Tetsujin
The Game Thread Dude
The more the Lakers suffer the better
Chris Paul is a shameless copycat
- Thread starter Vlade4GM
- Start date
The more the Lakers suffer the better
MassachusettsKingsFan
All-Star
The Hornets are getting completely screwed here. That team is ruined.
With Stern cancelling this deal .. I don't see how he can allow Paul to be traded anywhere. And there is no way in hell he stays in New Orleans next season.
So instead of Scola, Martin, Odom and a pick the Hornets will have no one. Brilliant.
With Stern cancelling this deal .. I don't see how he can allow Paul to be traded anywhere. And there is no way in hell he stays in New Orleans next season.
So instead of Scola, Martin, Odom and a pick the Hornets will have no one. Brilliant.
If the league is going to save face here, they'd better expedite the sale of the Hornets and remove the handcuffs. If the new owner either deals CP3, or says outright he won't, then eventually this will be dropped. But I agree, if the league forces Paul to stick around until he becomes a free agent, that's a big black eye.
Vlade4GM
All-Star
I think it was kind of screwed up what Paul was doing but what Stern did was seriously wrong and screwed up. This puts such a black mark on the NBA, I'm more pissed about this than I would have been about Paul and Howard forcing their way to the Lakers. This is a travesty.
Last edited:
Vlade4GM
All-Star
I'd understand this move more if it was done to a subsequent Howard trade, but this Paul trade by itself wasn't that bad, and it wasn't that big of a difference from the norm. There was nothing particularly unique about the way this went down, if you compare it to the Garnett trade or the Melo trade, how is this any worse? Yeah, Paul was exerting his influence, but the Lakers and Rockets were giving up significant pieces of their team, I don't care if this was anticipation of a Howard trade.
You're absolutely right, this is so arbitrary and it now forces the NBA to keep nixing deals in order to not appear biased. Essentially screwing the team you're supposedly trying to protect. I don't know where the NBA goes from here, but it's not going to be pretty. As an NBA fan, I'm very depressed about the state of this league, this whole things stinks of something seriously screwed up behind closed doors. What is the NBA planning on doing? Enforcing the system that they wanted and didn't get in the CBA by a flat out dictatorship?
Last edited:
Telemachus
Starter
I don't understand what the owners are thinking here either. I wonder if all the backlash they are getting right now might make them reconsider? I actually thought this was a good trade for NO and a mediocre trade for LA. I kept wondering who the Lakers' frontcourt was going to be (especially the first 5 games w/o Bynum). The only other big man I know of on their roster is Derek Caracter.
kingsnation
All-Star
When I saw the news just 5 minutes ago, I was PO'd that LA got Paul. Then I was really, really excited and laughed at the fact that the NBA just spit in the face of the Lakers by nixing the deal. It's about time. However, I have never seen such issues with the way a sports league is ran, at least in the 4 major sports. For a league to pretty much be based upon Superstars and Super-Teams this entire past half-decade, it's pretty odd to see them all of a sudden shoot down a trade that, as others have stated, isn't as uneven as some others in the past.
In retrospect, I don't feel bad for LA or Chris Paul. I'm laughing pretty hard at them. I do feel bad for Pau, Odom, Houston, New Orleans and all of the other players involved.
In retrospect, I don't feel bad for LA or Chris Paul. I'm laughing pretty hard at them. I do feel bad for Pau, Odom, Houston, New Orleans and all of the other players involved.
Vlade4GM
All-Star
Well the Lakers would have had a decent size trade exception to play with if they didn't get Howard right away. I think the owners were trying to stop a Kobe, Paul, Howard team up. Why that means they had to prevent this trade instead of a Howard trade, I don't know. I literally cannot believe that that a major sports league would do this. How do they think they can get away with doing this? This is far more disturbing to me than the lockout was. What does the CBA even mean if Stern can just block any move he wants?
