Grizzlies sign F Miles to second 10-day contract

[Masbee]

if he was demanding too much and other teams didn't bother to make offers, they have no one to blame but themselves.

the grizzlies got marc gasol, crittendon, two late firsts, and a 9 mil expiring contract for gasol. i'm not sure there was another offer out there that would have gotten memphis two young prospects, two picks, and a large expiring contract like this did.

You keep repeating the deal made. We all know what the deal was. Pau Gasol for a bunch of loose change.

That isn't the question.

The question is why did Chris Wallace make a deal so widely ridiculed WEEKS before the deadline? And why did he make a deal within the same Conference - something GM's normally avoid doing when trading all-stars (KG; West to East; Billups; East to West; T-Mac; East to West; AI; East to West to East; Shaq; East to West to East to West - Notice the pattern here?)

No one will ever know.

What is known is that Wallace is also widely considered among the worst GM's in the NBA. Guy comes across as dumb. He makes moves his own owner questions as dumb. What the fuck is going on here? Got me.

But please stop trying to defend this trade. He could have done better. He at least could have waited to see if he could have done better.

 

[rocketeer]

The question is why did Chris Wallace make a deal so widely ridiculed WEEKS before the deadline? And why did he make a deal within the same Conference - something GM's normally avoid doing when trading all-stars (KG; West to East; Billups; East to West; T-Mac; East to West; AI; East to West to East; Shaq; East to West to East to West - Notice the pattern here?)

my guess as to why he did it? because he doesn't give a shit about getting ridiculed and that deal gave him exactly what he wanted. some(but not equal) talent and a big expiring. the lakers were already giving him exactly what he wanted, so the hell would he shop around?

the team was 13-33(on pace for 23 wins) when they traded him. they finished the year 22-60. it's not like they got worse or anything.

 

[Boob-No-More]

KG; West to East; Billups; East to West; T-Mac; East to West; AI; East to West to East; Shaq; East to West to East to West - Notice the pattern here?

So, if David West gets traded to an Eastern Conference team, will he have to change his name to David East?

BNM

 

[Minstrel]

I don't think the Gasol deal was a great one, but I think people are way overstating how bad it was. Teams dump productive players all the time, for varying reasons. The Nuggets dumped Camby for a second-round pick and cap space. While it was called a bad deal, it didn't generate a firestorm of claims that the Nuggets must've been colluding with the Clippers because the deal was historically unequal or any such thing. Gasol is better than Camby and the Grizzlies got a lot more talent back than the Nuggets did. Portland dumped Randolph, a good if flawed player, for what amounts to Frye, a late first round pick and cap space. Portland used that pick very well (Rudy Fernandez), but it was still a late first round pick.

The Gasol deal was not unusual or historically unbalanced. Teams often deal before they have to. The idea that Wallace was negligent by not waiting is illogical. Yes, sometimes you get more by waiting until the deadline. Sometimes the market never emerges and you get less because your potential trade partners know you are up against a looming deadline. It's completely untrue that it is always better to wait.

A previous poster summed it up...if it hadn't been the Lakers who benefited, no one would care today. Had the Warriors picked up Gasol for that sort of package (a good big man prospect in Marc Gasol, a couple of late first-round picks and cap space), it simply wouldn't have been a story.

 

[Masbee]

I don't think the Gasol deal was a great one, but I think people are way overstating how bad it was. Teams dump productive players all the time, for varying reasons.

Of course this happens......

After they make a good or fair deal, OR if they are under pressure, the best of an unfair batch of deals, after they have turned over every rock and waited until the deadline.

Memphis did neither.

They didn't make what any objective observer thought a "fair" deal.

They didn't stash their All-Star in the opposite conference.

They didn't pick from the "best of the worst" deals after calling every GM twice over and waiting until the deadline.

They found a crappy deal, with a team in their own conference, stopped calling other teams, and pulled the trigger.

Those actions are NOTHING like what other teams do "all the time by dumping productive players."

The Nuggets dumped Camby for a second-round pick and cap space. While it was called a bad deal, it didn't generate a firestorm of claims that the Nuggets must've been colluding with the Clippers because the deal was historically unequal or any such thing. Gasol is better than Camby and the Grizzlies got a lot more talent back than the Nuggets did. Portland dumped Randolph, a good if flawed player, for what amounts to Frye, a late first round pick and cap space. Portland used that pick very well (Rudy Fernandez), but it was still a late first round pick.

