Thoughts on the league blocking the Chris Paul deal

[gomretat]

NBA is in a catch 22. This deal is as good as what Denver did with Melo and the same situation. However, the fact that it makes sense proves they signed a CBA that does nothing to stem the tide of creating 6-8 super teams which is a death knell on the league. They irony is that the deal that proves how dumb they were to sign the CBA so happened to occur with the one team the league owns. Either option here is bad. IMO, they had no business blocking the trade but I get why they did so.

 

[write4u]

Don't see how Paul is dictating. He has one year left and has indicated he'd prefer to go elsewhere, so the smart thing to do is trade him, like we did with DWill. Only they're getting a much better return, at least so far as players, than we did. Not sure how the money stacks up. Maybe someone could show how this affects the Hornets financially -- I'm too lazy to look it up. That might be where the sticking point was from Stern's POV ???

Ok, found an article that breaks down the spending numbers and the rationale:

https://www.grantland.com/blog/the-triangle/post/_/id/12005/the-chris-paul-trade-what-the-nba-did-wrong

 

[Gyp Rosetti]

The lakers could easily get Dwight Howard. They have draft picks.

So to the Magic it would be Brook Lopez plus picks vs Bynum plus picks. Most people in the league feel the Bynum package would be better.

It's a mute point anyways. David Stern doesn't own the Hornets. The owners do. And they can choose not to approve of trades that will hurt them for years to come

Yeah, I'm sure teams are dying for the 28th pick in the draft.
*moot

 

[Gyp Rosetti]

This trade has to do with the power structure of not only the NBA head office, but also that of the Lakers: it's now the Jim Bus Era, and it might be another sign of shifting focus to Bynum as THE big man, and franchise standard.

Is that a bluff? The organization has been selling it for long enough.

So far as Gasol "clearly" declining? His regular season was on-par with what he'd achieved before in forum blue&gold, and it was only the second season in his career where he averaged a double-double (not animal-style). He's played in under 800 regular season games, and much of his worth his footwork, size and overall skill-based rather than athletic.

He declined as the playoffs approached last season, and was miserable in them. But that was matched to the team's performance, which speaks both to his worth and the factor that likely truly killed the Lakers: they'd just come off 3 straight seasons where they made the Finals. Teams almost universally collapse the fourth year following such runs in the modern era.

The irony of people complaining about this trade being vetoed by the NBA, is that the Lakers never should have had Gasol to trade in the first place. Note that the media is more upset about this than they ever were about what went down with the league's pushing of Gasol to LA and Garnett to Boston.

Buss moran.

 

[Ferguson_Mellochill]

This resembles the original Gasol deal. LA offered some decent players and the league vetoed the deal. Then the Lakers included an assistant coach, a bunch of picks, some scrubs, etc. and Stern approved it. End result: the 2nd deal was actually BETTER for LA. So Odom and/or Gasol won't be included becuase they have expensive, longer-term deals, which actually might decrease the sales price of the NO franchise. So one will be kept, thus enabling a deal to be made for Howard. Stern is the best GM the Lakers have had since West was forced out.

So basically, LA and Houston are trying again. Only difference is that LA is trying to get a pick to toss to NOH, and they're willing to take back a scrub or two. Deja vu per GlassEater. Lets see if Stern approves based on this nuance.

https://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/217334/New_Pieces_Of_Paul_Trade_Emerge_Now_In_Sterns_Hands

 

[billyshelby]

On rethinking this, Stern does technically have a justification. As the de facto owner, he can say the deal isn't good enough. He wants to avoid the appearance of gifting Paul to LA so he asks the other parties to sweeten the deal.

This is what any owner of any NBA team might conceivably do. Tell their GM they like the deal, but they want just a little more. That said, the deal was pretty solid in the first place and I don't think the extra effort for PR purposes was necessarily worth it. As a wrinkle, he might be hoping that the extra effort results in ENSURING LA has nothing but Bynum to offer for Howard which would effectively kill that possibility.

 

[Ferguson_Mellochill]

Good point. I think the uproar among the owners wasn't the Chris Paul deal by itself, but the idea that it would make Dwight Howard demand a trade to LA and leave LA with enough pieces and cap to get Dwight. The Lakers were always pursuing Dwight, and they were trying to get Chris Paul first to make Dwight demand a trade to LA, which would then undermine other offers Orlando would get for him.

If I were Stern, I'd sit on this for a while. Let the players association threaten with their stupid litigation. The Hornets have no obligation to trade Chris Paul in the next month or two. Stern is under no obligation to approve a trade even if it's a good one.

If I were Orlando, I'd also sit on this for a while. There's no hurry to trade Dwight, even if he doesn't report.

ESPN is trying to cook up controversy because they're media wh0~3S.

 

[footawn]

not to mention how Houston was selling their team for a past-his-prime softie that played his way out of LA last postseason.

 

[Ferguson_Mellochill]

Ha Ha! No deal.

 

[write4u]

Think what you want, but it seems a lot of the media supporting Stern, because the prime players might be on the downside of their careers, are forgetting Goran Dragic who might've ended up being the best part of the deal, plus they were also getting a first rounder.

 

[idiot]

Anyone know how much Stern is worth? How about giving him a "you break it, you buy it rule" for the Hornets? Send him into retirement with ownership of the club.