The trade hasn't even been given to the league office at this point. Nobody can do anything until July 9.
Yes but there is almost no precedent in teams backing out of a trade unless a player fails a physical or the NBA vetoes the trade. Bud and Pop are close so they may have a wink wink agreement but it's going to look very obvious if this trade doesn't go through. Other owners might cry foul play. They've cried for less.
Bud's hands might be tied because the trade was made public. All of Atlanta is expecting the team to get Splitter for peanuts. He might not be able to reverse it.
The biggest threat that is prying LMA away from the Spurs is Portland tbh. In the end, LMA might just be toying with these teams just to get a bigger check from the team he's played his whole career with.
The trade doesn't exist. It's been reported in the media. If the Spurs and the Hawks say "What trade?" in two days, there's nothing anyone can do about it. There's a moratorium. If a player gives a verbal agreement today and then changes his mind before the 9th they could do it.
They already offered him the most money they can possibly offer, and more than anyone else. If money is his goal, he could have stayed at home. Again, it's a pretty elaborate ruse selling his house in Oregon just to go back.
I would love for Aldridge to sign with the Spurs, but IMO the key to the Spurs free agency was resigning Green/Leonard and the return of TD.
The only bad part of going after Aldridge, not just for the Spurs, but for all teams seriously interested, is the wait.
Decent plan B's start disappearing. Also, complementary pieces the team could to go after along with him, also start disappearing. I can't fathom what it takes to make this type of decision, but I think it's in the free agent's best interest, and his new team's best interest, to decide quickly.
The pursuing teams also have to have an internal deadline, "if he doesn't decide by x date, then it's time to move on" after all, it is a business decision.
2 pages and counting...
I think this is wishful thinking. Unless you can point out something similar happening in the past, I highly doubt the league will let this fly. Bud is supposed to be an independent president of operations of another team, not the patsy of the Spurs. The Hawks have no incentive to back out of the trade, they are getting a very good big for nothing.
The rest of the owners were crying conspiracy when the Grizzlies salary dumped Gasol. This is even more obvious.
FA have backed out before (very rarely) but they only represent themselves, not another team. There's no possibility of collusion there. And even when FA back out of their verbal agreements, they are vilified for it.
Sun of a . Seriously. His wishy washyness already makes him a got and not in a gay way. Just straight up got. I want players who want to play here.
Just a memory is all he’ll ever be,
he had to stay, I had to go...
He could always come to the realization that he couldn't picture himself leaving Portland... the realization which can come anytime within seconds of making his final decision. But again, I'm just trying not to get my hopes up just to have it crushed lol.
You keep saying this, but it only exists in your imagination, particularly the part about what the Spurs are getting back. The only announcement has been that the Spurs traded Tiago Splitter. There has not been a single shred of paper filed with the league office, because it can't happen at the moment. This is not the same as the Gasol trade, which took place in the middle of the season. This is an announcement during a mandatory league moratorium. If you can come up with a rule that it violates, either spirit or letter, I'd love to see it.
If the Spurs lose out on LMA tomorrow, they can say "We've decided that we aren't trading Splitter" and there's nothing anyone can do about it.
EDIT: The Spurs probably will NOT do that. They'll probably take Walter Tavares or a draft pick or something, but they could do that.
Spurs fans = Zack if LMA signs elsewhere.
But he is good! 23 and 10 guys don't come around too often...
I can say the same thing. Teams backing out of trades exist only in your imagination. If you can point out a couple of past examples of this happening, I'd love to see it. If you can find a team that's backed out of a verbal agreement trade that was reported by legitimate media, I will feel better about the Spurs chances to keep Splitter.
Any sane 3rd party can see this as collusion and the NBA doesn't need specific laws to take action. The league has vetoed trades based on "basketball reasons," fined the Spurs for resting players, and took away a team from an owner for past racist comments. I doubt any of that shows up in the rule book. As long as the owners agree to that unfair compe ion is taking place, Silver can act.
Edit: I don't want to keep arguing with you. Spurstalk is the worst place to have a discussion since everyone is so stubborn and everyone believes they're right. I will concede that the Spurs COULD try to pull this off but likely won't because other teams can easily claim unfair compe ion (aka collusion) and Bud would not look so good in front of the Hawk's owner. So Splitter is likely gone which is my original point.
Last edited by 024; 07-02-2015 at 04:50 PM.
SOFT
Well, I do see your side in this, and I understand that the league has powers that extend beyond the rule book, but I simply can't see any violation here, even if nobody has done it before. , for all we know, it HAS been done, but there wasn't 24-hour media and people scooping each other to report it when it happened. General managers talk to each other all the time, and they rescind trades all the time. Usually it's for medical reasons, and sometimes it's just blamed on medical reasons. The Thunder backed out of a trade for Tyson Chandler years ago and vaguely mentioned "cause for concern". Chandler has been playing the subsequent six years in the NBA.
Anyway, if I had to predict, I'd say that's probably not what the Spurs will do. I think they'll probably just initiate the trade for something the Spurs need if Lamarcus goes somewhere else. But I'm also saying that there's just no reason I can see why they couldn't do it. If Pop and Bud had a verbal agreement that said the trade was contingent upon the Spurs' signing Lamarcus Aldridge, and then followed through, I don't see how in the world that's either collusion or a violation of any rule anywhere. It doesn't hurt any other team, and it frankly doesn't affect negotiations with any other team. It just makes the player sure that they've got their ducks lined up. It's not a conduct violation of any type. There's no rule in place that says the Spurs have to clear cap space when negotiating, and there's no rule that says the trade has to be completed before they offer a free agent a deal. If a team complains, I don't see how they're injured or damaged in any way. There's no tampering here. It's a handshake agreement between two general managers.
"Hey, I might be getting this guy, and I'll need to get rid of this other guy. Do you want him if that happens?"
"Yeah, sure. We'll figure out what to give you back if and when."
FRED AT YAHOO SPORTS REPORTS TRADE MADE
I'm simply saying that in that sequence of events above, there's not actually a trade made. Someone in the office of one of the teams called Fred at Yahoo and told him about it. That's not collusion, that's just a phone call. If the Spurs had to submit paperwork to the league, and then did this as a ruse to sneak around the process then it would definitely be a violation. General managers have a certain amount of autonomy, and Bud was in a position to take advantage of the Spurs if they signed Lamarcus, and the Spurs were in a position to get their player back if they didn't.
Wow 7th in the NBA in scoring 23.4ppg and 8th in rebounding 10.2rpg.. Also, people say he's a terrible defender? Wrong. Apparently he's among the best interior defenders in the NBA too.
This was just a season ago, check this out...
http://www.blazersedge.com/2013/3/4/...post-defenders
We better get this guy, because there's no way we can say 'LMA wasn't that good anyways'.
Last edited by G-Dawgg; 07-03-2015 at 12:27 AM.
That usually indicates a FA won't choose the Spurs. The FA's that choose the Spurs generally know they want to go to the Spurs.
The Spurs would lose league wide credibility if they ever did that.But I wouldn't be surprised if Splitter somehow failed his physical and Atlanta rescinded the trade,
Somehow I don't see the Spurs landing Aldridge; in his stead, they fall back on David West, Kosta Koufos, and Alan Anderson
He's a pretty good defender but he couldn't defend Zbo in the playoffs?
Good analysis.
Free agency ignited a good number of thoughtful posts.
This place does have some hope.
This is why healthy Tiago was so valuable. He could defend a wide variety of players thereby taking a huge load off of Tim. Boris is now going to have to shoulder this load and he can't frustrate guys like Tiago could. We will get another push shove pick up fouls send em to the FT line guy. Tiago actually making players take tough shots without fouling will be a concern for our D.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote