|
Post by ducky on Jun 19, 2007 13:26:13 GMT -5
Anyway it doesn't matter. No point in arguing. Nothing will change, I'll be gone, yall will be happy. Whatever.
|
|
|
Post by Bender on Jun 19, 2007 13:26:22 GMT -5
it's a case by case basis . i"m prolly gonna be fired too. spence uses his diiscretion he's a fair man. Besides even if u do get fired u can stay on as an assistant and wait for another job to open up. thta'ss what i'm gonna do. Your gonna have to pry me out of atlanta . The hawks are my pride and joy.
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Jun 19, 2007 13:26:25 GMT -5
I'm confused here. You guys are saying that the Duck should've signed Spree. Uh, did I miss where LeBron and Smith (2 guys that play the same position and are his main core) along with KVH and Christie got traded? The Duck's problem wouldn't have been fixed by maxing out a Spree. There was only one good PG FA. trade him. people like vets, especially when you give him 1 year deals.
|
|
|
Post by ducky on Jun 19, 2007 13:26:51 GMT -5
Dan....your not getting the goddamn point. It's very tough to rebuild from the ground up and have a good team in 4 years when all you have to work with is the draft basically...FA is full of 30+ year old players...it makes no fucking sense to sign 33 year olds to 3 year deals and hurt himself cap wise and just get his teamt o win 35-40 games a year just to appease this rule...he'd be killing his team's future just to satisfy this new 40-win rule. Not to mention, the 40 win rule was established this year, giving me 0 time to actually try to win...
|
|
|
Post by KruPaxson on Jun 19, 2007 13:26:59 GMT -5
You guys make it seem like every single team in the league has to win. Check any sim league. Any real league (NBA, NFL, etc). There are rebuilding teams. Why exactly are we trying to screw them over here? Sorry, having every single team in the league with 40 wins ain't happening. In a four year cycle you should be able to put a 40 win team together. This is not saying every team every year has to win 40. Rebuilding to win at least 40 games in your 4th season is very plausible.
|
|
|
Post by ducky on Jun 19, 2007 13:27:49 GMT -5
You guys make it seem like every single team in the league has to win. Check any sim league. Any real league (NBA, NFL, etc). There are rebuilding teams. Why exactly are we trying to screw them over here? Sorry, having every single team in the league with 40 wins ain't happening. In a four year cycle you should be able to put a 40 win team together. This is not saying every team every year has to win 40. Rebuilding to win at least 40 games in your 4th season is very plausible. Why would I though, when I could stay young, and potentiall land a team with Paul/Bron/Dwight. why? I don't understand your logic!
|
|
|
Post by nybombers3 on Jun 19, 2007 13:27:50 GMT -5
I'm confused here. You guys are saying that the Duck should've signed Spree. Uh, did I miss where LeBron and Smith (2 guys that play the same position and are his main core) along with KVH and Christie got traded? The Duck's problem wouldn't have been fixed by maxing out a Spree. There was only one good PG FA. trade him. people like vets, especially when you give him 1 year deals. To where? For what? Rebuilding pieces? He can't do that.
|
|
|
Post by aaron2344 on Jun 19, 2007 13:27:57 GMT -5
Anyway it doesn't matter. No point in arguing. Nothing will change, I'll be gone, yall will be happy. Whatever. i thought the situation is looked at. if the person doesn't reach 40, spence looks at the team as a whole, is this wrong?
|
|
|
Post by duce on Jun 19, 2007 13:28:02 GMT -5
I don't know if this argument is even on topic anymore. If in fact only 10% of great star players leave then that's not going to solve much at all in terms of winning 40 games or being out.
|
|
|
Post by ducky on Jun 19, 2007 13:28:21 GMT -5
You guys make it seem like every single team in the league has to win. Check any sim league. Any real league (NBA, NFL, etc). There are rebuilding teams. Why exactly are we trying to screw them over here? Sorry, having every single team in the league with 40 wins ain't happening. In a four year cycle you should be able to put a 40 win team together. This is not saying every team every year has to win 40. Rebuilding to win at least 40 games in your 4th season is very plausible. Not when you give me 1 seasons notice when I've been trying to stay young and build a sick team for the future.
|
|
|
Post by cjmjones008 on Jun 19, 2007 13:28:22 GMT -5
rebuilding should not take more than 4 seasons in a sim league, if it does you are a bad gm and should be fired. dont complain that their is not enough talent in fa to make you win games when your WHOLE PLAN was to lose every game those years Well it will take more than 4 seasons if there is a max rule. That's what my whole argument is! it took me 2 years...
|
|
|
Post by nova on Jun 19, 2007 13:28:27 GMT -5
I agree with Duce, the 40-win rule should not be retroactive...not at all fair to rebuilding teams since it was just now implemented.
|
|
|
Post by ducky on Jun 19, 2007 13:28:52 GMT -5
Anyway it doesn't matter. No point in arguing. Nothing will change, I'll be gone, yall will be happy. Whatever. i thought the situation is looked at. if the person doesn't reach 40, spence looks at the team as a whole, is this wrong? What do you mean?
|
|
|
Post by nybombers3 on Jun 19, 2007 13:29:00 GMT -5
You guys make it seem like every single team in the league has to win. Check any sim league. Any real league (NBA, NFL, etc). There are rebuilding teams. Why exactly are we trying to screw them over here? Sorry, having every single team in the league with 40 wins ain't happening. In a four year cycle you should be able to put a 40 win team together. This is not saying every team every year has to win 40. Rebuilding to win at least 40 games in your 4th season is very plausible. I'm not disagreeing with this. What if your in your 1st or 2nd though? FA still sucks ass and the only way you can build up is with picks.
|
|
|
Post by ducky on Jun 19, 2007 13:29:28 GMT -5
Well it will take more than 4 seasons if there is a max rule. That's what my whole argument is! it took me 2 years... Cuz you got lucky and landed Marbz!!!!!!!!!!!!! ahhh you guys are fucking crazy. Basically when there is finally a star on the FA market, one guy gets lucky, and look how his team turns out.
|
|
|
Post by ducky on Jun 19, 2007 13:29:59 GMT -5
In a four year cycle you should be able to put a 40 win team together. This is not saying every team every year has to win 40. Rebuilding to win at least 40 games in your 4th season is very plausible. I'm not disagreeing with this. What if your in your 1st or 2nd though? FA still sucks ass and the only way you can build up is with picks. Which is what I did. And what other GMs did in the past and it paid off.
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Jun 19, 2007 13:30:04 GMT -5
Dan....your not getting the goddamn point. It's very tough to rebuild from the ground up and have a good team in 4 years when all you have to work with is the draft basically...FA is full of 30+ year old players...it makes no fucking sense to sign 33 year olds to 3 year deals and hurt himself cap wise and just get his teamt o win 35-40 games a year just to appease this rule...he'd be killing his team's future just to satisfy this new 40-win rule. I traded away my guys to get alot of picks in last years drafts and ones in teh past. I draft Deng, Jameer Nelson Andris Biedrins. Then I traded those two for Marbury, I managed to get richard jefferson and with that Jrich. Its not that hard to build a team through the draft and FA and trading in four years my friend. This is your first week here.
|
|
|
Post by duce on Jun 19, 2007 13:30:33 GMT -5
Anyway it doesn't matter. No point in arguing. Nothing will change, I'll be gone, yall will be happy. Whatever. i thought the situation is looked at. if the person doesn't reach 40, spence looks at the team as a whole, is this wrong? I sure hope he looks at ducky's situation differently, for reasons I've been posting. I'm sure if ducky was aware of all this he may have drafted older players outside of LeBron.
