Has the NBA paid off their CP3 debt to the Lakers?
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Has the NBA paid off their CP3 debt to the Lakers?
Yes
13%
 13%  [ 17 ]
No
86%
 86%  [ 107 ]
Total Votes : 124

Author Message
AFireInside619
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 11 Dec 2015
Posts: 11447

PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 11:53 am    Post subject: Has the NBA paid off their CP3 debt to the Lakers?

When David Stern vetoed the Chris Paul trade to the Lakers, it set off a chain reaction with the end result being the Lakers sucking for pretty much half a decade. For the past four draft lotteries, I (as well as many other Lakers fans) joked about them giving us the #1 overall pick for "Basketball Reasons". The Lakers have gotten the #2 pick three years a row, with the odds stacked against us.

So just for fun I am taking the pulse of LG with this poll. Call it Karma or dumb luck, but in your opinion, do three #2 picks in a row make up for the blocked CP3 trade?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Runway8
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Posts: 22734
Location: La Jolla, San Diego

PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 11:59 am    Post subject:

The lotto is not rigged. The odds weren't really stacked against us. 47% is basically 50/50. It only felt stacked, because as fans, we FEARED losing it. If they were trying to pay a debt, we would at least win the lottery once.

When the Cavs won the lottery a few years ago, now the odds were stacked against them. After winning in 92, I believe the Magic weren't' as bad in 93, but somehow won it again. Now those odds were stacked.

We just merely won 50/50 coin tosses.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
epak
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 34147

PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 12:01 pm    Post subject:

No. Because there was no debt to pay back.
The league had a right to veto the trade as the Hornets were owned by the other teams. But can Lakers fans finally let go?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Chronicle
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 21 Jul 2012
Posts: 31930
Location: Manhattan

PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 12:02 pm    Post subject:

No

No veto means cp3 and kobe win a championship, likely attracting howard or with bynum, and melo would join too. It would win multiple championships

It would beat oklahoma, but not with the twin towers. This means they don't keep perkins and instead keep harden. Harden never goes to houston

Golden state never beats other young teams because it's just the lakers. Small ball never materalizes

Lebron doesn't win a ring in miami so he doesn't move back to cleveland



Everything would be drastically different if there was no cp3 veto. Most importantly is that teams would still be building their rosters based on how to stop the lakers. As a result, no small ball
_________________
Kobe
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
CandyCanes
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 24 Dec 2007
Posts: 35750
Location: Santa Clarita, CA (Hell) ->>>>>Ithaca, NY -≥≥≥≥≥Berkeley, CA

PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 12:02 pm    Post subject:

epak wrote:
No. Because there was no debt to pay back.
The league had a right to veto the trade as the Hornets were owned by the other teams. But can Lakers fans finally let go?


Right, and the package they got from the Clippers was SO much better than ours.
_________________
Damian Lillard shatters Dwight Coward's championship dreams:

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
epak
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 34147

PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 12:03 pm    Post subject:

CandyCanes wrote:
epak wrote:
No. Because there was no debt to pay back.
The league had a right to veto the trade as the Hornets were owned by the other teams. But can Lakers fans finally let go?


Right, and the package they got from the Clippers was SO much better than ours.


Again, they had full right to do so.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Travis Bickle
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 31 Jul 2001
Posts: 2895

PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 12:05 pm    Post subject:

Runway8 wrote:
The lotto is not rigged. The odds weren't really stacked against us. 47% is basically 50/50. It only felt stacked, because as fans, we FEARED losing it. If they were trying to pay a debt, we would at least win the lottery once.

When the Cavs won the lottery a few years ago, now the odds were stacked against them. After winning in 92, I believe the Magic weren't' as bad in 93, but somehow won it again. Now those odds were stacked.

We just merely won 50/50 coin tosses.


Totally agreed. Lakers got lucky, how does that have anything to do with NBA helping Lakers? The only way the NBA can payback the Lakers is give the Lakers a extra top 3 pick or give Lakers extra salary cap. FU Stern.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
noahp45
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 23 Apr 2006
Posts: 6572
Location: Oceanside Ca

PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 12:06 pm    Post subject:

epak wrote:
No. Because there was no debt to pay back.
The league had a right to veto the trade as the Hornets were owned by the other teams. But can Lakers fans finally let go?



