Saturday, December 10, 2011

The Latest...

The Lakers picked-up a 1st round draft pick from Dallas for Odom.

They say the talks for Chris Paul are off, but wasn't one of Sterns mandates that the Hornets get younger in the deal for Paul to the Lakers? Perhaps Stern didn't want Odom's age and contract on the Hornet's roster. I guess a deal can still get done for Paul without Odom in the package. I mean, if the deal were to go through as it was proposed (the 2nd deal) it would have looked a lot like the first deal.

If Stern allowed the second deal to go through, then he would come off looking like he did a foolish (he did look foolish) thing by shooting down the first deal because it was basically the same as the second deal. The man has to save face in all this madness. Eliminating Odom from the deal would make it look more legit if the Lakers included the trade exception they got from Dallas and the 1st rounder, too.

I mean, check out this tweet:

"John Hollinger tweets he is confused by the Lakers strategy if Howard is their target. "Any exception created by dealing Odom isn't big enough to take in Turkoglu. I'm not seeing LA's endgame here, nor why Dallas would help."

The end game probably still has Paul going to the Lakers, but without Odom going to the Hornets. That way the deal looks like it was really reworked. Everything, including the leak that talks between the Lakers, Hornets, and Rockets have broken off, has to look as if it went through the wringer with the league. Remember, first and foremost, David Stern is about marketing, and he and the product need to look good. Either that or Stern is way out of control.

mike t.

Just Got A Text Message from the Bleacher Report!

The Lakers have trade Lamar Odom to the Dallas Mavericks?

The Lakers are out of the Chris Paul sweepstakes?

What the heck is going on? This sounds like Dwight Howard is on his way to Los Angeles.

After months of being on lock-out status, the NBA is exploding big time! I don't know what direction the Lakers are going in, but, I guess, you can say that Daddy Buss must have listened to Magic Johnson and decided to blow the team up.

What can possibly happen next? I told you: welcome the the drama that is the Los Angeles Lakers and the NBA.

The report is that David Stern shot down the new proposal between the Hornets, Lakers, and the Rockets. The Lakers have moved on by trading Odom to Dallas. Now, if Dwight Howard does end up in Los Angeles, then I think we can say that the NBA is pretty close to being rigged. And if the Los Angeles comes out of this without either Paul or Howard, then we can say that David Stern is truly drunk with power.

With that thought in mind, the question now has to be this: how long will the Lakers stand by and let David Stern mandate their future? These manipulations against the Lakers, by Stern, might be enough to get the ball rolling on his ouster as the commissioner of the NBA.

Can anyone else say: wow?

Updates to come soon.

mike t

What's in an NBA Player's Name? Ask the Knicks!

Carmelo Anthony. Amare Stoudemire. And now Tyson Chandler. The New York Knicks have 3 of the biggest names in the league, right now. But, does that equal a championship? That is the question that has to be asked about the Knicks players. Of course, what is behind an NBA name is a reputation.

Let's take a look at the Knicks:


REPUTATION: Scoring small forward. One of the best in the league. Not a very good defender.


REPUTATION: Scoring power forward. One of the best in the league. Electrifying! Not a very good defender.


REPUTATION: Defensive center. One of the best in the league? I don't know about that. If he truly is one of the best defensive centers in the league; Dallas would have found a way to have kept him. I mean, you just don't let legitimate defensive centers go. Not in this league, you don't.

Offensive skills? If the lane is open, he's good for the alley-oop for sure. Dunks, of course, come with the package. Other than that, well, he's called a defensive center for a reason. His stay in New Orleans and Charlotte didn't work out too well, and he found himself in Dallas who already had 2 seven-footers on the roster.

What does it mean? Well, we have to take a look at a couple of other names in the mix to figure that out.


REPUTATION: Run and gun offensive system. I didn't follow the Knicks too close last season. Is the run and gun still the philosophy that coach D'Antoni applies to his teams? All I have to go on is his reputation. If he's still running and gunning that could only spell trouble in N.Y., because in the NBA, it's a proven fact that defense wins championships.

