# Quick says no deal in the works



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

http://blog.oregonlive.com/behindblazersbeat/2007/06/hinrich_trades_and_workouts.html



Just so you all know, I called the person that told me such things and he agreed with this......Sort of.. He said technically nothing is in the works because it has already been done. That's all he told me.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

mediocre man said:


> Just so you all know, I called the person that told me such things and he agreed with this......Sort of.. He said technically nothing is in the works because it has already been done. That's all he told me.


Uh huh.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Samuel said:


> Uh huh.


So you gonna give him cred when it comes true or you gonn pull the ole "anyone coulda guessde that we all knew something was gonna happen"?


----------



## Mr. Chuck Taylor (Aug 2, 2004)

mediocre man said:


> http://blog.oregonlive.com/behindblazersbeat/2007/06/hinrich_trades_and_workouts.html
> 
> 
> 
> Just so you all know, I called the person that told me such things and he agreed with this......Sort of.. He said technically nothing is in the works because it has already been done. That's all he told me.


Quick said "The Blazers have not, and are not close to, making any trades." Doesn't sound like its already been done to me. The thing that gets me is that so many people took this rumor for gospel and didn't even question its legitimacy.


----------



## Tennisball (Jun 4, 2007)

I find that very hard to believe, KP is for sure working on something.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

Schilly said:


> So you gonna give him cred when it comes true or you gonn pull the ole "anyone coulda guessde that we all knew something was gonna happen"?


When what comes true?


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

mediocre man said:


> He said technically nothing is in the works because it has already been done.


This doesn't match with what Quick said:

"_The Blazers *have not, and are not close to, making any trades*. The Blazers are in discussions with several teams, but general manager Kevin Pritchard said most teams are in the "feeling out" process and are not ready to deal.

Pritchard said *if the Blazers do indeed make a deal, it wouldn't be announced until 48 hours before the draft at the earliest*._"

BNM


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Samuel said:


> When what comes true?


Well that explains a few things.... I didn't figure I'd have to explain it to you.


----------



## BlazerCaravan (Aug 12, 2004)

Tennisball said:


> I find that very hard to believe, KP is for sure working on something.


Yeah, that's the funny thing. For days, we've read blog entires to the effect of: "KP wants more picks, preferably in the lottery." Many articles say this; his intent is known.

We get a rumor corroborated by two independent, reputable members with ears in and around the organization. Now, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to say "a trade is coming" in the midst of all this "KP wants to deal" talk, but things "feel" right... all we have are hunches, because these two guys are pretty mum.

The rumors swirl around Philly...

Barrett says, "It's not Philly."

The rumors swirl around Chicago...

Quick says, "Chicago says Kirk Heinrich is untouchable... not that it matters because there never was a deal..." I can almost hear him saying, "Yeah, that's the ticket."

This feels exactly the same as right before we trade a player. It's happened before. In fact, I seem to remember a past GM making a statement: "We're not trading him." And then the next day, he was gone.

Because of all that talk before, Quick's statement feels weirder to me than MM's or TBPup's.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

Schilly said:


> Well that explains a few things.... I didn't figure I'd have to explain it to you.


There's really nothing confirmed at this point. "Fireworks", or whatever. You put yourself in an interesting position when your only information is that 'something' is happening 'soon.' Then KP mentions that nothing will be happening soon. 

So when you say 'when it comes true', I ask, when what comes true? Nothing has been confirmed nor denied (save for a few players/teams).


----------



## Mr. Chuck Taylor (Aug 2, 2004)

Schilly said:


> So you gonna give him cred when it comes true or you gonn pull the ole "anyone coulda guessde that we all knew something was gonna happen"?


Uh, the later of the two.

Seriously, does anyone actually think we won't make at least one trade come draft time? I think the odds are in our favor. Anybody can figure out that is the likely scenario. Besides there are tons of trade talks going on, whatever deals may end up going down could have nothing to do what MM claims to know now. And thats the beauty of "having to keep it secret"...we'll never know if he really knew or not. So I don't see how he would deserve any cred at all.


