*NBA THREAD* Abe will be missed (6 Viewers)

[Dr. Gobbler]

It's a lot of things but it's not collusion. Will you Laker folks stop saying that?

What is the proper term for what rival owner's did? They pressured Stern to disallow a trade he obviously approved of. If not collusion what would you call it? Seriously.

If it's not called collusion the only other word that fits is ABORTION!

 

[Daywalker]

It's a lot of things but it's not collusion. Will you Laker folks stop saying that?

What is the proper term for what rival owner's did? They pressured Stern to disallow a trade he obviously approved of. If not collusion what would you call it? Seriously.

I would say the majority of the team's ownership (ie other owners) did not want to make the trade. Call that what you will but it's not collusion. It's a really screwed up system and one they should have fixed with the lockout but they didn't. Curious to see how Stern handles this mess over the next few days.

I'd be surprised if Paul is not a Laker within a few days. Dan Gilbert didn't help his own cause either. What a dolt.Think the legal ramifications haven't been though out. Paul getting screwed here. The majority of NBA owners can basically dictate his contract status.

 

[Truman]

So Stern says for months the hornets front office has authority to make deals then they put together a deal for a guy who is set to walk at the end of the year and it gets vetoed? Not to mention this would have destroyed the Lakers front court and their chances for 2012........all because that great basketball visionary Dan Gilbert objected?

 

[Daywalker]

As stated previously, would be hilarious if the league rejecting this deal leads to Lakers getting Howard.

As a Laker fan, this Howard wanting to go to NJ rumors has me nervous.

Lakers should say eff the Paul deal and get Howard tomorrow. Leaving the league with a legal mess with Paul.

 

[Sammy3469]

Call me crazy but I agree with Gilbert. As a 1/29th owner of a team I'd be steaming if you told me I'm giving up the best player and getting back pieces getting paid 30 million, most of that locked up for 2+ years when none of that talent is a top 10 player at their position (and spare me Scola is great crap...if he were great Houston wouldn't be offloading him and Martin and a pick and Dragic for Gasol).

Who would want to buy into that situation? What exactly is NO getting back? They aren't rebuilding, they aren't clearing cap space, they aren't getting rid of bad contracts. Why accept a highly paid pu pu platter?

 

[Daywalker]

P. Gasol

for

Scola

Martin

Dragic

Knick's #1

Wouldn't be so bad for Lakers if Houston is actually that nuts. Move Bynum and Odom for Howard.

Martin/Dragic

Kobe

Artest

Scola

Howard

Just saying what the hell are the Rockets thinking?

 

[Daywalker]

Call me crazy but I agree with Gilbert. As a 1/29th owner of a team I'd be steaming if you told me I'm giving up the best player and getting back pieces getting paid 30 million, most of that locked up for 2+ years when none of that talent is a top 10 player at their position (and spare me Scola is great crap...if he were great Houston wouldn't be offloading him and Martin and a pick and Dragic for Gasol).Who would want to buy into that situation? What exactly is NO getting back? They aren't rebuilding, they aren't clearing cap space, they aren't getting rid of bad contracts. Why accept a highly paid pu pu platter?

Because it's the best offer out there for starters (see Carmelo trade). As well as you get three players (Scola, Odom and Martin) who could be traded without the hang-up of the leverage Paul has due to his contract situation.Wouldn't the Celtics look hard at Martin and Scola for Rondo? Now you got Rondo and Odom for Paul. That's just an example of the flexibility the Paul to Lakers trade could open up for NO.

 

[bigbottom]

It's a lot of things but it's not collusion. Will you Laker folks stop saying that?

What is the proper term for what rival owner's did? They pressured Stern to disallow a trade he obviously approved of. If not collusion what would you call it? Seriously.

A conflict of interest.

 

[Captain Quinoa]

When will we just change the name of 25 of the 30 teams to the Washington Generals?

This is the best part of the letter. Hey Dan, if you don't want to be the Washington Generals, then don't act like them. When you're lucky enough to get one of the greatest players of all time in the draft, perhaps you should spend some money and surround him with a good supporting cast, rather than simply making as much as you can off him without improving the team, and then whining when he leaves. Guys like Gilbert are jealous of the Lakers because it's a big market team, but that's not the reason the Lakers have been successfull, otherwise the Knicks would have a ton of championship rings as well. The Lakers have been successful because they are smart, because they are willing to take gambles and spend money when they have to, unlike Dan Gilbert. And no matter how much guys like Gilbert try to devise new ways to equalize the NBA, it's never going to happen, because smart teams like the Lakers will always dominate over dumb teams like the Cavaliers.

exactly! the Cavs could have made a number of trades and free agent signings while he was there but chose to do nothing. they could have consulted Lebron on all of these moves. they could have coddled him and given all his buddies jobs and unfettered access to team amenities. they could have spent above the luxury tax even if it meant putting them in a cap bind should he leave. but noooooo, they did nothing. stupid cheapass Gilbert!

 

[shadyridr]

Did Dan Gilbert really end that e-mail with "please advise"? I thought that was strictly shtick from around here.

Hilarious.

Commissioner,

It would be a travesty to allow the Lakers to acquire Chris Paul in the apparent trade being discussed.

This trade should go to a vote of the 29 owners of the Hornets.

Over the next three seasons this deal would save the Lakers approximately $20 million in salaries and approximately $21 million in luxury taxes. That $21 million goes to non-taxpaying teams and to fund revenue sharing.

I cannot remember ever seeing a trade where a team got by far the best player in the trade and saved over $40 million in the process. And it doesn’t appear that they would give up any draft picks, which might allow to later make a trade for Dwight Howard. (They would also get a large trade exception that would help them improve their team and/or eventually trade for Howard.) When the Lakers got Pau Gasol (at the time considered an extremely lopsided trade) they took on tens of millions in additional salary and luxury tax and they gave up a number of prospects (one in Marc Gasol who may become a max-salary player).

I just don’t see how we can allow this trade to happen.

