Profile
Search
Register
Log in
NBA 2011-2012. The NBA is back!!
View previous topic | View next topic >

Post new topic Reply to topic
Strange Famous Forum > The General Forum

Author Message
futuristxen



Joined: 01 Jul 2002
Posts: 19356
Location: Tighten Your Bible Belt
 Reply with quote  

I don't agree that it was a good move for the Hornets. The Hornets are trying to get sold to an actual owner--getting enough players to be mediocre so you miss out on one of the deepest drafts in recent memory is not what you want to do. Especially when you are taking on money to do so.

The NBA is paying these guys salaries. All 29 teams.

It's completely absurd that they are allowed to make any trades at all. It's too much of a conflict of interest. They should only be allowed to make vet minimum signings to fill out their roster, and draft players.

Or they should be contracted.

There should never have been negotiations in the first place. But the NBA completely dropped the ball.
Post Fri Dec 09, 2011 7:31 am
 View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
quasifoto



Joined: 30 Jun 2002
Posts: 975
Location: Albany
 Reply with quote  

Hornets were getting some solid players out of the trade. How are the fans going to feel if the lose CP3 for nothing? And now how do they decide what trades are good and bad from now on, where is the fine line drawn?

So you think they shouldn't be allowed to make trades? That seems crazy to me but I guess that's just differing opinions.
Post Fri Dec 09, 2011 8:43 am
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
desert penguin



Joined: 27 Oct 2006
Posts: 1104
 Reply with quote  

No, that's just an asinine opinion. You can't handcuff an entire franchise like that. You either contract them, or let the people that work there do their jobs. Stern promised last year that if the management recommended it, then the NBA would back it. The Hornets' GM made a valiant attempt in fielding a team that could win some fan support while making the best deal he could possibly make. Having a lame duck superstar player is about the worst spot a GM can be in. David Stern managed to make things even harder on him.
Post Fri Dec 09, 2011 8:52 am
 View user's profile Send private message
desert penguin



Joined: 27 Oct 2006
Posts: 1104
 Reply with quote  

Post Fri Dec 09, 2011 8:53 am
 View user's profile Send private message
porkchopexpress



Joined: 31 May 2004
Posts: 105
Location: Portland, Seattle, Ithaca
 Reply with quote  

As a UW alum who grew up in Portland, this is a sad day. Brandon Roy to retire any day now. I'm glad his salary will come off the books (possibly as soon as April 28, 2012), but still sad to see that his knees have killed his career. Maybe he'll go into coaching.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7335092/brandon-roy-portland-trail-blazers-retire-due-knees-sources-say
Post Fri Dec 09, 2011 11:23 am
 View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
McLirious



Joined: 24 Feb 2003
Posts: 533
Location: Portland, OR
 Reply with quote  

This is, obviously, a huge PR blunder for Stern. And his continuing vague & vacuous response has zero traction, “Chris Paul in New Orleans was more valuable than the trade that was being discussed.” Really? Keeping him there to begrudgingly walk the company line while just waiting to hop the 12:01 train …? That surely instills confidence in a potential buyer! And unless there was some sort of insider-trading knowledge that LA would in fact snag Howard as well, it’s not like the Lakers were stacking stars. Kobe may be the (tied) biggest name in the game, but he’s in decline! Who else? Bynum & Metta World Peace!?!

Stern has to give; the whole thing is a mess, and it’s all on his shoulders. And if Dan Gilbert was the driving force behind this: fuck. that. guy.

Sad news about Roy. I saw him thread the Knicks' D for a down-by-one, at-the-buzzer lay in a couple years ago & it was beautiful – he meant a lot to this city. Blazers: no luck!

EDIT: Just read Gilbert’s email. I’m somewhat sympathetic to his argument, with the financial savings brought to light, but the deal was favorable enough to the three teams involved to move forward & it’s awful precedent to block a trade based on “what ifs”, which I think was the case here.
Post Fri Dec 09, 2011 11:59 am
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
sloe t
self-worthlessness


Joined: 06 Mar 2005
Posts: 685
Location: ellensburg, wa
 Reply with quote  

futuristxen wrote:
I don't agree that it was a good move for the Hornets. The Hornets are trying to get sold to an actual owner--getting enough players to be mediocre so you miss out on one of the deepest drafts in recent memory is not what you want to do. Especially when you are taking on money to do so.

The NBA is paying these guys salaries. All 29 teams.

It's completely absurd that they are allowed to make any trades at all. It's too much of a conflict of interest. They should only be allowed to make vet minimum signings to fill out their roster, and draft players.

Or they should be contracted.

There should never have been negotiations in the first place. But the NBA completely dropped the ball.

this is pretty silly. they were going to get one of the best offensive two guards in the game and two star-level front court players. but it's better for them if they tank the season and let their star player walk with no compensation so they can get one high draft pick? oh they were also getting another first round pick in that deal. oh and they made the playoffs with paul last year so it's not like they're guaranteed to be in the lottery if they keep him.

i agree that they probably should have been contracted, but if you're not going to that then they have to be allowed to operate like any other team.

my favorite conspiracy theory is that stern actually blocked the trade because it weakens the lakers so much.

i hate the lakers, and really don't like the idea of rooting against paul, but i kind of feel like if stern doesn't reverse this decision this whole season will be tainted.
Post Fri Dec 09, 2011 12:03 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
tommi teardrop



Joined: 12 Apr 2007
Posts: 2214
Location: Las Vegas
 Reply with quote  

I don't know. I think people acting like this is such a huge blunder that will taint Stern's legacy are overdoing it a bit. A team that is owned by the league shipped one of the best players in the league to a franchise that the league has an interest in succeeding. And the Lakers didn't even have to give up their most promising young star (Bynum).

