Déjà vu

[blackice]

This move will either be vindicated or denounced depending on if SAC wins a title this season.

So 100% SAC would have won a Title with Durant?

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. With Durant he'd have a higher chance of winning, there's no 100% either way obviously. If he wins without Durant the move is vindicated, if he doesn't those saying he should have tried to sign Durant will say IF he had Durant he would have had a much better chance of winning.

[NuggOlesk]

This move will either be vindicated or denounced depending on if SAC wins a title this season.

So 100% SAC would have won a Title with Durant?

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. With Durant he'd have a higher chance of winning, there's no 100% either way obviously. If he wins without Durant the move is vindicated, if he doesn't those saying he should have tried to sign Durant will say IF he had Durant he would have had a much better chance of winning.

But you are denounced his move if he doesn't win a Title this season?

Then what about every team that had cap space, but didn't offer Durant max? They had a chance he would have signed! If they don't do good next season, they should be denounced also for not making the offer!

[blackice]

But you are denounced his move if he doesn't win a Title this season?

Then what about every team that had cap space, but didn't offer Durant max? They had a chance he would have signed! If they don't do good next season, they should be denounced also for not making the offer!

1. Denouncing the move, not the GM (i.e they should be denounced, etc.)
2. SAC clearly had a shot at Durant and chose not to pursue him by pulling out with the explanation that they were good enough without him and want to grow internally. This may be true and I admire the approach but if they don't win a title GM's will say, and justifiably so, that with Durant they would have had a better shot at winning one. A fairly simple notion.
3. Durant may have not signed with SAC but there was a good chance. That cannot be said for all teams with caproom.
4. If you equate what I said to meaning all those with max room that didn't put in an offer for Durant should be denounced (again I was talking about the move and not the GM) then so be it. You don't understand my point which is fine.

[NuggOlesk]

They should be denounced also for not making the offer!

1. Denouncing the move, not the GM (i.e they should be denounced, etc.)
2. SAC clearly had a shot at Durant and chose not to pursue him by pulling out with the explanation that they were good enough without him and want to grow internally. This may be true and I admire the approach but if they don't win a title GM's will say, and justifiably so, that with Durant they would have had a better shot at winning one. A fairly simple notion.
3. Durant may have not signed with SAC but there was a good chance. That cannot be said for all teams with caproom.
4. If you equate what I said to meaning all those with max room that didn't put in an offer for Durant should be denounced (again I was talking about the move and not the GM) then so be it. You don't understand my point which is fine.

1. LOL, dissing a move or GM is the same thing, as the GM did the move
2. I think everybody has said things and then not done it, I with Griffin and other stuff...maybe you haven't.. mr. not trading Wade
3. I think NY with Griffin and PHI with deep team also had chance!
4. I did understand lol, I think you didn't understand, as I also said they sould be denounced for their move (making an offer = a move) !

[Dennis]

bt is a noob

[blackice]

They should be denounced also for not making the offer!

1. Denouncing the move, not the GM (i.e they should be denounced, etc.)
2. SAC clearly had a shot at Durant and chose not to pursue him by pulling out with the explanation that they were good enough without him and want to grow internally. This may be true and I admire the approach but if they don't win a title GM's will say, and justifiably so, that with Durant they would have had a better shot at winning one. A fairly simple notion.
3. Durant may have not signed with SAC but there was a good chance. That cannot be said for all teams with caproom.
4. If you equate what I said to meaning all those with max room that didn't put in an offer for Durant should be denounced (again I was talking about the move and not the GM) then so be it. You don't understand my point which is fine.

1. LOL, dissing a move or GM is the same thing, as the GM did the move
2. I think everybody has said things and then not done it, I with Griffin and other stuff...maybe you haven't.. mr. not trading Wade
3. I think NY with Griffin and PHI with deep team also had chance!
4. I did understand lol, I think you didn't understand, as I also said they sould be denounced for their move (making an offer = a move) !

Ok, I don't wanna go back and forth but...

1. Dissing and denouncing are two different things. As an aside, if I say you made a bad move in a deal because of xyz that's different then attacking you personally, saying for example that you have no idea how to value assets or build a team.
2. Right. I'm not saying SAC should be punished for saying something and not doing it, I merely pointed out that if he wins a title without Durant he'll be vindicated.
3. From my understanding SAC made an offer to Durant and then pulled it with the explanation that he wanted to build internally. I admire the move. Not sure NYK or PHI did the same.
4. I explained my position and you keep falling on that point. That's your opinion, as this is mine. Both entitled to them.

[NuggOlesk]

I just didn't understand where you took the GM part, I also talked about the move.
But as you started talking GM, I just followed, and in this context it didn't matter if it was a diss or denouncing, I replaced them on purpose.

I have no problem with what SAC did, don't really care if others don't like it, just funny how much posts this kind of topic gets

[Jaboo]

Shocking if true.

[Sun Scorched]

Man, I was looking forward to this.

But I understand the logic - it's why we didn't pursue Durant last season also.

Love you bt.

[emplep7]

I would love to see Durant on the Kings and to see all of us scramble to keep up with the arms race.

[Marcos_Beck]

I would love to see Durant on the Kings and to see all of us scramble to keep up with the arms race.

I could trade you Rose, Horford and Noah and maybe a Rose Kemba KCP Horford Noah team can win against them. Then we would share the ring and the banner.

[emplep7]

I would love to see Durant on the Kings and to see all of us scramble to keep up with the arms race.

I could trade you Rose, Horford and Noah and maybe a Rose Kemba KCP Horford Noah team can win against them. Then we would share the ring and the banner.

Haha that might actually be the only way to stop them.

[NuggOlesk]

I would have liked to see Durant and Griffin duo.

[bt]

Not saying we're good enough to win without him but we're a contender.

Plus, it was a super long shot with this engine anyway. Greed reigns supreme and it's tough with limited raises and no 5th year.

[bt]

Man, I was looking forward to this.

But I understand the logic - it's why we didn't pursue Durant last season also.

Love you bt.

Actually, you were the original. You pulled out and we followed last season and again this season

[bt]

bt is a noob