capstone21 Mentor

capstone21

Posted
  • Author
  • Admin
Posted

Crazy end to the deadline ... wow what a flurry of surprising deals at the end... 

 

A lot of teams improved themselves ... OKC, Miami, Detroit, Bucks (maybe) with a traditional point guard now ... 

 

I don't know if the Nets did or not ... Thad Young was disappointing in Minny

 

Don't understand that PHX organization.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Admin Newbie

Admin

Posted
Posted

There are trade-offs. And at the risk of breaking any trust with Paul and DeMarre, it's not worth it to me. I'd much rather have the possibility that those two sign at their Early Bird Max. It's a bit of conjecture on my part that Bud is telling the guys he values them, but so is your idea that we can get Redick for Jenkins (or Mack or whatever).

But making a trade would not be a top priority in my mind. Last year, the Spurs didn't make a deadline move (errr...shutup about Austin Daye). Neither did the Heat. The year before that, neither of those teams made a deadline deal. Year before that? No deadline deal for the NBA Finalists. The year before that one? No deadline deals for the NBA Finalists.

So I am completely fine sticking with the group as opposed to making a move. As I said before, there isn't a Rasheed Wallace available. If there were, then I'd be willing to take a chance. But as I look through all of the players moved, I can't seem to find an All-Star that was shifted around. Wait, scratch that as I see Garnet was traded. {/sarcasm}

 

You may have a point with the trust and early bird thing and that can't be overlooked. Reddick for Jenkins (or Mack) and 1st was floated earlier in the thread or in one of the threads as something the Clippers wanted but Hawks were hesitating on so I was just piggybacking off of it but apparently it wasn't something the Hawks were that interested in anyway. 

 

I wasn't looking for an All-Star but there were guys who were moved today and probably could have been moved that could help us out. I'm also of the opinion that we're not going to be able to rely on Thabo to be healthy based on his past 2 years so I think we need someone who can pick up his slack or the slack created by Baze moving up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...