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

So, the possibilities are:

A) Quick knows something.

B) Quick is being pressured to spread misinformation.

C) Quick didn't take his meds, and the voices are talking to him again.

D) Quick is just a clueless loudmouth who can't keep his own stories straight.


Since Quick has managed to be on BOTH sides of this story in less than 24 hrs, my best guess is "D". 

I am a looooong way from convinced anything major is going down - but Quick is doing nothing that sways me in either direction.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

All I'm saying at this point is that my guy says Quick is dead wrong. He says a deal in principle is in place. 

I would also assume that if Quick asked KP about trades he wouldn't say "yes Jason, we have already made a trade" 

More than likely he would say what he said. 

I agree with Chuck though. The Blazers are more than likely going to make a trade before or on draft day. Whether it's this one or another one. Chances are 99% that Portland does something IMO. Chances are 99% that it's already done IMO


----------



## GOD (Jun 22, 2003)

MM - one question and one suggestion.

Question - Do you know who is involved in the deal or do you just know a deal is coming?

Suggestion - If you do know who is involved, choose one poster of integrity like Schilly, EdO or Hap and email them all the information with the caveat that they remain mute until after the draft. Then, if the deal comes to fruition then your word will remain golden.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Ok so let's play decipher the GM....According to mm and TbPup on RealGM a deal has been agreed on in principle.

Quick says according to KP: 

No Deal has happened: Yep it has been agreed upon but isn't completed
If the Blazers make a trade it won't be until 48 hours before the draft (kinda interesting that he has that pegged so specifically)
No deals are close to happening: would 2 weeks out be considered close? 

Smoke and mirrors smoke and mirrors.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

BlazerCaravan said:


> Quick says, "Chicago says Kirk Heinrich is untouchable... not that it matters because there never was a deal..." I can almost hear him saying, "Yeah, that's the ticket."


That does not mean the deal IS NOT with Chicago... it only means that kirk is not involved in the trade

It could be said, that indeed talks had been done with Chicago for sure.... but he is not it


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Nate McVillain said:


> MM - one question and one suggestion.
> 
> Question - Do you know who is involved in the deal or do you just know a deal is coming?
> 
> Suggestion - If you do know who is involved, choose one poster of integrity like Schilly, EdO or Hap and email them all the information with the caveat that they remain mute until after the draft. Then, if the deal comes to fruition then your word will remain golden.




How bout this. When I'm told I can say more I will to the entire group. Although I will probably tell Hap, B&B and Schilly first because I have shared info with them before and visa versa

Now about question. I was told who is involved, and that the deal had been agreed upon in principle by the teams involved.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Nate McVillain said:


> MM - one question and one suggestion.
> 
> Question - Do you know who is involved in the deal or do you just know a deal is coming?
> 
> Suggestion - If you do know who is involved, choose one poster of integrity like Schilly, EdO or Hap and email them all the information with the caveat that they remain mute until after the draft. Then, if the deal comes to fruition then your word will remain golden.


I think he should tell me... I can keep a secret :whistling:


----------



## BlazerCaravan (Aug 12, 2004)

Trader Bob said:


> That does not mean the deal IS NOT with Chicago... it only means that kirk is not involved in the trade
> 
> It could be said, that indeed talks had been done with Chicago for sure.... but he is not it



Exactly. Quick was blathering like he usually does, and basically contradicted his own implications:

1, that we've been talking with Chicago, but they're not down with losing KH 

which directly conflicts with

2, that "oh wait, there's no trades in the works yet!"

He really needs an editor.


----------



## Mr. Chuck Taylor (Aug 2, 2004)

BlazerCaravan said:


> Exactly. Quick was blathering like he usually does, and basically contradicted his own implications:
> 
> 1, that we've been talking with Chicago, but they're not down with losing KH
> 
> ...



That doesn't directly conflict at all. 
"Hello, Chicago...this is Kevin Pritchard. Is Kirk Hinrich available? Oh, he's untouchable? OK, thanks." 
Under this scenario, I wouldn't say a trade was in the works.

