This may be why the CP trade was nixed

[GSH]

The Hornets currently have $38.6M in committed salaries, including CP3. In the trade they would be sending out about $16.4M in salary (Paul), and taking back $31.6M in salaries (Odom, Scola, Martin, Dragic). That would give them a net of + $15.2M. Add that to their current commited salaries, and they would have a payroll of $53.8M, which is well under the recently-released $58M cap for the upcoming season.

BUT... that's not all that is included when calculating team salary, for cap purposes. The Hornets have a restricted free agent (Bellinelli), whose qualifying offer of $3.4M has to be included in team salary. And since they would only have 9 players on their roster after the trade, they also have to include the rookie minimum for another 4 players (about $2M), to bring the roster up to league minimum. Those two things, alone, would be enough to put their team salary at $59.2M after the trade, well above the $58M cap.

Next, they have to include the amounts of the Mid-Level and Bi-Annual Exceptions, and any Traded Player exceptions they may have. (They could renounce their exceptions, which would take them out of the salary calculation, but that would kill them for trying to round out the rest of the roster.) Plus, if they have made any verbal agreements with any other players (think Aaron Gray, Carl Landry, Willie Green, D Ilunga-Mbenga), those amounts have to be included as well.

In short, the trade would put the Hornets over the cap, which means they can't take back 192% of CP3's salary in the trade. Even if they haven't made any verbal agreements, AND they renounce all their exceptions (which would be horribly destructive), they would still be over the cap just by virtue of the cap hold for Bellinelli and the roster charges for the 4 vacant spots.

[GSH]

I'll throw in one more thing - especially for the butt-hurt Laker fans out there. The Hornets have a bunch of free agents sitting out there. If they have any kind of verbal agreements with any of them, the trade would put them way over the cap. (Maybe there's an "understanding" that it won't happen until after the trade?) It would be illegal as hell, and Stern would be absolutely right to kill the trade on that basis.

And even if there are no real agreements, the appearance would always be there. If Stern let the trade go through, and then the Hornets signed any of their FA's right away, the other owners would call foul in an instant. As they should. It's kind of ironic, but it may be that the deal couldn't go through because the Lakers gave the Hornets too much in return, and put them over the cap.

It may be time to take off the conspiracy theory hats in LA.

[TDMVPDPOY]

demps should be fired that incompetant fck...

clearly the rockets couldnt win with there current roster no wonder why they are dumping them, so why does demp think he can win with there acquired trash?

all he did was made the rebuilding phase 2 years slower if it went through...and 100m between the owners in committed salaries..

[dbestpro]

I tend to think that if N.O. kept Gasol and not tried to move him on for Houston's trash that the deal would have held.

[Harry Callahan]

That's why the league has to approve the deals to make sure the numbers work. I have a problem with the league owning a team anyway. There is a conflict of interest one way or the other.

[dbestpro]

Word is the real reason the trade was nixed was because of the salary relief it brought LA, which would let them off the hook for all the money they would have to send to small market teams over the next few years due to luxury taxes.

[mudyez]

I have a problem with the league owning a team anyway. There is a conflict of interest one way or the other.

Yeah, thats the sole problem...get them an owner and that is it!

btw.: Stern is doing everything to keep the Hornets in NO, while he more or less pushed for the Sonics to leave Seattle. Why?

[Mel_13]

Yeah, thats the sole problem...get them an owner and that is it!

btw.: Stern is doing everything to keep the Hornets in NO, while he more or less pushed for the Sonics to leave Seattle. Why?

Stern asked the city, county, and state officials in Seattle to build him a new arena at taxpayer expense. They refused and he picked up the team and left.

Sacramento has been given a one year reprieve. The Kings will be gone if Sacramento doesn't come up with a new building.

[tmtcsc]

Am I the only one that thinks this was a bad trade for LA anyways ? You lose in the playoffs and your answer is to trade Gasol and Odom for a pg ? That's awful. I know that Paul is good, but he's not that good. A serviceable, young PG could have made things better for the Lakers.

I thought the Hornets got a great deal. Scola, Martin, Odom, Dragic plus draft picks for a player that was going to walk at season's end ? Houston was crazy though. To send all that away for Gasol was insane.

Perhaps the league should have developed some sort of relief in cases where a designated Franchise player opts to leave via Free Agency. Perhaps additional cap space to go out and lure another top FA.

[elec99]

Am I the only one that thinks this was a bad trade for LA anyways ? You lose in the playoffs and your answer is to trade Gasol and Odom for a pg ? That's awful.

Agreed 100%. Great deal for the hornets, someone is Houston is either on the NO or LA payroll or simply just on crack, and not a good deal for LA anyways.
LA is good partially because of its great length and you trade that away?

Anyway, looks like CP will be in NO until he's a FA.

[Mugen]

it got blocked because the others owners knew that D12 was gonna be traded shortly afterwards for glass knees bynum and some other garbage.

They had the power to veto a trade and they did. Lakerfan was so used to the commish suckin them off that they had no idea what hit them when he f'd them in the ass.

