Posted by Bippity10:

Just to play devil's advocate, a "good deal" is subjective. Dumars may have turned down something that another GM could have turned into gold. Walsh the same thing. He may have dropped the ball this summer, but it's difficult to know if you aren't in the negotations. Going by the status of our current players if I was an opposing GM I would try to rob the Pistons and the Knicks because I know that they are despearate to readjust their rosters. There is a good possibility that this is what occured over the summer and we just don't know exactly what was being offered.

Posted by Markji:

"We talked to teams this summer, but nothing was presented to me that would make us better than we already are," Dumars said.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/basketball/nba/09/18/pistons.dumars.ap/index.html?eref=si_nba

This is so similar to the Zach situation. Walsh has publically been saying and trying to trade Zach. But he hasn't - for the same reason as Dumars - no good deal was available.

So I think we can cut Walsh some slack. If other GM's aren't going to make a decent offer, then we don't need to cave in to a bad deal. We can stand pat - just like Dumars is doing. When a deal is right, it will be made.

[Edited by - markji on 09-19-2008 10:46 AM]

Posted by TMS:

Posted by Markji:

"We talked to teams this summer, but nothing was presented to me that would make us better than we already are," Dumars said.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/basketball/nba/09/18/pistons.dumars.ap/index.html?eref=si_nba

This is so similar to the Zach situation. Walsh has publically been saying and trying to trade Zach. But he hasn't - for the same reason as Dumars - no good deal was available.

So I think we can cut Walsh some slack. If other GM's aren't going to make a decent offer, then we don't need to cave in to a bad deal. We can stand pat - just like Dumars is doing. When a deal is right, it will be made.

[Edited by - markji on 09-19-2008 10:46 AM]

notice the part i bolded... the whole point in trading Zach is to become better than we already are... that's done by removing a bad element & allowing the leftover parts to start gelling as a team... last year his presence clearly created confusion & redundancy that we did not need to see in another rebuilding year... again, u don't give up an unprotected pick to get rid of him but if these MEM rumors are true & they're willing to throw us back a decent prospect in exchange for a protected pick, i will definitely be disappointed that Walsh didn't make the deal... but who knows what the real deal is if there even is one.


[Edited by - TMS on 09-19-2008 1:10 PM]

Posted by Ira:

I guess I just don't see things the way some here do. I don't put last season's problems on Zach. It's true that he and Curry didn't play well together, but, all in all that was more Curry's fault. Curry is the one that doesn't have any outside shot and Curry is the one who is probably one of the worst passing big men in the history of the game.

I think last season's problems were more a part of Q's very poor season compared to the season before, to Curry's not picking up his game and to Marbury and Isaiah being who they were. It's true that Zach wasn't a great fit, but he replaced the useless Channing Frye and played much better than Frye did the previous season.