So say if Westbrook went out for the year in January and Reggie's numbers jumped for 15 games, THEN we'd evaluate the trade given his recent production and circumstance (would likely keep the same numbers as Russy isn't coming back to affect them).

But even then, the LEAGUE reviewed it. It wasn't arbitrarily decided on by the traders involved. Which is really my biggest issue with it. Had Shawn took the approach like 'hey, I know it's a star for a non-star and Reggie eating off of temporary injuries. So ya'll let me know if this is cool now or do we need to wait a little longer given it's the start of the season', we could have put it up for vote/discussion and rocked with popular opinion.

His 'nope, within the numbers' shtick with no regard to the grey areas of the rule is the sleazy part of it all.

>so its kind of difficult to use this standard for enforcing a
>rule, that possibly half of the league didn't know was part of
>the criteria. Especially since we have a very specific written
>trade rule in place.

I post the rules every year, multiple times usually as someone asks what the trade or IR rules are. Everyone should have book marked that google site by now. And people use to ask for clarity if something wasn't evident/unclear. I don't buy ignorance at this point. We haven't had a rookie since when, what, Frank/Magilla came back to replace KC and Shelly? And they were returning players...not true rooks. And that's been at least 3 years, they should get it by now (you too).

>And regarding slow/fast starts, the rule gives leeway for hot
>streaks of 10-20 games. At the point the trade was made,
>drummond and reggie jackson had had enough games to be
>considered in that hot streak category. (unlike the 3 game
>example that you gave)