Derby Trail Forums

Derby Trail Forums (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/index.php)
-   Sports Bar & Grill (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=7)
-   -   Lakers trade (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=44783)

Cannon Shell 12-09-2011 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmorioles (Post 823691)
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?

Dahoss 12-09-2011 05:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmorioles (Post 823691)
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 12-09-2011 05:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell (Post 823701)
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?

cmorioles 12-09-2011 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dahoss (Post 823704)
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 12-09-2011 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dahoss (Post 823704)
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.

cmorioles 12-09-2011 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell (Post 823708)
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.

I don't really think that is reality any longer. We'll see, but I don't think the new deal is going to make these guys as valuable as "chips" as they were in the past.

Cannon Shell 12-09-2011 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmorioles (Post 823705)
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?

Do you seriously think that an NBA controlled team is going to be allowed to be under the salary cap min after having a lockout? The players might strike lol

Scola and Martin arent superstars but arent nearly as bad as you are making them out to be. Miami would love to have either guy.

cmorioles 12-09-2011 05:36 PM

KBergCBS Ken Berger

Quote:

In resumption of CP3-Lakers talks with Houston, Hornets under directive from NBA to get younger players, quality picks in deal, souces say.

Cannon Shell 12-09-2011 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmorioles (Post 823711)
I don't really think that is reality any longer. We'll see, but I don't think the new deal is going to make these guys as valuable as "chips" as they were in the past.

Why would you think that? The new deal isnt really much different than the old deal.

Dahoss 12-09-2011 05:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmorioles (Post 823706)
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.

I just think if they are interested in actually marketing the team to a potential owner, you can do it easier with a guy like Odom in place. He's not a superstar, but certainly all star quality type guy who is capable of playing multiple positions. Yes, Scola and Martin aren't exactly exciting, but serviceable and better than what they have now minus Ariza. Plus, they were getting a first round pick in the process.

I can't see someone taking a plunge on this team based on hoping they get lucky in the draft which is what you are proposing. You can minimize your losses by making the trade and begin to look to the future now, instead of wasting a year with a team that will be gone in a year. At the very least Odom would give them a bargaining chip in the draft or in any trades they try and make.

Cannon Shell 12-09-2011 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmorioles (Post 823715)
KBergCBS Ken Berger

Seriously? That is laughable. Are these guys serious? Again who outside of a team like LA or NY is going trade for a guy who may be a rental? Really NBA? High picks or younger players? Yeah maybe the Clippers will trade Griffin to NO. lol. It is like bizzaro world. Bill Simmons has enough ammo for 1000 columns now.

cmorioles 12-09-2011 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell (Post 823714)
Do you seriously think that an NBA controlled team is going to be allowed to be under the salary cap min after having a lockout? The players might strike lol

Scola and Martin arent superstars but arent nearly as bad as you are making them out to be. Miami would love to have either guy.

Of course Miami would, as a 4th option, and at half the price. Even then, Martin wouldn't fit. I doubt you've seen him play near the number of times I have...he is a liability to any team he is on. That lineup you quote might make the playoffs in the East, but no way in hell in the West.

Cannon Shell 12-09-2011 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dahoss (Post 823717)
I just think if they are interested in actually marketing the team to a potential owner, you can do it easier with a guy like Odom in place. He's not a superstar, but certainly all star quality type guy who is capable of playing multiple positions. Yes, Scola and Martin aren't exactly exciting, but serviceable and better than what they have now minus Ariza. Plus, they were getting a first round pick in the process.

I can't see someone taking a plunge on this team based on hoping they get lucky in the draft which is what you are proposing. You can minimize your losses by making the trade and begin to look to the future now, instead of wasting a year with a team that will be gone in a year. At the very least Odom would give them a bargaining chip in the draft or in any trades they try and make.

Luis Scola and Kevin Martin are far better NBA players than Ariza ever thought about being.

cmorioles 12-09-2011 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dahoss (Post 823717)
I just think if they are interested in actually marketing the team to a potential owner, you can do it easier with a guy like Odom in place. He's not a superstar, but certainly all star quality type guy who is capable of playing multiple positions. Yes, Scola and Martin aren't exactly exciting, but serviceable and better than what they have now minus Ariza. Plus, they were getting a first round pick in the process.

I can't see someone taking a plunge on this team based on hoping they get lucky in the draft which is what you are proposing. You can minimize your losses by making the trade and begin to look to the future now, instead of wasting a year with a team that will be gone in a year. At the very least Odom would give them a bargaining chip in the draft or in any trades they try and make.

I don't really disagree, except that I know as an owner I'd rather buy a bad team than a mediocre one, blow it up and start over. It is tough to start over taking on guys like Martin and particularly Scola. Odom is a one year deal and Dragic doesn't make much, so those two are fine.

cmorioles 12-09-2011 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmorioles (Post 823722)
I don't really disagree, except that I know as an owner I'd rather buy a bad team than a mediocre one, blow it up and start over. It is tough to start over taking on guys like Martin and particularly Scola. Odom is a one year deal and Dragic doesn't make much, so those two are fine.

Just to be clear, I think the trade should have been allowed. I'm just trying to show there is another side of it.

Cannon Shell 12-09-2011 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmorioles (Post 823719)
Of course Miami would, as a 4th option, and at half the price. Even then, Martin wouldn't fit. I doubt you've seen him play near the number of times I have...he is a liability to any team he is on. That lineup you quote might make the playoffs in the East, but no way in hell in the West.

Martin wouldnt fit in Miami? If Eddie House fits than I'm pretty sure Martin would fit like a glove. The guy is a scorer, excellent FT shooter, pretty good 3 point range. Anyone who can score 23 points a game in 32 minutes in the NBA has some appreciable skills. He is what he is.

The West isnt looking so hot. Denver is worse, Memphis lost Battier and gained Gay (net loss perhaps). What has Portland done? Phoenix? The Lakers arent better. NO made the playoffs last year with arguably a worse lineup.

King Glorious 12-09-2011 05:58 PM

New Orleans would have been better this year than last. Scola, Martin, and Odom are all solid NBA players. Maybe not all stars but guys that in any given night can give you an all-star performance. Guys that can give you 18-8 or 23 a night or be triple-double threats don't grow on trees.

cmorioles 12-09-2011 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell (Post 823726)
Martin wouldnt fit in Miami? If Eddie House fits than I'm pretty sure Martin would fit like a glove. The guy is a scorer, excellent FT shooter, pretty good 3 point range. Anyone who can score 23 points a game in 32 minutes in the NBA has some appreciable skills. He is what he is.

The West isnt looking so hot. Denver is worse, Memphis lost Battier and gained Gay (net loss perhaps). What has Portland done? Phoenix? The Lakers arent better. NO made the playoffs last year with arguably a worse lineup.

Martin has to have the ball to score. How is he going to get the ball? He dominates the ball to score those points. It isn't happening on a team like Miami.

Now, to the West...

NO made the playoffs for one reason...Chris Paul.

How is Denver worse? They were much better after the Mello trade. They do, of course, need to get a few guys back from China. Losing JR Smith is a plus, not a minus.

Battier isn't the same caliber as Gay...no way in hell is that a net loss. Battier is a solid role player, nothing more. He was not much of a factor on their second half surge. He is a decent locker room guy, but on the court, not a big deal.

Portland lost Roy, but they played without him for long stretches. If Oden stays healthy, big if obviously, they'll be better. If not, they are still a playoff team. Aldridge is a stud that is getting better all the time.

Phoenix didn't make it last year, and they won't this year either. They should get rid of Nash and rebuild. He is good enough that he'll keep them stuck in 500 land until he leaves.

The Clippers are going to be much better. I think they are a lock for the playoffs. I've been wrong before, but I would bet they make it.

cmorioles 12-09-2011 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious (Post 823728)
New Orleans would have been better this year than last. Scola, Martin, and Odom are all solid NBA players. Maybe not all stars but guys that in any given night can give you an all-star performance. Guys that can give you 18-8 or 23 a night or be triple-double threats don't grow on trees.

No way in hell is this team better off on the court without Paul and getting those guys. Paul is that good.

Cannon Shell 12-09-2011 06:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmorioles (Post 823734)
Martin has to have the ball to score. How is he going to get the ball? He dominates the ball to score those points. It isn't happening on a team like Miami.

Now, to the West...

NO made the playoffs for one reason...Chris Paul.

How is Denver worse? They were much better after the Mello trade. They do, of course, need to get a few guys back from China. Losing JR Smith is a plus, not a minus.

Battier isn't the same caliber as Gay...no way in hell is that a net loss. Battier is a solid role player, nothing more. He was not much of a factor on their second half surge. He is a decent locker room guy, but on the court, not a big deal.

Portland lost Roy, but they played without him for long stretches. If Oden stays healthy, big if obviously, they'll be better. If not, they are still a playoff team. Aldridge is a stud that is getting better all the time.

Phoenix didn't make it last year, and they won't this year either. They should get rid of Nash and rebuild. He is good enough that he'll keep them stuck in 500 land until he leaves.

The Clippers are going to be much better. I think they are a lock for the playoffs. I've been wrong before, but I would bet they make it.

Martin can shoot. On Miami he wouldnt have to do anything else.

When Gay went down, Memphis went up.

Denver is losing Nene, Chandler (for 3 months at least), Martin (I know he was hurt) and Smith (who I dont like but guys who can score like him have valuable in the NBA with 48 minute games)

Portland has issues and depending on Oden is well...you know.

Yeah the Clippers are going to be better but SA is worse, Houston is in flux, Golden State has issues, Utah needs to develop, Sacramento is a strange team, Dallas is obviously worse, Minnesota will be better but has a long way to go

Cannon Shell 12-09-2011 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmorioles (Post 823735)
No way in hell is this team better off on the court without Paul and getting those guys. Paul is that good.

Paul is a very good player but lets not forget he avg 16 points and 10 assists a game last year.

cmorioles 12-09-2011 07:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell (Post 823737)
Paul is a very good player but lets not forget he avg 16 points and 10 assists a game last year.

Yes, but he makes the guys around him better as do most superstars.

Dahoss 12-09-2011 08:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmorioles (Post 823624)
Here is some idea of why this is bad from the Hornets. In it, Mark Cuban explains why he isn't signing free agents. It sheds some light on why the NBA nixed this deal and how it wasn't that great for the Hornets:

December, 8, 2011

By Tim MacMahon

I emailed Mark Cuban with one question: What am I missing?

It took a while to get to the question. The email started with my take on his Mavericks’ recent moves, or lack thereof: It appears that their logic is that the team’s long-term outlook is better if they attempt to reload next summer instead of bringing a championship team back intact to defend its title. The likely low odds of landing a superstar, given the landscape in the league and contract rules, makes this difficult to understand.

Then again, I didn’t think trading for Tyson Chandler last summer was a last-piece-in-a-championship-puzzle kind of move … so there’s no doubt Cuban and Donnie Nelson have earned benefit of the doubt. Or at least the opportunity to fully explain their decision-making process.

Still, it seemed that with the harsher luxury tax penalties not kicking in for a couple of years, the Mavs could have kept Chandler and sparkplug guard J.J. Barea and tried to maximize at least the next two seasons. What am I missing?

Here is the explanation straight from the keyboard of the Mavs’ owner on the first night he is free to speak again about the team's roster:
If this were the old CBA rules, we probably would have kept everyone together. But the rules changed.

If we were able to sign everyone to two-year deals, that would have possibly changed things as well, but that wasn’t in the cards either.

What you are missing is that it’s not about the luxury tax. It’s about the ability to improve our team going forward.

The reality is that in the new system, cap room will have far more value than it had in the past. I realize that everyone is all freaked out about how and where free agents and future free agents are going, but it’s not just about getting one guy.

We are not saving cap room in hope of that one super special free agent being there. It’s about being in the position to improve every year and possibly add some significant, younger players next year and in future years.

What I don’t think people understand is that once a team hits the tax level the ability to improve our team is reduced dramatically. In addition, your ability to make trades is reduced. So basically, if we made the move to keep everyone together with five-year deals, the team we have today is going to be the team we have for the next five years. If we were a young team it would be one thing. But we are not a young team.

In the past, it was different. If we had a problem, I could fix any mistake by having Donnie find a trade and just taking on more money. That is how we got Jet, the Matrix, JKidd, Tyson. It was always about taking on more money. That trick doesn’t work any more for teams over the tax. So we have to change our approach. By getting back under the cap, we have a ton of flexibility not only for free agent signings but also trades. If we can get the right guy(s) via free agency, great. if we do it via trade, great. We have that much more flexibility to make moves.

Again, I know this is tough for all of us after winning a championship. But we still believe as much as last year we are in a position to compete for a championship.

The difference is that with this approach, we can be in a position to compete for a championship this year and to reload and continue to compete in future years.

By just signing everyone to long-term deals, there is no chance of that happening.

We won last year because we put ourselves in a position to create opportunities that brought us the right players at the right time.

We structured contracts in ways that gave us upside. The rules are different now, and while it makes it tougher this year because of the affection we have for many of the guys that are leaving, if we want the Mavs to be able to compete for championships in future years as well, it’s a hard decision, but I believe the right decision.

I actually like Mark Cuban but what he says here looks a little silly based on reports they are close to signing Vince Carter. Vince Carter?

