Magic-Celtics [sorry pacers]

[HeatGM]

tom has good points..

for me, pacers and magic gm should have made a thread and post it like:

Pacers:
expirings (try to sign from FA)

for

Magic:
Dwight

then that would be considered a final agreement...according to tom's post...pacers said he would try to sign...and trying means its not final either....

[PacersGM]

oh, and I would LOVE, absolutely LOVE to see someone sign Shane Wedge to a $13.140.000 mill 2yr deal.
I wonder how long the Magic would have to uphold this joke of a deal then.

well you got your wish. but don´t worry i took care if that scenario would take place. i have enough expirings now to make the deal. in fact you did me a favor with your wish.

[CelticsGM]

let's see how long that arrogance will prevail

[PacersGM]

let's see how long that arrogance will prevail

what kind of arrogance????
i just took care in the conversation with magic that the deal could also be done without shane.
in fact it would have been pretty difficult to manage the cap with signing shane.

[PacersGM]

tom has good points..

for me, pacers and magic gm should have made a thread and post it like:

Pacers:
expirings (try to sign from FA)

for

Magic:
Dwight

then that would be considered a final agreement...according to tom's post...pacers said he would try to sign...and trying means its not final either....

sorry heat can´t understand your view. We never ever posted sign and trades before they happened. In fact if i have an agreement the deal is done for me. If you want to get out of it ask at least.

[CelticsGM]

as if anybody ever was let out of a deal where he get's ripped, just because he found a better deal for his team before it was posted.
hasn't happened before, will never happen.


Unfortunately ...

[NetsGM]

according to tom's post...pacers said he would try to sign...and trying means its not final either....

For the last time.  Pacers and Magic discussed specific players.  It was not "I'll try to get expirings".

Furthermore, IF someone does say "I'll trade you so and so for expirings, anyone", and they agree to that, it is binding without names.  Both parties have agreed to those conditions.

as if anybody ever was let out of a deal where he get's ripped, just because he found a better deal for his team before it was posted.
hasn't happened before, will never happen.


Unfortunately ...

You're right.  It never will happen.  Unfortunately for some reason you're unable (or, more likely, unwilling) to comprehend why it shouldn't happen.

When someone agrees to a trade, that affects the future decision making of the other GM.  If I offer a trade, and the other guy says he accepts it, then I'm going to base my next moves on the assumptions that this trade is going through.  As I said in my first post on this matter, what happens if you agree to a sign and trade, I then sign those players to the contracts YOU wanted, then you decide to take someone elses offer?  Yeah, you may have gotten a better deal, but if we don't enforce the original agreement, you've now screwed the league.

Here's a novel idea.  If you don't like the trade, or if you want to continue to explore the trade market, DON'T FUCKING AGREE TO THE DEAL.

[CelticsGM]

Yes, unfortunately ... it would mean you would have to talk to people and have mutual understanding of each others needs.

Imagine somebody telling you: "Hey, I think I made a mistake prematurely agreeing to our deal, could you please let me out of it, I found another deal that will benefit the future of my team more than this one"
And you answer would be: "Hey, no problem, you got to do what's best for your team, I understand that"

Wouldn't that be nice to happen ?


Honestly, how many GMs here would say that 2nd sentence when we just aquired a 30ppg All-teamer and former MVP for a couple of expirings ?

As you stated, never will happen. Which I think is a mirror of today's society ... and unfortunate.

[NetsGM]

It has nothing to do with "talking to people and have mutual understanding of each others needs."

This argument is crap, Tom.  And I'm pretty sure you know it is, but you're just carrying on because you wanted Dwight.  I almost feel like I shouldn't indulge you.

As I've said probably 15 times now, when you agree to a trade, it affects the other person in the deal.  This is the PERFECT example of why you should be bound to your agreement.  If Pacers had gone ahead and signed those players Magic wanted, it would have been completely and utterly unfair for Magic to be able to back out of an agreement. 

What you're saying is a mirror of today's society.  "Hey, I know we agreed to something, and I know I'm going to screw you by backing out of it, and I know you don't want those players that you signed as part of our agreement, and now you're stuck with them, and I know you made personnel moves based on our decision, but I changed my mind.  I have to do what's best for MY team, afterall.  I mean, why should I take responsibility for the decision I made?".

In fact, that last statement you made pretty much just made my point.  Thanks.

If you step back on it, and look at it from the league's perspective, not your own, you'd know that I am right.

[CelticsGM]

of course you are right.

of course the other GM has the best for his team (a title?) in his mind too, and of course that's the reason such a "deal cancelling" won't happen. but that doesn't mean you can't ask, and with lesser deals you even could succeed.

That's why i asked, who would allow the other team to back out. Myself, most likely I wouldn't, even when knowing the other team (trade partner) is hurt more by keeping this trade up than it would hurt me cancelling it. But that's because i'm too much part of this society ...

... and in this society we're trained a "ME FIRST" attitude from the time we make our first steps.



But I wish it were different. I wish I were different, more open-minded and understanding towards others. Call me old-fashioned, a dreamer, I don't care, but I know i would enjoy living in that other world more.


(btw, if the international perception of the modern-day US is on target, I don't expect you Americans to understand one iota of what i'm talking about here ...)
 

[CelticsGM]

maybe that "Magic-Celtics [sorry pacers]" post should be moved to "Off Topic discussion".
it's not close to a "Completed trade " anyway ...

[NetsGM]

The point ends up being that if you agree to something, you've agreed to it. With Big Mike, I had discussions with a handful of teams concurrently. It's a pain, but each PM I had to communicate a non-commital approach while I was negotiating until I got the offer I liked. So I used language like "so, something like this...." or "would you be willing to consider this..' They are much different than "Ok, I'll do that", of "I agree." And when I communicated this way to the team who ended up NOT getting him, he followed all along and understood quite clearly. All it takes in the end is a quick PM to the other teams saying that you're going in another direction.

And besides, where's Magic in all this - he was more a part of it than Tom was?  

Oh, and go Nets go! And Celtics are going down!! (Tom, I still want to get a good rivalry going). And Hornets - I'm coming after you!

[NetsGM]

Now tom goes into his patronizing tone.

Tom, you don't know shit about me or the life I live.  So let's not even go there. 

Disregarding your little jab, your point is flawed.  In this scenario, MagicGM is the one looking out for himself. The view you support (I found a better deal, I don't care if it screws over PacersGM, I'm backing out of my agreement) is the one who's selfish and not thinking about others.

This is a matter of precedent.  By allowing Magic to back out of the deal, and thus screwing over PacersGM royally, it leaves the door open for others to do the same in the future.  There is ALWAYS a victim when an agreed to deal is backed out of even though both sides reached an agreement. 

Tom, don't sit here and lecture me on me not being able to understand, when you're sitting here arguing entirely for your cause with little regard to everyone else it's affecting.  You can take YOUR me first, condescending attitude and shove it up your ass.  You absolutely amaze me how when it affects you, you think about yourself first.  I'm sorry, but that's the way it is.  You might have your soap box and pipe dream, but at least on SSBA, you're about as self-serving as it comes.

[MagicGM]

lo and behold I am here. read third paragraph starting below for being mum.

first anD foremost, i believe we were always told what has been agreed on the completed trade boards is the deal.

secondly, in the deal pacers sent me, it never involved finley. i'm looking at the deal he pm'd me he mentioned about using money to buy an exception. but never did we talk about jim finley, nor did he pay an exception on the deal posteD.

so trade would be:

expiring (shane)

for

mark

and

howard
for
caleb, dumars and 024th

plus an exception has to be buyed.

it could be that we have to do the trades on different days since i don´t know when these guys will sign with me. please agree to this pm so we have a deal. if one part of the deal can´t be done because i couldn´t sign the expirings the whole deal has to be done with different expirings.
for example i could make finley expring and send him to you for mark if shane isn´t signing with my team. i am sure caleb will because i will offer him max but shane could be a problem.

sure sure. I started this problem. and I'm not in the position to tell whats wrong and right now. I just want to show you the cause for my statements below.

third, right now, I don't even care what I'm getting anymore in dealing dwight, hence the posting of my agreement on the pacers deal even if it did involved finley. there are certain reasons why, and I do not wish to divulge them in public.

[KingsGM-old]

Now tom goes into his patronizing tone.

I can't belive he wrote that.