Chris Paul is a shameless copycat

Superman said:
You're telling me that the NBA doesn't want the Lakers to be good? The Lakers being good is driving a whole heck of a lot of revenue for the NBA right now, and as soon as they get their revenue sharing banged out, it's going to be even bigger. They signed a TV deal that's bringing in $150 million a year for the next two decades. And now, you're saying that this entire veto was to stop the Lakers?
Click to expand...

It depends on how you define "NBA," I think a lot of owners complained because Paul was going to the Lakers and that since they weren't taking a lot of money back, it would be very likely they'd get Howard next.

And don't give me that "so the NBA doesn't want the Lakers to be good?" line, you know damn well that wasn't what I was saying, and you know damn well that the Lakers will still be good with or without this trade. There's a difference between being good and racking up star players, two of which are 25-26. Lakers are still contenders without this trade and Stern knows that.
 
Last edited:
Heard a revamped deal is done but somewhat on life support as some are still trying to kill the deal. Hoping the new deal adds salary to the lakers so it makes it difficult for them to acquire Howard.
 
est.1999 said:
Heard a revamped deal is done but somewhat on life support as some are still trying to kill the deal. Hoping the new deal adds salary to the lakers so it makes it difficult for them to acquire Howard.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's what I'm hoping for too. I think this deal is fine for the league by itself, but if the Lakers get Howard as well? Ugh.
 
Vlade4GM said:
It depends on how you define "NBA," I think a lot of owners complained because Paul was going to the Lakers and that since they weren't taking a lot of money back, it would be very likely they'd get Howard next.

And don't give me that "so the NBA doesn't want the Lakers to be good?" line, you know damn well that wasn't what I was saying, and you know damn well that the Lakers will still be good with or without this trade. There's a difference between being good and racking up star players, two of which are 25-26. Lakers are still contenders without this trade and Stern knows that.
Click to expand...

The current iteration of the Lakers got swept out of the second round of the playoffs. There's "good," and then there's "we just got Chris Paul and Dwight Howard and we're set for the next eight years." The Lakers can be "good" with Kobe and Odom and Gasol and Bynum, and then they'll be barely mediocre as Kobe declines. Or they can be top three for the next four years with Kobe, Paul and Howard. What do you think is better for the league financially?

Any idea that the NBA (meaning Stern and the cronies in NY) doesn't want the Lakers to add Paul and Howard is crazy talk. But the league (meaning the other owners) doesn't want to see the Lakers get reloaded, especially when it's made possible by the team the league owns. And I get that, and I agree. If the NBA didn't own the Hornets, there would be no basis for this deal to get rejected by Stern. It simply looks bad.
 
I think the bottom line is that there is no dilemma between the Lakers still being a draw and pissing off the owners. The Lakers will be a draw either way (at least for the near future), Stern could be greedy for the league and let the trade go through, or he could be greedy for himself and do what the owners wanted. He chose himself at that point, but the backlash may be too bad to do it yet again.

It's moot anyway, because I don't think the decision Stern made was really what he (personally) wanted to do, but he gave in to the complaints of multiple owners. It's my opinion that those owners were not making those complaints based on their interest in the Hornets, but rather their interest in their franchises (just look at Gilbert and Cuban's comments, that makes it very clear.) That's owners colluding on how other teams should manage their roster. We may not like what's happening with the Lakers (although I don't care as long as they don't get Howard as well), but it's a "tough ****" situation at this point, the greater evil is collusion against specific teams.
 
Vlade4GM said:
I think the bottom line is that there is no dilemma between the Lakers still being a draw and pissing off the owners. The Lakers will be a draw either way (at least for the near future), Stern could be greedy for the league and let the trade go through, or he could be greedy for himself and do what the owners wanted. He chose himself at that point, but the backlash may be too bad to do it yet again.

It's moot anyway, because I don't think the decision Stern made was really what he (personally) wanted to do, but he gave in to the complaints of multiple owners. It's my opinion that those owners were not making those complaints based on their interest in the Hornets, but rather their interest in their franchises (just look at Gilbert and Cuban's comments, that makes it very clear.) That's owners colluding on how other teams should manage their roster. We may not like what's happening with the Lakers (although I don't care as long as they don't get Howard as well), but it's a "tough ****" situation at this point, the greater evil is collusion against specific teams.
Click to expand...