The Gasol deal was not unusual or historically unbalanced. Teams often deal before they have to. The idea that Wallace was negligent by not waiting is illogical. Yes, sometimes you get more by waiting until the deadline. Sometimes the market never emerges and you get less because your potential trade partners know you are up against a looming deadline. It's completely untrue that it is always better to wait.

I disagree. When you have a GOOD trade on the table, those can sometimes disappear and you have move fast. But, when you have an objectively crummy deal on the table, the odds that Memphis would have been stuck at the deadline with something even WORSE, is implausable. As it is NBA execs were quoted saying they could have topped the LA offer. Their risk of losing out of that "incredible, not to be missed" LA deal is a laughfest.

A previous poster summed it up...if it hadn't been the Lakers who benefited, no one would care today. Had the Warriors picked up Gasol for that sort of package (a good big man prospect in Marc Gasol, a couple of late first-round picks and cap space), it simply wouldn't have been a story.

Maybe not in the media, but hardcore fans would still think it was a dopey trade and that Chris Wallace is a tool.

Everyone talks about this prime prospect Marc Gasol. They are Monday Morning Quarterbacking as he has played so well. So did Boozer after he was drafted in the 2nd round. After the fact doesn't prove the value of Gasol in the trade before he played in the NBA. Look where he was drafted. Sure, he improved in Europe and his stock rose. But not THAT much. There were worries about his footspeed and ability to defend. It is not like LA gave Memphis a top big man prospect. Crittendon was a throw-in. Low first round pick aren't worth a whole lot as Portland has proved by buying them/trading into and up into them regularly.

Pao Gasol - a dominant offensive 7 footer, who was the best player on several 50 win teams - STILL IN HIS PRIME;

does not compare to Camby - past his prime, limited in game, exposed as a bit of a stat hound. Camby was dumped by a team with 2 other good bigs that made more sense to keep to get under the incredibly costly and painful luxury tax. He cost the Nuggets double his salary. Gasol was dumped by a team nowhere near the luxury tax.

Nor does he compare to Randolph with his exposed game - can't win with him as the number one offensive option - can't fit him in unless he gets big touches - not to mention he has huge PR problems and a longer contract. Flat out, never near a valuable as Gasol.

 

[La Bomba]

Yea, but Gasol wasn't holding the development of other players back. The fans were booing because the team was losing and Pau was the team leader. Addition by subtraction is what I'd call trading Iverson or similar "black hole" players.

Negative. The fans were booing him because he said numerous times how much he hated Memphis and how he wanted out. He kept mentioning how much he liked Chicago and all the pieces they had since Chicago was the leading team in the Pau Gasol "sweepstakes" at one point. He stopped trying after that point, so the boos are well deserved.

 

[Boob-No-More]

The curse lives on. The Grizzlies lost to the Bobcats by 15 tonight. That's seven in a row.

I guess Darius really is part of the Grizzlies re-building plan. Having him on the roster seems destined to insure a high lottery pick (although, not higher than 4th, thanks to the curse).

BNM

Further evidence of the curse...

from the NBA Power Rankings: Memphis has dropped 4 spots from last week all the way to number 30 (dead last):

30 - Memphis (26) 11-28 Pace: 88.6 (22), Off: 104.5 (27), Def: 111.1 (23)
Since their four-game winning streak in early December, the Grizzlies have lost 13 of 15 and are having a tough time putting the ball in the basket. Marc Gasol sums it up pretty well: "We run around like chickens with our heads cut off."

When will they learn?

BNM

 

[Minstrel]

After they make a good or fair deal, OR if they are under pressure, the best of an unfair batch of deals, after they have turned over every rock and waited until the deadline.

Memphis did neither.

They didn't make what any objective observer thought a "fair" deal.

They didn't stash their All-Star in the opposite conference.

They didn't pick from the "best of the worst" deals after calling every GM twice over and waiting until the deadline.

They found a crappy deal, with a team in their own conference, stopped calling other teams, and pulled the trigger.

Those actions are NOTHING like what other teams do "all the time by dumping productive players."