I know the vast majority of owners feel the same way that I do.

When will we just change the name of 25 of the 30 teams to the Washington Generals?

Please advise….

Dan G

this sounds eerily similar to some of the emails I get from the resident grump in my fantasy football league, especially the bolded part.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

What is stern/nba official reasoning? And again, id nba are the owners collectively of hornets, should the deal have been put to a vote before it eas announced? Or was it actually never announced and just bucher etc opened pandora's box because sources told them they finalized terms (but perhaps wasnt voted on yet by hornets)?

 

[wadegarrett]

When will we just change the name of 25 of the 30 teams to the Washington Generals?

This is the best part of the letter. Hey Dan, if you don't want to be the Washington Generals, then don't act like them. When you're lucky enough to get one of the greatest players of all time in the draft, perhaps you should spend some money and surround him with a good supporting cast, rather than simply making as much as you can off him without improving the team, and then whining when he leaves. Guys like Gilbert are jealous of the Lakers because it's a big market team, but that's not the reason the Lakers have been successfull, otherwise the Knicks would have a ton of championship rings as well. The Lakers have been successful because they are smart, because they are willing to take gambles and spend money when they have to, unlike Dan Gilbert. And no matter how much guys like Gilbert try to devise new ways to equalize the NBA, it's never going to happen, because smart teams like the Lakers will always dominate over dumb teams like the Cavaliers.

 

[TobiasFunke]

It's a lot of things but it's not collusion. Will you Laker folks stop saying that?

What is the proper term for what rival owner's did? They pressured Stern to disallow a trade he obviously approved of. If not collusion what would you call it? Seriously.

I would say the majority of the team's ownership (ie other owners) did not want to make the trade. Call that what you will but it's not collusion. It's a really screwed up system and one they should have fixed with the lockout but they didn't. Curious to see how Stern handles this mess over the next few days.

I'd be surprised if Paul is not a Laker within a few days. Dan Gilbert didn't help his own cause either. What a dolt.Think the legal ramifications haven't been though out. Paul getting screwed here. The majority of NBA owners The majority ownership of his current team can basically dictate his contract status.

Yeah, this is really unprecedented. You're right, they clearly haven't thought out the legal ramifications. Paul should totally sue the Hornets' owners for the way they dictated what team he would play for while he was under contract to play for their team.

 

[Tom Hagen]

From Woj's most recent article here

“We were all told by the league he was a trade-able player, and now they’re saying that Dell doesn’t have the authority to make the trade?” said an NBA executive who had periodic talks with New Orleans throughout the process. “Now, they’re saying that Dell is an idiot, that he can’t do it his job. [Expletive] this whole thing. David’s drunk on power, and he doesn’t give a [expletive] about the players, and he doesn’t give a [expletive] about the hundreds of hours the teams put into make that deal.

“How do the Lakers explain this to Odom? How does Houston deal with the guys it just tried to trade? Scola and Martin are going to be pissed at them, and who knows how long that takes to get over? Explain to me how the league kills this Pau Gasol deal, but allows Kwame Brown for Pau Gasol?

“To me, this makes the league feel like it’s rigged, that Stern just does whatever Stern wants to do. He’s messed up the competitive balance of this league a lot worse by killing the deal, because you’ve completely destroyed the planning that New Orleans, Houston did and left them in shambles over this. I’ve never been so discouraged about this league, never so down.

“I mean, come on: Chris Paul is leaving New Orleans in 66 games. He’s gone. And what’s Dell Demps, and that franchise, going to have to show for it?”

What a mess.

From the same column

Hornets general manager Dell Demps is “disconsolate” over the heavy-handed move from the commissioner’s office, a source told Y! Sports. Demps considered resigning his job on Thursday, league sources said, and had to be talked out of it. The Hornets had scored a terrific deal for Paul, a trade that was lauded by some of Demps’ peers throughout the league. Officials involved in the trade talks said the league office was consulted throughout the negotiations, and there was never an indication Demps didn’t have the power to make a deal. In fact, several teams negotiating with New Orleans to get Paul asked the league office, and were told Demps had full authority to execute a trade.

The Lakers, Rockets and any other team negotiating with the Hornets were doing so in good faith based upon assurances that Demps had the authority to make a deal. If the other owners wanted veto power, they should have disclosed that up front. This is a huge black eye for the league.I understand the concerns about small market teams and competitive balance but those should have been addressed in the lockout. Stopping this one trade does nothing to fix the problem.

 

[TobiasFunke]

I'm confused, is it in the best interests of the Hornets to let Paul walk with no compensation after this season. That really seemed to work for Cleveland.

The NBA owners don't care. They just want to punish the Lakers. That's why it's collusion.

St. Louis Cardinals fans have embarrassed themselves less over the last 12-24 hours, and they have a lot more to be upset about."Oh woe is me! After 30 years of my team's privileged status in a desirable destination getting us elite player after elite player, and winning title after title because of it, we actually couldn't get this one particular elite player! Everyone is out to get me!"

 

[Kev4029]

When will we just change the name of 25 of the 30 teams to the Washington Generals?

This is the best part of the letter. Hey Dan, if you don't want to be the Washington Generals, then don't act like them. When you're lucky enough to get one of the greatest players of all time in the draft, perhaps you should spend some money and surround him with a good supporting cast, rather than simply making as much as you can off him without improving the team, and then whining when he leaves. Guys like Gilbert are jealous of the Lakers because it's a big market team, but that's not the reason the Lakers have been successfull, otherwise the Knicks would have a ton of championship rings as well. The Lakers have been successful because they are smart, because they are willing to take gambles and spend money when they have to, unlike Dan Gilbert. And no matter how much guys like Gilbert try to devise new ways to equalize the NBA, it's never going to happen, because smart teams like the Lakers will always dominate over dumb teams like the Cavaliers.

exactly! the Cavs could have made a number of trades and free agent signings while he was there but chose to do nothing. they could have consulted Lebron on all of these moves. they could have coddled him and given all his buddies jobs and unfettered access to team amenities. they could have spent above the luxury tax even if it meant putting them in a cap bind should he leave. but noooooo, they did nothing. stupid cheapass Gilbert!

Whoa now! We don't need thought and reasoning in this thread right now. Dan Gilbert is single handily running the NBA from Cleveland, we gotta stop him.:lightsatorchgrabsapitchfork:

 

[JMon348]

What a cluster f this is.

Today should have been a great day for the NBA, with training camps and FA opening. Now this will dominate the headlines until Christmas.

Chris Paul won't report to camp and might pursue legal action.

 

[TobiasFunke]

When will we just change the name of 25 of the 30 teams to the Washington Generals?

This is the best part of the letter. Hey Dan, if you don't want to be the Washington Generals, then don't act like them. When you're lucky enough to get one of the greatest players of all time in the draft, perhaps you should spend some money and surround him with a good supporting cast, rather than simply making as much as you can off him without improving the team, and then whining when he leaves. Guys like Gilbert are jealous of the Lakers because it's a big market team, but that's not the reason the Lakers have been successfull, otherwise the Knicks would have a ton of championship rings as well. The Lakers have been successful because they are smart, because they are willing to take gambles and spend money when they have to, unlike Dan Gilbert. And no matter how much guys like Gilbert try to devise new ways to equalize the NBA, it's never going to happen, because smart teams like the Lakers will always dominate over dumb teams like the Cavaliers.

exactly! the Cavs could have made a number of trades and free agent signings while he was there but chose to do nothing. they could have consulted Lebron on all of these moves. they could have coddled him and given all his buddies jobs and unfettered access to team amenities. they could have spent above the luxury tax even if it meant putting them in a cap bind should he leave. but noooooo, they did nothing. stupid cheapass Gilbert!

I know this is a short-term PR disaster, but it's easily worth it for the laughs at the expense of Lakers fans.

 

[the moops]

I know this is a short-term PR disaster, but it's easily worth it for the laughs at the expense of Lakers fans.

I am quite sure they would be laughing like the rest of the world if this happened to the Heat or the Celtics or the Knicks.

 

[Abraham]

When will we just change the name of 25 of the 30 teams to the Washington Generals?

This is the best part of the letter. Hey Dan, if you don't want to be the Washington Generals, then don't act like them. When you're lucky enough to get one of the greatest players of all time in the draft, perhaps you should spend some money and surround him with a good supporting cast, rather than simply making as much as you can off him without improving the team, and then whining when he leaves. Guys like Gilbert are jealous of the Lakers because it's a big market team, but that's not the reason the Lakers have been successfull, otherwise the Knicks would have a ton of championship rings as well. The Lakers have been successful because they are smart, because they are willing to take gambles and spend money when they have to, unlike Dan Gilbert. And no matter how much guys like Gilbert try to devise new ways to equalize the NBA, it's never going to happen, because smart teams like the Lakers will always dominate over dumb teams like the Cavaliers.

exactly! the Cavs could have made a number of trades and free agent signings while he was there but chose to do nothing. they could have consulted Lebron on all of these moves. they could have coddled him and given all his buddies jobs and unfettered access to team amenities. they could have spent above the luxury tax even if it meant putting them in a cap bind should he leave. but noooooo, they did nothing. stupid cheapass Gilbert!

The cavs made a ton of of moves to help lebron. The fact that they didn't work out in the playoffs doesn't mean they didn't try.

 

[Popinski]

So, assuming Stern doesn't change his decision in light of all the backlash and allow the trade to go through, what happens now with Paul? If any another team agrees to trade for him, then it seems like Stern just didn't want Paul on the Lakers. If the Hornets keep him all year and let him go via FA, then they get nothing in return.

Edit to add: Funny thing is if Paul does not get traded, the Knicks won't be able get him in FA because of all the money they just gave Chandler.

 

[Short Corner]

When will we just change the name of 25 of the 30 teams to the Washington Generals?

This is the best part of the letter. Hey Dan, if you don't want to be the Washington Generals, then don't act like them. When you're lucky enough to get one of the greatest players of all time in the draft, perhaps you should spend some money and surround him with a good supporting cast, rather than simply making as much as you can off him without improving the team, and then whining when he leaves. Guys like Gilbert are jealous of the Lakers because it's a big market team, but that's not the reason the Lakers have been successfull, otherwise the Knicks would have a ton of championship rings as well. The Lakers have been successful because they are smart, because they are willing to take gambles and spend money when they have to, unlike Dan Gilbert. And no matter how much guys like Gilbert try to devise new ways to equalize the NBA, it's never going to happen, because smart teams like the Lakers will always dominate over dumb teams like the Cavaliers.

exactly! the Cavs could have made a number of trades and free agent signings while he was there but chose to do nothing. they could have consulted Lebron on all of these moves. they could have coddled him and given all his buddies jobs and unfettered access to team amenities. they could have spent above the luxury tax even if it meant putting them in a cap bind should he leave. but noooooo, they did nothing. stupid cheapass Gilbert!

The cavs made a ton of of moves to help lebron. The fact that they didn't work out in the playoffs doesn't mean they didn't try.

You serious Clark?

 

[Abraham]

When will we just change the name of 25 of the 30 teams to the Washington Generals?

This is the best part of the letter. Hey Dan, if you don't want to be the Washington Generals, then don't act like them. When you're lucky enough to get one of the greatest players of all time in the draft, perhaps you should spend some money and surround him with a good supporting cast, rather than simply making as much as you can off him without improving the team, and then whining when he leaves. Guys like Gilbert are jealous of the Lakers because it's a big market team, but that's not the reason the Lakers have been successfull, otherwise the Knicks would have a ton of championship rings as well. The Lakers have been successful because they are smart, because they are willing to take gambles and spend money when they have to, unlike Dan Gilbert. And no matter how much guys like Gilbert try to devise new ways to equalize the NBA, it's never going to happen, because smart teams like the Lakers will always dominate over dumb teams like the Cavaliers.

exactly! the Cavs could have made a number of trades and free agent signings while he was there but chose to do nothing. they could have consulted Lebron on all of these moves. they could have coddled him and given all his buddies jobs and unfettered access to team amenities. they could have spent above the luxury tax even if it meant putting them in a cap bind should he leave. but noooooo, they did nothing. stupid cheapass Gilbert!

