Blazers / Magic

Post Completed Trades Here

Moderators: UOducksTK1, Zyme, lukeyrid13, Oregon Ownage

Post Reply
User avatar
lukeyrid13
All-American
Posts: 10475
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 12:58 am
GM: Portland TrailBlazers

Blazers / Magic

Post by lukeyrid13 »

Magic trade
Isiah rider

Blazers trade
Chris smith
Thor azario
97 1st (top 4 protected)
User avatar
Boom
All Pac-12
Posts: 5805
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 10:32 pm
GM: Houston Rockets

Re: Blazers / Magic

Post by Boom »

Seems a little early for the Magic to punt on Rider.
User avatar
FlDuckFan
All Pac-12
Posts: 5068
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 2:45 am
GM: Orlando Magic GM
Location: Florida

Re: Blazers / Magic (Not Processed)

Post by FlDuckFan »

Thought I replied to this . Accept.

Rider can be nice but the future is far enough in the future I'm happy.
User avatar
Oregon Ownage
All-American
Posts: 15301
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 9:40 am
GM: Dallas Mavericks
Location: Hampton Roads, Virginia

Re: Blazers / Magic (Not Processed)

Post by Oregon Ownage »

lukeyrid13 wrote:Magic trade
Isiah rider

Blazers trade
Chris smith
Thor azario
97 1st (top 4 protected)
Top 4 protected forever?
Image
User avatar
Oregon Ownage
All-American
Posts: 15301
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 9:40 am
GM: Dallas Mavericks
Location: Hampton Roads, Virginia

Re: Blazers / Magic (Not Processed)

Post by Oregon Ownage »

I HATE PROTECTIONS WHEN THE TEAM GIVING AWAY THE PICK HAS NOTHING TO LOSE

In '97 Rider will still be on his rookie deal and Blazers gave up no one of note, so why the protection? Makes no sense

Processed
Image
User avatar
lukeyrid13
All-American
Posts: 10475
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 12:58 am
GM: Portland TrailBlazers

Re: Blazers / Magic

Post by lukeyrid13 »

I didn’t specify in my messages to the Magic

So I’d say technically speaking it should only be in 97
User avatar
lukeyrid13
All-American
Posts: 10475
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 12:58 am
GM: Portland TrailBlazers

Re: Blazers / Magic (Not Processed)

Post by lukeyrid13 »

Oregon Ownage wrote:I HATE PROTECTIONS WHEN THE TEAM GIVING AWAY THE PICK HAS NOTHING TO LOSE

In '97 Rider will still be on his rookie deal and Blazers gave up no one of note, so why the protection? Makes no sense

Processed
I mean from my side, top 4 helps protect if I got random lotto luck
User avatar
Oregon Ownage
All-American
Posts: 15301
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 9:40 am
GM: Dallas Mavericks
Location: Hampton Roads, Virginia

Re: Blazers / Magic (Not Processed)

Post by Oregon Ownage »

lukeyrid13 wrote:
Oregon Ownage wrote:I HATE PROTECTIONS WHEN THE TEAM GIVING AWAY THE PICK HAS NOTHING TO LOSE

In '97 Rider will still be on his rookie deal and Blazers gave up no one of note, so why the protection? Makes no sense

Processed
I mean from my side, top 4 helps protect if I got random lotto luck
So you can eat your cake too? So in the event you get lucky and jump into the top 4, you keep the pick and player? You have no risk in this scenario. Trading a future pick is a gamble.

Im not attacking you just struggling to see why this is acceptable. Protections, in my mind, are used when factors outside your control can be in play (player leaves in FA, if a team wins a title, etc.) or used as a sweetener (additional pick with minor protections).
Image
bellsduck
Senior
Posts: 3851
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 12:40 am
GM: Utah Jazz

Re: Blazers / Magic (Not Processed)

Post by bellsduck »

Oregon Ownage wrote:
lukeyrid13 wrote:
Oregon Ownage wrote:I HATE PROTECTIONS WHEN THE TEAM GIVING AWAY THE PICK HAS NOTHING TO LOSE

In '97 Rider will still be on his rookie deal and Blazers gave up no one of note, so why the protection? Makes no sense

Processed
I mean from my side, top 4 helps protect if I got random lotto luck
So you can eat your cake too? So in the event you get lucky and jump into the top 4, you keep the pick and player? You have no risk in this scenario. Trading a future pick is a gamble.

Im not attacking you just struggling to see why this is acceptable. Protections, in my mind, are used when factors outside your control can be in play (player leaves in FA, if a team wins a title, etc.) or used as a sweetener (additional pick with minor protections).
Agree with this 100%.
Hate protections in scenarios like this. It's probably why I've made so little trades as I have over the years. Everyone wants these protections, so what's the upside.
User avatar
FlDuckFan
All Pac-12
Posts: 5068
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 2:45 am
GM: Orlando Magic GM
Location: Florida

Re: Blazers / Magic

Post by FlDuckFan »

I am terrible at this.
Post Reply