If you are the Rockets, does Martin, Scola and Dragic for a 31 year old pau gasol sound like a good deal?

From my perspective, the trade looked shady, just like the kwame for pau gift that jerry west gave the lakers. That trade should have been vetoed. More trades like this should be vetoed.

It's one thing if free agents want to go to certain places. It's another when a team owned by the league ships the best PG on earth to the premier team in the league, without getting their youngest best prospect in return. A team whos success means more success to the league as a whole.

I can't believe no one is mentioning any of this today.

And can we stop acting like this is the best thing the Hornets ever could have gotten for Paul?
Post Fri Dec 09, 2011 12:34 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
squirtisblow



Joined: 12 Mar 2003
Posts: 1587
Location: SFV
 Reply with quote  

Bynum is a promising young star? dude has been already, and most likely will be, injured his whole career. he could be a young star in the making, i wouldn't say it's promising, though.

i think the lakers are better off with LO and Gasol over CP3. Especially in a bigs dominated league... Don't get me wrong i wanted to see cp3 go to the lakers just for a change up in laker ball, but i think they'll win more games with gasol and odom. The chemistry sure is fucked, though. Odom will be a baby about it too.
Post Fri Dec 09, 2011 12:42 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address MSN Messenger
tommi teardrop



Joined: 12 Apr 2007
Posts: 2214
Location: Las Vegas
 Reply with quote  

Tell me what the Rocket's starting lineup would be after that proposed trade. They would be the worst team in the league easily.
Post Fri Dec 09, 2011 12:43 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
sloe t
self-worthlessness


Joined: 06 Mar 2005
Posts: 685
Location: ellensburg, wa
 Reply with quote  

3 legitimate starters and a first round pick is pretty solid. the best they could have ever gotten for him? no. but the best they could have gotten from him when everyone knows he's leaving after 66 games? most likely.

i agree that the rockets didn't get a great deal, but i think the hornets actually made out great. i also think it's possible that the hornets or rockets didn't want bynum, with his history of injuries and attitude problems.

word is the rockets were close to landing nene in addition to pau as they have a lot of cap space i guess, which would have left them not great but not any worse off than they were last year.
Post Fri Dec 09, 2011 12:49 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
squirtisblow



Joined: 12 Mar 2003
Posts: 1587
Location: SFV
 Reply with quote  

tommi teardrop wrote:
Tell me what the Rocket's starting lineup would be after that proposed trade. They would be the worst team in the league easily.


They wouldn't be the worst, and Pau is one of the best pf / centers in the league... not only that, but the rockets agreed to the trade... they wanted this. You're telling me the owners got upset because the rockets were getting a shitty deal? please
Post Fri Dec 09, 2011 12:53 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address MSN Messenger
tommi teardrop



Joined: 12 Apr 2007
Posts: 2214
Location: Las Vegas
 Reply with quote  

No I'm saying that a trade in which:

1. A league owned team sends the best PG in the world to the league's cash cow;

2. The trade is made possible because one team is willing to give up 3 of its best players for an aging star and have an awful roster afterwards;

3. The rich get richer and the poor get worse;

4. The premier tradee (CP3) is dictating where he will go by threatening not to resign unless it is a premier team;

should be vetoed. That's my opinion. If the Lakers would have won the title with Paul, you don't think that sounds like a huge setup by the league?

And what team would have a worse starting lineup than Lowry, Courtney Lee, Budinger, Pau and Thabeet? Even if you add Nene for Thabeet, that is a terrible team.
Post Fri Dec 09, 2011 1:21 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
squirtisblow



Joined: 12 Mar 2003
Posts: 1587
Location: SFV
 Reply with quote  

i don't care how shitty the deal is for one of the teams. the owners shouldn't be vetoing anything, especially after they walked away with a better deal after the whole lockout shit.

This trade was actually best for NO... now the league's team is even deeper in shit cuz no owner will want to buy them knowing the star is upset and IS going to leave in July leaving them with nothing really. Not only this but players feel the heavy hand of the league even more now. There's no way to stop players from wanting to play in the legacy of lakers or boston or any big ticket team. It's retarded to veto it.

There's a lot of shitty teams with bad lineups... argue that houston would be the worst if you want.. I think a few teams should be cut from the nba.

So if Lakers won it would be all cuz the league? yea just like tebow makes touchdowns because of god. That's bullshit the players want to win and play to win, give them credit.
Post Fri Dec 09, 2011 1:35 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address MSN Messenger
tommi teardrop



Joined: 12 Apr 2007
Posts: 2214
Location: Las Vegas
 Reply with quote  

And by making that trade, the Hornets and the Rockets are effectively allowing the Lakers, a team in their own conference, to continue their dominance even after Kobe's career is over.

Why as a team would you allow the perennial title contenders to become even stronger and more attractive to potential free agents over the next 6-8 years?

Aren't the Hornets the same team that gave the Lakers Kobe for Vlade Divac? One of the worst trades of all time, no?
Post Fri Dec 09, 2011 1:38 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website

Post new topic Reply to topic
Jump to:  
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 9, 10, 11  Next
All times are GMT - 6 Hours.
The time now is Fri Aug 01, 2014 8:22 am
  Display posts from previous:      


Powered by phpBB: © 2001 phpBB Group
Template created by The Fathom
Based on template of Nick Mahon