The cavs made a ton of of moves to help lebron. The fact that they didn't work out in the playoffs doesn't mean they didn't try.

You serious Clark?

Jamison, shaq, Tim Thomas....People are quick TI forget that the cavs added players to help lebron. And people forget that the cavs were a great regular season team for many years. Dan Gilbert was never going to get Chris bosh to sign in Cleveland. Or any other big name. They did the best they could and lebron ended up leaving because he wanted to go somewhere else. The end.

 

[Good Posting Judge]

I know this is beside the point, but Stern did the Lakers a huge favor by killing this.

 

[thecatch]

I agree with hollinger - don't think that deal is a great one for the lakers. Don't think Kobe and Paul would fit that well together and they'd be praying for Bynum's and Paul's knees to hold up, not to mention Kobe is getting up there and we have a compressed season. If that's why the league vetoed it, they are being short sighted.

 

[Notorious T.R.E.]

I know this is a short-term PR disaster, but it's easily worth it for the laughs at the expense of Lakers fans.

I am quite sure they would be laughing like the rest of the world if this happened to the Heat or the Celtics or the Knicks.

I've never been a laker hater, but I'm enjoying this just because of the whinedowns that are occurring.

 

[scoobygang]

I think there's a potential for a pretty significant long-term impact for the league.

I think the league certainly faces a non-trivial amount of legal exposure, particularly from the Rockets and Lakers. I think the fallout from this could easily result in a custom where the league just won't take over failing franchises, which could mean a quicker trigger on contraction or franchise relocations. And who knows what effect it will have on already tenuous relationships within the owners and between the owners and the players.

I don't mind watching the Lakers get screwed, but the Hornets weren't getting a better deal (which might be another reason for one of the minority owners to squawk as this may effect the longterm value of the franchise).

 

[pollardsvision]

Maybe I'm crazy, but I don't think that trade (and I think it'll still happen) makes the Lakers better in 2011-12.

Good move for future, but for this year, giving away that size advantage makes them worse off in the short-term. It's amazing how quickly people forget how good Pau is. Relying on Bynum even more doesn't sound like winning play.

The league should've been happy. This move wouldn've ensured that LAL didn't get any titles in the near future and would be rebuilding around a brittle PG and C.

 

[the moops]

Jamison, shaq, Tim Thomas....

 

[boubucarow]

Maybe I'm crazy, but I don't think that trade (and I think it'll still happen) makes the Lakers better in 2011-12. Good move for future, but for this year, giving away that size advantage makes them worse off in the short-term. It's amazing how quickly people forget how good Pau is. Relying on Bynum even more doesn't sound like winning play.The league should've been happy. This move wouldn've ensured that LAL didn't get any titles in the near future and would be rebuilding around a brittle PG and C.

I agree. Unless Howard is coming, the Lakers will be weaker now. They will just be too weak down low even if Bynum finally emerges as a 30+ minute every night player.As long as Paul can still play on those knees, there is no question the Lakers will have a brighter future.

 

[Sammy3469]

I know this is beside the point, but Stern did the Lakers a huge favor by killing this.

Basketball-wise maybe, but Stern blowing this up was all about strangling NO into salary cap hell while letting the Lakers out and getting them out from Gasol's deal. FWIW, Cuban has an interesting e-mail on how exactly the new CBA basically forces teams to be under the luxury tax (which is why they aren't resigning Chandler and may not resign Barea). Basically rich teams can't spend their out of bad contracts anymore (which is what both the Lakers and Dallas was doing). There's no way Stern (and the other NBA owners) are letting the Lakers out of that hell and getting the best player back in a deal. They just aren't especially since it places NO in salary cap purgatory forever. Demps may have gotten the best basically talent available, but he absolutely got outclassed on the salary cap.

Edit for Cuban's e-mail

 

[TobiasFunke]

I agree with hollinger - don't think that deal is a great one for the lakers. Don't think Kobe and Paul would fit that well together and they'd be praying for Bynum's and Paul's knees to hold up, not to mention Kobe is getting up there and we have a compressed season. If that's why the league vetoed it, they are being short sighted.

Do any rational people have a perspective on why the league vetoed it? Darren Rovell was posting on twitter last night arguing that the more attractive revenue stream for the Hornets with Paul this season might make the team more valuable than it would be with better personnel pieces from a trade even though the buyer would obviously know the revenue numbers were Paul-influenced. There's also the obvious thought that the majority of league owners know that the continued building of superteams negatively impacts the value of their franchises (e.g. why do I want to spend hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars cheering for the development of John Wall if moves like this one lead me to increasingly assume that his departure when he nears free agency is inevitable?).Scooby- what do you see as the legal exposure? Sort sort of common law restraint of trade argument? Sherman Act challenge? I'm no expert but either seems like a bit of a stretch.

 

[boubucarow]

I know this is beside the point, but Stern did the Lakers a huge favor by killing this.

Basketball-wise maybe, but Stern blowing this up was all about strangling NO into salary cap hell while letting the Lakers out and getting them out from Gasol's deal. FWIW, Cuban has an interesting e-mail on how exactly the new CBA basically forces teams to be under the luxury tax (which is why they aren't resigning Chandler and may not resign Barea). Basically rich teams can't spend their out of bad contracts anymore (which is what both the Lakers and Dallas was doing). There's no way Stern (and the other NBA owners) are letting the Lakers out of that hell and getting the best player back in a deal. They just aren't especially since it places NO in salary cap purgatory forever. Demps may have gotten the best basically talent available, but he absolutely got outclassed on the salary cap.

