Page 2 of 401 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
12
52
102
... LastLast
  1. #21
    Fluffy Kitten conscript's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Jonesville, Michigan
    Posts
    10,443
    Quote Originally Posted by Skippy88 View Post
    Can't wait until next year to see how the Hornets were "better served".
    You aren't going to have to wait until next year. The Hornets, Rockets, and Lakers are working on a new deal, Paul is considering legal action, and David Stern looks like a freaking moron for having now flip flopped about why they did this. If it does go to arbitration with Paul he is going to win the decision. The NBA commissioner just blocked his opportunity for an extension. What happens if the deal doesn't go through and Paul gets a career ending injury in game one of the preseason? David Stern's decision to block the deal he had no reason to block will have cost Paul millions of dollars. The player's union isn't going to roll over on this. Stern overstepped his bounds by blocking a deal because of "basketball reasons" for the first time in the history of the league. This deal wasn't even remotely close to the most uneven lopsided deal in NBA history.

    The only reason Gilbert was mad about the deal is because he is a spiteful little bitch and because it would have potentially taken revenue sharing money out of his pockets if the Lakers fall out of luxury tax range. He had 6 years to put players around LeBron James but never did so LeBron left and devastated the value of his franchise. That is on Glibert and not anyone else. He should worry less about $2-3 million in revenue sharing he would have received from the Lakers and more about improving his own piece of crap team and have it make money on its own.

    That move last night is going to cost Stern his job. If he isn't out at some point this year I will be shocked. He already was a major reason for delay during the lockout because of his contentious attitude toward the players. Overstepping his power like this will be a huge black mark on his career just like the Donaghy ref scandal was.
    Last edited by conscript; 2011-12-09 at 10:47 PM.

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowfoxx View Post
    Stern set up a horrible situation by vetoing that trade. One of the reasons it was not allowed was due to Chris Paul dictating where he wanted to go and the collective bargaining agreement was supposed to prevent that. Of course, there is already a situation like this with Dwight Howard and him going to tell the Magic he wants to be with the Nets. Stern would catch more grief for allowing that to happen, but not the Paul trade.
    I do not understand how the Hornets are better off with having Paul stay for another year and then having him leave at the end of the season, which he will, instead of allowing this deal.

    Also, the Nets are accused of tampering now.
    The Hornets themselves aren't better served for having him. The NBA is. As it's been pointed out, it's the NBA that owns the team. CP is the only reason to watch this team. He sells tickets. The teams value plummets without him. And who loses money then? The owners aka NBA.

    If we've learned anything from other teams in other leagues, it's better for the franchise to get something for a player while you can instead of letting them walk.

  3. #23
    Fluffy Kitten conscript's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Jonesville, Michigan
    Posts
    10,443
    Quote Originally Posted by RollTide View Post
    The Hornets themselves aren't better served for having him. The NBA is. As it's been pointed out, it's the NBA that owns the team. CP is the only reason to watch this team. He sells tickets. The teams value plummets without him. And who loses money then? The owners aka NBA.

    If we've learned anything from other teams in other leagues, it's better for the franchise to get something for a player while you can instead of letting them walk.
    In that case it is fine, but that isn't why Stern blocked the trade. He made it clear to multiple teams around the league and to Demps who is running the Hornets and told them that Paul is on the market. If he nixes the trade because of financial concerns, that is perfectly acceptable. He didn't do that though. He nixed it as the commissioner, not the NBA appointed owner. He didn't nix it because of potential finance issues. he nixed it because of "basketball reasons" related to competitiveness. Nothing he has done was in the name of the Hornets or their owners, it was in the name of the NBA as a league and that is the issue at hand. The NBPA is giving the teams and the league until Monday to figure out a new deal and get it approved before they and Paul will seek legal recourse.

    The Howard to the Nets deal may be dead in the water too. Aside from the Magic potentially filing tampering charges, which would block Howard from that team in trades and potentially free agent signing, the Nets are reportedly about to sign Nene to a massive deal. Can't have a team with two high paid centers so the Howard to the Lakers deal is going to open up again. The Magic essentially have replaced Howard with Big Baby Davis whom they traded for today so Howard should be gone in the coming days unless they are going with Davis playing PF which would make for a massive front court.
    Last edited by conscript; 2011-12-09 at 11:34 PM.

