PDA

View Full Version : 3-Way talks for Paul have re-started?



unleashthebeast
12-09-2011, 05:21 PM
WojYahooNBA Adrian Wojnarowski
New Orleans, Houston and Lakers are re-engaged in talks to find a new way to complete Chris Paul blockbuster trade, league sources tell Y!

Will probably get beaten, so someone can merge the threads, but this is interesting. Wonder what changes are made this time, I personally expect it to get done

Pakman
12-09-2011, 05:22 PM
Yes beaten by 20 min.

unleashthebeast
12-09-2011, 05:24 PM
^Woj only posted it 5 minutes ago, so that isn't really possible

ripjhb18
12-09-2011, 05:25 PM
^Woj only posted it 5 minutes ago, so that isn't really possible

Wrong, he read his ****ing mind and knew it would be tweeted before you saw it.

Punk
12-09-2011, 05:26 PM
Considering this has gone past the sporting world and now has entered general news reports. It would be ******** if they axed the trade again.

J4KOP99
12-09-2011, 05:26 PM
yeah, I would have a hard time believing that what happened last night was the end of all of this...

These 3 teams basically finalized this deal before Stern killed it. They will most likely attempt to restructure the deal now and then submit it again.

C-Style
12-09-2011, 05:26 PM
WOw so they got the Ok from the NBA?

Chacarron
12-09-2011, 05:27 PM
Add a pick or two. I'm not too happy with the trade because we have no PF after it, but I can't complain if we are getting CP3. I'd much rather trade Bynum + whatever for Dwight.

unleashthebeast
12-09-2011, 05:28 PM
Wonder if Bynum is somehow included now? Probably not, but should be interesting. If anything, Rockets may add another young guy and Lakers will add some picks, we'll see

Pakman
12-09-2011, 05:30 PM
I imagine the only way the nba let's it go through is if Bynum is involved. They want to gut the lakers roster if Paul is goin to go to LA

last stand
12-09-2011, 05:30 PM
this was sterns out. there will be a minor tweak and suddenly he can claim it was a better deal

-Kobe24-TJ19-
12-09-2011, 05:30 PM
i already posted it, 1 minute before u beast;)

spurs4#5
12-09-2011, 05:31 PM
while cp3 is possibly the best point guard in the league...he's not worth 2 bigs in the west...you win down low in the west

ripjhb18
12-09-2011, 05:31 PM
Wonder if Bynum is somehow included now? Probably not, but should be interesting. If anything, Rockets may add another young guy and Lakers will add some picks, we'll see

Options would be take back Okafor or Ariza if the Hornets want to dump salary, add Bynum instead of Odom probably or add picks. I think those are options they have. Houston shouldn't have to be the one to add anything.

J4KOP99
12-09-2011, 05:31 PM
I really do not think there is any way that the Lakers trade both Bynum AND Gasol for Chris paul... not a chance.

king4day
12-09-2011, 05:32 PM
A friend of mind heard on the radio in NY that if they get Paul, the next step will be signing David West.

Pakman
12-09-2011, 05:33 PM
I really do not think there is any way that the Lakers trade both Bynum AND Gasol for Chris paul... not a chance. this. I found it hard they would do it for Howard.

shep33
12-09-2011, 05:33 PM
No, adding Bynum isn't the issue, its having NO's shed some of its salary, so maybe Okafor or Ariza get involved

Heediot
12-09-2011, 05:34 PM
I really do not think there is any way that the Lakers trade both Bynum AND Gasol for Chris paul... not a chance.

What if... They get Paul, Ariza, Okafor, West (S & T) for Bynum, Gasol, Odom.
It gives the Hornets more financial flexibilty.

waveycrockett
12-09-2011, 05:34 PM
while cp3 is possibly the best point guard in the league...he's not worth 2 bigs in the west...you win down low in the west

Best Front Lines are in the East now.

Celticsfan2007
12-09-2011, 05:35 PM
What if... They get Paul, Ariza, Okafor, West (S & T) for Bynum, Gasol, Odom.
It gives the Hornets more financial flexibilty.

You sir, are a Heediot!

Sportfan
12-09-2011, 05:35 PM
Hopefully this means it's a level playing field again, and Danny Ainge comes in the clutch with a dirty three all over Buss's face

last stand
12-09-2011, 05:35 PM
this is damage control. lakers/rockets/paul probably all talked to stern and stern probably talked to owners and said we have to let this go through but instead of revoking it we'll have the trade tweaked

lakersiznumber1
12-09-2011, 05:35 PM
i believe bynum should go i never wanted us 2 traded odom or gasol but i think gasol showed stay hes a class act by showing up 4 practice keep pau. trade bynum and odom because odom dont want 2 b here anymore.

Pakman
12-09-2011, 05:35 PM
i really do not think there is any way that the lakers trade both bynum and gasol for chris paul... Not a chance.

what if... They get paul, ariza, okafor, west (s & t) for bynum, gasol, odom.
It gives the hornets more financial flexibilty.no

J4KOP99
12-09-2011, 05:36 PM
What if... They get Paul, Ariza, Okafor, West (S & T) for Bynum, Gasol, Odom.
It gives the Hornets more financial flexibilty.

Is that even financially possible? Have you looked into it?


...and I still do not think the Lakers would do that but I really don't have any idea what that would look like financially.

Purugskid
12-09-2011, 05:36 PM
Must. Concentrate. On. Studying. For. Fina....Oh look, another rumor

Ari Gold
12-09-2011, 05:36 PM
If the NBA's reasoning is they would like to add more salary (Okafor/Ariza) that is seriously moronic. The Hornets have 5 players under contract. What are they going to do fill them out with vet. minimum players so the owners don't ***** and whine some more?

If the original trade goes down as originally proposed it was the best case scenario for the hornets. They get 4 players for 1. This will help them fill out their roster. By including Okafor/Ariza in the deal it just ****s the Hornets up even more. **** THESE NBA owners.

J4KOP99
12-09-2011, 05:36 PM
Hopefully this means it's a level playing field again, and Danny Ainge comes in the clutch with a dirty three all over Buss's face

haha

NBA_Starter
12-09-2011, 05:37 PM
Here we go

last stand
12-09-2011, 05:37 PM
Hopefully this means it's a level playing field again, and Danny Ainge comes in the clutch with a dirty three all over Buss's face

dell demps liked the lakers trade more. they get 3 starters and a very good backup along with picks

instead of an overrated PG and a below average tweener

unleashthebeast
12-09-2011, 05:38 PM
Maybe something like this happens:
Hornets Receive: Kmart, Bynum, picks
Rockets Receive: Pau
Lakers Receive: Okafor, Paul, Scola

Maybe? Not sure, but the Hornets would look pretty good if a deal like that happened

dolfan720
12-09-2011, 05:40 PM
its gonna be bynum and gasol to houston
Lowry, scola, thabeet, odom, picks to Hornets
Chris paul to lakers

Heediot
12-09-2011, 05:41 PM
You sir, are a Heediot!


Is that even financially possible? Have you looked into it?


...and I still do not think the Lakers would do that but I really don't have any idea what that would look like financially.

I'm just going off numerous rumors where Okafor will be added and the Lakers want to S & T for West (with a trade exemption). Maybe take out Ariza if he adds too much salary. The only reason why i added him was he was their next biggest contract and the owners are complaining about the Lakers saving too much money.

shep33
12-09-2011, 05:41 PM
If the NBA's reasoning is they would like to add more salary (Okafor/Ariza) that is seriously moronic. The Hornets have 5 players under contract. What are they going to do fill them out with vet. minimum players so the owners don't ***** and whine some more?

If the original trade goes down as originally proposed it was the best case scenario for the hornets. They get 4 players for 1. This will help them fill out their roster. By including Okafor/Ariza in the deal it just ****s the Hornets up even more. **** THESE NBA owners.

I agree it is moronic, and its the main point that Dan Gilbert was making. I don't understand why the NBA is sabatoging its own team:facepalm:

-Kobe24-TJ19-
12-09-2011, 05:41 PM
Maybe something like this happens:
Hornets Receive: Kmart, Bynum, picks
Rockets Receive: Pau
Lakers Receive: Okafor, Paul, Scola

Maybe? Not sure, but the Hornets would look pretty good if a deal like that happened

no Dwight:cry:

last stand
12-09-2011, 05:41 PM
lakers wont even entertain giving up bynum and pau

nothappyinut
12-09-2011, 05:42 PM
If the NBA's reasoning is they would like to add more salary (Okafor/Ariza) that is seriously moronic. The Hornets have 5 players under contract. What are they going to do fill them out with vet. minimum players so the owners don't ***** and whine some more?

If the original trade goes down as originally proposed it was the best case scenario for the hornets. They get 4 players for 1. This will help them fill out their roster. By including Okafor/Ariza in the deal it just ****s the Hornets up even more. **** THESE NBA owners.


Why is it hard for people to research stuff before opening up their mouths. The hornets need to shed salary the current deal would have the hornets incurring roughly 15mil more of salary. Please understand what the hell you are talking about before talking. It's easy for you to say all that seeing its not your 15mil. :facepalm:

shep33
12-09-2011, 05:43 PM
its gonna be bynum and gasol to houston
Lowry, scola, thabeet, odom, picks to Hornets
Chris paul to lakers

No chance in hell LA gives up it's entire frontline. The NBA wants the Lakers to take on more money is the real issue here. LA saves a ton of cash in the deal, so maybe if they add Okafor or sign and trade David West.

J4KOP99
12-09-2011, 05:43 PM
Only way Lakers give up Bynum and Pau is if they are participating in a 3 way trade with the Hornets and........MAGIC.

zB_#85
12-09-2011, 05:43 PM
its gonna be bynum and gasol to houston
Lowry, scola, thabeet, odom, picks to Hornets
Chris paul to lakers

I seriously hope you don't truly believe that. No way would LA give up Gasol, LO, and Bynum for CP3 :laugh:

ripjhb18
12-09-2011, 05:45 PM
No, adding Bynum isn't the issue, its having NO's shed some of its salary, so maybe Okafor or Ariza get involved
The Hornets getting Bynum instead of Odom at least gives them some kind of young piece rather than an early 30s player.

its gonna be bynum and gasol to houston
Lowry, scola, thabeet, odom, picks to Hornets
Chris paul to lakers
Im sure the Lakers would do this. Of course they would trade their entire front line for one PG.

Heediot
12-09-2011, 05:45 PM
I think the biggest deal breaker is that the Hornets are adding payroll. Who pays for the payroll? (the 29 other owners)

beliges
12-09-2011, 05:47 PM
Lakers should add picks and hold on to either Pau or Lamar. Thats too much to give away for CP3. Who knows what the other piece the Lakers will get from NO. But Lo and Pau for CP3 is too much. Hopefully the league will force the Lakers to give up future picks which would allow LA to keep LO. Thats more of a fair deal anyways.

Dee_Edge
12-09-2011, 05:48 PM
Paul: LA
Okafor & Gasol: Hou
Scola, Thabeet, Lamar, Martin, & a pick for good measure: NO

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=8475q8m

kozelkid
12-09-2011, 05:48 PM
Must. Concentrate. On. Studying. For. Fina....Oh look, another rumor

Same here :sigh:
This honestly couldn't have come in a worst time.

ChiSoxJuan
12-09-2011, 05:48 PM
Hornets Receive: Kmart, Bynum, picks
Rockets Receive: Pau
Lakers Receive: Okafor, Paul, Scola

I don't think Gilbert would have a problem with that as long NO gets Hou picks, & Hou gets LAL picks.

-Kobe24-TJ19-
12-09-2011, 05:49 PM
its gonna be bynum and gasol to houston
Lowry, scola, thabeet, odom, picks to Hornets
Chris paul to lakers

:facepalm:

mttwlsn16
12-09-2011, 05:50 PM
I imagine the only way the nba let's it go through is if Bynum is involved. They want to gut the lakers roster if Paul is goin to go to LA

rightfully so

beliges
12-09-2011, 05:51 PM
No chance in hell LA gives up it's entire frontline. The NBA wants the Lakers to take on more money is the real issue here. LA saves a ton of cash in the deal, so maybe if they add Okafor or sign and trade David West.

in that case, package Ariza with CP3 and at least that way the trade becomes a bit more even. At least for LA. Because I guarantee you, LA was not gonna get rid of both LO and Pau if they werent certain they would acquire Dwight as well otherwise Lakers were essentially committing suicide. LO + Pau is better than just CP3.

Heediot
12-09-2011, 05:52 PM
Hornets Receive: Kmart, Bynum, picks
Rockets Receive: Pau
Lakers Receive: Okafor, Paul, Scola

I don't think Gilbert would have a problem with that as long NO gets Hou picks, & Hou gets LAL picks.

Nice proposal. Scola and Okafor complement each other.

shep33
12-09-2011, 05:53 PM
The Hornets getting Bynum instead of Odom at least gives them some kind of young piece rather than an early 30s player.

Im sure the Lakers would do this. Of course they would trade their entire front line for one PG.

Honestly it's not about that at this point. They will not get a better offer, and they have to realize that. Odom is not just some scrub, he'll get you 15 and 10 a night off the bench, and he is a low financial threat since he's a team option next season, so they can just not re-up him and get some cap space.

The problem from what I'm understanding is that the Lakers are saving an enormous sum of money, despite people not realizing they still have to get 2 pf's and a backup sg still. NO's needs to take some money away from their salary, not much, but some.

younggunn113
12-09-2011, 05:53 PM
I think the biggest deal breaker is that the Hornets are adding payroll. Who pays for the payroll? (the 29 other owners)

Agreed, I think LA takes back Emeka.

Final trade

LA: Paul, Emeka

NO: Dragic, Odom, Scola, Martin
Rockets 1st rounder (from NY), Lakers 1st rounder

Houston: Gasol

Just my idea - changes up the financial landscape a little bit.

Pierzynski4Prez
12-09-2011, 05:53 PM
All they have to do is freaking add in Okafor and its done.

J4KOP99
12-09-2011, 05:54 PM
What is Okafor's contract, guys? I don't feel like looking it up?

beliges
12-09-2011, 05:55 PM
rightfully so

Since when do you penalize a team for managing their franchise successfully. I dont understand the backlash aginst the Lakers. They are the epitome of what each franchise in this league needs to do to succeed. Why do you hold that against them? Additionally, what kind of precedent does this set in the league? It seems now that any big market team that attains a marquee free agent will be scrutinized and will face a potential void by the NBA.

bkcpfan9984
12-09-2011, 05:55 PM
The original trade would've freed up about 20 mil in cap space foe the lakers. Coincidently, what player could they look to fill the void with? Hmmmm. They don't want to take on okafors or ariza contract bc that would basically knock them out of the Howard running bc they wouldn't be able to afford him. Clever? Yes. Sneaky by la? Absolutely. Surprised? Not really. It's la, we know their track record with trades

club america
12-09-2011, 05:56 PM
This goes to the the people including bynum in the trade.

Im not saying hes worth that much but from what i know j.buss would only trade bynum 4 howard or lebron. And if he would include him in the trade it would be straight deal bynum 4 paul and maybe some pics

smith&wesson
12-09-2011, 05:56 PM
easy.

take odom out of the trade. insert bynum.

houston still gets gasol.

the hornets get k.mart, scola, bynam, dragic, and a pick

the lakers get paul and okafor.

cmon thats fair for the hornets. they get a startig 5, a starting 4 and a staring 2 gaurd plus a first round pick.

cooters22
12-09-2011, 05:57 PM
I think the league was initially concerned that LA gained so much cap space and New Orleans took so much on, and was getting players that weren't that young and exciting anymore. I'm expecting LA to take some baggage in return and call it a deal.

Angelus™
12-09-2011, 05:59 PM
Hoping this thing gets done this time around. Hell it should of gone down the first time but, i guess you have to deal with what you are dealt

Tymathee
12-09-2011, 06:00 PM
Dan Gilbert is still butt hurt by Lebron yet he's ready to allow New Orleans to go thru the same thing.

Big Time Titan
12-09-2011, 06:00 PM
I think the league was initially concerned that LA gained so much cap space and New Orleans took so much on, and was getting players that weren't that young and exciting anymore. I'm expecting LA to take some baggage in return and call it a deal.

BINGO was his name-o!

shep33
12-09-2011, 06:01 PM
Sam Amick from SI.com just mentioned the deal is back on


@sam_amick
Sam Amick Sources confirm New Orleans is talking Chris Paul deals again. 3-team deal w/ Lakers, Hou might still have hope, but others discussed too.

club america
12-09-2011, 06:01 PM
Since when do you penalize a team for managing their franchise successfully. I dont understand the backlash aginst the Lakers. They are the epitome of what each franchise in this league needs to do to succeed. Why do you hold that against them? Additionally, what kind of precedent does this set in the league? It seems now that any big market team that attains a marquee free agent will be scrutinized and will face a potential void by the NBA.

:clap:

Yeah the others owners r but hurt(:mad:) that lakers have always known how to run there franchise and they havent. Its not there fault others dont know what 2 do.

KB-Pau-DH2012
12-09-2011, 06:03 PM
What is Okafor's contract, guys? I don't feel like looking it up?

