What's new
By:

Lockout is OVER!!! NBA is back according to sources

I'm interested to see what changes to the drug policy the two sides want to make. The NBA has always been very lax on weed, and I can't imagine a deal would get done if that changed drastically. We'll see.
 
GVC said:
I'm interested to see what changes to the drug policy the two sides want to make. The NBA has always been very lax on weed, and I can't imagine a deal would get done if that changed drastically. We'll see.
Click to expand...

I tried giving you rep but apparently I've given you too much.
 
David Aldridge is saying that the sing-and-trade has been reinstated. That was one thing I really wanted to be abolished in this CBA. Gives players too much leverage to force a trade and still get paid (i.e. Melo).
 
AlaskanAssassin said:
David Aldridge is saying that the sing-and-trade has been reinstated. That was one thing I really wanted to be abolished in this CBA. Gives players too much leverage to force a trade and still get paid (i.e. Melo).
Click to expand...
Melo has never been part of a sign and trade.
 
AlaskanAssassin said:
Extend-and-trade? Does that work better for you? I think everyone knows what I'm referring to.

https://basketball.realgm.com/wiret...o_Eliminate_Carmelo_Anthony_Extend_And_Trades
Click to expand...
The provision allows the team making the trade to get something in return for the player. If not for that provision, the Nuggets would have been left with nothing. Because that provision exists, the Nuggets have a bunch of young, controllable players.

Is excessive player movement really an issue in the NBA? Melo stuck it out in Denver for nearly 8 years, and LeBron was in Cleveland for 7. That's a big chunk of their expected NBA lifespan that they would have preferred to play elsewhere.
 
AlaskanAssassin said:
David Aldridge is saying that the sing-and-trade has been reinstated. That was one thing I really wanted to be abolished in this CBA. Gives players too much leverage to force a trade and still get paid (i.e. Melo).
Click to expand...

Keeping extend-and-trades is a big blow. That ****ing sucks.

The owners really ****ed this one up. I believed that if the owners went for the right things then I'd be behind the lockout 100%. Instead of working on issues of parity and fortifying the ability of teams to not get Leboned, it was a cash grab.

What the **** ever. Give me my ****ing hoops.
 
GVC said:
The provision allows the team making the trade to get something in return for the player. If not for that provision, the Nuggets would have been left with nothing. Because that provision exists, the Nuggets have a bunch of young, controllable players.

Is excessive player movement really an issue in the NBA? Melo stuck it out in Denver for nearly 8 years, and LeBron was in Cleveland for 7. That's a big chunk of their expected NBA lifespan that they would have preferred to play elsewhere.
Click to expand...
I don't think Melo was unhappy in Denver for most of that time. Lebron changed the culture of the league like no one else has. That HAD to be curtailed and the owners put on fireworks but did nothing about it.
 
NUMBERICA said:
Lebron changed the culture of the league like no one else has. That HAD to be curtailed
Click to expand...
He shouldn't have been able to sign elsewhere? He took less money to move to another team as a free agent. How would you curtail that?
 
GVC said:
He shouldn't have been able to sign elsewhere? He took less money to move to another team as a free agent. How would you curtail that?
Click to expand...
*Lebron and Bosh. The not very big 3 have changed the culture of the league.

Franchise contract, ideally. No extend and trades at least.
 
NUMBERICA said:
*Lebron and Bosh. The not very big 3 have changed the culture of the league.

Franchise contract, ideally. No extend and trades at least.
Click to expand...
So your solution is to force players to stay on the same team? For how long? Their whole career?

And Denver didn't have to extend-and-trade Melo. They could have waited until the end of the season and lost him for nothing.
 
GVC said:
He shouldn't have been able to sign elsewhere? He took less money to move to another team as a free agent. How would you curtail that?
Click to expand...

Good point. More lucrative bird rights wouldn't have even helped in Lebron's case. They could have done something where they only allow resigned players to receive fully guaranteed contracts, but it would have been a blood issue for the union.
 
GVC said:
So your solution is to force players to stay on the same team? For how long? Their whole career?

And Denver didn't have to extend-and-trade Melo. They could have waited until the end of the season and lost him for nothing.
Click to expand...
Oh the options Denver had.

It's all rather academic when it comes to the Carmelo situation for me. I think and have thought forever that he was a junk player that made his team worse and the Nuggets are better for his forcing his way out. That doesn't change that the Nuggets shouldn't have to face that situation with the player they had done everything to placate and frankly had done a good job.

Getting back to the Cavs, Lebron's decision set that franchise back 20 years. I can think of worse things than being paid the 2nd highest salary in the league with an already pretty damn good team. The pieces they assembled to make him as happy as they could don't work without him as the centerpiece.

I also think there's a lot to be said about the overall product of the NBA. Fans might tune in once the NWO is formed (wrestling reference), but once the NWO becomes the way of the league (even more so than it is now), people will start jumping ship. That's conjecture, though.
 
My question is what happened to the hardliner small market teams? I thought they were going to band together and force the big market teams to compete on an equal playing field? So did the players cave or the small market teams?
 
GVC said:
So your solution is to force players to stay on the same team? For how long? Their whole career?

And Denver didn't have to extend-and-trade Melo. They could have waited until the end of the season and lost him for nothing.
Click to expand...

The problem isn't that Melo was traded, or what the return was for Denver. The problem is that Melo had too much control over the matter. He basically told Denver where he wanted to play, and requested an extend-and-trade so that he wouldn't lose out on any $. In essence, Melo had all the control! All of the financial incentives of staying with the same team are eliminated when a player can hold his team hostage like this. We traded Deron early just to avoid this type of situation.

You can assume that Melo would have left for nothing if Denver didn't do this, but you can't prove it! Maybe he would have stayed when forced to give up millions of dollars to move to a different city and play for a different team.

If Denver didn't want to take that risk, they could have traded him for the remainder of the year to a contender for a slightly smaller ransom.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top