  4. #24
    Moderator Skarsguard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Ravenloft usually
    Posts
    2,517
    Quote Originally Posted by conscript View Post
    The Hornets were getting a ton of stuff in this deal. They were getting four solid bench players or starters on a terrible team like New Orleans and a first round pick all for a player that has zero interest in playing for their team and will be leaving at season's end.
    Look at the T-Wolfs they been doing nothing since KG left at least before they would get into the post season and people would by there jerseys which is awesome marketing you can't get that with those players. The only reason people bought Gasol jerseys was because he played for the Lakers. How many people have Cav jerseys that say something other then Lebron. Yeah Hornets would get good players but not a superstar that will put asses in the seats and buy merchandise that's the problem with the NBA they need a franchise tag to keep city's other then LA, NY,Miami,Chicago be able to keep great players not just good players.

  5. #25
    Fluffy Kitten conscript's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Jonesville, Michigan
    Posts
    10,443
    Quote Originally Posted by skarsguard View Post
    Look at the T-Wolfs they been doing nothing since KG left at least before they would get into the post season and people would by there jerseys which is awesome marketing you can't get that with those players. The only reason people bought Gasol jerseys was because he played for the Lakers. How many people have Cav jerseys that say something other then Lebron. Yeah Hornets would get good players but not a superstar that will put asses in the seats and buy merchandise that's the problem with the NBA they need a franchise tag to keep city's other then LA, NY,Miami,Chicago be able to keep great players not just good players.
    That simply isn't ever going to happen. The NBA owners already bitch about paying too much, forcing them to pay the crazy rates NFL teams have to pay for franchise tagged players wouldn't fly. Even the franchise tag system wouldn't last more than a year or the players would simply break away from the NBA as the league could dictate where you play your entire career. Every team that has lost a megastar has had ample opportunity to keep that player. Not a single one of them had zero reason for leaving that wasn't obvious. In every case they have been players that would be walking from the team the following year. Adding a franchise tag is only going to delay that a year and cost your team a fortune and create more max salary players.

    Players don't want to play for bad teams and some teams are inevitably bad because of the upper management. Look at the T-Wolves. They have had a top 5 pick for 4 years in a row, and several other first round picks to go with them. Their GM is an absolute moron though and continues to take worthless player after worthless player. One year he takes two Point Guard's in the first round with back to back picks. One ends up terrible and the other refused to play for the team. Next year he took two PFs in the first round. The team continues to be terrible and it is almost all because of him and his lack of ability, yet he keeps his job. Why the hell would anyone who plays in Minnesota want to stay on that team? Its not that different for the Hornets. That franchise is in shambles. The previous owner ruined the value of the franchise when he fled from Charlotte to New Orleans, then to OKC and back to NO thanks to the hurricane. They've never been a big spending team and despite having some good talent, they just don't have enough supporting pieces due to handcuffs from prior ownership and now from the NBA ownership. Who wants to stay on a team with no future?

    Can't wait to see how different the new CP3 trade is compared to the one Stern blocked. I am going to laugh my ass off if it is essentially the same thing with a second round pick tacked on and the Lakers taking back some salary player like Ariza who is the Hornets third highest salary at $6 million and change.

  6. #26
    Moderator Skarsguard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Ravenloft usually
    Posts
    2,517
    Quote Originally Posted by conscript View Post
    That simply isn't ever going to happen. The NBA owners already bitch about paying too much, forcing them to pay the crazy rates NFL teams have to pay for franchise tagged players wouldn't fly. Even the franchise tag system wouldn't last more than a year or the players would simply break away from the NBA as the league could dictate where you play your entire career. Every team that has lost a megastar has had ample opportunity to keep that player. Not a single one of them had zero reason for leaving that wasn't obvious. In every case they have been players that would be walking from the team the following year. Adding a franchise tag is only going to delay that a year and cost your team a fortune and create more max salary players.