It's about 12.6M a yr

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=dxfap98

Lakers Get:

Chris Paul - $16.4 M
Emeka Okafor - $ 12.4 M

Incoming Salary - $29 M


Rockets Get:

Pau Gasol - $18.7 M

Incoming Salary - $18.7 M



Hornets Get:

Lamar Odom - $8.9 M

Kevin Martin - $11.5 M

Luis Scola - $8.6 M

Goran Dragic - $2.1 M

2012 1st Rd Pick


Incoming Salary - $31.1 M + 1st Rd Pick

rasajr23
12-09-2011, 06:03 PM
I think its going down this way without including Scola. The Hornets dont need two PF's.

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=7y95rjc

nothappyinut
12-09-2011, 06:04 PM
:clap:

Yeah the others owners r but hurt(:mad:) that lakers have always known how to run there franchise and they havent. Its not there fault others dont know what 2 do.

Says one delusional laker fan to the other, that has no idea not even in the least of what he is talking about. They other owners don't want to pay for the hornets to induce 15mil extra salary and have no real revenue increase. Get it

beliges
12-09-2011, 06:05 PM
I think the league was initially concerned that LA gained so much cap space and New Orleans took so much on, and was getting players that weren't that young and exciting anymore. I'm expecting LA to take some baggage in return and call it a deal.

But since when can the league dictate how each franchise runs their team in that sense? If a team makes a legitimate trade that puts them in a great position to compete and gives them cap room to make future great deals, since when can the NBA control that? It just seems very fishy and silly. This is not right. You cannot penalize a team for being successful while doing everything by the books and legitimately.

KB-Pau-DH2012
12-09-2011, 06:06 PM
I think its going down this way without including Scola

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=7y95rjc

Then Houston really lucks out by getting Pau and keeping Scola. Scola is a stud and should be on NOH. Thabeet is not enough for NOH.

-Kobe24-TJ19-
12-09-2011, 06:10 PM
BINGO was his name-o!

:laugh:

ripjhb18
12-09-2011, 06:10 PM
Honestly it's not about that at this point. They will not get a better offer, and they have to realize that. Odom is not just some scrub, he'll get you 15 and 10 a night off the bench, and he is a low financial threat since he's a team option next season, so they can just not re-up him and get some cap space.

The problem from what I'm understanding is that the Lakers are saving an enormous sum of money, despite people not realizing they still have to get 2 pf's and a backup sg still. NO's needs to take some money away from their salary, not much, but some.

I've already said countless times I don't get why Okafor or Ariza weren't in the deal to begin with. LA should have to take them back. But it seems like the Hornets GM was trying to put together a competitive team and would need both of them to do so.

You can't be competitive without spending money and they have to add more on this year anyway, I thought I had seen that there was a spending floor. And they have what, 6 players on their roster?

I'd think the league would like the Hornets to not be completely awful when they are trying to sell them.

beliges
12-09-2011, 06:11 PM
Says one delusional laker fan to the other, that has no idea not even in the least of what he is talking about. They other owners don't want to pay for the hornets to induce 15mil extra salary and have no real revenue increase. Get it

See I believe its something you dont get. The owners that own the Hornets collectively put individuals in charge of day to day operations of the team and they gave these individuals the authority to negotiate and make moves on behalf of the team. This is what happened here. Those who had the authority to OK trades, agreed to this deal. The NBA then disallowed the deal. You cannot cloak someone with the authority to act on behalf of your franchise, and when an agreement is made, whether its beneficial or not, void the deal. Everything was legit here. If the owners did not want to take on teh financial responsibility of owning the Hornets, they should have never agreed to do so. Furthermore, if the owners did not want any deals involving the Hornets, they should have never given their GM the authority to make deals on behalf of their franchise.

-Kobe24-TJ19-
12-09-2011, 06:11 PM
ChrisMannixSI Chris Mannix
If the Knicks or LA opened training camp with the collection of D-Leaguers the Hornets did today, @CP3 wouldn't want to stay there, either

jrok217
12-09-2011, 06:14 PM
My biggest quarrel with the league is that they're making this about "big-market" teams. What about the Hornets? They're giving up one player, that is going to walk at years end, in exchange for 4 players. Dan Gilbert, and other NBA owners, are arguing that it's not in their best interest as owners of the New Orleans Hornets to accept the trade; when they forget that the Hornets are in dire need of players; they currently only have 5 players under contract going in to training camp. So, is this a bitter attempt by owners like Gilbert and Cuban that are simply in fear of what is to come? Big Market teams like the Lakers, Celtics, and Knicks have given the league history and built a reputation which has generated millions for the league. Small Market teams are in the league to compete, but like in any business, ownership is a risk. Players should not be subjugated to playing for these teams forever, hence a free market. In 2012, when Chris Paul walks and signs with a team not named the New Orleans Hornets, maybe the owners will be content knowing they left the Hornets with little options at running a small market team.

shep33
12-09-2011, 06:14 PM
I've already said countless times I don't get why Okafor or Ariza weren't in the deal to begin with. LA should have to take them back. But it seems like the Hornets GM was trying to put together a competitive team and would need both of them to do so.

You can't be competitive without spending money and they have to add more on this year anyway, I thought I had seen that there was a spending floor. And they have what, 6 players on their roster?

I'd think the league would like the Hornets to not be completely awful when they are trying to sell them.

You know what makes sense, well kinda? Let LA take Ariza back right, then LA should use its amnesty on Artest or Walton... this way they just screw the NBA right back lol, although Ariza has a few years left doesn't he?

nothappyinut
12-09-2011, 06:17 PM
See I believe its something you dont get. The owners that own the Hornets collectively put individuals in charge of day to day operations of the team and they gave these individuals the authority to negotiate and make moves on behalf of the team. This is what happened here. Those who had the authority to OK trades, agreed to this deal. The NBA then disallowed the deal. You cannot cloak someone with the authority to act on behalf of your franchise, and when an agreement is made, whether its beneficial or not, void the deal. Everything was legit here. If the owners did not want to take on teh financial responsibility of owning the Hornets, they should have never agreed to do so. Furthermore, if the owners did not want any deals involving the Hornets, they should have never given their GM the authority to make deals on behalf of their franchise.

So with that failed logic if I own a business and I hire a CFO and give him a good amount of authority and decision making yet I see him a year later making a deal that will hurt the company I can't step in and stop it cause I hired him to do that job??? Good luck in the business world I'm guessing you will hear the term "sucker" quite frequently with that logic.

-Kobe24-TJ19-
12-09-2011, 06:37 PM
ChrisMannixSI Chris Mannix
Sources: Lakers, Rockets, Hornets searching for ways to make a @CP3 deal sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/basketbal…
17 seconds ago

ripjhb18
12-09-2011, 06:37 PM
You know what makes sense, well kinda? Let LA take Ariza back right, then LA should use its amnesty on Artest or Walton... this way they just screw the NBA right back lol, although Ariza has a few years left doesn't he?

Ariza has 3 years at roughly $6 million per I think. Again, the Lakers should have to take back Ariza or Okafor for the deal to be fair. That opens up the money for the Hornets.

But I think Demps didn't want to do that because he wants them there to help the team win. He doesn't want to just dump their contract. This is where it seems the ownership and management of the Hornets disagree.

Wade>You
12-09-2011, 06:39 PM
The ol song and dance with the NBA:

Owner objects to player's request, makes ridiculous demand, player plans to sue, owner gets back to negotiating table, get a little more from the player, and call it a day.

Sportfan
12-09-2011, 06:41 PM
ESPNSteinLine Marc Stein
Sources say league-owned Hornets on Friday afternoon were given clearance to re-open phone lines to all teams interested in Chris Paul
13 minutes ago

DA in the clutch!

Pakman
12-09-2011, 06:45 PM
ESPNSteinLine Marc Stein
Sources say league-owned Hornets on Friday afternoon were given clearance to re-open phone lines to all teams interested in Chris Paul
13 minutes ago

DA in the clutch! looks like he's closer to being traded then not

beliges
12-09-2011, 06:55 PM
So with that failed logic if I own a business and I hire a CFO and give him a good amount of authority and decision making yet I see him a year later making a deal that will hurt the company I can't step in and stop it cause I hired him to do that job??? Good luck in the business world I'm guessing you will hear the term "sucker" quite frequently with that logic.

LOL Its not my logic...its the law. If you own a company and you cloak one of your employees to contract on behalf of your company and the person he contracts with in good faith, is under the impression that the person he is negotiating with has the authority of bind the company, then that deal is legit even if it is a bad deal for the company. If it is a clearly bad deal, you as the owner of the company can then go after your employee who made deal as a breach of his/her fiduciary duty. The only problem with that is there was no formal contract signed here, at least I dont think there was. The reports indicated that both sides agreed to terms. I dont know if this means that both sides signed a contract agreeing to go through with this trade. This is no failed logic but rather its the law when it comes to business organizations. Hope this enlightens you a bit as to why everyone is taking legal action into consideration. There are a lot of facts Im not aware of as of yet but it seems to me that if this entire ordeal was sent to court, CP3 has a very good chance of making the NBA allow this deal to go through.

bluefire7002
12-09-2011, 06:58 PM
My biggest quarrel with the league is that they're making this about "big-market" teams. What about the Hornets? They're giving up one player, that is going to walk at years end, in exchange for 4 players. Dan Gilbert, and other NBA owners, are arguing that it's not in their best interest as owners of the New Orleans Hornets to accept the trade; when they forget that the Hornets are in dire need of players; they currently only have 5 players under contract going in to training camp. So, is this a bitter attempt by owners like Gilbert and Cuban that are simply in fear of what is to come? Big Market teams like the Lakers, Celtics, and Knicks have given the league history and built a reputation which has generated millions for the league. Small Market teams are in the league to compete, but like in any business, ownership is a risk. Players should not be subjugated to playing for these teams forever, hence a free market. In 2012, when Chris Paul walks and signs with a team not named the New Orleans Hornets, maybe the owners will be content knowing they left the Hornets with little options at running a small market team.

I completely agree with you. It's funny how this deal was vetoed from the owners. Since they own the Hornets wouldn't you want whats best for them? and that would be this deal... you would have got 4 quality players for 1! Yea it is Chris Paul but at least you have a pretty good team, rather than grabbing a bunch of D-league players. So in the best interest of the Hornets??? i think not... in the best interest of YOURself and YOUR team AND PO'd because a big market team saves money... thats better

THE MTL
12-09-2011, 07:00 PM
I cant wait to see another veto. Lakers aint getting Paul in no trade. And neither is any big market team.

MTar786
12-09-2011, 07:05 PM
i will laugh so hard if the difference is them adding david west via sign and trade and then we trade for dwigh too. would just make us even more elite hahahaha

paul/fisher
kobe/barnes
artest/hedo/kapono
west/3m'MLE/hedo
dwight/free agent

and if that not the case and they want us to tak back a contract.. then give us ariza and we will amnesty artest or add him to the orlando trade lolol

LA_Raiders
12-09-2011, 07:08 PM
Veto 2.0 Coming up. We should go for Dwight instead...

xnick5757
12-09-2011, 07:09 PM
apparently stern wants young players

Chacarron
12-09-2011, 07:18 PM
Just give them Kobe already...:hide: :D

beliges
12-09-2011, 07:29 PM
I cant wait to see another veto. Lakers aint getting Paul in no trade. And neither is any big market team.

Well then you CP3 has a very winnable law suit on his hands. You cant engage in bad faith tactics in this league. Sounds like a certainty that the 3 teams will make some minor tweeks and go ahead with essentially the same deal.

nothappyinut
12-09-2011, 07:30 PM
LOL Its not my logic...its the law. If you own a company and you cloak one of your employees to contract on behalf of your company and the person he contracts with in good faith, is under the impression that the person he is negotiating with has the authority of bind the company, then that deal is legit even if it is a bad deal for the company. If it is a clearly bad deal, you as the owner of the company can then go after your employee who made deal as a breach of his/her fiduciary duty. The only problem with that is there was no formal contract signed here, at least I dont think there was. The reports indicated that both sides agreed to terms. I dont know if this means that both sides signed a contract agreeing to go through with this trade. This is no failed logic but rather its the law when it comes to business organizations. Hope this enlightens you a bit as to why everyone is taking legal action into consideration. There are a lot of facts Im not aware of as of yet but it seems to me that if this entire ordeal was sent to court, CP3 has a very good chance of making the NBA allow this deal to go through.

I see what you are trying to get at but it's incorrect. First I know for a fact there was no contract signed seeing it was the day before any contract could be signed when they agreed in principle. Second depending on situation ie a CFO you hire does something shady there are ways to get out of contract. I deal with contracts all day 5 days a week. I deal not only with 100 dollar contract but also million dollar contracts. There is always clauses and laws to get you out of something under certain circumstances. Under these circumstance which we are discussing the owners had every right to negate the current "verbal agreement". Just because you have an employee that makes a bonehead move doesn't meant you've got to eat it. So many different scenarios and situation we would be in class all day to go over just a handfull of them. Bottom line there was no contract all trade have to be approved by the commish this one was not. Based off the return I understand the owners not wanting to shell out x amount of dollars to a money pit.

