Knicks / Hornets Trade

[gotrunks226]

W/e.. if ashes puts it through then whatever i don't care no more.

People need to relax. Yes me too.. was just pissed going 1-6, it's going down.

[DB]

Nov 22, 2008 3:06:38 GMT -5 w6602876 said:

Nov 22, 2008 2:23:49 GMT -5 DB said:

I meant to say how can you say a person will be tolerated if he will threaten to quit. That is complete bullshit. Step down, be my guest, You agreed to a trade. Whether the season started or not is irrelevant at this point, you agreed to do a deal and a deal will be put through since both parties agreed. Salaries are off, big deal, that is something that can be fixed and has and it goes through. I do not care if he is 0-5 or 5-25, he agreed to this trade and so did blue, so it goes through. Why can't you see that is beyond me. You can not just back out of a deal because you realize your team is shit.

If two parties agreed to a trade and it largely favored one over the other, you feel it should be put through?

Trades have been overturned in the past, I'm just wondering where you would stand on that issue.

This trade in no way shape or form should be VETOED. Just because he started off shitty? Are you kidding me, if the salaries were fine, no one had a problem with this trade before. Why should this trade, of all the horrible trades in the past, this one should not be allowed? Makes no sense.

If two parties agreed to a trade and it largely favored one over the other, you feel it should be put through?
Yes, I would not say this largely favors the other at all.

[w6602876]

Nov 22, 2008 11:59:56 GMT -5 DB said:

Nov 22, 2008 3:06:38 GMT -5 w6602876 said:

If two parties agreed to a trade and it largely favored one over the other, you feel it should be put through?

Trades have been overturned in the past, I'm just wondering where you would stand on that issue.

This trade in no way shape or form should be VETOED. Just because he started off shitty? Are you kidding me, if the salaries were fine, no one had a problem with this trade before. Why should this trade, of all the horrible trades in the past, this one should not be allowed? Makes no sense.

If two parties agreed to a trade and it largely favored one over the other, you feel it should be put through?
Yes, I would not say this largely favors the other at all.

I asked you a general question in terms of vetoing, not this particular case. As the case stands the Hornets were miraculously victorious in the last sim beating the Nets and Warriors. People actually did have a problem with this trade before. But it is nice of you to have selective reading in this case. Considering he was giving up a pick this season and didn't have what would have been his best player on the team in the first 7 games, makes me think you have something in it to screw other people over no matter what the circumstance. This position is extremely radical and it makes me wonder if this is how you work in real life, cut-throat the little guy.

[DB]

Nov 22, 2008 12:53:42 GMT -5 w6602876 said:

Nov 22, 2008 11:59:56 GMT -5 DB said:

This trade in no way shape or form should be VETOED. Just because he started off shitty? Are you kidding me, if the salaries were fine, no one had a problem with this trade before. Why should this trade, of all the horrible trades in the past, this one should not be allowed? Makes no sense.

If two parties agreed to a trade and it largely favored one over the other, you feel it should be put through?
Yes, I would not say this largely favors the other at all.

I asked you a general question in terms of vetoing, not this particular case. As the case stands the Hornets were miraculously victorious in the last sim beating the Nets and Warriors. People actually did have a problem with this trade before. But it is nice of you to have selective reading in this case. Considering he was giving up a pick this season and didn't have what would have been his best player on the team in the first 7 games, makes me think you have something in it to screw other people over no matter what the circumstance. This position is extremely radical and it makes me wonder if this is how you work in real life, cut-throat the little guy.

hahah you are ridiculous and not seeing the point at all. Why should he be allowed to back out of a deal that he agreed to in the first place? In the nba, you can not back out of a deal that was already agreed upon by both parties, so why should you be allowed to do that here? So what, he messed up the salaries, that is there fault, it is there fault that they did not check and it is only his fault that anderson was not on his roster. He was only 1-6 in the FIRST SIM, how hard is it to adjust, and come back and make the playoffs? Oh wait, I am sorry you have no idea because you have never made the playoffs and have been so unsuccessful here you would not know what that feels like.

