| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Has the NBA paid off their CP3 debt to the Lakers? |
| Yes |
|
13% |
[ 17 ] |
| No |
|
86% |
[ 107 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 124 |
|
| Author |
Message |
ArminNBA
Star Player
Joined: 20 Sep 2008
Posts: 2173
|
 Posted: Wed May 17, 2017 1:44 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? |
No, the other owners did not have this right, which was exactly expressed by Stern and the front office during the transfer of ownership. The issue with teams owning other teams is the potential for CONFLICT OF INTEREST and COLLUSION.
This is why David Stern explicitly said that Dell Demps would serve as the independent mediator who would make basketball decisions (EDIT: This was actually Jac Sperling who was appointed Interim Chairman; I remembered that there was someone actually just above Demps so I did some quick research and this was Sperling who was the legitimate decision-maker for the Hornets and approved the trade). This is why David Stern scoffed at the owners outrage when Demps traded for Carl Landry and added salary. Cuban was one of the loudest opponents of the Landry trade because he did not want to be responsible for paying 1/29th of Landry's salary. However, Stern deflected the criticism because owners making decisions for other teams is CONFLICT OF INTEREST.
The "veto" had nothing to do with the league's right or the owner's right. And I'm almost 100% sure that I don't need to spell out what really went down for Lakers fans in the know (most of LG).
Last edited by ArminNBA on Wed May 17, 2017 1:54 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
activeverb
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470
|
| Posted: Wed May 17, 2017 1:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Lucky_Shot wrote: |
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 |
This is old terrain, but basically ...
Here's what Stern says: He was acting owner and he vetoed a trade his GM made because he didn't think it was good enough. In itself, nothing is wrong with that; happens all the time.
The stuff that made it odd was that (1) Stern implied though never quite said the GM would be able to make unilateral decisions; (2) people were confused if Stern was acting as team owner or commissioner when he vetoed the trade; (3) other team owners, who technically owned the Hornets, protested the trade.
So it was a muddled situation, and you can get any range of opinions of why Stern did what he did, but we'll never really know. I think it was all set up incorrectly, with too many conflicts of interest that should have been avoided, but I have no idea if anything unethical actually happened.
| Lucky_Shot wrote: | | 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. . |
Football, baseball and hockey commissioners have all vetoed trades. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
epak
Retired Number
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 34147
|
| Posted: Wed May 17, 2017 1:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ArminNBA 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? |
No, the other owners did not have this right, which was exactly expressed by Stern and the front office during the transfer of ownership. The issue with teams owning other teams is the potential for CONFLICT OF INTEREST and COLLUSION.
This is why David Stern explicitly said that Dell Demps would serve as the independent mediator who would make basketball decisions (EDIT: This was actually Jac Sperling who was appointed Interim Chairman; I remembered that there was someone actually just above Demps so I did some quick research and this was Sperling who was the legitimate decision-maker for the Hornets and approved the trade). This is why David Stern scoffed at the owners outrage when Demps traded for Carl Landry and added salary. Cuban was one of the loudest opponents of the Landry trade because he did not want to be responsible for paying 1/29th of Landry's salary. However, Stern deflected the criticism because owners making decisions for other teams is CONFLICT OF INTEREST.
The "veto" had nothing to do with the league's right or the owner's right. And I'm almost 100% sure that I don't need to spell out what really went down for Lakers fans in the know (most of LG). |
You sound right
Here's his quote from last year
| Quote: | | “I'm going to correct your language: What 'cancelation'? The GM [Dell Demps] was not authorized to make that trade,” Stern told Brian Berger on the Sports Business Radio Road Show. “And acting on behalf of owners, we decided not to make it. I was an owner rep. There was nothing to 'void.' It just never got made." |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
audioaxes
Franchise Player
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 12573
|
| Posted: Wed May 17, 2017 1:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
not getting CP3 potentially cost us a championship and we definitely would have been strong contenders. It remains to be seen if our picks makes us contenders.
And its not like the NBA paid off the Lakers anyway, we earned our draft picks from sucking and lottery balls falling our way.
_________________
(bleep) Kawhi |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ArminNBA
Star Player
Joined: 20 Sep 2008
Posts: 2173
|
| Posted: Wed May 17, 2017 1:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| epak wrote: | | ArminNBA 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? |
No, the other owners did not have this right, which was exactly expressed by Stern and the front office during the transfer of ownership. The issue with teams owning other teams is the potential for CONFLICT OF INTEREST and COLLUSION.
This is why David Stern explicitly said that Dell Demps would serve as the independent mediator who would make basketball decisions (EDIT: This was actually Jac Sperling who was appointed Interim Chairman; I remembered that there was someone actually just above Demps so I did some quick research and this was Sperling who was the legitimate decision-maker for the Hornets and approved the trade). This is why David Stern scoffed at the owners outrage when Demps traded for Carl Landry and added salary. Cuban was one of the loudest opponents of the Landry trade because he did not want to be responsible for paying 1/29th of Landry's salary. However, Stern deflected the criticism because owners making decisions for other teams is CONFLICT OF INTEREST.
The "veto" had nothing to do with the league's right or the owner's right. And I'm almost 100% sure that I don't need to spell out what really went down for Lakers fans in the know (most of LG). |
You sound right
Here's his quote from last year
| Quote: | | “I'm going to correct your language: What 'cancelation'? The GM [Dell Demps] was not authorized to make that trade,” Stern told Brian Berger on the Sports Business Radio Road Show. “And acting on behalf of owners, we decided not to make it. I was an owner rep. There was nothing to 'void.' It just never got made." |
|
Yup. I remember the quotes from this conference last year. Good for Stern for going out there to try to protect and rewrite his legacy. Stern did many great things for the NBA, no doubt, but the "veto" was a massive mistake.
Additional quote (Grantland):
| Quote: | | Twelve months ago, the NBA bought the New Orleans Hornets for a little more than $300 million. Every other owner (29 in all) split the price for the franchise, the same way you’d split a meal 12 ways for your buddy’s birthday or something. Stern and his cronies claimed this wouldn’t be a problem, that Hornets GM Dell Demps would be able to swing moves just like any other general manager. When Mark Cuban flipped out in February after a Carl Landry/Marcus Thornton swap caused New Orleans’ payroll to rise, nobody really cared. |
http://grantland.com/features/the-sixth-day-nba-christmas/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
activeverb
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470
|
| Posted: Wed May 17, 2017 9:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| audioaxes wrote: | | not getting CP3 potentially cost us a championship and we definitely would have been strong contenders. . |
who knows? he was supposed to make the clippers contenders and that hasn't worked out too great. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NBALakerLegends
Star Player
Joined: 06 Aug 2007
Posts: 1026
|
| Posted: Wed May 17, 2017 9:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I voted yes as in I can finally let it go. The odds of winning second place in the lottery for three straight years is very tough. Not to mention the penalty of losing the pick if we landed outside the top 3. All three events went our way whether it was rigged or just the basketball gods righting the ship, I feel vindicated. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dengman
Starting Rotation
Joined: 27 Mar 2017
Posts: 196
|
| Posted: Wed May 17, 2017 10:09 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? |
Just got burned by Lebron and was sour, the Lakers didn't cry and pursue a lawsuit for an "agreed" upon trade |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
activeverb
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470
|
| Posted: Wed May 17, 2017 10:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| epak wrote: | | ArminNBA 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? |
No, the other owners did not have this right, which was exactly expressed by Stern and the front office during the transfer of ownership. The issue with teams owning other teams is the potential for CONFLICT OF INTEREST and COLLUSION.
This is why David Stern explicitly said that Dell Demps would serve as the independent mediator who would make basketball decisions (EDIT: This was actually Jac Sperling who was appointed Interim Chairman; I remembered that there was someone actually just above Demps so I did some quick research and this was Sperling who was the legitimate decision-maker for the Hornets and approved the trade). This is why David Stern scoffed at the owners outrage when Demps traded for Carl Landry and added salary. Cuban was one of the loudest opponents of the Landry trade because he did not want to be responsible for paying 1/29th of Landry's salary. However, Stern deflected the criticism because owners making decisions for other teams is CONFLICT OF INTEREST.
The "veto" had nothing to do with the league's right or the owner's right. And I'm almost 100% sure that I don't need to spell out what really went down for Lakers fans in the know (most of LG). |
You sound right
Here's his quote from last year
| Quote: | | “I'm going to correct your language: What 'cancelation'? The GM [Dell Demps] was not authorized to make that trade,” Stern told Brian Berger on the Sports Business Radio Road Show. “And acting on behalf of owners, we decided not to make it. I was an owner rep. There was nothing to 'void.' It just never got made." |
|
The league bought the team because it was financially unstable, with the intention of selling it. Stern's obligation was to enhance the financial value of the franchise.
Gilbert had no right to influence events based solely on his own self interest, which is what he tried to do. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Goldenwest
Star Player
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2802
|
| Posted: Wed May 17, 2017 11:13 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? |
Are you kidding? PG13 would have to be gift wrapped for us. And that's just for starters. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
giordan0
Star Player
Joined: 05 Jan 2016
Posts: 1017
|
| Posted: Thu May 18, 2017 4:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Screw David Stern, screw Dan Gilbert, screw Basketball reasons.
Many years on, this topic is still aggravation.
_________________
_____________________________________
#MPLStheoriginallakeshow
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lakersfever714
Franchise Player
Joined: 05 Jan 2016
Posts: 11846
|
| Posted: Thu May 18, 2017 4:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
If Foston makes a trade for PG13, the NBA should veto it for obvious basketball reasons. That would all but secure PG13 to LA for free. Then we'd call it even.
These #2 picks are yummy. I don't think it's been rigged but I still have to thank for league for it.
_________________
Playoffs is good enough. - Jeanie Buss 2024 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144474
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Thu May 18, 2017 9:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| dengman 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? |
Just got burned by Lebron and was sour, the Lakers didn't cry and pursue a lawsuit for an "agreed" upon trade |
The Lakers couldn't sue the league
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
audioaxes
Franchise Player
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 12573
|
| Posted: Thu May 18, 2017 9:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| lakersfever714 wrote: | If Foston makes a trade for PG13, the NBA should veto it for obvious basketball reasons. That would all but secure PG13 to LA for free. Then we'd call it even.
These #2 picks are yummy. I don't think it's been rigged but I still have to thank for league for it. |
its not the same. The NBA was able to veto the trade because it had control of the Hornets at that time. Otherwise they couldnt do anything about it just like they cant keep Boston from trading with Indiana.
_________________
(bleep) Kawhi |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mhan00
Retired Number
Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 32067
|
| Posted: Thu May 18, 2017 9:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| 70sdude wrote: | 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. |
The draft isn't rigged. The days of "frozen" or bent envelopes is long over. There is an actual process now that makes it extremely difficult, if not completely impossible to rig the draft (barring some new tech that only the league office knows of that none of the 30 owners do), and it would be even harder to do so and get away with it without detection. The risk of setting off a firestorm that could destroy franchise values when they're soaring to insane highs and lower league popularity at a time when the NBA is on the rise worldwide would be stupid to take, especially for very questionable benefit. As you yourself noted, draft picks IN NO WAY assure the success of a franchise. Picks BUST ALL THE TIME, or merely turn out to be decent players and not franchise altering ones. Also, the Lakers being successful doesn't actually ensure anything, except the enjoyment of Laker fans. The league signed their most massive TV deals after several years of the Lakers being bad with no signs and little hope of success anytime soon.
The video of the draft process is free for all to see, and is overseen by a reputable accounting firm who does business with far more than just the NBA, so them colluding with the NBA to rig the draft when it could absolutely destroy their reputation and credibility for all their other clients would be ridiculously stupid. Teams are assigned their combinations, and the numbers are placed into the machine, and numbers are only drawn when a person with his back to the machine raises his arm at random intervals, with a camera on the number before it is handed to the gentleman announcing the number. After the four balls are drawn, they are placed back into the machine to be reused for the next draw, so even if the balls are weighted in some manner, there's no chance to reweight the balls, so if the balls are weighted to give the top pick to one team, there's no way to change them so other teams can be picked. It would also be much easier to rig the lottery for the top pick, and much, much more difficult to rig it for the second and third picks because the same balls are used during the entire process. After all three picks are determined, the balls are free to be examined by any of the player reps.
It's not impossible to rig the lottery, just extremely difficult and with a high risk of detection, and with no real tangible benefit, and thus no real motivation for any of the parties that would have to be involved to do so. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144474
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Thu May 18, 2017 9:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
And to add, reps from all 30 teams sign off on the results
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LarryCoon
Site Staff
Joined: 11 Aug 2002
Posts: 11265
|
| Posted: Thu May 18, 2017 9:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| There's a lot in this thread that isn't correct. This came up in the General NBA forum a couple weeks ago and I posted a complete explanation. Refer to that (LINK). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
focus
Star Player
Joined: 23 May 2012
Posts: 2526
|
| Posted: Thu May 18, 2017 12:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SuperboyReformed wrote: | | 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. |
All of this, plus wouldn't the budget have been well timed to stagger salaries of the key players? We could have been like the spurs, phasing players in as other players retired. Or the Warriors with their contracts. Even if I remember wrongly though, the main points you stated are why we got so royally screwed. It can't be gotten back. We would have had more rings than the Celtics, Kobe potentially more than MJ, but more than that the organization would have set themselves up well financially for the postKobe years. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
focus
Star Player
Joined: 23 May 2012
Posts: 2526
|
| Posted: Thu May 18, 2017 12:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LarryCoon wrote: | | There's a lot in this thread that isn't correct. This came up in the General NBA forum a couple weeks ago and I posted a complete explanation. Refer to that (LINK). |
I take it you have not yet had the chance to ask your contact the question in that thread re why we didn't proceed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dwarf Nebula
Star Player
Joined: 23 Mar 2004
Posts: 1338
|
| Posted: Thu May 18, 2017 12:18 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? |
Never. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
leor_77
Franchise Player
Joined: 23 Mar 2012
Posts: 21920
|
| Posted: Thu May 18, 2017 3:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| What did they "pay" us? We've had good results in their legitimate draft lottery system. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AFireInside619
Franchise Player
Joined: 11 Dec 2015
Posts: 11447
|
| Posted: Fri May 19, 2017 3:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
So I heard Freddie Prince Jr. mention on Mason & Ireland that the "Debt" for the CP3 incident has been paid off. That segment of the show happened a few hours after my thread. Any chance he lurks LG? I'm going to have to say "Yes" to that one.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
VicXLakers
Franchise Player
Joined: 08 Feb 2006
Posts: 11823
|
| Posted: Fri May 19, 2017 8:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| AFireInside619 wrote: | | So I heard Freddie Prince Jr. mention on Mason & Ireland that the "Debt" for the CP3 incident has been paid off. That segment of the show happened a few hours after my thread. Any chance he lurks LG? I'm going to have to say "Yes" to that one. |
thought the same thing... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NBALakerLegends
Star Player
Joined: 06 Aug 2007
Posts: 1026
|
| Posted: Fri May 19, 2017 9:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| LarryCoon wrote: | | There's a lot in this thread that isn't correct. This came up in the General NBA forum a couple weeks ago and I posted a complete explanation. Refer to that (LINK). |
Thanks for this. This actually makes me a feel a lot better about the whole CP3 fiasco. I already let it go after getting 2nd in the lottery the last three years but I know many of my Lakers friends have not.
Plus even with CP3, I don't think we win a Championship but we would be contenders. Let's just say no other major transactions happened since we didn't have cap space and Kobe didn't get hurt. The timeline below is the outcome I feel would have happened.
2011-2012 (Bynum, Kobe, CP3) - That year we lost to the thunder 4-1 in the semis. The year prior we got swept in the semis 4-0 by the Mavs and that with odom and Pau. I don't think that team gets by the Thunder let alone the Spurs and Miami who was out for blood. That team beat the Thunder 4-1.
2012-2013 (Dwight Kobe CP3) - Dwight was injured and not the same player in Orlando. Let's just say Kobe didn't get hurt, we weren't getting by the Spurs or Miami that year. That Spurs team was a ball movement machine and should have won it all that year.
2013-2014 (Dwight, Kobe, CP3) - Kobe is a year older but Dwight is healthy. Dwight still wasn't the same player he was in Orlando though. I don't see them getting by the Spurs. That was the best Spurs team of the Pop era. They also had the revenge factor that the 2012 Heat had. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NBALakerLegends
Star Player
Joined: 06 Aug 2007
Posts: 1026
|
| Posted: Fri May 19, 2017 9:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Dwarf Nebula 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? |
Never. |
Trust me, it feels a lot better to Let it Go. It really does. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
