Chad Ford: Trade for Paul was very close

[Minstrel]

That's faulty logic and makes no sense.

What logic is faulty? I was saying that your point seemed very non sequitur-ish.

I meant the major stories involving the Blazers and potential new players. Chris Paul last week; Wes Matthews/Jordan Farmar today. Connecting factor: new players being discussed for the Portland Trail Blazers.

Unless you're saying that multiple ideas/actions can't be carried out simultaneously and/or independently, I still don't see what your sentence means. That if one player is mentioned after another in time, then the second player has something to do with the first?

What an odd post. I understand what you were trying to do, but you failed this time.

Well, then you have the advantage...I don't even understand what you were trying to do.

 

[Ed O]

That's faulty logic and makes no sense. I meant the major stories involving the Blazers and potential new players. Chris Paul last week; Wes Matthews/Jordan Farmar today. Connecting factor: new players being discussed for the Portland Trail Blazers.

What an odd post. I understand what you were trying to do, but you failed this time.

You implied that the Blazers have taken a dramatic step down in what they're aiming for within the last week, and within the context of all your bashing of the Blazers, that seems to indicate you think it is a sudden loss of competence.

Why do you think that the team would not go after Matthews even if the team had acquired Chris Paul? Why should the team not go after free agents when they fail to land a player like Chris Paul?

What is the value of linking these two things together as you did?

Ed O.

 

[BGrantFan]

What logic is faulty? I was saying that your point seemed very non sequitur-ish.

Your example didn't compare.

Blazers(Paul) + Blazers(Matthews) has "Blazers" as a common factor.

Your example, Oil Spill + World Cup, doesn't have a common factor.

LOL

Unless you're saying that multiple ideas/actions can't be carried out simultaneously and/or independently, I still don't see what your sentence means. That if one player is mentioned after another in time, then the second player has something to do with the first?

I never said that. Neat story, though.

Well, then you have the advantage...I don't even understand what you were trying to do.

Obviously

 

[Idog1976]

What logic is faulty? I was saying that your point seemed very non sequitur-ish.



Unless you're saying that multiple ideas/actions can't be carried out simultaneously and/or independently, I still don't see what your sentence means. That if one player is mentioned after another in time, then the second player has something to do with the first?



Well, then you have the advantage...I don't even understand what you were trying to do.

Getting sucked in to this is a real...

 

[BGrantFan]

You implied that the Blazers have taken a dramatic step down in what they're aiming for within the last week, and within the context of all your bashing of the Blazers, that seems to indicate you think it is a sudden loss of competence.

I do think there is a sudden loss of competence, but that has nothing to do with media reports of Chris Paul last week versus media reports of Wesley Matthews today.

Why do you think that the team would not go after Matthews even if the team had acquired Chris Paul? Why should the team not go after free agents when they fail to land a player like Chris Paul?

I never said they wouldn't still go after Paul. I based my opinion on what is available ... media reports, and what is being discussed as the most likely addition today.

What is the value of linking these two things together as you did?

Ed O.

I told you that in the original post. I just told you again. If you can't understand it, that's a "you" problem.

 

[Minstrel]

Your example didn't compare.

Blazers(Paul) + Blazers(Matthews) has A as a common factor.

Your example, Oil Spill + World Cup, doesn't have a common factor.

Sure, they do. They both have "happening to the world" as a common factor.

LOL

Does that mean you won? Did you just pwn me and then laugh about it? That's not at all in the spirit of comradely discussion.

 

[Ed O]

I never said they wouldn't still go after Paul. I based my opinion on what is available ... media reports, and what is being discussed as the most likely addition today.

What is your opinion?

Since when is a regurgitation of two threads into a single sentence an opinion?

I told you that in the original post. I just told you again. If you can't understand it, that's a "you" problem.

"We go from (allegedly) almost getting Chris Paul to chasing Wesley Matthews in the span of a week.

Keep the faith! Rise with us! "

Where did you tell anyone anything in that post?

Ed O.

 

[Nikolokolus]

What is your opinion?

Since when is a regurgitation of two threads into a single sentence an opinion?

Ed O.

Clown Town.

 

[Minstrel]

Getting sucked in to this is a real...

It's all good. We have another Chris Paul thread. And, I imagine, five more will spring up over the next few days. PapaGrantFan was just explaining why the Chris Paul no-deal and the Wesley Matthews rumoured deal were related, which is kinda on-topic.

 

[Biggie]

I think we would of made this move if Batum wasn't in it. Maybe swap him for Rudy?

 

[BGrantFan]

What is your opinion?

Since when is a regurgitation of two threads into a single sentence an opinion?

Ed O.

My opinion was obvious. In one week, the story on potential Blazers has gone from Chris Paul to Wesley Matthews.

Keep the Faith!

 

[EGame]

I think we would of made this move if Batum wasn't in it. Maybe swap him for Rudy?

I think the Hornets laugh big time.

 

[Idog1976]

I think we would of made this move if Batum wasn't in it. Maybe swap him for Rudy?

BTW I think your avatar should be in the running for GM as a step up from recent happenings.

Yes, I am aware Biggie is dead.

 

[LittleAlex]

Does every thread have to devolve at some point into a debate on the rhetorical merits of someones post?



Ironically, this IS a rhetorical question. Obviously the answer is yes.

 

[Minstrel]

I think we would of made this move if Batum wasn't in it. Maybe swap him for Rudy?

The Hornets turned down the deal, not the Blazers. Giving them less is not generally an inducement for them to change their mind.