He has an above 500 record now, after the SECOND sim, and anderson is on his roster. Screw him over? He looks pretty set to me right now? How would the league screw him over when he is the one who agreed to the trade in the first place? He is running the hornets, he agreed to a trade, there is no argument for me or anyone in the league to be made about screwing him over. I did not agree to the trade, he did, and therefore it went through. I am done with this bullshit because you can not understand a simple thing. I have said what I needed to say. Try to come back at me with some remark about how it was wrong to bring your franchise into the mix or how I am cutting the throat of the little guy. It is all bullshit and your only fucking come back, which is pathetic. Someone needs to make a statement about the lack of activity and unsuccessful franchises in this league. Damn.

Or you can just quit like you did before. Either way stop making this out like the league was going after this guy, its ridiculous.

[w6602876]

Nov 22, 2008 17:03:57 GMT -5 DB said:

Nov 22, 2008 12:53:42 GMT -5 w6602876 said:

I asked you a general question in terms of vetoing, not this particular case. As the case stands the Hornets were miraculously victorious in the last sim beating the Nets and Warriors. People actually did have a problem with this trade before. But it is nice of you to have selective reading in this case. Considering he was giving up a pick this season and didn't have what would have been his best player on the team in the first 7 games, makes me think you have something in it to screw other people over no matter what the circumstance. This position is extremely radical and it makes me wonder if this is how you work in real life, cut-throat the little guy.

hahah you are ridiculous and not seeing the point at all. Why should he be allowed to back out of a deal that he agreed to in the first place? In the nba, you can not back out of a deal that was already agreed upon by both parties, so why should you be allowed to do that here? So what, he messed up the salaries, that is there fault, it is there fault that they did not check and it is only his fault that anderson was not on his roster. He was only 1-6 in the FIRST SIM, how hard is it to adjust, and come back and make the playoffs? Oh wait, I am sorry you have no idea because you have never made the playoffs and have been so unsuccessful here you would not know what that feels like.

He has an above 500 record now, after the SECOND sim, and anderson is on his roster. Screw him over? He looks pretty set to me right now? How would the league screw him over when he is the one who agreed to the trade in the first place? He is running the hornets, he agreed to a trade, there is no argument for me or anyone in the league to be made about screwing him over. I did not agree to the trade, he did, and therefore it went through. I am done with this bullshit because you can not understand a simple thing. I have said what I needed to say. Try to come back at me with some remark about how it was wrong to bring your franchise into the mix or how I am cutting the throat of the little guy. It is all bullshit and your only fucking come back, which is pathetic. Someone needs to make a statement about the lack of activity and unsuccessful franchises in this league. Damn.

Or you can just quit like you did before. Either way stop making this out like the league was going after this guy, its ridiculous.

Again, I said in general should a trade that is lopsided be allowed to be vetoed if it wasn't fair? Not this trade in particular, but in general. In the NBA you can't back out of deal but in the NBA it takes weeks sometimes to get a trade done, not like here where it would be a few minutes.

You also have no idea what you're talking about as I had successful seasons here and have made the playoffs. It is much easier to make the playoffs in this league than it is to rebuild. So again you missed the point completely. Again, you have to take his record with a grain of salt as you've completely overlooked the fact that he probably just got lucky in the last sim. I also never said you were to bring my franchise in the mix, so I have no idea what you are talking about. How about stop putting words into my mouth and come back to reality.

I have absolutely nothing to gain with this trade and I only gain something out of this trade when it goes through. I've made this point before. You're making the point of unsuccessful franchises, this will only encourage him to lack activity since you're coercing him into making this trade. What happens next after his franchise is unsuccessful without his own draft picks? He'll only leave and we'll never get a GM to replace him since the team has been handicapped without four draft picks. I care about this league enough that I'd rather have his team keep the picks than have them traded off like that. You obviously don't and completely overlooked the fact that people didn't like the trade before and assume everything is fine and dandy.

It is pretty sad you have to scoop down to a level where you have to start using curse words to get your point across because I don't need to. You've blown your fuse and it is very telling. I've just got a GM to come over here from BBS named jbjb, I hope you can get a GM in case trunks ever decides to step down because I'm willing to bet the way you want to handicap that franchise, you wont be able to, make no mistake about it.

[DB]

Nov 22, 2008 18:12:30 GMT -5 w6602876 said:

Nov 22, 2008 17:03:57 GMT -5 DB said:

hahah you are ridiculous and not seeing the point at all. Why should he be allowed to back out of a deal that he agreed to in the first place? In the nba, you can not back out of a deal that was already agreed upon by both parties, so why should you be allowed to do that here? So what, he messed up the salaries, that is there fault, it is there fault that they did not check and it is only his fault that anderson was not on his roster. He was only 1-6 in the FIRST SIM, how hard is it to adjust, and come back and make the playoffs? Oh wait, I am sorry you have no idea because you have never made the playoffs and have been so unsuccessful here you would not know what that feels like.

He has an above 500 record now, after the SECOND sim, and anderson is on his roster. Screw him over? He looks pretty set to me right now? How would the league screw him over when he is the one who agreed to the trade in the first place? He is running the hornets, he agreed to a trade, there is no argument for me or anyone in the league to be made about screwing him over. I did not agree to the trade, he did, and therefore it went through. I am done with this bullshit because you can not understand a simple thing. I have said what I needed to say. Try to come back at me with some remark about how it was wrong to bring your franchise into the mix or how I am cutting the throat of the little guy. It is all bullshit and your only fucking come back, which is pathetic. Someone needs to make a statement about the lack of activity and unsuccessful franchises in this league. Damn.

Or you can just quit like you did before. Either way stop making this out like the league was going after this guy, its ridiculous.

Again, I said in general should a trade that is lopsided be allowed to be vetoed if it wasn't fair? Not this trade in particular, but in general. In the NBA you can't back out of deal but in the NBA it takes weeks sometimes to get a trade done, not like here where it would be a few minutes.

You also have no idea what you're talking about as I had successful seasons here and have made the playoffs. It is much easier to make the playoffs in this league than it is to rebuild. So again you missed the point completely. Again, you have to take his record with a grain of salt as you've completely overlooked the fact that he probably just got lucky in the last sim. I also never said you were to bring my franchise in the mix, so I have no idea what you are talking about. How about stop putting words into my mouth and come back to reality.

I have absolutely nothing to gain with this trade and I only gain something out of this trade when it goes through. I've made this point before. You're making the point of unsuccessful franchises, this will only encourage him to lack activity since you're coercing him into making this trade. What happens next after his franchise is unsuccessful without his own draft picks? He'll only leave and we'll never get a GM to replace him since the team has been handicapped without four draft picks. I care about this league enough that I'd rather have his team keep the picks than have them traded off like that. You obviously don't and completely overlooked the fact that people didn't like the trade before and assume everything is fine and dandy.

It is pretty sad you have to scoop down to a level where you have to start using curse words to get your point across because I don't need to. You've blown your fuse and it is very telling. I've just got a GM to come over here from BBS named jbjb, I hope you can get a GM in case trunks ever decides to step down because I'm willing to bet the way you want to handicap that franchise, you wont be able to, make no mistake about it.

Get it through you head, he handicapped himself by accepting this trade, he has no one else to blame but himself. The deal went through end of story, so obviously you are wrong. His team has not been successful and neither has him what was motivating him in the past to stay? Do you remember how many times he traded his future picks, he still is here. That point is not valid.

You have never had a team worth remembering.

Again in the NBA you can not back out of a deal whether it is weeks or 2 minutes does not matter, once you agree, you agree. How come this does not make sense?

"since you're coercing him into making this trade."
HOW AM I DOING THIS? he made it himself. what the hell.

YES, i use curse words, I am a big boy, I like to use them.

Great you got a bbs gm to sign up here, I have been with the uosl leagues since day 1 and done everything in my abilities to make them successful and fun. I hope you can find more gms.

I will come back to reality as soon as you stop smoking the crack.

[Bluedevil$]

Nov 22, 2008 12:53:42 GMT -5 w6602876 said:

Nov 22, 2008 11:59:56 GMT -5 DB said:

This trade in no way shape or form should be VETOED. Just because he started off shitty? Are you kidding me, if the salaries were fine, no one had a problem with this trade before. Why should this trade, of all the horrible trades in the past, this one should not be allowed? Makes no sense.

If two parties agreed to a trade and it largely favored one over the other, you feel it should be put through?
Yes, I would not say this largely favors the other at all.

I asked you a general question in terms of vetoing, not this particular case. As the case stands the Hornets were miraculously victorious in the last sim beating the Nets and Warriors. People actually did have a problem with this trade before. But it is nice of you to have selective reading in this case. Considering he was giving up a pick this season and didn't have what would have been his best player on the team in the first 7 games, makes me think you have something in it to screw other people over no matter what the circumstance. This position is extremely radical and it makes me wonder if this is how you work in real life, cut-throat the little guy.

Don't act like there was a consensus for vetoing this trade after that sim. The only person who was against it was you.

It's not about screwing people over. It's about being a man of your word and not backing out of a mutual agreement. Pretty basic concept, you don't seem to understand it though.

[w6602876]

Nov 22, 2008 19:07:42 GMT -5 DB said:

Nov 22, 2008 18:12:30 GMT -5 w6602876 said:

Again, I said in general should a trade that is lopsided be allowed to be vetoed if it wasn't fair? Not this trade in particular, but in general. In the NBA you can't back out of deal but in the NBA it takes weeks sometimes to get a trade done, not like here where it would be a few minutes.

You also have no idea what you're talking about as I had successful seasons here and have made the playoffs. It is much easier to make the playoffs in this league than it is to rebuild. So again you missed the point completely. Again, you have to take his record with a grain of salt as you've completely overlooked the fact that he probably just got lucky in the last sim. I also never said you were to bring my franchise in the mix, so I have no idea what you are talking about. How about stop putting words into my mouth and come back to reality.

I have absolutely nothing to gain with this trade and I only gain something out of this trade when it goes through. I've made this point before. You're making the point of unsuccessful franchises, this will only encourage him to lack activity since you're coercing him into making this trade. What happens next after his franchise is unsuccessful without his own draft picks? He'll only leave and we'll never get a GM to replace him since the team has been handicapped without four draft picks. I care about this league enough that I'd rather have his team keep the picks than have them traded off like that. You obviously don't and completely overlooked the fact that people didn't like the trade before and assume everything is fine and dandy.

It is pretty sad you have to scoop down to a level where you have to start using curse words to get your point across because I don't need to. You've blown your fuse and it is very telling. I've just got a GM to come over here from BBS named jbjb, I hope you can get a GM in case trunks ever decides to step down because I'm willing to bet the way you want to handicap that franchise, you wont be able to, make no mistake about it.

Get it through you head, he handicapped himself by accepting this trade, he has no one else to blame but himself. The deal went through end of story, so obviously you are wrong. His team has not been successful and neither has him what was motivating him in the past to stay? Do you remember how many times he traded his future picks, he still is here. That point is not valid.

You have never had a team worth remembering.

Again in the NBA you can not back out of a deal whether it is weeks or 2 minutes does not matter, once you agree, you agree. How come this does not make sense?

"since you're coercing him into making this trade."
HOW AM I DOING THIS? he made it himself. what the hell.

YES, i use curse words, I am a big boy, I like to use them.

Great you got a bbs gm to sign up here, I have been with the uosl leagues since day 1 and done everything in my abilities to make them successful and fun. I hope you can find more gms.

I will come back to reality as soon as you stop smoking the crack.

The problem here is you have trouble connecting the dots. His team was already in hole and he was giving up a pick this season starting the season without Kyle Anderson. The handicap was there without Kyle Anderson. I'm not sure if you understand the point here because if you are it doesn't seem like you're bothering to address it. The problem is you put words into my mouth and make assumptions that are off base you can't even follow the topic, so you hijack the conversation to another discussion about my past, which only proves that your memory is rather faulty, at best.

