LeBron FA saga is old to say the least; He need to man up...

[WiggyRuss]

Do you even know what the basketball reason were? Does anyone?

Stern vetoed it because of the timing and bitchiness of a couple owners. It had nothing to do with the players involved or the perceived resell value of the franchise. I haven't changed my mind. There was no owner's meeting, or vote, like you contend.

wait you just quoted something as saying it was "purely basketball reasons"

just to be clear-- which one are you picking? like i said--- think hard - becuase you keep flip-flopping and it doesnt look like you know what you are talkng about.



when did i say there was a vote of the owners? I said that Gilbert discusssed it with a "vast majority of owners" and that htey agreed with him---- is that what you are disagreeing with? So you argument is that "bitchiness of a couple owners" - of Cuban and Gilbert- was the reason the deal was vetoed...that Gilbert and Cuban alone have SOO MUCH POWER over Stern they can say--- " Ya know- none of the other owners have a problem with this- but Me and Mark do- so veto the deal and screw the Lakers since we are out to get them!"--- and Stern said "Ya know Mark and Dan- none of the other owners are saying ANYTHING about it- but I like you guys a lot! Ill veto it JUST BECAUSE ITS YOU TWO!!!" LOL


ALL of the owners are together for an owners meeting in NY--- BUT ONLY Cuban and Gilbert talked about the deal and told Stern to veto it- and like a good little boy- Stern listened to the MSOT POWERFUL OWNERS IN THE SPORT- and vetoed the deal and said screw Buss and the Lakers!! lol--- do you realize how dumb that sounds?

cmon man....get a clue and stick to ONE story that at least has a SHRED of actual truth to it.

 

[lakersrule]

wait you just quoted something as saying it was "purely basketball reasons"

just to be clear-- which one are you picking? like i said--- think hard - becuase you keep flip-flopping and it doesnt look like you know what you are talkng about.



when did i say there was a vote of the owners? I said that Gilbert discusssed it with a "vast majority of owners" and that htey agreed with him---- is that what you are disagreeing with? So you argument is that "bitchiness of a couple owners" - of Cuban and Gilbert- was the reason the deal was vetoed...that Gilbert and Cuban alone have SOO MUCH POWER over Stern they can say--- " Ya know- none of the other owners have a problem with this- but Me and Mark do- so veto the deal and screw the Lakers since we are out to get them!"--- and Stern said "Ya know Mark and Dan- none of the other owners are saying ANYTHING about it- but I like you guys a lot! Ill veto it JUST BECAUSE ITS YOU TWO!!!" LOL


ALL of the owners are together for an owners meeting in NY--- BUT ONLY Cuban and Gilbert talked about the deal and told Stern to veto it- and like a good little boy- Stern listened to the MSOT POWERFUL OWNERS IN THE SPORT- and vetoed the deal and said screw Buss and the Lakers!! lol--- do you realize how dumb that sounds?

cmon man....get a clue and stick to ONE story that at least has a SHRED of actual truth to it.

I haven't flip flopped on anything. My opinion has always been the same. I can't help if you lack reading comprehension skills.

 

[WiggyRuss]

I haven't flip flopped on anything. My opinion has always been the same. I can't help if you lack reading comprehension skills.

AND HERE IT COMES-- I CANT HELP IF U DONT UNDERSTAND

dude-

you say that it was for "purely basketball reasons" in one post


and then say- its becuase of Cuban and Gilbert.....lol.....ya knowI have to agree with you i guess- Cuban and Gilbert have SOOO MUCH influence over the league they can just clal the commissioner and tell him to veto deals and they get vetoed.....Imagine how influential Dan Gilbert is to have that type of power !! to SINGLE handedly (WHOOPS- WITH MARK CUBAN- not singlehandedly- 2 GUYS, lol) to send the Lakers into the death spiral they have been in since the trade was vetoed....you better not get on DAns bad side with that type of power where he can just call up the commissioner and get deals vetoed whenever he wants!!! YOU WISH your owner had that type of power !! LOL...unreal.....

 

[tlance]

do the rest of you lakers fans agree with Lakersrule?

that none of the owners weighed in- that Stern acted on his own for pure basketball reasons when vetoing the deal?

I think most objective parties will agree with you on this one Wiggy.

This would have gone down as one of the worst deals in league history, not just because of the players but because of the $. Never do you see a team acquiring the best player and cutting $20 million off payroll at the same time, without giving up other significant assets.

Laker fans are still pissed, as they should be, but I tend to agree that Gilbert was the voice of the mob.

It is ironic, however, how outspoken Gilbert was against possible super teams during the last CBA negotiations. Now, the Cavs have their own super team and are well above the luxury line. You think Gilbert regrets pushing so hard there? Don't think for a second that the Tristan Thompson contract is not LeBron's way of sticking it to an owner he has no respect for.

I don't have an issue with how Gilbert acted when the CP3 deal went down, but I do think he is a terrible hipocrite for pushing so hard to punish luxury tax teams, then becoming one himself.

 

[WiggyRuss]

I think most objective parties will agree with you on this one Wiggy.

This would have gone down as one of the worst deals in league history, not just because of the players but because of the $. Never do you see a team acquiring the best player and cutting $20 million off payroll at the same time, without giving up other significant assets.

Laker fans are still pissed, as they should be, but I tend to agree that Gilbert was the voice of the mob.

It is ironic, however, how outspoken Gilbert was against possible super teams during the last CBA negotiations. Now, the Cavs have their own super team and are well above the luxury line. You think Gilbert regrets pushing so hard there? Don't think for a second that the Tristan Thompson contract is not LeBron's way of sticking it to an owner he has no respect for.

I don't have an issue with how Gilbert acted when the CP3 deal went down, but I do think he is a terrible hipocrite for pushing so hard to punish luxury tax teams, then becoming one himself.

i just dont understand what is hypocritical about it considering he is more than willing to pay the punitive tax.

I agree with Dan and the other owners that passed the CBA that the tax should be more punitive.....if Gilbert cries about it in the future- then FOR SURE he is a hypocrite--- if he keeps writing HUMONGOUS checks that cheap skates like Arison NEVER WILL on the same level i dont know how you dont see that he played it perfectly.

 

[SJ76]

Lebron must really hate Steph Curry

Hes the reason Bron will never again see a Title and/or an MVP

Lebronda is getting scared he's not going to win the NBA Finals this year and is already thinking of making "other plans".

Gee I've seen this movie before.

 

[lakersrule]

AND HERE IT COMES-- I CANT HELP IF U DONT UNDERSTAND

dude-

you say that it was for "purely basketball reasons" in one post


and then say- its becuase of Cuban and Gilbert.....lol.....ya knowI have to agree with you i guess- Cuban and Gilbert have SOOO MUCH influence over the league they can just clal the commissioner and tell him to veto deals and they get vetoed.....Imagine how influential Dan Gilbert is to have that type of power !! to SINGLE handedly (WHOOPS- WITH MARK CUBAN- not singlehandedly- 2 GUYS, lol) to send the Lakers into the death spiral they have been in since the trade was vetoed....you better not get on DAns bad side with that type of power where he can just call up the commissioner and get deals vetoed whenever he wants!!! YOU WISH your owner had that type of power !! LOL...unreal.....

I never said it was for basketball reasons. I was highlighting a quote from a NBA spokesperson in regards to your claim. My opinion hasn't changed.

 

[lakersrule]

I think most objective parties will agree with you on this one Wiggy.

This would have gone down as one of the worst deals in league history, not just because of the players but because of the $. Never do you see a team acquiring the best player and cutting $20 million off payroll at the same time, without giving up other significant assets.

Laker fans are still pissed, as they should be, but I tend to agree that Gilbert was the voice of the mob.

It is ironic, however, how outspoken Gilbert was against possible super teams during the last CBA negotiations. Now, the Cavs have their own super team and are well above the luxury line. You think Gilbert regrets pushing so hard there? Don't think for a second that the Tristan Thompson contract is not LeBron's way of sticking it to an owner he has no respect for.

I don't have an issue with how Gilbert acted when the CP3 deal went down, but I do think he is a terrible hipocrite for pushing so hard to punish luxury tax teams, then becoming one himself.

They gave up their second and third best players. How is that not significant?

 

[WiggyRuss]

I never said it was for basketball reasons. I was highlighting a quote from a NBA spokesperson in regards to your claim. My opinion hasn't changed.

ok....so you think Gilbert and Cuban have so much power that they can just call up Stern and get a deal vetoed because they dont like it...cool! Im glad you have so much respect for the great power and influence Dan Gilbert wields in the NBA!

 

[tlance]

They gave up their second and third best players. How is that not significant?

Assets other than players. They saved $ and traded a very good player (Gasol) who NO was not even getting, and a fading player (Odom), for a superstar. By other assets, I am referring to picks and other future considerations.

 

[SJ76]

Lebron just said he would take a pay cut to play one or two season with Melo, CP3 and Wade. I can't wait until this happens to see what kind of clusterfuck that ends up to be.

The NBA is becoming a shit show. At least Golden St made good draft picks and key free agents to make their bad ass team.

I say put the pussies together and they still don't win it.

Lebron doesn't get it. He must have moved around a lot as a kid.

How long before he bails on his teammates like he did in the Cleveland/Boston playoff series before he went to Miami?

 

[lakersrule]

Assets other than players. They saved $ and traded a very good player (Gasol) who NO was not even getting, and a fading player (Odom), for a superstar. By other assets, I am referring to picks and other future considerations.

Fading? He was just the Sixth Man of the Year and had one his best seasons ever.

Gasol just a very good player? Not a top big man in the league? Shit, when people want to discount Kobe's career, they always mention how he's never won without playing alongside one of the best bigs in the league.

It's funny how people's perceptions of players change when they are on the Lakers versus when they are not.

 

[tlance]

Fading? He was just the Sixth Man of the Year and had one his best seasons ever.

Gasol just a very good player? Not a top big man in the league? Shit, when people want to discount Kobe's career, they always mention how he's never won without playing alongside one of the best bigs in the league.

It's funny how people's perceptions of players change when they are on the Lakers versus when they are not.

If the trade was not favorable for the Lakers, then why are you still pissed about it years later?

The whole point is that the deal was awful for NO, the team giving by far the best player, and the $ saved opened a window for the Lakers to get yet another star who was perceived to be greater than Gasol at the time.

 

[trojanfan12]

Frankly, it could be argued that the Lakers gave up too much to get him.

Funny thing about that part of the quote is that I wondered the same thing when the trade was announced. I assumed that the Lakers would have made other moves, but I felt that giving up Gasol and Odom was too much for CP3.

Minus other moves, I just didn't see how it made the Lakers better.

 

[trojanfan12]

And the notion that Gilbert is motivated by an extra 2-3 million in income by lux. tax sharing in a single season is completely and totally assinine for a man with a net worth of over 4 billion. Just think of how dumb that contention is- especially considering the lux. tax spending he is paying- and having the highest payroll in the league.

Yet, that's exactly part of what he was crying about. And you're full of shit thinking he didn't care about those extra millions. He may be worth $4 billion, but he doesn't want to have to use that money to pay his teams salary, unless he's a bigger moron than he shows in the letter.

If he is so willing to spend, why wasn't he dipping into his own money to improve the roster during the 4 years that Lebron was in Miami and the Cavs were in the lottery. Remember how they were going to win a title before he did?

 

[tlance]

Funny thing about that part of the quote is that I wondered the same thing when the trade was announced. I assumed that the Lakers would have made other moves, but I felt that giving up Gasol and Odom was too much for CP3.

Minus other moves, I just didn't see how it made the Lakers better.

That is the whole point though. Those other moves were coming thanks to the $ they were saving. Their championship window had closed with the roster they had.

Again though, this is not about whether or not the deal was good for the Lakers.

 

[trojanfan12]

hey if thats how you want to believe it that just cuts the argument TOTALLY my way and 100% TOTALLY AND COMPLETELY absolves Gilbert and Cuban of any influence. Thats cool by me if you want to put it 100% on Stern....

No it doesn't, it does the exact opposite. If the owners never discussed it, it means that Gilbert and Cuban were the only owners that bitched and cried. The other owners never expressed an opinion.

Basically, it means Gilbert was full of shit when he said that the vast majority of owners agreed with him.

 

[WiggyRuss]

Funny thing about that part of the quote is that I wondered the same thing when the trade was announced. I assumed that the Lakers would have made other moves, but I felt that giving up Gasol and Odom was too much for CP3.

Minus other moves, I just didn't see how it made the Lakers better.

then why was it vetoed?

 

[lakersrule]

If the trade was not favorable for the Lakers, then why are you still pissed about it years later?

The whole point is that the deal was awful for NO, the team giving by far the best player, and the $ saved opened a window for the Lakers to get yet another star who was perceived to be greater than Gasol at the time.

I never said it wasn't favorable for the Lakers. I just contend it wasn't awful for New Orleans. They received a nice haul for CP3. Other rival executives thought so. Ultimately it worked out good because they were able to draft Davis, but getting the #1 pick was never guaranteed in the trade. Took some luck there. Very speculative to make any conclusions about what the state of the franchise would look like now if the Lakers trade were allowed.

The money saved wasn't opening any windows to acquire D12. The Lakers would still be trading Bynum and other assets for him.

 

[WiggyRuss]

No it doesn't, it does the exact opposite. If the owners never discussed it, it means that Gilbert and Cuban were the only owners that bitched and cried. The other owners never expressed an opinion.

Basically, it means Gilbert was full of shit when he said that the vast majority of owners agreed with him.

so you are saying that Gilbert and Cuban by themselves were enough to get the Commissioner of the NBA to veto a trade? lol...do you know how dumb that sounds?---- hey- if you want to give Gilbert that much power- great...i just think its delusional. - as would any other sane people.