|
|
|
Post by ducky on Jun 19, 2007 13:32:28 GMT -5
i thought the situation is looked at. if the person doesn't reach 40, spence looks at the team as a whole, is this wrong? I sure hope he looks at ducky's situation differently, for reasons I've been posting. I'm sure if ducky was aware of all this he may have drafted older players outside of LeBron. Thank you duce. This is what I'm getting at. Look at what DJ did through tanking many years to get top picks. I was using the same approach. There was no reason for me not to. I still tried to sign the best in FA, but I didn't want to sign old guys and ruin my chance of future success. But now with this new rule, I was basically forced to sign unwanted FAs, mess up my entire rebuilding situation. So now my whole team is a mess.
|
|
|
Post by garf2000 on Jun 19, 2007 13:35:01 GMT -5
4 years to rebuild... you sign FAs and trade them for picks in the next year or two. you then trade those picks for good players. if you cant do that in 4 years, there is a problem, and the problem IS NOT the bbs rules.
|
|
|
Post by ducky on Jun 19, 2007 13:35:29 GMT -5
4 years to rebuild... you sign FAs and trade them for picks in the next year or two. you then trade those picks for good players. if you cant do that in 4 years, there is a problem, and the problem IS NOT the bbs rules. Your right, the problem is the short notice.
|
|
|
Post by ducky on Jun 19, 2007 13:36:23 GMT -5
4 years to rebuild... you sign FAs and trade them for picks in the next year or two. you then trade those picks for good players. if you cant do that in 4 years, there is a problem, and the problem IS NOT the bbs rules. But still, look at this years and last years FA. The best players have been dally and Joe Smith... And they aren't even starters on some teams. And I'd probably have to do like 10mil/4year deals. Just doesn't make sense
|
|
|
Post by Bender on Jun 19, 2007 13:37:28 GMT -5
well in my opinion your looking at it the wrong way. i had to trade aa star to get a better star because it made my team better. do u think i really wanted to trade francis hell it took me 6 seasons to do it. but the opportunity to get jermaine o neal presented itself and i thought about which team would be better so i stuck with it. now you have a choice . you have three great young players in lbj josh smith and livingston. you dont need all three hell u only need one in my opinion and thats lbj so shop them around see what offers themselves u dont have to trade them but see whats out there. maybe u could get a nice big to go wit lebron. the season is still fresh i dont understand why ur putting dirt on ur grave after the first sim especially when u went 4 and 3
|
|
|
Post by garf2000 on Jun 19, 2007 13:37:30 GMT -5
the whole reason why the rule was implemented was so you couldnt build a dynasty completely around tanking, like some people have done over the past couple of years (real years, not bbs years)
|
|
|
Post by KruPaxson on Jun 19, 2007 13:37:52 GMT -5
First off Ducky, it's not 1 season's notice. The rule has been in place but you don't think you were on thin ice anyways???
You could have easily signed players to help you improve. You've made countless bad decision after bad decision. Like I stated earlier giving 15 mil 1 yr deals is bad! Hard to trade and you could have gotten them for nearly 50% of that contract.
Lets look at this This offseason.... Have... Primoz Brezec 35 mil 4 yr deal Nazr Muhammad 30 mil 3 yr deal
Could have had.... Keith Closs 5 mil 1 yr deal
Last offseason....
Had... KVH 1 yr 15 mil deal
Could have had... Jose Calderon 3 yr 12 mil deal
If you would have invested in smarter contracts you could have easily stocked up draft picks into your reserve while still maintaining liquid salary and wait to make your big splash in free agency. You've had countless opportunities to MAX a MAX worthy player, which I'm sure some you've missed out on which is expected. Calderon could command 1-2 firsts pending on situation and need but what could a 15mil KVH command....nothing. You weren't wise in anything you did and you set yourself up for disaster. Andy and Duce can argue in your favor of the 40 win rule being unfair but in actuality it's not even a matter about 40 wins it's about where you have ran this franchise and that is in the ground.
|
|