And most scenarios are like this...because as any GM will tell you, most trade talks go nowhere.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

I'll post more MOnday if I hear anything over the weekend


----------



## Mr. Chuck Taylor (Aug 2, 2004)

From Chad Ford's blog...

"Another dark horse in the Yi sweepstakes might be Portland, which is trying to get another top 10 draft pick. As I've mentioned before, the Bulls seem like a possible trading partner, with Zach Randolph involved.

Can you imagine the huge front line of Greg Oden, LaMarcus Aldridge and Yi? Wow."


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

mediocre man said:


> I'll post more MOnday if I hear anything over the weekend


wait just a minute their buddy :rofl:

Don't you feed the gerbils in your computer on the weekend??? your computer works right?

yeah thanks a lot. tease us for 1.5 days then run off for 2 days :nonono:


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

I HATE being teased like this. You can PM me, MM. I won't tell. Promise!


----------



## Spud147 (Jul 15, 2005)

I have a friend who tells me, "Well I got your present and I think you'll really like it." every December. It's just an announcement that she has it but it's not open for discussion. It drives me nuts... 

Waiting for the actual draft is excruciating... between the Oden/Durant debate and the trades I just want to get it over with. The suspense is killing me!!!

I might be the only one but I want Randolph and Jack to stay. They both want to be here, both work hard to improve, both are part of the positive locker room chemistry we have going. I still think Jack is going to be really good in a couple years, he's just too smart to give up on. Great work ethic, great attitude, and Sergio's game is fun to watch but he'd be a turnover machine as a starter. Jarrett's not flashy but I trust him more at this point. 

And I think the light bulb finally went on for Zach. He came into training camp in the best shape of his life last year. He doesn't always make the best decisions or friends but he's not an instigator. I think he's been very positively influenced by Brandon, Jarrett, and LaMarcus. Oden is only going to make that more positive. And I think he's finally getting on board with the team concept and making effort on defense.


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

There is a reason it is callled "hearsay" and is not considered evidence in a court of law.

MM can be 100% honest, and it means zip, since we have no idea whether his source is either bullshirting him, or just plain wrong.


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

Mr. Chuck Taylor said:


> Quick said "The Blazers have not, and are not close to, making any trades." Doesn't sound like its already been done to me. The thing that gets me is that so many people took this rumor for gospel and didn't even question its legitimacy.


Then again, how legitimate is Quick's retraction?

"The truth is always the first victim in any war."

Or something like that.

PBF


----------



## blakeback (Jun 29, 2006)

> The Blazers are more than likely going to make a trade before or on draft day. Whether it's this one or another one. Chances are 99% that Portland does something IMO. Chances are 99% that it's already done IMO


This sure turned from "deal coming soon" to "more than likely going to make a trade before or on draft day" quickly. 


My dog had a dream that Portland was going to make a trade before or on draft day, and my dog doesn't even follow the nba. Everyone and everything knows that KP is doing things.

I'd say chances are 99.9% that even after your 99% deal was done, another deal was done.

And others are tentative.


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

BlazerCaravan said:


> Yeah, that's the funny thing. For days, we've read blog entires to the effect of: "KP wants more picks, preferably in the lottery." Many articles say this; his intent is known.
> 
> We get a rumor corroborated by two independent, reputable members with ears in and around the organization. Now, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to say "a trade is coming" in the midst of all this "KP wants to deal" talk, but things "feel" right... all we have are hunches, because these two guys are pretty mum.
> 
> ...


Couldn't have said it better myself, BC. Nice post.

PBF


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

Mr. Chuck Taylor said:


> Uh, the later of the two.
> 
> Seriously, does anyone actually think we won't make at least one trade come draft time? I think the odds are in our favor. Anybody can figure out that is the likely scenario. Besides there are tons of trade talks going on, whatever deals may end up going down could have nothing to do what MM claims to know now. And thats the beauty of "having to keep it secret"...we'll never know if he really knew or not. So I don't see how he would deserve any cred at all.


MM could produce e-mail after the fact that show the communication (if not the name/address of the person with whom he was communicating). Some here may not believe their legitimacy, but given MM's general rep here I would.