I hope I can find more GM's but if a GM trades away picks and decides to step down, is it easy to find a new one? Not always. The previous Pistons GM before duceinmyheart traded future picks to beef up his team, conveniently left so he didn't have to address the hard cap problem and didn't have to face the facts that he didn't have his picks in the future, so he left because of "lack of interest." Spurs GM trades away two future pick for Ethan Telfair, which you called a bad trade by me when it is now looking like a great trade by me. Again, faulty logic on your part. The point here is you lack the foresight to see things in the future. If trunks isn't happy, he'll be inactive. Sure he might stick around and man it up. But at the end of the day, we'd much rather have active GM's. You don't care if they are happy or not, but I do. Sorry for being so blunt.

As far as smoking crack, I've never done it and never handled it, I might not even know what it looks like. Personally I think it should be legalized but that's for another discussion.

[w6602876]

Nov 22, 2008 19:13:30 GMT -5 Bluedevil$ said:

Nov 22, 2008 12:53:42 GMT -5 w6602876 said:

I asked you a general question in terms of vetoing, not this particular case. As the case stands the Hornets were miraculously victorious in the last sim beating the Nets and Warriors. People actually did have a problem with this trade before. But it is nice of you to have selective reading in this case. Considering he was giving up a pick this season and didn't have what would have been his best player on the team in the first 7 games, makes me think you have something in it to screw other people over no matter what the circumstance. This position is extremely radical and it makes me wonder if this is how you work in real life, cut-throat the little guy.

Don't act like there was a consensus for vetoing this trade after that sim. The only person who was against it was you.

It's not about screwing people over. It's about being a man of your word and not backing out of a mutual agreement. Pretty basic concept, you don't seem to understand it though.

Really now, I was the only person that said it was a bad trade?

[Bluedevil$]

Did I say that? I said you were the only person who said the original deal should be vetoed after it didn't go through after the first sim. Reading comprehension son.

[w6602876]

Nov 22, 2008 23:16:23 GMT -5 Bluedevil$ said:

Did I say that? I said you were the only person who said the original deal should be vetoed after it didn't go through after the first sim. Reading comprehension son.

Given that enough people had an issue about this trade before the sim, don't you think the people wouldn't like this trade after sim 1?

Once this trade goes through, I'll ask Ducky permission to have a poll on this trade for a veto just like I did when Dmoney traded away Rivera.

[Bluedevil$]

The two trades don't even compare. He's not trading away a franchise player for way below face value.

[ashes]

Lol, it's not even that bad for the Hornets.

Done.

[DB]

Nov 22, 2008 22:21:53 GMT -5 w6602876 said:

Nov 22, 2008 19:07:42 GMT -5 DB said:

Get it through you head, he handicapped himself by accepting this trade, he has no one else to blame but himself. The deal went through end of story, so obviously you are wrong. His team has not been successful and neither has him what was motivating him in the past to stay? Do you remember how many times he traded his future picks, he still is here. That point is not valid.

You have never had a team worth remembering.

Again in the NBA you can not back out of a deal whether it is weeks or 2 minutes does not matter, once you agree, you agree. How come this does not make sense?

"since you're coercing him into making this trade."
HOW AM I DOING THIS? he made it himself. what the hell.

YES, i use curse words, I am a big boy, I like to use them.

Great you got a bbs gm to sign up here, I have been with the uosl leagues since day 1 and done everything in my abilities to make them successful and fun. I hope you can find more gms.

I will come back to reality as soon as you stop smoking the crack.

The problem here is you have trouble connecting the dots. His team was already in hole and he was giving up a pick this season starting the season without Kyle Anderson. The handicap was there without Kyle Anderson. I'm not sure if you understand the point here because if you are it doesn't seem like you're bothering to address it. The problem is you put words into my mouth and make assumptions that are off base you can't even follow the topic, so you hijack the conversation to another discussion about my past, which only proves that your memory is rather faulty, at best.

