'00 Lottery Odds

[lukeyrid13]

This is a tough one.

Who made a trade with the Lakers first chronologically?

Maybe see if one prefers the 01 unprotected instead

[jibbajabba614]

Sweet! Let’s just hope Cavs mess up with #1!

Always a possibility

I think everyone will appreciate the notes this season

[the goat]

Well, I traded the 2000 1st away first, so that should probably just be grandfathered in...

Why can't Celtics get this year because that's what he traded for, and then I owe my 2001 1st to the Pistons

[DrBradBuss]

Shady dealings for sure by the Lakers. Mental note taken.
Celtics can have the pick since he made the deal first. It's not gonna make or break me.

[jibbajabba614]

Shady dealings for sure by the Lakers. Mental note taken.
Celtics can have the pick since he made the deal first. It's not gonna make or break me.

Truly an interesting case.

Lakers getting Brand, he had to know he was dealing same pick in 00 to two different teams unless he thought Celtics were getting a top five pick which is highly unlikely.


True that would be best solution. Being said I feel like protections (top 5 forever) should be unprotected and he could be punish. He got away with 99 draft cause he fell into top five and picked Brand. If it was me, I would want Brand and Celtics getting #9 cause that’s what he agreed to before dealing same pick

Punishment is the question.


I’m just saying, when he realize he was in top 5 in 99 1st. I would have realize my 00 first goes to two different teams. And I would have given the pick to Pistons. If it was me. But that’s not the case. So yeah Lakers should be held accountable

[Boom]

That's poor protection management from Lakers (and not the first time from my recollection). I dunno what the solution is but not a great problem to see.

If a team trades a pick with protections then they shouldn't be able to trade a future 1st until the pick has been conveyed.

[vincent1469]

That's poor protection management from Lakers (and not the first time from my recollection). I dunno what the solution is but not a great problem to see.

If a team trades a pick with protections then they shouldn't be able to trade a future 1st until the pick has been conveyed.

True. Plus it hella disincentivizes the “Top __ Forever” protections.

[pistolpetejr]

Stone him!!!!!!!!!

[lukeyrid13]

Stone him!!!!!!!!!

Or even worse, he might pass me and the Grizzlies in nefarious rankings!

[dd10snoop28]

we also may need an un-nefarious rankings now. bradbuss would earn himself a top spot for lack of fortune and high character.

[jibbajabba614]

Stone him!!!!!!!!!

Or even worse, he might pass me and the Grizzlies in nefarious rankings!

The goat number one in nefarious rankings. Seems fitting

[the goat]

Stone him!!!!!!!!!

Or even worse, he might pass me and the Grizzlies in nefarious rankings!

The goat number one in nefarious rankings. Seems fitting

[the goat]

Shady dealings for sure by the Lakers. Mental note taken.
Celtics can have the pick since he made the deal first. It's not gonna make or break me.

Truly an interesting case.

Lakers getting Brand, he had to know he was dealing same pick in 00 to two different teams unless he thought Celtics were getting a top five pick which is highly unlikely.


True that would be best solution. Being said I feel like protections (top 5 forever) should be unprotected and he could be punish. He got away with 99 draft cause he fell into top five and picked Brand. If it was me, I would want Brand and Celtics getting #9 cause that’s what he agreed to before dealing same pick

Punishment is the question.


I’m just saying, when he realize he was in top 5 in 99 1st. I would have realize my 00 first goes to two different teams. And I would have given the pick to Pistons. If it was me. But that’s not the case. So yeah Lakers should be held accountable

My understanding was that since I dealt my 00 1st unprotected, the protections on the 99 pick would just roll over to 2001.

[Craig]

I move for a vote of no confidence in the woat's competence