Summary/Analysis of the CP3 Fiasco...

[Tave]

that deal was awful for NO, the only people that argue otherwise are Laker fan boys

I can't stand the Lakers and I think it was a decent trade.

[demcanes26]

Dude Kurt Thomas got traded for a first roud pick at the deadline. You telling me a guy that is a top 50-60 player doesn't have value? A guy that's a top 50-60 player on a expiring contract.

You fail to realize that not every situation is going to be the same. A team would need to add another salary with the first round pick assuming he's going to a contender to make the trade actually work. First you would need to find such a team, it's hardly a guarantee.

You act like contending teams don't have expiring contracts? You act like contending teams don't have trade exceptions? The Nets got a first rounder for taking Sasha's contract last season. Trading first round picks are hardly something new. Especially for teams trying to win a title.

[demcanes26]

lol. I figure that. You are saying the Lakers and Hou deal is bad, so I gave you the Boston deal. You can't name one SG or PF who would take a 1 year deal. I am not assuming anything, I am using common sense. The reason you can't name one is because they don't exist. There is not a starting SG or PF they can sign because they have multiple teams bidding on them, so they have OPTIONS. If the Hornets want a Jamal Crawford they have to give him a multy year contract. If they don't want to do that, they can sign Vince Carter.

So common sense is assuming that the Hornets are already set on signing mediocre aging veterans to big contracts?

You can call it mediocre all you want, but it is the BEST ON THE OPEN MARKET. And since it is in the rules for them to spend the money, and they have a need at the position, where do you think they are going to spend da money? I will let you guess.

[Dr Positivity]

Great post

For me, when I heard Pau was in the talks to 3 way to Houston, I begrudgeably accepted that it made sense with the young pieces Houston had built up

When the word came out that it was Martin and Scola, my jaw dropped. Houston should be the one with the win now players, not New Orleans!

I think a good trade for the NOH would be involving Flynn, Terrence Williams, Hasheem Thabeet and one of Donatas Motiejunas/Marcus Morris/Patrick Patterson. The first 3 guys have been deemed total busts but need PT and a new situation and then you get another young big. Add in cash savings and the NY pick and that's what should be expected out of a Paul deal IMO

[Kabookalu]

You act like contending teams don't have expiring contracts? You act like contending teams don't have trade exceptions? The Nets got a first rounder for taking Sasha's contract last season. Trading first round picks are hardly something new. Especially for teams trying to win a title.

And you're doing an awfully lot of assuming, which does not surprise me. I think teams are well aware they have those options available to them for Odom, though that's jumping into the future; the Lakers didn't purposely get stuck into Sasha's contract just so they can see if they can trade him for a first rounder. This is what you're not getting; you're already assuming the Hornets are going to be getting something good in return.

[DreDay]

Probably the best post on the CP3 situation. It baffles me how people like this trade for the Hornets.

[questionmark]

Dude Kurt Thomas got traded for a first roud pick at the deadline. You telling me a guy that is a top 50-60 player doesn't have value? A guy that's a top 50-60 player on a expiring contract.

You fail to realize that not every situation is going to be the same. A team would need to add another salary with the first round pick assuming he's going to a contender to make the trade actually work. First you would need to find such a team, it's hardly a guarantee.

You act like contending teams don't have expiring contracts? You act like contending teams don't have trade exceptions? The Nets got a first rounder for taking Sasha's contract last season. Trading first round picks are hardly something new. Especially for teams trying to win a title.

You still fail to realize that Odom is the ONLY player in this trade where the Hornets have at least a chance (and a slim one) to get something usefull out of, with him most likely just becoming a free agent after the season.
So the Hornets would still have to deal with the rediculous contract of Scola and Martin who has an ok contract, but will probably keep you from tanking your way to Top-3 pick.

The main priority for the Hornets is to be sold AS FAST ASPOSSIBLE! Nothing else. Giving a potential new owner a clean sheet + high draft picks and if possible high potential young guns.

[demcanes26]

You act like contending teams don't have expiring contracts? You act like contending teams don't have trade exceptions? The Nets got a first rounder for taking Sasha's contract last season. Trading first round picks are hardly something new. Especially for teams trying to win a title.

And you're doing an awfully lot of assuming, which does not surprise me. I think teams are well aware they have those options available to them for Odom, though that's jumping into the future; the Lakers didn't purposely get stuck into Sasha's contract just so they can see if they can trade him for a first rounder. This is what you're not getting; you're already assuming the Hornets are going to be getting something good in return.

I am not assuming at all. I am using the history of the NBA. I am not guranteeing anything. I never said he would get traded, I said that it is likely because he is a good player on a expiring contract.

