View Single Post
  #27  
Old 12-19-12, 11:09 AM
WILLTHETHRILL's Avatar
WILLTHETHRILL WILLTHETHRILL is offline
Herman Cain of the board
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Live Oak,Texas
Posts: 3,898

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uwe Blab View Post
Again, GS saying "they were leaning towards keeping him" (directly from your article), doesn't say they were excited to get him. It means they weren't sure what to do with him. And the fact that they jumped at the chance to trade him for what seems like an unbalanced return (RJ for 3 more years at 10 mil per) just says that they were happy to get rid of him. As far as ownership, fine. Great research. That doesn't mean that erases the past, even the recent past, like a few weeks before he got traded. And for the record, I'm not even complaining about his behavior here. I just think he's overrated, could be a good trade piece this year to bring in someone else.

You have an opinion and I have an opinion. Neither of us are right because we don't know what was said behind closed doors. We are both guessing. I realize that and you don't.
I said they did it for salary purposes mainly already GEEZ! GS getting SJax that is. Never said they targeted to receive him or asked for him. Disagree about the RJ trade view point. They did it for the draft pick alone not because they loved RJ or some frantic trigger finger reaction to move SJax for his past actions with a different regime in GS or anywhere else. I brought up the Eric Williams trade with Rasho as a great example of a basketball plus non basketball trade. Did the Spurs want Williams? Heck no! Is SJax overpayed yes he is. SJax is at this stage of his career but at a reduced salary .......I would take him back next year and Manu too. If they agree to take big cuts. Also I asked several questions and you refused to answer any of them. So much for growing up. SJax is a good trade piece but might be better to clear his salary in the summer and take advantage of this year's playoff run. I realize that with direct quotes from worthy news sources from the actual trade makers and movers after the fact, That it does not matter to you at all unless you post it. So since you didn't witness the moon landing in 1969 and you were not on the moon yourself it didn't count in your book. Maybe that Columbus guy didn't come to America in 1492 because you were not on the ship with him or part of his welcoming party in America. Oh the Titantic sinking in 1912 maybe it didn't go down? I was not on cruise myself. Maybe it was all a bad nightmare and it was a tall tale. Maybe all the history books are full of lies and dreamed theories? I realize you have to be on the phone with GMs for anything to count or you have to witness it live right in front of yourself for it to be true unless you say or type it. That's so lame man. So lame and pathetic.
Reply With Quote