Also another good article by Simmons
https://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7334835/the-sixth-day-nba-christmas
Thoughts on the league blocking the Chris Paul deal
- Thread starter BluesRocker
- Start date
Also another good article by Simmons
https://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7334835/the-sixth-day-nba-christmas
JAZZFAN_2814
Active Member
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.
mellow
Well-Known Member
I thought Chris Paul would be relieved that he wasn't getting traded, after all the players are forever reminding us how unfair it is to them to be bartered and traded like chattel. And Chris himself told us last week his heart was in New Orleans.
The players cry that its not fair that they get traded without being asked, now they are crying that they 'have to' stay. Cry for longer contracts, then cry that they have to fulfill their contract. The stars claim to be the man, demanding a high salary, then cry for 'help' asking the team to sign more guys so they can win. To hell with them.
The lock out solved nothing, the lines of division are now further entrenched and the star players that control the NBAPU are going to destroy the league.
The players cry that its not fair that they get traded without being asked, now they are crying that they 'have to' stay. Cry for longer contracts, then cry that they have to fulfill their contract. The stars claim to be the man, demanding a high salary, then cry for 'help' asking the team to sign more guys so they can win. To hell with them.
The lock out solved nothing, the lines of division are now further entrenched and the star players that control the NBAPU are going to destroy the league.
JAZZFAN_2814
Active Member
BluesRocker
Banned
Loggrad98 you misspelled know. It's not spelled "now". Just thought I'd nitpick and point that out since you like to spell check me.
JAZZFAN_2814
Active Member
Utah still has a mess of a roster. The idea that they are well on their way to contention is worth a smirk, but little else.
So far as market analysis, Utah actually blew up the Boozer-Williams Era a season too early: right as the Spurs got way too much mileage, and the Lakers were punch-drunk, Utah was "rebuilding".
From a matchup perspective, Utah would have been in great shape against any other team in the West.
Too bad.
NAOS
Well-Known Member
the rift between the owners (obvious in the labor negotiations) was bound to surface at some point. Who knew it would be so quickly.
Personally, I think this is pure comedy: people crying in LA; a league-owned team (which is league-owned because of poor NBA management vis-a-vis expansion) as a stage for internal dissent; Laker players showing up to camp knowing they're not wanted; lolz
As far as I'm concerned, the NBA can continue to shoot itself in the foot during this labor deal. Until there is equal revenue sharing and a harder cap, then I think the dirty laundry should wave for all.
Personally, I think this is pure comedy: people crying in LA; a league-owned team (which is league-owned because of poor NBA management vis-a-vis expansion) as a stage for internal dissent; Laker players showing up to camp knowing they're not wanted; lolz
As far as I'm concerned, the NBA can continue to shoot itself in the foot during this labor deal. Until there is equal revenue sharing and a harder cap, then I think the dirty laundry should wave for all.
candrew
Well-Known Member
Trades do not occur in a vacuum. There was obviously another deal in the works to upgrade LA after the loss of Odom and Gasol. Maybe not Howard; but something.
As for the loss of these players - right now people know the motivated and productive Lamar Odom. That's because Phil Jackson put him in a situaution where he can succeed. They forgot about the unmotivated, inconsistent Odom that would shoot The Clippers out of games, and show up on D once every other game. If he was traded back to a fair to middling team, I have no doubt he'd go back to the way he was.
The trade just "looks" bad. And for every talking head protesting the NBA right now for shooting down this deal, there would be ten of them saying how nothing has changed in terms of team parity with the new CBA if this trade went through.
As for the loss of these players - right now people know the motivated and productive Lamar Odom. That's because Phil Jackson put him in a situaution where he can succeed. They forgot about the unmotivated, inconsistent Odom that would shoot The Clippers out of games, and show up on D once every other game. If he was traded back to a fair to middling team, I have no doubt he'd go back to the way he was.
The trade just "looks" bad. And for every talking head protesting the NBA right now for shooting down this deal, there would be ten of them saying how nothing has changed in terms of team parity with the new CBA if this trade went through.
It would be in everyone's best interest if one team from each conference was contracted. That's the #1 thing here. THE NBA OWNS A TEAM BECAUSE NO ONE WOULD BUY.
Change the New Orleans Hornets to the Seattle Supersonics and sell (there will be a bidder), axe the Timberwolves and Bobcats. Or something.
LogGrad98
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2020-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
Go back to 4 divisions and axe 2 teams from each conference. This idea has been debated here before. It would help parity since it would increase the overall level of talent/team in the league.
Easy criteria too. Axe the least profitable team, and the historically least successful team (in terms of overall record for the life of the franchise).
The only asset the Lakers have left is Bynum so I guess they could have traded him to get two or three big guys, but things were looking ugly on the Laker frontline.
Who would the other two be? If not careful the Jazz could be on that list.
Jazz4ever
Well-Known Member
No, it is not. They were getting no rebuilding pieces at all. They weren't even going to get Gasol, Houston was. That's why Stern ultimately stopped it. How would you feel about getting Kevin Martin and Lamar Kardashian for DWill?
But nobody likes the Bobcats, have no history, no assets, and are currently absolute dreck. Let Jordan have the Hornets in Charlotte, bump The Bobcats and a bad basketball city in one move.
Seattle should have a team as well. Just throwing that out there.
Got it! Minnesota and NO chopped, Bobcats sent to Seattle and given first two picks in contraction draft (Love and ?)
orangello
Well-Known Member
So, in your scenario the Jazz would lose DWill but we would get Lamar, Martin Scola, Dragic and the Knicks first round pick unprotected? We would already have Bell, Hayward, Miles, Watson, Millsap, Evans, Okur and Jefferson. Lets break this down a little bit:
PG's- Watson, Dragic and Price
SG/SF- Martin, Bell, Miles, Hayward, Evans
PF/C- Scola, Millsap, Odom, Okur and Jefferson.
I can see the weakness in the PG spot but everywhere else we would be packed. It would have been a great team. We would not be building for the future, we would be able to compete almost immediately.
Jazz4ever
Well-Known Member
I was doing the comparison from a value perspective. NO would be getting some 30+ year old has beens and a overpaid, non defending SG in Martin. They would fight for the 8th spot for a couple years and then enter a long, painful dark age. The Jazz will likely avoid this sort of dark age because they got youth and multiple lottery picks.
Nice of you to leave out a 18 and 10 guy and a first round pick that could be at least be in the middle of the first round in a potentially packed draft. Martin is a big time scorer and Odom is the best 6th man in the league who constantly killed us.