Geoff
Starter
I hate the Lakers, but right now I am upset about the way this entire thing went down. I agree with Brick that the three-way trade was as fair as could be under the circumstances, and this high-handed action by David Stern has completely fouled up the system. Where CAN CP3 go? Who determines what players are worthy to be traded with him for? What right does David Stern have to stop the other two teams from the trades they made? This is not good. It is not good at all, and I predict that this will AT LEAST do as much damage to the league as the full season lockout would have done. I wouldn't blame CP3 for sitting out the entire season as long as that sort of thing happens.
Vlade4GM
All-Star
The action that the NBA has taken is the greater evil. Besides, if you look at this trade for the Lakers, by itself, it doesn't indisputably improve them. Bynum is often injured and inconsistent, and he's all that's left in their once dominant frontcourt. They gave up their biggest advantage in this league, their frontcourt depth, for the most ball dominant player in basketball.
KingsCitizen
Starter
The Hornets is league owned so it should not make deals that will eventually trigger imbalance in the market sharing. As long as it's NBA owned it should stay by this rule. If somehow, the Hornets will finally be bought by someone within this year, then the league no longer have rights to veto any deal as long as it's observing proper CBA guidlines. So Mr. Chris Paul, go look for a new owner and stop sulking.
rainmaker
Hall of Famer
Look at this. Letter to Stern from Dan Gilbert
That is mind boggling. LA came out, and got worse in the deal. NO came out great. No way can they reproduce that, unless this is pushed through.
Also is unfair to CP3, every player involved, all the franchises involved, and every teams FO which is attempting to figure out what's going on as FA kicks off. Incredibly unfair. That word doesn't give it justice.
It is scary, what just happened. I hate the Lakers, but this isn't good business, it's corrupt, from the league, and completely screws up the franchises involved, potentially for years. Demps had the leagues blessing to trade CP3, and kept them updated. The league knew what was happening, as it was happening, over a couple week. Then blocked it with no explanation? An idiot owner that can't see NO and Hou came out great in this deal, and that it wasn't one sided? I mean, can Gilbert be this dumb, seriously?
I'm kind of in shock over what happened. Stern should push the deal through, and then resign.
That is mind boggling. LA came out, and got worse in the deal. NO came out great. No way can they reproduce that, unless this is pushed through.
Also is unfair to CP3, every player involved, all the franchises involved, and every teams FO which is attempting to figure out what's going on as FA kicks off. Incredibly unfair. That word doesn't give it justice.
It is scary, what just happened. I hate the Lakers, but this isn't good business, it's corrupt, from the league, and completely screws up the franchises involved, potentially for years. Demps had the leagues blessing to trade CP3, and kept them updated. The league knew what was happening, as it was happening, over a couple week. Then blocked it with no explanation? An idiot owner that can't see NO and Hou came out great in this deal, and that it wasn't one sided? I mean, can Gilbert be this dumb, seriously?
I'm kind of in shock over what happened. Stern should push the deal through, and then resign.
Last edited:
rainmaker
Hall of Famer
What are you talking about? They did play by the rules. Everything you said is off.
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
If I was more of a reality TV guy and less of a basketball analyst guy I would be having the time of my life right now.
the word debacle comes to mind.
Vlade4GM
All-Star
Does anyone see the irony in him complaining about the Lakers being under the tax threshold? Lakers gave up Odom and Gasol, 2 main cogs on their team, and that's supposed to be a travesty for the league? A travesty? No, the travesty is that what was once a great sports league, is now a dictatorship. Dan Gilbert, and everyone that agrees with him, can go to hell. I don't like what was seemingly about to happen with the Lakers, but this is so much worse. This league has become a joke, fodder for backroom politics and petulant loser billionaires demanding that the CBA be forcibly circumvented to their liking by arbitrary executive rulings.
KingsCitizen
Starter
They did not break CBA rules but the Hornets is financed by the league whose budget comes from other owner's pocket.
