|
|
Post by Ian Noble on Apr 4, 2022 10:44:41 GMT
Shaquille O'Neal you're being inconsiderate to the Trade Committee and to Tom Izzo. I'm marking this trade as passed using Sacramento's 2022 2nd.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tom Izzo on Apr 4, 2022 10:52:59 GMT
Shaquille O'Neal you're being inconsiderate to the Trade Committee and to Tom Izzo . I'm marking this trade as passed using Sacramento's 2022 2nd. Let me know when I can update my depth chart please |
|
|
|
Post by Ian Noble on Apr 4, 2022 11:08:10 GMT
Shaquille O'Neal you're being inconsiderate to the Trade Committee and to Tom Izzo . I'm marking this trade as passed using Sacramento's 2022 2nd. Let me know when I can update my depth chart please It's processed  |
|
|
|
Post by Andrei Kirilenko on Apr 4, 2022 11:53:23 GMT
A few points here:
- I don’t think it’s a good precedent to use private negotiations to judge GM intentions. Just because Shaq was playing it cool in negotiations doesn’t mean he didn’t want/value a certain pick.
- Isn’t another way to interpret the private negotiations that Tom lied to Shaq about what pick he had, Shaq posted the deal, and now Shaq is being forced to take on a worse asset because Tom was not truthful?
- Shouldn’t this be automatically rejected if one GM doesn’t own the pick he’s trying to trade? Why we are even entertaining the idea of passing it? At the very least it needs to be reposted and re-voted on. Shaq is now getting an even worse deal on a trade that he was already losing big. The committee needs to judge if the trade is still fair with the worse pick.
- How are we OK with saying it doesn’t matter which 2nd rounder Shaq gets? Isn’t that also a super weird precedent to set that all 2nd rounders have the same value? Who are we to even judge that as non-participants in the trade? What if it was a first round pick mix up? Would we still force the trade through?
I think we should reconsider the decision to approve this trade without Shaq agreeing to the worse pick. It’s unfair to him and sets several bad precedents for the league.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tom Izzo on Apr 4, 2022 11:57:30 GMT
We're arguing over a typo. The year or team was never relevant to the agreed trade. If I had caught the typo sooner we wouldn't be here.
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrei Kirilenko on Apr 4, 2022 11:58:13 GMT
I share James Kay's concerns here, Miami are not getting a great return for Jrue, but trade passes I guess. One big sticking point: Houston does not own Sacramento's 2025 2nd pick  Tom Izzo Shaquille O'Neal whatcha gonna do 'bout it? Well I guess I have to decline the trade then... Also didn’t Shaq already decline this? Why are we just ignoring this? lol |
|
|
|
MIA - HOU
Apr 4, 2022 11:59:46 GMT
via mobile
Post by Andrei Kirilenko on Apr 4, 2022 11:59:46 GMT
We're arguing over a typo. The year or team was never relevant to the agreed trade. If I had caught the typo sooner we wouldn't be here. You can’t just assume that though, is my point. It’s insane to think that a year or team is not relevant to what pick you are trading lol. |
|
|
|
Post by Tom Izzo on Apr 4, 2022 12:01:25 GMT
Well I guess I have to decline the trade then... Also didn’t Shaq already decline this? Why are we just ignoring this? lol This comment was based on the pick "not existing" at all, which isn't true. It was just the wrong year. This doesn't set any precedent for the league. This is just a rare situation that arose from a mistake in the year of the pick that had no bearing on the agreed upon deal. |
|
|
|
Post by Tom Izzo on Apr 4, 2022 12:02:37 GMT
We're arguing over a typo. The year or team was never relevant to the agreed trade. If I had caught the typo sooner we wouldn't be here. You can’t just assume that though, is my point. It’s insane to think that a year or team is not relevant to what pick you are trading lol. Nobody is assuming anything, this is a fact. It. Was. Never. In. The. Discussion. We literally never discussed years or teams. You're making the assumption that it was pertinent to the deal, which it was not. |
|
|
|
MIA - HOU
Apr 4, 2022 12:03:00 GMT
via mobile
Post by Andrei Kirilenko on Apr 4, 2022 12:03:00 GMT
Also didn’t Shaq already decline this? Why are we just ignoring this? lol This comment was based on the pick "not existing" at all, which isn't true. It was just the wrong year. This doesn't set any precedent for the league. This is just a rare situation that arose from a mistake in the year of the pick that had no bearing on the agreed upon deal. This sets a TON of precedents for the league. We are forcing a GM to do a trade he didn’t agree to |
|
|
|
Post by Tom Izzo on Apr 4, 2022 12:03:38 GMT
You're twisting the narrative and stretching the truth.
