No "Stack back to Dallas" allowed - Signed, The NBA

[Findog]

It's awesome to watch the complete ownage that Jmark and fyatuk have been handing out in this thread.

Mavs fans, you should be pissed at Stack for even bringing the rule to attention.

Oh yeah, they've really been schooling everybody:

http://startelegram.typepad.com/mavs...house-can.html

The League currently doesn't have any plans to look into what Stackhouse said, nor have they said he can't return to Dallas, so it's much ado about nothing. Nothing but pathetic grasping at straws.

[LakeShow]

I have to agree with some of the mavs fans on this one. Stack did open his mouth but the rules state that it is ok for a player to go back to the team that traded him in 30 days. So what he said was not technically illegal or getting around the rules. He stated what he was going to do per league rules. I don't think the NBA should jump in and say that he can not return to mavs just because he said that. You wouldn't have changed any of the other questionable happenings in the NBA during mid season, doesn't seem fair to do it now.

In the off season, change the rules again to reflect the whole season.
stack should be allowed to sign with any team if he were bought out, even the mavs in 30 days. That's the rule!

[Findog]

Where is fyatuk now?

It's awesome to watch the complete ownage that Jmark and fyatuk have been handing out in this thread.

http://www.nj.com/nets/index.ssf/200..._as_a_net.html

ESPN.com reported that the NBA had already put a stop to the deal -- at least with regard to the Stackhouse boomerang scenario.


But a league official said last night that the report was inaccurate, and that the NBA was asking the Web site to retract it. Thorn made it sound like a non-issue.

"You can't make deals like that," Thorn said. "They're illegal. I'm not going to do that. Who knows whether he'd want to play for us or not? I'm perfectly willing to take him."

[Findog]

Pulling things directly from the CBA is hardly out of thin air. In addition...

You're the one not familiar with the CBA. The CBA says Stackhouse can go back to Dallas after 30 days.

You are a freaking moron. An argument can be based on cir stantials and heresay, not evidence. Evidence certainly helps, but it'd not necessary. Again, this isn't a court of law.

Heresay and cir stantials over hard, tangible evidence? I'd hate to get a hearing before that hypothetical arbitrator. In case you haven't noticed, since you've been so busy writing 5,000 word illogical posts about how Stackhouse and the Mavs are somehow in violation of the CBA, the NBA considers it a complete non-issue and are even asking ESPN to retract the reports that caused all this fuss:

http://www.nj.com/nets/index.ssf/200..._as_a_net.html

ESPN.com reported that the NBA had already put a stop to the deal -- at least with regard to the Stackhouse boomerang scenario.

But a league official said last night that the report was inaccurate, and that the NBA was asking the Web site to retract it. Thorn made it sound like a non-issue.

I think I'll take the word of David Stern's PR flacky and Rod Thorn over "fyatuk" on Spurstalk.com

This is getting ridiculous. If you refuse to learn, there's no point attempting to teach.

Indeed. The irony of this post is delicious.

[Cry Havoc]

Oh yeah, they've really been schooling everybody:

http://startelegram.typepad.com/mavs...house-can.html

The League currently doesn't have any plans to look into what Stackhouse said, nor have they said he can't return to Dallas, so it's much ado about nothing. Nothing but pathetic grasping at straws.

So your entire argument for this thread is based upon the stance that the NBA has "not said that something could not happen"?

In other words, you're calling out people for being an idiot because the league has not made an official comment on something yet. Ah. Brilliant. I totally see the light now.

Of COURSE the league isn't going to take an official stance on this unless they have to. It's a PR nightmare already, and they aren't going to piss off a bunch of fans needlessly when they can simply fold their hands and point to a player invoking a trade restriction as the reason they're saying no to the trade. They haven't taken an official stance yet, and you are taking this as meaning, they are fine with everything, even as the SAME article you link says the league will probably look at Stack's comments if he's included in the trade.

Get real. According to reports, EVERY GM in the league except those for the Nets and Mavs is up in arms over this deal. But you're right. They are just upset for no reason.

[Findog]

So your entire argument for this thread is based upon the stance that the NBA has "not said that something could not happen"?

In other words, you're calling out people for being an idiot because the league has not made an official comment on something yet. Ah. Brilliant. I totally see the light now.

They've done more than that, they've gone so far as to ask ESPN to retract the story.

Get real. According to reports, EVERY GM in the league except those for the Nets and Mavs is up in arms over this deal. But you're right. They are just upset for no reason.

Just like they were upset over Gasol going to the Lakers for an expiring contract, and there was nothing about that trade that violated the CBA. The Lakers got a big that made them better, rebuilding Memphis got an expiring contract and cap space. I was against the Kidd trade for x's and o's reasons, but professional basketball people with more expertise than me obviously differ on that assessment. They think Dallas gets better with Kidd if they can keep Stack, and they're clenching their cornholes, biting pillows and whining like little es. They can be upset that a Western compe or got better, but they can't argue that there is anything here that violates the CBA. Get real.

[Rummpd]

Again, Stack saying that he plans to resign with the Mavs is no violation of rules. If the Mavs and Nets had an agreement for this all to happen, then that was against the rules. But there is no proof, so there have been no rules violated as far as people looking at this situation should be concerned.

It was a brain dead trade from the get go and then even better the Mavs found a way to mess it up. The team built on the most mentally soft superstar of all time, the most obnoxious owner, and the most over-rated preachy coach is in a shambles - how fun and deserving!

[Findog]

It was a brain dead trade from the get go and then even better the Mavs found a way to mess it up. The team built on the most mentally soft superstar of all time, the most obnoxious owner, and the most over-rated preachy coach is in a shambles - how fun and deserving!

35-18 is in shambles? I'll take it!

[fyatuk]

Where is fyatuk now?

Like this is my entire life...

You're the one not familiar with the CBA. The CBA says Stackhouse can go back to Dallas after 30 days

You're still looking at the wrong rule... After being it's been explained this many times... I think you may have and away too many braincells.

I'm not explaining it again. Have fun. And thanks for the laughs!

[Findog]

You're still looking at the wrong rule... After being it's been explained this many times...

Oh yes, the "implied" "under the table" "side agreement", of which there is no evidence. But somehow pointing that out to an arbitrator won't matter.

[LakeShow]

Oh yes, the "implied" "under the table" "side agreement", of which there is no evidence. But somehow pointing that out to an arbitrator won't matter.

That would be just about impossible to prove unless there's video or audio tapes of the conversation. I personally believe that they did have an agreement which was in violation of league rules but it's not unreasonable for Stack to say that he didn't discuss that with anyone. That's his decision! He knows Cuban really would like to have him and he really would like to stay in Dallas, so he would just tell Thorn that he doesn't want to play for the Nets and would like to be bought out.

Either way Cuban and Mavs will take a hit for this. Cuban is at a no win situation. By removing Stack from the table, he gives the impression that there was collusion. By not removing him he may be afraid with the public outcry that Thorn won't buy him out even if Stack requests it. Shaky deal but no way to prove collusion. Unless stack is so stupid he tells that too!

[Findog]

That would be just about impossible to prove unless there's video or audio tapes of the conversation. I personally believe that they did have an agreement which was in violation of league rules but it's not unreasonable for Stack to say that he didn't discuss that with anyone. That's his decision! He knows Cuban really would like to have him and he really would like to stay in Dallas, so he would just tell Thorn that he doesn't want to play for the Nets and would like to be bought out.

Either way Cuban and Mavs will take a hit for this. Cuban is at a no win situation. By removing Stack from the table, he gives the impression that there was collusion. By not removing him he may be afraid with the public outcry that Thorn won't buy him out even if Stack requests it. Shaky deal but no way to prove collusion. Unless stack is so stupid he tells that too!

This Kidd trade soap opera is yet another chapter in the tragic majesty that is the Dallas Mavericks...

[Findog]

The facts are ESPN has hurt this trade far more than the two teams have by reporting false information. They run with one comment and put words in people's mouths. This trade is still well and alive but ESPN has journalists trying to make a name for themselves and be part of the story by driving the story. Neither team has said this trade is completely kaput, but ESPN keeps eulogizing it ad nauseum.

[Cry Havoc]

This Kidd trade soap opera is yet another chapter in the tragic majesty that is the Dallas Mavericks...