PBF


----------



## graybeard (May 10, 2003)

So if KP tells Quick that if he spills the beans on this trade he'll never get insider info from him again, what's Quick gonna do? He's going to say there is no deal in the works.


----------



## RedHot&Rolling (Jun 26, 2004)

Sounds like to me that a deal has been reached between two or more teams, pending draft selections. If you do this, then we'll do that. Very plausible.

Now, we just have to wait 20 more freaking days to know the answer!!!!!


----------



## Mr. Chuck Taylor (Aug 2, 2004)

ProudBFan said:


> Then again, how legitimate is Quick's retraction?
> 
> "The truth is always the first victim in any war."
> 
> ...


But what has quick even retracted? He never said a deal was done or even close. I think the closest thing to it was that we are active in trade discussions and want to aquire another first round pick. None of which contradict his statement today saying no deal is imminent.


----------



## dudleysghost (Mar 24, 2006)

Mr. Chuck Taylor said:


> But what has quick even retracted? He never said a deal was done or even close. I think the closest thing to it was that we are active in trade discussions and want to aquire another first round pick. None of which contradict his statement today saying no deal is imminent.


For sure, like someone said in one of these threads, General Managers make mountains of calls, have tons of discussions about specific players, even outlining plenty of specific potential deals, but the vast majority don't end up as completed trades. There's a huge gap between KP talking about possibilities with other GMs and a deal actually getting agreed upon.


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

Mr. Chuck Taylor said:


> But what has quick even retracted? He never said a deal was done or even close. I think the closest thing to it was that we are active in trade discussions and want to aquire another first round pick. None of which contradict his statement today saying no deal is imminent.


Barrett said in his blog that Quick (during his CSxN chat) was (at the time) guaranteeing an additional first-round pick. It's what Quick said on CSxN.

And now he's saying the Blazers never have, and are not working on, any trades.

So, yes, Quick is retracting what he said on CSxN. It's all in the first post of the INFO thread.

PBF


----------



## Mr. Chuck Taylor (Aug 2, 2004)

ProudBFan said:


> Barrett said in his blog that Quick (during his CSxN chat) was (at the time) guaranteeing an additional first-round pick. It's what Quick said on CSxN.
> 
> And now he's saying the Blazers never have, and are not working on, any trades.
> 
> ...


Nonsense. No contradiciton has been made. Quick believeing we will get another pick and Quick saying that no deal is imminent are not mutually exclusive. There are still almost 3 weeks til draft day. Furthermore, he did not say the blazers "never have, and are not working, on any trades". Quick said "The Blazers have not, and are not close to, _making_ any trades." Big, big difference.


----------



## NateBishop3 (Jul 22, 2003)

I didn't know the Blazers and Jason Quick were such great friends, especially since it wasn't the Blazers who contacted Quick about the trade sending Sheed to Atlanta. 

Sorry, but Jason has gotten it wrong so many times. In fact, I'm not really sure when he ever got it right.


----------



## Sabas (Jun 24, 2005)

Look, I work in the media and believe me, everyone thinks they know something. I'm not saying they don't, but in my experience someone who tells me they know something or heard something, I can figure they know about 15-25% of it. And believe me, teams use mis-information more than they ship out real information... yes, even to co-workers and subordinates. I'm not saying that someone on this site or any other site doesn't know anything, they probably do. But there's also a chance they think they know the real deal, but they don't know the whole deal. You guys should know better than anyone, NBA trades are like mob hits... you never see it coming.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

we saw the sheed trade coming....


but if we get YI wow that would be awesome!

MM message me!


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

I am not trying to doubt MM sources or anything...

All I am going to say is that is a very convenient position for him or any other person with "insider" knowledge to take the "I know what the deal is but I can't say" and then wait for *A* deal to happen, as it appears VERY likely that POR will make a deal, and then come out and say "See, this is the deal I was hinting about"....

it is brilliant quite frankly....

that being said, I have never got the impression that either Tbpup or MM are full of hot air when it comes to such information....I just wish we had some sort of sealed envelope....