    Players don't want to play for bad teams and some teams are inevitably bad because of the upper management. Look at the T-Wolves. They have had a top 5 pick for 4 years in a row, and several other first round picks to go with them. Their GM is an absolute moron though and continues to take worthless player after worthless player. One year he takes two Point Guard's in the first round with back to back picks. One ends up terrible and the other refused to play for the team. Next year he took two PFs in the first round. The team continues to be terrible and it is almost all because of him and his lack of ability, yet he keeps his job. Why the hell would anyone who plays in Minnesota want to stay on that team? Its not that different for the Hornets. That franchise is in shambles. The previous owner ruined the value of the franchise when he fled from Charlotte to New Orleans, then to OKC and back to NO thanks to the hurricane. They've never been a big spending team and despite having some good talent, they just don't have enough supporting pieces due to handcuffs from prior ownership and now from the NBA ownership. Who wants to stay on a team with no future?

    Can't wait to see how different the new CP3 trade is compared to the one Stern blocked. I am going to laugh my ass off if it is essentially the same thing with a second round pick tacked on and the Lakers taking back some salary player like Ariza who is the Hornets third highest salary at $6 million and change.
    I don't even think they would have blocked the trade if it was to another team like the Clippers or Rockets I just think the NBA would have looked dumb if they would have had this CBA and a Big Market team took another great player from a small market team. Look basketball teams is a business and having L.Odem on your team isn't going to sale tickets but people keep thinking the Hornets are getting an awesome trade when there just getting one guy past his prime and 2 scrubs.

  7. #27
    Fluffy Kitten conscript's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Jonesville, Michigan
    Posts
    10,443
    Quote Originally Posted by skarsguard View Post
    I don't even think they would have blocked the trade if it was to another team like the Clippers or Rockets I just think the NBA would have looked dumb if they would have had this CBA and a Big Market team took another great player from a small market team. Look basketball teams is a business and having L.Odem on your team isn't going to sale tickets but people keep thinking the Hornets are getting an awesome trade when there just getting one guy past his prime and 2 scrubs.
    The Hornets were getting three starters and a first round pick for a guy that is going to "sell tickets" for 7 months before he leaves town. Seems like a pretty damn good trade to me. Look at what is on the table for Dwight Howard from the Nets. Brooks Lopez and two firsts. Both those firsts will be mid-late picks with the Nets improving, both later than the Rockets pick would have been for sure, and the Magic would have picked up one guy whereas the Hornets would have gotten three guys who can come in and start for them from day one. The only team really getting shafted in that deal is the Rockets who give up a first, dump a couple contracts, and get back Gasol's contract.
    Last edited by conscript; 2011-12-10 at 11:55 PM.

  8. #28
    Moderator Skarsguard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Ravenloft usually
    Posts
    2,517
    If those players are so good why are they so eager to get rid of them

  9. #29
    Fluffy Kitten conscript's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Jonesville, Michigan
    Posts
    10,443
    Quote Originally Posted by skarsguard View Post
    If those players are so good why are they so eager to get rid of them
    Thats an insane thing to say. Why is any team willing to trade anyone? Chris Paul is better than what the Lakers have now. Odom, Scola, and Martin are better than what the Hornets have now. It is the same reason that every trade ever is made (outside of the Gasol for Kwame Brown trade which made no sense at all). The Hornets GM and President obviously considered all of those players good enough to trade for.

  10. #30
    Moderator Skarsguard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Ravenloft usually
    Posts
    2,517
    Yes this is true but it always seems the Big market team gets the tier 1 player and the smaller market team gets tier 2-3 players. I'm just trying to give the perception of the smaller market teams view on it. Look at the T-wolfs after KG look at the Cavs after Lebron Nuggets after Carmelo. Yea I know Lebron wasn't traded but he went to a big market team because they couldn't land bosh and wade money wise.

  11. #31
    Fluffy Kitten conscript's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Jonesville, Michigan
    Posts
    10,443
    Quote Originally Posted by skarsguard View Post
    Yes this is true but it always seems the Big market team gets the tier 1 player and the smaller market team gets tier 2-3 players. I'm just trying to give the perception of the smaller market teams view on it. Look at the T-wolfs after KG look at the Cavs after Lebron Nuggets after Carmelo. Yea I know Lebron wasn't traded but he went to a big market team because they couldn't land bosh and wade money wise.
    The only solution for that is massive revenue sharing in the league to the point where every franchise is making the exact same money or a true hard salary cap. The league didn't do either one in their new CBA. They collapsed on their hard cap demand and went essentially with the same model as before with a "cap" that isn't really a cap because you can exceed it and pay luxury tax on the additional salary. They didn't expand revenue sharing enough to support the small market teams. The league dug their own grave on this. The big, big market teams like the Lakers, Celtics, Heat, Knicks, Mavs, Bulls, etc. will be able to spend as money as they want and easily pay the luxury tax because they are making massively more money than the other teams. They can keep their stars and pay yours to come to them. Small market teams can't financially support more than one max salary player so they are forced to rely on internal building for success (the Spurs) or lucking out and having one star for a couple years until he leaves (the Cavs). The league had two options to truly prevent stars from playing where they want, while still making maxish salaries, and they went with neither solution. Any problem the league has is caused by the owner's being less willing to spend than other owners due to greed, market constraints, etc. Players are always going to want to play with the best guys they can so they are going to flock to teams that will pay to have talent.

    There is a third option that the league could and should consider. Contraction. Do we need teams in New Orleans, Charlotte, Memphis, Sacramento, etc.? The smaller market clubs in the NBA that are financially unable to hold onto their own talent because of their terrible markets. The NBA may make a few more dollars because they exist, arguably as teams "losing" money inspired the lockout, but is the NBA a better product for having so many teams? My answer is no. A whole hell of a lot of the NBAs financial troubles would disappear if they got rid of some of the smaller market and failing teams. I honestly think they should contract to 24 teams. Contract Minnesota, Charlotte, New Orleans, Memphis, Sacramento, and Indiana. I'm no expert on NBA finances, but the on floor product would be much better and the small market concern would be alleviated slightly.

  12. #32
    Moderator Skarsguard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Ravenloft usually
    Posts
    2,517
    Quote Originally Posted by conscript View Post
    The only solution for that is massive revenue sharing in the league to the point where every franchise is making the exact same money or a true hard salary cap. The league didn't do either one in their new CBA. They collapsed on their hard cap demand and went essentially with the same model as before with a "cap" that isn't really a cap because you can exceed it and pay luxury tax on the additional salary. They didn't expand revenue sharing enough to support the small market teams. The league dug their own grave on this. The big, big market teams like the Lakers, Celtics, Heat, Knicks, Mavs, Bulls, etc. will be able to spend as money as they want and easily pay the luxury tax because they are making massively more money than the other teams. They can keep their stars and pay yours to come to them. Small market teams can't financially support more than one max salary player so they are forced to rely on internal building for success (the Spurs) or lucking out and having one star for a couple years until he leaves (the Cavs). The league had two options to truly prevent stars from playing where they want, while still making maxish salaries, and they went with neither solution. Any problem the league has is caused by the owner's being less willing to spend than other owners due to greed, market constraints, etc. Players are always going to want to play with the best guys they can so they are going to flock to teams that will pay to have talent.

    There is a third option that the league could and should consider. Contraction. Do we need teams in New Orleans, Charlotte, Memphis, Sacramento, etc.? The smaller market clubs in the NBA that are financially unable to hold onto their own talent because of their terrible markets. The NBA may make a few more dollars because they exist, arguably as teams "losing" money inspired the lockout, but is the NBA a better product for having so many teams? My answer is no. A whole hell of a lot of the NBAs financial troubles would disappear if they got rid of some of the smaller market and failing teams. I honestly think they should contract to 24 teams. Contract Minnesota, Charlotte, New Orleans, Memphis, Sacramento, and Indiana. I'm no expert on NBA finances, but the on floor product would be much better and the small market concern would be alleviated slightly.
    Well yeah there are some teams that could probably go away I mean some markets can only handle 1-2 sports and there are some teams that do well because they have only one team "Spurs". You could probably say that the NBA could get rid of about 8 teams and also drop 1/3 of there games to make the reg. season meaningful same with baseball.