I can understand that you're upset now... but it's not like you guys aren't le contenders just because this trade didn't go through. You're still on the top echelon of teams, IMO.

Top tier: Spurs, Lakers, Mavs
Second tier: Suns, Hornets, Jazz

If you guys play GS in the playoffs again this year, you get the chance to beat them and get a HUGE surge of confidence.

[Findog]

I can understand that you're upset now... but it's not like you guys aren't le contenders just because this trade didn't go through. You're still on the top echelon of teams, IMO.

Top tier: Spurs, Lakers, Mavs
Second tier: Suns, Hornets, Jazz

If you guys play GS in the playoffs again this year, you get the chance to beat them and get a HUGE surge of confidence.

For the past month I've been screaming to anybody that would listen that I did NOT want the Mavs to trade for Kidd because of the high price it would take. I felt there was not enough of a difference between Harris and Kidd to make it worth it. Not saying Harris is as good as Kidd, but he's 10 years younger and he can do a better job of defending the quick guards Dallas is likely to see in the playoffs (Nash, Paul, Iverson, Parker, Williams) than Kidd. And I felt that this team as is, despite the constant effluence of negativity by national writers questioning their mettle and heart, would only be looking up at San Antonio, Detroit and Boston when April 20th rolled around.

With the proposed trade as is, I've been wrestling back and forth with whether or not the Mavs become better. When asked about it, the Pistons were adamantly against the trade, while the Suns thought it made Dallas better. I think that's understandable, given that a team like Detroit values defense (Diop, Harris), while a team like Phoenix only thinks in terms of offensive execution (Kidd). It's not a slam-dunk no-brainer. You can make arguments for and against it. As I see it, you either make this trade or you don't. What you don't let happen is to pretty much get up to the altar and break out the rings, only for one of the parties to get cold feet and run off. I would've been just fine standing pat, or bringing in a role player, but now I feel like our chemistry has been damaged if we call this trade off. You have Dirk, Stackhouse and Terry pushing for Kidd's arrival. If this doesn't happen, I wonder about Devin's confidence. I just think that this has gotten past the point of no return, and our best shot now is with Kidd as opposed to standing firm.

[JMarkJohns]

Hey, if the League didn't have an issue with it, and the source for the original article saying they did was wrong or lying, then why the revised trade that no longer includes Stackhouse?

In theory every single thing I said was accurate. if the League doesn't feel that way, perhaps they should review the rulebook, because it clearly defined that this situation is iffy, and since iffy, the appearance of collusion and cir venting made this trade worthy of the investigation.

If for whatever reason Stackhouse happens to get traded, then waived, then resigns with the Mavs after 30 days, then, in reality, I suppose it will be within the guidelines laid out by the NBA.

But you can't tell me, nor will you convince me that Stackhouse's comments don't raise questions as to whether prior arrangements/discussions had been made/had.

It's just silliness to me. The NBA needs to get it's act together this offseason and make it so that either team no longer have to match with 15%, therefore making the case of "filler" unnecessary, or disallow traded, then waived player to return to trading team for that entire season, except through a possible acquisition from a different signing team.

[Humble Billy Hayes]

Hey, if the League didn't have an issue with it, and the source for the original article saying they did was wrong or lying, then why the revised trade that no longer includes Stackhouse?

To keep the media & Suns fans from ing for 30 days about how unfair it is that Stack would be returning to Dallas?

[JMarkJohns]

To keep the media & Suns fans from ing for 30 days about how unfair it is that Stack would be returning to Dallas?

You can say whatever you want, but if the shoe was on the other foot and the Suns or Spurs were doing what the Mavericks attempted, willfully or not, then the Mavs fanbase would be ing as well.

It just seems like another instance of the NBA's rules being shortsighted. Either don't have the 30 days, or disallow a traded, then waived player to return to the trading team for that specific season. They say they didn't want something like this, thus the rule change a few years back. But by only making it 30 days they left themselves open for these scenarios.

I don't even know what pro-trade fans are grumbling about, You still get Kidd, get to keep Stack for the entire season and all it's going to cost is extra money that isn't really coming from the fans.