I hope I can find more GM's but if a GM trades away picks and decides to step down, is it easy to find a new one? Not always. The previous Pistons GM before duceinmyheart traded future picks to beef up his team, conveniently left so he didn't have to address the hard cap problem and didn't have to face the facts that he didn't have his picks in the future, so he left because of "lack of interest." Spurs GM trades away two future pick for Ethan Telfair, which you called a bad trade by me when it is now looking like a great trade by me. Again, faulty logic on your part. The point here is you lack the foresight to see things in the future. If trunks isn't happy, he'll be inactive. Sure he might stick around and man it up. But at the end of the day, we'd much rather have active GM's. You don't care if they are happy or not, but I do. Sorry for being so blunt.

As far as smoking crack, I've never done it and never handled it, I might not even know what it looks like. Personally I think it should be legalized but that's for another discussion.

It is his fault that kyle anderson was not on his roster opening day and only his fault, so he has no one else to blame but himself. Why is it his fault? Because contracts did not match. End of story.


Gms will always be there, If not, someone can take over the LA Lakers and I will take their damn team from them and run it, I dont give a crap.

Great, you made one good trade out of all the horrible ones? Besides the point anyway, who really cares about that one trade, it has not done anything that is worth talking about.

Of course we want active gms in here, but him trading all those picks away is his problem, he is the one that did it, not me. How many times do I have to say this.

I have made my point, the deal is accepted. good riddance.

[w6602876]

Nov 23, 2008 1:14:27 GMT -5 DB said:

Nov 22, 2008 22:21:53 GMT -5 w6602876 said:

The problem here is you have trouble connecting the dots. His team was already in hole and he was giving up a pick this season starting the season without Kyle Anderson. The handicap was there without Kyle Anderson. I'm not sure if you understand the point here because if you are it doesn't seem like you're bothering to address it. The problem is you put words into my mouth and make assumptions that are off base you can't even follow the topic, so you hijack the conversation to another discussion about my past, which only proves that your memory is rather faulty, at best.

I hope I can find more GM's but if a GM trades away picks and decides to step down, is it easy to find a new one? Not always. The previous Pistons GM before duceinmyheart traded future picks to beef up his team, conveniently left so he didn't have to address the hard cap problem and didn't have to face the facts that he didn't have his picks in the future, so he left because of "lack of interest." Spurs GM trades away two future pick for Ethan Telfair, which you called a bad trade by me when it is now looking like a great trade by me. Again, faulty logic on your part. The point here is you lack the foresight to see things in the future. If trunks isn't happy, he'll be inactive. Sure he might stick around and man it up. But at the end of the day, we'd much rather have active GM's. You don't care if they are happy or not, but I do. Sorry for being so blunt.

As far as smoking crack, I've never done it and never handled it, I might not even know what it looks like. Personally I think it should be legalized but that's for another discussion.

It is his fault that kyle anderson was not on his roster opening day and only his fault, so he has no one else to blame but himself. Why is it his fault? Because contracts did not match. End of story.


Gms will always be there, If not, someone can take over the LA Lakers and I will take their damn team from them and run it, I dont give a crap.

Great, you made one good trade out of all the horrible ones? Besides the point anyway, who really cares about that one trade, it has not done anything that is worth talking about.

Of course we want active gms in here, but him trading all those picks away is his problem, he is the one that did it, not me. How many times do I have to say this.

I have made my point, the deal is accepted. good riddance.

It is the fault of the knicks GM who should have contacted the hornets that the trade didn't go through before sim one. He's been around in leagues long enough to realize this and most likely ran a league of his own or ran someone else's league. I've never actually made a horrible trade, that's the point. You have a terrible memory, you can't even recall what was done only a few seasons ago. I'd say your credibility is already shot. I've made fantastic trades in the past it is me getting unlucky in the draft which attributes to my poor record.

Regardless, you have just proved my point. You don't care if GM's are happy or not as long as they are active. I like all GM's here and I want them to be happy. We are here to have a good time, not making people accept deals that didn't work the first time around.