Screw player collusion

As a spur fan, I'm sick to my stomach at how the league has transformed in just a short period, beginning with the player collusion that occurred in Boston a couple of years back/Gasol trade to Los Angeles for a pack of glazed donuts.


Now this has occurred during the offseason culminating in a gathering of two of the worlds best players on the same team (Miami).


Next year, we might see this again with Melo, TP, and any other player that is hungry to win.



This totally goes against the Spurs philosophy for the past decade. To those who disagree with me, you will point out to the fact that we added Duncan when we already had Robinson. Let me point out that we did this through the draft, and we did it not by bribing, or by asking, we earned that last pick because of how bad the team was that year.

Sucks, but it's part of the game now. So I guess we just have to deal with it.

doesnt help when its a long summer and nothing to write about so they spew up bullshit trades shit to get into players minds hoping one bites

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by triggeredexcellence

As a spur fan, I'm sick to my stomach at how the league has transformed in just a short period, beginning with the player collusion that occurred in Boston a couple of years back/Gasol trade to Los Angeles for a pack of glazed donuts.


Now this has occurred during the offseason culminating in a gathering of two of the worlds best players on the same team (Miami).


Next year, we might see this again with Melo, TP, and any other player that is hungry to win.



This totally goes against the Spurs philosophy for the past decade. To those who disagree with me, you will point out to the fact that we added Duncan when we already had Robinson. Let me point out that we did this through the draft, and we did it not by bribing, or by asking, we earned that last pick because of how bad the team was that year.

---

You can say what you want but if the Spurs had the chance to pull up such a trade they would not have hesitated a second. Big markets are more appealing to star players. That's how it is and how it always has been.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eisfeld

You can say what you want but if the Spurs had the chance to pull up such a trade they would not have hesitated a second. Big markets are more appealing to star players. That's how it is and how it always has been.

---

i dont think they would have pulled off the whole thing i think the spurs would have done it differently if i were to guessthey would much rather want wade and bosh than lebron.

Screw overtly tanking for the number 1 pick. Show some dignity while losing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 21_Blessings

Screw overtly tanking for the number 1 pick. Show some dignity while losing.

---

Like whining for a trade when "your" team misses the playoffs?

basketball is a team game, so any player that is supposed to be "THE ONE" is overrated, therefore i don't mind seeing miami or boston getting multiple big stars.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Leonard Curse

i dont think they would have pulled off the whole thing i think the spurs would have done it differently if i were to guessthey would much rather want wade and bosh than lebron.

---

Look man, if in 2008, the grizzlies called and said "We will trade you Pau Gasol for Francisco Elson, Damon Stoudamire, and a number 2" we would have done it. Simple as that. It most certainly looks like collusion, but to say we don't make that trade is ludicrous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drachen

Look man, if in 2008, the grizzlies called and said "We will trade you Pau Gasol for Francisco Elson, Damon Stoudamire, and a number 2" we would have done it. Simple as that. It most certainly looks like collusion, but to say we don't make that trade is ludicrous.

---

well i thought we were talking about the lebronbosh acquisition and not a general statement of course i think the spurs would pull big moves if they could i was just referring to the lebron BS

Oh, ok, well I am sure that if Lebron and Bosh decided that they really respected Tim Duncan, and wanted to play with him, the Spurs wouldn't say no.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seventyniner

Like whining for a trade when "your" team misses the playoffs?

---

At least the Lakers didn't overtly tank like complete bitches. LA builds their championships through front office savvy and not defeatism like the Spurs.

Player collusion? Guys want to go where they can enjoy themselves and win.

If this was prime Duncan, then guys would want to come to SA. Duncan has passed his prime so its all on the front office to get crafty with trades, drafts, and signings.

Nothing wrong with SA except for the fact that Duncan is on the downside. If (likely the draft) they get another superstar player, more guys will come.

21 D-Bags at it again. You are either an incompetent troll or a complete moron (the latter is probably accurate).

It is not front office savvy when you trade garbage/washed up players for quality players or #1 picks. The Lakers for forty freakin years have acquired players like Chamberlain, Jabbar, Magic, Worthy, Scott, Shaq, Kobe, Gasol. In each and every case the Lakers traded washed up players, bad players, low 1st round picks, or just bought the player like O'Neal. 21 D-bags might be smart enough to look those trades up.

Your whining about the Spurs rings hollow really, 21 D-bags. The Spurs have had four or five top ten draft picks during their entire NBA history, and yet they put out a really good product. The two teams that resulted in #1 lottery picks in no way shape or form guaranteed to get the top pick. The 86-87 team was horrible and the 96-97 lost their top two or three players for 1/2 to 3/4 of the season. Playing David Robinson for 15 games at the end of a lost season would have been STUPID - your beloved Lakers would have done the same thing in the same situation. The Lakers didn't have to worry about a bad record in 1996-97 because they just bought O'Neal (for no compensation) and acquired Bryant for a guy with one year left on his contract that they neither wanted nor needed (Divac).

The Lakers never had to go to the bottom of the league because they always had a weak sister team they could rip off. The Spurs recent success is a whole lot more legitimate that the Lakers. That is a fact.

The funny thing is if the Lakers fall back in the next few years, if Bryant breakes down or a major injury hits the Lakers, 90% of these Laker posters will disappear, just like from 2004-2007.

You forgot to mention that Kobe forced the action to the Lakers too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drachen

You forgot to mention that Kobe forced the action to the Lakers too.

---

That's correct. It was beneath Kobe to play for the Charlotte Hornets. Idiot Bob Bass let him go to LA.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drachen

Look man, if in 2008, the grizzlies called and said "We will trade you Pau Gasol for Francisco Elson, Damon Stoudamire, and a number 2" we would have done it. Simple as that. It most certainly looks like collusion, but to say we don't make that trade is ludicrous.

---

And we would call it what it would be, collusion.
Not like Laker Douchebag marketing puppet who tries to spin it as "front office savvy" or "Kobme was such a lure". :lmao

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 21_Blessings

At least the Lakers didn't overtly tank like complete bitches. LA builds their championships through front office savvy and not defeatism like the Spurs.

---

If the Spurs were trying to tank for Duncan, they certainly didn't do a very good job at it.

The Spurs won 6 of their last 22 games that season, compared to 2 for the Grizzlies, 3 for the Celtics, and 3 for the Nuggets.

It the Spurs were tanking, why would they give players like Elliott, Johnson and Del Negro 30+ minutes?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Harry Callahan

That's correct. It was beneath Kobe to play for the Charlotte Hornets. Idiot Bob Bass let him go to LA.

---

I knew his grand daughter, went to school with her. She cut off half of my rat tail in 6th grade. Years later, saw her at SAC, she told me she did that because she liked me. LOL

(oh, BTW, I was total white trash (classic rock not country white trash). I had the plastic mesh net shirts and everything).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ambchang

If the Spurs were trying to tank for Duncan, they certainly didn't do a very good job at it.

The Spurs won 6 of their last 22 games that season, compared to 2 for the Grizzlies, 3 for the Celtics, and 3 for the Nuggets.

It the Spurs were tanking, why would they give players like Elliott, Johnson and Del Negro 30+ minutes?

---

LOL that right there tells you how bad we were that year without Robinson.
"what do you mean you think we were tanking, we played AVERY JOHNSON AND VINNY DEL NEGRO, we would have played far lesser talents than that if we were tanking."

Pure awesome.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2Cleva

...

If this was prime Duncan, then guys would want to come to SA. Duncan has passed his prime so its all on the front office to get crafty with trades, drafts, and signings.

