Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Lakers

  1. #1
    laram0's Avatar
    laram0 is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Age
    57
    Posts
    9,312
    Rep Power
    109

    Lakers

    Chris Paul traded to Lakers!!!!!


  2. #2
    r8rh8rmike's Avatar
    r8rh8rmike is online now Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    29 Palms, Ca.
    Age
    55
    Posts
    12,094
    Rep Power
    132

    Re: Lakers

    Quote Originally Posted by laram0 View Post
    Chris Paul traded to Lakers!!!!!
    At a price, they gave up Pau Gasol and Lamar Odom. Not sure I would have made that move. Letting two solid players go and bringing in a dominant point guard who's going to be taking ball time away from Kobe. Guess they better make good on their next rumored move, going after Dwight Howard.

    Not that I really care, I'm a Clippers fan.

  3. #3
    r8rh8rmike's Avatar
    r8rh8rmike is online now Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    29 Palms, Ca.
    Age
    55
    Posts
    12,094
    Rep Power
    132

    Re: Lakers

    Looks like NO DEAL:

    NEW ORLEANS -- The NBA, as owners of the New Orleans Hornets, won't trade All-Star guard Chris Paul to the Los Angeles Lakers.

    NBA spokesman Mike Bass says: "It's not true that the owners killed the deal, the deal was never discussed at the Board of Governors meeting and the league office declined to make the trade for basketball reasons."

    The Lakers trade to obtain Hornets' Paul for Pau Gasol and Lamar Odom hit a snag Thursday night, sources tell ESPN.com's Marc Stein.

    Sources said that a group of NBA owners, assembled in New York for the ratification of the league's new labor pact with the players, protested vigorously that the league-owned Hornets were trading Paul to the star-studded Lakers and convinced NBA commissioner David Stern to intervene.

  4. #4
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    19,051
    Rep Power
    172

    Re: Lakers

    The odd thing about this is that the proposed deal would have been questionable for the Lakers (at least in the short run), good for the Hornets, and horrible for the Rockets.

  5. #5
    laram0's Avatar
    laram0 is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Age
    57
    Posts
    9,312
    Rep Power
    109

    Re: Lakers

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    The odd thing about this is that the proposed deal would have been questionable for the Lakers (at least in the short run), good for the Hornets, and horrible for the Rockets.
    I think the Lakers were to looking to the future. The Rockets wanted Gasol after losing Ming to an early retirement. The repercussions of this cancelled trade will be interesting to say the least.

  6. #6
    r8rh8rmike's Avatar
    r8rh8rmike is online now Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    29 Palms, Ca.
    Age
    55
    Posts
    12,094
    Rep Power
    132

    Re: Lakers

    So let me get this straight, the owners have no problem with Wade, James and Bosh in Miami, and no problem with Garnett, Pierce and Allen in Boston, but do have a problem with Bryant and Paul in LA?? Um, I'm not getting it, or the notion that the Lakers are "star-studded". Kobe and Metta World Peace hardly qualify the Lakers as star- studded, if that should even matter.

    The NBA rivals the NCAA for most screwed up sports association.

  7. #7
    Ram Mar Ram's Avatar
    Ram Mar Ram is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Apia
    Age
    33
    Posts
    554
    Rep Power
    9

    Re: Lakers

    So they veto'd the deal, that means Paul wont be allowed to go to Knicks, Celtics and anywhere where there is an established star.

  8. #8
    laram0's Avatar
    laram0 is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Age
    57
    Posts
    9,312
    Rep Power
    109

    Re: Lakers

    Quote Originally Posted by r8rh8rmike View Post
    So let me get this straight, the owners have no problem with Wade, James and Bosh in Miami, and no problem with Garnett, Pierce and Allen in Boston, but do have a problem with Bryant and Paul in LA?? Um, I'm not getting it, or the notion that the Lakers are "star-studded". Kobe and Metta World Peace hardly qualify the Lakers as star- studded, if that should even matter.

    The NBA rivals the NCAA for most screwed up sports association.
    All 3 teams are appealing the decision. This is nuts!!!!

