PDA

View Full Version : Who got screwed hardest in this 3 teams trade fiasco?



Better-Than-You
12-11-2011, 03:50 AM
I would say Dell Demps, basically all the executives found out that he has no power and any trade that he accepts will need to be reviewed. If somehow the proposal gets leaked and Stern vetoes again, then their team chemistry is ruined also. The guy tried so hard to put an adequate and competing team together.

itsripcity32
12-11-2011, 03:53 AM
Kobe got screwed hardest

buffalochipster
12-11-2011, 03:54 AM
No doubt the Hornets F.O.... i feel so bad for them. they pull of a trade, in which all three teams come out with good pieces, just to have it taken from them. they work for 2 days on the same trade, before that falls apart. Now they have to go back to the drawing board again, all with Stern watching over them like a hawk

Hellcrooner
12-11-2011, 04:22 AM
who has ended up giving his 3rd or 4th best player for.......NOTHING to the rival that

1 sweeped them in the playoffs

2 is looking for the same target than you ( dwight) and you just gave him one of your best assets.

3 the team whos owner was one of the perpetrators of the unholy tampering/colussion that disallowed your perfectly legal trade?


i think its clear here, rockets and hornets have lost time and anything else.

gotoHcarolina52
12-11-2011, 04:23 AM
Monty Williams. The season starts in two weeks and he only has six players on his roster, one of whom is extremely disgruntled.

Ty Fast
12-11-2011, 04:27 AM
the hornets were going to get 3 starters for someone who didnt want nothing to do with them so i would say them

MTar786
12-11-2011, 04:28 AM
the lakers lol

Avenged
12-11-2011, 04:33 AM
Hornets and Lakers equally? I don't know. The Hornets will still get talent. I mean i'ts Chris Paul we're talking about here.

As for the Lakers? Well Chris Paul is out of the picture. And Dwight seems like a big stretch.

last stand
12-11-2011, 04:35 AM
the hornets. they have 6 players on roster and were about to get about 6 players added for only giving up 1

they were about to get a bunch of picks as well

but stern tried to play poker with the buss family and the buss family folded so stern didn't screw them into not having a shot at dwight either

LakersIn5
12-11-2011, 04:37 AM
**** stern

THE MTL
12-11-2011, 04:38 AM
It might be the Lakers to tell you the truth. It made things really awkward for especially Odom, I figured that they kinda had to trade him. Dwight Howard looks like a stretch for them as well. Chemistry is def thrown off.

I think New Orleans will (..and can) eventually trade Paul. It is just the other owners were complaining for their selfish reasons. It had to do with Paul going to the Lakers def. I can see another trade from another team working out for them.

KB-Pau-DH2012
12-11-2011, 04:42 AM
Lakers lose their heart and soul the last 7 yrs in Lamar Odom. Lakers come out the biggest loser...AT THE MOMENT!

AWC713
12-11-2011, 04:55 AM
underratedly, the rockets.

they just lost out on the chance of having a gasol-nene front court.....trading scola and martin opened up the cap room and i really think we would h ave signed nene had pau been acquired. thats an insane front court. two very solid 6'11 players.

AWC713
12-11-2011, 04:56 AM
now they sulk back to mediocrity...a great fundamental team that plays their hearts out but lack the superstar to take them to the next level.

p.s....i can't even imagine the godly works mchale could've done with bigmen like pau and nene...

gotoHcarolina52
12-11-2011, 04:58 AM
The biggest loser is Monty Williams, but a runner up is Mike Brown. First questions circled about whether or not Kobe and the others would buy into his system and respect him. Now he has to come in and deal with disgruntled players. Good luck!

flea
12-11-2011, 04:58 AM
the hornets. they have 6 players on roster and were about to get about 6 players added for only giving up 1

they were about to get a bunch of picks as well

but stern tried to play poker with the buss family and the buss family folded so stern didn't screw them into not having a shot at dwight either

It was a horrible trade proposal. I don't see how that's even a debate.

MFFL==FML
12-11-2011, 05:02 AM
First the Mavericks rape the Lakers in a 4 game sweep, then Cuban unofficially helps the trade to land the Lakers Chris Paul get destroyed, and now they take the Laker's 3rd/4th best player for literally nothing.


This post season and off-season...
Cuban - 3
Lakers - 0

shep33
12-11-2011, 05:03 AM
LA is getting screwed... no Paul, maybe no Howard, and no Odom who didn't want to play for us anymore,

Hellcrooner
12-11-2011, 05:12 AM
LA is getting screwed... no Paul, maybe no Howard, and no Odom and disenchanted/angry Gasol who may notwant to play for us anymore,


fixed

gaughan333
12-11-2011, 05:19 AM
All of the players who now have to go back to the teams that tried to trade them

TopsyTurvy
12-11-2011, 07:55 AM
Will always be the Hornets. CP3 walking for less than what was offered is a tragedy for the franchise - to think of any other team is idiotic.

LakersIn5
12-11-2011, 08:22 AM
lakers lose big time. getting cp3 benefits them now and in the future and getting cp3 will entice dwight to come to the lakers

Raps18-19 Champ
12-11-2011, 08:46 AM
Hornets will end up being screwed the least. They'll get enough for Paul. A better package than what they would have gotten.

Clippers will cave sooner or later and trade Eric Gordon, DeAndre Jordan and more for Paul and Okafor.

29$JerZ
12-11-2011, 11:11 AM
Hornets since Paul essentially is screwed in any trade thanks to Stern

ink
12-11-2011, 11:20 AM
I would say Dell Demps, basically all the executives found out that he has no power and any trade that he accepts will need to be reviewed. If somehow the proposal gets leaked and Stern vetoes again, then their team chemistry is ruined also. The guy tried so hard to put an adequate and competing team together.

No Demps got saved from being given old players that will not even be with the team in 2 years. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that if you lose a superstar you rebuild. And you don't rebuild with guys over 30.

richardj
12-11-2011, 11:22 AM
No Demps got saved from being given old players that will not even be with the team in 2 years. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that if you lose a superstar you rebuild. And you don't rebuild with guys over 30.

100% agree here

ink
12-11-2011, 11:24 AM
LA is getting screwed... no Paul, maybe no Howard, and no Odom who didn't want to play for us anymore,

Which of course is their own fault, since they're the ones that were going to dump these players. Pau and Odom should be pissed off at LAKERS management for wanting to trade them. That's what you get when you always play the hoard talent game. The talent you hoarded before gets dumped when you want to hoard the next wave of elite talent. Build from within properly and you don't need to keep alienating everyone. It's the dark side of free agency that you guys like to ignore: what happens to the great players that get dumped?

Valleyfella
12-11-2011, 11:24 AM
The NBA as a whole. A league already struggling with its credibility now looks like one of those fly by night semi pro leagues where anything can and does happen.

ink
12-11-2011, 11:28 AM
It was a horrible trade proposal. I don't see how that's even a debate.

Exactly.


Kobe got screwed hardest

Last thing anyone should care about. He's the guy that famously *****ed to Lakers fans in a parking lot that he wanted his teammate Bynum traded.

Breaks my heart to see the franchise that has exploited other franchises for years stopped in their tracks. Kobe has had enough stacked teams built for him to win his rings.

ink
12-11-2011, 11:29 AM
The NBA as a whole. A league already struggling with its credibility now looks like one of those fly by night semi pro leagues where anything can and does happen.

I agree but if we have to blame, that blame needs to be laid at the feet of the guy who started all of this by whining to leave the Hornets. None of this would have happened if the BFFs didn't have to play together.

kobebabe
12-11-2011, 11:39 AM
Lakers......then CP3
Cuban is the "star"

JordansBulls
12-11-2011, 11:41 AM
Hornets easily. They were giving up the best player in the group while not getting the 2nd best player back and all for guys over 30+ years of age.

ink
12-11-2011, 11:43 AM
I am glad the league was in a position to kill a deal that stunk this badly.

nycericanguy
12-11-2011, 11:43 AM
NJ!

NJ wanted LA to use their chips for CP. Now LAL seem like they will make a big run at Howard. And with ORL signing Richardson & Davis, that tells me they don't want to blow it up and go into full rebuild mode. So a Bynum/Gasol package would be something they'd be interested in over Brook Lopez & 2 picks.

So NJ might lost out on Howard now, and thus lose D-wil to the Mavs! Could be catastrophic for them.

LOOTERX9
12-11-2011, 11:44 AM
I dont care who got screwed. All i care about is my knicks team. let paul stay the year there and ny get him next season. ny got tyson chandler so im very happy

ManRam
12-11-2011, 11:46 AM
The Rockets got saved.
The Hornets got screwed...but still have a chance and it might be better in the long run.
Doesn't affect the Lakers.

Raps18-19 Champ
12-11-2011, 11:47 AM
Hornets easily. They were giving up the best player in the group while not getting the 2nd best player back and all for guys over 30+ years of age.

You mean the Hornets benefited.

His question was that who was screwed after the trade fell through.

Avenged
12-11-2011, 11:54 AM
The Rockets got saved.
The Hornets got screwed...but still have a chance and it might be better in the long run.
Doesn't affect the Lakers.

It doesn't???? Odom was traded to the Mavericks because he doesn't wanna play for the Lakers anymore. It affects them greatly. The chemistry is gone.

ManRam
12-11-2011, 11:56 AM
It doesn't???? Odom was traded to the Mavericks because he doesn't wanna play for the Lakers anymore. It affects them greatly. The chemistry is gone.

They'll rebound. They're the Lakers. They'll figure something out.

But yeah, it does impact them. I just think ultimately they'll come out as good if not better as a team some way somehow. But that's speculation, so it does impact them negatively for now.

KingstonHawke
12-11-2011, 12:04 PM
Believe it or not (and I'm a die-hard Lakers fan) I'd have to say the Rockets. The Lakers were going to be a 50+ team already. The Hornets were going to be a 6 to 8 seed regardless. The Rockets though, had a chance to go from obscurity to top 4 seed if they'd of been able to land Gasol, and then Nene. Opportunity cost is everything, and it sounds like if they landed Gasol, Nene wasa lock to sign. That front court would have been scary.

ink
12-11-2011, 12:05 PM
It doesn't???? Odom was traded to the Mavericks because he doesn't wanna play for the Lakers anymore. It affects them greatly. The chemistry is gone.

But that blood is on the Lakers' hands. They're the ones chasing superstars and dumping Odom to do it. THEY betrayed Odom and Pau and can't blame anyone else. That's the dark side of free agency everyone conveniently ignores.

Odom has taken so much crap in LA. I remember the fans abusing him with sigs that said GARBAGE for a season or two. I'm not surprised he has mixed feelings or didn't want to play there after all that. It can be an abusive market and it's not made any better by the team always playing the chase the superstar game.

Teeboy1487
12-11-2011, 12:10 PM
Doesn't affect the Lakers.
We just lost Odom with nothing in return. We are clearly weaker :facepalm:. I wish the Lakers would have just did nothing like I said at first. Now we are much weaker.

albertc86
12-11-2011, 12:13 PM
The Lakers did. They lost Odom and Pau even though the trade didn't fully go through.

waveycrockett
12-11-2011, 12:14 PM
Easily the Lakers. They just HAD to give up Lamar for nothing because of all this garbage. Dude didnt want to go back. Even if they get D12 they are going to have to give up Pau and Bynum. This wont make them a better team

houstonzfinest
12-11-2011, 12:15 PM
the rockets were the biggest losers. the lakers won't be hurt much because they will always be in the mix for big time players. plus the the hornets will eventually trade paul and get something in return. but the rockets had so much riding on this trade, this was just the first of a few things i believe they had planned

3mikee_
12-11-2011, 12:16 PM
I think the Hornets lost.. I mean look at all the players they were gonna get..

ink
12-11-2011, 12:19 PM
The Lakers did. They lost Odom and Pau even though the trade didn't fully go through.


Easily the Lakers. They just HAD to give up Lamar for nothing because of all this garbage. Dude didnt want to go back. Even if they get D12 they are going to have to give up Pau and Bynum. This wont make them a better team

The Lakers only have themselves to blame for playing the superstar sweepstakes for the 1,000th time. This time they got burned.

basketfan4life
12-11-2011, 12:25 PM
The Lakers only have themselves to blame for playing the superstar sweepstakes for the 1,000th time. This time they got burned.

whatever the reason is, doesn't change the faxt that they got screwed hardest.

Teeboy1487
12-11-2011, 12:26 PM
In my opinion, I thought the Hornets was getting good in return and I thought the Lakers and Rockets were giving up way too much for the players they wanted. The Hornets can possibly be hit the hardest by this only if Paul walks and they get nothing in return. I don't buy that keeping Paul saves this team. That's bologna. The possible suitors buying the team with Paul on it will eventually have to trade Paul or worst, let him walk for nothing. There is nothing appealing about the Hornets with keeping Paul there. They might as well contract.

shep33
12-11-2011, 01:02 PM
But that blood is on the Lakers' hands. They're the ones chasing superstars and dumping Odom to do it. THEY betrayed Odom and Pau and can't blame anyone else. That's the dark side of free agency everyone conveniently ignores.

Odom has taken so much crap in LA. I remember the fans abusing him with sigs that said GARBAGE for a season or two. I'm not surprised he has mixed feelings or didn't want to play there after all that. It can be an abusive market and it's not made any better by the team always playing the chase the superstar game.


C'mon man, your one of the few here arguing that it was a good decision by the league. The problem is the Hornets, the Lakers, and the Rockets all agreed to differrent versions of the trade twice. How is that the Lakers fault. The 2nd trade was going to net the Hornets Dragic, Devin Ebanks, Budinger, Patterson, multiple picks, Lamar Odom (team option in 2012), Luis Scola, Kevin Martin who's only 28.

You hate LA, and we get that, you've always stated your dismay for them. But think reasonably man, LA got screwed because everyone agreed to the first trade... then everyone agreed for the 2nd trade. Odom then had enough of being jerked around, and the Lakers respectfully traded him to a team he is content with. They could've traded him to other teams, for the same or even better offer.

They "betrayed" Odom... if this was your team you'd be thinking completely differently, I'm sorry, but your flat out wrong man.

The real issue isn't the package NO's got, the real issue is that the Lakers were involved in this. You know what, if the league said we don't want to deal with LA at the very start, I wouldn't have one problem with it at all.
But they didn't give a proper reason for the lakers to stop, actually after the first proposal they said give us more young players and draft picks, and the teams worked day and night to get that done, which they did. The NBA then stalled according to David Aldridge, it was taking abnormally long for the league to make a decision, they kept trying to through multiple variations of the trade, until LA said they had enough.

LA fans aren't upset that we didn't get Paul, the league screwed us, just like they did the other 2 teams. Let your hate for the Lakers just subside for 5 minutes or so, and really think about what happend here.

Cp3 said he wouldn't sign an extension with the Clips before the Lakers trade, I don't get how that changes now. If the Clips give up, Jordan + Gordon + Minni's pick, that's a good deal, and the NBA will demand that deal I'm sure.

flea
12-11-2011, 01:51 PM
Why do LA fans insist on playing the victim? It was an abysmal trade. It was even worse than the one that got the Lakers Gasol. Why on earth would a rebuilding team with no owner not only take 3 aging complementary pieces but also foot the bill for the Lakers so they can get their superstars? It was completely absurd and it has nothing to do with the fact that it was LA that proposed it.

RLundi
12-11-2011, 02:02 PM
Lol at 'screwed the hardest'.

Ripper Gein
12-11-2011, 02:03 PM
This Guy is an Idiot arguing here is like trying to convince a donkey that Michael j. Fox was in Back to the future.

BrandoCommando
12-11-2011, 02:06 PM
Lakers.

gaughan333
12-11-2011, 02:15 PM
Lakers fans are delusional

topdog
12-11-2011, 02:17 PM
At first glance, I would say the Hornets. However, they may end up getting a better deal if the Clips get smart and package their 2012 Minny draft pick gift with Kaman and Aminu or Bledsoe. Although we don't know what trades would have followed from the original (Minny supposedly was interested in Martin and only has young players to give).

So, I'd say the Rockets because it was their defining move in getting Pau and cashing in some of their duplicate assets.

Ripper Gein
12-11-2011, 02:20 PM
Your delusion are Lakers fans reality, when your as successful as they have been we expect a Great product. Now go back to cheering for your lame *** team...

GREATNESS ONE
12-11-2011, 02:29 PM
I really think that was about as fair of a deal for all parties. It's not done yet but man I don't see how Stern can Vetoe a trade and get away with it.... this is gonna cause a ***** storm for the NBA

flea
12-11-2011, 02:31 PM
I really think that was about as fair of a deal for all parties. It's not done yet but man I don't see how Stern can Vetoe a trade and get away with it.... this is gonna cause a ***** storm for the NBA

It was the Hornets owners that vetoed it, not Stern.

DeyAce
12-11-2011, 02:33 PM
Hornets would have become the rockets if that trade went through

Byronicle
12-11-2011, 02:37 PM
Lakers for sure

they lost Odom, that player always came in playing like a mad man when Bynum was out. He was my favourite player on that team too

The other teams, Hornets still can trade CP3, Houston didn't really lose anything.

tippa irie
12-11-2011, 02:41 PM
Why do LA fans insist on playing the victim? It was an abysmal trade. It was even worse than the one that got the Lakers Gasol. Why on earth would a rebuilding team with no owner not only take 3 aging complementary pieces but also foot the bill for the Lakers so they can get their superstars? It was completely absurd and it has nothing to do with the fact that it was LA that proposed it.

How was the trade that got them Gasol bad? The Grizzlies wanted cap room, young talent and draft picks for Pau.

The grizzlies won 0 playoff games with Pau and have won 7 since they got his brother Marc in that trade. Just because you are not a GM who can evaluate young talent makes it a bad trade.. Your brain is probably the size of a .....flea

gaughan333
12-11-2011, 02:48 PM
Your delusion are Lakers fans reality, when your as successful as they have been we expect a Great product. Now go back to cheering for your lame *** team...

I'm a bulls fan, I would not consider that a lame *** team. You're just a lakers fan who is butt hurt that the NBA isn't letting you rape the league anymore. Your posts are garbage and just filled with homeristic statements. You have nothing intelligent to add to anything and just keep complaining the league is out to get the lakers. It's ok though, I assume you are about 14.

flea
12-11-2011, 02:50 PM
How was the trade that got them Gasol bad? The Grizzlies wanted cap room, young talent and draft picks for Pau.

The grizzlies won 0 playoff games with Pau and have won 7 since they got his brother Marc in that trade. Just because you are not a GM who can evaluate young talent makes it a bad trade.. Your brain is probably the size of a .....flea

The fact that something unforeseeable happened (Zach Randolph turned into a good NBA player rather than basketcase) was what made the Grizzlies competitive. They still paid him too much, but it worked out. The fact that a one-sided deal ended up not hurting as much because they got lucky in the the fact that the other Gasol actually came to America doesn't mean it just becomes a good trade. It wasn't as bad as this CP3 proposal, but it was not a very good trade, and they likely could have done better.

It's cute you need to resort to name-calling when your argument doesn't have much substance, but I think it's against the rules.

gaughan333
12-11-2011, 02:52 PM
How was the trade that got them Gasol bad? The Grizzlies wanted cap room, young talent and draft picks for Pau.

The grizzlies won 0 playoff games with Pau and have won 7 since they got his brother Marc in that trade. Just because you are not a GM who can evaluate young talent makes it a bad trade.. Your brain is probably the size of a .....flea

Correlation does not equal causation

Also, I would just like to point out that you can't use the argument that basketball analysts think the CP3 was good and then defend the Grizz trade by saying we are not as smart as gms. IIRC analysts and journalists were saying things like that being the most lopsided trade they'd ever seen, etc.

Better-Than-You
12-11-2011, 02:57 PM
The fact that something unforeseeable happened (Zach Randolph turned into a good NBA player rather than basketcase) was what made the Grizzlies competitive. They still paid him too much, but it worked out. The fact that a one-sided deal ended up not hurting as much because they got lucky in the the fact that the other Gasol actually came to America doesn't mean it just becomes a good trade. It wasn't as bad as this CP3 proposal, but it was not a very good trade, and they likely could have done better.

It's cute you need to resort to name-calling when your argument doesn't have much substance, but I think it's against the rules.

