Kings out of the picture for Iverson...
- Thread starter VF21
- Start date
It Looks Official According to Sacramento Bee's Sam Amick
http://www.sacbee.com/100/story/91475.html
Gavin Maloof: Kings "out of the running" for Iverson
By Sam Amick - Bee Staff Writer
Published 3:30 pm PST Tuesday, December 12, 2006
The Kings are no longer in the Allen Iverson sweepstakes, according to team co-owner Gavin Maloof.
"We're officially out of the running," Maloof said by phone. "We never got to that point to be in the running. I don't think we got to the point where we were talking or negotiating. It never got to that point."
Iverson, Philadelphia's seven-time All-Star and the league's current leading scorer, demanded Friday to be traded from the 76ers. On Sunday, a league source told The Bee the Kings were involved in discussions with the 76ers, and Kings co-owner Joe Maloof said a day later that they were "in the mix."
While Gavin Maloof said the Kings were not negotiating, two sources close to the organization said there were two deals that had been discussed. The first, according to one source, would have sent Kings point guard Mike Bibby and forward Kenny Thomas to Philadelphia and bring Iverson to the Kings.
The obstacle, however, may have been third-year Kings shooting guard Kevin Martin, who the 76ers also coveted but whom the Kings were unwilling to give up.
The other deal, according to the second source, would have sent Bibby and Thomas to the Los Angeles Clippers, who would send third-year point guard Shaun Livingston and veteran small forward Corey Maggette to Philadelphia. The 76ers, in turn, would send Iverson to Sacramento.
Both sources did not wish to be identified because they were unauthorized to discuss the negotiations.
While the contractual terms of the first deal would work with or without Martin, the deal involving the Clippers would have required them to include more than Livingston and Maggette in a package.
http://www.sacbee.com/100/story/91475.html
Gavin Maloof: Kings "out of the running" for Iverson
By Sam Amick - Bee Staff Writer
Published 3:30 pm PST Tuesday, December 12, 2006
The Kings are no longer in the Allen Iverson sweepstakes, according to team co-owner Gavin Maloof.
"We're officially out of the running," Maloof said by phone. "We never got to that point to be in the running. I don't think we got to the point where we were talking or negotiating. It never got to that point."
Iverson, Philadelphia's seven-time All-Star and the league's current leading scorer, demanded Friday to be traded from the 76ers. On Sunday, a league source told The Bee the Kings were involved in discussions with the 76ers, and Kings co-owner Joe Maloof said a day later that they were "in the mix."
While Gavin Maloof said the Kings were not negotiating, two sources close to the organization said there were two deals that had been discussed. The first, according to one source, would have sent Kings point guard Mike Bibby and forward Kenny Thomas to Philadelphia and bring Iverson to the Kings.
The obstacle, however, may have been third-year Kings shooting guard Kevin Martin, who the 76ers also coveted but whom the Kings were unwilling to give up.
The other deal, according to the second source, would have sent Bibby and Thomas to the Los Angeles Clippers, who would send third-year point guard Shaun Livingston and veteran small forward Corey Maggette to Philadelphia. The 76ers, in turn, would send Iverson to Sacramento.
Both sources did not wish to be identified because they were unauthorized to discuss the negotiations.
While the contractual terms of the first deal would work with or without Martin, the deal involving the Clippers would have required them to include more than Livingston and Maggette in a package.
Last edited:
dang...i leave to take one stupid final, and the kings go from being on the brink of acquiring iverson to straight outta the running for him. crazy stuff...
at any rate, even if the kings are out of the running to acquire iverson, that doesn't necessarily mean that they are no longer involved in the deal. they could easily act as an equalizing third team and come out with something. or maybe they are indeed entirealy out of the deal. who knows? although hopefully we will know by the end of the day...
at any rate, even if the kings are out of the running to acquire iverson, that doesn't necessarily mean that they are no longer involved in the deal. they could easily act as an equalizing third team and come out with something. or maybe they are indeed entirealy out of the deal. who knows? although hopefully we will know by the end of the day...
If there is a year to do it, its this one. I'm all for entry into the Greg Oden sweepstakes.