Edit for Cuban's e-mail

That is what happens when a GM makes a trade without an owner. The only issue here is that the NBA allowed the GM the power to do this and then took it away when they didn't like the deal. There should have been an NBA owner approval clause to every deal the Hornets make until there is a GM. Sounds messy but what other choice is there?

 

[Notorious T.R.E.]

I agree with hollinger - don't think that deal is a great one for the lakers. Don't think Kobe and Paul would fit that well together and they'd be praying for Bynum's and Paul's knees to hold up, not to mention Kobe is getting up there and we have a compressed season. If that's why the league vetoed it, they are being short sighted.

Do any rational people have a perspective on why the league vetoed it? Darren Rovell was posting on twitter last night arguing that the more attractive revenue stream for the Hornets with Paul this season might make the team more valuable than it would be with better personnel pieces from a trade even though the buyer would obviously know the revenue numbers were Paul-influenced. There's also the obvious thought that the majority of league owners know that the continued building of superteams negatively impacts the value of their franchises (e.g. why do I want to spend hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars cheering for the development of John Wall if moves like this one lead me to increasingly assume that his departure when he nears free agency is inevitable?).

Scooby- what do you see as the legal exposure? Sort sort of common law restraint of trade argument? Sherman Act challenge? I'm no expert but either seems like a bit of a stretch.

Here's a pretty good explanation I think:http://www.sbnation.com/2011-nba-free-agency/2011/12/9/2622974/chris-paul-trade-veto-la-lakers-david-stern-owners-hook/in/2386043

By vetoing the Chris Paul trade to the L.A. Lakers, David Stern has allowed his owners to feast on their own in the spirit of envy. The league is worse for it.

Follow @sbnation on Twitter, and Like SBNation.com on Facebook.

Dec 9, 2011 - NBA commissioner David Stern's decision to veto the L.A. Lakers' blockbuster trade for Chris Paul is not that surprising once you get past the ugly precedent it sets, the massive P.R. wound for the league it represents and the incredible unfairness embedded within. Look at the basics laid bare:

* Stern desperately wants his league to be more balanced competitively, which means the worst teams need to be better and the best teams need to be worse.

* The CP3 trade would likely have downgraded the financially challenged New Orleans Hornets while improving the fortune of the filthy rich Lakers. (This is in some dispute; I hold that the superstar trumps all, even though New Orleans negotiated a good package.)

* Stern has been harping on competitive balance for weeks, but has to know deep down that nothing in the NBA lockout deal approve Thursday actually improves parity. It's like fighting a tornado with a machete.

* Stopping the CP3 trade by hook or crook is the easiest path to preserving a sense of competitive balance in the Paul trade game, insomuch as the rich don't get richer.

* The NBA owns the Hornets, and Stern runs the league, so if Stern doesn't want the Hornets to make this trade, he has the stature (and likely the legal authority) to stop it.

So that's what he did. Assuming the Lakers would be better off with CP3, Stern accomplished in one phone call what the league has struggled to make headway on for years to no avail: he preserved a slice of competitive balance.

Now come the repercussions.

Stern almost assuredly has the wide support of his owners, who have proven over the past six months to be solipsistic little monsters, with internal fights over revenue sharing and transaction restrictions on teams with the highest payrolls causing multiple delays in the lockout talks. The cabal of small-market owners (once reportedly led by Michael Jordan and Paul Allen, with renewed villain Dan Gilbert assumed to be enjoined) pushed and prodded Stern to be more Draconian, to turn the screws when the players didn't cave as the season began to crumble. Five of these jokers voted against the lockout deal, one which saved owners some $3 billion in future salary and created a heavily graduated luxury tax system.

Gilbert, the angry little man who owns the Cleveland Cavaliers, fired off a letter to the commissioner on Thursday complaining about the CP3 trade. The hilarious thing is that the trade doesn't mean jack Schintzus to Dan Gilbert and the Cleveland Cavaliers. What, are the Cavs now in the mix for CP3 via trade or free agency? Please. Are the Cavs on the cusp of competing against the Lakers for an NBA championship? Not unless that dude has been working on a time machine and a way to put LeBron James under hynopsis. This deal doesn't mean a damn thing to Gilbert, except that in the long run it probably boosts the Lakers' luxury tax bill, of which Gilbert would take a cut.

So why is Gilbert acting as if his opinion matters? Why does his opinion matter? Why should any of the 29 owners have any role in the operations of the Hornets? Buying a 1/29th share of a business, last I checked, doesn't give you a whole lot of sway in board meetings. I don't know a lot of folks who hold 3.4 percent of a company's stock and legitimately expect a voice at the table. Last November when Stern decided to bail out Hornets' owner George Shinn, the owners voted to buy the franchise and give Stern authority to run it. And when Stern took that authority, he made perfectly clear who would be calling the shots: not him.

Here's a transcript from Stern's December 6, 2010, media call discussing the Hornets' arrangement in response to a question about who will approve the team's proposed trades and free agent signings. You can hear the quotes for yourself at the Hornets' website. (Scroll down to the December 6 file.)

Take it away, 2010 Stern:

"As far as we're concerned there have been while this process has been going on, there have been two significant transactions. And our response to both of them was, 'You guys are management, you understand your budget and your instructions, just go ahead, because we've got Jac Sperling, Hugh Weber here, and if they recommend it, then we're going to be approving it.'"

Unless, you know, Dan Gilbert and his pack of wolves have a problem with it.

Just so we're clear, here's 2011 Stern's position on the league office's role in the management of the New Orleans Hornets:

[NBA spokesman Tim] Frank: "... League office declined to make the trade for basketball reasons."

Never mind that every GM anonymously quoted in the aftermath says the Hornets did better in that deal than anyone had expected. Never mind that some observers are even questioning if the Lakers might have ended up worse if they couldn't have followed up with an Andrew Bynum-Dwight Howard trade. Just the very idea that Stern reneged on his commitment to allow the Hornets' management to run the Hornets is dirty enough. "If they recommend it, then we're going to be approving it." So much for that.

This is disgusting jealousy from a set of NBA owners toward Lakers owner Jerry Buss, and it's sickening that players are (again!) used as pawns in one of the league's internal wank-offs. Gilbert and the small-market cabal already extracted $50 million in new revenue sharing from Buss ... and now they have blocked his 2011 coup de grace. Never mind that the Lakers' financial advantage has very little to do with the proposed Paul trade; L.A. has amassed great players on largely fair contracts. Sure, Buss' massive revenue streams probably helped keep Lamar Odom when the forward reached free agency, but he did reach free agency. Other teams had a chance to keep him away from the Lakers. L.A. traded for both Odom and Pau Gasol in previous years. This is a well-built team, not one purchased on the open market.

But it's a great team, and the Lakers are always great. (Seriously: 51 years in L.A., four seasons in which the Lakers missed the playoffs.) As a fan of a rival team, that makes me mad. It makes me want to scream. But I understand that the Lakers have been able to have that success because Buss has run the business side like a master, and that he always has a top-flight general manager at the helm. The Lakers don't win because they make money: they make money because they win.

Instead of working to become legit challengers to the Lakers over the course of generations -- which is what it takes, a long-term commitment to being smart, which some teams obviously struggle with -- these owners would rather execute a jock-block for the ages to extract another pound of flesh from the league's most successful, wealthy franchise. All the while, David Stern enables it by changing league policy with the wind, extending his micromanaging tendencies to wildly impactful basketball trades and treating players like hogs at the market. Stern's either an overbearing dictator who demands the control the narrative (a neo-Vince McMahon) or he's the zookeeper who has lifted all of the gates and let chaos reign before him. Neither one is a good look, and the league is much worse off than it would have been had the Lakers landed CP3.

 

[Short Corner]

When will we just change the name of 25 of the 30 teams to the Washington Generals?

This is the best part of the letter. Hey Dan, if you don't want to be the Washington Generals, then don't act like them. When you're lucky enough to get one of the greatest players of all time in the draft, perhaps you should spend some money and surround him with a good supporting cast, rather than simply making as much as you can off him without improving the team, and then whining when he leaves. Guys like Gilbert are jealous of the Lakers because it's a big market team, but that's not the reason the Lakers have been successfull, otherwise the Knicks would have a ton of championship rings as well. The Lakers have been successful because they are smart, because they are willing to take gambles and spend money when they have to, unlike Dan Gilbert. And no matter how much guys like Gilbert try to devise new ways to equalize the NBA, it's never going to happen, because smart teams like the Lakers will always dominate over dumb teams like the Cavaliers.

exactly! the Cavs could have made a number of trades and free agent signings while he was there but chose to do nothing. they could have consulted Lebron on all of these moves. they could have coddled him and given all his buddies jobs and unfettered access to team amenities. they could have spent above the luxury tax even if it meant putting them in a cap bind should he leave. but noooooo, they did nothing. stupid cheapass Gilbert!

The cavs made a ton of of moves to help lebron. The fact that they didn't work out in the playoffs doesn't mean they didn't try.

You serious Clark?

Jamison, shaq, Tim Thomas....People are quick TI forget that the cavs added players to help lebron. And people forget that the cavs were a great regular season team for many years. Dan Gilbert was never going to get Chris bosh to sign in Cleveland. Or any other big name. They did the best they could and lebron ended up leaving because he wanted to go somewhere else. The end.

Read it a couple mmore times. You are bound to pick up the sarcasm eventually.

 

[Notorious T.R.E.]

When will we just change the name of 25 of the 30 teams to the Washington Generals?

This is the best part of the letter. Hey Dan, if you don't want to be the Washington Generals, then don't act like them. When you're lucky enough to get one of the greatest players of all time in the draft, perhaps you should spend some money and surround him with a good supporting cast, rather than simply making as much as you can off him without improving the team, and then whining when he leaves. Guys like Gilbert are jealous of the Lakers because it's a big market team, but that's not the reason the Lakers have been successfull, otherwise the Knicks would have a ton of championship rings as well. The Lakers have been successful because they are smart, because they are willing to take gambles and spend money when they have to, unlike Dan Gilbert. And no matter how much guys like Gilbert try to devise new ways to equalize the NBA, it's never going to happen, because smart teams like the Lakers will always dominate over dumb teams like the Cavaliers.

exactly! the Cavs could have made a number of trades and free agent signings while he was there but chose to do nothing. they could have consulted Lebron on all of these moves. they could have coddled him and given all his buddies jobs and unfettered access to team amenities. they could have spent above the luxury tax even if it meant putting them in a cap bind should he leave. but noooooo, they did nothing. stupid cheapass Gilbert!

The cavs made a ton of of moves to help lebron. The fact that they didn't work out in the playoffs doesn't mean they didn't try.

You serious Clark?

Jamison, shaq, Tim Thomas....People are quick TI forget that the cavs added players to help lebron. And people forget that the cavs were a great regular season team for many years. Dan Gilbert was never going to get Chris bosh to sign in Cleveland. Or any other big name. They did the best they could and lebron ended up leaving because he wanted to go somewhere else. The end.

Read it a couple mmore times. You are bound to pick up the sarcasm eventually.

GB CQ

 

[JMon348]

I agree with hollinger - don't think that deal is a great one for the lakers. Don't think Kobe and Paul would fit that well together and they'd be praying for Bynum's and Paul's knees to hold up, not to mention Kobe is getting up there and we have a compressed season. If that's why the league vetoed it, they are being short sighted.

Do any rational people have a perspective on why the league vetoed it? Darren Rovell was posting on twitter last night arguing that the more attractive revenue stream for the Hornets with Paul this season might make the team more valuable than it would be with better personnel pieces from a trade even though the buyer would obviously know the revenue numbers were Paul-influenced. There's also the obvious thought that the majority of league owners know that the continued building of superteams negatively impacts the value of their franchises (e.g. why do I want to spend hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars cheering for the development of John Wall if moves like this one lead me to increasingly assume that his departure when he nears free agency is inevitable?).

Scooby- what do you see as the legal exposure? Sort sort of common law restraint of trade argument? Sherman Act challenge? I'm no expert but either seems like a bit of a stretch.

Here's a pretty good explanation I think:http://www.sbnation.com/2011-nba-free-agency/2011/12/9/2622974/chris-paul-trade-veto-la-lakers-david-stern-owners-hook/in/2386043

By vetoing the Chris Paul trade to the L.A. Lakers, David Stern has allowed his owners to feast on their own in the spirit of envy. The league is worse for it.

Follow @sbnation on Twitter, and Like SBNation.com on Facebook.

Dec 9, 2011 - NBA commissioner David Stern's decision to veto the L.A. Lakers' blockbuster trade for Chris Paul is not that surprising once you get past the ugly precedent it sets, the massive P.R. wound for the league it represents and the incredible unfairness embedded within. Look at the basics laid bare:

* Stern desperately wants his league to be more balanced competitively, which means the worst teams need to be better and the best teams need to be worse.

* The CP3 trade would likely have downgraded the financially challenged New Orleans Hornets while improving the fortune of the filthy rich Lakers. (This is in some dispute; I hold that the superstar trumps all, even though New Orleans negotiated a good package.)

* Stern has been harping on competitive balance for weeks, but has to know deep down that nothing in the NBA lockout deal approve Thursday actually improves parity. It's like fighting a tornado with a machete.

* Stopping the CP3 trade by hook or crook is the easiest path to preserving a sense of competitive balance in the Paul trade game, insomuch as the rich don't get richer.

* The NBA owns the Hornets, and Stern runs the league, so if Stern doesn't want the Hornets to make this trade, he has the stature (and likely the legal authority) to stop it.

So that's what he did. Assuming the Lakers would be better off with CP3, Stern accomplished in one phone call what the league has struggled to make headway on for years to no avail: he preserved a slice of competitive balance.

Now come the repercussions.

Stern almost assuredly has the wide support of his owners, who have proven over the past six months to be solipsistic little monsters, with internal fights over revenue sharing and transaction restrictions on teams with the highest payrolls causing multiple delays in the lockout talks. The cabal of small-market owners (once reportedly led by Michael Jordan and Paul Allen, with renewed villain Dan Gilbert assumed to be enjoined) pushed and prodded Stern to be more Draconian, to turn the screws when the players didn't cave as the season began to crumble. Five of these jokers voted against the lockout deal, one which saved owners some $3 billion in future salary and created a heavily graduated luxury tax system.

Gilbert, the angry little man who owns the Cleveland Cavaliers, fired off a letter to the commissioner on Thursday complaining about the CP3 trade. The hilarious thing is that the trade doesn't mean jack Schintzus to Dan Gilbert and the Cleveland Cavaliers. What, are the Cavs now in the mix for CP3 via trade or free agency? Please. Are the Cavs on the cusp of competing against the Lakers for an NBA championship? Not unless that dude has been working on a time machine and a way to put LeBron James under hynopsis. This deal doesn't mean a damn thing to Gilbert, except that in the long run it probably boosts the Lakers' luxury tax bill, of which Gilbert would take a cut.

So why is Gilbert acting as if his opinion matters? Why does his opinion matter? Why should any of the 29 owners have any role in the operations of the Hornets? Buying a 1/29th share of a business, last I checked, doesn't give you a whole lot of sway in board meetings. I don't know a lot of folks who hold 3.4 percent of a company's stock and legitimately expect a voice at the table. Last November when Stern decided to bail out Hornets' owner George Shinn, the owners voted to buy the franchise and give Stern authority to run it. And when Stern took that authority, he made perfectly clear who would be calling the shots: not him.

Here's a transcript from Stern's December 6, 2010, media call discussing the Hornets' arrangement in response to a question about who will approve the team's proposed trades and free agent signings. You can hear the quotes for yourself at the Hornets' website. (Scroll down to the December 6 file.)

Take it away, 2010 Stern:

"As far as we're concerned there have been while this process has been going on, there have been two significant transactions. And our response to both of them was, 'You guys are management, you understand your budget and your instructions, just go ahead, because we've got Jac Sperling, Hugh Weber here, and if they recommend it, then we're going to be approving it.'"

Unless, you know, Dan Gilbert and his pack of wolves have a problem with it.

Just so we're clear, here's 2011 Stern's position on the league office's role in the management of the New Orleans Hornets:

[NBA spokesman Tim] Frank: "... League office declined to make the trade for basketball reasons."

Never mind that every GM anonymously quoted in the aftermath says the Hornets did better in that deal than anyone had expected. Never mind that some observers are even questioning if the Lakers might have ended up worse if they couldn't have followed up with an Andrew Bynum-Dwight Howard trade. Just the very idea that Stern reneged on his commitment to allow the Hornets' management to run the Hornets is dirty enough. "If they recommend it, then we're going to be approving it." So much for that.

This is disgusting jealousy from a set of NBA owners toward Lakers owner Jerry Buss, and it's sickening that players are (again!) used as pawns in one of the league's internal wank-offs. Gilbert and the small-market cabal already extracted $50 million in new revenue sharing from Buss ... and now they have blocked his 2011 coup de grace. Never mind that the Lakers' financial advantage has very little to do with the proposed Paul trade; L.A. has amassed great players on largely fair contracts. Sure, Buss' massive revenue streams probably helped keep Lamar Odom when the forward reached free agency, but he did reach free agency. Other teams had a chance to keep him away from the Lakers. L.A. traded for both Odom and Pau Gasol in previous years. This is a well-built team, not one purchased on the open market.

But it's a great team, and the Lakers are always great. (Seriously: 51 years in L.A., four seasons in which the Lakers missed the playoffs.) As a fan of a rival team, that makes me mad. It makes me want to scream. But I understand that the Lakers have been able to have that success because Buss has run the business side like a master, and that he always has a top-flight general manager at the helm. The Lakers don't win because they make money: they make money because they win.

Instead of working to become legit challengers to the Lakers over the course of generations -- which is what it takes, a long-term commitment to being smart, which some teams obviously struggle with -- these owners would rather execute a jock-block for the ages to extract another pound of flesh from the league's most successful, wealthy franchise. All the while, David Stern enables it by changing league policy with the wind, extending his micromanaging tendencies to wildly impactful basketball trades and treating players like hogs at the market. Stern's either an overbearing dictator who demands the control the narrative (a neo-Vince McMahon) or he's the zookeeper who has lifted all of the gates and let chaos reign before him. Neither one is a good look, and the league is much worse off than it would have been had the Lakers landed CP3.

Was just coming to post this article. Really sums everything up perfectly. The bolded quote from last year is going to get Stern into a lot of trouble.

What a mess.

 

[JMon348]

@ESPNSteinLineMarc SteinCP3 Trade Latest: Sources tell ESPN com that teams involved in three-team trade blocked by David Stern appealing to NBA to reverse decision

 

[JMon348]

Maybe I'm crazy, but I don't think that trade (and I think it'll still happen) makes the Lakers better in 2011-12. Good move for future, but for this year, giving away that size advantage makes them worse off in the short-term. It's amazing how quickly people forget how good Pau is. Relying on Bynum even more doesn't sound like winning play.The league should've been happy. This move wouldn've ensured that LAL didn't get any titles in the near future and would be rebuilding around a brittle PG and C.

I agree. Unless Howard is coming, the Lakers will be weaker now. They will just be too weak down low even if Bynum finally emerges as a 30+ minute every night player.As long as Paul can still play on those knees, there is no question the Lakers will have a brighter future.

And Bynum out the first 5 games, the Lakers would be starting Derrick Character at center and MWP or Luke Walton at PF.

 

[the moops]

Broussard who broke news of Howard's intentions, said the deal, as he understands it, would be Howard for Brook Lopez and two first round draft choices, presumably the Nets two picks in 2012: their own' first round pick and the Rockets lottery-protected pick obtained in the Terrence Williams trade a year ago. Whether other players would be included remains uncertain.

There has got to be more than this from the Nets, right?

 

[JMon348]

Maybe I'm crazy, but I don't think that trade (and I think it'll still happen) makes the Lakers better in 2011-12. Good move for future, but for this year, giving away that size advantage makes them worse off in the short-term. It's amazing how quickly people forget how good Pau is. Relying on Bynum even more doesn't sound like winning play.The league should've been happy. This move wouldn've ensured that LAL didn't get any titles in the near future and would be rebuilding around a brittle PG and C.

You are exactly right. Unless they could have somehow magically turned Bynum into Howard, it wasn't a smart trade by LA.

 

[Premier]

Broussard who broke news of Howard's intentions, said the deal, as he understands it, would be Howard for Brook Lopez and two first round draft choices, presumably the Nets two picks in 2012: their own' first round pick and the Rockets lottery-protected pick obtained in the Terrence Williams trade a year ago. Whether other players would be included remains uncertain.

There has got to be more than this from the Nets, right?

I can't imagine the Magic going for this. There will be like 400 people at the games this year.

 

[JMon348]

Wow Simmons posted his story at 7am Pacific. He must have been up all night. He is infuriated.

 

[the moops]

Broussard who broke news of Howard's intentions, said the deal, as he understands it, would be Howard for Brook Lopez and two first round draft choices, presumably the Nets two picks in 2012: their own' first round pick and the Rockets lottery-protected pick obtained in the Terrence Williams trade a year ago. Whether other players would be included remains uncertain.

There has got to be more than this from the Nets, right?

I can't imagine the Magic going for this. There will be like 400 people at the games this year.

I'm not sure I can even put together a package from the Nets roster that seems appropriate. Their roster is gross minus Deron and Lopez.

 

[Premier]

Broussard who broke news of Howard's intentions, said the deal, as he understands it, would be Howard for Brook Lopez and two first round draft choices, presumably the Nets two picks in 2012: their own' first round pick and the Rockets lottery-protected pick obtained in the Terrence Williams trade a year ago. Whether other players would be included remains uncertain.

There has got to be more than this from the Nets, right?

I can't imagine the Magic going for this. There will be like 400 people at the games this year.

I'm not sure I can even put together a package from the Nets roster that seems appropriate. Their roster is gross minus Deron and Lopez.

Seriously, if you're the Magic and that's the offer, you tell Dwight to stuff it and approach things again at the deadline.

 

[JMon348]

More terrible news, Brandon Roy is retiring.

 

[the moops]

More terrible news, Brandon Roy is retiring.

Portland has some #### ### luck

 

[Premier]

More terrible news, Brandon Roy is retiring.

Not terrible news for the Blazers. Major cap relief.

 

[Cliff Clavin]

Wow. This is blowing up in LA's face.

Thats really too bad.

 

[pollardsvision]

Wow Simmons posted his story at 7am Pacific. He must have been up all night. He is infuriated.

In Tuesday's article (4th Day of NBA Christmas), Simmons mentioned the the league ownership of the Hornets being a potential issue. It was for very different reasons though (Clippers, not Lakers)."One Other Variable That Scares Me: Everyone keeps forgetting that the NBA still owns the Hornets. I know the league gave Demps the authority to make every move, but still … if you're David Stern and Adam Silver, are you that excited about building a possible juggernaut for the Clippers, the same franchise that's owned by the single most loathsome NBA owner of the past 30 years (and someone who wasn't exactly pro-Stern during the lockout)? Do you really want Donald Sterling to own one of your signature teams? Wouldn't you rather steer Paul toward the Lakers or Warriors?(You're right, I'm probably overthinking this. Please tell me I'm overthinking this.)"