You know more than analysts who collectively said it was a fantastic trade for the Hornets right? What you fail to realize is Paul has leverage and by refusing to sign an extension unless he gets traded to a desired team; it's impossible to get the utmost for him. There are probably teams that could offer more (probably not) for Paul but no extension = no trade. Your brain isn't as small as a flea but you are blind as a bat.

ink
12-11-2011, 02:58 PM
C'mon man, your one of the few here arguing that it was a good decision by the league. The problem is the Hornets, the Lakers, and the Rockets all agreed to differrent versions of the trade twice. How is that the Lakers fault. The 2nd trade was going to net the Hornets Dragic, Devin Ebanks, Budinger, Patterson, multiple picks, Lamar Odom (team option in 2012), Luis Scola, Kevin Martin who's only 28.

You hate LA, and we get that, you've always stated your dismay for them. But think reasonably man, LA got screwed because everyone agreed to the first trade... then everyone agreed for the 2nd trade. Odom then had enough of being jerked around, and the Lakers respectfully traded him to a team he is content with. They could've traded him to other teams, for the same or even better offer.

They "betrayed" Odom... if this was your team you'd be thinking completely differently, I'm sorry, but your flat out wrong man.

The real issue isn't the package NO's got, the real issue is that the Lakers were involved in this. You know what, if the league said we don't want to deal with LA at the very start, I wouldn't have one problem with it at all.
But they didn't give a proper reason for the lakers to stop, actually after the first proposal they said give us more young players and draft picks, and the teams worked day and night to get that done, which they did. The NBA then stalled according to David Aldridge, it was taking abnormally long for the league to make a decision, they kept trying to through multiple variations of the trade, until LA said they had enough.

LA fans aren't upset that we didn't get Paul, the league screwed us, just like they did the other 2 teams. Let your hate for the Lakers just subside for 5 minutes or so, and really think about what happend here.

Cp3 said he wouldn't sign an extension with the Clips before the Lakers trade, I don't get how that changes now. If the Clips give up, Jordan + Gordon + Minni's pick, that's a good deal, and the NBA will demand that deal I'm sure.

I don't hate LA, in fact I'm a huge fan of Odom and Pau and I like Bynum quite a bit. The first NBA team I ever backed was the Lakers. I don't like spoiled superstars and Kobe is one of the worst. I also thought Shaq was a complete ***, so that kinda means I can't cheer for those two soap opera characters doesn't it?

And Odom is not mad at the league. If he is he's medically ******** and to date I haven't heard that he is. It's his team that told him he was not wanted. They're the ones who he should feel betrayed by. They're supposed to believe in him, not dump him. But that's what superstar chasers do.

Finally, of course it was a good decision by the league. The only people upset here are the superstar worshippers who can't see that the empathy and love Paul gets is completely hypocritical considering the absolute hate Lebron got for basically the same thing. In fact, unlike Melo, Howard, and Paul, Lebron actually played until the completion of his contract. Not that that makes him any better to me, I think all of them are contributing to the destruction of the league.

flea
12-11-2011, 03:02 PM
You know more than analysts who collectively said it was a fantastic trade for the Hornets right? What you fail to realize is Paul has leverage and by refusing to sign an extension unless he gets traded to a desired team; it's impossible to get the utmost for him. There are probably teams that could offer more (probably not) for Paul but no extension = no trade. Your brain isn't as small as a flea but you are blind as a bat.

Okay but you're also resorting to name-calling without any substance behind your argument. Sure he has leverage, but my argument was also that doing nothing and getting nothing for Paul was better than footing the bill for the Lakers and getting old role players in a rebuilding period.

Why is everyone saying "the analysts say it's good, therefore it is" in here? Not only is it a logical fallacy, it just shows you're not willing to think for yourself. I guarantee none of those analysts saying that are Hornets fans like I am. I know Paul is gone, and I have nothing against the Lakers, but I don't want my team getting the shaft because of it.

ink
12-11-2011, 03:03 PM
You know more than analysts who collectively said it was a fantastic trade for the Hornets right? What you fail to realize is Paul has leverage and by refusing to sign an extension unless he gets traded to a desired team; it's impossible to get the utmost for him. There are probably teams that could offer more (probably not) for Paul but no extension = no trade. Your brain isn't as small as a flea but you are blind as a bat.

The media that follows the NBA are pretty lame. More concerned with player soap operas than anything else. I read Larry Coon, you know the dude who has made his living explaining the moronic CBA that has created this mess?, and I am not at all surprised that he thinks it's an "outrage" that the deal was killed. Of course he would, he's the biggest dispenser of status quo koolaid out there. :laugh2: You'll have to do better than citing the media as "proof" that it was a good deal.

sunnydayin'zona
12-11-2011, 03:03 PM
I think the lakers did. they ended up having to give up an unhappy odom for basically nothing as a result of the trade talks. I'm pretty glad though, the lakers had it coming after such good luck for so long

ink
12-11-2011, 03:03 PM
Lakers for sure

they lost Odom, that player always came in playing like a mad man when Bynum was out. He was my favourite player on that team too

The other teams, Hornets still can trade CP3, Houston didn't really lose anything.

Mine too.

ldawg
12-11-2011, 03:04 PM
Let it go fellow Lakers fans its just hate in here. The logic and the point they are making is make no sense. They are just speaking from a hate point of view complete bias. Lakers are just a victim of their success. Most NBA clubs would not pull the plug on this Laker team some teams are better at planing some just have no clue and blame Lakers for their success. Every successful person get unwarranted hatred LA is no different. Its just reckless a man of stern position does it.

Better-Than-You
12-11-2011, 03:07 PM
Okay but you're also resorting to name-calling without any substance behind your argument. Sure he has leverage, but my argument was also that doing nothing and getting nothing for Paul was better than footing the bill for the Lakers and getting old role players in a rebuilding period.

Why is everyone saying "the analysts say it's good, therefore it is" in here? Not only is it a logical fallacy, it just shows you're not willing to think for yourself. I guarantee none of those analysts saying that are Hornets fans like I am. I know Paul is gone, and I have nothing against the Lakers, but I don't want my team getting the shaft because of it.

Because they know more than you? If I say I think its a good trade, you would say I'm a homer.

tippa irie
12-11-2011, 03:07 PM
Dont really care what these "so called" experts say. They are not getting paid the big bucks to evaluate talent!!! If Marc Gasol is not in the trade it doesnt happen. Grizzlies did their homework. Plus they got the expiring contract of Kwame. Also #1 draft picks! BTW lots of teams trade for these contracts thats how Miami cleared space to sign the big 3. They new Gasol was coming they didnt get lucky, and btw any GM would take Marc over Randolf. You guys just cant accept it was a good trade so spin it to your advantage. A trade can not be evaluated for 3-5 years just like a draft pick!!! So now when the trade is analyzed looks like both teams made out!!!!!!! Those are the facts!!!!!!!!!!! Grizzlies didnt get ripped off they got what they wanted

flea
12-11-2011, 03:09 PM
The media that follows the NBA are pretty lame. More concerned with player soap operas than anything else. I read Larry Coon, you know the dude who has made his living explaining the moronic CBA that has created this mess?, and I am not at all surprised that he thinks it's an "outrage" that the deal was killed. Of course he would, he's the biggest dispenser of status quo koolaid out there. :laugh2: You'll have to do better than citing the media as "proof" that it was a good deal.

This, bro. I don't need to rehash my argument again for you when ink has explained it. You could also read this (though it's debatable whether NBA writers have any actual "authority"): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

ldawg
12-11-2011, 03:12 PM
Let it go fellow Lakers fans its just hate in here. The logic and the point they are making makes no sense. They are just speaking from a hate point of view complete bias. Lakers are just a victim of their success. Most NBA clubs would not pull the plug on this Laker team some teams are better at planing some just have no clue and blame Lakers for their failures. Every successful person or business get unwarranted hatred LA is no different. Its just reckless a man of stern position does it. La do not have control over other teams it was a trade. only parties not involve get upset. Grizzles got what they wanted.

ldawg
12-11-2011, 03:19 PM
Let it go fellow Lakers fans its just hate in here. The logic and the point they are making makes no sense. They are just speaking from a hate point of view complete bias. Lakers are just a victim of their success. Most NBA clubs would not pull the plug on this Laker team some teams are better at planing some just have no clue and blame Lakers for their failures. Every successful person or business get unwarranted hatred LA is no different. Its just reckless a man of stern position does it. La do not have control over other teams it was a trade. only parties not involve get upset. Grizzles got what they wanted.

Sportfan
12-11-2011, 03:20 PM
Houston's GM, Mitch had to be ****ing him pretty hard up the butt to satisfy NO