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrei Kirilenko on Apr 4, 2022 12:11:26 GMT
You're twisting the narrative and stretching the truth. You guys are the ones all assuming you know Shaq's intentions! How do we you know weren't intentionally deceiving him in negotiations? Its easy to make claims like that, but never before in D5 has a trade been passed based on assuming we know someone's intentions. You literally tried to trade a pick you didn't own. That's not allowed. It's that simple. Why are we even discussing this or considering making the other GM take on a different pick? It's insanity lol. |
|
|
|
Post by Tom Izzo on Apr 4, 2022 12:13:19 GMT
You're twisting the narrative and stretching the truth. You guys are the ones all assuming you know Shaq's intentions! How do we you know weren't intentionally deceiving him in negotiations? Its easy to make claims like that, but never before in D5 has a trade been passed based on assuming we know someone's intentions. You literally tried to trade a pick you didn't own. That's not allowed. It's that simple. Why are we even discussing this or considering making the other GM take on a different pick? It's insanity lol. You're making stuff up lol. I don't know how many times I have to say this. You're creating your own narrative. |
|
|
|
Post by Tom Izzo on Apr 4, 2022 12:16:33 GMT
You're twisting the narrative and stretching the truth. You guys are the ones all assuming you know Shaq's intentions! How do we you know weren't intentionally deceiving him in negotiations? Its easy to make claims like that, but never before in D5 has a trade been passed based on assuming we know someone's intentions. You literally tried to trade a pick you didn't own. That's not allowed. It's that simple. Why are we even discussing this or considering making the other GM take on a different pick? It's insanity lol. Really easy to prove. Stand by. |
|
|
|
Post by Andrei Kirilenko on Apr 4, 2022 12:18:43 GMT
You guys are the ones all assuming you know Shaq's intentions! How do we you know weren't intentionally deceiving him in negotiations? Its easy to make claims like that, but never before in D5 has a trade been passed based on assuming we know someone's intentions. You literally tried to trade a pick you didn't own. That's not allowed. It's that simple. Why are we even discussing this or considering making the other GM take on a different pick? It's insanity lol. You're making stuff up lol. I don't know how many times I have to say this. You're creating your own narrative. ... aren't you the one pushing the narrative that Shaq doesn't care what pick he gets? I feel like you are just trying to muddy the waters in this thread now so I am going to stop posting. But my points have not been addressed at all, so I am looking forward to hearing some justification |
|
|
|
Post by Jared Montini on Apr 4, 2022 12:20:41 GMT
Tom come to the discord to hash this out 😂
|
|
|
|
Post by Tom Izzo on Apr 4, 2022 12:23:50 GMT
You're making stuff up lol. I don't know how many times I have to say this. You're creating your own narrative. ... aren't you the one pushing the narrative that Shaq doesn't care what pick he gets? I feel like you are just trying to muddy the waters in this thread now so I am going to stop posting. But my points have not been addressed at all, so I am looking forward to hearing some justification I’m telling the truth and you're pushing a narrative to muddy the waters Josh. We had a good faith negotiation that led to a posting that had a last second typo that led us here. Following that, D5 third party side-line GMing attempting to manipulate the votes of the trade committee. Following that, we had the discovery of the wrong pick being included and a rare loop hole to potentially back out of the trade. Shaq then took the opportunity to troll all of you and he's been dragging his feet in re-accepting. We've already discussed this privately in messages, why he's slow rolled it I don't know. You're going to continue to blame me as if I'm conducting some manipulative operation to steal a player through bad faith negotiating and it's the furthest thing from the truth. I'm posting all the screen shots right now. |
|
|
|
Post by Tom Izzo on Apr 4, 2022 12:24:03 GMT
Tom come to the discord to hash this out 😂 Not happening. |
|
|
|
Post by Tom Izzo on Apr 4, 2022 12:28:52 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by James Kay on Apr 4, 2022 15:07:27 GMT
Shaquille O'Neal you're being inconsiderate to the Trade Committee and to Tom Izzo. I'm marking this trade as passed using Sacramento's 2022 2nd. This is crazy. I'm blown away that this is the decision. 1) Anything outside of the trade post should not be offered as evidence to support whether a GM wanted to do a trade or not. This is literally a legal term - the parol evidence rule. It's like signing a contract and then showing a scribbled napkin negotiation to show that a disputed term actually means something in your favor. Discord messages can be modified, the screenshots might not tell the whole story. I'm not saying they were, I'm just saying it's beyond the pale to allow them to constitute grounds for acceptance. 2) The difference in value between the substituted assets here is significant. The 2022 SAC 2nd is the 58th pick right now. Who knows what the 2025 pick might've been? Who knows how Sacramento's position changes in 2-3 years? 3) Even accepting the Discord messages as evidence speaking to some sort of intent on Shaq's behalf, it's really still unclear what was happening. Sure, Shaq said "any 2nd rounder will be good" but then immediately also asked if it were a 3 team trade, and further, was actually responding to Tom asking Shaq to include a 2nd. There is a great deal of ambiguity over whether Shaq believed another additional 2nd was going to be included. This sort of thing just highlights the dangerous waters you wade into when trying to use external messages to enforce a trade different than what was posted. Lastly, outside of this particular instance, allowing a different trade to be accepted than the one that was posted and voted on invites a whole mess of conflict, as typos and misunderstandings in trades are a frequent occurrence. Imagine that the IRL NBA forced the Grizzlies to deal Dillon Brooks and not MarShon Brooks because they agreed to trade the wrong player?IMO, either 1) Shaq should be able to decline the trade; or 2) the TC should have to re-vote now that the trade has changed. |
|
|
|
Post by James Kay on Apr 4, 2022 15:20:07 GMT
 BRB going to post this |
|
|
|
Post by Tom Izzo on Apr 4, 2022 15:31:13 GMT
You guys are doing some incredible mental gymnastics. It's a sight to really see
|
|
|
|
Post by Tom Izzo on Apr 4, 2022 15:38:14 GMT
You guys are really stretching the truth to what has occurred.