With Anthony and Stoudemire lacking in the defensive department; how, pray tell, does N.Y. compete for a championship? This brings us to the player they just amnestied:


REPUTATION: True point guard with true leadership abilities. Won a championship with Detroit. Turned the dysfunctional Denver Nuggets into contender with his on-court leadership. Excellent half-court offensive player. Understands the concept of team defense and fulfills his role in it. But, the N.Y. Knicks amnestied him? Why? Because they couldn't afford to hold on to him and pay Tyson Chandler, too.

All this to say what? That the Knicks overpaid for Chandler, and made a mistake by letting a true on-court leader, like Billups, go.

Now, if the Knicks had to cut Billups to make room for Chandler...what are they going to do with the rest of the roster? They had to get rid of Ronny Turiaf, too. Who do they sign to replace these players?

From what I understand the Knicks don't even have enough signed players to fill their roster. They have 3 big NBA names, along with their reputations, but after that, what do they have?

They have a mess with the salary cap and, I guess, a hope that some players will take less to play with the 3 big NBA names in N.Y.. But, isn't that the same position that the Heat are in, too? And the Celtics, too?

This is the perfect time for small-market teams to put balanced rosters together that will expose the holes that the N.Y's, Boston's, and Miami's have in their rosters.

What's in an NBA player's name like Tyson Chandler? I think we'll have to wait until the finals get here to see what two teams get there to know for sure.

In my 40 years of following basketball, I think I've formed an educated opinion on what it takes to win a championship. And my opinion is that the N.Y. Knicks are nowhere near being a championship caliber type team, because Tyson Chandler just isn't that good as a defensive center. But, do give Tyson Chandler his "props," because he did get his money.

mike t.

I Love you! I Love you Not!

Awwh, the sweet and sour taste of romance. One day you're in love, and the next day you're not. Such is the deal that would send Chris Paul to the Los Angeles Lakers. One day the league offices hate it, and the next day they love it.

All kidding aside, commissioner Stern took a lot of heat for killing the deal in the first place, but I have to believe that it didn't go down that way at all. I think we can come to that conclusion if we examine a quote from the commissioner back in 2008, which goes like this:

"Earlier this decade, during the height of the Shaq-Kobe era in L.A., commissioner David Stern was asked what his ideal Finals matchup would be. "The Lakers versus the Lakers," he said."

The Lakers versus the Lakers? lol! David Stern is no fool, and has a perfect understanding of what the Lakers mean to the league. There's no way he would try to kill a deal that would, essentially, keep the Lakers in the running for possible championships on his watch as the commissioner. No, he didn't kill the first deal. I have to believe that a group of small-market owners bombarded the commissioner with complaints to the point where he had to do something. And unfortunately, it was stopping the deal from going through.

I believe the reason why the small-market owners cried was because the deal came too soon; I mean, the new CBA hadn't even been ratified and already, it seemed, the Lakers were prospering like they always seem to prosper - under the old CBA -. With that idea in mind, the small-market owners had to be thinking: what has changed? The Lakers still come out on top. Hence, the bitter complaint to the commissioner.

But, after Dallas owner Mark Cuban sent out an email, or something explaining like that, how the new CBA has, indeed, hindered the big-market teams from just throwing money at their quest to put a championship team together, I think everyone has come to their senses. The deal in no way makes the Lakers any closer to winning a championship than before the deal was made, because they still have to sign Chris Paul to an extension. And that will push them to the limits of the salary cap.

The Lakers, if the new deal is approved, are setting themselves up for seriously limiting themselves in filling out the rest of their roster with quality players to compliment the superstars. And if they do, indeed, go after Dwight Howard, they are just creating a luxury tax mess for themselves. Again, how is the 3 superstar roster model going to win a championship without quality players to fill-out the rest of the roster? The 3 superstar roster model is a gamble and nothing more with the new CBA going into effect. I think that small-market owners are starting to realize that, and probably won't object to a new deal that has Chris Paul going to the Lakers.

It's easy not to be in love with what you don't consider to be attractive, but after getting to know a person better (the new CBA) it might allow for new feeling to grow into love. Oh, the sweet and sour taste of love never fails to provide drama, and keep us interested in possible new developments to the love story.

I hear the sound of a new trade coming! Brace yourselves. It could be that the league will love it or it not.

David Stern loves the Lakers, so you can expect the new deal to be approved because the small-market team owners are starting to realize the impact of the new CBA, and therefore, they probably won't complain, anymore.

mike t.
© 2011-12 All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.