owners don't consult with other owners about how their trade has hurt their feewwwwings. Which is why the Lakers should sue.
― Matt Armstrong, Friday, 9 December 2011 02:41 (twelve years ago) link
and can the owners possibly be so dumb as to buy their own BS about the reasons for the lockout? It was always about the revenue split and contract lengths.
― Matt Armstrong, Friday, 9 December 2011 02:42 (twelve years ago) link
there was a lot of small-market owner anger at big-market teams.
the labor-dispute was largely owner v. owner.
― Daniel, Esq., Friday, 9 December 2011 02:43 (twelve years ago) link
this is totally true and never really got enough coverage.
― clay, Friday, 9 December 2011 02:44 (twelve years ago) link
this wasn't about optics or owners being concerned about the league's image -- it was about butthurt owners
― v-shasty, Friday, 9 December 2011 02:45 (twelve years ago) link
butthurt small-market team owners. micky arison didn't do this.
― Daniel, Esq., Friday, 9 December 2011 02:46 (twelve years ago) link
RT @MickyArison Whatever happens with @CP3 all I can say is I wish him the the best.
― Daniel, Esq., Friday, 9 December 2011 02:47 (twelve years ago) link
oh god, daniel. don't just assume that bcuz micky arison amassed the big 3 that he was just totally cool w/ the lakers starting to assemble a super team to rival the heat.
― v-shasty, Friday, 9 December 2011 02:48 (twelve years ago) link
RicBucher Ric BucherReports are owners squashed Hou-LA-NO deal, citing conflict of interest for NBA-owned NO. But sources say Pau didn't want to go to Hou, too.
yeah, no shit
― v-shasty, Friday, 9 December 2011 02:49 (twelve years ago) link
David Stern steps in to protect the fragile pride of Pau Gasol
― Matt Armstrong, Friday, 9 December 2011 02:49 (twelve years ago) link
what's the evidence you have for thinking arison's trying to pull the ladder out now that he's climbed up into the treehouse of NBA powerhouses?
― Daniel, Esq., Friday, 9 December 2011 02:50 (twelve years ago) link
maybe if the league wanted to restrict player movement they shouldn't have asked for the players to give them 3 billion dollars.
― Matt Armstrong, Friday, 9 December 2011 02:50 (twelve years ago) link
what's the evidence you have that he didn't? a tweet at chris paul? the guy is a CEO, he knows how to put on a good face.
― v-shasty, Friday, 9 December 2011 02:51 (twelve years ago) link
sorry that sounded overly harsh. arison's comments -- during the lockout and now -- suggest to me he's not afraid of competiton or player movement or other teams ascending. maybe i'm wrong. we're all just reading tea leaves about individual owner's motives.
― Daniel, Esq., Friday, 9 December 2011 02:51 (twelve years ago) link
it's in arison's interest to be pro-player. he'll be able to spend a lot of money to create a new team if and when the Big 3 move on, retire, get injured, etc. that's a business-savvy perspective that a good CEO might take, as well.
― Daniel, Esq., Friday, 9 December 2011 02:52 (twelve years ago) link
i highly doubt that he tried to step in and defend the rights of jerry buss and the lakers to come for a crown that the heat desperately need
― v-shasty, Friday, 9 December 2011 02:52 (twelve years ago) link
like mccain said when the GOP was proposing to kill the fillibuster in, say, 2003: "i'd like this idea more if i thought we'd always be in the majority."
― Daniel, Esq., Friday, 9 December 2011 02:53 (twelve years ago) link
yeah but this move will have no precedent unless he's planning on trading for a hornet while the team is owned by the nba
― v-shasty, Friday, 9 December 2011 02:53 (twelve years ago) link
rescind the wilt chamberlain trade!
― Matt Armstrong, Friday, 9 December 2011 02:55 (twelve years ago) link
pretty fucking shameful that ESPN doesn't acknowledge Woj for breaking the story.
― Matt Armstrong, Friday, 9 December 2011 02:57 (twelve years ago) link
everyone carry on
NBA spox Mike Bass: "It's not true that owners killed the deal. The League office declined ... for basketball reasons."
― v-shasty, Friday, 9 December 2011 02:59 (twelve years ago) link
i think it's actually unspoken espn policy to never credit yahoo
unless it's something completely unavoidable, like hurricanes scandal
― v-shasty, Friday, 9 December 2011 03:00 (twelve years ago) link
"basketball reasons"
― Matt Armstrong, Friday, 9 December 2011 03:00 (twelve years ago) link
hooooly shit @ tonight
jordan otm throughout
― k3vin k., Friday, 9 December 2011 03:01 (twelve years ago) link
For Basketball Reasons
― clay, Friday, 9 December 2011 03:01 (twelve years ago) link
xp chuch
― v-shasty, Friday, 9 December 2011 03:02 (twelve years ago) link
chris paul, i think, could and maybe even should sue the league
― v-shasty, Friday, 9 December 2011 03:05 (twelve years ago) link
jerry buss wouldn't really be able to sue for anything, unless they ginned up some number to represent the estimated revenue that chris paul would've made the team, which considering the team involved, is prob pretty minimal
paul on the other hand via the cba is actually being forced out of money against his will by the nba, and that's something he could reasonably pursue
― v-shasty, Friday, 9 December 2011 03:06 (twelve years ago) link
ppl are talking about that on twitter - idk what kind of grounds he'd have to do that but i'd lol xp
― k3vin k., Friday, 9 December 2011 03:07 (twelve years ago) link
and it's a clear, precise number already in a contract
― v-shasty, Friday, 9 December 2011 03:07 (twelve years ago) link
it would be tough, i mean they would have to depose every owner in the nba -- but it's something worth pursuing if he eventually doesn't get dealt
how would that work, paul agreed to the cba
and stern has the right to veto any trade, "for best interests of the game"
― k3vin k., Friday, 9 December 2011 03:08 (twelve years ago) link
― v-shasty, Thursday, December 8, 2011 10:07 PM (1 minute ago)
wait what is this referring to?
― k3vin k., Friday, 9 December 2011 03:09 (twelve years ago) link
that max free agent deals are capped at a lower number than deals signed by returning players
― v-shasty, Friday, 9 December 2011 03:10 (twelve years ago) link
my point is that chris paul could point at the CBA and say "this collusion cost me x amount of dollars" whereas the lakers would have a much less tenuous position. they couldn't sue for the rights to chris paul, i don't think...
I would demand compensatory picks, but I doubt that's enforceable by a court.
― Matt Armstrong, Friday, 9 December 2011 03:12 (twelve years ago) link
right
― v-shasty, Friday, 9 December 2011 03:13 (twelve years ago) link
he should just sue out of spite. Fuck these guys.
― Matt Armstrong, Friday, 9 December 2011 03:15 (twelve years ago) link
feel like the nba might actually relent if cp pushes this hard enough
ESPNSteinLine Marc SteinOur own @Chris_Broussard on SportsCenter: Chris Paul fuming and exploring legal options w/NBPA director Billy Hunter to fight blocked deal
― v-shasty, Friday, 9 December 2011 03:17 (twelve years ago) link
this is all completely so psychotic
rooting for cp3 and all but man the nba just can't help but shoot itself in the foot
― clay, Friday, 9 December 2011 03:20 (twelve years ago) link
if the owners thought this would make them look good they're either incredibly stupid or lying through their teeth
― v-shasty, Friday, 9 December 2011 03:21 (twelve years ago) link
WojYahooNBA Adrian Wojnarowski (More) "In the end, David didn’t like that the players were dictating where they wanted to go," source says.
― k3vin k., Friday, 9 December 2011 03:23 (twelve years ago) link
hey, fuck you david!
― v-shasty, Friday, 9 December 2011 03:23 (twelve years ago) link
adbrandt Andrew Brandt The NBA just sent Kris Humphries back to Kim Kardashian.7 minutes ago Favorite Retweet Reply Retweeted by @johnhollinger
― k3vin k., Friday, 9 December 2011 03:24 (twelve years ago) link
what's so fucking stupid is that Paul will become a free agent.... and dictate where he wants to go.
― Matt Armstrong, Friday, 9 December 2011 03:25 (twelve years ago) link
"In the end, the players didn’t like that the david stern was dictating where they would go,"
― clay, Friday, 9 December 2011 03:25 (twelve years ago) link
i mean the bottom line is with this deal the lakers moved laterally, the hornets (or whatever they'll be called) were set up to rebuild better than they would have been w/ cp3 becoming a free agent, and the rockets probably improved. and the nba vetoed it
― k3vin k., Friday, 9 December 2011 03:27 (twelve years ago) link
lol the big blazers blog has this poll running:
Should the NBA have stepped in and vetoed the proposed trade sending Chris Paul to the Lakers?48%Yes138 votes48%No137 votes2%Other (explain in the comments)7 votesshort-sighted blazers fans just mostly like to see the lakers "punished: i'm assuming.
― clay, Friday, 9 December 2011 03:27 (twelve years ago) link
basically 48% thought it was good for the lakers, 48% bad for the lakers.
― Matt Armstrong, Friday, 9 December 2011 03:45 (twelve years ago) link