They would have let that trade go through if it wasn't for the Cavs owner crying like a BABY
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
AFireInside619
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 11 Dec 2015
Posts: 11447

PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 12:06 pm    Post subject:

epak wrote:
No. Because there was no debt to pay back.
The league had a right to veto the trade as the Hornets were owned by the other teams. But can Lakers fans finally let go?


Okay Epak, I'm finally ready to let go.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
epak
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 34147

PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 12:07 pm    Post subject:

noahp45 wrote:
epak wrote:
No. Because there was no debt to pay back.
The league had a right to veto the trade as the Hornets were owned by the other teams. But can Lakers fans finally let go?



They would have let that trade go through if it wasn't for the Cavs owner crying like a BABY


Which as a part 1/30th owner of the Hornets, he had a right to do no?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
noahp45
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 23 Apr 2006
Posts: 6572
Location: Oceanside Ca

PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 12:14 pm    Post subject:

epak wrote:
noahp45 wrote:
epak wrote:
No. Because there was no debt to pay back.
The league had a right to veto the trade as the Hornets were owned by the other teams. But can Lakers fans finally let go?



They would have let that trade go through if it wasn't for the Cavs owner crying like a BABY


Which as a part 1/30th owner of the Hornets, he had a right to do no?



Yes he did
but it was based off of bias and some BS and anyone that says different is on some BS
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
SuperboyReformed
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 07 Oct 2012
Posts: 4083

PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 12:25 pm    Post subject:

noahp45 wrote:
epak wrote:
noahp45 wrote:
epak wrote:
No. Because there was no debt to pay back.
The league had a right to veto the trade as the Hornets were owned by the other teams. But can Lakers fans finally let go?



They would have let that trade go through if it wasn't for the Cavs owner crying like a BABY


Which as a part 1/30th owner of the Hornets, he had a right to do no?



Yes he did
but it was based off of bias and some BS and anyone that says different is on some BS

no, because it robbed us of so many things. another championship(s) for kobe. having the superteams before everyone else with cp3 and dwight. it would have prevented a couple of lebron championships and probably the warriors championship. then all the free agents that didn't come afterwards. the championships is the worst because that's really the only thing lakers care about, unlike other teams. we've won a lot of them, the other things like making playoffs or good draft picks pale in comparison.
what's the most annoying part is gilbert complaining about the potential superteam coming to LA, and then the past few years he has been winning precisely due to the thing he complained about.
[edit] i wasn't saying no to noah, i was agreeing. no to the OP question.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
epak
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 34147

PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 12:36 pm    Post subject:

AFireInside619 wrote:
epak wrote:
No. Because there was no debt to pay back.
The league had a right to veto the trade as the Hornets were owned by the other teams. But can Lakers fans finally let go?


Okay Epak, I'm finally ready to let go.


Sing with me...
Let it go, let it go.
Can't hold it back anymore

Let it go, let it go.
Turn away and slam the door
I don't care
What they're going to say
Let the storm rage on
Stern never bothered me anyway
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
AFireInside619
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 11 Dec 2015
Posts: 11447

PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 12:38 pm    Post subject:

epak wrote:
AFireInside619 wrote:
epak wrote:
No. Because there was no debt to pay back.
The league had a right to veto the trade as the Hornets were owned by the other teams. But can Lakers fans finally let go?


Okay Epak, I'm finally ready to let go.


Sing with me...
Let it go, let it go.
Can't hold it back anymore

Let it go, let it go.
Turn away and slam the door
I don't care
What they're going to say
Let the storm rage on
Stern never bothered me anyway


OMFG
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Lucky_Shot
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 10 Jan 2016
Posts: 5140

PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 12:42 pm    Post subject:

epak wrote:
noahp45 wrote:
epak wrote:
No. Because there was no debt to pay back.
The league had a right to veto the trade as the Hornets were owned by the other teams. But can Lakers fans finally let go?



They would have let that trade go through if it wasn't for the Cavs owner crying like a BABY


Which as a part 1/30th owner of the Hornets, he had a right to do no?


Here the thing, even if he had the right to do so he shouldn't of gotten involved with what was happening at the time.

His involvement was unethical, he should of had no part in day to day decisions of the hornets. Imo he should of resigned, it was disgraceful.

For a commissioner to stop a trade that was already agreed to was an abuse of power. The kind that has never been seen in an american sport league.