 

[Idog1976]

It's all good. We have another Chris Paul thread. And, I imagine, five more will spring up over the next few days. PapaGrantFan was just explaining why the Chris Paul no-deal and the Wesley Matthews rumoured deal were related, which is kinda on-topic.

Whoa, whoa...WHOA! Since when has there been ANY Chris Paul to Portland speculation on this forum?

I think that's a pretty big reach Minstrel.

That's like saying some people are upset about how KP firing was handled. It's simply not true and just a blatant lie.

I hereby formally strip you of your producer status and will continue to live in my fantasy world where BoomChakaLaka and I are Co-GM's of this once great franchise.

You know the old saying "One man's Utopia is EVERYONE else's nightmare existence."

 

[BGrantFan]

Sure, they do. They both have "happening to the world" as a common factor.



Does that mean you won? Did you just pwn me and then laugh about it? That's not at all in the spirit of comradely discussion.

You know why I was laughing.

 

[Masbee]

Chard For brings up an excellent point. If the Hornets main concern is cutting costs and salary then Knicks or Nets could offer huge trade exceptions and swallow all of Okafor's contract along with Paul's without giving up much more than draft picks and maybe a cheap prospect or two. Doesn't it seem a little more likely that the Hornets would seek to move both for virtually no salary commitments?

Which is why the Knicks are out of it: They have NO draft picks to offer.

The Nets can offer the Hornets their choice of Harris on a reasonable deal - he is an "All-Star" player that can be a sop for the Hornets season ticket holders, or they can take future picks, or they can take Favors, or any combination.

 

[EGame]

The Hornets turned down the deal, not the Blazers. Giving them less is not generally an inducement for them to change their mind.

Show The Hornets what Rudy did in the Olympics a few years back and his dunking over Dwight and tell them how much better Rudy is than Batum. Who knows, it could work.

 

[BGrantFan]

Which is why the Knicks are out of it: They have NO draft picks to offer.

The Nets can offer the Hornets their choice of Harris on a reasonable deal - he is an "All-Star" player that can be a sop for the Hornets season ticket holders, or they can take future picks, or they can take Favors, or any combination.

The idea for trading Paul, in part, would be to make room for Darren Collison at a rookie contract for 3 more years. Why would they want Harris, who had the same PER as Collison, but at 8x the contract?


Plus, why would Paul want to go to New Jersey? I could see him refusing to report.

 

[Masbee]

Source: http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=aw-chrispaul062310

There ya go.

CHRIS PAUL: "I’d want to play with those players. (Brandon Roy and LaMarcus Aldridge)"

FUCK YEAH YOU DO!

Get on the phone to your agent Mr. Paul. Demand to be traded - to the Blazers. Rip City Baby!

 

[EGame]

The idea for trading Paul, in part, would be to make room for Darren Collison at a rookie contract for 3 more years. Why would they want Harris, who had the same PER as Collison, but at 8x the contract?


Plus, why would Paul want to go to New Jersey? I could see him refusing to report.

Well that article that Masbee just quoted me on talks about Paul not midning going to a, what he says "reduilding team" in the Nets or Knicks (wtf, Knicks?) So I am not so sure he would veto or be so unhappy. I do agree, they don't need nor want Harris.

 

[cdub503]

if we trade batum.... how well does babbit defend?

 

[BGrantFan]

Well that article that Masbee just quoted me on talks about Paul not midning going to a, what he says "reduilding team" in the Nets or Knicks (wtf, Knicks?) So I am not so sure he would veto or be so unhappy. I do agree, they don't need nor want Harris.

So, he doesn't mind losing so long as it is in New York. That's one way to look at that, isn't it?

That may make me reconsider wanting Chris Paul. How important is winning to him?

 

[BGrantFan]

if we trade batum.... how well does babbit defend?

Average, at best. Would Oden/Camby/Aldridge be enough to make up for that defensive deficiency?

 

[EGame]

So, he doesn't mind losing so long as it is in New York. That's one way to look at that, isn't it?

That may make me reconsider wanting Chris Paul. How important is winning to him?

It does strike me as odd that he mentioned not liking the situation if we traded one of Roy or Aldridge, but doesn't mention saying how he would not want to play for the Nets if say they got rid of say Lopez. I just found that odd and wonder. And still wtf Knicks? They suck and would remain sucky if Paul went there.

 

[Ed O]

My opinion was obvious. In one week, the story on potential Blazers has gone from Chris Paul to Wesley Matthews.

Keep the Faith!

I don't understand. Where is your opinion?

Are you re-reporting the news? Or are you adding something?

Either way is fine, but I don't understand why you'd be doing the former and claiming to do the latter and then act confused about why I pointed out that the two potential acquisitions are not inconsistent with one another nor necessarily tied to an alleged reduction in front office competence.

Ed O.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

if we trade batum.... how well does babbit defend?

Probably not as well as either Dante Cunningham or Wes Matthews. Or even Victor Claver.

 

[BGrantFan]

Are you re-reporting the news? Or are you adding something?

Either way is fine.

/end sidebar

Anyhow, back to Chris Paul.

 

[Ed O]

/end sidebar

Anyhow, back to Chris Paul.

Please let me know how it was an opinion. If you didn't express an opinion you can admit you're wrong, but rudely stating that it was my problem for not seeing one is unfair. Please point out the opinion or the point you were trying to make or admit that it was not my failure to detect a point but your failure to include one.

Ed O.