The "Real" reason why the CP3 trade to LA was canned...

[SHAQATTACK]

I think it was canned to break up the DH12 intention to join CP3 to make another NY YANKEE type juggernaunt . Another major market once again throwing its weight around was more than the rest of the league owners could bare.

This was probally the big sticking point to the agreement to begin with.

The majority of owners didn't like it and set off a firestorm under Sterns tail.

Now that D12 is probally not available for LA, is LA still HOT to have CP3 ?  They traded two of their best bigs .

The Whole thing of CP3 is really about DWIGHT HOWARD.....LA wanted CP3 to secure DH12 and dominate the league for the next 10 years.

If Howard joins NJ , then the temporary stoppage of CP3 to LA , has screwed LA's master plan ( which we all knew 2 years ago )

[Moranis]

Good post.  It is poor management that ruins teams.  Teams like Orlando, Cleveland, Toronto would have a shot to keep their superstars if they built good teams around them.

Did anyone else notice that without LeBron, the Cavs are the worst team in the NBA?  The Spurs would never have been the worst team without Duncan.  The Thunder would never have been the worst team without Durant.  The Lakers would never have been the worst team without Kobe.

A novel concept for small market teams trying to keep a superstar - build a good team!

  Orlando went to the Finals once, the ECF once and have won a fair amount of playoff series with Howard. It's not like with KG, where they were generally trying to claw their way into the playoffs every year. And the Cavs were built to be the supporting cast for the most ball dominant player in the league. GMs can't properly build around these players because they're always under these deadlines. "Show me improvement by such and such a date or I'll opt out/refuse to extend/leave the franchise". I blame the players more than the GMs.

The Cavs let Boozer go by trying to usurp the system.  Perhaps if they just kept Boozer their entire fate might have been different.  Trading for Jamison and Williams were terrible moves.  The reality is the Cavs just made a lot of poor trades and moves when they should have just been creating cap space and trying to do what Miami did or should have been adding the correct pieces.

[BballTim]

Good post.  It is poor management that ruins teams.  Teams like Orlando, Cleveland, Toronto would have a shot to keep their superstars if they built good teams around them.

Did anyone else notice that without LeBron, the Cavs are the worst team in the NBA?  The Spurs would never have been the worst team without Duncan.  The Thunder would never have been the worst team without Durant.  The Lakers would never have been the worst team without Kobe.

A novel concept for small market teams trying to keep a superstar - build a good team!

  Orlando went to the Finals once, the ECF once and have won a fair amount of playoff series with Howard. It's not like with KG, where they were generally trying to claw their way into the playoffs every year. And the Cavs were built to be the supporting cast for the most ball dominant player in the league. GMs can't properly build around these players because they're always under these deadlines. "Show me improvement by such and such a date or I'll opt out/refuse to extend/leave the franchise". I blame the players more than the GMs.

The Cavs let Boozer go by trying to usurp the system.  Perhaps if they just kept Boozer their entire fate might have been different.  Trading for Jamison and Williams were a terrible move.  .  The reality is the Cavs just made a lot of poor trades and moves when they should have just been creating cap space and trying to do what Miami did. 

  The Cavs and Boozer were both trying to game the system, their mistake was trusting him. And I'd be willing to bet that those trades were in response to threats/tantrums by LeBron because he didn't have the patience to have a team built around him. If they had the years Miami did James would have left sooner.

[celtsfan84]

Thank you for the excellent post.  There are about a million things Cleveland could have done that were better than what they eventually did to build their team.

If LeBron is the most ball dominant player in the league, why did it make sense to stick him with a scoring point (Mo Williams), a scoring four (Antawn Jamison), and a scoring five (Shaq)?  Wouldn't it have made more sense to surround him with shooters, surround him with defenders, surround him with anything but over-the-hill scorers?

Also, Orlando won as many series as they did with Dwight almost solely because of Dwight.  Can you honestly tell me that the Q-Rich, Duhon, and Arenas moves were good moves, regardless of the timetable given to the franchise?

Acquiring Arenas, signing Richardson, signing Duhon, acquiring Turkoglu, acquiring Shaq, acquiring Jamison, acquiring Mo Williams were all poort moves.  Why should LeBron or Dwight be forced to play places where they don't want to play?