If the deal will push through, it will actually give the Lakers a freakin salary space within the next season to sign another superstar and still sign Paul they way Miami did with Wade.
So what happens to the NBA market in the years after this? The rest of the teams become almost irrelevant.
If your a business man, are you going to support a business that will eventually make your existing business irrelevant in the future? Come on!
Uncia03
Starter
My first inclination was that this move by Stern really hurts the Hornets. This was probably as good a deal as they were going to get. But upon further reflection, I've completely changed my viewpoint.
The problem with this situation is that this was probably the best deal the Hornets could get. And it's not that other teams couldn't offer more for CP3. It's the fact that CP3 can basically hold the Hornets hostage, and dictate which teams have the right to compete for his services, because he'll threaten not to resign for most teams.
The Hornets were going to get a lot of good players. B-Level type players who would be competitive, and most likely prevent the team from dropping down to the worst of the League.
But here's the problem.
Who cares.
I mean, the goal of a team should always be to win a championship. And you basically have no shot to win a championship with-out at least 1 A-level player. (Please don't cite Detroit)
So, as good a deal as it was for the Hornets, it wasn't going to help them win a championship. So if you make a move that loses you your piece that could bring a championship, for some pieces which are good, but aren't really going to help you, then what have you accomplished? This trade was never going to allow the Hornets to seriously contend for anything.
I personally think that the Hornets would be better off not trading CP3. If he walks, then the team becomes really bad, and you hope to hit in the lottery to pick up A-Level talent, because there is no way they were going to get A-Level talent by going through with this trade.
So though I think think it was as good a deal as the Hornets were going to get, in the long run, I don't think it was going to do them any favors.
Now to address the point above, the reason Stern had to act on this deal was because the league does own the team. If the Hornets were owned by another owner, then there is no way that he vetos the trade. Having said that, if the Hornets were owned by someone else, (let's say someone like Mikhail Prokhorov) it's possible that they wouldn't trade Paul. CP3 says he won't sign an extension and will definitely walk after the season is completed, but that isn't a guarantee, especially if the right pieces are put in place.
I don't necessarily agree with Stern's decision to veto the trade, and I think that the backlash for this decision could really cause problems down the line, but I'm glad that he did.
Let's face the facts. Everyone knows that the Laker's next move was to bring in Howard. Now, they might not have pulled it off, but I'd say they had a very, very good chance to do it.
I would like someone to explain to me how allowing the big-market Lakers to obtain the best PG and best Center in the game, while in their primes, is good for the vast majority of the owners and teams out there.
The owners were upset that their star players could basically black-mail them into trading them to other teams of the player's choosing. I think owners are upset of taking the risks to draft and develop star talent, only to see that talent leave at the first available opportunity.
Basically we saw Cleveland, Denver, and Toronto become the farm-system team for Miami and New York. We were on the verge of seeing New Orleans become the farm-team for L.A.
And so, I think that is what prompted Stern to ultimately make this decision. It's basically a worst-case scenario for the majority of the owners and the markets, if the Lakers land both CP3 and Howard.
I mentioned this a week ago or so. I said that if CP3 and Howard both ended up forcing their way off their teams to go to big market teams, it was going to create the sort of leverage that small market teams would use in order to really go after system issues in 6 years after they can opt out of the new CBA.
The response was that the players would have the leverage in the next round, but I don't buy it.
There is no way you can look at what's going on right now, and tell me that the players aren't exerting their influence to a degree that hurts the majority of the teams out there.
I think everyone is going to remember this day, and I wouldn't be surprised if we lost a season in six years when the CBA can be opted out of. It's clear that the players have no problems trying to bully their way to the teams they want to play for, and I think it's equally clear that the owners are fed up with it.
I can see this being a sticking point, where neither side budges, and we end up with missed seasons because of it. I actually expected it this time around, but my guess is that the owners felt they won on the financials this time around, and would address these huge system issues in the next go-around.