When fans boo the current commissioners of the sports league today it makes me kinda makes me mad because when they do it, its for no reason too. When it came to david stern it made sense, he was the most abusive commissioner of all time.


Last edited by Lucky_Shot on Wed May 17, 2017 12:47 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
epak
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 34147

PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 12:44 pm    Post subject:

Lucky_Shot wrote:
epak wrote:
noahp45 wrote:
epak wrote:
No. Because there was no debt to pay back.
The league had a right to veto the trade as the Hornets were owned by the other teams. But can Lakers fans finally let go?



They would have let that trade go through if it wasn't for the Cavs owner crying like a BABY


Which as a part 1/30th owner of the Hornets, he had a right to do no?


Here the thing, even if he had the right to do so he shouldn't of gotten involved with what was happening at the time.

His involvement was unethical, he should of had no part in day to day decisions of the hornets. Imo he should of resigned, it was disgraceful.

For a commissioner to stop a trade that was already agreed to was an abuse of power. The kind that has never been seen in an american sport league.


You're saying this with the understanding that the League owned the Hornets at that time right? I agree that it sucked. But I don't blame Stern or the League.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Lucky_Shot
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 10 Jan 2016
Posts: 5140

PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 12:50 pm    Post subject:

epak wrote:
Lucky_Shot wrote:
epak wrote:
noahp45 wrote:
epak wrote:
No. Because there was no debt to pay back.
The league had a right to veto the trade as the Hornets were owned by the other teams. But can Lakers fans finally let go?



They would have let that trade go through if it wasn't for the Cavs owner crying like a BABY


Which as a part 1/30th owner of the Hornets, he had a right to do no?


Here the thing, even if he had the right to do so he shouldn't of gotten involved with what was happening at the time.

His involvement was unethical, he should of had no part in day to day decisions of the hornets. Imo he should of resigned, it was disgraceful.

For a commissioner to stop a trade that was already agreed to was an abuse of power. The kind that has never been seen in an american sport league.


You're saying this with the understanding that the League owned the Hornets at that time right? I agree that it sucked. But I don't blame Stern or the League.


It doesnt matter if he owned it. He clearly used his power and a loop hole to justify the way he wanted the league to look like. It was unethical... i said he should of resigned but honestly he should of been fired


Last edited by Lucky_Shot on Wed May 17, 2017 12:53 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
epak
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 34147

PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 12:52 pm    Post subject:

Lucky_Shot wrote:
epak wrote:
Lucky_Shot wrote:
epak wrote:
noahp45 wrote:
epak wrote:
No. Because there was no debt to pay back.
The league had a right to veto the trade as the Hornets were owned by the other teams. But can Lakers fans finally let go?



They would have let that trade go through if it wasn't for the Cavs owner crying like a BABY


Which as a part 1/30th owner of the Hornets, he had a right to do no?


Here the thing, even if he had the right to do so he shouldn't of gotten involved with what was happening at the time.

His involvement was unethical, he should of had no part in day to day decisions of the hornets. Imo he should of resigned, it was disgraceful.

For a commissioner to stop a trade that was already agreed to was an abuse of power. The kind that has never been seen in an american sport league.


You're saying this with the understanding that the League owned the Hornets at that time right? I agree that it sucked. But I don't blame Stern or the League.


It doesnt matter if he owned it. He clearly used his power and a loop hole to justify the way he wanted the league to look like. It was unethical


Stern did NOT own the Hornets.
The league, comprised of its 29 owners owned it no?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
70sdude
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 05 Feb 2009
Posts: 4567

PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 12:53 pm    Post subject:

I think the fix was in, yeah. but without causation relating to the CP3 deal so much.

This is the league's move to try to right the Laker ship, which heeled on its own due to a seven year series of lousy talent decisions.

Reminds me of Pat Ewing going to the Knicks in '86. The league behaves from time to time as if it needs to force feed talent to specific clubs so as to fulfill a responsibility to its business partners (i.e., to be profitable and successful in major markets.) Imagine that.

Of course, the steps taken by the league don't always work: Philadelphia still sucks wind despite having taken four top five picks in the last seven drafts. Managerial incompetence and poor assessment of basketball talent can defeat anything the league might try.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144432
Location: The Gold Coast

PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 12:53 pm    Post subject:

I voted no because there is no debt and no way to manipulate the draft
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023.


