GS ended up being bad so it fell within the protections, you know like how those types of trades usually work. We didn't have to convey a 1st to Chicago yet for Nance, does that mean we didn't try to trade a 1st for him?
Really good point here. They could have tanked with or without CJ.
I don't have a whole bunch of faith in Jason Quick but i guess he does have access.
I try not to look at last season at all besides knowing for sure that Ant can sustain a high level of play offensively. That's all I think we can take from last season. Any other judgments that we derive from guys who got playing time last season are either very limited sample sizes or amount to knowing who can't win us games. Most of those guys who couldn't win games last season were young so hopefully they get better... thus I take one thing away from what I saw last season.
Um... you kinda played yourself on this one because Poku was the 17th pick. I don't want to try and sort out all of the bullshit but they did end up with the 17th pick in that trade you just put a name on it.
I think CJ and Larry for a late lotto this year and Hart would have been a very underwhelming but not outrageously unfair trade. For Hart and a Bucks pick four fucking drafts from now but when the Bucks still figure to have a prime Giannis... well that fucking sucks.
You do realize you just posted the transactions as the players they drafted with those picks instead of the pick #'s themselves? The Thunder traded the 25th (Quickley) and 28th (McDaniels) picks along with Rubio for the 17th pick (Poku).
Cronin, Griffin, and multiple league executives have said otherwise. I'll take what the actual people said over you making stuff up.
Again, I simply wanted what New Orleans was WILLING to give up for him as his value. His value was a lottery pick 5-14, so that's what I want. The fact that New Orleans will likely have a pick in the 5-10 range that they were willing to give up in the trade is not acceptable. I don't care how anyone spins it. The value was established and Cronin failed to cover all angles.
You have to admit there's a bit of 20/20 hindsight here but overall I agree. Cronin should have been better on that pick. It makes the trade much more palatable.
I said it minutes after we found out the protections on the pick, the day of the trade, and have been saying it ever since.
You're making the same arguments that you've still failed to debunk. Name a trade where the conditions were good if the trade bombed for the other team, but got worse the better they did? Trades are set up the opposite way where you receive the same or less protection the following year or it conveys if the team makes the playoffs (Chicago pick). Hence why it's a massive failure to not at least negotiate the possibility of the Lakers pick falling into that protection when the New Orleans pick didn't.
Just a tad bit of a double standard there.
None of which answers the original question: Cronin was one of the top FO guys on a poorly run team. How does that earn him a promotion without bothering to even interview other candidates? You say we shouldn't bitch about his one week on a 50 week job - but you are ready to anoint him savior for that same one week.
Nobody is saying that the Pels should've traded an unconditional pick. Eric has acknowledged that last part in his explanation several times so I dont know why you're including it. Obviously the Lakers pick could jump into the top 4.
I swear you like misinterpreting people on purpose.