Dan Gilbert Appreciation Thread

Ronito · Post #1 » by **Ronito** » Fri Dec 9, 2011 7:07 am

So, most of Nets fans just experienced a full 180 - from "I'm done with the NBA phase" to now, "I don't know what happened, and I'm fine with it".

We saw the reports of Lakers trying to get CP3 and D12, and we brushed it off because of how outlandish it was. I mean, it was probably some media driven bull like Bynum-for-Howard swap. Two days later, the Lakers acquire Chris Paul for a pair of courtside, season tickets, a pair of old, soft players and best of all: get to keep their best trade asset(s). Yep, it was going to happen.

While the owners did absolutely nothing of significance during a five month lockout to protect themselves from this. And, as usual, it was going to bite small-market teams and fans in the ass. But, then, there was a man who loves to pen letters who took a stand. You, Mr. Dan Gilbert, I would like to thank for saving the NBA.

Let us discuss, Dan Gilbert being the second-best owner since Prokhorov acquired his passport.

Now this thread isn't about the Nets getting Dwight Howard, that is yet to come. We're also basketball fans, not just Nets fans, so I'm glad the NBA is saved. I also don't want to get my hopes up and see them crushed, per usual. But, I'm still excited and I just can't hide it.

Discuss.

jeff1624 · Post #2 » by **jeff1624** » Fri Dec 9, 2011 9:21 am

I'm sorry but that letter Gilbert sent to Stern was one of the stupidest things I've ever read. I was against this trade but that letter almost makes me wish it had gone through.

Netaman · Post #3 » by **Netaman** » Fri Dec 9, 2011 10:27 am

Let me say this about the trade that wasn't, I don't like it for NO at all - BUT - I also don't think it was as big of a homerun for the Lakers as it appeared. Getting Paul would have been great and all, but losing Odom and Gasol would have really hurt them.

Now, had they also gotten Howard because Bynum is the most overated trade asset of all time, it would have been ridiculous. Without that though, I think they would have reduced their chances at winning a title in the immediate future. As great as Paul is, without significant followup moves replacing Odom/Gasol would have been a very tall task with limited resources.

Talentfull · Post #4 » by **Talentfull** » Fri Dec 9, 2011 10:42 am

I don't really like it either. It seems to me the deal was more or less finalized. Granted I didn't like that trade, I don't like the fact that they killed it last minute because the owners decided to wine about it. Let Demps do his job in that scenario, they'll have to trade Paul sooner or later anyways. The NBA needs to sell the Hornets ASAP b/c whatever decision they make regarding CP3 would probably be scrutinized regardless.

Netaman · Post #5 » by **Netaman** » Fri Dec 9, 2011 10:52 am

Honestly though, I think the NBA was 100% justified for killing the trade if it was for financial reasons (which it almost undoubtedly was).

I don't know how a team without an owner, in financial peril, owned and operate by the NBA can justify absorbing 70+MM - in any trade.

SpeedyG · Post #6 » by **SpeedyG** » Fri Dec 9, 2011 10:56 am

Talentfull wrote:I don't really like it either. It seems to me the deal was more or less finalized. Granted I didn't like that trade, I don't like the fact that they killed it last minute because the owners decided to wine about it. Let Demps do his job in that scenario, they'll have to trade Paul sooner or later anyways. The NBA needs to sell the Hornets ASAP b/c whatever decision they make regarding CP3 would probably be scrutinized regardless.

You guys are missing the point (and I haven't read Gilbert's letter, but give the source, i'm sure it's probably over the top, but still has a point).

The Hornets have no owners. They are owned collectively by the NBA (and hence, the other owners).

From a business stand point, it makes no sense whatsoever for them to make the deal that they did. And you say, let the GM do his job. Listen, there are very very few GMs in sports who have Full command of his job. The GM doesn't write the check....the OWNER does.

In the Hornets case, that OWNER is the NBA. In the Hornets case, the OWNERS have every right to reject the deal.

This would be no different had King decide "Oh I'm going to give Jason Richardson a MAX deal". He sends that deal to Prok, and Prok will say "Are you kidding? I'm not signing this check!".

That's it. The only difference is that it took awhile for this thing to get rejected because Demps doesn't have direct contact to his "owner".

This was brought up during the deadline with the Kings trade. It was apparent then that the NBA needed to find the Hornets an owner. It is even more apparent now.

SpeedyG · Post #7 » by **SpeedyG** » Fri Dec 9, 2011 10:57 am

So I read Gilbert's letter...lol...not over the top at all.

And in fact pretty much hits the nail right on the head.

bimmer100 · Post #8 » by **bimmer100** » Fri Dec 9, 2011 2:01 pm

Netaman wrote:Honestly though, I think the NBA was 100% justified for killing the trade if it was for financial reasons (which it almost undoubtedly was).

I don't know how a team without an owner, in financial peril, owned and operate by the NBA can justify absorbing 70+MM - in any trade.

So what your saying is that YOU and the owners and STERN will have no problems with the 3 teams restructuring a deal where NO sends more salary out???? Or is the real reason that you dont want CP on the lakers for your own personal agenda, such as Howard signing with the lakers...Lets speak with the truth.

SpeedyG · Post #9 » by **SpeedyG** » Fri Dec 9, 2011 2:18 pm

bimmer100 wrote:
Netaman wrote:Honestly though, I think the NBA was 100% justified for killing the trade if it was for financial reasons (which it almost undoubtedly was).

I don't know how a team without an owner, in financial peril, owned and operate by the NBA can justify absorbing 70+MM - in any trade.

So what your saying is that YOU and the owners and STERN will have no problems with the 3 teams restructuring a deal where NO sends more salary out???? Or is the real reason that you dont want CP on the lakers for your own personal agenda, such as Howard signing with the lakers...Lets speak with the truth.

We won't like a restructured deal, no. Because of the reason you mentioned. However, if something like that was to happen, more than likely, it will largely prohibit the Lakers ability to make a deal for Dwight (because someone like Okafor's contract is coming to them, for example).

They also wouldn't get TE that would allow them to absorb contracts from the Magic (not Hedo or Arenas size, but say...Bass or even Jameer).

Born_Ready · Post #10 » by **Born_Ready** » Fri Dec 9, 2011 3:08 pm

he's a racist.... :thumbsup: