In your opinion, did David Stern and the NBA make the wrong decision by vetoing the C

Collapse

Recommended Videos

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • ojandpizza
    Hall Of Fame
    • Apr 2011
    • 29807

    #16
    Re: In your opinion, did David Stern and the NBA make the wrong decision by vetoing t

    In my opinion, I don't care enough one way or the other.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    Comment

    • Vni
      Hall Of Fame
      • Sep 2011
      • 14833

      #17
      Re: In your opinion, did David Stern and the NBA make the wrong decision by vetoing t

      Originally posted by ojandpizza
      In my opinion, I don't care enough one way or the other.


      Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
      Definately worth mentioning imo.

      Comment

      • 24ct
        Pro
        • Sep 2012
        • 884

        #18
        Re: In your opinion, did David Stern and the NBA make the wrong decision by vetoing t

        It would have been in bad trade then.

        Now it probably still would have been a bad trade considering NOLA got AD after the wait, which IMO is very sketchy. Especially considering the Cavs got TWO #1s after Lebron left lol. Scola & Odom aren't even in the NBA and Kevin Martin makes way too much money for what he provides. The only good thing that would have come was Dragic and even then you don't trade 1 player for 5/6 that aren't on his level as far as marketing value or even young enough to mature on the team.

        When the Nuggets traded Melo they got a bunch of guys they could develop. The only guy that was even young enough then was Dragic. Even with picks it would have been a terrible trade. IMO

        Comment

        • Indigo Wolf
          Rookie
          • Aug 2015
          • 9

          #19
          Re: In your opinion, did David Stern and the NBA make the wrong decision by vetoing t

          True. They have no business vetoing that trade. It was a very good trade for the Hornets at the time. A very good one! They just hate the fact that the Lakers will be a lot closer to a championship because of that. They want other teams to win too but it sucks that they are manipulating the system.

          Comment

          • redsox4evur
            Hall Of Fame
            • Jul 2013
            • 18169

            #20
            Re: In your opinion, did David Stern and the NBA make the wrong decision by vetoing t

            Originally posted by Indigo Wolf
            True. They have no business vetoing that trade. It was a very good trade for the Hornets at the time. A very good one! They just hate the fact that the Lakers will be a lot closer to a championship because of that. They want other teams to win too but it sucks that they are manipulating the system.
            Yes they do...they were the OWNERS of the team at the time. Why don't people understand this. They didn't veto the trade as the NBA commissioner. He vetoed the trade as the OWNER of the New Orleans Hornets. And there are multiple owners in sports who have some say when it comes to transactions. Look at Marc Cuban hunting down Deandre Jordan after he was considering vetoing his deal with Dallas and going back to LA. I know Toronto Blue Jays ownership will not allow their GM to a contract that has a length longer than 5 years, the Red Sox ownership has a policy that they will sign pitchers over the age of 30 to long term contracts. Owners can do whatever they want when it comes to transactions with some stipulations such as no movement/trade clauses. The Boston Celtics owners right now if they wanted to could trade their entire team for one player (obviously this is extreme, but it proves a point) or the Bulls owners could trade D-Rose and Jimmy Butler to the 6ers for 2 2nds if they wanted to because they don't have no trade clauses. But they won't because they allow the GM to make the move. And this example is different because they were trying to sell new owners that this was a good up and coming team. I equate it to the Red Sox offseason in 2001 when they signed Manny Ramirez. This was before the current Henry, Lucchino, Werner ownership. They gave Manny a huge contract to come and play in Boston because he was a great player on the field and could be marketed pretty easily because he was a character and a big name. So they could have gotten more money with Ramirez being on the team than without him. Do you get what I am saying?
            Follow me on Twitter

            Comment

            • ojandpizza
              Hall Of Fame
              • Apr 2011
              • 29807

              #21
              Re: In your opinion, did David Stern and the NBA make the wrong decision by vetoing t

              In all honestly, the trade would have likely ended up being bad for both teams.

              Lakers would have gutted that team to have just Kobe and CP3, with no assurance that Dwight or anyone else would join the duo. CP3 would never be CP3 playing alongside Kobe, and likely would leave.

              New Orleans wouldn't have Davis, which is really all that needs to be said about that.


              Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

              Comment

              • Smallville102001
                All Star
                • Mar 2015
                • 6542

                #22
                Re: In your opinion, did David Stern and the NBA make the wrong decision by vetoing t

                Originally posted by ojandpizza
                In all honestly, the trade would have likely ended up being bad for both teams.

                Lakers would have gutted that team to have just Kobe and CP3, with no assurance that Dwight or anyone else would join the duo. CP3 would never be CP3 playing alongside Kobe, and likely would leave.

                New Orleans wouldn't have Davis, which is really all that needs to be said about that.


                Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


                No it would have been great for the Lakers. They would have gotten CP3 and saved money and still would have gotten Howard. So they would have had Howard, CP3 and kobe and would have maybe been able to get 1 or 2 sold rule players. If that had happened then they may have had other championship. For the New Orleans they would have gotten more back in the trade then they ended up getting. There was no reason the trade should have not went though.

                Comment

                • ojandpizza
                  Hall Of Fame
                  • Apr 2011
                  • 29807

                  #23
                  Re: In your opinion, did David Stern and the NBA make the wrong decision by vetoing t

                  New Orleans would definitely not have gotten more back. They wouldn't have Davis, Gasol would have left, Odom is done anyways. I don't see how by any sort of logic that it would have ended up better for them.

                  Why would getting Dwight matter anyways? That experiment didn't work. And I don't see Kobe and CP3, or any ball dominant guard for that matter, really meshing all that well. Lakers ended up with Nash, Dwight, and kept Gasol. That gave them (on paper anyways) one of the best starting 5's in the past 10 years or so. All they would have had if the trade passed was Chris Paul and a shot at Dwight or whoever else they wanted to persuade to come to LA.. No guarantees though.

                  You could definitely argue that Chris Paul being a top tier player might have been the best move for LA, but I'm not sure that there can be a logical case made that New Orleans could have gotten off better had they accepted the trade.

                  Also I think people forget that Stern nixed the move as owner of New Orleans, not as commissioner of the NBA. He had every right to veto a trade that wasn't in the best interest of "his" team.



                  Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

                  Comment

                  • redsox4evur
                    Hall Of Fame
                    • Jul 2013
                    • 18169

                    #24
                    Re: In your opinion, did David Stern and the NBA make the wrong decision by vetoing t

                    Originally posted by ojandpizza
                    New Orleans would definitely not have gotten more back. They wouldn't have Davis, Gasol would have left, Odom is done anyways. I don't see how by any sort of logic that it would have ended up better for them.

                    Why would getting Dwight matter anyways? That experiment didn't work. And I don't see Kobe and CP3, or any ball dominant guard for that matter, really meshing all that well. Lakers ended up with Nash, Dwight, and kept Gasol. That gave them (on paper anyways) one of the best starting 5's in the past 10 years or so. All they would have had if the trade passed was Chris Paul and a shot at Dwight or whoever else they wanted to persuade to come to LA.. No guarantees though.

                    You could definitely argue that Chris Paul being a top tier player might have been the best move for LA, but I'm not sure that there can be a logical case made that New Orleans could have gotten off better had they accepted the trade.

                    Also I think people forget that Stern nixed the move as owner of New Orleans, not as commissioner of the NBA. He had every right to veto a trade that wasn't in the best interest of "his" team.



                    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
                    This X100000000000000000 thank you bringing this up again.
                    Follow me on Twitter

                    Comment

                    Working...