Last edited by venturalakersfan on Wed May 17, 2017 1:03 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Lucky_Shot
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 10 Jan 2016
Posts: 5140

PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 12:55 pm    Post subject:

epak wrote:
Lucky_Shot wrote:
epak wrote:
Lucky_Shot wrote:
epak wrote:
noahp45 wrote:
epak wrote:
No. Because there was no debt to pay back.
The league had a right to veto the trade as the Hornets were owned by the other teams. But can Lakers fans finally let go?



They would have let that trade go through if it wasn't for the Cavs owner crying like a BABY


Which as a part 1/30th owner of the Hornets, he had a right to do no?


Here the thing, even if he had the right to do so he shouldn't of gotten involved with what was happening at the time.

His involvement was unethical, he should of had no part in day to day decisions of the hornets. Imo he should of resigned, it was disgraceful.

For a commissioner to stop a trade that was already agreed to was an abuse of power. The kind that has never been seen in an american sport league.


You're saying this with the understanding that the League owned the Hornets at that time right? I agree that it sucked. But I don't blame Stern or the League.


It doesnt matter if he owned it. He clearly used his power and a loop hole to justify the way he wanted the league to look like. It was unethical


Stern did NOT own the Hornets.
The league, comprised of its 29 owners owned it no?


Its actually worse that he didnt owned it because every decision he made alone was that of an owner.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470

PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 1:01 pm    Post subject: Re: Has the NBA paid off their CP3 debt to the Lakers?

AFireInside619 wrote:
When David Stern vetoed the Chris Paul trade to the Lakers, it set off a chain reaction with the end result being the Lakers sucking for pretty much half a decade. For the past four draft lotteries, I (as well as many other Lakers fans) joked about them giving us the #1 overall pick for "Basketball Reasons". The Lakers have gotten the #2 pick three years a row, with the odds stacked against us.

So just for fun I am taking the pulse of LG with this poll. Call it Karma or dumb luck, but in your opinion, do three #2 picks in a row make up for the blocked CP3 trade?


Getting the three picks was equivalent to flipping a coin three times and getting heads each time -- it's a nice bit if luck, but it's hardly a mind-boggling occurrence.

About the Paul thing, there was no debt, and we haven't been paid anything.

I don't think Stern vetoing the trade was wrong; the way he handled it was. The NBA didn't owe us anything.

The NBA had no role in our draft picks. They haven't given us anything.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144432
Location: The Gold Coast

PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 1:02 pm    Post subject:

Lucky_Shot wrote:
epak wrote:
Lucky_Shot wrote:
epak wrote:
noahp45 wrote:
epak wrote:
No. Because there was no debt to pay back.
The league had a right to veto the trade as the Hornets were owned by the other teams. But can Lakers fans finally let go?



They would have let that trade go through if it wasn't for the Cavs owner crying like a BABY


Which as a part 1/30th owner of the Hornets, he had a right to do no?


Here the thing, even if he had the right to do so he shouldn't of gotten involved with what was happening at the time.

His involvement was unethical, he should of had no part in day to day decisions of the hornets. Imo he should of resigned, it was disgraceful.

For a commissioner to stop a trade that was already agreed to was an abuse of power. The kind that has never been seen in an american sport league.


You're saying this with the understanding that the League owned the Hornets at that time right? I agree that it sucked. But I don't blame Stern or the League.


It doesnt matter if he owned it. He clearly used his power and a loop hole to justify the way he wanted the league to look like. It was unethical... i said he should of resigned but honestly he should of been fired


Fired for doing what those who employed him wanted him to do? That isn't how the world works.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Mamba Mentality
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 04 May 2017
Posts: 3077
Location: The Left Coast

PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 1:17 pm    Post subject:

I voted no because there is no debt. That CP3 veto was within its boundaries, albeit sucked for us Lakers fans. The real issue was when Odom started crying about how we were trying to trade him and ended up only getting a second round pick for him. Gasol was never the same emotionally and we let him walk. Those two guys hurt us more than anything during that time.

BTW there is no way to rig the lottery. The NBA isn't hand picking us to get the #2 pick 3 years in a row.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
numero-ocho
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 27 Jul 2004
Posts: 18190
Location: Los Angeles, CA

PostPosted: Wed May 17, 2017 1:40 pm    Post subject:

I voted no because as soon as we hit another rough patch someone is going to bring it up again.
_________________
"Suck it up. Don't be a baby. Do your job." - Kobe Bryant
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB