George Anthony James....

[DWCP2]

Has anyone else caught this, I seem to find rather funny.

Apparently in a candid interview on July 16th, Paul George said he wants to be a Pacer and his heart is still here, but admits that if he doesn't have a new deal in place, his 2nd team of choice would be the Lakers citing it would be hard to say no to Kobe.

Now fast forward to today, in auspicious timing, an article comes out citing Lakers are setting their eyes on not just Lebron but also Carmelo to team with Kobe.

Kinda saying sorry about your luck, but at the same time glad the Lakers decided to pretty much dismiss George's chances.

[Wizop]

here's a link to a longer version of the interview.

http://blogs.pacers.com/2013/07/16/paul-george-is-happy-where-hes-at-not-looking-for-real-estate-in-l-a/

[Scoot McGroot]

Yeah, it was obvious how much Colin Cowherd was really trying to push him to LA, or create a news story, but PG wasn't having any of it.

[Boneman2]

This is the Lakers secret. When the media tampers for you it opens many lines of communication. Now James, Melo, and to a lesser extent PG will be linked to this possible move and constantly have to address it in the future.

Time Warner is a global company. I wonder why they choose to give the LA market this huge advantage.

Any corporate sponsorships coming into the NBA should be split evenly. Then they could do away with the current model of revenue sharing that resembles Obama's social policies. This model actually forces all but a few markets to stay under the cap in order to collect a welfare check. I'd also set a hard cap to alleviate teams like LA from gathering the top two f/a's (Howard/Nash) even though they are over the cap. Once you reach the cap you would essentially be barred from any activity that wasn't an even dollar for dollar swap.

[Scoot McGroot]

Honestly, I think the new CBA is doing a good job. It bans certain signings and trades once a team is over the apron. It makes it financially insane to go too far over the luxury tax. Heck, I'm ok with Brooklyn over $100m because it means that they'll be paying out crazy tax bills near $100m that will get split amongst us non-tax paying teams. We also get cuts of he massive Lakers cable deal through revenue sharing.

Ultimately, unless you can acquire a ton of tradable assets on low contract deals to deal for a third max guy, it's near impossible to acquire more than 2 max guys now. Although, if superstar guys are willing to take half their money to do it, no system can ever stop that.

[23artest23]

Honestly, I think the new CBA is doing a good job. It bans certain signings and trades once a team is over the apron. It makes it financially insane to go too far over the luxury tax. Heck, I'm ok with Brooklyn over $100m because it means that they'll be paying out crazy tax bills near $100m that will get split amongst us non-tax paying teams. We also get cuts of he massive Lakers cable deal through revenue sharing.

I agree, it is financially insane to get so far into the luxury tax. While I do not like this new "3 superstar" trend that seems to have risen many levels with the new CBA, I do appreciate that partipants in this rising trend are hammered fiscally. From my understanding, Prohkerovh (surely spelled incorrectly) has so much Russian loot that he just does not care about fiscal responsibility. If that is true, I find that to be a problem. The idea of plucking the best players in the league from their respective teams simply because of a lack of fiscal responsibility allows it seems distasteful at best IMO. "Teams" are built, not bought. I highlight "teams" because as a definition in my mind, a team (in the sense of professional sports) is a collective of men/women building themselves individually and with others within the collective to better themselves as a collective, or team. In organized sports in general, the idea of teams are a collective of people whom stick together bettering themselves towards winning.

I had a question and caught myself ranting. My question is how does that luxury tax money get distributed? I cannot remember anymore but I figure it was simply refunded to those teams under the cap in the form of the organization receiving money. I"m wondering if it is distributed in such a way that gives recipients any further cap flexibility or is it simply a reward to fiscally responsible owners.

[Scoot McGroot]

Honestly, I think the new CBA is doing a good job. It bans certain signings and trades once a team is over the apron. It makes it financially insane to go too far over the luxury tax. Heck, I'm ok with Brooklyn over $100m because it means that they'll be paying out crazy tax bills near $100m that will get split amongst us non-tax paying teams. We also get cuts of he massive Lakers cable deal through revenue sharing.

