Big Country Posted December 9, 2011 Share Posted December 9, 2011 Damn you David Stern. All of the little Napoleon commishes that like to dictate how other teams are allowed to manage their teams can now say - well, the NBA does it, so precedence is set where if they do it in the pros, I can do it in my fantasy league. Just great. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted December 9, 2011 Share Posted December 9, 2011 Damn you David Stern. All of the little Napoleon commishes that like to dictate how other teams are allowed to manage their teams can now say - well, the NBA does it, so precedence is set where if they do it in the pros, I can do it in my fantasy league. Just great. Really disturbing, isn't it? And on top of that - I thought LA was getting taken in the deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEC=UGA Posted December 9, 2011 Share Posted December 9, 2011 Who the hell is this "David Stern" of whom you speak? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted December 9, 2011 Share Posted December 9, 2011 Who the hell is this "David Stern" of whom you speak? World famous ghey midget. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEC=UGA Posted December 9, 2011 Share Posted December 9, 2011 World famous ghey midget. I just flipped though my porn collection and didn't find him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted December 9, 2011 Share Posted December 9, 2011 Who the hell is this "David Stern" of whom you speak? I think he is an old john lovitz character from SNL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hal9000 Posted December 9, 2011 Share Posted December 9, 2011 In Webster's look up ego-maniacal and there will be a freakin' picture of the guy.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted December 9, 2011 Share Posted December 9, 2011 (edited) Damn you David Stern. All of the little Napoleon commishes that like to dictate how other teams are allowed to manage their teams can now say - well, the NBA does it, so precedence is set where if they do it in the pros, I can do it in my fantasy league. Just great. Hogwash. All you need to do is remind them that your FF league is not some two-bit flea circus like the NBA and you're all good. Edited December 9, 2011 by detlef Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted December 9, 2011 Share Posted December 9, 2011 I just flipped though my porn collection and didn't find him. Check under your "livestock" category. The listing right after "spain". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
montster Posted December 9, 2011 Share Posted December 9, 2011 In my local redraft, instead of replacing an owner who leaves, we like to have the other 11 owners manage the team. It totally works! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted December 9, 2011 Share Posted December 9, 2011 In my local redraft, instead of replacing an owner who leaves, we like to have the other 11 owners manage the team. It totally works! It's really stunning, actually. Moves so bush-league that any self-respecting guy refuses to be a part of for $100 and these guys are doing this crap with a league as large as the NBA. It's truly amazing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted December 9, 2011 Share Posted December 9, 2011 World famous ghey midget. Can we get a confirmation from cliaz? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukon Cornelius Posted December 9, 2011 Share Posted December 9, 2011 In my local redraft, instead of replacing an owner who leaves, we like to have the other 11 owners manage the team. It totally works! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted December 9, 2011 Share Posted December 9, 2011 That was my first reaction too ... but all things aside doesn't the NFL own the Hornets and as such can choose NOT to trade any player on their team? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted December 9, 2011 Share Posted December 9, 2011 Damn you David Stern. All of the little Napoleon commishes that like to dictate how other teams are allowed to manage their teams can now say - well, the NBA does it, so precedence is set where if they do it in the pros, I can do it in my fantasy league. Just great. That's what you get in a league where the league itself runs a team. (Not familiar with why, as I don't follow NBA much.) If you have an absentee owner in a fantasy league the commissioner (one person) should not be responsible for making decisions. This is actually more like allowing a league to veto trades by a vote. And the people who say "It doesn't benefit me so I always vote against it." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted December 9, 2011 Share Posted December 9, 2011 That's what you get in a league where the league itself runs a team. (Not familiar with why, as I don't follow NBA much.) If you have an absentee owner in a fantasy league the commissioner (one person) should not be responsible for making decisions. This is actually more like allowing a league to veto trades by a vote. And the people who say "It doesn't benefit me so I always vote against it." In fairness, the Hornets are collectively owned by the other owners in the league but is managed by a GM who works for that team exclusively. Messed up to be sure, but not quite as bad as it seems. At very least, it pales in comparison to Stern vetoing a trade, especially in light of the fact that no shortage of NBA experts have said was by no means lopsided. Hell, how does this help the Hornets. Paul is gone the second his contract is up, which means they'll get nothing for him. As it is, they get Lamar Odom and two big men who are not household names but hughly capable players. LA, meanwhile, is giving up two starters, one to Houston and one to NO. Seriously, it's exactly the type of trade that people here would be wondering who actually got the better deal and, thus, why it's even being discussed at all. In fact, many think the Hornets did well enough in the deal that it sort of undermines any conspiracy theories about the team being owned by the league and how that may have affected the ruling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Country Posted December 9, 2011 Author Share Posted December 9, 2011 That was my first reaction too ... but all things aside doesn't the NFL own the Hornets and as such can choose NOT to trade any player on their team? The NBA does indeed own it, however all thorughout have said that the management team in place was allowed to run the team as they saw fit. The league was also appraised of the negotiations throughout and had confirmed to multiple league executives, not just those involved in this particular deal, that Dell Demps, the team GM did have the authority to execute and make a deal. The deal was agreed to by all parties involved, from what I heard the league accepted it but then David Stern stepped in and nixed it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Country Posted December 9, 2011 Author Share Posted December 9, 2011 In fairness, the Hornets are collectively owned by the other owners in the league but is managed by a GM who works for that team exclusively. Messed up to be sure, but not quite as bad as it seems. At very least, it pales in comparison to Stern vetoing a trade, especially in light of the fact that no shortage of NBA experts have said was by no means lopsided. Hell, how does this help the Hornets. Paul is gone the second his contract is up, which means they'll get nothing for him. As it is, they get Lamar Odom and two big men who are not household names but hughly capable players. LA, meanwhile, is giving up two starters, one to Houston and one to NO. Seriously, it's exactly the type of trade that people here would be wondering who actually got the better deal and, thus, why it's even being discussed at all. In fact, many think the Hornets did well enough in the deal that it sort of undermines any conspiracy theories about the team being owned by the league and how that may have affected the ruling. Not to turn this into an NBA discussion, but yes, most "ekspurts" agree that it was a pretty dang good deal across the board. The Hornets were receiveing 3 starting players (Odom, Martin and Scola) and a backup PG and a 1st round pick for a player with 66 games left on his contract who had already stated he would not be resigning with the team. Talk about a freaking steal for the Hornets. I know, based on the letter that Dan Gilbert, owner of the Cavs, sent to Stern asking for the trade to be reviewed/reversed, one of the issues was that in addition to getting Paul, the Lakers essentially got about $40 million in cap relief over the next several years in salary savings and reduced luxury tax.... which... guess what, if they have to pay, gets distributed to the smaller market teams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted December 9, 2011 Share Posted December 9, 2011 Not to turn this into an NBA discussion, but yes, most "ekspurts" agree that it was a pretty dang good deal across the board. The Hornets were receiveing 3 starting players (Odom, Martin and Scola) and a backup PG and a 1st round pick for a player with 66 games left on his contract who had already stated he would not be resigning with the team. Talk about a freaking steal for the Hornets. I know, based on the letter that Dan Gilbert, owner of the Cavs, sent to Stern asking for the trade to be reviewed/reversed, one of the issues was that in addition to getting Paul, the Lakers essentially got about $40 million in cap relief over the next several years in salary savings and reduced luxury tax.... which... guess what, if they have to pay, gets distributed to the smaller market teams. So the Lakers, who apparently realize they're about to go over the cap and have to pay out a bunch of jack to everyone are not allowed to rectify the situation? Do I understand that correctly? Dude, how effed up is that? I would have thought the luxury tax thing was put in place to discourage teams from running up their pay-rolls not simply as a means of fleecing certain teams out of some money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grogansghost Posted December 9, 2011 Share Posted December 9, 2011 i think part of the league's thinking in nixing the trade was that the team would be more valuable to prospective buyers with Paul there. even if the team was more competitive after the trade a big name is what draws at the gate. where that reasoning falls short is: 1) they haven't been able to sell the team even with Paul there 2) any prospective owner now knows that Paul won't be staying. to me theyve just delayed Pauls leaving and made it tougher to find a new owner. is the league now going to keep Paul from going anywhere? who's going to offer a better trade? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted December 9, 2011 Share Posted December 9, 2011 (edited) my perception is that this is the league's lame way of putting its foot down on the phenomenon of all these prima donna players trying to create these "super teams" in the larger markets. they realize this phenomenon is really hurting the league and its image outside of those larger markets. but shooting down this trade doesn't fix the larger problem even a little bit. if paul just waits until the end of the season and bolts, that certainly doesn't help the hornets any. maybe david stern just wants to see him end up in new york instead of LA? Edited December 9, 2011 by Azazello1313 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
untateve Posted December 9, 2011 Share Posted December 9, 2011 the nba sucks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Country Posted December 9, 2011 Author Share Posted December 9, 2011 is the league now going to keep Paul from going anywhere? who's going to offer a better trade? Well, they can't exactly accept another offer else I would think they are opening themselves up to lawsuits by the owners and accusations that rather than players dictating where they are going to play, it is Stern trying to dictate it. There were obviously multiple deals on the table. Now when he leaves at the end of the season, the Hornets get nothing for him instead of having received 3 starters, the backup PG AND a 1st round pick. my perception is that this is the league's lame way of putting its foot down on the phenomenon of all these prima donna players trying to create these "super teams" in the larger markets. they realize this phenomenon is really hurting the league and its image outside of those larger markets. but shooting down this trade doesn't fix the larger problem even a little bit. if paul just waits until the end of the season and bolts, that certainly doesn't help the hornets any. maybe david stern just wants to see him end up in new york instead of LA? Problem is that if the Knicks do indeed sign Tyson Chandler, they no longer have the cap room to sign Chris Paul. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted December 9, 2011 Share Posted December 9, 2011 my perception is that this is the league's lame way of putting its foot down on the phenomenon of all these prima donna players trying to create these "super teams" in the larger markets. they realize this phenomenon is really hurting the league and its image outside of those larger markets. but shooting down this trade doesn't fix the larger problem even a little bit. if paul just waits until the end of the season and bolts, that certainly doesn't help the hornets any. maybe david stern just wants to see him end up in new york instead of LA? There's a good article on SI.com about how the league has been star driven to this nature even before the Bird/Magic arrival. I actually didn't realize it and they tossed around a few names that surprised me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted December 9, 2011 Share Posted December 9, 2011 That was my first reaction too ... but all things aside doesn't the NFL own the Hornets and as such can choose NOT to trade any player on their team? I am quite sure the NFL does not own the Hornets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.