Neither deals I mentioned meet all your requirements. Portland wasn't under a time pressure...they could have waited longer and "turned over more rocks" and it was a pretty crappy deal, IMO. The reason some "objective observers" might think it was fair is either because they're now counting the value of Rudy Fernandez who looks like he'll way exceed the expected value of his draft slot (something you don't believe is reasonable when it comes to Marc Gasol) or because they personally think Randolph is a tool and with pretty weak evidence believe he's a psychic cancer to his team.

Camby wasn't dealt out of conference, nor were the Nuggets to the point of "having turned over every rock."

Gasol was being booed by his home court fans, there were very few teams bidding on him and Memphis took the best offer available at the time. There's zero evidence that better deals were right around the corner. Had they waited two weeks and the Lakers opportunistically decided to lower their offer because now Memphis HAD to deal, Memphis would have gotten even less. That's at least as likely as a last-hour bounty.

I disagree. When you have a GOOD trade on the table, those can sometimes disappear and you have move fast. But, when you have an objectively crummy deal on the table, the odds that Memphis would have been stuck at the deadline with something even WORSE, is implausable. As it is NBA execs were quoted saying they could have topped the LA offer.

Laughable is putting any credence in "We could have have topped that." If they could have, they should have. Memphis didn't deal on the first day of the regular season. Almost all of the pre-deadline season had passed. It's incredibly flimsy to just assume that everything would have changed in the last two weeks. To that point, exactly two teams had offers on the table, and the other offer was even worse.

Also, your claims that the deal is "objectively" crummy is obviously nonsense. There's no such thing as "objective" merit to a trade. There's only opinion. I think the deal wasn't great but far from awful. Stating your opinion of the deal as objective fact doesn't strengthen your opinion.

Everyone talks about this prime prospect Marc Gasol. They are Monday Morning Quarterbacking as he has played so well. So did Boozer after he was drafted in the 2nd round. After the fact doesn't prove the value of Gasol in the trade before he played in the NBA.

Gasol was considered just as good a prospect as Rudy Fernandez, from draft profiles I read. He was one of the players with a claim to "best young player in Europe." He wasn't, and still isn't, an elite prospect. But it's not remotely hindsight to say he was a good prospect with plenty of value. IMO, he had, and still has, value equivalent to Rudy Fernandez.

And yes, Gasol is better than Camby and Randolph. And Memphis got more in return for Gasol than Portland did for Randolph and far more than Denver for for Camby.

 

[La Bomba]

At this point I don't care. These losses only get us closer to Blake Griffin or Hasheem Thabeet.

 

[Boob-No-More]

At this point I don't care. These losses only get us closer to Blake Griffin or Hasheem Thabeet.

Or, whoever else you can get with the 4th pick - remember, it's a curse. There is no way your tanking will be rewarded by the lottery gods - or did you already forget the 2007 draft lottery?

But, it doesn't really matter where you pick. Whoever you take will be a bust. It is, after all, a curse.

BNM

 

[Masbee]

Neither deals I mentioned meet all your requirements. Portland wasn't under a time pressure...they could have waited longer and "turned over more rocks" and it was a pretty crappy deal, IMO. The reason some "objective observers" might think it was fair is either because they're now counting the value of Rudy Fernandez who looks like he'll way exceed the expected value of his draft slot (something you don't believe is reasonable when it comes to Marc Gasol) or because they personally think Randolph is a tool and with pretty weak evidence believe he's a psychic cancer to his team.

Camby wasn't dealt out of conference, nor were the Nuggets to the point of "having turned over every rock."

The Clippers were the ONLY team with cap room willing to take Camby without sending a contract back, solving the owners sudden edict to get out of lux tax land. Ballgame.

Are you arguing that Randolph and Camby had similar value to Gasol?

Cause unless you are, your point doesn't resonate with me.

Effectively - for a variety of reasons - Randolph and Camby had very little trade value. Thus - their deals aren't all that crappy. They may not have been great, but that is not what I am arguing.

I am not arguing that every team should be able to cleverly dump their overhyped trash for good stuff.

Randolph and Camby were exposed players, known by the world not to be cornerstones of.... well of anything. They are both ballers, and have merit, but are essentially, just another player. Thus, their trade value has as much to do with their contract situations, attitude, team fit, age, injury history, PR value, etc. On most of those accounts Randolph and Camby score low.

See how easy that it to figure out. A player with an effective NET value that is low will tend to bring back little in return.

Thus, Randolph and Camby returning little for their teams means.....little. Because, you know, they weren't worth all that much.

Gasol was being booed by his home court fans, there were very few teams bidding on him and Memphis took the best offer available at the time. There's zero evidence that better deals were right around the corner. Had they waited two weeks and the Lakers opportunistically decided to lower their offer because now Memphis HAD to deal, Memphis would have gotten even less. That's at least as likely as a last-hour bounty.

So what? LA has crap offer on table. If nothing better comes along Memphis has to suck on a slightly more sour lemon? BFD. Lemon is lemon. Take the chance on sweetness arriving. That is what I say.

There is ZERO evidence that there were only two teams with offers, only two teams interested, and that a looming deadline for an excellent PRIME player would have flushed out NO OTHER OFFERS.

Despite that version of history being fairly implausable.

Laughable is putting any credence in "We could have have topped that." If they could have, they should have. Memphis didn't deal on the first day of the regular season. Almost all of the pre-deadline season had passed. It's incredibly flimsy to just assume that everything would have changed in the last two weeks. To that point, exactly two teams had offers on the table, and the other offer was even worse.

Also, your claims that the deal is "objectively" crummy is obviously nonsense. There's no such thing as "objective" merit to a trade. There's only opinion. I think the deal wasn't great but far from awful. Stating your opinion of the deal as objective fact doesn't strengthen your opinion.

Sure it does. I am Masbee.

In the past lots of trade deadline deals occur at the last moment. Wonder why?

Gasol was considered just as good a prospect as Rudy Fernandez, from draft profiles I read. He was one of the players with a claim to "best young player in Europe." He wasn't, and still isn't, an elite prospect. But it's not remotely hindsight to say he was a good prospect with plenty of value. IMO, he had, and still has, value equivalent to Rudy Fernandez.

Great. Pau gets you a prospect as good as we got with the far less valuable (for many reasons) Zach Randolph. Meaning what? That they didn't get all that much for Pau. Thank you.

And yes, Gasol is better than Camby and Randolph. And Memphis got more in return for Gasol than Portland did for Randolph and far more than Denver for for Camby.

Well sure they did. They still got hosed. Gasol at the time was worth far, far, far more than both those guys put together.

Trash + Trash in the NBA doesn't equal not trash.

Don't care if Gasol was getting booed. How are their ticket sales now in comparison? Did they help their team by making the trade they did? When they did?

Is it your contention that every trade made is the best trade that a GM could have made? That all GM's are roughly equal?

You are arguing that there were only two deals on the table and Wallace made the best deal.

If not, then why is it so hard to think that maybe, just maybe, Chris Wallace made a bad trade?

 

[Minstrel]

Effectively - for a variety of reasons - Randolph and Camby had very little trade value. Thus - their deals aren't all that crappy. They may not have been great, but that is not what I am arguing.

Effectively - for a variety of reasons - Pau Gasol had very little trade value. Thus - the deal isn't all that crappy. It may not have been great, but that is not what I am arguing.

See how easy that it to figure out? A player with an effective NET value that is low will tend to bring back little in return.

There is ZERO evidence that there were only two teams with offers, only two teams interested, and that a looming deadline for an excellent PRIME player would have flushed out NO OTHER OFFERS.

Sure there is. Those were the only two deals reportedly offered, with about 90% of the pre-deadline period finished. That's certainly evidence that those were the only teams with offers and/or interested and/or that would ever come along. It's not proof, but what actually had happened is certainly evidence.

Why can't I admit that Wallace simply made a bad deal? Because I don't think he did. As far as I'm concerned, Marc Gasol was a big man with a value similar to Rudy Fernandez. Two first-round draft picks, even late in the round, have significant value, which is why Pritchard buys them when he can. And cap space is apparently pretty valuable, as teams constantly jostle for it. Pau Gasol, as I recall, was nearing the end of his contract and had made clear that he had no intentions of re-signing. Was what they got worth 0.5 - 1.5 years (I forget if he was a FA at the end of last year or this year) of Pau Gasol? I think so. It's possible that they could have received more had they waited, but I don't think it is anything like a certainty as you seem to believe.

 

[La Bomba]

Or, whoever else you can get with the 4th pick - remember, it's a curse. There is no way your tanking will be rewarded by the lottery gods - or did you already forget the 2007 draft lottery?

But, it doesn't really matter where you pick. Whoever you take will be a bust. It is, after all, a curse.

BNM

Yeah Rudy Gay and OJ Mayo are the biggest busts in NBA history.

 

[rocketeer]

They didn't make what any objective observer thought a "fair" deal.

clearly this isn't true.

 

[rocketeer]

Or, whoever else you can get with the 4th pick - remember, it's a curse. There is no way your tanking will be rewarded by the lottery gods - or did you already forget the 2007 draft lottery?

But, it doesn't really matter where you pick. Whoever you take will be a bust. It is, after all, a curse.

BNM

4th might be better. i'd rather end up with greg monroe than griffin or thabeet.

 

[Boob-No-More]

Yeah Rudy Gay and OJ Mayo are the biggest busts in NBA history.

But those picks were pre-curse. The curse began the instant Darius Miles set foot in an NBA game wearing a Memphis Grizzlies uniform. With only 1:46 left, that game was already decided, but you haven't won one since - and now you've fired your coach.

The curse, is real - VERY real. Don't believe me, just ask Marc Iavaroni - like all this was somehow HIS fault. Chris Wallace is the one who should be fired. He's the one who brought the curse down on your franchise.

BNM

 

[La Bomba]

I like the Miles cruse then. We finally fired Iavaroni and we're loosing games. Go Darius!

 

[Boob-No-More]

I like the Miles cruse then. We finally fired Iavaroni and we're loosing games. Go Darius!

And I thought Miles was a bad fit for Memphis. Given that their fans like losing, I guess I was wrong. He's perfect for the team and their fans.

BNM

 

[MrJayremmie]

I don't think the Gasol deal was a great one, but I think people are way overstating how bad it was.

I agree that some make it out to be worse than it was when all things are considered, including cap space and that the LA pick turned out to be Arthur. But LA still got the best of that trade, and overall it wasn't a good trade for Memphis.

But they wanted to get younger and have cap space and they got that. Marc Gasol is turning out to be a great pickup, and Pau wasn't going to take them anywhere and he didn't want to be there and had a big contract.

And from this upcoming draft, Griffon and Hardin are going to be great! IMO they will be the best 2 in the draft... Memphis should do everything they can to get Griffon, and then all they are missing is a PG.

30 - Memphis (26) 11-28 Pace: 88.6 (22), Off: 104.5 (27), Def: 111.1 (23)
Since their four-game winning streak in early December, the Grizzlies have lost 13 of 15 and are having a tough time putting the ball in the basket. Marc Gasol sums it up pretty well: "We run around like chickens with our heads cut off."

LOL, I love Marc.

 

[drexlersdad]

Yeah Rudy Gay and OJ Mayo are the biggest busts in NBA history.

trading battier for gay has sure done wonders for your winning percentage.

 

[drexlersdad]

I agree that some make it out to be worse than it was when all things are considered, including cap space and that the LA pick turned out to be Arthur. But LA still got the best of that trade, and overall it wasn't a good trade for Memphis.

But they wanted to get younger and have cap space and they got that. Marc Gasol is turning out to be a great pickup, and Pau wasn't going to take them anywhere and he didn't want to be there and had a big contract.

And from this upcoming draft, Griffon and Hardin are going to be great! IMO they will be the best 2 in the draft... Memphis should do everything they can to get Griffon, and then all they are missing is a PG.



LOL, I love Marc.

kinda sad they picked a pg in the last 3 drafts.

 

[Masbee]

Effectively - for a variety of reasons - Pau Gasol had very little trade value. Thus - the deal isn't all that crappy. It may not have been great, but that is not what I am arguing.

See how easy that it to figure out? A player with an effective NET value that is low will tend to bring back little in return.

Clearly, I don't agree.

I can't prove my contention. Neither can you prove yours.

I contend that Pau had much more trade value than Camby and Randolph, and even more value than what Memphis got.