We made a typo at the last second that should have never happened. You're trying to create a narrative around the picks as if it was pertinent to the negotiation. You're drumming up these fantasies about what really happened or what should happened, exaggerating the entire situation.
I told Shaq the correct pick initially. Made a distracted mistake while at work when I asked him to post for me. And that's why we're here. Everything beyond that is just nonsense wrapped up in dramatic envy in an attempt to spin reality.
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrei Kirilenko on Apr 4, 2022 15:48:31 GMT
Tom, I think you are missing our point in that it doesn't matter what you discussed on discord, what you think you agreed to, etc. We aren't trying to create narratives, we are arguing for the opposite- to stop creating narratives and just stick to the rules and facts. The trade that was posted and agreed to on D5 is not that trade that ended up getting approved, and one party has been made worse off by that. That is the big issue here.
Can we not just repost the trade on the site and have you both accept and the TC vote again, rather than passing a trade where we've only heard from one side and the other side's acceptance is being derived from discord screenshots? That is really all we are advocating and I don't feel like it should be controversial.
This isn't some agenda against you, or special one-off scenario... its how we've been doing trades for the entire history of D5.
|
|
|
|
Post by Shaquille O'Neal on Apr 4, 2022 16:11:27 GMT
Shaquille O'Neal you're being inconsiderate to the Trade Committee and to Tom Izzo. I'm marking this trade as passed using Sacramento's 2022 2nd. How am I being inconsiderate to the trade committee now? clearly there was something wrong with the communication and I was taking a 2025 pick. we are re-negotiating now and this trade should be at least on hold. Its not my fault you already processed the depth charts and cannot proceed with sims because of this. |
|
|
|
Post by Ian Noble on Apr 4, 2022 17:25:31 GMT
Shaquille O'Neal you're being inconsiderate to the Trade Committee and to Tom Izzo. I'm marking this trade as passed using Sacramento's 2022 2nd. How am I being inconsiderate to the trade committee now? clearly there was something wrong with the communication and I was taking a 2025 pick. we are re-negotiating now and this trade should be at least on hold. Its not my fault you already processed the depth charts and cannot proceed with sims because of this. Your reply: getting some trade offers for Jrue hmmmmm Did I misunderstand? Are you not saying that you're now fielding other offers for Jrue whilst we wait for you to decide whether you've changed your mind about this trade? Sorry but (1) whether it's a 2022 or 2025 Sacramento pick hardly matters, not least because you had to ask Izzo which pick it was before you posted and (2) making everybody else wait whilst you decide what's best entirely for you is not something I'm going to wait for. |
|
|
|
Post by Shaquille O'Neal on Apr 4, 2022 17:36:07 GMT
added 2022 cleveland pick. accepted
|
|
|
|
Post by Tom Izzo on Apr 4, 2022 17:43:12 GMT
added 2022 cleveland pick. accepted We did negotiate this last night and I gave him my word. I accept adding the 2nd I just obtained from Denver. |
|
|
|
Post by Ian Noble on Apr 4, 2022 21:23:02 GMT
added 2022 cleveland pick. accepted Thanks Shaq Is that instead of the Sacramento 2022 2nd? |
|
|
|
Post by Tom Izzo on Apr 5, 2022 9:38:16 GMT
added 2022 cleveland pick. accepted Thanks Shaq Is that instead of the Sacramento 2022 2nd? Both 2022 CLE and 2022 SAC By all means, this entire situation arose out of a last second typo. Shaq used this situation to finesse me out of an additional pick, but it's fine - just ready to move on. |
|
Boston Celtics
Houston Rockets
Brooklyn Nets
Utah Jazz
Charlotte Hornets
Miami Heat