Lakers + Giants
12-09-2011, 07:39 PM
Lets give up our Rookies Darius Morris, and Andrew Goudelock. . .if they want 1st round picks from us as well I'm sure we wouldn't mind giving up Picks in the late 20's

And we'll have to take on Ariza's contract or Okafor's. Im fine with either or. . .

Aust
12-09-2011, 07:43 PM
I would expect Okafor and maybe another pick, but probably just Okafor. Lakers aren't trading Bynum, who the eff would they have at center?!? Anyways, savin Bynum for Howard, especially since New Jersey is no longer a sure thing.

Chacarron
12-09-2011, 07:47 PM
This is so idiotic, if the Lakers end up "absorbing" Okafor's contract, the league would look even more ridiculous. They don't allow a perfectly fine trade BUT decide to add another good player to the Lakers who would be already getting Chris Paul, just so that the Lakers pay more luxury tax money. Great job NBA.

beliges
12-09-2011, 07:55 PM
I see what you are trying to get at but it's incorrect. First I know for a fact there was no contract signed seeing it was the day before any contract could be signed when they agreed in principle. Second depending on situation ie a CFO you hire does something shady there are ways to get out of contract. I deal with contracts all day 5 days a week. I deal not only with 100 dollar contract but also million dollar contracts. There is always clauses and laws to get you out of something under certain circumstances. Under these circumstance which we are discussing the owners had every right to negate the current "verbal agreement". Just because you have an employee that makes a bonehead move doesn't meant you've got to eat it. So many different scenarios and situation we would be in class all day to go over just a handfull of them. Bottom line there was no contract all trade have to be approved by the commish this one was not. Based off the return I understand the owners not wanting to shell out x amount of dollars to a money pit.

Well, essentially the reason I said im not sure on the facts so dont know what legal basis any impending suit will depend on. But I dont know what part of work you do on contracts, but each contract has its terms set within the four corners of the actual contract. If you are a CFO, CEO or whatever and you give an employee express, implied or cloak them with apparent authority to make decisions which bind the company, then you are stuck with that decision. If there are clauses in the contract which make the agreement void under certain circumstances then that clause will most likely be deemed valid. But you as a CEO or whatever have the responsibility to hire rational people who will uphold their fiduciary duties to the company. You cannot undo a legally binding agreement. However, what you can do is sue your employee for breaking his fiduciary duties to your company. In that case, the agreement does not become undone. This is why its crucial to give authority to those you trust if you own a business/company.

But as I stated earlier, Im not aware of any kind of binding contract that was signed between NO and LA. Terms were agreed upon in principal so there was nothing legally binding either side I would assume. But the facts have not been released and probably will not be made public. But lets get one thing straight, CP3 has multiple different avenues to attack this decision by Stern.

Sportfan
12-09-2011, 08:03 PM
Jim_Eichenhofer Jim Eichenhofer
Dell Demps: "Since that (3-team) deal did not go through, we’re going to keep plugging away and see if we can get a deal for the team.”

wording is confusing, could mean many different things.

kozelkid
12-09-2011, 08:03 PM
This is so idiotic, if the Lakers end up "absorbing" Okafor's contract, the league would look even more ridiculous. They don't allow a perfectly fine trade BUT decide to add another good player to the Lakers who would be already getting Chris Paul, just so that the Lakers pay more luxury tax money. Great job NBA.

Or to avoid LA from using a 20mil exception and Bynum to nab Howard.

ripjhb18
12-09-2011, 08:24 PM
Or to avoid LA from using a 20mil exception and Bynum to nab Howard.

I thought trade exceptions could not be used with other players in a trade?

Chacarron
12-09-2011, 08:32 PM
Or to avoid LA from using a 20mil exception and Bynum to nab Howard.

If you listen to what Dan Gilbert has said and how revenue sharing works, you'd know the Lakers contribute the most out of all tax-paying teams with revenue sharing. If the original trade for Chris Paul had passed, non-tax paying teams like the Cavs would have received less money as a result of the Lakers saving 11 or so million dollars.