No Question. Stern Did What Was Best For Hornet's Future

[Kane3387]

Some of you guys are funny.

Who says the right way to trade your franchise player is to get a stud young guy and a boatload of draft picks?

Is that written in some manual somewhere?

1.) You ain't ever going to trade away your franchise player and get anything back in return that will make you a contender...that just doesn't happen, you never get more return on your dollar when you deal away a player who doesn't want to play on your team.

2.) Trading away your franchise player for young, unproven stud player or draft picks are always a huge risk.....this risk will also not draw buyers. It might draw fans who think the future is how you make money, but it isn't. How you make money is how your present state of business is currently situated.

3.) I could have sworn the reasoning Stern opposed the trade was because he did not like players dictating where they wanted to go. That is not preserving any benefit for NO Hornets. That is preserving Stern and some of the other owners' personal ego.

I don't think anyone would disagree that ego and sticking it to the players made this a little sweet BUT I disagree with you that the way to go isn't to get young players, picks, and cap space especially with this draft on the horizon.

[Kane3387]

“Since the NBA purchased the New Orleans Hornets, final responsibility for significant management decisions lies with the Commissioner’s Office in consultation with team chairman Jac Sperling. All decisions are made on the basis of what is in the best interests of the Hornets. In the case of the trade proposal that was made to the Hornets for Chris Paul, we decided, free from the influence of other NBA owners, that the team was better served with Chris in a Hornets uniform than by the outcome of the terms of that trade.”

http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/12/09/david-stern-releases-statement-on-chris-paul-trade-veto?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Pretty much he is saying that trade sucks for the Hornets in the long term and that is all we are concerned about.

[Evantime34]

“Since the NBA purchased the New Orleans Hornets, final responsibility for significant management decisions lies with the Commissioner’s Office in consultation with team chairman Jac Sperling. All decisions are made on the basis of what is in the best interests of the Hornets. In the case of the trade proposal that was made to the Hornets for Chris Paul, we decided, free from the influence of other NBA owners, that the team was better served with Chris in a Hornets uniform than by the outcome of the terms of that trade.”

http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/12/09/david-stern-releases-statement-on-chris-paul-trade-veto?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Pretty much he is saying that trade sucks for the Hornets in the long term and that is all we are concerned about.

I think that deal kept New Orleans in the playoffs. When Paul leaves after the year is over they are going to be mega screwed for the future.

I hate the Lakers as much as anyone but this is a fair trade.

[PosImpos]

To those who thought this was a good trade. Follow me here. We are on the verge of one of the greatest drafts ever. Right? A draft loaded with talent!!! Now why the heck would the NBA want to won a franchise that is losing their top player and on top of that receives enough talent to basically eliminate them from having the chance to draft any of the potential great players in this draft?

That's insanity!

Scola, Martin, and Dragic aren't worth a guy like Barnes, Sullinger, etc. It's not even close from a selling standpoint for the NBA.

I don't care how good these guys are presently. Top 10 or not. This is a long term business decision. Do you think a guy who buys the Hornets is only concerned with this upcoming season and getting to the playoffs?... Exactly!

The league is better off if the Hornets are complete trash this year, get a chance to draft a top five player like Anthony Davis, put him on a rookie deal, and have loads of cap room. The NBA isn't playing checkers. This is chess. This is ten years they're thinking about. Not one.

That NY pick will be garbage. Scola is 32. Where will he be in 2 years at 34 with two more years on his deal? Odom will be happy in NO? What are you realistically going to get for one of these guys that compares to a top 5 2012 pick? Kevin Martin? The dude is made of glass and this is the best he will ever be. Dragic? Seriously? He ain't no starter.

NO needs to dump salary, acquire some good picks, and bring in a solid young player.

Honestly I think Stern wants to do the Celtic deal if we agree to take back a bad contract.

Rondo = young player
Clips pick = top 15 choice in 2012
Celtics take back salary = salary relief in future for NO
NO = lottery team

No way Stern wants two on the wrong side of 30 PFs, a breakable SG, and a trashy pick in the 20s over a potential top 8 pick in maybe the deepest draft ever for this franchise. LOL not while he is the owner of it at least.

Yep, I agree with this entire thought process.

yeah, kane nailed it.

[Kane3387]

“Since the NBA purchased the New Orleans Hornets, final responsibility for significant management decisions lies with the Commissioner’s Office in consultation with team chairman Jac Sperling. All decisions are made on the basis of what is in the best interests of the Hornets. In the case of the trade proposal that was made to the Hornets for Chris Paul, we decided, free from the influence of other NBA owners, that the team was better served with Chris in a Hornets uniform than by the outcome of the terms of that trade.”

http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/12/09/david-stern-releases-statement-on-chris-paul-trade-veto?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Pretty much he is saying that trade sucks for the Hornets in the long term and that is all we are concerned about.

I think that deal kept New Orleans in the playoffs. When Paul leaves after the year is over they are going to be mega screwed for the future.

I hate the Lakers as much as anyone but this is a fair trade.

No way Paul isn't traded. No way. Just not for a deal that screws the Hornet's cap for the next few years.

[ManUp]

This morning after letting the Laker hate tone down and looking at the trade. I have to admit the Hornets got a decent return, although I don't see why Houston does this trade.

Dragic, Martin, Odom, and Scola is solid the only thing I have to say is that it makes no sense for rebuilding team. As for the Rockets I don't see why they'd give up a 18/8 big man in Scola, a 20+ scoring big man and Dragic for a 20/10 big in Gasol. Not to mention they'd be helping build a team that they'd have to contend with if they have any real aspirations as a contender. 

[Eja117]

To those who thought this was a good trade. Follow me here. We are on the verge of one of the greatest drafts ever. Right? A draft loaded with talent!!! Now why the heck would the NBA want to won a franchise that is losing their top player and on top of that receives enough talent to basically eliminate them from having the chance to draft any of the potential great players in this draft?

That's insanity!

Scola, Martin, and Dragic aren't worth a guy like Barnes, Sullinger, etc. It's not even close from a selling standpoint for the NBA.

I don't care how good these guys are presently. Top 10 or not. This is a long term business decision. Do you think a guy who buys the Hornets is only concerned with this upcoming season and getting to the playoffs?... Exactly!

The league is better off if the Hornets are complete trash this year, get a chance to draft a top five player like Anthony Davis, put him on a rookie deal, and have loads of cap room. The NBA isn't playing checkers. This is chess. This is ten years they're thinking about. Not one.

That NY pick will be garbage. Scola is 32. Where will he be in 2 years at 34 with two more years on his deal? Odom will be happy in NO? What are you realistically going to get for one of these guys that compares to a top 5 2012 pick? Kevin Martin? The dude is made of glass and this is the best he will ever be. Dragic? Seriously? He ain't no starter.

NO needs to dump salary, acquire some good picks, and bring in a solid young player.

Honestly I think Stern wants to do the Celtic deal if we agree to take back a bad contract.

Rondo = young player
Clips pick = top 15 choice in 2012
Celtics take back salary = salary relief in future for NO
NO = lottery team

No way Stern wants two on the wrong side of 30 PFs, a breakable SG, and a trashy pick in the 20s over a potential top 8 pick in maybe the deepest draft ever for this franchise. LOL not while he is the owner of it at least.

Yep, I agree with this entire thought process.

yeah, kane nailed it.

Well when you put it that way....

[Yoki_IsTheName]

That was a GREAT deal for the Hornets. High caliber players in Scola and Kevin Martin. Dragic is pretty decent. And Lamar Odom And a pick. Lakers get Paul. I don't know why Houston is doing this though. Getting rid of all those to be tied to Gasol and that huge contract.

Then again, this deal shoul've not been vetoed. That's just me.

[wdleehi]

That was a GREAT deal for the Hornets. High caliber players in Scola and Kevin Martin. Dragic is pretty decent. And Lamar Odom And a pick. Lakers get Paul. I don't know why Houston is doing this though. Getting rid of all those to be tied to Gasol and that huge contract.

Then again, this deal shoul've not been vetoed. That's just me.

It should not be vetoed for basketball reasons.


It should never of happened for financial reasons.  The team should be kept very financially and personal flexible as they try and sell it someone. 

[indeedproceed]

“Since the NBA purchased the New Orleans Hornets, final responsibility for significant management decisions lies with the Commissioner’s Office in consultation with team chairman Jac Sperling. All decisions are made on the basis of what is in the best interests of the Hornets. In the case of the trade proposal that was made to the Hornets for Chris Paul, we decided, free from the influence of other NBA owners, that the team was better served with Chris in a Hornets uniform than by the outcome of the terms of that trade.”

http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/12/09/david-stern-releases-statement-on-chris-paul-trade-veto?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Pretty much he is saying that trade sucks for the Hornets in the long term and that is all we are concerned about.

I didn't think that's what he was saying at all. nickagneta I think nailed the reason why the trade was vetoed, and I don't think it was Dan Gilbert, or the actual players coming back that had anything to do with it.

I think it was done purely because if the Hornets traded Chris Paul before a new owner could take the keel, the only thing it could do is drive down the price of the team in the short term. Chris Paul is leaving, that's not the debate. The debate moreso is that if/when he leaves, the new team owner will be able to pull the trigger, so any outcomes of that future trade are just projections, not realities.

Better to hold and sell than trade him now and potentially drive down the return on the team.

[Kane3387]

“Since the NBA purchased the New Orleans Hornets, final responsibility for significant management decisions lies with the Commissioner’s Office in consultation with team chairman Jac Sperling. All decisions are made on the basis of what is in the best interests of the Hornets. In the case of the trade proposal that was made to the Hornets for Chris Paul, we decided, free from the influence of other NBA owners, that the team was better served with Chris in a Hornets uniform than by the outcome of the terms of that trade.”

http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/12/09/david-stern-releases-statement-on-chris-paul-trade-veto?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Pretty much he is saying that trade sucks for the Hornets in the long term and that is all we are concerned about.

I didn't think that's what he was saying at all. nickagneta I think nailed the reason why the trade was vetoed, and I don't think it was Dan Gilbert, or the actual players coming back that had anything to do with it.

I think it was done purely because if the Hornets traded Chris Paul before a new owner could take the keel, the only thing it could do is drive down the price of the team in the short term. Chris Paul is leaving, that's not the debate. The debate moreso is that if/when he leaves, the new team owner will be able to pull the trigger, so any outcomes of that future trade are just projections, not realities.

Better to hold and sell than trade him now and potentially drive down the return on the team.

Are there any prospective buyers at the moment anyway? Are they in negotiations with people? Acquiring an NBA franchise just doesn't happen overnight.

[Ersatz]

That was a GREAT deal for the Hornets. High caliber players in Scola and Kevin Martin. Dragic is pretty decent. And Lamar Odom And a pick. Lakers get Paul. I don't know why Houston is doing this though. Getting rid of all those to be tied to Gasol and that huge contract.

Then again, this deal shoul've not been vetoed. That's just me.

It should not be vetoed for basketball reasons.


It should never of happened for financial reasons.  The team should be kept very financially and personal flexible as they try and sell it someone.  

But it would have been flexible. All of those guys are very tradable, either in some sort of package or individually. That's why it's a great move: you can keep that team and make the playoff, or you can get rid of the parts for picks and cap relief. The trade would have made the Hornets more flexible.

[indeedproceed]

“Since the NBA purchased the New Orleans Hornets, final responsibility for significant management decisions lies with the Commissioner’s Office in consultation with team chairman Jac Sperling. All decisions are made on the basis of what is in the best interests of the Hornets. In the case of the trade proposal that was made to the Hornets for Chris Paul, we decided, free from the influence of other NBA owners, that the team was better served with Chris in a Hornets uniform than by the outcome of the terms of that trade.”

http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/12/09/david-stern-releases-statement-on-chris-paul-trade-veto?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Pretty much he is saying that trade sucks for the Hornets in the long term and that is all we are concerned about.

I didn't think that's what he was saying at all. nickagneta I think nailed the reason why the trade was vetoed, and I don't think it was Dan Gilbert, or the actual players coming back that had anything to do with it.

I think it was done purely because if the Hornets traded Chris Paul before a new owner could take the keel, the only thing it could do is drive down the price of the team in the short term. Chris Paul is leaving, that's not the debate. The debate moreso is that if/when he leaves, the new team owner will be able to pull the trigger, so any outcomes of that future trade are just projections, not realities.

Better to hold and sell than trade him now and potentially drive down the return on the team.

Are there any prospective buyers at the moment anyway? Are they in negotiations with people? Acquiring an NBA franchise just doesn't happen overnight.

The field of prospective owners is pretty small. You have to think that David Stern knows, or has an idea of who will be buying the team, assuming there are viable partners to be had at the moment.

For a league wanting to unload a team onto a new owner and keeping that team's value high and static, keeping Chris Paul is the right move. For expediting the rebuilding process (from a basketball standpoint), trading CP3 is the right move.

[Ersatz]

Completely disagree with the OP. Hornets turned Paul into two-thirds of a playoff-quality lineup: a great scorer and rebounder in Scola, one of the league's most efficient scorers in Martin, and maybe the league's most versatile player in Odom. As far as immediate basketball impact, that's a way better haul than Gasol, Garnett, or Anthony netted.

Again the NBA is trying to sell this team. No luck in doing so yet. So throw immediate basketball impact out the window. It's about making this team more attractive for a buyer and that will likely take time.

The team has not been able to attract a buyer with CP3 on the team. If he was the lure, why haven't they found anyone yet? It's a question of market more than it is the composition of the roster. The team they assembled would have been a playoff team, and a pretty interesting, diverse one at that. Yes, superstars make a big impact, but the team is not re-signing CP3 no matter what, so why not get a decent team out of the deal?

[Who]

The field of prospective owners is pretty small. You have to think that David Stern knows, or has an idea of who will be buying the team, assuming there are viable partners to be had at the moment.

David Stern said there were around 5 prospective owners for the Hornets a while back.

In an interview given in late October, this Jac Sperling (name?) guy said that the number was larger than that.

If they had that many people looking at the team in late October and have had no new updates (at least that I have seen) since ... I have to believe they are still pretty far from selling the team.