Posted by firefly:

Posted by bigpimpin:

but just to show you how ingorant your post is--let me point this out to you

you say kurt is a 33 year old pf. so i take it that you mean he is on his last leg, right?

well explain to me how old man kurt got us a 25 year old player and the 21st pick in the first round?

it couldn't have been talent, right. okay then.

suns got eisley, ward, mcdyess, vujanic and lampe and first round picks in the marbury, penny trade but if that trade doesn't go through then they don't get nash or Q.

all that junk they got when we robbed them meant nothing to them because they were wanting to rid themselves of penny and marbury for a reason.

just as they wanted to rid themselves of Q for a reason

i'm trying to raise you the right way!

I appreciate the economics lesson, really I do. The fact that we got a player thats 8 years younger then KT was not to say that KT is on his last legs. As you say, basketball is a business, and it all pans out long term, not short term. Unlike the Marbury trade, when we gave them tremendous cap flexibility, KT is still on the hook for another what, 3 years? Whenever KT's body does decide to pack it in, Q's will be around 8 years longer. That makes long term sense. Also, we wont be on the hook when he's 36, and struggling to get out of bed in the morning, the Suns will.

So this deal is completely different to the first Suns trade, this was a talent swap, not a cap move. Agreed? Good.

Therefore I posit as follows. If A = KT talent and length of future, B = Q's and Nates talent and length of future and C = Extraneous considerations such as cap space and D = Extranteous considerations such as draft picks and cash, then in the absence of C, B+D>>>A.

Hows that? . So we screwed them.

Nice equation. I don't think we screwed them because Kurt is a good player, but we definitely got the better deal.