• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Bill Simmons on Chris Paul

Tin Cup said:
But really, what precedent are they going for? The "you cant be traded in a contract year, you can only play out the year and then leave on your own accord" precedent? It makes no sense.
Click to expand...

I dont know. I suppose like others have said, they are being babies and trying to pry the power back from the star players.

Heard Mark Cuban saying on sports center that first of all, he voted against the CBA because he is tired of having to shell out a ton of money to stay competitive. He would rather have more parity. This is they guy who just won the championship. He also lobbied stern to veto the Paul trade. He said that a huge part of the lockout was discussing how to protect smaller market teams, and so I suppose this is their way of attempting to do that, as ridiculous as it is.
 
TwentyONE said:
Heard Mark Cuban saying on sports center that first of all, he voted against the CBA because he is tired of having to shell out a ton of money to stay competitive. He would rather have more parity. This is they guy who just won the championship. He also lobbied stern to veto the Paul trade. He said that a huge part of the lockout was discussing how to protect smaller market teams, and so I suppose this is their way of attempting to do that, as ridiculous as it is.
Click to expand...
So the plan is to protect small market teams by forcing Paul to move in free agency, when the small market team will get nothing in return.

:rulz:
 
lefty said:
I have no idea why NO wasn't contracted in the summer. Why would the NBA keep a team that it was forced to buy, because there were no other suitors?

And now Stern thinks he can save the franchise by letting Paul go next year with absolutely nothing in return?
Click to expand...

Because the NBA owners can still eventually sell that NO franchise to someone (read: a Seattle businessman), at some point, for 500+ million, and split the money. And the player's association would never have agreed to the loss of 15 jobs during the negotiations.
 
TwentyONE said:
I dont know. I suppose like others have said, they are being babies and trying to pry the power back from the star players.

Heard Mark Cuban saying on sports center that first of all, he voted against the CBA because he is tired of having to shell out a ton of money to stay competitive. He would rather have more parity. This is they guy who just won the championship. He also lobbied stern to veto the Paul trade. He said that a huge part of the lockout was discussing how to protect smaller market teams, and so I suppose this is their way of attempting to do that, as ridiculous as it is.
Click to expand...

He voted against his main rival in the West getting the best point guard in the league. The rest is window dressing.
 
"The message is we went through this lockout for a reason," Cuban said Friday on ESPN Dallas 103.3 FM's Ben and Skin Show. "Again, I'm not speaking for Stern. He's not telling me his thought process. I'm just telling you my perspective, having gone through all this. There's a reason that we went through this lockout, and one of the reasons is to give small-market teams the ability to keep their stars and the ability to compete."
...
"We just had a lockout, and one of the goals of the lockout was to say that small-market teams now have a chance to keep their players, and the rules were designed to give them that opportunity," Cuban said. "So to all of a sudden have a league-owned team trade their best player, particularly after having gone out and sold a ton of tickets in that market, that's not the kind of signal you want to send.
Click to expand...


Cuban is adjusting to the new CBA, but was against it:


Nevertheless, Cuban admitted voting against the collective bargaining agreement. He hoped for a system that would allow the Mavericks to keep their championship team largely intact while maintaining some flexibility to make roster upgrades, as they'd done in the past.
Click to expand...

http://espn.go.com/los-angeles/nba/...chris-paul-la-lakers-deal-went-lockout-reason
 
ArlingtonDeac said:
Because the NBA owners can still eventually sell that NO franchise to someone (read: a Seattle businessman), at some point, for 500+ million, and split the money. And the player's association would never have agreed to the loss of 15 jobs during the negotiations.
Click to expand...
Right, but this can only be done if they sell the team this year with Paul on the roster.

They bought the team for $300m; what owner in their right mind is going to buy a team for almost double what the league paid (when there were no other potential owners bidding) with a roster that doesn't have any superstars?

At least the trade would have made the hornets more attractive to buy; if the league doesn't sell the franchise this year, then it's a complete clusterfuck - right? or am I way off base?
 
Stern really picked the wrong guy to mess with in all of this. CP3 is one of the good guys, but he's also one of the most well-liked players in the league and he is tight w/ Bron, Melo, Howard etc etc. Anyone think we see some sort of CAA player strike over this?
 
Tin Cup said:
Stern really picked the wrong guy to mess with in all of this. CP3 is one of the good guys, but he's also one of the most well-liked players in the league and he is tight w/ Bron, Melo, Howard etc etc. Anyone think we see some sort of CAA player strike over this?
Click to expand...

I doubt it. Perhaps a big lawsuit against the NBA, but not a player strike. CP is too much of a citizen to deprive rank-and-file players out of more money... I mean, after all of this, there are reports that CP's in the gym working out and shooting with his teammates.

That being said, Stern is just showing a remarkable lack of judgment with a lot of this. I do see him being fired/let-go/resigning, if not within the year, then definitely before the start of the 2012-2013 season.
 
lefty said:
Right, but this can only be done if they sell the team this year with Paul on the roster.

They bought the team for $300m; what owner in their right mind is going to buy a team for almost double what the league paid (when there were no other potential owners bidding) with a roster that doesn't have any superstars?

At least the trade would have made the hornets more attractive to buy; if the league doesn't sell the franchise this year, then it's a complete clusterfuck - right? or am I way off base?
Click to expand...

You're right in principle, but no one in their right "business" mind buys an NBA team in the first place. Some rich douche will overpay for the franchise, with or without Paul, because ultimately it's an ego trip purchase. Further, the lack of any big contracts at the time of sale is a counter-plus.

I totally agree that moving Paul for young, cheap talent like this deal would've made the team more attractive to buyer, not less. The league will definitely hurt the team's value if they let its best asset simply walk for nothing, as anyone with a pulse could tell you. But this decision had nothing to do with the Hornets and everything to do with Laker envy.
 
Am I the only that thinks that that CP3 would have preferred to spend his career with the Hornets but felt like he wasn't going to be able to win a championship there due to mismanagement? In other words, I don't think think Paul was going to the Lakers because of the name, but rather because he knew they'd put a championship caliber supporting cast around him even though it is definitely doable for a small market team (ie: Spurs).

CP3 seems a lot more like Duncan than Kobe from a values/character POV.
 
TBR said:
Am I the only that thinks that that CP3 would have preferred to spend his career with the Hornets but felt like he wasn't going to be able to win a championship there due to mismanagement? In other words, I don't think think Paul was going to the Lakers because of the name, but rather because he knew they'd put a championship caliber supporting cast around him even though it is definitely doable for a small market team (ie: Spurs).

CP3 seems a lot more like Duncan than Kobe from a values/character POV.
Click to expand...

Hornets management has actually been quite good with the new regime.

Possibilities

1) The Old GM was the coach for a while. He also got rid of Tyson for Emeka. Maybe he and West didn't like the old coach or Emeka much, and they really liked Chandler.

2) Being on TV once a year sucks if you're an NBA player. People get envious of teams that are on all the time.

3) Not having an owner sucks. I don't think the management is the issue as much as the current lack of owner. Looking at Demps he looks like a guy player would like, and he's made decent moves.


Chris lobbying for JJ and helping push Thornton out of town then leaving shortly thereafter aren't really "character" moves. He got whatever he wanted in NO and bailed soon thereafter.
 
TBR said:
Am I the only that thinks that that CP3 would have preferred to spend his career with the Hornets but felt like he wasn't going to be able to win a championship there due to mismanagement? In other words, I don't think think Paul was going to the Lakers because of the name, but rather because he knew they'd put a championship caliber supporting cast around him even though it is definitely doable for a small market team (ie: Spurs).

CP3 seems a lot more like Duncan than Kobe from a values/character POV.
Click to expand...

Yes, you are the only one that thinks CP3 would have preferred to spend his career with the hornets.
 
Cheapest tix I can find for Opening night on christmas day are $155 for upper deck.

Ouch.

Guess I'm going to have to welcome Chris in a preseason game.
 
i have better things to do (of course), but i also have better things to do than post on this stupid board all the time. it's the main reason, how's that?
 
The NBA isn't successful with parity, it is successful when the large market teams are winning. This isn't the NFL, where Green Bay and Pittsburgh can be successful and the league thrives. Parity sounds all sweet and nice and fair, but the average NBA fan doesn't give a crap about that. They want the Lakers and the Celtics in the Finals. The small markets need to stop spending their time trying to bring the elite franchises down, and invest their time and money more wisely into finding ways to compete with the elite on a higher level.
 
palmab03 said:
Chris does have the "I love New Orleans/Winston" routine down pretty good.
Click to expand...

I am sure Chris does love NO/W-S, but that doesn't mean he wants to spend his career there. As a pro athlete, he wants to win and make good money doing it. In New Orleans, he only has a shot at one of those and it isn't winning. Not to mention, the Hornets aren't staying in New Orleans.
 
If you worked five years for a bad company and did well, would you be considered a bad person for wanting to leave to work for a better company?

That's all this is.
 
Tin Cup said:
Stern really picked the wrong guy to mess with in all of this. CP3 is one of the good guys, but he's also one of the most well-liked players in the league and he is tight w/ Bron, Melo, Howard etc etc. Anyone think we see some sort of CAA player strike over this?
Click to expand...

Unless you talk to the fans of other teams. There is not a lot of warm and fuzzies towards Paul in other arenas and this will only solidify that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top