|
MIL/POR
Sept 26, 2010 15:50:30 GMT -5
Post by grannydanger - former Bucks on Sept 26, 2010 15:50:30 GMT -5
Portland TrailBlazers Send: 2012 2nd (TOR) 2013 2nd (LAL)
Milwaukee Bucks send: 2013 1st (MIL)
Accept, picks will be close in range and my team is too old to wait.
|
|
|
MIL/POR
Sept 26, 2010 15:55:29 GMT -5
Post by Marco's Blazers on Sept 26, 2010 15:55:29 GMT -5
I accept. I am willing to wait an extra season for a higher pick.
|
|
|
MIL/POR
Sept 26, 2010 16:30:16 GMT -5
Post by San Antonio Spurs on Sept 26, 2010 16:30:16 GMT -5
Unless you purchased a crystal ball off of EBAY how are you so certain that the "picks will be close in range and my team is too old to wait."
Please elaborate otherwise I will respectfully abstain from voting on this trade since a 1st for a 2nd unless one is certain -- like 100 percent positive -- that the 1st will be in bottom five and the second in the top five just is illogical.
Regards.
|
|
|
MIL/POR
Sept 26, 2010 16:45:46 GMT -5
Post by San Antonio Spurs on Sept 26, 2010 16:45:46 GMT -5
Bucks, this is such an unorthodox and unusual trade that at the very least you should have that first lottery protected. Imagine if your 2013 season is not what you envision, you have now traded a lottery pick for a useless 2nd rounder.
Regards.
|
|
|
MIL/POR
Sept 26, 2010 16:46:21 GMT -5
Post by grannydanger - former Bucks on Sept 26, 2010 16:46:21 GMT -5
Just like I said, my team is old but good so I dont really care about a 2013 pick. And Toronto will still be developing in 2012.
|
|
|
MIL/POR
Sept 26, 2010 16:55:29 GMT -5
Post by grannydanger - former Bucks on Sept 26, 2010 16:55:29 GMT -5
Ok it might have been a bad deal (new to this and didn't really expect a 2013 pick to have any value). Blazers agreed to iclude LA 2013 2nd round pick
|
|
|
MIL/POR
Sept 26, 2010 16:56:44 GMT -5
Post by Marco's Blazers on Sept 26, 2010 16:56:44 GMT -5
That's fine with me.
|
|
|
MIL/POR
Sept 26, 2010 20:08:57 GMT -5
Post by Detroit Pistons on Sept 26, 2010 20:08:57 GMT -5
Reject...sorry i find this uneven. will not get my vote. dont try to convince.
|
|
|
MIL/POR
Sept 26, 2010 20:21:36 GMT -5
Post by Marco's Blazers on Sept 26, 2010 20:21:36 GMT -5
Reject...sorry i find this uneven. will not get my vote. dont try to convince. It is really ok. It is your job to reject a deal that you find rejectable. I will just save the troubles and move this to the rejected section, LOL. I agree with the argument that Spurs pointed out over AIM saying that trades like don't usually happen and if they do, the 1st pick is heavily protected.
|
|