Page 3 of 3

Re: Q2: Project our wins

Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:28 am
by The Bobster
The draft picks and draft trades were especially disheartening.

Re: Q2: Project our wins

Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:31 am
by The Bobster
And this gigantic shit stain all leads back to Robert Sarver.

Re: Q2: Project our wins

Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2019 10:07 am
by Superbone
The Bobster wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:31 am
And this gigantic s*** stain all leads back to Robert Sarver.
The man with the golden touch!

Re: Q2: Project our wins

Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2019 10:31 am
by Mori Chu
Superbone wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 10:07 am
The Bobster wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:31 am
And this gigantic s*** stain all leads back to Robert Sarver.
The man with the golden touch!
He touched me with his foam finger.

Re: Q2: Project our wins

Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2019 12:10 pm
by Shabazz
Marty [Mori Chu] wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 10:31 am
Superbone wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 10:07 am
The Bobster wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:31 am
And this gigantic s*** stain all leads back to Robert Sarver.
The man with the golden touch!
He touched me with his foam finger.
Would you be willing to testify? If so, maybe this is what we finally need to get him removed.

Re: Q2: Project our wins

Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2019 12:27 pm
by Split T
I didn’t realize we had Mirotic’s rights at one point. Or was that just the draft pick that ended up being used to draft mirotic?

Re: Q2: Project our wins

Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2019 1:26 pm
by Ring_Wanted
Split T wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 12:27 pm
I didn’t realize we had Mirotic’s rights at one point. Or was that just the draft pick that ended up being used to draft mirotic?
We never has his rights, but if I am not mistaken he was selected with the pick we sent to HOU along with Dragic for Aaron Brooks.

Re: Q2: Project our wins

Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2019 2:50 pm
by Split T
Dragic and a 1st for brooks was such an awful trade and never made any sense. The laker pick for Knight was bad, but you could make a (weak) argument for it at the time. There is no argument for dragic and a first for brooks

Re: Q2: Project our wins

Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2019 3:19 pm
by Superbone
Split T wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 2:50 pm
Dragic and a 1st for brooks was such an awful trade and never made any sense. The laker pick for Knight was bad, but you could make a (weak) argument for it at the time. There is no argument for dragic and a first for brooks
Didn't it have something to do with broken glass? :)

Re: Q2: Project our wins

Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2019 3:28 pm
by Indy
It did. Or at least that was the story reported that made us think trading him was good.

Re: Q2: Project our wins

Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2019 4:22 pm
by Cap
Superbone wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 3:19 pm
Split T wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 2:50 pm
Dragic and a 1st for brooks was such an awful trade and never made any sense. The laker pick for Knight was bad, but you could make a (weak) argument for it at the time. There is no argument for dragic and a first for brooks
Didn't it have something to do with broken glass? :)
Sarver married Dragic?

Re: Q2: Project our wins

Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2019 5:34 pm
by Indy
Cap wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 4:22 pm
Superbone wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 3:19 pm
Split T wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 2:50 pm
Dragic and a 1st for brooks was such an awful trade and never made any sense. The laker pick for Knight was bad, but you could make a (weak) argument for it at the time. There is no argument for dragic and a first for brooks
Didn't it have something to do with broken glass? :)
Sarver married Dragic?
That would explain so much. Dragic did break a glass with his foot.