This first day of the new CBA has truly been a disaster, and I think it's going to have a major impact on the tone of the league for a long time. And with that said, I'm still pleased that the odds of L.A. ending up with both CP3 and Howard are slim-to-none.
Vlade4GM
All-Star
I'm sorry, but the ends don't justify the means here. There is a huge conflict of interest by the NBA shutting down the move made by Demps (who was essentially made their mediator to avoid a conflict of interest), and it's not right. They should not have that kind of power to just arbitrarily shut down trades, especially when they let it get as far as it being all but officially completed, which leaves disgruntled players. Also, all these owners basically coming together to collude against the teams involved in this trade (which I think is clearly shown by the Gilbert letter and the timing of the nixed trade) is bogus as well. I don't care if someone thinks this isn't a good rebuilding package for NOH. Value for value, how is this not a fair deal when they're going to lose Paul no matter what? How is this any worse than the Garnett trade, the Gasol trade, or the Anthony trade? I'd argue that it's a lot better than those trades when you add the overall value of the players they're getting. This is BS, and the league is just going to let Dwight do the exact same thing that they accused Paul of doing. If the league is bitter about what the players are doing, then they should have thought of that before they agreed to the CBA. Everyone knew that they would try to do this, their rules weren't good enough, and now they just said screw the rules, we'll do whatever we want to anyway.
I hated the idea of Kobe/Paul/Dwight too, but a league where that happens is preferable to a league where this kind of abuse of authority happens.
I hated the idea of Kobe/Paul/Dwight too, but a league where that happens is preferable to a league where this kind of abuse of authority happens.
Last edited:
Uncia03
Starter
First I just want to mention that it's most likely the case that Sterns been buried in getting the CBA finished. I believe they mentioned that the final items weren't even finished until Thursday morning. So perhaps this deal would have been killed sooner if he wasn't focused on trying to put together the deal to get the league up and running again.
With that said, I agree that the timing is egregious. In an ideal world, this would have been shut down way before anything concrete came of it.
But here's a question for you.
If you heard that there had been discussions, but then nothing came of it, but Stern was the one to Veto, and you never knew that is what took place, then would this be such a fire-storm?
I think that because it happened in the manner it did, makes this a whole lot worse for Stern and the League than it otherwise would have been.
As to Stern's power-trip, as long as it is in the interest of fair, competitive balance, I'm fine with a league being high-handed. And this goes for all the leagues. NBA, NFL, MLB, NHL, ect. I think all of the leagues are better off if every team has an opportunity to compete for a championship, provided that they make good decisions and are run well.
I hate when people talk about the Spurs as the model organization, and how a small market team can win. They were flat out lucky. They had Robinson and Duncan back-to-back, and let's be honest here. It's because of who Duncan is, that they had success. If they had drafted Shaq, I'm sure he would have left as soon as he had the opportunity. So not only were the Spurs lucky in getting the #1 pick, they ended up with someone who has the personality to stay with them long-term.
I've said it a couple of times. Stern's decision could end up having ramifications that cause serious issues down the line. But that's just speculation at this point. Right now, at this moment, he made a competitive balance decision. He was high-handed, but it was made with the interests of the majority of the league, and for that reason I'm fine with it.
Vlade4GM
All-Star
So you think the whole time this deal was being discussed, the Hornets FO never got any feedback from the commissioner's office?
Where's the Hornets competitive balance? The NBA gives Demps the authority to trade Paul, and he gets a team in return that will still compete (which can be argued is what they need in their ownership situation), and it gets nixed and basically ruins their chances of getting something good for Paul.
Being in favor of competitive balance is fine, but being in favor of it being arbitrarily ruled on by an executive led by colluding owners? A sports league cannot function that way.
Where's the Hornets competitive balance? The NBA gives Demps the authority to trade Paul, and he gets a team in return that will still compete (which can be argued is what they need in their ownership situation), and it gets nixed and basically ruins their chances of getting something good for Paul.
