Posted by SugarRayRichardson:
Thank you wsdm. Blue seats went off on some word game rant instead of just accepting the obvious truth. It was obvious Nate was named in these stories since many Knicks messageboard had long threads discussing it with articles in them. Knick fans didnt just make this up in to thin air.
It's not a word game, and you don't have to get so defensive about it. It's simply trying to weight the veracity and credibility of the stories we read. What, you don't do that? Isn't that what brought you into this thread? Your entire position on Elton Brown vs Curry is that the media can't be trusted. Unless it's talking about Larry Brown, I guess...
There's two reasons that I put more weight in the article I posted than the one from you and wsdm (thanks wsdm).
1) it's the only one that seemed to offer both sides of the story, the others seemed to emanate from the MSG office of propaganda.
2) if you look at all the other players rumored to be waived Nate is the only one who stands out from the rest as having a small tradable contract. all the others were "unmovable" contracts, or expirings, the trading of which would further bloat the payroll. Nate is easily tradable, so i don't believe brown would ask that he be waived. And if you'll recall that was where this tangent started, with you believing Brown asked for him to be waived instead of traded.
Now, is it inconceivable to me that Brown would want Nate traded? No. Nate was a wise-ass and seemed to be following in Marbury's footsteps. On the other hand he gave him a lot of PT that Nate generally made good use of. And in the article I presented that did offer Brown's side Nate was one of the guys he said he would play - as opposed to everyone else on the buyout list. So my guess is that LB was ambivalent toward nate and wouldn't have been opposed to using him as bait in a trade package to get someone he liked better, but he also wasn't on his prime list of guys who had to go.
But people will make so much of it if brown wanted anyone but say, Taylor, Malik or Snacks to go. Meanwhile, the Pacers, who won 41 games last year - a number that this team aspires to, a number that will have all the "optimists" leaving I-told-you-so's in every thread, a number that will secure isiah's job for a decade and prove him a genius - turned over 11 players this off-season. Why so many? Well, Carlisle was thought to have "lost" some of his players and the team chemistry was bad.
Don't take it personally Sugar, this is what we do. We try to make sense of things with far too little info to go on. You do it too.
