Per Quick, no trades with West teams

[PtldPlatypus]

On 95.5 just now: "The Blazers are very active right now, but it has become apparent that no team in the western conference is willing to deal with the Blazers."

He says that the public backlash toward the Gasol deal was so great that none of them are willing to risk the possibility of a repeat. If any deal is to be made, it will have to be with an Eastern team (which I think most of us assumed).

 

[THE HCP]

Do you blame 'em?

 

[anonymous gambler]

On 95.5 just now: "The Blazers are very active right now, but it has become apparent that no team in the western conference is willing to deal with the Blazers."

He says that the public backlash toward the Gasol deal was so great that none of them are willing to risk the possibility of a repeat. If any deal is to be made, it will have to be with an Eastern team (which I think most of us assumed).

And what did we have to do with the Gasol deal?

 

[hasoos]

And what did we have to do with the Gasol deal?

And does it really matter who you trade with if you give them all the pieces they need to win a finals that year?

 

[Nikolokolus]

The West is just too competitive. The only teams that are even close to rebuilding mode are the Warriors, but it doesn't appear they actually know this yet, due to their woefully ineffective management team. You're going to need to see some established teams start to under perform or falter before they're going to blow it up and start shedding vets for youngsters.

 

[MARIS61]

On 95.5 just now: "The Blazers are very active right now, but it has become apparent that no team in the western conference is willing to deal with the Blazers."

He says that the public backlash toward the Gasol deal was so great that none of them are willing to risk the possibility of a repeat. If any deal is to be made, it will have to be with an Eastern team (which I think most of us assumed).

What a moronic statement. Does Quick even have a thought process before he blurts out such nonsense?

I seriously doubt any GM would refuse to deal with any other team if the deal was good for their purposes. He'd be fired immediately.

 

[maxiep]

Not surprising. If I had to face this team three to four times a year, I wouldn't want to trade with them either.

 

[BrianFromWA]

The "backlash from the Gasol deal" stemmed from the fact that Wallace dealt Gasol 2 months early, for a (perceived by about the entire GM world) lesser deal than many were offering, on the opinion of many just to help out the L*kers.

If this was a deal where there was perceived equality in the terms, I don't see many GMs having a problem with it.

"They want to give up LMA for Jamison? More power to them. I wouldn't give anything that valuable" is a lot different than "They got Chris Bosh for Przybilla, Outlaw, Blake and a 2012 lotto-protected first? WTF?"

 

[Ed O]

What a moronic statement. Does Quick even have a thought process before he blurts out such nonsense?

I seriously doubt any GM would refuse to deal with any other team if the deal was good for their purposes. He'd be fired immediately.

I agree with you... a team should be worried first and foremost about improving ITSELF. The fallout on the rest of the conference/league is secondary.

If the Grizzlies consider it a good deal--and they're the only team other than LA who does--then they'd make the same kind of deal, and teams should not avoid being "Memphis" (getting a deal that works for them and their trading partner, screws other teams).

Ed O.

 

[the ob]

wow,
he must have been on the phone calling all his sources to get that info.