I'm sure if we had actually gone with coach Whiz it would have been to pull an ML Carr type job on this season. Yeah it didn't work out for the Celtics but where would the Spurs be today if they had pulled out all the stops in that season and somehow squeaked into the playoffs as an 8 seed? One losing season isn't going to kill us and in fact could turn around the franchise for the next decade.
I'm sure if we had actually gone with coach Whiz it would have been to pull an ML Carr type job on this season. Yeah it didn't work out for the Celtics but where would the Spurs be today if they had pulled out all the stops in that season and somehow squeaked into the playoffs as an 8 seed? One losing season isn't going to kill us and in fact could turn around the franchise for the next decade.
No no-trade contract? No problem for The AnswerBy Marc Stein
ESPN.com
Archive
What they're saying on the Allen Iverson grapevine: The Answer has let it be known that he doesn't want to play in Charlotte.
What they're also saying in front-office circles: Iverson isn't thrilled about the prospect of relocating to Sacramento, either.
What I find myself saying whenever I hear such sentiments: How do players scare teams off so easily when almost no one in the NBA possesses a no-trade clause?
The Bobcats, let's face it, would be skittish about trading for A.I. even if he welcomed the move, given owner Bob Johnson's obvious comfort level with a roster that doesn't pay a single player more than $5.5 million. Although he badly wants to fill up his building and ranks as one of the league's most outspoken owners regarding the struggles of small-market, Johnson is clearly hesitant to sanction an Iverson deal. Sure, Iverson has a knack for selling tickets, he also has $39.8 million left on his contract after this season and the little man has a hard-to-handle history.
But here's the thing.
Iverson doesn't possess the ultimate hammer. NBA front-office sources confirmed Tuesday that his contract does not contain a no-trade clause.
In fact, as far as I know, the Lakers' Kobe Bryant is the only NBA player who has one.
Why?
This simply isn't baseball, where no-trade clauses or partial no-trade clauses are routinely built into player contracts ... and where the famed 10-and-5 rule automatically enables veterans with 10 years of service time and five with a player's current team to veto trades.
In the NBA, only players with at least eight years of service time and four with the same team are eligible for a no-trade clause.
The problem?
Very few players get to that point with one team and then have the opportunity to negotiate a no-trade clause through free-agency.
Star players like Iverson, for starters, generally sign their first big-money deals well before their eighth season.
Star players like Iverson, furthermore, often sign extensions to those big deals ... and NBA extensions do not allow players to add major changes in contract terms, such as a no-trade clause. A player must enter free agency to change major terms in a contract.
That's how Bryant put himself in the rare position to negotiate a no-trade clause. He was a full-fledged unrestricted free agent in the summer of 2004 and, having just completed his eighth season and after flirting seriously with the Clippers, signed a new seven-year, $136 million contract with the Lakers which includes a no-trade provision.
Iverson?
He's actually never been eligible for a no-trade clause, even though this is his 11th season with the same team. His four-year, $72.4 million extension with the Sixers, which began last season, operates under the same main terms -- without a no-trade clause, in other words -- as his previous contract, which he signed before he had eight years in the league.
The league, on top of that, now has the right to suspend players who refuse to report to their new teams after trades, following the Alonzo Mourning debacle in Toronto after the Nets swiped Vince Carter from the Raps in December 2004.
Yet the league's authority in such matters didn't stop the Bobs from quickly abandoning the concept of adding Iverson to their quartet of promising kiddies: Emeka Okafor, Adam Morrison, Raymond Felton and Sean May.
We'll have to wait and see how it impacts the Kings, who continue to flirt with the idea of sending Mike Bibby (and others excluding Kevin Martin) to Philly to pair Iverson with Ron Artest ... and who have a history of ignoring star players' initial resistance to Natomas County (Chris Webber and Artest) and trading for them anyway.
Iverson, sources says, most wants to go Minnesota or Boston. He's also apparently open to Indiana and would presumably sanction Denver, which has registered interest in spite of its vows to sit this out.
All those teams continue to face serious issues assembling the package of young players, draft picks and/or favorable contracts Philly is looking for, but their quests live on and actually gain momentum if Iverson can continue to dissuade Charlotte from making bids.
Even without official trade-blocking power.
Marc Stein is the senior NBA writer for ESPN.com. To e-mail him, click here.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=stein_marc&id=2695408
ESPN.com
Archive
What they're saying on the Allen Iverson grapevine: The Answer has let it be known that he doesn't want to play in Charlotte.
What they're also saying in front-office circles: Iverson isn't thrilled about the prospect of relocating to Sacramento, either.
What I find myself saying whenever I hear such sentiments: How do players scare teams off so easily when almost no one in the NBA possesses a no-trade clause?
The Bobcats, let's face it, would be skittish about trading for A.I. even if he welcomed the move, given owner Bob Johnson's obvious comfort level with a roster that doesn't pay a single player more than $5.5 million. Although he badly wants to fill up his building and ranks as one of the league's most outspoken owners regarding the struggles of small-market, Johnson is clearly hesitant to sanction an Iverson deal. Sure, Iverson has a knack for selling tickets, he also has $39.8 million left on his contract after this season and the little man has a hard-to-handle history.
But here's the thing.
Iverson doesn't possess the ultimate hammer. NBA front-office sources confirmed Tuesday that his contract does not contain a no-trade clause.
In fact, as far as I know, the Lakers' Kobe Bryant is the only NBA player who has one.
Why?
This simply isn't baseball, where no-trade clauses or partial no-trade clauses are routinely built into player contracts ... and where the famed 10-and-5 rule automatically enables veterans with 10 years of service time and five with a player's current team to veto trades.
In the NBA, only players with at least eight years of service time and four with the same team are eligible for a no-trade clause.
The problem?
Very few players get to that point with one team and then have the opportunity to negotiate a no-trade clause through free-agency.
Star players like Iverson, for starters, generally sign their first big-money deals well before their eighth season.
Star players like Iverson, furthermore, often sign extensions to those big deals ... and NBA extensions do not allow players to add major changes in contract terms, such as a no-trade clause. A player must enter free agency to change major terms in a contract.
That's how Bryant put himself in the rare position to negotiate a no-trade clause. He was a full-fledged unrestricted free agent in the summer of 2004 and, having just completed his eighth season and after flirting seriously with the Clippers, signed a new seven-year, $136 million contract with the Lakers which includes a no-trade provision.
Iverson?
He's actually never been eligible for a no-trade clause, even though this is his 11th season with the same team. His four-year, $72.4 million extension with the Sixers, which began last season, operates under the same main terms -- without a no-trade clause, in other words -- as his previous contract, which he signed before he had eight years in the league.
The league, on top of that, now has the right to suspend players who refuse to report to their new teams after trades, following the Alonzo Mourning debacle in Toronto after the Nets swiped Vince Carter from the Raps in December 2004.
Yet the league's authority in such matters didn't stop the Bobs from quickly abandoning the concept of adding Iverson to their quartet of promising kiddies: Emeka Okafor, Adam Morrison, Raymond Felton and Sean May.
We'll have to wait and see how it impacts the Kings, who continue to flirt with the idea of sending Mike Bibby (and others excluding Kevin Martin) to Philly to pair Iverson with Ron Artest ... and who have a history of ignoring star players' initial resistance to Natomas County (Chris Webber and Artest) and trading for them anyway.
Iverson, sources says, most wants to go Minnesota or Boston. He's also apparently open to Indiana and would presumably sanction Denver, which has registered interest in spite of its vows to sit this out.
All those teams continue to face serious issues assembling the package of young players, draft picks and/or favorable contracts Philly is looking for, but their quests live on and actually gain momentum if Iverson can continue to dissuade Charlotte from making bids.
Even without official trade-blocking power.
Marc Stein is the senior NBA writer for ESPN.com. To e-mail him, click here.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=stein_marc&id=2695408
Yup...and we'll have too good of record to have any shot at getting Odom or Noah...oh well...HELLO 7th PICK!! Bobby Hurley anyone??
I mean he's done it before with the Knicks, Magic and Bulls, right? Where's my tin foil hat?
But maybe, just maybe, David Stern will rig the lottery for us since he's so keen on getting a new arena built in Sactown?
I mean he's done it before with the Knicks, Magic and Bulls, right? Where's my tin foil hat?
I mean he's done it before with the Knicks, Magic and Bulls, right? Where's my tin foil hat?