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Kmurph said:


> I am not trying to doubt MM sources or anything...
> 
> All I am going to say is that is a very convenient position for him or any other person with "insider" knowledge to take the "I know what the deal is but I can't say" and then wait for *A* deal to happen, as it appears VERY likely that POR will make a deal, and then come out and say "See, this is the deal I was hinting about"....
> 
> ...




Great point really. I'll tell you what. I'll let Hap, Schilly and B&B know before I'm told it will get out to the public. Really shouldn't be until June 20 something though.


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

mediocre man said:


> Great point really. I'll tell you what. I'll let Hap, Schilly and B&B know before I'm told it will get out to the public. Really shouldn't be until June 20 something though.


So is this something that won't be announced until the day of or day proir to the draft? I'm really curius to see how this plays out, I know that Pritchard wants to get atleast one if not two other lottery picks and from what I have gathered Jack to Atlanta isn't your rumor (agreed deal).

Did you mention if it was a pick or player? There is mentino of this all over the board and I can't honstly remember. Ugh you're killing me. :lol:

Bottom line, in your opinion, does it make the team better? If it does then I'm fine with it as I am sure the others here on the board are too.


----------



## Storyteller (Dec 31, 2002)

Look, based on past experiences, I'm inclined to give *mediocre man* the 'benefit of doubt' on this issue. And honestly, for him it's a bit of a no-win scenario. No rational person expects him to divulge details until his source gives him the green light. By the time that happens, the trade will truly be done and simply waiting announcement. In which case there will those who will say, "You didn't really know in early June, you just made a guess and waited until a real trade was announced."

Or, the trade could still fall through - it's the NBA after all (see Billy Donovan). In which case people on this board will say, "See, no trade. I knew all along you were full of it."

So, let me say, *mm*, that I personally appreciate the heads up. And try not to let the negative posts get to you - you're doing us a service even if they don't get it.

BTW, isn't it interesting that information about Blazer roster moves is often reported on a board like this earlier than it is by the 'mainstream' press? What did we ever do without the Internet?


----------



## OdomLOL (May 16, 2006)

Storyteller said:


> Look, based on past experiences, I'm inclined to give *mediocre man* the 'benefit of doubt' on this issue. And honestly, for him it's a bit of a no-win scenario. No rational person expects him to divulge details until his source gives him the green light. By the time that happens, the trade will truly be done and simply waiting announcement. In which case there will those who will say, "You didn't really know in early June, you just made a guess and waited until a real trade was announced."
> 
> Or, the trade could still fall through - it's the NBA after all (see Billy Donovan). In which case people on this board will say, "See, no trade. I knew all along you were full of it."
> 
> ...


I appreciate what MM has given this board very much.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

Storyteller said:


> Look, based on past experiences, I'm inclined to give *mediocre man* the 'benefit of doubt' on this issue. And honestly, for him it's a bit of a no-win scenario. No rational person expects him to divulge details until his source gives him the green light. By the time that happens, the trade will truly be done and simply waiting announcement. In which case there will those who will say, "You didn't really know in early June, you just made a guess and waited until a real trade was announced."
> 
> Or, the trade could still fall through - it's the NBA after all (see Billy Donovan). In which case people on this board will say, "See, no trade. I knew all along you were full of it."
> 
> ...


Good post!

MM is not the type to post a rumor he heard from the the mailman. I have no doubt he's got a good source.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

I think the sealed envelop PM's sopund like a great idea, when the time comes. I know that dealing with people within organizations that info does leak, regardless of how ridgid they are. They are human tehy get excited about things and have friends tehy tell and what not. In most cases it is very important that such info doesn't make it out for public consumption. Jobs very literally can be at jeopardy. In fact I know of at least one case where leaked info was a factor in a person losing their job. Not the whoel reason, but it was a factor.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

yeah bob ross 

security clearence anyone? hands up?!?!


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

I apprecaite the heads up too MM

Thanks


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

yes but when is this deal to happen?


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

Utherhimo said:


> yes but when is this deal to happen?


Probably during the draft. Thus, we'll have plenty of time to wait


----------