Have you ever left a place of employment or are you still at your first job?

[action781]

Thank you for the excellent post.  There are about a million things Cleveland could have done that were better than what they eventually did to build their team.

If LeBron is the most ball dominant player in the league, why did it make sense to stick him with a scoring point (Mo Williams), a scoring four (Antawn Jamison), and a scoring five (Shaq)?  Wouldn't it have made more sense to surround him with shooters, surround him with defenders, surround him with anything but over-the-hill scorers?

Well, you mentioned surround him with shooters, but Mo Williams, Jamison, Delonte, Anthony Parker, Ilgauskas, and others are all shooters.  You mentioned surround him with defenders and they gave him Varejao, Parker, Larry Hughes, and Ben Wallace.

You are right in saying "anything but over-the-hill".  The problem with that is they were in need of veterans.  If they got young guys, they would have been (rightly) critiqued for "getting young inexperienced players when they are in a position to win".  So they needed to go after vets, but they just didn't grab the right ones.

They really needed to have pulled off that trade for Amare.

[action781]

Why should LeBron or Dwight be forced to play places where they don't want to play?

Have you ever left a place of employment or are you still at your first job?

Absolutely right, the players should have the choice to play where they want.  The problem is that an entire private sector doesn't depend on each company to survive for the health of all the companies in that sector.  If one company goes under, that's actually better for all the other companies in that sector.

In the NBA, while every team wants to be the best, it also needs every other team to at least survive.  If some teams go under, that means less games played, which means less $.

Players absolutely should be allowed to go where they want.  But the NBA really should have tried to make fixes to the system to give players incentive to not all join one team.  Give them the option to, but incentive not to.  Just like any private company would do for me if they truly didn't want me to move to Florida for another job.  Only problem is that the NBA teams are restricted in how much they can do.  I'm disappointed the NBA didn't address this in the lockout.

[celtsfan84]

Fair point. I should have said quality shooters and quality defenders.  And that is also assuming that LeBron is the most ball dominant player in the league, as mentioned above.  I was basing my recommendations off of that assumption, which I believe is wrong to begin with.

Here is the starting lineup for the team that LeBron carried to the finals:

PG - Larry Hughes
SG - Sasha Pavolvic
SF - LeBron James
PF - Anderson Varejao
C - Zydrunas Ilgauskas

Within a year or two, LeBron was the only starter on that team for any team in the league.  Let's call 2007 Lebron and 2007 Duncan equals for the moment.  Would you rather have Parker and Ginobili or anyone on the Cavs roster?  Why do you think Duncan stayed and LeBron left?

[celtsfan84]

acton781, you make a very fair and rational point.  Another poster, forgetting who, mentioned teams getting an additional draft pick or something when a high level free agent leaves.

The NFL gives out compensatory picks for a free agent departure based on quality.  Maybe giving Cleveland, Toronto, Orlando an extra lottery pick would help a quicker rebuild.

[Greenbean]

Fair point. I should have said quality shooters and quality defenders.  And that is also assuming that LeBron is the most ball dominant player in the league, as mentioned above.  I was basing my recommendations off of that assumption, which I believe is wrong to begin with.

Here is the starting lineup for the team that LeBron carried to the finals:

PG - Larry Hughes
SG - Sasha Pavolvic
SF - LeBron James
PF - Anderson Varejao
C - Zydrunas Ilgauskas

Within a year or two, LeBron was the only starter on that team for any team in the league.  Let's call 2007 Lebron and 2007 Duncan equals for the moment.  Would you rather have Parker and Ginobili or anyone on the Cavs roster?  Why do you think Duncan stayed and LeBron left?

Yeah it's all about management.

Orlando shot itself in the foot with bad contracts now they cant build around Dwight.

The Hornets dont even have an owner right now.


Why would these guys want to stay?

[Greenbean]

acton781, you make a very fair and rational point.  Another poster, forgetting who, mentioned teams getting an additional draft pick or something when a high level free agent leaves.

The NFL gives out compensatory picks for a free agent departure based on quality.  Maybe giving Cleveland, Toronto, Orlando an extra lottery pick would help a quicker rebuild.

Not lottery but just player's new team's pick...good point.