Nothing wrong with SA except for the fact that Duncan is on the downside. If (likely the draft) they get another superstar player, more guys will come.

---

Really? Names like Jason Kidd and Jermaine O'neal come to mind...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drachen

LOL that right there tells you how bad we were that year without Robinson.
"what do you mean you think we were tanking, we played AVERY JOHNSON AND VINNY DEL NEGRO, we would have played far lesser talents than that if we were tanking."

Pure awesome.

---

Our leading scorer that year was Dominique Wilkins. Yes, the former human highlight film at 37 or 38 years of age was our go to guy that year.

His jersey number was 21 (throughout his career). We got a little better player in the #21 the next year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pad300

Really? Names like Jason Kidd and Jermaine O'neal come to mind...

---

Duncan was closer to his prime then (and they still didn't come btw). But a few years ago, Duncan still had some ball left in him.

Now? He's playing out the string. It happens to almost everyone but Duncan is now a shadow of himself. No shame in that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Harry Callahan

Our leading scorer that year was Dominique Wilkins. Yes, the former human highlight film at 37 or 38 years of age was our go to guy that year.

His jersey number was 21 (throughout his career). We got a little better player in the #21 the next year.

---

Oh I remember, though I will be honest with everyone here, that season wasn't as painful for me as it was for everyone else here. I was an exchange student in Germany in 96-97, so I was unable to watch, and could only keep up with box scores over the internet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2Cleva

Duncan was closer to his prime then (and they still didn't come btw). But a few years ago, Duncan still had some ball left in him.

Now? He's playing out the string. It happens to almost everyone but Duncan is now a shadow of himself. No shame in that.

---

You're either doing a really bad job of trolling or you don't know what you're talking about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2Cleva

[B]Duncan was closer to his prime then (and they still didn't come btw). But a few years ago, Duncan still had some ball left in him.

Now? He's playing out the string. It happens to almost everyone but Duncan is now a shadow of himself. No shame in that.

---

Yeah, that's the point I was making...
Certainly the level of player co-operation that has resulted in Miami is unprecedented. The closest example I can think of, off the top of my head, is Payton and Malone to LAL, but those guys were ring chasing at the end of their careers (not in their prime); it was still considered a bitch move by everyone who wasn't a Faker fan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2Cleva

Duncan was closer to his prime then (and they still didn't come btw). But a few years ago, Duncan still had some ball left in him.

Now? He's playing out the string. It happens to almost everyone but Duncan is now a shadow of himself. No shame in that.

---

"A shadow" is a bit hyperbolic. He's in decline, no doubt, but he put up perfectly good stats with perfectly good efficiency last season.

If Tim is a shadow of his former self then he must of been the GOAT tbh, because he averaged 19/10 on .500% shooting along with 2 blocks and 3 assists a game in the playoffs.

I am really glad that they went there though for two reasons.
A. They didn't win
B. There was a lot of talk about Malone coming here if he didn't go there - FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF THAT!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pad300

Yeah, that's the point I was making...
Certainly the level of player co-operation that has resulted in Miami is unprecedented. The closest example I can think of, off the top of my head, is Payton and Malone to LAL, but those guys were ring chasing at the end of their careers (not in their prime); it was still considered a bitch move by everyone who wasn't a Faker fan.

---

malone and payton were coattailing to a good team though, at budget prices. this heat thing doesnt bother me that much, because miami has sucked pretty bad the past couple years. its not like lebron and bosh are going to a sure thing. and though they've now got a core and some nice pieces, they still have most of their cap tied up in that big 3. i dont know, I'm not happy about it, but I wouldnt call it a bitch move. it could very well blow up in their faces.

muser - I don't troll.

pad - Funny thing is that if SA hadn't beat LA the year before, then Malone and GP would have went to the Spurs. They didn't want to appear to be gravy training, even though they were.

admiral - pretty good numbers, no doubt. But not the impact of previous years. Not a knock - he's still better than most in the NBA. But when superstars fall down to mortal realm, what is great for most is subpar for them. Different level of player, different standards.

Drachen - agreed.

diego - it's only a bitch move for LeBron. Supposedly the best player in the game, you don't jump on no one else's cart - you make your own and get others to follow you. Eternal black mark on LeBron's career.

Does that include Brent Barry's "Get me out of here" statement?

I don't like it either, but there is nothing that can be done about it. Teams are doing exactly what they are supposed to do: gather the best collection of players possible. The Spurs were one of the first teams in the current era to don the three superstar philosophy with Tim, Tony, and Manu. If anything, other teams just followed suit, because suddenly two stars (MJ/Pippen, Tim/David, Shaq/Kobe) wasn't enough to compete anymore.

The league itself needs to be smaller, with a considerably shorter schedule (60 games), which would cause a large diffusion of healthier talent.

I shall use 7777 to say good luck to the Spurs this season; we're gonna need it.

Good bye.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by triggeredexcellence

As a spur fan, I'm sick to my stomach at how the league has transformed in just a short period, beginning with the player collusion that occurred in Boston a couple of years back/Gasol trade to Los Angeles for a pack of glazed donuts.


Now this has occurred during the offseason culminating in a gathering of two of the worlds best players on the same team (Miami).


Next year, we might see this again with Melo, TP, and any other player that is hungry to win.



This totally goes against the Spurs philosophy for the past decade. To those who disagree with me, you will point out to the fact that we added Duncan when we already had Robinson. Let me point out that we did this through the draft, and we did it not by bribing, or by asking, we earned that last pick because of how bad the team was that year.

---

How you blame players for the Lakers and Boston additions is beyond me unless of course you mean former players, Ainge, McHale and behind the scenes West then I understand fully. Other than that there is no relation to the Miami James, Wade and Bosh situation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by z0sa

The league itself needs to be smaller, with a considerably shorter schedule (60 games), which would cause a large diffusion of healthier talent.

I shall use 7777 to say good luck to the Spurs this season; we're gonna need it.

Good bye.

---

ummm....NO. Just because your stars are old doesn't mean the league should cater to your needs. If the season was 60 games then kevin willis, patrick ewing, d-rob, and a host of other old codgers would play years beyond what they should (and those aforementioned players already did that anyways). If the season is too tiring or too hard on your body, then maybe it's time to contemplate retirement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Harry Callahan

21 D-Bags at it again. You are either an incompetent troll or a complete moron (the latter is probably accurate).

It is not front office savvy when you trade garbage/washed up players for quality players or #1 picks. The Lakers for forty freakin years have acquired players like Chamberlain, Jabbar, Magic, Worthy, Scott, Shaq, Kobe, Gasol. In each and every case the Lakers traded washed up players, bad players, low 1st round picks, or just bought the player like O'Neal. 21 D-bags might be smart enough to look those trades up.

Your whining about the Spurs rings hollow really, 21 D-bags. The Spurs have had four or five top ten draft picks during their entire NBA history, and yet they put out a really good product. The two teams that resulted in #1 lottery picks in no way shape or form guaranteed to get the top pick. The 86-87 team was horrible and the 96-97 lost their top two or three players for 1/2 to 3/4 of the season. Playing David Robinson for 15 games at the end of a lost season would have been STUPID - your beloved Lakers would have done the same thing in the same situation. The Lakers didn't have to worry about a bad record in 1996-97 because they just bought O'Neal (for no compensation) and acquired Bryant for a guy with one year left on his contract that they neither wanted nor needed (Divac).

The Lakers never had to go to the bottom of the league because they always had a weak sister team they could rip off. The Spurs recent success is a whole lot more legitimate that the Lakers. That is a fact.

The funny thing is if the Lakers fall back in the next few years, if Bryant breakes down or a major injury hits the Lakers, 90% of these Laker posters will disappear, just like from 2004-2007.

---

This is why the lakers front office > the spurs front office

The Lakers can retool their team and stay a contender because they can acquire great players outside of the draft. The spurs only get their top players through their draft picks.
Much harder to stay on top that way. The window closes on the spurs as Duncan declines and it will take another franchise player to turn the spurs into a contender again.

The bigger colliusion is that no team complains even when rules are broken. This includes the Spurs. Also, Laker fans who talks yak, also is most likely to have Hulk Hogan posters on his wall.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbestpro

The bigger colliusion is that no team complains even when rules are broken. This includes the Spurs. Also, Laker fans who talks yak, also is most likely to have Hulk Hogan posters on his wall.

---

Pop said as much as he could about the Gasol trade. The League has proven it doesn't invite criticism, and that sort of artificially uncritical climate ultimately dilutes the NBA brand and product.

A wimp with a fist full of $50's and viagra can get a beautiful hooker. That don't make him a stud.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lotr1trekkie

A wimp with a fist full of $50's and viagra can get a beautiful hooker. That don't make him a stud.

---

Leave Marc Cuban out of this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by admiralsnackbar

Pop said as much as he could about the Gasol trade. The League has proven it doesn't invite criticism, and that sort of artificially uncritical climate ultimately dilutes the NBA brand and product.

---

The Lakers just have a superior front office than the Spurs. Don't hate.

Instead of being a whiny sore-losing-baby how about you don't give away Scola. And try to trade for players that can actually help you dethrone the Lakers instead of signing proven rapists like Neal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 21_Blessings

The Lakers just have a superior front office than the Spurs. Don't hate.

Instead of being a whiny sore-losing-baby how about you don't give away Scola. And try to trade for players that can actually help you dethrone the Lakers instead of signing proven rapists like Neal.

---

Did you get that Hulk Hogan poster signed?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 21_Blessings

The Lakers just have a superior front office than the Spurs. Don't hate.

Instead of being a whiny sore-losing-baby how about you don't give away Scola. And try to trade for players that can actually help you dethrone the Lakers instead of signing proven rapists like Neal.

---

I'm not hating, I'm truthing. Your off-topic trolling may confuse the issue, but it only makes your bitch-made insecurity more day-glo. Go back downstairs and play with the rest of the retards and let 2Cleva represent the Lakers.

I'm not even trolling here. Spur fan is just being a complete hypocrite.

You claim collusion which is completely unproven and debunked by multiple facts. Yet ignore that your front office just gave a guy that was never that good to begin with and a terrible fit 40 million for choking like the loser he was in the playoffs.

Collusion lol, right. You guys still tanked for Duncan. At least admit your sins and savor the championships won.

The argument in play is that the PLAYERS colluded to play in MIA. I only brought up Pop because he complained about the Gasol trade inasmuch as he could (in counter to dbestpro who said nobody did anything to criticize suspect trades), and that trade was just arguably collusion.

The Gasol trade STILL arguably merits speculation about collusion --whether you accept it or not -- but it is also STILL not the center of this discussion. Go start another thread about it if it seems important enough to do so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by admiralsnackbar

The argument in play is that the PLAYERS colluded to play in MIA. I only brought up Pop because he complained about the Gasol trade inasmuch as he could (in counter to dbestpro who said nobody did anything to criticize suspect trades), and that trade was just arguably collusion.

The Gasol trade STILL arguably merits speculation about collusion --whether you accept it or not -- but it is also STILL not the center of this discussion. Go start another thread about it if it seems important enough to do so.

---

The OP flat out said the Gasol trade was collusion and then seriously thought the Spurs earned Duncan when Pop purposely held back D-Rob from returning as quick as he could have. Hypocrisy.

You tanked for Duncan. Won a few titles but couldn't pull out the back to backs because the Lakers front office continually outmaneuvered San Antonio's.

The Spurs are in this position not because of player collusion but because of their front office's underwhelming performance in recent years. Signing your 1st rounder 4 years later isn't something that should be applauded. How does re-upping Jefferson and signing a guy that likes banging chicks when they're black out drunk help you beat the Lakers?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 21_Blessings

The OP flat out said the Gasol trade was collusion and then seriously thought the Spurs earned Duncan when Pop purposely held back D-Rob from returning as quick as he could have. Hypocrisy.

You tanked for Duncan. Won a few titles but couldn't pull out the back to backs because the Lakers front office continually outmaneuvered San Antonio's.

The Spurs are in this position not because of player collusion but because of their front office's underwhelming performance in recent years. Signing your 1st rounder 4 years later isn't something that should be applauded. How does re-upping Jefferson and signing a guy that likes banging chicks when they're black out drunk help you beat the Lakers?

---

Note to everyone, don't feed this troll.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 21_Blessings

At least the Lakers didn't overtly tank like complete bitches. LA builds their championships through front office savvy and not defeatism like the Spurs.

---

Saavy front office.... ok then Luke, Jordan, and Brown. Throw in sasha and then send Kobe to talk to Raja Bell who then farted in Kobe's face. Yeah great FO...
Was it kupcake's idea to send ambASSador Kobe to talk to players?

And a question:
Will Artest beat his wife again and fall down the stairs dead drunk on X-mas?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 21_Blessings

Collusion lol, right. You guys still tanked for Duncan. At least admit your sins and savor the championships won.

---

How the f/k do you tank for a ping pong ball to land your way ya ignorant slut?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by triggeredexcellence

Note to everyone, don't feed this troll.

---

Sorry.

Dumb needs extermination.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pgardn

How the f/k do you tank for a ping pong ball to land your way ya ignorant slut?

---

You sure helped your chances by tanking:toast

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BadOdor

You sure helped your chances by tanking:toast

---

The chances were awful.
Its called dumb luck.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pgardn

The chances were awful.

---

Didn't hurt to increase them a little by tanking though:toast

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BadOdor

Didn't hurt to increase them a little by tanking though:toast

---

After the fact it never looks bad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pgardn

After the fact it never looks bad.

---

Sup pgardn, I suppose you got sick of those Laker trolls on the ESPN board too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rascal

This is why the lakers front office > the spurs front office

The Lakers can retool their team and stay a contender because they can acquire great players outside of the draft. The spurs only get their top players through their draft picks.
Much harder to stay on top that way. The window closes on the spurs as Duncan declines and it will take another franchise player to turn the spurs into a contender again.

---

You completely missed my point supposed Spurs fan Rascal. Look at the details behind all these transactions through the years for the LAL. The Lakers traded (in most cases) garbage for players or picks that propped up their franchise.

There is nothing superior about a front office whose three most impactful moves in the last 15 years were to buy Shaq O'Neal for no compensation (and less money than what Orlando offered), this move allows you to trade an inferior center Divac for Kobe Bryant the same offseason.

The incompentent Charlotte Hornet GM Bob Bass got one year out of Divac in exchange for Kobe Bryant. Utterly stupid on his part. The only reason Bass kept his job with Hornets for way too long is George Shinn being the rotten owner he is.

LA has reaped the benefits from these two bogus transactions for 15 years. These two moves were no-brainers for LA. There was no intelligence involved. Shaq was a scumbag (and a great player) who was an attention whore and thought nothing of destroying Orlando's franchise for years. Bryant refused to play for Charlotte (another attention whore who had to play in a big market). Bob Bass blinked and made a bad trade.