My support is all the comments and analysis above, and that wide, deep and universal dissing of the Memphis trade, which continues to this day. Camby trade coverage was mixed. A few media complained about Denver "dumping" Camby, but those were stories which rarely explained the lux tax problem, nor did they carefully analyize team needs, Camby's overhyped game and the return of Nene. The proof Camby's overhyped game is in the win total pudding. The media coverage of the Randolph trade was also very mixed, pro and con.

Sure there is. Those were the only two deals reportedly offered, with about 90% of the pre-deadline period finished. That's certainly evidence that those were the only teams with offers and/or interested and/or that would ever come along. It's not proof, but what actually had happened is certainly evidence.

What the heck are you talking about.

Number one - a large portion of trade deadline deals, happen AT the deadline. That is for a good reason. Teams moving a valuable asset (That would be Pau, not Kwame, Javaris, low picks) are in the driver seat, and wait to pressure for the best possible deal. Unless you are Chris Wallace and don't even know you are in the driver seat - or are working under different marching orders.

Number two - You have no proof at all there were only two interested teams. We as fans don't hear about the vast majority of legit, but preliminary trade discussions. You and I have no idea what was floating out there. We do know that there were complaints that more would have been offerred if Pau had been handled "normally", ie, marketed hard, auctioned off at the deadline. That's why they call it the trade DEADLINE.

Why can't I admit that Wallace simply made a bad deal? Because I don't think he did. As far as I'm concerned, Marc Gasol was a big man with a value similar to Rudy Fernandez. Two first-round draft picks, even late in the round, have significant value, which is why Pritchard buys them when he can. I never said it was a certainty. I said they should have waited. Risking a poor deal becomming a bit more poor was a worthwhile gamble.

And you keep harping on the "value" of what Memphis. I agree the stuff had value. Not total garbage. Some value. But NOT MUCH. And in the NBA you just can't add up a bunch of low value stuff to equal high value. It doesn't work that way.

To stretch the point. Say you have LeBron and he is worth 10 - Maximum value. A team offers you 10 players/picks/contracts each worth 4. The total sum = 40. Four times better, right? Guess what - no GM in the NBA takes that offer. No matter how many low value pieces you put together you cannot equal the value of a Prime All-Star caliber player who knows how to play team ball. Again, that would be Pau.

I never said Memphis had to choose between rejecting the LA deal and losing Pau for nothing. I know he had to go soon. Memphis put themselves in that position by having previouly rejected better deals and running low on a self-imposed time limit. But, time hadn't run out, most deals pop up at the last moment, and Wallace had not (according to reports) turned over every single stone.

I think a clue Wallace didn't work his ass off is that it wasn't a three team deal. If he had worked the phones like a maniac, he should have/could have worked out a better deal by including another team.

And cap space is apparently pretty valuable, as teams constantly jostle for it. Pau Gasol, as I recall, was nearing the end of his contract and had made clear that he had no intentions of re-signing. Was what they got worth 0.5 - 1.5 years (I forget if he was a FA at the end of last year or this year) of Pau Gasol? I think so. It's possible that they could have received more had they waited, but I don't think it is anything like a certainty as you seem to believe.

Cap space is a total JOKE for crap franchises. Wait til you see what Memphis does with their cap space. Nuff said.

Your recollection about Pau's contract is off. This may be coloring your perception of the deal. Pau was under contract for 3 1/2 more years when he was traded.

 

[JE]

I see nothing in the CBA against claiming a waived player and sitting him.

While that may be correct... why are you bitching about Memphis being unethical, when you want to the Blazers to sign a guy that they have no use for and basically hold him captive?

 

[e_blazer]

While that maybe be correct... why are you bitching about Memphis being unethical, when you want to the Blazers to sign a guy that they have no use for and basically hold him captive?

If Memphis only signed Miles to play him the minimum number of games (and I'll admit that all we have is rumor and conjecture to back that up at this point) for the sole purpose of screwing Portland out of cap space and have no plans of keeping him now that he's served that purpose, then they're not exactly the kings of the ethics department. Let's assume that the Blazers have pretty good reason to believe that's the case, then is it unethical for them to use the CBA's waiver provisions to try to protect themselves from another team that is using other CBA provisions simply to screw the Blazers?

 

[Minstrel]

Clearly, I don't agree.

I can't prove my contention. Neither can you prove yours.

I contend that Pau had much more trade value than Camby and Randolph, and even more value than what Memphis got.