The owners would have had no grounds to complain about this deal if they weren't part owners of the Hornets. Sure, they have conflicted interests. They may have complained about just ratifying a new CBA that was supposed to make it easier for small market teams to keep their stars. They may have hated the fact that the Lakers were reloading. But they only have a leg to stand on in this regard because they all own a part of the Hornets.

They all put up over $10 million to buy out George Shinn. The more the team sells for, the more they get. Trading Chris Paul impacts the selling price. If I were an owner, I'd be hoping we could sell to anyone before we trade away the one bright spot. Heck, sell to Ellison and let him do whatever he wants, because he's already agreed to pay $350 million.

Again, that's only part of the issue. The idea that the league-owned team is giving its best player to the Lakers really doesn't look good.
 
Superman said:
The owners would have had no grounds to complain about this deal if they weren't part owners of the Hornets. Sure, they have conflicted interests. They may have complained about just ratifying a new CBA that was supposed to make it easier for small market teams to keep their stars. They may have hated the fact that the Lakers were reloading. But they only have a leg to stand on in this regard because they all own a part of the Hornets.

They all put up over $10 million to buy out George Shinn. The more the team sells for, the more they get. Trading Chris Paul impacts the selling price. If I were an owner, I'd be hoping we could sell to anyone before we trade away the one bright spot. Heck, sell to Ellison and let him do whatever he wants, because he's already agreed to pay $350 million.

Again, that's only part of the issue. The idea that the league-owned team is giving its best player to the Lakers really doesn't look good.
Click to expand...

Well, obviously they have grounds to complain because of the league's ownership in the Hornets, that's not disputed here. However, they really have no business complaining about the moves the Hornets are making based on the interest of any team other than the Hornets. I'm sure they can come up with reasons why this trade is bad for the Hornets, but I don't believe for a second that's why they clamored so hard against it. Gilbert stated as much in his e-mail, and Cuban came right out and said it. It's obvious what is going on here, they're using their ownership in the Hornets to arbitrarily legislate the league as well as their own interests. I think there is something hugely wrong with that.
 
Last edited:
It's wrong but then it's right. Mostly the way of going about it is what is wrong, but I don't think that is what people are all upset about. All the noise I hear is coming from Laker fans and the media, and the press has been nothing but a player agent mouthpiece through this whole lockout and trade fiasco. It's not secret that the "angry executive" is Daryl Morey having a bitchfest to his press pals, but all the Rocket fans I know aren't angry like Morey that the trade was vetoed. They were worried about giving up a lot players and some draft picks for a big man who may be on the decline, and who had his balls hung out to question by his team and then traded away. They're worried that this happens, it fails and all that ends up happening is that their team help continue a Lakers dynasty.

People are angry because somebody in power finally told the Golden God No. They're angry because they represent players who thought they were going to get their way before the new CBA rules started to kick in. They're angry because they had the Chris Paul in LA storylnes all ready to go.
 
Looks as if CP3 to the Lakers is now dead.
Dallas is taking their trade-exception that got from the Chandler S&T and trading for Lamar Odom and picks.

So it looks as if L.A. is going to make a big run for Howard.
I think that LA's Trade Exception will be worth 8.9 million, so I don't think they can actually use it for Hedo's 10.6 mil contract.

And it also looks as if the Clippers might be the front-runners for CP3. If they end up trading Gordan and signing Jordan, they'd have CP3, Griffin, and Jordan as the main pieces, along with the newly signed Butler. That's a good team there.

And if the Hornets did end up with Gordon, that's a far better trade for them than what they were going to get from the Laker deal.

I'd be ok if CP3 ended up as a Clipper, then if Howard has to leave Orlando, ending up with the Nets. The question is simple, would he rather play with Williams for 5 years, or the Lakers with no PG.

It's going to be really interesting to see how it all plays out.
 
