4 Point Play/81 Point Man trade...

[4PointPlay]

This trade was agreed on previously if I was able to get this player where I wanted too.

81 Point Man gets:
Jason Thompson

4 Point Play gets:
Marvin Williams

Waiting for 81 Point to confirm.

[81pointman]

hell yes, this guy is the only thing close to a starting worthy PF in sac town... prolly won't get it right away, but him and hawes are going to be a nice team down low. nice nab getting him this low, i thought you lost the deal when you didn't take him at 13 or 14.

[cooljesture20]

Veto.

[4PointPlay]

The trade has been up for 2 days and you are the first one to say anything. Considering he traded 2.1 to get him, 1.18 is technically him getting better value for a guy he just traded for like a week ago. Veto is for obviously bad trades... Navy basically gave up ramon sessions to get Williams and then traded him for 2.1 and now he got traded for 1.18...

How do you veto this, but not 2.1 for him?

I understand the knee-jerk reaction of "I would have offered a better player for him than that." because I did that when Navy got him for almost nothing, but I don't call for a veto unless it's obviously unfair. And judging by the 2 deals he was involved in before this one with no mention of veto, this deal is obviously far from unfair. I myself probably wouldn't have drafted Thompson there, but because of this deal, I did.

[bluefox]

well, i do think this is veto worthy, but being a keeper, it's hard to veto a trade. Marvin is a player that we all know about, he isn't anything special, but he is solid.
About Thompson, i gotta recognize that i thought "who!!??", but then i realized that he has some upside.
So basically, i think i should veto this, but what if then Thompson becomes a great player and then 4pp is happy and says "thank god you guys vetoed that trade" and we all realize we just screwed 81ptm.
I think this is veto worthy, but not clear enough, at least for me, to veto it....

[cooljesture20]

I don't mind being the only one to veto something, it just means it's not getting overturned, but that doesn't mean I'm not going to not state my opinion. This trade is a joke and I don't even need to explain why, you both know it. We're talking a proven player that's still young and yet to hit his prime, even though he's already a really solid fantasy option. In exchange for an unproven rookie whom has yet to see the floor. This would be like trading LeBron James for O.J Mayo just because of Mayo's upside. You know in any league allowing vetoes this wouldn't make it a day without being thrown in the the trash.

[tian820]

Yeah, I thought veto too when I initially saw this trade, but then in these things there's always the problem with picking. Why not just trade the pick to him for Marvin instead? I don't think this is fair either, but if it was 1.18 for Marvin instead, people may feel differently. Tough to say...

[gnmg85]

I too could see why this is veto worthy since it's Jason Thompson being traded rather than the promise of whoever else was available at 1.18. Personally, I wouldn't have traded Marvin for JT but maybe 81PM sees something that we have all missed.

I find it funny how the GM picking up JT is again getting criticized now just as the Kings were in June.

[4PointPlay]

You know, I actaully really like Jason Thompson, he is this years Rodney Stucky... a guy who was little known because he didn't goto a big school. He is NBA ready, probably even more than Hawes even after being in the league for a year and he would have been a top 5-8 pick in the draft if he went to a big school. I mean he went 12th which isn't bad to begin with.

[cooljesture20]

The "big school" argument works both ways though, he also played small schools. If went to a big school, he'd be looking at facing fellow big men the likes of Noah, Oden, Hibbert, Williams, Hansborough, Love, Beasley, Aldridge, etc, etc, etc. not necessarily facing those guys, but that's the calibur.

Rodney Stuckey also spent a season learning from Chauncey Billups and Rip Hamilton and playing on a high class squad with a winning mentality. Jason Thompson plays for the Kings...that hasn't been a good thing for any player in many many years.

[4PointPlay]

Sept 8, 2008 17:52:41 GMT -5 @cooljesture20 said:

The "big school" argument works both ways though, he also played small schools. If went to a big school, he'd be looking at facing fellow big men the likes of Noah, Oden, Hibbert, Williams, Hansborough, Love, Beasley, Aldridge, etc, etc, etc. not necessarily facing those guys, but that's the calibur.

Rodney Stuckey also spent a season learning from Chauncey Billups and Rip Hamilton and playing on a high class squad with a winning mentality. Jason Thompson plays for the Kings...that hasn't been a good thing for any player in many many years.

Out of all the guys you listed, I think Hansborough (and maybe Oden) would be the only one(s) that would consistantly give Thompson a hard time. I can honestly see Thompson being a slightly more athletic David West but without Chris Paul there to help him jack up his fantasy line. He is a very good mid range shooter, and a pretty solid athlete with a pretty good BBall IQ and is still learning. Don't get me wrong, I think he could end up being a limited role player, but he is in a situation where he will at least get a chance to earn some time and if he shows up like I think he can, he will be starting there pretty quick. I mean, who is fighting for time with... S. Williams, everyone knew he was a bust from day one... B. Miller is getting old and could very well get traded for almost nothing... Mikki Moore is well... lucky to be in the league for the most part... Abdur Rahim, LOL... Kenny Thomas will only get playing time to bait someone into trading for him.

So that basically leaves Thompson, Hawes and Miller to get the lions share of time with a few role players around to steal some minutes here and there.