December 9, 201114 yr http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=ys-nba_dan_gilbert_email_lakers_hornets_trade_120811 Thanks Dan Gilbert. The following is the email in its entirety: Commissioner, It would be a travesty to allow the Lakers to acquire Chris Paul in the apparent trade being discussed. This trade should go to a vote of the 29 owners of the Hornets. Over the next three seasons this deal would save the Lakers approximately $20 million in salaries and approximately $21 million in luxury taxes. That $21 million goes to non-taxpaying teams and to fund revenue sharing. I cannot remember ever seeing a trade where a team got by far the best player in the trade and saved over $40 million in the process. And it doesn’t appear that they would give up any draft picks, which might allow to later make a trade for Dwight Howard. (They would also get a large trade exception that would help them improve their team and/or eventually trade for Howard.) When the Lakers got Pau Gasol (at the time considered an extremely lopsided trade) they took on tens of millions in additional salary and luxury tax and they gave up a number of prospects (one in Marc Gasol who may become a max-salary player). I just don’t see how we can allow this trade to happen. I know the vast majority of owners feel the same way that I do. When will we just change the name of 25 of the 30 teams to the Washington Generals? Please advise….
December 9, 201114 yr If Dwight Howard gets traded to the Nets to team up with Deron Williams, I see no reason that Stern shouldn't be tarred and feathered.
December 9, 201114 yr I will admit that I really haven't gotten excited about the NBA since the last year Jordan was with the Bulls in '98. I've been a casual fans, enjoyed watching the Pistos the year they won it and have kinda followed the Celtics but I really thought I was about to come back when I heard about Paul going to LA. I envisioned myself watching a few more NBA games. But because of David Stern and how corrupt he is, I see myself going back to simply being a casual fan...at best. I'm not even a fan of the Lakers, but this is stupid.
December 9, 201114 yr Is it a fair trade? It sounds like the salary savings is what is making the deal look uneven to owners. Just looking at the players moving, it doesn't look that lopsided to me but I am one of those playoff time only NBA fans.
December 9, 201114 yr Is it a fair trade? It sounds like the salary savings is what is making the deal look uneven to owners. Just looking at the players moving, it doesn't look that lopsided to me but I am one of those playoff time only NBA fans. To me it shouldn't matter about salary savings. If GMs approve a deal, it should be made. Period.
December 9, 201114 yr Very good article from Ian Thomsen about it all... http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/ian_thomsen/12/09/hornets.need.new.owners/index.html?xid=cnnbin
December 9, 201114 yr If anything the Lakers are getting the short end of this trade. It's just absurd. It's seems as if they want Paul to leave at the end of the year and get nothing for him and then contact that team. Just go ahead and do it already if you are going to pull crap like this.
December 9, 201114 yr To me it shouldn't matter about salary savings. If GMs approve a deal, it should be made. Period. What Gilbert who is proving to be by far the biggest idiot of "the decision" fails to mention in his cry baby email is Paul would re-sign for about $20M a year for 4 or 5 years. So the money savings isn't quite as high as he's whining about. Also how can NO get anything better than 3 starters for Paul? So Gilbert just wants him to walk or does he have to be traded to a small market team to get approved? Paul isn't going to report to training camp and I feel he has a very legit law suit that he will win easily. It might take a decade to win it though.
December 9, 201114 yr To me it shouldn't matter about salary savings. If GMs approve a deal, it should be made. Period. Money does matter. The Reds made a trade in the 70's for Vida Blue that was nixed by the baseball commissioner because of the money.
December 9, 201114 yr I guess the real wild card in the deal is the NBA owns the Hornets. So technically David Stern is the owner and if a team's owner doesn't approve a trade, then how can it be a trade?
December 9, 201114 yr I guess the real wild card in the deal is the NBA owns the Hornets. So technically David Stern is the owner and if a team's owner doesn't approve a trade, then how can it be a trade? He doesn't run the team. Well technically he doesn't but obviously he does. They still have a GM that makes decisions.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.