You know, even if you think shutting down that trade to the Lakers is okay, you have to admit that the league letting things go as far as they did before they shut it down was way wrong. It essentially forced the Lakers to break up their team, because there's no way their chemistry was coming back from that.

I think trading Odom was way too big of a gamble. I'm sure they have some kind of angle here for Dwight, but he's no guarantee even if they put together the best deal they can, not without Paul to quell his long term concerns. For the Lakers' sake, they better have some kind of assurances for Howard, or else they just tossed one of their core players in the garbage.

Supposedly the Clippers aren't giving up Gordon for Paul, now or ever.
 
Vlade4GM said:
You know, even if you think shutting down that trade to the Lakers is okay, you have to admit that the league letting things go as far as they did before they shut it down was way wrong. It essentially forced the Lakers to break up their team, because there's no way their chemistry was coming back from that.
Click to expand...

It did go far too far. Demps was making deals without the interest of his owners in mind or even the good of NO in mind. He was the wrong hire. Second, once it was killed the first time they should have made it clear that the teams involved simply didn't have what it took to get Paul and stopped wasting anymore time.
 
I put it on the league, not Demps. How many times was he told he had autonomy to run the club? The league could have stepped in sooner when they knew the direction of the talks. It's not Demps' responsibility to read the league's mind, if he knew what they wanted, he wouldn't have gone along with the trade in the first place. It's on the league to stop that trade before it got too far, only they know what they would have accepted.
 
I'm obviously not for moving teams from cities considering the Kings situation, but the real mistake was not selling the Hornets when they had a buyer. Every GM should realize he serves the wants and benefits of his owners and the team. The moves proposed didn't help the Hornets as a team as it put them in NBA purgatory of 8th seed hell. They also devalued the franchise and hurt the owners. Demps was put in a bad spot, but this trade AND the David West trade don't make sense. Why is he helping the Celtics by trading West for j. O'Neal? A player that will ask to be released before even stepping foot in New Orleans. It seems the league thought Demps understood but he didn't. I am not sure at what point all the owners learned of the trade. It may have just been Demps and Stern discussing it and Stern not informing the 29 others financially on the hook for NO until too late. There was certainly a communication error somewhere.
 
It seems to me that the Lakers are mailing it in this season now. I still can't believe that they didn't try to work something with Houston directly. Getting Scola, Martin, Dragic, and a 1st is far better than what they seem to be settling for now. Dumbasses.
 
Vlade4GM said:
It seems to me that the Lakers are mailing it in this season now. I still can't believe that they didn't try to work something with Houston directly. Getting Scola, Martin, Dragic, and a 1st is far better than what they seem to be settling for now. Dumbasses.
Click to expand...

They're going to try to go after Dwight dude. I hope they fail because if they get him we're screwed.
 
Variant said:
So where does CP3 end up now? Clippers? Does he sign an extension?
Click to expand...

Clippers are probably the biggest suitors now, but you know Sterling will try to cheap out as much as possible.

I think the league may believe that Paul will be forced to re-sign after all these teams lose their cap space. What they don't get though is teams have a tendency to shed space at the last minute when a player they want is about to be a free agent.
 
You know what, I've been trying to understand the position that the Hornets would have been worse off after this deal, and I don't get it. Odom, Scola, and Martin, are all movable pieces. You could probably send Martin to Chicago for good rebuilding pieces right now. Scola? Sky's the limit there, a versatile scoring big for essentially 9-10 million a year? That's what DeAndre Jordan is about to get. Odom? Well at worst you get cap relief and a 1st rounder. I think the only way Stern didn't just kill the Hornets is if the Clippers bail them out with a good rebuilding package. That would actually take Sterling wanting to spend money though, and we all know he doesn't like that.

Edit: Now there's rumors of Minny being interested in Martin.
 
Last edited:
DeAndre Jordan benefits from Chris Paul sweepstakes

Interesting I just read Golden state has offer sheet to Jordan for 40 mil 4 yrs,
Clippers had offer of 40 mil over 5 yrs and has 3 days to match

Paul seems to be ok with Clippers as 3rd option, partly because of Jordan being there

If Paul might be ok with Warriors (seemed a possibility when they were after Chandler)
If Golden state steals Jordan away it might increase their chances getting Paul?

If clippers keep Jordan, they have Paul wanting to go there

If clippers loose Jordan, Golden state might convince Paul to stay

Then it becomes which deal the Hornets like best
 
The Los Angeles Clippers plan to match the Golden State Warriors' offer sheet of four years and $40 million for center DeAndre Jordan, a league source said, a move that will practically force starting center Chris Kaman to seek a trade elsewhere, according to a second source. ESPN.com

Well so much for warriors and sets up clippers as in the lead for Paul

Hey warriors can you say 4yrs 44 mil? LOL

Also Union says litigation coming if no deal by monday
 
Vlade4GM said:
You know what, I've been trying to understand the position that the Hornets would have been worse off after this deal, and I don't get it. Odom, Scola, and Martin, are all movable pieces. You could probably send Martin to Chicago for good rebuilding pieces right now. Scola? Sky's the limit there, a versatile scoring big for essentially 9-10 million a year? That's what DeAndre Jordan is about to get. Odom? Well at worst you get cap relief and a 1st rounder. I think the only way Stern didn't just kill the Hornets is if the Clippers bail them out with a good rebuilding package. That would actually take Sterling wanting to spend money though, and we all know he doesn't like that.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's the responsibility of New Orleans to have to do all the hard work of converting ill-fitting assets into useable assets. That should be the job of the teams wanting the better players.

I agree that you could potentially pick up some nice pieces for Martin, Scola, and Odom, but that shouldn't be the job of the Hornets.

The Lakers want Chris Paul.
The Rockets want Pau Gasol.
The Hornets do not want to trade Chris Paul, but seem to be backed into a corner.

With a dynamic like that, if I'm the Hornets I tell the Lakers and Houston to get other teams involved. If it's so easy to turn Martin, Scola, and Odom into assets that will be good for the Hornets, then go find those teams willing to do that, then get back to me.

If you can't find teams willing to turn those three players into the assets that I need, then how do you expect me to do it.

So while in theory, you are correct that you could probably get something for those three players, if I'm the Hornets I tell them to go out and do it, if they want CP3 and Gasol so badly. And if they can't do it, then it means that it isn't as easy as people are making it out to be.
 
The Hornets whining about responsibility is cutting off their nose to spite their face, it doesn't really matter. It only matters if what they could get for those guys is better than what they could get from anyone else for Paul. The reason why it would be difficult for Houston and LA to get those pieces right now would be because a.) they probably don't want to help the Lakers out, and b.) too many things are up in the air at that point, so they don't want to commit rebuilding pieces when it may come in handy for something else later on. Like, for example, the Bulls may not want to get in on that trade, because a.) it would increase the Lakers chances of getting Howard and they've been rumored to be trying to get in on the talks, and b.) If they want Howard, they don't want to use up their rebuilding pieces on someone like Martin, and end up shorthanded for a potential Howard deal. There's so many opportunities that can open up once that Paul domino falls, so you can see where the dilemma is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

venom_7
Venom_7 Doxxes | A Ghost of Christmas Past
Replies
2
Views
574
venom_7
venom_7
Tetsujin
  • Locked
[Game] Shriek-ramento Kings @ Charlotte Horror-nets 10/31/2022 4pm Western, 7pm Eastern
15 16 17
Replies
492
Views
17K
kingsfan101
K
V
What should a good NBA GM know - and when should he/she know it ? (A LONG read - be warned)
2
Replies
53
Views
3K
Noble
Noble
Tetsujin
[Game] Kings @ Pelicans, 10/29/21 5pm Pacific 8pm Eastern
9 10 11
Replies
304
Views
11K
Mr. S£im Citrus
Mr. S£im Citrus
Tetsujin
[Game] Kings @ Magic, 1/27/2021, 4pm PST, 7pm EST
4 5 6
Replies
161
Views
7K
SCKingsfan
S
Back
Top