I can't prove my contention, no. Your support is the after-the-fact dissing of the deal, which is reasonable. My support is the at-the-time weak bidding. The market establishes value, and Gasol was not drawing very impressive bids.

Number two - You have no proof at all there were only two interested teams. We as fans don't hear about the vast majority of legit, but preliminary trade discussions. You and I have no idea what was floating out there.

I just said, in my last post, that it wasn't "proof." You said that there was "zero evidence." That isn't true...the fact that only two teams were reported as interested (which is substantiated by the fact that no other GM after the fact mentioned having made any offer...in the bitch-fest following the deal, any GM who had actually made an offer would likely have mentioned it) is certainly evidence. Not proof.

And you keep harping on the "value" of what Memphis. I agree the stuff had value. Not total garbage. Some value. But NOT MUCH. And in the NBA you just can't add up a bunch of low value stuff to equal high value. It doesn't work that way.

I realize that, but all quality-for-quantity deals work that way. The team dealing the one quality player rarely gets back equal value. When the Lakers dealt Shaq, they certainly didn't get equal value back in anyone's eyes. You make the deal because you've decided you're not going to get any further with your star and you want a group of lesser players. The theory is that the combination of lesser players will equal the one excellent player, but that almost never is true.

Your recollection about Pau's contract is off. This may be coloring your perception of the deal. Pau was under contract for 3 1/2 more years when he was traded.

Fair enough. Being wrong on that fact does change my perception of the deal. There was still pressure on him since pressing on with an unhappy star is never a good situation, but less than I thought. While I still don't think that the deal was a historically bad one or deserving of all the angst, I now think it was far too hasty and probably not sufficient considering he could have spent more time waiting.

 

[Masbee]

I realize that, but all quality-for-quantity deals work that way. The team dealing the one quality player rarely gets back equal value. When the Lakers dealt Shaq, they certainly didn't get equal value back in anyone's eyes. You make the deal because you've decided you're not going to get any further with your star and you want a group of lesser players. The theory is that the combination of lesser players will equal the one excellent player, but that almost never is true.

To clarify a bit on this point, I agree that rarely can you get equal value when trying to trade a star, and you have to make several pieces or elements put together, often with an element of future value. "I trade you my now player, for your future (I hope) player."

I am not claiming they should (or could) have traded Gasol for Dirk or another star. I think they took a player who had a value in the league of an 8 out of 10 and traded him for a couple of 2's a 3 and a 4. I think a deal more in the ballpark is a trade of an 8 for a 6 and a couple of 3's.

As for the Shaq deal, Lamar Odom and Caron Butler are far below Shaq in impact, but they were 7's to Shaq's 10. Much closer imo to the leftovers Memphis got for a prime, still young Pau.

 

[La Bomba]

And I thought Miles was a bad fit for Memphis. Given that their fans like losing, I guess I was wrong. He's perfect for the team and their fans.

BNM

I don't like loosing, but when the team isn't going anywhere, I stop caring about winning and I rather loose anf get a better draft pick.

trading battier for gay has sure done wonders for your winning percentage.

Gay is still better the Battier and it's not even close.

 

[Boob-No-More]

Yet more evidence of the curse...

The Grizz lost to the Knicks tonight by 20.

So, that's 8 in a row and a fired coach. Congratulations to Chris Wallace. Your franchise is now the laughing stock of the entire NBA.

BNM

 

[ehizzy3]

lol im betting against memphis everytime now. gonna make some $$$

 

[JE]

If Memphis only signed Miles to play him the minimum number of games (and I'll admit that all we have is rumor and conjecture to back that up at this point) for the sole purpose of screwing Portland out of cap space and have no plans of keeping him now that he's served that purpose, then they're not exactly the kings of the ethics department. Let's assume that the Blazers have pretty good reason to believe that's the case, then is it unethical for them to use the CBA's waiver provisions to try to protect themselves from another team that is using other CBA provisions simply to screw the Blazers?

PapaG is angry with Memphis being 'unethical' in signing Miles to whack Portland's cap space. Is that unethical? Maybe. But, he also supports claiming a player off waivers, denying him any playing time or oppurtunity, essentially holding him captive on the bench (hell probably not even letting him come to the arena). Is that unethical? Maybe.



I'm just sayin...