The Gasol deal was an inside job, no doubt about it. No other teams were allowed to make a legit for Gasol offer as the incompetent Memphis owner got taken by the retiring team president in Jerry West who spent most of his adult life playing or working for the Lakers.

These transactions had as much to do with incompetence on the part of other franchises as anything. The Lakers have received a bunch of free passes that bastardized the competitive balance of the NBA. David Stern looks the other way - as well all know "Lakers vs. Lakers" is what he wants.

The Miami situation also taints the league with players thumbing their noses at some of the franchises and leaving them high and dry so guys like Bosh, Wade, and James can put on a circus. The NBA is veering towards ML Baseball territory now. The salary cap keeps the NBA from becoming a joke like MLB where the top FA players generally end up in Boston or New York.

The NFL is dominating the other pro leagues because all the teams have a realisitic OPPORTUNITY to compete for championships. The Green Bays and New Orleans of the world can compete with the big market teams to win titles. MLB can't say that. It was a little miracle that the Spurs have won so many titles given the road the NBA seems to be taking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by triggeredexcellence

Now this has occurred during the offseason culminating in a gathering of two of the worlds best players on the same team (Miami).

---

Correction. Three of the world's best players on the same team, in the starting lineup.

From a player efficiency standpoint, LeBron, Dwyane and Chris were 3 of the top 4 players in the NBA last season.

There is only one basketball, but when the game is on the line, Miami now has 3 options who are among the best in the world at getting it done. In fact, in the clutch minutes (final 5 minutes), James was the best scorer, Bosh and Wade were in the top 25, and Wade was the 3rd best assist man (behind Nash and Deron Williams - source 82games.com).

Miami has amazingly added a group of role players with playoff experience, even NBA Finals experience. Barring major loss to injuries, the Heat should dominate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Harry Callahan

You completely missed my point supposed Spurs fan Rascal. Look at the details behind all these transactions through the years for the LAL. The Lakers traded (in most cases) garbage for players or picks that propped up their franchise.

There is nothing superior about a front office whose three most impactful moves in the last 15 years were to buy Shaq O'Neal for no compensation (and less money than what Orlando offered), this move allows you to trade an inferior center Divac for Kobe Bryant the same offseason.

The incompentent Charlotte Hornet GM Bob Bass got one year out of Divac in exchange for Kobe Bryant. Utterly stupid on his part. The only reason Bass kept his job with Hornets for way too long is George Shinn being the rotten owner he is.

LA has reaped the benefits from these two bogus transactions for 15 years. These two moves were no-brainers for LA. There was no intelligence involved. Shaq was a scumbag (and a great player) who was an attention whore and thought nothing of destroying Orlando's franchise for years. Bryant refused to play for Charlotte (another attention whore who had to play in a big market). Bob Bass blinked and made a bad trade.

The Gasol deal was an inside job, no doubt about it. No other teams were allowed to make a legit for Gasol offer as the incompetent Memphis owner got taken by the retiring team president in Jerry West who spent most of his adult life playing or working for the Lakers.

These transactions had as much to do with incompetence on the part of other franchises as anything. The Lakers have received a bunch of free passes that bastardized the competitive balance of the NBA. David Stern looks the other way - as well all know "Lakers vs. Lakers" is what he wants.

The Miami situation also taints the league with players thumbing their noses at some of the franchises and leaving them high and dry so guys like Bosh, Wade, and James can put on a circus. The NBA is veering towards ML Baseball territory now. The salary cap keeps the NBA from becoming a joke like MLB where the top FA players generally end up in Boston or New York.

The NFL is dominating the other pro leagues because all the teams have a realisitic OPPORTUNITY to compete for championships. The Green Bays and New Orleans of the world can compete with the big market teams to win titles. MLB can't say that. It was a little miracle that the Spurs have won so many titles given the road the NBA seems to be taking.

---

This.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Harry Callahan

You completely missed my point supposed Spurs fan Rascal. Look at the details behind all these transactions through the years for the LAL. The Lakers traded (in most cases) garbage for players or picks that propped up their franchise.

There is nothing superior about a front office whose three most impactful moves in the last 15 years were to buy Shaq O'Neal for no compensation (and less money than what Orlando offered), this move allows you to trade an inferior center Divac for Kobe Bryant the same offseason.

The incompentent Charlotte Hornet GM Bob Bass got one year out of Divac in exchange for Kobe Bryant. Utterly stupid on his part. The only reason Bass kept his job with Hornets for way too long is George Shinn being the rotten owner he is.

LA has reaped the benefits from these two bogus transactions for 15 years. These two moves were no-brainers for LA. There was no intelligence involved. Shaq was a scumbag (and a great player) who was an attention whore and thought nothing of destroying Orlando's franchise for years. Bryant refused to play for Charlotte (another attention whore who had to play in a big market). Bob Bass blinked and made a bad trade.

The Gasol deal was an inside job, no doubt about it. No other teams were allowed to make a legit for Gasol offer as the incompetent Memphis owner got taken by the retiring team president in Jerry West who spent most of his adult life playing or working for the Lakers.

These transactions had as much to do with incompetence on the part of other franchises as anything. The Lakers have received a bunch of free passes that bastardized the competitive balance of the NBA. David Stern looks the other way - as well all know "Lakers vs. Lakers" is what he wants.

The Miami situation also taints the league with players thumbing their noses at some of the franchises and leaving them high and dry so guys like Bosh, Wade, and James can put on a circus. The NBA is veering towards ML Baseball territory now. The salary cap keeps the NBA from becoming a joke like MLB where the top FA players generally end up in Boston or New York.

The NFL is dominating the other pro leagues because all the teams have a realisitic OPPORTUNITY to compete for championships. The Green Bays and New Orleans of the world can compete with the big market teams to win titles. MLB can't say that. It was a little miracle that the Spurs have won so many titles given the road the NBA seems to be taking.

---

No you don't see it. Thats what makes the Lakers a great front office. They make steals of trades landing stars for nothing. They can attract and get the top free agents. And dont say it is because they are in LA. The Clippers also play in LA. The lakers have a history of success and much of it is due to an agressive active front office.

They deliver the players with their player moves. the spurs do nothing other than build their team through the draft. Most of their top players have been their draft picks. And many of the moves the Spurs have made regarding trades and free agency have been failures. That is not a successful front office.

If it wasn't for blind luck landing Robinson and Duncan the spurs would have not won anything. The lakers even 3 peated during 3 prime years of Robinson and Duncan together. That is a lame run for the spurs front office to lose out to the Lakers 3 years in a row with Robinson and Duncan on the team. They made some bad player acquisistions during that 3 year run.

Which front office lakers or Spurs do you think will deliver titles in the future? The clear answer is the lakers front office. They have the history which shows they regroup and win titles by the moves they make not depending on lucky lottery balls.

Miami was collusion because their team was formed in the summer of 2008. I don't give a shit, because collusion doesn't bother me in the slightest, but lets call a spade a spade.

The reason that the NBA differs from MLB and NFL is there are less players and single individual talents make greater impacts. It has little to do with city. If a team has a stud they will succeed, whether its LA, SA or Memphis.

I agree the days of small market teams building a team through the draft and competing for a title in the NBA may be coming to an end as players see that they can jump teams and join together like what happened in Miami. Chris Paul wanted to also join in on it but was not able to because of his contract with New Orleans.

The big market teams that are attractive destinations will be the teams that build winners overnight and San Antonio is not high on that list of desirable destinations. The NBA doesn't care as long as marquee teams exist in the big dollar markets.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rascal

I agree the days of small market teams building a team through the draft and competing for a title in the NBA may be coming to an end as players see that they can jump teams and join together like what happened in Miami. Chris Paul wanted to also join in on it but was not able to because of his contract with New Orleans.

The big market teams that are attractive destinations will be the teams that will build winners overnight and San Antonio is not high on that list of desirable destinations. The NBA doesn't care as long as marquee teams exist in the big dollar markets.

---

I agree somewhat, but that doesn't explain the utter futility of the Knicks (the NBA's largest market).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeadlyDynasty

I agree somewhat, but that doesn't explain the utter futility of the Knicks (the NBA's largest market).

---

It is karma for that 1985 draft lottery.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by picc84

Miami was collusion because their team was formed in the summer of 2008. I don't give a shit, because collusion doesn't bother me in the slightest, but lets call a spade a spade.

---

Of course collusion would not bother you. The lakers will be on top of the list of teams that collude to remain on top.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeadlyDynasty

I agree somewhat, but that doesn't explain the utter futility of the Knicks (the NBA's largest market).

---

The NBA wants the Knicks to get back on top. Give it another year or two and they will be back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rascal

The NBA wants the Knicks to get back on top. Give it another year or two and they will be back.

---

maybe so, but the NBA's largest market hasn't won since 1973 (I think?) and they've been downright putrid this past decade

Finally went to see Inception last night. I was prepared to be disappointed because it had been built up so much. But it was a great movie. Very well done and great job of telling a pretty complex story in just under 3 hours.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rascal

If it wasn't for blind luck landing Robinson and Duncan the spurs would have not won anything. The lakers even 3 peated during 3 prime years of Robinson and Duncan together. That is a lame run for the spurs front office to lose out to the Lakers 3 years in a row with Robinson and Duncan on the team. They made some bad player acquisistions during that 3 year run.

---

The first year of the run, Duncan went down with a knee injury; second year, Derek Andersen (a free agent aquisition) went down with a cheap shot in the preceding round (say what you will, but he WAS the 2nd leading scorer that season; - not saying the Spurs would have won, but they would have made it a series) - not to mention Sean Eliot's kidney prematurely ended his career - and the last year of the three peat was Parker's first year (19 year old rookie starting pg) - and the Spurs were CLEARLY building, for they would win 3 of the next 5 rings - with consistent contributions from several notable FA acquisitions (Claxton, Kerr, Horry, Barry, etc...)

Hell, if the front office's were switched, and the Lakers had to play with the hand the Spurs were, and are, dealt being in a relatively TINY market - I'm doubting the Lakers brain trust could win a division, much less 4 championships! Hell, they failed to make the playoffs with Kobe IN HIS PRIME!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cantthinkofanything

Finally went to see Inception last night. I was prepared to be disappointed because it had been built up so much. But it was a great movie. Very well done and great job of telling a pretty complex story in just under 3 hours.

---

you should netflix "girl with the dragon tattoo"...great flick as well

Free agents want to go to a franchise in a marquis city where there will an instant shot of winning it all. Miami had everything to offer lebron and bosh as well as wade. It's an advantage Miami has over franchises like the Spurs. It makes the Spurs' championships that more impressive. Spurs FO decisions are all the more crucical. Winning is more dependent on the draft than free agency for SAS.

I think refereeing of games is a bigger issue than player collusion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rascal

No you don't see it. Thats what makes the Lakers a great front office. They make steals of trades landing stars for nothing. They can attract and get the top free agents. And dont say it is because they are in LA. The Clippers also play in LA. The lakers have a history of success and much of it is due to an agressive active front office.

They deliver the players with their player moves. the spurs do nothing other than build their team through the draft. Most of their top players have been their draft picks. And many of the moves the Spurs have made regarding trades and free agency have been failures. That is not a successful front office.
If it wasn't for blind luck landing Robinson and Duncan the spurs would have not won anything. The lakers even 3 peated during 3 prime years of Robinson and Duncan together. That is a lame run for the spurs front office to lose out to the Lakers 3 years in a row with Robinson and Duncan on the team. They made some bad player acquisistions during that 3 year run.

Which front office lakers or Spurs do you think will deliver titles in the future? The clear answer is the lakers front office. They have the history which shows they regroup and win titles by the moves they make not depending on lucky lottery balls.

---

That's a bit of an extreme position to take, rascal. While there is some ping-pong ball luck involved, there have been a lot of decisions and selling that the Spurs have had to do over the years to make things happen. The fact that they even made it into the NBA and land David Robinson after drafting him were because of the efforts of Angelo Drossos.

Angelo Drossos, of the lame Spurs front offices of which you speak, did some amazing selling to a group of San Antonio banks at the last minute to get $5M in loans to pay the NBA, Kentucky Colonels and Spirits of St. Louis so that San Antonio could get into the NBA. Drossos and others battled with Red Auerbach and Larry O'Brien regarding the 3-point shot and gained acceptance for it in the NBA. In 1989, there was speculation that Robinson might choose not to sign with the Spurs and to become a free agent once his Navy commitment ended. Robinson decided in the end to come to San Antonio, no thanks to Rick Barry's comments, due in part to the wooing by Drossos, GM Bob Bass and the rest of the Spurs' front office.

By the time the Spurs made it to the NBA Finals, under the regime of Peter Holt and other investors, Gregg Popovich and RC Buford, the Spurs did have 3 great (lucky?) draftees in Robinson, Duncan and Elliott but, as we all know, you don't win championships with just 3 star players. You must have key role players to win championships (ask Michael). The Spurs front office added starters Mario Elie and Avery Johnson...plus Lakers-killer Jaren Jackson, Malik Rose, Antonio Daniels, Steve Kerr, Jerome Kersey and Will Perdue - all undrafted by the Spurs.

When the Spurs won the NBA crown in 2003, they wouldn't have done it without Captain Jack, before he was Captain Jack, and taking a flier on Tony Parker, spending some money to bring over Manu Ginobili..a late 2nd round asset they chose to keep over Gordon Giricek, plus Rose, Kerr, Willis, Steve Smith, Ferry and Speedy Claxton.

Luck has a role, but it's what one does with its luck, along with lots of other decisions, that separates a team from being a team like the Spurs or Lakers and from being a team with lots of lottery luck, the Los Angeles Clippers or even the Portland Trailblazers since 1977.

...and then, of course, there is the terrible front office failure in signing free agent journeyman, Bruce Bowen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rascal

This is why the lakers front office > the spurs front office

The Lakers can retool their team and stay a contender because they can acquire great players outside of the draft. The spurs only get their top players through their draft picks.
Much harder to stay on top that way. The window closes on the spurs as Duncan declines and it will take another franchise player to turn the spurs into a contender again.

---

I guess the Lakers front office is better than the spurs because they were capable of pulling off one fishy trade for gasol. Memphis could have got more for gasol in that trade and I believe someone posted a article admitting that. So that wasn't the greatness of the Lakers front office, it was horrible front office of Memphis. What other great trades are you talking about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rascal

No you don't see it. Thats what makes the Lakers a great front office. They make steals of trades landing stars for nothing. They can attract and get the top free agents. And dont say it is because they are in LA. The Clippers also play in LA. The lakers have a history of success and much of it is due to an agressive active front office.

They deliver the players with their player moves. the spurs do nothing other than build their team through the draft. Most of their top players have been their draft picks. And many of the moves the Spurs have made regarding trades and free agency have been failures. That is not a successful front office.

If it wasn't for blind luck landing Robinson and Duncan the spurs would have not won anything. The lakers even 3 peated during 3 prime years of Robinson and Duncan together. That is a lame run for the spurs front office to lose out to the Lakers 3 years in a row with Robinson and Duncan on the team. They made some bad player acquisistions during that 3 year run.