  13. #33
    Reports now that the Lakers have pulled out of the CP trade altogether. Looking to send Lamar Odom to Dallas.

    More or less confirmed. Lamar's last game involved hammering Dirk in the playoffs. Now they're teammates.

    And tack this on, Clippers new early favorites for CP3.
    Last edited by RollTide; 2011-12-11 at 06:08 AM.

  14. #34
    It's funny ESPN was reporting earlier the 3 teams revised the deal and resubmitted the trade. Stern must have still said no behind the scenes.

    We were joking in the office the Rapters should try to grab him but Stern probably have blocked that too.

  15. #35
    Fluffy Kitten conscript's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Jonesville, Michigan
    Posts
    10,443
    Quote Originally Posted by Skippy88 View Post
    It's funny ESPN was reporting earlier the 3 teams revised the deal and resubmitted the trade. Stern must have still said no behind the scenes.

    We were joking in the office the Rapters should try to grab him but Stern probably have blocked that too.
    Pretty shocking that the NBA would block the passage of the trade again. I wouldn't be surprised at all if no one is able to trade for CP3. Now we'll see if the Lakers can swing a deal for Howard.

    Seems pretty clear that Stern's only motivation for blocking the new deal is to try and maintain the value of the Hornets. The new deal would have included the Hornets getting Skola, Odom, and Martin along with a 2012 1st from Houston and a 2012 first from LA while sending back Paul and two other guys in sign and trades to LA. So the league office turned down the team getting three viable starters and two first round picks. Hi-lar-i-ous.

    THe Lakers sent Odom to Dallas for a first round pick instead to try and bring in Howard. The Lakers should look at bringing in JJ Barea to play the point. Dude is a serviceable PG and he has to be better defensively and athletically than Fischer at this point.

  16. #36
    I'm not into basket stuff, but there's always big news about this guy who come from the same town as me (was a good friend of my brother), Jonas Jerebko. Is he doing any good? I know he have a new contract with Pistons or Pistols what ever worth around 18 million dollars.

  17. #37
    Fluffy Kitten conscript's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Jonesville, Michigan
    Posts
    10,443
    Quote Originally Posted by TordFish View Post
    I'm not into basket stuff, but there's always big news about this guy who come from the same town as me (was a good friend of my brother), Jonas Jerebko. Is he doing any good? I know he have a new contract with Pistons or Pistols what ever worth around 18 million dollars.
    Hes serviceable. He was decent as a bench player for the Pistons in 2009 but was hurt all of last year. Hopefully he does pretty good this season.

  18. #38
    If chris paul is traded anywhere but LA this season I will never watch or pay attention to basketball again. completely rigged situation.

  19. #39
    Fluffy Kitten conscript's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Jonesville, Michigan
    Posts
    10,443
    Quote Originally Posted by Twiddly View Post
    If chris paul is traded anywhere but LA this season I will never watch or pay attention to basketball again. completely rigged situation.
    CP3 and the NBPA are going to file collusion charges tomorrow if no new trade comes through tonight. Can't wait to see what happens there.

  20. #40
    Mechagnome
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    706
    More maybe-not-so-up-to-date news:

    David West to Celtics fall through, ends up with Pacers. Indiana is definitely starting to become a threat in the East.

    Rip Hamilton to Chicago which helps fill that SG void that ultimately ended their season last year. There's also talks of Chicago moving Luol Deng, Joakim Noah and picks for Dwight Howard.

    Big Baby Davis and Von Wafer to the Magic - if Otis thinks that'll keep Dwight there, he's nuts.

    Along with Battier, Heat pick up Curry who's reportedly lost 70 lbs. Plus, Billups got amnestied which leaves him wide open for the Heat if he can clear waivers.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •