Chris Paul to the Lakers?

[Dave Gray]

They were going to pick him up with the departure of Gasol and Odom.  ...then, speculation seems to be Andrew Bynum to Orlando for Dwight Howard, creating a Big 3 in L.A. of Kobe, Dwight Howard, and CP3.

However, some owners around the league (since the league owns the Hornets) are throwing a fit, so the trade is on hold.

Do you think it's fair for the league to make deals like this for a team that has no ownership?  ...and does it set off any red flags that they're dealing the best pointguard in the league to the league's most popular franchise?

[Cathal]

I think this deal just got squashed by the NBA's owners and David Stern.

[Phishfan]

I think the cancelling of this trade is a travesty. First, the league itself didn't broker the deal. The Hornets have a front office staff and their job is to conduct business as usual while they look for a new owner. That is who set this deal up. Second, the league had no objections to Chris Paul being traded until they saw it was to the Lakers. I think David Stern is a power hungry fool and is quickly ruining the NBA. He might be the worst commissioner in sports.

[Landshark]

I think the cancelling of this trade is a travesty. First, the league itself didn't broker the deal. The Hornets have a front office staff and their job is to conduct business as usual while they look for a new owner. That is who set this deal up. Second, the league had no objections to Chris Paul being traded until they saw it was to the Lakers. I think David Stern is a power hungry fool and is quickly ruining the NBA. He might be the worst commissioner in sports.

Might be?  He flat out is. 

[EKnight]

I'm NOT in any way debating or taking a stance on Stern, but I have read conflicting reports. Did he veto the trade "because he could," or did he veto it because Cavs owner Dan Gilbert and several other owners demanded it be put to a vote by the rest of owners- in which case it would have been vetoed anyway. Wasn't he, in essense, just saving an extra step? -EK

[Cathal]

From what I'm reading, the NBA owners in small markets were up in arms about this whole thing and wanted David Stern to put it to a vote of NBA owners. Based on that, David Stern then terminated the deal. Not his fault most of the owners wanted it terminated.

[Phishfan]

I don't think a vote was mandatory though. The NBA had informed everyone that New Orleans was free to deal Chris Paul. When a deal was reached that made some ( this is the key phrase here because I haven't seen anywhere that a vote would have definitely nullified this trade) owners angry, they contacted Stern. Stern then single handedly made the decision.

[EKnight]

OK gotcha.-EK

[masterfins]

I believe it was Gilbert who told Stern "you might as well rename 25 teams the Washington Generals."  I don't like Stern cancelling the trade, but I also don't like how all the talent is pooling among a few teams.

[Dave Gray]

My only concern is that "leadership" might have not been doing what is best for the Hornets, but what is best for the pockets of the NBA.

[Phishfan]

It definitely isn't the best option for NO I don't think. Now any trade of Paul cannot happen or it is going to look rigged (I'm not even sure Stern would care if it did appear that way though). I don't see Paul changing his mind and staying there, so there are not going to get anything for their star player when they could have had three very good contributors added to their squad.

[EDGECRUSHER]

The Hornets would've gotten as much value for Paul as humanly possible in this trade. He is a superstar who will be leaving in 6 months, how much could he be worth via trade? The deal was totally fair, but Stern caved to a bunch of stupid owners who overpaid for their franchises.

[AZ Fins Fan 55]

In seeing what the Clippers have offered it is not near as much talent wise as they would have received in the LA/Houston deal. If they approve this deal with the Clippers it just proves this move was to keep Paul off of the Lakers. What a horrible decision Stern and the league have made here. The NBA continues to push me away as a fan.

[bsmooth]

From what I'm reading, the NBA owners in small markets were up in arms about this whole thing and wanted David Stern to put it to a vote of NBA owners. Based on that, David Stern then terminated the deal. Not his fault most of the owners wanted it terminated.

Actually it has only been confirmed that Cuban and Gilbert were the biggest complainers so far.

[Spider-Dan]

If they approve this deal with the Clippers it just proves this move was to keep Paul off of the Lakers.

So what?  This is a competitive league; if NO, a Western Conference team, has the option to trade Paul to a team that would potentially dominate their conference, or to a team that didn't even make the playoffs last year, they should gravitate to the latter.  And with NO currently being owned by the league (read: the other owners), they all have a vested interest in NOT creating a new juggernaut.

If Stern had blocked a trade of Howard to the Lakers, that would be one thing.  But this team was owned by the owners as a group... and if they wanted to take a vote as to whether this trade should go through, that should be their right.

Stern just avoided the embarrassment of such a vote by nixing the deal.