?QuestionMark?

I wasn't a big fan of this in the first place, unless Howard was coming in a 2nd deal. But at this point LA almost has to go through with it. Odom is too mentaly fragile to stay in LA. I hate to lose Gasol because he's LA's most consistent big. I was surprised yesterday when Houston agreed to include Martin. I would have thought that the point of getting Gasol was to pair him with K-Mart.

At this point, isn't VC a kiss of death? Any team he goes to ends up getting worse. Solid pickup, though. Fills a need in the rotation.

So in the best interest of the league, to avoid a superteam formed, he's going to force Paul to stay or get traded to where he doesn't want to be,,,,for him to opt out and sign with a super team anyway, leaving the Hornets or the team he walks out on with nothing to show for it? Yeah, not buying that. League owners colluded to prevent Paul heading to LA. Even with a CBA, I'm pretty sure that's still illegal. Wrong. He can't arbitrarily block trades. Trades get blocked if they violate a CBA rule...that's not the case here. If he didn't want Paul to LA, he should have let it be known before the deal was agreed upon. This is the league owners getting in his ear. There were rumors about this since when? As an owner he didn't have an idea it might happen until it did? He could have said no a week ago. He could have said no this morning. He waited til owners bitched and moaned. Proof this had nothing to do with "basketball reasons". Gilbert was scared Paul and Howard would end up in LA. Period. Doesn't matter than NO would have actually ended up with a better team. Four starters and 2 1st rounders for a guy that's going to walk anyway.

No they don't. The Hornets are no more valuable without Chris Paul than an unhappy Chris Paul already declaring he won't return. That argument would hold more water if Stern nixed the deal right away. Did he not think it would actually happen? He waited until the deal was agreed upon before saying "NO" when he could have said "NO" from the get-go. So now, essentially you have an entire league saying, "you can't trade Paul to anyone EXCEPT the Lakers". I haven't seen the new CBA but I'm pretty sure that's illegal.

PS...I'm pretty sure this is called collusion.

PS...the Rockets are the ones who IMO are getting screwed in the deal. Pair Gasol with Martin and Lowry...makes sense. Gasol with just Lowry....ehh. Seems like a lateral move. Hornets at least get 4 starting caliber players in the deal.

[expletive] YOU CUBAN! I didn't really like the deal because it leaves Bynum as the only big. But now you almost have to complete it because how can you build any chemistry with Gasol and Odom knowing ownership wanted them out. [expletive] you Stern too!

Agreed. College isn't for everyone, much less those who are only there because they feel forced to be there. It's unfair to the player, the program, and the university. I don't like the idea of age limits or restrictions on adults, but at least this is a fair compromise. If a player is good enough out of HS to make it, he should be able to go to the NBA. If he fails, oh well, he made a big boy decision. If a player chooses college, a program shouldn't have to worry about him being one-and-done.

PS...while I doubt LA could land both D12 and CP3. If it did happen.... howbig a "F*CK YOU!" would this be to the rest of the league? The new CBA was put in place to limit the Lakers specifically from becoming a super team and they would essentially be doing it anyway and be set going into the future with the best center in the league and arguably the best PG in the league.

Yeah, I don't know how that's gonna happen. That's a pretty major feat. I can see them getting one or the other. Don't see them getting both. ONLY way I can see it happening is they can deal Gasol to a third team with young pieces they're willing to trade to add an all-star big man to help them contend (Nets, Wolves, Rockets). But I seriously doubt any of them would be willing to do it, mostly because they don't want to help LA pair Paul and Howard together.

http://www.latimes.com/sports/basketball/nba/lakers/la-sp-lakers-20111206,0,3081429.story Hopefully the 2nd year is a team option or non guaranteed.

For the minimum he's a solid pickup. Would be better if Walton wasn't on the team wasting a roster spot. Kapono fills a need. Especially since LA needs to spread the floor for Gasol and Dwight

Luckily, that'll be Orlando's problem.

Przybilla hasn't really been able to jump for a while. His game is based mostly on his size and timing. Even if he is done, he's still better than any center they have...mostly because they have none. He's a low risk acquisition, I don't think anyone will give him more than a minimum offer at this point. Boston doesn't really have many other options. Dalembert would be ideal but he's doubtful for the mini MLE. (I think Miami could offer a full MLE deal, not sure). Kwame would be the next best candidate (sad). It gets thinner after that. Jeff Foster, Dan Gadzuric, and Aaron Gray are all decent but they're backups. Then you're down to stiffs like Elson, Fesenko, Ely, Magloire, Dampier, Etan Thomas. Celtics are pretty much screwed. I love it.

1. Mo Evans - With Brown gone, Evans would be a nice replacement. Could be had for mini MLE. 2. Sebastian Telfair - LA needs speed in the backcourt with that old dinosaur Fisher and Blake as the lead guards. LA could use his ability to get into the lane. 3. Delonte West - Could reunite with Mike Brown. Would provide defense, could spread the floor, hit clutch shots, and could play both backcourt positions. Also adds another element of crazy to go with MWP and Matt Barnes.

