Lakers trade

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

CJ that article was from before the Paul deal was made. I dont see how it pertains to NO as they are in a far different place than Dallas and were never going to pay the luxury tax even before the NBA took them over. As a matter of fact I dont see how this deal is going to help the small market teams much except force the big market teams from going too far over the cap and making them give up a little more revenue. Billionaires helping Billionaires...

I just think it explains why it isn't as great a deal as it appears on the surface. It isn't about the players it is about the money.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

I just think it explains why it isn't as great a deal as it appears on the surface. It isn't about the players it is about the money.

Perhaps from the standpoint of the other owners in regards to the Lakers purging money but as of now the Hornets have 6 players under contract and are a huge amount below the cap. Cap space is only important if you can get players to use it. Now that there is a bottom salary number in place some teams including NO may have to sign some bad deals to simply get to the min number w/o penalty. What Cuban was saying is how the new rues effect the rich teams that were willing to pay the luxury tax. Teams like NO are on the opposite side. And as much as we fret about cap space and mid level exceptions the product on the floor every night is going to dictate where the team is headed. The Paul deal was going to allow NO to compete until a owner is found. Now they are screwed. Not only do they have a hard time attracting FA's the one trade chip they have has been taken from them.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

The Paul deal was going to allow NO to compete until a owner is found. Now they are screwed. Not only do they have a hard time attracting FA's the one trade chip they have has been taken from them.

The Hornets would have been an average team in the NBA. Being average in the NBA is like purgatory, you are stuck. They are much better off blowing the team up and starting over. I also like that they are sticking it to Paul. He doesn't deserve the extra salary he can get if stays with his current team if it really wasn't his current team.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

The Hornets would have been an average team in the NBA. Being average in the NBA is like purgatory, you are stuck. They are much better off blowing the team up and starting over. I also like that they are sticking it to Paul. He doesn't deserve the extra salary he can get if stays with his current team if it really wasn't his current team.

I have no idea why you think that losing Paul for nothing is a better outcome. Again they have 5 players under contract one (Okafur) who may evenutally be an amnesty case. How can the NBA allow a team to just go to the level that NO is headed, you know like all time worst team? The thing is that it isnt so easy to blow a team up anymore with a salary cap floor. The players they were getting were not only going to allow the team to compete (you know to appease the 10000 season ticket holders they crow about) but could also be used as future trade bait. The fact is that NO has pretty much zero chance to get marquee players through free agency if they are a team that wins 14 games this year and 10 next and they are supposedly courting an owner. "Hello Mr new NBA owner...meet your best player, Jarret Jack" isnt going to appeal to many potential owners. They will have to overpay desperados to get to the salary floor. How is that a good option. Again what good is cap space if no one wants to play for you?

[Cannon Shell]

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/73...ow-sources-say

NBA may allow the 3 teams to "rework" the trade. Seriously? Who exactly is going to be added/subtracted to not make this look like a massive retreat if it goes through. Not to mention all the spin they have been applying will look even more pathetic.

I just wish Cuban, Gilbert and the rest of these assholes would stop insulting us. The lockout wasnt so small market teams could keep their players and there is no scenario where Paul is resigning with NO. Just stop with the nonsense.

[Cannon Shell]

The Hornets current roster consists of Chris Paul, Emaka Okafur, Trevor Ariza, Jarret Jack, Marco Bellinelli and Quicny Pondexter.

That's it.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I have no idea why you think that losing Paul for nothing is a better outcome. Again they have 5 players under contract one (Okafur) who may evenutally be an amnesty case. How can the NBA allow a team to just go to the level that NO is headed, you know like all time worst team? The thing is that it isnt so easy to blow a team up anymore with a salary cap floor. The players they were getting were not only going to allow the team to compete (you know to appease the 10000 season ticket holders they crow about) but could also be used as future trade bait. The fact is that NO has pretty much zero chance to get marquee players through free agency if they are a team that wins 14 games this year and 10 next and they are supposedly courting an owner. "Hello Mr new NBA owner...meet your best player, Jarret Jack" isnt going to appeal to many potential owners. They will have to overpay desperados to get to the salary floor. How is that a good option. Again what good is cap space if no one wants to play for you?

Well, that is what we would find out. Lets look at who New Orleans was actually getting:

Lamar Odom, Luis Scola, Kevin Martin, Goran Dragic, and a 1st rounder in 2012. That core is not a 500 team. Scola can't guard anyone, Odom is pretty good, but he is more a sidekick guy, not a leader, Martin is a black hole that improved Sacramento by leaving, and Dragic a servicaeble backup PG. How are you going to market that team to a prospective new owner?

