What's new

Nobody talkin about Dajievic for Shan Foster

Is he under contract? Looking at his four years in college he was a dynamite three point shooter every year. So we pick up three long-distance guys in one day? So was the San Antonio series the straw that broke the camel's back on seeing us get our *** kicked by the three point shot on both ends of the floor?
 
So help me speculate here. Last night KOC is telling Spence & Locke that they had two guys on their board when it came time to pick at #47 a pf and a sg, the pf (Furkan? OQuinn? Hummel?) was ranked higher but they figured they had enough pf with Favors and Millsapp and wondered if he could make the team so they went for a sg. But the framework for the Mo trade was already in place so they knew they were getting Foster. So they now have 4 pgs, 4 sgs (Hayward, burks, Murphy, Foster, no vet?) no sf and then Al, Favors, Milsapp and Turk to play big. And everyone is talking about trading Al---why didn't they draft the higher rated pf?
 
So help me speculate here. Last night KOC is telling Spence & Locke that they had two guys on their board when it came time to pick at #47 a pf and a sg, the pf (Furkan? OQuinn? Hummel?) was ranked higher but they figured they had enough pf with Favors and Millsapp and wondered if he could make the team so they went for a sg. But the framework for the Mo trade was already in place so they knew they were getting Foster. So they now have 4 pgs, 4 sgs (Hayward, burks, Murphy, Foster, no vet?) no sf and then Al, Favors, Milsapp and Turk to play big. And everyone is talking about trading Al---why didn't they draft the higher rated pf?

because we love unbalancedness

4 pg. 4 sg. 4 pf.

seriously... what else would you want
 
Does anyone really think that he will even see the light of day on the court? I don't know why they did the trade unless they needed to include some real asset to make it work, but really? He was 'drafted' four years ago! And he probably went to most of his college years too, so he is already in the middle of his 'prime' and he hasn't even seen the court in the NBA.

I'm not sure of all of the details, but I'm pretty sure that getting excited about this guy is even more far fetched then getting excited about our 47'th pick.
 
Does anyone really think that he will even see the light of day on the court? I don't know why they did the trade unless they needed to include some real asset to make it work, but really? He was 'drafted' four years ago! And he probably went to most of his college years too, so he is already in the middle of his 'prime' and he hasn't even seen the court in the NBA.

I'm not sure of all of the details, but I'm pretty sure that getting excited about this guy is even more far fetched then getting excited about our 47'th pick.

So what you're saying is that we've upgraded our two spot?
 
So help me speculate here. Last night KOC is telling Spence & Locke that they had two guys on their board when it came time to pick at #47 a pf and a sg, the pf (Furkan? OQuinn? Hummel?) was ranked higher but they figured they had enough pf with Favors and Millsapp and wondered if he could make the team so they went for a sg. But the framework for the Mo trade was already in place so they knew they were getting Foster. So they now have 4 pgs, 4 sgs (Hayward, burks, Murphy, Foster, no vet?) no sf and then Al, Favors, Milsapp and Turk to play big. And everyone is talking about trading Al---why didn't they draft the higher rated pf?
I heard the opposite in the interview I listened to w/ KOC. He said they had four players in the tier, two were selected before #47 and they took the highest remaining. And I'm not sure they knew they were getting Foster - or if that really matters. The trade was agreed to in principle, but likely both teams said they'd exchange a player TBD. That may not have even been in discussion until Houston piggybacked their deal. Why Houston jumped aboard, I'm not really sure, but it must have been advantageous to someone under the terms of the CBA.
 
How about KOC tells Dallas "are you serious? Yeah, we LIKE Mo, but we don't need him, we're building for the future, and you need us to facilitate grabbing our former franchise player. You need to cough something up, and Peter Fehse ain't cutting it, *******."?
 
How about KOC tells Dallas "are you serious? Yeah, we LIKE Mo, but we don't need him, we're building for the future, and you need us to facilitate grabbing our former franchise player. You need to cough something up, and Peter Fehse ain't cutting it, *******."?

You mad? I ain't hatin' .. sincerely curious.
 
How about KOC tells Dallas "are you serious? Yeah, we LIKE Mo, but we don't need him, we're building for the future, and you need us to facilitate grabbing our former franchise player. You need to cough something up, and Peter Fehse ain't cutting it, *******."?

Then Dallas says "Nah, this deal only saves us 2.3 million dollars. We just want this POS off our team for the sake of him being off the team. You are getting a former All-Star PG for free, stop being greedy.".
 
Maybe KOC will go Kahn on sgs:

David Locke: Likely the Bulls don't pick up the option on Kyle Korver. Jazz liked everything about Korver other than the $$ Bulls were offering. 1 minute ago
 
You mad? I ain't hatin' .. sincerely curious.
I think we're divided into two camps:
1) posters like Numberica and billy shelby who believe we didn't really need Mo and should have walked away from the deal if we didn't get more
2) those who hope this is a precursor to other deals and we needed a PG like Mo before trading Harris. If this is the case, then KOC may not have wanted to press any further.

Personally, I'm in the latter camp. KOC is the Ross Perot of GM's. He measures twice (or four times) before cutting once. How many deals has he turned down already because he didn't feel enough value was offered or it didn't make the team better or he didn't like the long-term contracts? Well, this deal he liked. And right now he has the team, both financially and personnel-wise on track. He has some good young talent and no long-term absurd contracts. I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt.
 
Maybe KOC will go Kahn on sgs:

David Locke: Likely the Bulls don't pick up the option on Kyle Korver. Jazz liked everything about Korver other than the $$ Bulls were offering. 1 minute ago

And the fact he decided his personal goals (the 3-pt record) was more important than taking shots when the Jazz needed his scoring. No thanks.
 
I think we're divided into two camps:
1) posters like Numberica and billy shelby who believe we didn't really need Mo and should have walked away from the deal if we didn't get more
2) those who hope this is a precursor to other deals and we needed a PG like Mo before trading Harris. If this is the case, then KOC may not have wanted to press any further.

Personally, I'm in the latter camp. KOC is the Ross Perot of GM's. He measures twice (or four times) before cutting once. How many deals has he turned down already because he didn't feel enough value was offered or it didn't make the team better or he didn't like the long-term contracts? Well, this deal he liked. And right now he has the team, both financially and personnel-wise on track. He has some good young talent and no long-term absurd contracts. I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt.

Cool. I'm in between.. I'm okay with the move, period .. if KOC is. But then, my guess is that there's more to the story, which makes me by far happier. (and that's what KOC is paid to do .. make me happy.)
 
Back
Top