2012 - CB draft board "Let's get it on!"

[WeMadeIt17]

Knicks have thier big 3

[The Walker Wiggle]

Okc sends Blake griffin 8.24 10.16
Knicks send serge Ibaka Kendrick Perkins Courtney lee

Is OKC trading Marc Gasol too? Why else would they have so much interest in Perk and Lee?

Anyway, it doesn't matter. It's bad deal. A very bad deal.

I think its good for nyc get another star in blake

It's a home-run for New York. Major upgrade.

Another weird trade. Oklahoma City trades a franchise talent doesn't get anyone comparable back. That said, New York just dealt three of its four best defenders. Bargnani, Griffin, Anthony is going to struggle defensively. Time to move Andrea again?

Knicks have thier big 3

You two have certainly been making bold choices. I like it.

[celticpride07]

Time out: the trade got voided because of confusion over 10th round picks

[The Walker Wiggle]

Wow i sent 10.3 to him he said yes? What happened

You're right. I took back the second trade until its resubmitted.

You're right. Quick everybody send in their Blake Griffin trade offers.

[indeedproceed]

Well first and foremost, the Blake Griffin trade isn't done as of right now.

Secondly, I'm going to bed.

[WeMadeIt17]

Good lord!

[The Walker Wiggle]

Good lord!

Look on the bright side, Manu had a 21-10-6 with 4 steals tonight.

[WeMadeIt17]

Goodnight

[Rondo2287]

Jeez, definitely lots of action after i went to bed last night.  Not sure that I like adding another high usage high turnover guy to IP's team.

[Gomesfan]

Hopefully the trade for Griffin go through.... I have been working on it for days with OKC and had to go to bed last night.

[StartOrien]

Trade:

Bulls trade: Stephen Curry, 7.24, 10.20
Nets trade: Jeremy Lin, Kenneth Faried, 6.6

Don't get the hoopla from before, this seems like a pretty fair trade.

[KCattheStripe]

Reminder , lads and lasses, I'll be away from the comp most of the day  so send your offers to that rakish rogue Startorien.

[Roy H.]

It depends who my big man is that I take next round. If he's a big name, I'll likely start the big guy. If he's a smaller name, I'll likely start Faried.

I appreciate IP saying this; we don't often see candor like this.

IP won't start the guy he thinks is the better player.  Rather, he'll go for the bigger "name", because this exercise has become all about winning votes.  It's a smart strategy and a winning strategy, because many voters aren't going to be open-minded about challenging their pre-conceived notions. 

As one of the co-founders of the CB Draft, I'm a little sad that it's turned into this.  Pandering for votes, and putting an inferior team on the floor to do so, is the exact opposite of what we were originally going for.  However, it's the strategy that wins.

For the record, I didn't like the trade for IP.

[indeedproceed]

It depends who my big man is that I take next round. If he's a big name, I'll likely start the big guy. If he's a smaller name, I'll likely start Faried.

I appreciate IP saying this; we don't often see candor like this.

IP won't start the guy he thinks is the better player.  Rather, he'll go for the bigger "name", because this exercise has become all about winning votes.  It's a smart strategy and a winning strategy, because many voters aren't going to be open-minded about challenging their pre-conceived notions. 

As one of the co-founders of the CB Draft, I'm a little sad that it's turned into this.  Pandering for votes, and putting an inferior team on the floor to do so, is the exact opposite of what we were originally going for.  However, it's the strategy that wins.

For the record, I didn't like the trade for IP.

I just woke up, so I might still be dreaming but, huh?

I meant if the guy is an established starter, I'll likely continue to start him, to avoid chemistry problems. If the guy is a guy who is used to coming off the bench, I'll bring him off the bench.

Where did you get all that mess about pandering for votes and whatnot?

[Roy H.]

It depends who my big man is that I take next round. If he's a big name, I'll likely start the big guy. If he's a smaller name, I'll likely start Faried.

I appreciate IP saying this; we don't often see candor like this.

IP won't start the guy he thinks is the better player.  Rather, he'll go for the bigger "name", because this exercise has become all about winning votes.  It's a smart strategy and a winning strategy, because many voters aren't going to be open-minded about challenging their pre-conceived notions. 

As one of the co-founders of the CB Draft, I'm a little sad that it's turned into this.  Pandering for votes, and putting an inferior team on the floor to do so, is the exact opposite of what we were originally going for.  However, it's the strategy that wins.

For the record, I didn't like the trade for IP.

I just woke up, so I might still be dreaming but, huh?

I meant if the guy is an established starter, I'll likely continue to start him, to avoid chemistry problems. If the guy is a guy who is used to coming off the bench, I'll bring him off the bench.

Where did you get all that mess about pandering for votes and whatnot?

You didn't mention chemistry or starters or bench players, so I guess I didn't get what you were saying.  My interpretation was that you were going to start the guys who were most well known.  If that wasn't your intent, it should have been; you'll win more votes with "big names" than you will with good, but lesser known, players.