[Russ]

This may be why the CP trade was nixed :pop:

His Gasol comments :flag:

[twilo73]

Am I the only one that thinks this was a bad trade for LA anyways ? You lose in the playoffs and your answer is to trade Gasol and Odom for a pg ? That's awful. I know that Paul is good, but he's not that good. A serviceable, young PG could have made things better for the Lakers.

I thought the Hornets got a great deal. Scola, Martin, Odom, Dragic plus draft picks for a player that was going to walk at season's end ? Houston was crazy though. To send all that away for Gasol was insane.

Perhaps the league should have developed some sort of relief in cases where a designated Franchise player opts to leave via Free Agency. Perhaps additional cap space to go out and lure another top FA.

It's just not only this trade... the next one was Bynum and crap for Dwight Howard. Enough is enough. LA can't rebuild their team based on crap trades every few years.

[cheguevara]

it got blocked because the others owners knew that D12 was gonna be traded shortly afterwards for glass knees bynum and some other garbage.

bingo

[K-State Spur]

Am I the only one that thinks this was a bad trade for LA anyways ? You lose in the playoffs and your answer is to trade Gasol and Odom for a pg ? That's awful. I know that Paul is good, but he's not that good. A serviceable, young PG could have made things better for the Lakers.


In and of itself - yes, I would agree that the Lakers got worse under this deal.

For the rest of the WC though, the problem is that it left LA enough assets leftover to make a run at Howard. Paul + Kobe + Bynum < Kobe + Pau + Odom + Bynum. But Paul + Kobe + DH > Kobe + Pau + Odom + Bynum.

[sabar]

If it was mismatched salaries then Stern would of said something by now. The league office remaining silent while the NBA is the laughing stock of the sports world is quite telling. Stern obviously nixed the deal to make a point about players going where they want vs what is best for the franchises and the NBA. Bill Simmons is dead on about this whole debacle. With this, two lockouts, and the ref gambling, Stern's legacy is tainted.

[eisfeld]

It got blocked because it would have eliminated the chance of anyone buying the Hornets franchise.

[GSH]

Well, I tried to look for some technical cover for why the trade was cancelled. But Stern just says it was because the Hornets are better with Paul in a Hornets uniform than without. I'm not so sure. I guess that depends on whether he's willing to walk away from >$20M next season to get out of NO.

A lot of the players are ranting about Stern keeping him in New Orleans. What's keeping him in New Orleans is the fact that he signed a 4-year contract with them. The rules are there to give players more money for staying put. Paul wants to have his cake and eat it too. He wants to get the same money he would get for staying in NO, and get to move wherever he wants.

LeBron walked away as a free agent, and it cost him money. That was his right. Paul is trying to game the system. The more I thought about it, the more I understand Stern's decision on this trade. It's not about helping one team (the Hornets) or hurting one team (the Lakers) - it's about preventing players from gaming the system. Getting the extra money for staying in one place, while demanding the ability to move to whatever team they want.

Next year, he will have to make a decision to stay or walk away from over $20 million. And there will be assholes like Bryant Gumbel comparing that to slavery, because they want to "force" him to go where they want.

[The ADMIRAL 50]

It got blocked because it would have eliminated the chance of anyone buying the Hornets franchise.

I saw you post something to this effect in another thread, but it makes no sense. Any prospective buyer of the Hornets wont be so oblivious that they dont realize Paul is gone after this year anyways.

Hornets are getting screwed, Scola, Martin, Odom, Dragic and a 1st rounder woudve been an excellent return for CP3, no he's gonna walk and they'll get nothing.

[ChumpDumper]

I saw you post something to this effect in another thread, but it makes no sense. Any prospective buyer of the Hornets wont be so oblivious that they dont realize Paul is gone after this year anyways.

Hornets are getting screwed, Scola, Martin, Odom, Dragic and a 1st rounder woudve been an excellent return for CP3, no he's gonna walk and they'll get nothing.Why would a prospective buyer want those salary obligations on a team that won't make the playoffs?

[Mel_13]

Well, I tried to look for some technical cover for why the trade was cancelled. But Stern just says it was because the Hornets are better with Paul in a Hornets uniform than without. I'm not so sure. I guess that depends on whether he's willing to walk away from >$20M next season to get out of NO.

A lot of the players are ranting about Stern keeping him in New Orleans. What's keeping him in New Orleans is the fact that he signed a 4-year contract with them. The rules are there to give players more money for staying put. Paul wants to have his cake and eat it too. He wants to get the same money he would get for staying in NO, and get to move wherever he wants.

LeBron walked away as a free agent, and it cost him money. That was his right. Paul is trying to game the system. The more I thought about it, the more I understand Stern's decision on this trade. It's not about helping one team (the Hornets) or hurting one team (the Lakers) - it's about preventing players from gaming the system. Getting the extra money for staying in one place, while demanding the ability to move to whatever team they want.

Next year, he will have to make a decision to stay or walk away from over $20 million. And there will be assholes like Bryant Gumbel comparing that to slavery, because they want to "force" him to go where they want.

I really believe that you've hit on Stern's prime motivation for cancelling the trade. Beyond the 3B dollars, the lockout was about regaining control over player movement in the wake of last season's dramas with LeBron and Melo. Having just concluded the new CBA, the first major transaction was a superstar getting his way and being traded to LA. Stern was able to stop it and he did.

As to fallout, that remains to be seen.

[Josepatches_]

Why would a prospective buyer want those salary obligations on a team that won't make the playoffs?

This

CP3 will be out anyway

[eisfeld]

I saw you post something to this effect in another thread, but it makes no sense. Any prospective buyer of the Hornets wont be so oblivious that they dont realize Paul is gone after this year anyways.

Hornets are getting screwed, Scola, Martin, Odom, Dragic and a 1st rounder woudve been an excellent return for CP3, no he's gonna walk and they'll get nothing.

Scola + Martin + Odom + Dragic + low first rounder = Huge salary over a couple of years. Which means no cap space to lure in the players the new owner wants to pursue. Scola + Martin + Odom + Dragic would mean around 40 - 45 wins a season which would mean no decent draft picks.

So essentially we have no cap space, no decent first round picks and a mediocre team for the next 4-5 years. You're right - That's really appealing to any buyer.

He won't go for nothing - even if they'll trade him for aspiring contracts and a lottery pick.

[Josepatches_]

It's kind of ironic, but it may be that the deal couldn't go through because the Lakers gave the Hornets too much in return, and put them over the cap.



ironic? They only gave too much "salary obligations" . But if we talk about players it was fair.

[GSH]

I really believe that you've hit on Stern's prime motivation for cancelling the trade. Beyond the 3B dollars, the lockout was about regaining control over player movement in the wake of last season's dramas with LeBron and Melo. Having just concluded the new CBA, the first major transaction was a superstar getting his way and being traded to LA. Stern was able to stop it and he did.

As to fallout, that remains to be seen.

Yep. Think about how the rules are structured:

1. The player's current can offer a bigger/longer contract than anyone else. That's the reward for staying with the same team.
2. If the team decides to trade a player, the player gets Bird rights as compensation - so they can still get a bigger/longer contract from the new team.
3. If the player really wants to go elsewhere, they can always play out their contract, and take a "normal" contract from some other team.

The idea is that good players get PAID for staying with the same team. CP3 wants to get the extra pay AND the ability to choose his destination. The Bird rights aren't there just to make sure he gets a bigger payday. If Stern lets this go, the option year becomes the leverage year. And small markets will be totally screwed. I hope he holds the line against whatever backlash comes from it.

[Seventyniner]

Yep. Think about how the rules are structured:

1. The player's current can offer a bigger/longer contract than anyone else. That's the reward for staying with the same team.
2. If the team decides to trade a player, the player gets Bird rights as compensation - so they can still get a bigger/longer contract from the new team.
3. If the player really wants to go elsewhere, they can always play out their contract, and take a "normal" contract from some other team.

The idea is that good players get PAID for staying with the same team. CP3 wants to get the extra pay AND the ability to choose his destination. The Bird rights aren't there just to make sure he gets a bigger payday. If Stern lets this go, the option year becomes the leverage year. And small markets will be totally screwed. I hope he holds the line against whatever backlash comes from it.

Maybe the next big fight in 6 years will be over whether Bird rights should carry over in a trade. If the owners could get rid of that, they could really strike at the heart of this issue. The players might hold out on the whole season over that one, though.

[Mel_13]

Yep. Think about how the rules are structured:

1. The player's current can offer a bigger/longer contract than anyone else. That's the reward for staying with the same team.
2. If the team decides to trade a player, the player gets Bird rights as compensation - so they can still get a bigger/longer contract from the new team.
3. If the player really wants to go elsewhere, they can always play out their contract, and take a "normal" contract from some other team.

The idea is that good players get PAID for staying with the same team. CP3 wants to get the extra pay AND the ability to choose his destination. The Bird rights aren't there just to make sure he gets a bigger payday. If Stern lets this go, the option year becomes the leverage year. And small markets will be totally screwed. I hope he holds the line against whatever backlash comes from it.

He saw Melo, Bron, and Bosh do it and he wants the same treatment. The rules changes mean the only way he can get it is through a trade to a team he wants during the season. He won't be able to get the extra year in a S&T this summer like LeBron and Bosh did last year. They got 6 years, the best he can do in an S&T this summer is 4 years.

[GSH]

He saw Melo, Bron, and Bosh do it and he wants the same treatment. The rules changes mean the only way he can get it is through a trade to a team he wants during the season. He won't be able to get the extra year in a S&T this summer like LeBron and Bosh did last year. They got 6 years, the best he can do in an S&T this summer is 4 years.


Oh, I understand what he wants. If that trend were allowed to continue, it would be the death of the league. I'd like to think I would feel the same way, even if it were the Spurs on the receiving end of the deal.

But remember, LeBron did it the right way. He played out his contract, and gave up the extra money, in return for the ability to go where he wanted. I hated "The Decision", but at least he didn't hijack the CBA the way Paul is trying to do.