Being in favor of competitive balance is fine, but being in favor of it being arbitrarily ruled on by an executive led by colluding owners? A sports league cannot function that way.
Uncia03
Starter
I don't really want to argue this back and forth. I really do think that Stern was probably out-of-the-loop and the day to days of the trade discussions, being that he's been killing himself to get this thing up and running in the narrow timeframe available, but I'm not saying that justifies the horrible timing of this all. It just might be the reality of the situation, and one that does a lot of harm long-term.
I understand where you're coming from, and I'm curious to see what sort of backlash there might be.
From a league competitive balance standpoint, blocking the trade was "probably" the right thing to do.
And until we actually see what happens to Paul and the Hornets over the next year, we won't really be able to say whether this hurt them or not. (I know it's a cop-out to say we won't know till later, but it is sort of true. It's the same as when you make a trade for a draft-pick, you can't really evaluate until you get those players)
Anyway, the main reason I responded was because I was just thinking about something else, and I'm curious as to your opinion.
I'm sure you've seen the tweets from Odom regarding having to go back to L.A. now, and how is he supposed to handle that.
I really wonder what Derek Fisher is thinking. Now, we all know that he's past his prime as the PG there, and since they will probably move away from the triangle, he's even more useless.
But he just spent an exhaustive summer fighting for the rights of players and the very first thing that happens is the Lakers take advantage of the wiggle-room he fought for them, and use it to bring in a super-star replacement.
I wonder if he's happy or sad or upset about Stern stopping the trade. Personally it probably benefits him, though it goes against what he was fighting for.
I don't have any idea, but find the thought interesting.
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
One more time, its an isolated case. The NBA owns the Horents. Made all this possible. "Arbitrary rulings by colluding owners (not sure you can collude against a team you also partially own)" are only possibe with this one specific team at this one specific time.
Truth is that Stern probably had good reaos not to step in before now -- the players voted on the new CBA yesterday, and if he had raised a stink before then it might have endaangered the vote. But it could also very well have simply been the same process Geoff or anybody else goes through. Demps neogtiates a deal, takes it to his owner, in this case 29 owners, and says ok here it is, can I complete this? And then the owners, and I am guessing here in particular the small marklet owners still fuming from not getting the things they wanted in the new CBA say "**** no you can't do that!"
Doesn;t have any relevance to trades between teams not owned by the NBA.
UK_King
Starter
Slightly odd interview with Lamar Odom on this situation: http://www.espn.go.com/espnradio/losangeles/play?id=7334400
Dime Dropper
All-Star
Rumours that Howard will soon demand a trade to the Nets, and may not even show up for training camp. What a joke - these idiots are ruining the NBA.
Geoff
Starter
If you're a businessman, are you going to use an unfair advantage to frak up three other businessmen's deals? What the Lakers can or can't do isn't your business! If CP3 wants to go to LA or New York, that's his perogative!
sc3252
Bench
I actually think it would be bigger if they stoped a Dwight Howard trade. The NBA owns the Hornets, so its within their power to stop any trade they think isn't in the best interest of the hornets or the league. Heck the Hornets should be trading for picks anyways, not older guys like Martin, Scola, and Odom.
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
Not yet though, not until he's a FA. This has been the confusion/delusion of which I think the owners have been trying to break the current generation of hubris filled stars -- the idea that that they are bigger than the game, the system, adn their contracts, and can dow ahtever they want and make whatever they want happen even if they are under contract for somebody else.
Maybe the NBA should plant some meth on one of these guys and boot him from the league for substance abuse violations just so he, and his fellow pals looking to pull the same maneuver, would come to realize how unmissed he would be. The league would roll on, and the one guy's absence would leave no bigger hole than when Arenas's knee went, or A.I. got drummed out. Be new stars and new storylines and the league would go on just fine.
Similar threads
- Locked
