Shocked, I tell you.

David Lee escapes for nothing this year if we sign Bosh. Getting under the cap is a plan, but there are smarter ways to go about building for the future. Walsh doesn't seem to do that.

Cosmic wrote:Conditional 2nd rounder and regardless of the feelings on Nate Robinson the fact was he wasn't returning and he was becoming a problem for the team. So to swap him for House was fine. Nobody was giving us a 1st round pick or a better player for him. The deal is fine if you look at everything involved beyond just liking Nate Robinson.

agreed.

i actually think house is a better fit for this team than nate. nate is extremely overrated here. i love his passion, but hate a lot of things about the way he plays.

Cosmic wrote:Conditional 2nd rounder and regardless of the feelings on Nate Robinson the fact was he wasn't returning and he was becoming a problem for the team. So to swap him for House was fine. Nobody was giving us a 1st round pick or a better player for him. The deal is fine if you look at everything involved beyond just liking Nate Robinson.

It's not about liking Nate.
Career avgs:
Nate: 24 mins, 43%, 35.3 3PT %, 2.9 reb, 2.8 AST, 12.5 PPG
House: 17 mins, 41%, 39.3 3PT %, 1.7 reb, 1.6 ASt, 7.6 PPG

I am not a GM, but looking at the traces going around, we have overpaid this year. For House, for Tmac, for Srod, for cap space. Let's hope with more winning, there will be more respect.

1997-10-09 Raptors

ACQUIRED: John Wallace

RELINQUISHED: first round pick (lottery protected) (2000 #18-Quentin Richardson), second round pick (top 50 protected through 2012) (2007 #52-Taurean Green) 3-team trade with Blazers, Knicks

link to the page its on this page

Dude put a top 50 protection on a 2nd round pick for 15 YEARS!!!!! I bet it's STILL not consummated!!!!

TMS wrote:this conditional 2nd round pick is akin to the infamous "Player to be named later" acquisitions in baseball... barely even worthy of a footnote.

What if Boston implodes in 2 years - and in 2 years that's the conditional 2nd round pick we're slated to receive?

Who the hell knows. 2nd round picks grow on trees. Teams trade scrubs for them or buy them for like 500K. And sometimes those picks turn out to be the Horneceks or Ginobillis of the league don't they?

Unconcerned.

Nate wasn't coming back. To swap him for House so we're not depleted in guards was just fine.

If Nate was worth what we wanted we would have gotten it. Truth is he wasn't.

TMS wrote:we gave up Nate for nothing, let's face it... neither Giddens nor Walker are going to be even half the player Nate is & we're not getting sheit for that conditional pick from BOS but another scrub to add to Donnie's collection... how is this any different than just buying Nate out & gaining the luxury tax savings?

of course Nate wasn't worth what we wanted, cuz MDA did his best this season to destroy his trade value w/that moronic 14 game benching... yeah, that really did a lot to change the culture of losing around here... i can already see the difference of fight in this team since we went that route... gimme a break.

Nate was going to walk for nothing anyway.

So what's the problem? In fact half the reason no team offered us anything was because --- 1) Nate said it's LA, ORL, BOS or I veto. 2) He was walking at years end so why give the Knicks anything if you can sign him as an UNRESTRICTED free agent at years end. 3) Teams knew he was done in NY and teams knew he was being shopped since DEC with no takers.

Nobody was giving us a damn thing. At least we got a 30 game replacement so we're not over-tiring everyone left.

You can't turn every player that's on his way out into gold you know. It'd be nice if we could but it wasn't going to happen with Nate.

So, what we did was turn him into a player we could use for the last 30 games to makes sure we had enough of a roster to not run everyone else into the ground being shorthanded.

Nothing more here. Our hands were tied as soon as we signed him to a 1 year contract.

TMS wrote:we should have traded Nate last year... as soon as Nate was re-signed to a 1 year deal, he should have been a focal point of the offense this season to try & raise his value & not treated as a pariah by the head coach... unlike Fishlips, Nate can actually play.

Yes, yes we should. Maybe even Lee as well.

But, the question is, what would we get back? Guys on 2010s and a few picks? If so, beautiful. If guys on 2011s, then, well, whoops - doesn't work.

I still laugh at people who say the Kings-Knicks deal wasn't a real 'rumor'.

It indeed was. The NBA granted the Kings and Knicks an extension until 3:15PM that afternoon to see if they could agree to a trade. They could not. This is factual information.

The principle parts were Jeffries+Nate for Kenny Thomas. Thoughts were more was involved and Walsh declined. I would speculate that Petrie, like any other GM that season, demanded a 1st rounder from us for the cap relief we sought.

But, well, now we're at TODAY. Can't do anything about yesterday anymore.