All-Time Bob Houbregs Rick Fox Jamaal Magloire Bill Wennington Leo Rautins Current Tristan Thompson Kris Joseph Cory Joseph Kevin Pangos Dwight Powell

I just assume most GMs are stupid, but even I don't think a GM is stupid enough to spend that much on Nene or Chandler. Gasol at 14 mil is overpaying as well, but at least you can make a case that he can improve. Nene and Chandler have pretty much plateaued and I wouldn't give them more than 12 per...and even that might be stretching it.

I'm guessing if Boston needs a center, they may have to settle for a guy like Przybilla or Kwame. I would think Hayes's value is high enough that he gets more than what Boston can offer.

I don't think he's really leaving as much as negotiating with Cuban through the media. If Dallas wants to make a run at Deron Williams next offseason, it'd be more enticing for DW if Chandler was on board.

With the Laker deal, they still dump salaries and would be in a nice position in 2013 as far as cap space (if they amnesty Arenas). They also get arguably the 2nd best center in the (when healthy) who can command a double team and anchor defensively, and who at worst is 15/8/2 as a starter. Yeah, it's not a great deal, but Howard could leverage Orlando into taking it since it may be the best they can do. I agree that LAC's offer can potentially be better, but does Sterling pull a trigger on that deal if he has concerns whether Howard would sign an extention? That's what it'll come down to: who will call Howard's bluff?

Make it happen, Jim! Make it an early Christmas gift for Lakers fans!

I don't think Rashard gets to LA. If I understand the new amnesty waiver wire, with cap space can bid on players that have been amnestied. So if Rashard gets waived, a team like the Nets with cap space can put a bid for him at 5 million and only have to pay him that 5 million. He's overpaid now, but if they can get him on a smaller 4-7 million deal, he'd be a nice bargain. So I doubt he gets to LA. He'll get picked up before. Baron, though, could sneak by. I don't know many teams with cap space that need an overweight PG. But for LA, as fat and out of shape as he is, he's still an upgrade over Fisher. If he's willing to play for the minimum, I'd like to have him.

Yes, we're in a recession. The NBA isn't. They're one of the few industries that has seen an increase in revenue. You say this was a bad deal because of these huge losses. Salaries are fixed and tied to revenue, so where did these losses suddenly come from? After the 99 CBA ended, the owners weren't claiming these catastrophic losses, but now they suddenly appear whent he NBA is selling more than ever? How is that? You believe the owners are losing 2 billion, I don't. That's fine. But assuming that they did lose $2B, the players by taking 50% in BRI from 57, are allowing the owners to keep 3 billion to cover any future potential losses. They can't make up those past losses, they're sunk costs. To expect to recover those by squeezing the players is trying to have the players cover the owners' mess. The real problem isn't that the owners aren't making profits -- you can cook the books (legally) to make profits look like losses -- but that the owners aren't making enough profit. Just like you said the players want guaranteed profits, so do the owners. That's what this is about. The owners want to be able to make a profit simply for owning a team. Nevermind the product they put on the floor; the mere fact that they own a team makes the owners feel entitled to a profit. As for the players just taking guaranteed profits, contracts don't HAVE to be guaranteed. Owners can offer partial or non guaranteed deals, you can have incentive driven contracts, or you can add a team option. Owners just have no self control and often outbid themselves. When an owners thinks Rashard Lewis is worth getting 19 mil per year, that their problem, and shouldn't be the union's. If they don't want a bunch of overpaid players, then simply don't overpay for players. Bill Walton once said about Donald Sterling, "At least he's never overpaid for a stiff".

I don't think that's true. The Lakers make about 80 million in revenue alone just in ticket prices. That doesn't include their TV rights and their other revenue streams. The Lakers were one of the most profitable teams in the NBA by far. I think the biggest reason they didn't deal for Hinrich, besides salaries not matching, was not finding a place for him to play with Fisher and Blake already on the roster. I think the extent where money comes in is that the Lakers are Buss's primary source of income, so he won't just spend blindly and didn't feel Hinrich was worth the 18 million cap hit. Bad players are going to get overpaid regardless of the system. Owners just have no self control. But even if players are asking for max raises and max everything, that is no different than what players were demanding with the 99 CBA. Yet the owners agreed to continue with a similar system. But now suddenly the owners are amassing these massive losses? Doesn't make sense. I don't deny teams are losing money. I just think the extent of their losses is exaggerated. If they can't turn a profit with the players giving them 3 billion back and with the league making record revenue, then that's on the owners. If small markets can't support a team, then they need more revenue sharing or get move to a bigger market.

Didn't they trade Malcolm Lee? I think Afflalo is the ideal choice. Defends, slashes, spreads the floor, is young. But he's restricted and I don't know Denver lets him walk. I think Jason Richardson is the best Chicago can realistically get.