I agree, it is financially insane to get so far into the luxury tax. While I do not like this new "3 superstar" trend that seems to have risen many levels with the new CBA, I do appreciate that partipants in this rising trend are hammered fiscally. From my understanding, Prohkerovh (surely spelled incorrectly) has so much Russian loot that he just does not care about fiscal responsibility. If that is true, I find that to be a problem. The idea of plucking the best players in the league from their respective teams simply because of a lack of fiscal responsibility allows it seems distasteful at best IMO. "Teams" are built, not bought. I highlight "teams" because as a definition in my mind, a team (in the sense of professional sports) is a collective of men/women building themselves individually and with others within the collective to better themselves as a collective, or team. In organized sports in general, the idea of teams are a collective of people whom stick together bettering themselves towards winning.

I had a question and caught myself ranting. My question is how does that luxury tax money get distributed? I cannot remember anymore but I figure it was simply refunded to those teams under the cap in the form of the organization receiving money. I"m wondering if it is distributed in such a way that gives recipients any further cap flexibility or is it simply a reward to fiscally responsible owners.

It's a cash payout. 50% of the tax collected is split equally amongst all the non-tax teams. The other 50% is used for "league purposes", which tends to mostly to into the revenue sharing pot.

[23artest23]

Right on. I had read about it a while back and had forgotten. Thanks.

[Scoot McGroot]

I agree, it is financially insane to get so far into the luxury tax. While I do not like this new "3 superstar" trend that seems to have risen many levels with the new CBA, I do appreciate that partipants in this rising trend are hammered fiscally. From my understanding, Prohkerovh (surely spelled incorrectly) has so much Russian loot that he just does not care about fiscal responsibility. If that is true, I find that to be a problem. The idea of plucking the best players in the league from their respective teams simply because of a lack of fiscal responsibility allows it seems distasteful at best IMO..

You know, I'm ok with Brooklyn. They sold everything they had to get aging veterans, that in some cases, no other team wanted (i.e. Joe Johnson, and formerly Gerald Wallace). Now, they've got a what appears to be a tough lineup, but they're limited in moves they can make going forward. No receiving players in a S&T. Essentially no signings. Other than Kirilenko going to a Russian owned team, whom else do you see taking a massive paycut to go there? Then, what do they do when KG and/or Pierce retire or are injured? They're still capped out, with untradeable assets, and no sweeteners to go along (no young players or picks). They're on the Isiah-era Knicks crash and burn model, with only Deron Williams and Brook Lopez, the two guys they'd want to keep long-term, as attractive trade pieces.

Short-term? Championship contender. Long-term? Paper lions.

[Wizop]

I'm also okay with Brooklyn provided Kirilenko isn't getting money from a related source. the NFL had to deal with that problem in the early days of its cap too. as I remember the 49'ers owner got suspended. if the same thing is going on here, I'd want the extra money to be figured into the tax bill. otherwise, if they want to mortgage their future, so be it.

[23artest23]

You both definitely have a valid point in that they are and will continue to be hampered in the future as a result of the 13-14 offseason. A few years down the line when Pierce and KG are too old and brittle to be on the court, what conditions will the Nets rebuild under? I suppose that should decide how I interpret and feel about teams that are willing and ultimately able to fund a 3 max (or near max) star team. Perhaps the demise of one of these teams will come even sooner with Miami's big 3. A starting lineup of Deron, JJ, PP, KG, and Lopez is probably the most established, veteran, and talented 1-5 in basketball. With what I understand to be a roster that will end up costing about 180 million this upcoming year, I doubt they win the championship. As pointed out, the Nets should be severely hampered in regards to improving on their great but already aged acquisitions. With that said and the natural odds considered, I would predict the Nets fail in regards to buying their way to a championship.

[xBulletproof]

but admits that if he doesn't have a new deal in place, his 2nd team of choice would be the Lakers citing it would be hard to say no to Kobe.

I have no idea where you got this from. From the interview I heard he just said something like it would be great to play at home and it would be hard to say no to Kobe, but he never specified anything about it being his 2nd place of choice. That's taking an awful big leap. What is he supposed to say?

"Aw man, the Lakers suck, I wouldn't want to go there, oh and hell yes it would be easy to say no to Kobe, it's my career. Not his."

He was just being polite.

Besides that the Lakers are going after the UNrestricted free agents because they know the Pacers will just match anything Paul gets offered. So why would they tie up time and money in a lost cause?

[mikepacernation]

I would honestly hate to see George go any especially the Lakers. Kobe would just ruin and promising career of Georges. He will stay with the pacers cause I think the pacer have more of a chance to win a championship then the Lakers do right now