Cannon Shell 12-09-2011 08:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dahoss (Post 823776)
I actually like Mark Cuban but what he says here looks a little silly based on reports they are close to signing Vince Carter. Vince Carter?

I dont think Vinsanity is commanding much dough at this point. Cuban is bitter because he knows his team is one and done and there isnt much he can do about it.

Cannon Shell 12-09-2011 08:51 PM

David Stern has gotten blown up a lot lately but this one might be the harshest

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slu...rn_veto_120911

Cannon Shell 12-09-2011 09:01 PM

Dan Gilbert!

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/73...gilbert-letter

Dahoss 12-09-2011 09:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell (Post 823778)
I dont think Vinsanity is commanding much dough at this point. Cuban is bitter because he knows his team is one and done and there isnt much he can do about it.

True, but whatever money they are using to sign him could have been used in an effort to keep Chandler or even Barea, who was a real difference maker in the playoffs. No one had an answer for him.

Cannon Shell 12-09-2011 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dahoss (Post 823781)
True, but whatever money they are using to sign him could have been used in an effort to keep Chandler or even Barea, who was a real difference maker in the playoffs. No one had an answer for him.

I dont think they could resign Chandler w/o serious luxury tax issues. He supposedly got 15 million a year for 4. Barea is now overvalued at 6 or 7 million a year. That is more or less what Cuban was complaining about, he couldnt just go over the cap and pay the luxury tax on these guys like he nomally would because the new deal cripples teams too far over.

I'm guessing Carter comes in at something like 2.5 million a year (I guess they are calling it the mini-exception?). Hard to believe but he is more or less playing the DeShawn Stevenson role now...with less defensive intensity and no beard.

Cannon Shell 12-09-2011 10:48 PM

David West in a sign and trade to Boston supposedly. Corpses coming back to NO. Lets see what Dan Gilbert says about this.

cmorioles 12-09-2011 11:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell (Post 823798)
David West in a sign and trade to Boston supposedly. Corpses coming back to NO. Lets see what Dan Gilbert says about this.

Those are exactly the type of trades the Hornets need to make! Blow the motha up...LOL.

King Glorious 12-10-2011 03:11 AM

Tyson Chandler was offered one year at $20 million by Dallas. No way would I have come close to offering what he wanted for multiple years if I'm Dallas.

horseofcourse 12-10-2011 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell (Post 823780)

I think Dan is just jealous teams are now starting to do what he should have, trade your superstar before he leaves for nothing. Anthony, Deron Williams, Paul. It's also a case of you have a buffoon so keep making him a buffoon for the league and EVPN to keep pumping up LeBron, witness his recent interview there. I think to insinuate this letter by Gilbert is the main reason this trade was turned back is pretty convenient and shoddy reporting.

RockHardTen1985 12-11-2011 12:38 AM

How about this? I dont really know how to feel about that.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slu..._waiver_121011

cmorioles 12-11-2011 10:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985 (Post 824071)
How about this? I dont really know how to feel about that.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slu..._waiver_121011


He sounds like another crybaby. The guy is going to get 14.2 million, stfu and play with whatever team picks you.

cmorioles 12-11-2011 12:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by horseofcourse (Post 823864)
I think Dan is just jealous teams are now starting to do what he should have, trade your superstar before he leaves for nothing. Anthony, Deron Williams, Paul. It's also a case of you have a buffoon so keep making him a buffoon for the league and EVPN to keep pumping up LeBron, witness his recent interview there. I think to insinuate this letter by Gilbert is the main reason this trade was turned back is pretty convenient and shoddy reporting.

I'm sure you are right. However, how exactly has that worked out for those teams?

You never really get close to fair value. You get average players and stuck in the middle of the league going nowhere. Cleveland will be better for not trading Lebron. What exactly were they going to get from Miami?

geeker2 12-12-2011 08:19 AM

Looks like Paul will be playing at Staples Center anyway !


http://content.usatoday.com/communit...the-clippers/1

RockHardTen1985 12-12-2011 11:28 AM

I dont like this trade for the Clippers. I like the young core, plus the draft pick is likely to be a top 1-5 pick. Its the pick from Minnesota.

cmorioles 12-12-2011 12:41 PM

Why Stern was right to veto...

http://hoopspeak.com/2011/12/david-s...e-right-thing/

King Glorious 12-12-2011 01:16 PM

A lot of sense made in that article.

cmorioles 12-12-2011 02:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985 (Post 824479)
I dont like this trade for the Clippers. I like the young core, plus the draft pick is likely to be a top 1-5 pick. Its the pick from Minnesota.

...and now that one is dead too.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:34 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.