[Kabookalu]

You can call it mediocre all you want, but it is the BEST ON THE OPEN MARKET. And since it is in the rules for them to spend the money, and they have a need at the position, where do you think they are going to spend da money? I will let you guess.

I always find it cute when people think they're commanding me to do something. Again, which I see myself doing often here, they have a need at certain positions, but it doesn't mean they're going to fill them up with mediocre aging veterans on long term contracts. Their goal isn't to field out a balanced starting lineup.

[Kabookalu]

I am not assuming at all. I am using the history of the NBA. I am not guranteeing anything. I never said he would get traded, I said that it is likely because he is a good player on a expiring contract.

I can't think of a situation where a team got themselves an aging veteran that is only above average for the purpose of seeing if they can flip him for a late first rounder. And if it did happen, it happened with an aforementioned trade already planned (Rasheed Wallace to Atlanta). That's also ignoring Luis Scola's terrible contract.

[demcanes26]

You still fail to realize that Odom is the ONLY player in this trade where the Hornets have at least a chance (and a slim one) to get something usefull out of, with him most likely just becoming a free agent after the season.
So the Hornets would still have to deal with the rediculous contract of Scola and Martin who has an ok contract, but will probably keep you from tanking your way to Top-3 pick.

The main priority for the Hornets is to be sold AS FAST ASPOSSIBLE! Nothing else. Giving a potential new owner a clean sheet + high draft picks and if possible high potential young guns.[/quote]

And you fail to realize that it is the less of two evils. Do you want the contracts of Odom, Scola, and Martin or Rondo, Green, (SG), (PF). I think you want the contracts that expire faster.

In a idea world, the Hornets should be able to get expiring contracts, and high draft picks, but teams who usually have that are pretty bad, so I don't see how any team not name the Clippers can give NO what they truely want.

[demcanes26]

You can call it mediocre all you want, but it is the BEST ON THE OPEN MARKET. And since it is in the rules for them to spend the money, and they have a need at the position, where do you think they are going to spend da money? I will let you guess.

I always find it cute when people think they're commanding me to do something. Again, which I see myself doing often here, they have a need at certain positions, but it doesn't mean they're going to fill them up with mediocre aging veterans on long term contracts. Their goal isn't to field out a balanced starting lineup.

I was joking with the last comment. My point is you are not being realistic. No one knows the future, but they have to spend money. If they are lucky enough to sign J Rich on a 1year deal then God bless them. My point is when you have to spend money, you usually spend it overpaying players. Chicago gave Ben Wallace 4/60 million. Why? Because they had to spend it.

[Kabookalu]

I was joking with the last comment. My point is you are not being realistic. No one knows the future, but they have to spend money. If they are lucky enough to sign J Rich on a 1year deal then God bless them. My point is when you have to spend money, you usually spend it overpaying players. Chicago gave Ben Wallace 4/60 million. Why? Because they had to spend it.

I'm aware they have to spend money as ratified by the league, I don't agree how you were using that as a reason why the initial deal was good for them using that argument that was made up on assumptions that they're already set on signing mediocre aging veterans over or way too near the 30 year mark. They probably will have to overspend to meet that mark, though I hardly doubt they would settle for a Jamal Crawford on a long term contract.

[kobeaki]

I'll cliff notes it a lot quicker: The NBA tried to gift Paul to the Lakers and set up Dwight to follow. The owners got pissed, put pressure on Stern and he nixed it to try to look like the good guy.

it must be tough to go through life like that...

[kobeaki]

The Celtics deal takes a steaming loaf on that flaming bag of dog poo New Orleans is about to get.

Unreal.

wrong...rondo is a great player within that system, with 3 silver sluggers batting after him in the order...he will not be the same player on a less talented team,,,,after rondo...the kelts deal is shite...

but the lakers are being foolish...by giving up the best pf in the game for a whiny, suspect(his knees) pg is way too steep a price to pay in the first place...this is jim buss, and doughboy mike brown...philip and the old man would never have made such a crappy offer...pau gasol is as importanat to the lakers as paul is to the hornets...

[demcanes26]

Because they all have resonable contracts that can be easily moved. The Mavs just got a hugh trade exception from Chandler. You don't think they would give up a first rounder to get Odom. Especially knowing that can decline his team option and still have cap space?

Last time I checked Odom and Scola don't play the most starved position in basketball, they're both older than Chandler, one is an average PF and the other is above average but plays better when he's like the third option or coming off the bench. Chandler can legitimately anchor a championship winning defense.

Do you really think Odom has no trade value? Seriously dude. The guy won the six man award, and is basically an expiring contact. You don't think a contending team wouldn't be willing to give up a pick for a guy that help them, and know that they don't have to pay him past this season. Veteran players on expiring contracts get traded at the deadline all the time, for picks.

I guess I was right.