  9. #9
    Fettmaster's Avatar
    Fettmaster is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    1,311
    Rep Power
    25

    Re: Lakers

    Worth the read.

    Quote Originally Posted by Deadspin
    David Stern Did The Right Thing With Chris Paul

    That's a painful headline to write, and especially inconceivable after the histrionics that followed the NBA's veto of a deal that would have sent Chris Paul to the Lakers last week. It was a power trip, a violation of Dell Demps's autonomy, and maybe even an anti-trust violation: and as it turns out, a shrewd move by a man inured to criticism.


    The Hornets roster is a mess. Right now, they'd start Jarrett Jack at point, Eric Gordon at the 2, Trevor Ariza back in his natural position at small forward, the just re-signed Carl Landry at PF, and Emeka Okafor at center. That's a terrible team, a 25-win team at best. [UPDATE: prorate that for 66 games.] How on earth can it be better than the Lakers package that was shot down?


    Think future. I think we all got tricked by the inclusion of Pau Gasol, the only true star in the deal, even though New Orleans would have flipped him to Houston. The Lakers trade had some big names, but what did it really offer the Hornets? The league's best sixth man as your new centerpiece? One-dimensional, 28-year-old Kevin Martin as the youngest guy coming over? More salary commitments? It would have been an even trade, and seemed more even because we're not accustomed to seeing the Lakers give up fair value. But it was a trade for a team just a couple pieces from contending, not a moribund, orphaned franchise that's blowing up to start over. The Clippers haul, on the other hand, is exactly what they need. A cornerstone player in Gordon, a project with potential in Aminu, a major trade piece in Chris Kaman's expiring contract, a number one draft pick from a likely lottery team, and a ton of financial flexibility (they could keep Kaman and amnesty Okafor, and would have $40 million in cap space going into the season).

    If I'm a prospective buyer, this is a team I wouldn't mind inheriting. But is this a Pyrrhic victory for Stern, protecting the Hornets at the expense of the league's credibility? The meddling "hurts the NBA", goes the received wisdom. But who is "the NBA?" The fans? They don't care about the fans. It's not the players, because we just had an ugly lockout to determine just how deep the players would get [screwed over]. No, David Stern remembers just who elected him commissioner, and who has the real money and control, and who he's thrall to. By vetoing the Lakers deal, David Stern guaranteed the owners Jerry Buss's continued luxury tax dollars, kept another superstar away from one of the "haves," and drove up the asking price for buying into the league.


    Stern's taken criticism before, and he honestly doesn't give a [crap] what you think about some fanciful concept of "integrity." He's got his own bosses to please, and they're all thrilled this morning. And if us little people are satisfied enough to put away the torches and pitchforks, that's just gravy.


  10. #10
    r8rh8rmike's Avatar
    r8rh8rmike is online now Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    29 Palms, Ca.
    Age
    55
    Posts
    12,094
    Rep Power
    132

    Re: Lakers

    All hail David Stern, King of the NBA! What a joke. He manipulates the balance in the NBA by orchestratng who gets what? I don't care what anybody says, it's complete BS. Is he now going to start scrutinizing every trade to make sure it satisfies all the owners, or does this new policy only kick in when the Lakers are involved? I guess the next order of business is to retroactively nix the Celtics Kevin Garnett deal and the Heats LeBron James trade?? Talk about a slippery slope.

    That said, I love the fact that Paul went to the Clippers, who are finally making some solid decisions and looking to win. I just wish it had happened under legitimate circumstances.

Similar Threads

  1. Lakers
    By laram0 in forum OTHER SPORTS
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: -07-08-2009, 05:02 PM
  2. Los Angeles Lakers
    By laram0 in forum OTHER SPORTS
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: -12-27-2007, 11:18 AM
  3. Lakers Offseason...
    By bruce4life in forum OTHER SPORTS
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: -05-30-2007, 12:24 PM
  4. Lakers
    By RAMMAN68 in forum OTHER SPORTS
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: -05-07-2007, 04:54 PM
  5. L. A. Lakers
    By laram0 in forum OTHER SPORTS
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: -02-24-2007, 05:31 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •