The locking of posts and scrounging for information on Knick trades today poses an interesting question.

What qualifies as an acceptable source to post "The deal is done" or even ask if anyone has access to a source that is reporting it as done? Is WFAN reliable? Is NBATV reliable? What about the annoucement of Dewey winning the presidency over Truman, or how about the announcement of Al Gore winning Florida and the election in 2000 (by major media sources at one point).

Remember the "King Kong" trade of Ewing, which was renneged upon by Detroit? (Oh and ESPN.com, which I suspect most here consider one of the most reliable source announced that one)

I hope I don't get reprimanded for expressing this view because I enjoy reading and posting (once in a while) on this board, but personally, I think the action of locking posts of questions about "official" reports or even reports from news sources is a slippery slope, as I tried to indicate above. If some individuals are "tired" of reading these threads, does that make it necessary to lock their posts? What of those who want to read & respond to them, or haven't been posting all day? Is it an issue of sever space?

In my own case, I was just trying to find out if anyone had heard the same thing. I honestly was not trying to say that it was true or be the "first one" to report anything. I wanted to know if someone could verify the information.

I say let the readers/posters decide if they want to read it, or if the source is reliable. We are intelligent creatures. (I hope..haha) If NBATV says that the Crawford deal is basically done, then should we not be able to decide if it is real or not? The Post and Daily News have been saying a "deal is done" for weeks. Are their reports any more valuable? I don't know.

I guess it probably doesn't matter so much, but I wanted to explain my post after martin's response, but by being locked out I wasn't able to. That was dissapointing. If I am missing a point here, I am open to constructive criticism.

Sorry, didn't see a post with a similar topic. Will this lead to my post being locked?

I love knick fans.

Even argue over the rumors of the news leading to specutlation not cofirmed that proposed exchange is not yet available.

Posted by PresIke:

In my own case, I was just trying to find out if anyone had heard the same thing. I honestly was not trying to say that it was true or be the "first one" to report anything. I wanted to know if someone could verify the information.

I may have been on quick-draw mode with your thread, so no worries. Since there are a bunch of threads on the topic, you may have added this to another thread.

I think there are no reliable rumors, as with Mullin this year and Detroit back in the Ewing deal, teams back out of verbal agreements. But it's usually widely reported when teams have a conference call with the league office to verify a trade.

In my experience though, when Vecsey has said something is a 'done deal' he's usually pretty accurate (say 50%, which is pretty good for rumors). He was the first to report Sheed to Detroit, I believe.

But obviously, don't get too excited until you see the computer graphic of Crawford in a Knicks uniform on ESPN or something...

Posted by crzymdups:

By the way, what was the 'King Kong' trade? I remember the trade to Seattle that involved Vin Baker? Was Detroit involved in that? Please remind me, I love excuses to bitterly remember the Layden era....

The original deal netted us Vin Baker, Glen Rice. We sent Ewing to Seattle, and Dudley to the Lakers. Detroit sent Christian Laettner to the Lakers and Detroit basically got no one who would play, draft picks and cash.

The word got out on the internet about the deal and Detroit sports radio shows went nuts, as the story suppossedly goes. Dumars, as a result of fan backlash, allegedly renegged on the deal, and Ewing wasn't traded for another month, which of course did not involved Baker, and got us Rice, Travis Knight and Luc Longley (who never played a regular season game for us).

What a disaster that was.

i don't think the mods have a problem w/posting questions on what the latest is on the pending rumors, as long as you post them on the topic threads that were already started up dealing w/the topics.

the fact that people find the need to start up a new thread everytime they want an update on the Jamal Crawford situation is probably what they are trying to avoid...that just tends to clutter up the boards.

just my $.02

Posted by TMS:

i don't think the mods have a problem w/posting questions on what the latest is on the pending rumors, as long as you post them on the topic threads that were already started up dealing w/the topics.

the fact that people find the need to start up a new thread everytime they want an update on the Jamal Crawford situation is probably what they are trying to avoid...that just tends to clutter up the boards.

just my $.02

Yeah, those are good points. I'd give you at least $.03 for them