Spurs / Celtics / Pacers make an announcement - doesn't work

[SpursGM-old]

So in essence my part of the trade changed TWICE and I no longer have a say.

No, you did have a say.  You agreed.

Here's the ruling:
- If the Spurs part of the trade remains exactly the same, he has already agreed to it.  To cancel it the Celtics have to agree.
- If the Spurs part of the trade changes whatsoever, Spurs have to re-accept.

What about the once posted and accepted rule.  Yesterday Celtics posted a trade involving Gerald Wallace.  Pacers accepted.  Now that trade has been deleted and that is allowed.  Spurs trade did change to include Gerald Wallace and Spurs did not accept that change.

Celtics even sent this PM to me announcing the change in the trade.

please tell me if the adjusted trade is ok with you. We can change that FA now, but you can sign any FA you prefer over defensive wiz Gerald Wallace (who might fit your SG/SF bill) later without any consequences too.

[NetsGM]

You're part of the trade is now:
furthermore, in deal #2
the Boston Celtics trade
PF Al Jefferson, the lone rider
PG Chase 'The Mover' Prewitt (see, he did it again ... moving)
Blazers 2011 1st round draft pick

to the San Antonio Spurs for
C Etan Thomas
SF Gerald Chapman
Magic 2011 1st round draft pick

Correct?



Is that your originally agreed upon trade?  If yes, then you are held by it.    The reason Pacers and Celtics were working on another is because they didn't have my ruling.

If the current Celtics/Spurs trade is the same as the original Celtics/Spurs trade, you are held to it, because you have already accepted it.

[SpursGM-old]

Special rules for some....Celtics can delete an accepted trade.  Spurs can't.  

[NetsGM]

Special rules?  Hardly.  Their trade was never valid because the only way another trade with different teams can be posted is if the original trade is pronounced dead and 24 hours have gone by.  The 2nd Celtics/Pacers trade was posted because they thought they were screwed out of your end of the deal.  Since they're not, and since the waiting period hasn't gone by, that trade was never valid.

You can flip this either way, you're trying to find a loophole out of a trade you have accepted.  No matter what's gone on since the original post, YOU HAVE ACCEPTED YOUR END OF THE TRADE.  Let's not lose site of that.  If you didn't like the trade, don't accept it.

[CelticsGM]

I don't see any reason to rescind the deal with the Spurs.

First, it is now the same deal as before (whatever ideas there were thrown around inbetween)

Second, it is two seperate deals, that just have/happen to be posted simultaneously. Whatever happens in the other deal has nothing to do with our deal.

And third, I don't like your reason for NOT doing the deal at all, since it's related to what happened AFTER our deal was agreed upon from both sides.

[PacersGM]

i agree to bods and tom. the first trade of Celtics/Spurs have been agreed and could have been done. Only problem was that i didn´t calculated my trade with the celtics right. So i had to change the trade with the celtics. we will find a solution before deadline.

[CelticsGM]

now finally part 1 of this deal could be finalized without cuts. It had to be REWORKED due to salary problems with the original post:

deal # 1:
the Boston Celtics trade
- PG Rocky Elliott
- PG Nathaniel Van Exel
- C Vladimir Stepania
Nets 2011 1st round draft pick

to the Indiana Pacers for
- SF Richard Jefferson
- PG Parker Kidd
- PG Chase Prewitt
Pacers 2011 2nd round draft pick


Celtics agree, waiting for the Pacers to agree ...

[PacersGM]

pacers agree

[KingsGM-old]

YEEEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

       

[CelticsGM]

finally, the reasons(s) for doing this are pretty obvious:

Not only do i get outrebounded 80% of the time, but i'm dead last (by a landslide) in opp rebounds. Hope Thomas can provide some help.

ande RJ i brought in to have a veteran backup behind Manu and Lenard, providing strong defense and some offense at a legit size (the experiment starting Van Exel over Manu did show that good young Nat is too undersized tp perform at SG).

Parker Kidd will back up Chauncey for now, but i'm sure he won't have to carry that burden full time, maybe Escamilla gets a chance now too ...


I'm completely wrecked now btw., gonna get myself a nice cold beer tonight ...
 

[KingsGM-old]

Me too....uh, this is just too much even for the real GM's