I would contend that any new owner would rather come in not saddled with some of those contracts. I wouldn't pay Kevin Martin 10 million for the next two years, let alone 25 million. Luis Scola is signed for 10 million per through 2015. Who would want that? I'd rather sign a bunch of scrubs for a year and get the lottery balls. There is a reason Houston is dumping Martin after a partial season and Scola to get only Gasol...they are bad investments at the price.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Well, that is what we would find out. Lets look at who New Orleans was actually getting:

Lamar Odom, Luis Scola, Kevin Martin, Goran Dragic, and a 1st rounder in 2012. That core is not a 500 team. Scola can't guard anyone, Odom is pretty good, but he is more a sidekick guy, not a leader, Martin is a black hole that improved Sacramento by leaving, and Dragic a servicaeble backup PG. How are you going to market that team to a prospective new owner?

I would contend that any new owner would rather come in not saddled with some of those contracts. I wouldn't pay Kevin Martin 10 million for the next two years, let alone 25 million. Luis Scola is signed for 10 million per through 2015. Who would want that? I'd rather sign a bunch of scrubs for a year and get the lottery balls. There is a reason Houston is dumping Martin after a partial season and Scola to get only Gasol...they are bad investments at the price.

LOL

There is a mininum and they arent close to it. There are no lottery balls, there is lottery ball. And based on some of the recent drafts there are a lot of high picks who wish they were as good as Luis Scola or Kevin Martin.

Your argument is ignoring the reality that they have to spend 49 million a year minimum. The cap is estimated at 58 million and teams are now required to spend 85%. How do you suppose they get to $49 million this year or next especially after you erase Paul's 17 million?

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

LOL

There is a mininum and they arent close to it. There are no lottery balls, there is lottery ball. And based on some of the recent drafts there are a lot of high picks who wish they were as good as Luis Scola or Kevin Martin.

Your argument is ignoring the reality that they have to spend 49 million a year minimum. The cap is estimated at 58 million and teams are now required to spend 85%. How do you suppose they get to $49 million this year or next especially after you erase Paul's 17 million?

They can certainly do better than paying Martin and Scola, that is for sure. Guys like Martin and Scola aren't selling tickets, and they aren't winning games. What exactly is the upside? If you are going to lose, lose it paying the minimum with short term contracts. They can always just pay a tax if they don't reach the minimum, right?

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Well, that is what we would find out. Lets look at who New Orleans was actually getting:

Lamar Odom, Luis Scola, Kevin Martin, Goran Dragic, and a 1st rounder in 2012. That core is not a 500 team. Scola can't guard anyone, Odom is pretty good, but he is more a sidekick guy, not a leader, Martin is a black hole that improved Sacramento by leaving, and Dragic a servicaeble backup PG. How are you going to market that team to a prospective new owner?

I would contend that any new owner would rather come in not saddled with some of those contracts. I wouldn't pay Kevin Martin 10 million for the next two years, let alone 25 million. Luis Scola is signed for 10 million per through 2015. Who would want that? I'd rather sign a bunch of scrubs for a year and get the lottery balls. There is a reason Houston is dumping Martin after a partial season and Scola to get only Gasol...they are bad investments at the price.

And when you got the lottery balls you'd get the chance to overpay young, unproven players. In the grand scheme of things how many contracts are actually good investments...5% maybe?

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

And when you got the lottery balls you'd get the chance to overpay young, unproven players. In the grand scheme of things how many contracts are actually good investments...5% maybe?

They aren't as a whole, but the ones that are usually are younger guys under the rookie scale. Maybe it is just me, but give me young, unproven guys over proven guys that win nothing every single time.

As I said before, being mediocre in the NBA gets you nothing but more mediocrity. It has been going on for decades. Teams get good by spending on superstars (good ones) or getting lucky in the draft. You don't get lucking drafting 15th.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

And when you got the lottery balls you'd get the chance to overpay young, unproven players. In the grand scheme of things how many contracts are actually good investments...5% maybe?

They were even getting another 1st rounder in the deal so they would have 2 next year. The (Knicks) pick will be around #20 or so which means a pretty reasonable deal.

The reason why I hated the Knicks/Carmello deal last year was because the Knicks gave up every possible trade chip they had when they could have waited Anthony out and got everything. Sure he would have bitched about not getting the resigning max but who really cares? What the Hornets were getting back were assesta that could be used either in a rebuilding plan on the court or for future moves. Overpaid guys in the NBA become very valuable in the final year of their deal. The become salary cap chips. That is what CJ is really missing. His concept that the team isnt going to be a real contender and needs to rebuild is sound however the business of the salary cap make what he wants them to do impossible.