What type of asset is Hayward?

[GVC]

and my point is that he agreed on july 3rd, which you have no response for because your whole argument revolves around things not existing until they are signed...

I have no problem with them agreeing on July 3rd to an agreement to be signed on July 10th IF nothing better comes along. That's exactly what happened.

I took issue with your story (and DaThrone's statement) that players could sign offer sheets and THEN be traded, which is exactly what you said. That can't be done, which is all I've stated.

 

[GVC]

after Tyreke's 4th season he signed a 44mil contract with the Pelicans, the kings didnt match, and still managed to get back Greivis Vaszquez

after his 4th season Batum signed a 46mil contract with Minnesota, the Blazers matched, so the Twolves offered packages of 1st rounders and Derrick Williams

Wrong (x2).

Tyreke signed a 44 million dollar Offer Sheet with the Pelicans which the kings had a chance to match, they declined. after that the details were worked out for the S+T and then the contract was signed.

Wrong.

Tyreke signed the offer sheet on July 3rd and the trade went thru July 10th

Wrong.

It is these statements I was responding to.


Also, as stated MANY times, Gordo can't be traded. He certainly can't be traded before he becomes a free agent, thus becoming a restricted free agent for the acquiring team (as Billy had suggested). Gordo CAN be involved in a sign-and-trade AFTER the July moratorium. He can't be involved in a sign-and-trade AFTER he's already signed an offer sheet, as you've suggested repeatedly (see the above quotes).

 

[Game6Conley]

He can't be traded.

Gordo can only be traded in a sign-and-trade.

... i rest my case

my initial post here was in response to the first quote, and it seems GVC has seen the light so ill stop posting in this thread

Edit: I guess not

Also, as stated MANY times, Gordo can't be traded.

LOL make up your mind.

 

[GVC]

... i rest my case

my initial post here was in response to the first quote, and it seems GVC has seen the light so ill stop posting in this thread

Did you think I meant that Gordo can't be traded for the rest of his career? Context is everything. My "He can't be traded" post was in response to billshelby's post about the acquiring team in a trade acquiring the right of first refusal. This implies that Gordo can be traded BEFORE he becomes a free agent. Thus, "he can't be traded" (because he can't).

When you asked about sign-and-trades, I explained how that works, and stated that Gordo CAN be involved in a sign-and-trade. That, of course, isn't what BillyShelby was talking about or what I was initially responding to (with "he can't be traded"). This should have been obvious.

 

[GVC]

LOL make up your mind.

This last point really depends on whether you consider a sign-and-trade a "trade". The two are different, especially considering the initial post I was responding to. Gordo can't just be traded, since his contract is ending. He can be involved in a sign-and-trade. The distinction is important because the only team that can take advantage of Gordo's restricted free agency (the right of first refusal) is the Jazz.

 

[Zulu]

Sooo that happened!!!!

 

[GVC]

Sooo that happened!!!!

This is how I procrastinate.

 

[Game6Conley]

your point is someone signs and cant be traded, great.

my point is

is that actually how teams operate though?? teams panic to get early agreements in free agency so they can figure their other moves out

they Operate like what happened with Tyreke Evans.. (agree verbally, shop around, look at trade options)

dunno why you've decided to get defensive about a bunch of rules that are commonly circumvented.

you repeat ad nasuem that Hayward cant be traded, yet he can return value to the jazz as a piece in a trade, so im not sure how that works

the one thing i am sure of, which is too funny to me, is that GVC has decided to get all holier than thou when it comes to the difference between Trades and Sign and Trades, like thats some common distinction everyone should make

is a sign and trade not a trade too? it sounds like you have alot to say on this subject

 

[GVC]

dunno why you've decided to get defensive about a bunch of rules that are commonly circumvented.

The rules we've been discussing are not circumvented. The July moratorium exists in part to allow teams to negotiate with free agents (while waiting for the next season's cap to be set). What I was saying is that players can't be signed to offer sheets and subsequently traded, as you repeatedly claimed. Do you have an example of a team signing a player during the July moratorium? An example of a team signing a player to an offer sheet (under the current CBA) and subsequently trading him?

edit: There are situations where players can be signed during the July moratorium. Thought I'd put this in for completeness.

you repeat ad nasuem that Hayward cant be traded, yet he can return value to the jazz as a piece in a trade, so im not sure how that works

BillyShelby said Gordo has value in a trade in part because the team trading for him would have the option of matching any offer to Gordo in restricted free agency. The problem with this statement is that the Jazz can't trade him before he becomes or while he is a free agent. They can only move him in a sign-and-trade. The only team that will have the opportunity to match an offer sheet for Gordon Hayward this offseason is the Jazz. Is this clear?

the one thing i am sure of, which is too funny to me, is that GVC has decided to get all holier than thou when it comes to the difference between Trades and Sign and Trades, like thats some common distinction everyone should make

is a sign and trade not a trade too? it sounds like you have alot to say on this subject

See the above. Context matters. Did you (have you?) read billyshelby's post I initially responded to?

Also, it is a common distinction everyone should make. You can only trade players who are under contract. You can only sign-and-trade players who are free agents. This is where context comes into play (maybe it's time you finally read billyshelby's post).

 

[cowhide]

you realize that many people have been saying almost the exact same thing since last November, right? Or were you too busy taking copious rolls in the snow to read those posts?

Dude, Leave Green alone he was giving me my day in the sun. Long over due I might add. LMAO.

 

[Game6Conley]

it doesnt matter what context you say 'Hayward can't be traded' because the statement itself is misinformation.

'Hayward cant be traded' certainly looks like a blanket statement to me, why you'd presume that readers would know that comment only applies to the above post and nothing else eludes me.

my initial question was whats the difference between Hayward this year and Tyreke last year... the answer is there's no difference

if you want to cry over semantics, and say Tyreke wasn't traded because he was signed and traded, so be it, let the tears flow, have your moment

the facts are the agreement Tyreke made on the 3rd was for exactly the same terms of the contract signed. call me naive for assuming verbal agreements will eventually be signed, but these verbal agreements are very common and happen all the time going into the moratorium period

i just came to this thread to give an example of precedent, what happened with Tyreke is a prime example of what could happen to Hayward this off-season, hopefully that hasent been lost in this nonsense

 

[GVC]

it doesnt matter what context you say 'Hayward can't be traded' because the statement itself is misinformation.

Context doesn't matter to complete ****ing morons, true. I could have been clearer, of course, but that was all sorted out after I responded to your post about the possibility of Gordo being involved in a sign-and-trade (which, AGAIN, had nothing to do with billyshelby's post that I had responded to).

what happened with Tyreke is a prime example of what could happen to Hayward this off-season, hopefully that hasent been lost in this nonsense

You realize I agreed with you when you made this statement, right? The disagreement was over you misstating that Tyreke and Batum signed offer sheets and were subsequently traded, which did not and could not happen.

Are you even reading my posts? You've yet to respond directly to any of the questions I've asked. Did you read Billy's post? Do you understand the problem with the statement he made? Do you understand which parts of your posts I agreed and disagreed with? Do you understand the differences between trades and sign-and-trades?