Chris Paul to Lakers - Not Official?

[Moon Knight]

The NBA catches a lot of flack but pretty much the exact same thing happens in baseball. Pujols and Wilson to LA, Jose Reyes and Mark Buehrle to Miami, New York and Boston getting huge names pretty much every year.

And yet the Yanks and Soxs have 2 rings each in the past 12 years to show for it. Big name talent doesn't mean a title. The NBA is a joke, first the players being greedy dicks and now the owners crying over a trade and getting blocked to protect their interests. This is all moronic, what do the owners want? Paul to opt out after this year and the Hornets get nothing? Or them trade him to a small market team and get garbage in return? Neither are good for that team. This is why I refuse to support that joke of league any further. NFL is trying my patience with how it has taken defense out of the game.

 

[Big Sexy]

And yet the Yanks and Soxs have 2 rings each in the past 12 years to show for it. Big name talent doesn't mean a title.

I never said it did. I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy of baseball fans who trash the NBA for lack of talent on small market teams. It's not like the multiple superstar teams always win in the NBA. Dallas just won with only one superstar. The Spurs won three times this decade with one superstar. The Pistons won in 2004 with really no superstars.

 

[The Crock]

And yet the Yanks and Soxs have 2 rings each in the past 12 years to show for it. Big name talent doesn't mean a title.

What about the NBA? In that same timeframe Detroit, San Antonio, and Dallas all won titles. Yeah, the Celtics and Lakers have been at the forefront for the last few years, but the same can be said for the Yanks and Phils.

EDIT: Big Sexy got to it before me, that fucker.

 

[Megatron]

The NBA catches a lot of flack but pretty much the exact same thing happens in baseball. Pujols and Wilson to LA, Jose Reyes and Mark Buehrle to Miami, New York and Boston getting huge names pretty much every year.

Thing is in baseball you need all 25 players. In basketball you can have 3 really good ones and make the finals (Heat).

I never said it did. I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy of baseball fans who trash the NBA for lack of talent on small market teams. It's not like the multiple superstar teams always win in the NBA. Dallas just won with only one superstar. The Spurs won three times this decade with one superstar. The Pistons won in 2004 with really no superstars.

What about the NBA? In that same timeframe Detroit, San Antonio, and Dallas all won titles. Yeah, the Celtics and Lakers have been at the forefront for the last few years, but the same can be said for the Yanks and Phils.

EDIT: Big Sexy got to it before me, that fucker.

Since 1984 there have been 20 different franchises to win the World Series at least once.

Since 1980 there have been 9 different franchises to win the NBA Finals at least once.

Don't give me that shit. The NBA has nothing for parity. In fact they're the conference with the least of the big 4 because 1 or 2 men really can take them far. The fact that only 9 different teams have won titles (with 3 of them only having won it once) in over 30 years shows that. NBA would be best off contracting a few teams because then these superteams wouldn't be so bad since most teams would have them.

 

[Big Sexy]

My argument was never about parity. No one said basketball had a ton of parity. My argument is about people shitting on the NBA for the fact that the big stars always want to play in big markets and letting other leagues, particularly baseball, slide. It's not a coincidence Pujols and Wilson went to LA. It's a big market that overpaid them. Same with Reyes and Buehrle to Miami, same with guys like A Rod and CC ending up in New York, Carl Crawford and company in Boston, etc....

 

[Megatron]

My argument was never about parity. No one said basketball had a ton of parity. My argument is about people shitting on the NBA for the fact that the big stars always want to play in big markets and letting other leagues, particularly baseball, slide. It's not a coincidence Pujols and Wilson went to LA. It's a big market that overpaid them. Same with Reyes and Buehrle to Miami, same with guys like A Rod and CC ending up in New York, Carl Crawford and company in Boston, etc....

Miami was never a big team, money wise. In fact they've been one of the cheapest. This is the first time they've been active during free agency in a while and can't throw them in that category because of one big offseason. And a lot of teams still keep their superstar players. Mauer stayed with the Twins. JV stayed with the Tigers. Kemp just resigned with his team thats in the shitter right now. Tulowitzki and Cargo signed to stay on with their teams. It's not always the same teams getting the big names either. This year its the Marlins and Angels. Last year it was the Red Sox. Years before it was the Yankees, Phillies, Giants, Cubs, Tigers. Aside from the Yankees, who are just made of money, you never see the same teams active each year. Whenever a real big name is up in the NBA, though, the Lakers, Knicks, and Celtics always seem to have a mention.

Plus like I said it's a lot easier to rebuild in MLB with your farm system then it is in the NBA since if you have a good player or two you can ride them to the finals. The Pistons of 04 are really the only example lately of a team winning without a major star and that was more of an aberration then anything.

 

[Big Nick Dudley]

I forgot Chicago. Eight team league. Fuck it.

 

[gd]

Small market teams have a chance, if they run their team the way it's supposed to be run by making smart decisions the players will stay (San Antonio, OKC, etc) If they do an absolutely terrible job of surrounding their star with talent (Cleveland), their star can leave. Lebron may have been a asshole the way he did it, but he was compltely within his rights to to leave. That's why free agency exists.

 

[Big Sexy]

Miami was never a big team, money wise. In fact they've been one of the cheapest. This is the first time they've been active during free agency in a while and can't throw them in that category because of one big offseason.

Florida was cheap. Miami is a completely new situation, at least for now.

Mauer stayed with the Twins. JV stayed with the Tigers. Kemp just resigned with his team thats in the shitter right now.

Dirk stayed with Dallas, Tim Duncan never left San Antonio, Kevin Durant just signed a long extension in Oklahoma City, Zach Randolph extended in Memphis.

It's not always the same teams getting the big names either. This year its the Marlins and Angels. Last year it was the Red Sox. Years before it was the Yankees, Phillies, Giants, Cubs, Tigers. Aside from the Yankees, who are just made of money, you never see the same teams active each year. Whenever a real big name is up in the NBA, though, the Lakers, Knicks, and Celtics always seem to have a mention.

Just like anytime a big name is available in baseball the teams that always seem to come up are Yankees, Red Sox, and Cubs. The name doesn't always go there but they almost always get a mention. Outside of last year with Amare and Melo when was the last time the Kicks had a huge superstar haul (and no Steve Francis and Stephon Marbury don't count)? Prior to the big three in 2008 when was the last time the Celtics had some major acquisition?

Plus like I said it's a lot easier to rebuild in MLB with your farm system then it is in the NBA since if you have a good player or two you can ride them to the finals. The Pistons of 04 are really the only example lately of a team winning without a major star and that was more of an aberration then anything.

Completely irrelevant to the point I'm making that big stars often want big markets.

The only reason basketball has less teams winning championships is because basketball is the one sport where a teams superstars can legitimately play every meaningful minute of every meaningful game. Only the goalie in hockey can make that claim for the other major sports. Pitchers can't start every game, hitters can't hit every inning, qb's don't play on both sides of the ball.

 

[Megatron]

I don't see what that changes the fact that the NBA should contract some teams. Charlotte, Sacramento, Hornets, etc. could leave and nobody would notice since they won't be relevant anytime soon. At least mid/small market teams like Tampa, San Diego (before this past season) St. Louis, Minnesota, etc. can have some success in the MLB.

 

[gd]

NBA definitely could use contraction. 26 teams is about right.

 

[Big Sexy]

I don't see what that changes the fact that the NBA should contract some teams. Charlotte, Sacramento, Hornets, etc. could leave and nobody would notice since they won't be relevant anytime soon. At least mid/small market teams like Tampa, San Diego (before this past season) St. Louis, Minnesota, etc. can have some success in the MLB.

How about the Royals, Orioles, and Pirates? Royals have had only one winning season since the 94 lockout. The Orioles haven't had a winning season since 1997. The Pirates haven't had a winning season since 1992.

Outside of the NFL every sports league could use less teams.

 

[ScreaminNormanSmiley]

The Royals are on the verge of a world series run, you leave them out of this.

 

[Big Nick Dudley]

Small market teams have a chance, if they run their team the way it's supposed to be run by making smart decisions the players will stay (San Antonio, OKC, etc) If they do an absolutely terrible job of surrounding their star with talent (Cleveland), their star can leave. Lebron may have been a asshole the way he did it, but he was compltely within his rights to to leave. That's why free agency exists.

Agreed. I think he's a giant douche, but of course he can do what he wants.

Small market teams have to hope a draft pick pans out. If not, that team is fucked. Totally, completely fucked. Detroit, my team, needs to draft a future superstar. If they don't, they're fucked. Why? No one, in 2011/12, would even consider coming to Detroit, shit or not. Do I blame them? Not really. But if this trend continues (in the NBA), where small market cities stand no chance, just close them down. I'd rather have no team as opposed to watching Detroit suck ass for the next 10-20 years.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

Remember when everyone thought the Twins were getting contracted. Now they are playing in a beautiful new ballpark.

Contraction always sounds like a nice simple solution when times are tough and then things improve and it's time to grow again.

Sometimes you have to ride out the down years to make more money in the future. It's a tough call but if you believe in your sport you've got to stick it out.

 

[Moon Knight]

I never said it did. I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy of baseball fans who trash the NBA for lack of talent on small market teams. It's not like the multiple superstar teams always win in the NBA. Dallas just won with only one superstar. The Spurs won three times this decade with one superstar. The Pistons won in 2004 with really no superstars.

Thats what I was saying, people make a big deal out of superteams but they don't always win. More in agreement really. The Heat won jack last year, the Lakers got hammered by Dallas and Boston won 1 title. Give me depth and chemistry over a few superstars anyday. I just don't like the reasons behind this trade getting blocked. BTW, Odom and Gasol can kiss my #%@! Not really that great anymore.

 

[Alastor]

The biggest losers have to be the Hornets management. They made a great deal for a departing All-Star and the league just gave them an FU for the good work they did.

 

[Megatron]

How about the Royals, Orioles, and Pirates? Royals have had only one winning season since the 94 lockout. The Orioles haven't had a winning season since 1997. The Pirates haven't had a winning season since 1992.

Outside of the NFL every sports league could use less teams.

MLB hasn't just gone through a lockout that has cost them 16 games and revenue. NBA franchises are the ones (aside from few) that were hemorrhaging money. Plus MLB teams can live without star players demanding trades to big markets. Plus each of those teams have some rich histories. Would anyone REALLY care if the Bobcats, T-Wolves, or Kings were taken out? I'm not saying they need to contract to 16 teams, but cutting down 2 or 4 wouldn't be the worst for the league.

I don't see why you're so pissy over this. You gotta be perfect with your drafting to have a shot at a real contender in the NBA as a small market.

 

[Moon Knight]

MLB hasn't just gone through a lockout that has cost them 16 games and revenue. NBA franchises are the ones (aside from few) that were hemorrhaging money. Plus MLB teams can live without star players demanding trades to big markets. Plus each of those teams have some rich histories. Would anyone REALLY care if the Bobcats, T-Wolves, or Kings were taken out? I'm not saying they need to contract to 16 teams, but cutting down 2 or 4 wouldn't be the worst for the league.

I don't see why you're so pissy over this. You gotta be perfect with your drafting to have a shot at a real contender in the NBA as a small market.

I am pretty sure fans of those teams would care. And over 700k people is small market?

 

[One Punch Doug Crashin]

does anyone care that the League itself owns the Hornets? Not that it matters or anything.

 

[gd]

Ummm...yeah that's basically why the trade could be vetoed, Dougy,

 

[Stormtrooper]

Just wanting to point this out, but in 2010, MLB owned the Rangers. While owning the team, the Rangers traded FOR Cliff Lee.

Just found it ironic that one league would help their league-owned team and the other hurt it.

 

[CDR]

Just wanting to point this out, but in 2010, MLB owned the Rangers. While owning the team, the Rangers traded FOR Cliff Lee.

Just found it ironic that one league would help their league-owned team and the other hurt it.

However, the MLB was very hesitant with that move, and other signings and trades. Often, when the Rangers requested money from the league for aquistitions (such as the Lee trade), many other teams had a fit about it and didn't like it all.

On another note, didn't the MLB block a trade a few years ago that would have sent A-Rod to the Red Sox? Is the current NBA situation similar to that or no?

 

[Taker Sucks]

3 teams all hurt because of this. The deal should have happened.

 

[Big Nick Dudley]

3 teams all hurt because of this. The deal should have happened.

The league owns and operates the Hornets. Obviously, they want to sell the team. Hard to make that happen when the best player is shipped off to LA.