Which front office lakers or Spurs do you think will deliver titles in the future? The clear answer is the lakers front office. They have the history which shows they regroup and win titles by the moves they make not depending on lucky lottery balls.

---

Chew on this:

1. Same comment as I had for the other quote.

2. You are an idiot if you do not believe location is a major factor in them getting more and better free agents than the spurs. Clippers have a great location but they suck and that is why free agent do not go there. Lakers have a great location and they are good. That is why free agents go there not because the lakers front office is agressive.

3. I wish I had that video that repeats "You're Wrong" many times because you are so wrong.

A few things that won us championships outside of the draft:
-Bruce Bowen
-Stephen Jackson
-Steve Kerr
-Rasho
-Nazr mohammad
-Robert Horry
-etc.

4. Is this a bad thing? No. The only pick we got lucky on was tim duncan. The other picks were steals that were made by the best front office in the league. I just want to know why the lakers didn't want a player like tony or manu on their team. Oh, because their front office couldn't recognize the potential like the spurs front office did.

5. The one failure is Richard Jefferson. Hedo turkoglu was almost on that list on number three. If only he did not choke and .4 did not happen. That would have been another great pickup.

6. I didn't realize that was David's prime.

7. Yeah, I hate bruce bowen to.

8. Wrong question you idiot. What front office would you rather run your team? Answer is the spurs front office.

Question: Why is there so many people from the spurs organization around the league and not as many from the lakers?

:ihit You just got smashed. Spurs FO>>>>>Lakers FO

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solid D

That's a bit of an extreme position to take, rascal. While there is some ping-pong ball luck involved, there have been a lot of decisions and selling that the Spurs have had to do over the years to make things happen. The fact that they even made it into the NBA and land David Robinson after drafting him were because of the efforts of Angelo Drossos.

Angelo Drossos, of the lame Spurs front offices of which you speak, did some amazing selling to a group of San Antonio banks at the last minute to get $5M in loans to pay the NBA, Kentucky Colonels and Spirits of St. Louis so that San Antonio could get into the NBA. Drossos and others battled with Red Auerbach and Larry O'Brien regarding the 3-point shot and gained acceptance for it in the NBA. In 1989, there was speculation that Robinson might choose not to sign with the Spurs and to become a free agent once his Navy commitment ended. Robinson decided in the end to come to San Antonio, no thanks to Rick Barry's comments, due in part to the wooing by Drossos, GM Bob Bass and the rest of the Spurs' front office.

By the time the Spurs made it to the NBA Finals, under the regime of Peter Holt and other investors, Gregg Popovich and RC Buford, the Spurs did have 3 great (lucky?) draftees in Robinson, Duncan and Elliott but, as we all know, you don't win championships with just 3 star players. You must have key role players to win championships (ask Michael). The Spurs front office added starters Mario Elie and Avery Johnson...plus Lakers-killer Jaren Jackson, Malik Rose, Antonio Daniels, Steve Kerr, Jerome Kersey and Will Perdue - all undrafted by the Spurs.

When the Spurs won the NBA crown in 2003, they wouldn't have done it without Captain Jack, before he was Captain Jack, and taking a flier on Tony Parker, spending some money to bring over Manu Ginobili..a late 2nd round asset they chose to keep over Gordon Giricek, plus Rose, Kerr, Willis, Steve Smith, Ferry and Speedy Claxton.

Luck has a role, but it's what one does with its luck, along with lots of other decisions, that separates a team from being a team like the Spurs or Lakers and from being a team with lots of lottery luck, the Los Angeles Clippers or even the Portland Trailblazers since 1977.

---

Angelo drossos did great things for the franchise. I am talking about the current front office.

There would be no titles in san Antonio without lottery luck.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeadlyDynasty

you should netflix "girl with the dragon tattoo"...great flick as well

---

That's weird. You're the second person in the last hour that recommended that movie to me. I have the book but haven't started it yet. I'll check out the movie. Thanks.

Check our Primer if you get a chance. It was under the radar but a really good movie.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rascal

There would be no titles in san Antonio without lottery luck.

---

Angelo Drossos was there for the lottery and when David was drafted and when David was convinced to come. Your argument has an element of truth, but only one small element...the lucky ping pong ball element. Every other part of your premise has unconvincing data to support it.

If, in retort, you repeat the data you have already used, then it will not convince even the casual observer.

Hi all, I'm new to the forum but am a bit confused. This is a Spurs FAN forum, right?? What's the deal with rascal??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by calabrese_P

Hi all, I'm new to the forum but am a bit confused. This is a Spurs FAN forum, right?? What's the deal with rascal??

---

Welcome to the board. Yes, this is forum of mostly Spurs fans. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solid D

That's a bit of an extreme position to take, rascal. While there is some ping-pong ball luck involved, there have been a lot of decisions and selling that the Spurs have had to do over the years to make things happen. The fact that they even made it into the NBA and land David Robinson after drafting him were because of the efforts of Angelo Drossos.

Angelo Drossos, of the lame Spurs front offices of which you speak, did some amazing selling to a group of San Antonio banks at the last minute to get $5M in loans to pay the NBA, Kentucky Colonels and Spirits of St. Louis so that San Antonio could get into the NBA. Drossos and others battled with Red Auerbach and Larry O'Brien regarding the 3-point shot and gained acceptance for it in the NBA. In 1989, there was speculation that Robinson might choose not to sign with the Spurs and to become a free agent once his Navy commitment ended. Robinson decided in the end to come to San Antonio, no thanks to Rick Barry's comments, due in part to the wooing by Drossos, GM Bob Bass and the rest of the Spurs' front office.

By the time the Spurs made it to the NBA Finals, under the regime of Peter Holt and other investors, Gregg Popovich and RC Buford, the Spurs did have 3 great (lucky?) draftees in Robinson, Duncan and Elliott but, as we all know, you don't win championships with just 3 star players. You must have key role players to win championships (ask Michael). The Spurs front office added starters Mario Elie and Avery Johnson...plus Lakers-killer Jaren Jackson, Malik Rose, Antonio Daniels, Steve Kerr, Jerome Kersey and Will Perdue - all undrafted by the Spurs.

When the Spurs won the NBA crown in 2003, they wouldn't have done it without Captain Jack, before he was Captain Jack, and taking a flier on Tony Parker, spending some money to bring over Manu Ginobili..a late 2nd round asset they chose to keep over Gordon Giricek, plus Rose, Kerr, Willis, Steve Smith, Ferry and Speedy Claxton.

Luck has a role, but it's what one does with its luck, along with lots of other decisions, that separates a team from being a team like the Spurs or Lakers and from being a team with lots of lottery luck, the Los Angeles Clippers or even the Portland Trailblazers since 1977.

---

Its not only having the lottery luck to land the first pick, like what the Clippers have done, but to have the lottery luck in the years that two Hall of fame franchise centers were available like what happened with the Spurs.

The Lakers went on to win 3 titles during the Robinson-Duncan era because the front office did not go out and get enough talent during those years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rascal

Its not only having the lottery luck to land the first pick, like what the Clippers have done, but to have the lottery luck in the years that two Hall of fame franchise centers were available like what happened with the Spurs.

---

...and that is why I mentioned post-'77 Portland. They passed on one of the greatest basketball players in the history of the game. They passed on a Hall of Fame Franchise player. Portland was lucky enough to draft ahead of the Chicago Bulls and they selected Sam Bowie.

You've lost your argument. Game, set, match.

Damn, good posting Solid D. I am still relatively new around here and I have not seen you post that much. But it seems like you are posting a bit more lately and it is good stuff.

Thanks, DPG21920. I would hardly think of you as relatively new...but I appreciate the thought.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rascal

Of course collusion would not bother you. The lakers will be on top of the list of teams that collude to remain on top.

---

Thats right. We'll be on top of a lot of things, for a long long time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeadlyDynasty

I agree somewhat, but that doesn't explain the utter futility of the Knicks (the NBA's largest market).

---

The Knicks fascination with Isiah Thomas is utterly bewildering. Probably one of the biggest failures of a large market team in professional sports and it appears to be deserved.

The Lakers can get idiots like Ron Artest and Matt Barnes to play, but they certainly are not going to let them coach or evaluate talent. Totally dont get the Knicks.

If the Spurs weren't located in San Antonio everyone would come to the Spurs and none of you would bitch

This is what makes me ashamed to be a Spurs fan. The girls that cry. Gasol got traded to the Lakers...wahhhhhhh. Let it go, man. We got Robinson and Duncan in the lottery which was as lucky as it gets. Should Laker fans cry about that?

HAHAHAHA dude even though RJ didn't come out what we wanted him to be he was averaging like 19 points in Milwaukee we still traded him for Oberto, Bowen, Thomas who combined made like 9 points so we are not ones to talk shit bro

If city was paramount, then explain the Clippers.

Success starts from the top down. You can have lotto luck and win rings (SA) or you can fuck it up (Cleveland). It all depends on how good your ownership and management is.

You don't have the continued success like the Laker franchise just based on luck, collusion, or any other conspiracy.

The Spurs are a great franchise as well. The problem is they are relativitely new to success - both the ownership & management as well as fans. They can bring in supporting talent but are wary of the risk involved in making the bold move. Thats where LA has the edge. Trading an All-Star center for a 17 year old rookie out of HS before it was vogue takes brass ones. Being the first to clear out cap space and dump players for Shaq set the standard. Willing to take on all the payroll of Pau took advantage of a situation when no other team was offerring that cap relief. Even telling Kobe no to dealing him or dealing Bynum. The Lakers have had gambles pay off. Some have failed like the short term impact of trading Shaq but scared money don't make none.

If SA wants to survive they have to roll the dice. Deal Parker for young talent, even deal Duncan if need be. Don't give all that money to old Manu or to RJ. SA doesn't know when to fold a hand and shuffle the deck - that's why they've got left behind - not collusion or small city. Its the mentality, not the market.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Harry Callahan

That's correct. It was beneath Kobe to play for the Charlotte Hornets. Idiot Bob Bass let him go to LA.

---

I'm from North Carolina, and any player who refuses to play basketball in the basketball capital of the universe isn't worth spitting on.

The sense of entitlement Bryant showed as a high school kid coming into the NBA, and refusing to play in Charlotte, was beyond astounding. Yet he's now made a career of that type of behavior.

So I've hated Bryant's guts ever since. He's proved to be nothing but a jake since Day One.

So many myths taken as facts....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baseline

I'm from North Carolina, and any player who refuses to play basketball in the basketball capital of the universe isn't worth spitting on.

The sense of entitlement Bryant showed as a high school kid coming into the NBA, and refusing to play in Charlotte, was beyond astounding. Yet he's now made a career of that type of behavior.

So I've hated Bryant's guts ever since. He's proved to be nothing but a jake since Day One.

---

Right - because its been such great NBA basketball in Charlotte.

First off, Charlotte was a mess at the time.

Quote:

---

By 1996, the Hornets were in a state of transition. Center Alonzo Mourning had been traded to Miami for Glen Rice and Matt Geiger. Larry Johnson was on the verge of being traded to the New York Knicks for Anthony Mason.

The team was still selling out every home game – the streak would eventually reach 364 games before ending in November 1997 – but the business of professional basketball had changed the dynamic.

Allan Bristow had resigned as coach after the team went 41-41 and missed the NBA playoffs in the 1995-96 season. Former Boston Celtics great Dave Cowens was hired.

The Hornets had one of the shortest rosters in the NBA after Mourning left, making it imperative they find a big man. With the 13th and 16th picks in the first round, the plan was to find a big man, then draft another guard.

"To think we were taking Kobe …" Bass says. "We had a small team and we were looking for size."

Among the big men the Hornets considered were Wright State's Vitaly Potapenko, Louisville's Samaki Walker and Memphis' Lorenzen Wright. Charlotte native Todd Fuller, a center at N.C. State, figured to be gone before the Hornets would draft.

With the 16th pick, the Hornets already had their eye on a guard – Santa Clara's Steve Nash, who had worked out with the team shortly before the draft. The Hornets had invited Bryant for a workout, but he cancelled the visit. The team had scouted Bryant twice but wanted a private workout to get a better feel for his potential.

"He wouldn't work out with us and that bothered us," Bass said. "We couldn't meet him. His agent was trying to aim him to the Lakers and they threatened us."

The Hornets got the message that if they drafted Bryant, he wouldn't play in Charlotte.

They weren't the only team to be warned off taking Bryant for their own.

The New Jersey Nets, coached by John Calipari, considered Bryant with the eighth pick but chose Villanova's Kerry Kittles after hearing a similar message.

---

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/201...g-on-kobe.html

But it still says NJ was warned away - not true either. At least not from Kobe.

Quote:

---

First West had to take the huge gamble of trading veteran center Vlade Divac to the Charlotte Hornets for their thirteenth pick in the draft. Then he learned that John Calipari, the coach of the New Jersey Nets, planned to take [Kobe] Bryant with the eighth pick before the Lakers could snare him at thirteen.

“Jerry wanted Kobe, so he basically called up and talked Cal out of drafting Kobe,” explained Hal Wiseel, who was with the Nets at the time. West encouraged the Bryant family to talk to Calipari and explain that their son really wanted to play for the Lakers. “He knew if we didn’t take him at eight, he’d drop to Charlotte, and he could make the deal with Charlotte,” Wissel recalled. “Cal was young in the league and, hey, it’s Jerry West on the phone.”

---

http://dimemag.com/2010/02/jerry-wes...drafting-kobe/

Quote:

---

The night before the draft, Calipari and Nash dined with Kobe’s parents, Joe and Pam. Joe had played in the NBA and in Italy. Mom and Dad told the Nets they were all for their son living in Jersey, a short drive from their suburban Philly home.

A practical joke for so long, the Nets were planning for one of the biggest nights in franchise history. The draft was being held in the Meadowlands, and on their own turf the Nets were going to stage a pep rally.

Calipari would introduce his first blue-chip recruit, a kid who would’ve never picked Cal’s Massachusetts program over the Blue Devils of Duke.

And then the phone rang. Out of nowhere, Bryant’s agent, Arn Tellem, warned the Nets that his client would play in Italy if the franchise dared to draft him.

Nash suspected it was a bluff. He figured Tellem had conspired with sneaker maven Sonny Vaccaro to steer Bryant to a larger, sexier market. He figured that Lakers GM Jerry West, a huge Bryant fan, had a prearranged deal with a team sitting behind the Nets in the draft pecking order.

---

http://www.northjersey.com/columnist...ost_a_Net.html

Kobe ended up in LA but that's because of West and Kobe's agent. Kobe would have been fine playing with the Nets. Again - it was about a franchise/management believing in what they felt and going for it. Ballsy move, took some pull and influence but that's the way the game is played. Relationships are part of most NBA trades.

To act like Kobe played no part in forcing his way to LA is silly.

And while I'm at - West wasn't part of the Gasol trade. I won't even post what was said at the time - I'll post what the owner said well after the deal when he was regretting it.

Quote:

---

“Is anybody jumping on Popovich in San Antonio because he traded that center to Houston for virtually nothing?” Heisley wondered.

Heisley was talking about Luis Scola, the forward, whom had been a long-ago draft pick of the Spurs. Only problem was, Scola never played a minute for the four-time champions. Gasol was the Grizzlies’ franchise player, and it was Spurs coach Gregg Popovich saying on the record what most of his peers had only the guts to say without attribution: What in the world was Memphis management thinking on the Gasol trade?

When much of the league was determined to make a serious bid for the 7-footer, how could Memphis settle so long before the February trade deadline for such a paltry offer out of the Lakers?

For the first time, even Heisley wondered whether his general manager, Chris Wallace, blew it by caving so soon to the Lakers.

“I don’t know if I got the most value,” Heisley confessed. “Maybe our people should’ve shopped (Gasol) more and maybe we would’ve gotten more, done a better deal. Maybe Chris did call every team in the league. I don’t think he did, but maybe he should’ve…”

Around the league, nothing will change this belief: Whatever the reasoning, this was one of the NBA’s worst trades in years. Most of all, rival executives wonder why they never had a chance to submit a best offer. For Gasol, the 7-footer who transformed the Lakers in the absence of Andrew Bynum, the Grizzlies were willing to take back the expiring contract of Kwame Brown, rookie point guard Javaris Crittenton, two future No. 1 picks and the draft rights to Gasol’s brother, Marc.

Crittenton is nothing special, and those draft picks in 2008 and 2010 will be near, if not at the end of, the first round. Gasol had demanded a trade out of Memphis, had been moping around, giving less than his best. Yes, he had to go, but you don’t trade your franchise player without getting back a minimum of a sure-thing young star and/or two solid young starters. For Memphis, salary-cap space will probably turn out to be money that’ll never make it back into the roster.

The one-sided nature of the trade inspired a lot of people to believe that retired Memphis GM, Jerry West, a Lakers’ legend, played a part in facilitating the deal. West was instrumental recruiting Wallace as his replacement in Memphis and still holds a close relationship with Heisley. His history in Los Angeles, especially his bond with Lakers GM Mitch Kupchak and star Kobe Bryant, made even the fair-minded cynical about the scenario.

Several sources close to the process insist West played no part, and Heisley swears, “Jerry didn’t know about the trade until after it was done.”

Still, it hasn’t stopped a rampant anger around the league that this wasn’t so much of a trade, as much as it was the word that Bryant himself used: a “donation.” Privately, the Lakers were thrilled that they were able to keep negotiations with the Grizzlies quiet because Los Angeles officials were blown away that they could get Gasol for so little.

One source with knowledge of the process said the Bulls had made the most credible offer. For Gasol and Memphis’ Hakim Warrick, the Bulls were willing to part with Andres Nocioni, Tyrus Thomas, Joakim Noah, Thabo Sefolosha, possibly Adrian Griffin and draft picks.

Heisley didn’t offer up those names, but insisted, “Chicago wouldn’t offer us any of their good, core players,” he said. “Our people told me that we weren’t able to get equal trade value for Gasol and that we needed to do a deal that would give us cap space and draft picks. It was no secret in the league that we were considering offers for him, but the Lakers were the one team that stepped up.”

Heisley has been losing money in Memphis, a small market where the franchise has come to flounder. He tried to sell the team, but no one has reached his asking price. Around the league there are those who believe that Wallace was forced to turn the Gasol trade into a salary dump, and there are league officials, including a close friend, who believe, “There is no way that Chris ever would’ve made that trade on his own.”

“I have no buyer’s remorse,” Heisley said. “Listen, I can’t tell you how many people would tell me, wherever I went in Memphis, ‘Get rid of Gasol. …Trade Gasol.’ And then some of the same people are booing us because we traded him. But I don’t mind that. I’m a big boy. I can take it.”

---

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slu...leygasol060308

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DPG21920

To act like Kobe played no part in forcing his way to LA is silly.

---

To act like he staged a coup is just as foolish. He would have went to NJ. Charlotte didn't even want him. Yes, he let his agent get him to a bigger market for commercial purposes but the only other team looking for a guard got conned out of it by the greatest GM of all-time.

Multiple layers of complexity but it all goes back to management/ownership ready to win, regardless of city. The Lakers have it. The Spurs have it - they just don't have enough experience to get back to the mountain after falling off. They keep putting fingers in the dike instead of rebuilding the whole thing.

Look at Kobe's actions now, they match up with the actions of back then. And "now" is supposedly when he is more mature.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rascal

No you don't see it. Thats what makes the Lakers a great front office. They make steals of trades landing stars for nothing. They can attract and get the top free agents. And dont say it is because they are in LA. The Clippers also play in LA. The lakers have a history of success and much of it is due to an agressive active front office.

---

Explain Baron Davis leaving Golden State for the Clippers then....

LA has a HUGE advantage with Hollywood when it comes to marketing $$$ players can make, and whether you want to believe it or not, players DO look at how much TOTAL $$$ they can make in a city, rather than just from their basketball contract.

It's why a guy like Jason Kidd turns down the chance to play with the NBA Champs in 2003 because he and his wife can't make the kinda $$$ they were making with NYC in their backyard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solid D

...and that is why I mentioned post-'77 Portland. They passed on one of the greatest basketball players in the history of the game. They passed on a Hall of Fame Franchise player. Portland was lucky enough to draft ahead of the Chicago Bulls and they selected Sam Bowie.

You've lost your argument. Game, set, match.

---

How did I lose the argument? My argument was the Clippers did not draft number 1 at a time there was a clear cut franchise player like Robinson or Duncan on the board.

The spurs championships are a direct result of that lottery luck and not so much to a superior front office. The front office is very conservative and almost fearful to pull the trigger on trades to upgrade the team. They also dont do enough to create and use cap space to add quality players. They would rather plug the holes with role player type of talent then take any chances with players like Sprewell, Barkley or R Wallace, all who could have given the spurs that extra spark to get past the Lakers.

Someone mentioned Kerr, Muhammad and Rasho as top trade/free agent moves for the franchise. what a joke. Kerr hit a few shots in a playoff game. Such a great aquisition that he was off the team the next year and did nothing else. Muhammad and Rasho, they won despite those guys. They were so good they let both of them go while they still had a hole at center.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dunc n Dave

Explain Baron Davis leaving Golden State for the Clippers then....

LA has a HUGE advantage with Hollywood when it comes to marketing $$$ players can make, and whether you want to believe it or not, players DO look at how much TOTAL $$$ they can make in a city, rather than just from their basketball contract.

It's why a guy like Jason Kidd turns down the chance to play with the NBA Champs in 2003 because he and his wife can't make the kinda $$$ they were making with NYC in their backyard.

---

What marketing money has Davis made because he plays for the Clippers that he couldn't make elsewhere? What does Hollywood have to do with the NBA and Davis making more money because Hollywood is in LA?


Davis is not the type of player that makes that much difference to turn the team into a contender anyways.

Fakers are at the top because they pull of unbalanced trades (Gasol) and get big name FAs for cheap (Artest). Its funny that the failed ring chasers are never mentioned by faker fans (Payton, Malone). If anyone argues that LA does not have the edge in attracting FA or pulling of unbalanced trades then that person is either trolling or a moron. No need argue with such people. A fact is a fact.