[CBS Sports] Howard no lock for Lakers; interested in Rockets

You...do realize that if a player/team just played better in the first quarters, you would not NEED to take clutch shots to win right? lol -- LBJ made a great layup to win Game 1 vs Pacers, but was hardly needed to do so in Game 3. Would I like my max players to be able to make clutch shots? Yes. But I would also like them to not consistently take a third of their shots from a range that they only make 27% of! And in the PLAYOFFS, Gay is only 42% overall and 21% from 3 pt range. Ouch.

Do I like my efficiency stats? Sure, I like them a lot more than your 'gut' which is pretty much next to useless. But while we're on the topic of 4th quarter clutch, let's talk about Gay's clutch stats (defined as <5min left of a game that is within a 5 pt differential). In clutch situations (which by your logic would matter even more than just simply the 4th quarter, esp. given the anecdote of your poor bball game), Gay shot an abysmal 36.4% and 16.7% from 3 pt range. Let that sink in.

Am I glad the Rockets aren't paying over $16M for a player who takes a third of his shots from one of the most inefficient ranges and only scores 27% of them, shoots <42% FG% overall but attempts almost 17 shots a game (for just 18 PPG), shoots around 32% from 3 pt range and has it drop to 21% in the playoffs, and is a 36.4% FG%/16.7% 3 pt clutch player? Yeah, a bit.

citation: http://stats.nba.com/leaguePlayerClutch.html?rowsPerPage=100&pageNo=4

 

Players after you have already explained why this notion is incorrect. Feel free to read the posts. Do you see why people laugh at you when you say you only make "objective" comments? Like, where are you even getting this crap? Then asking if others have watched nba games before? lol it makes it really hard to take you seriously. But I try because it is enjoyable and makes me feel better about myself. I'm petty like that

 

lmfao by players, I meant posters. I really wish I could edit posts haha.

 

One concern I have is if Howard still wants to go to Brooklyn.

While he isn't able this off season, he could offer to resign with the Lakers under the condition that if he becomes unhappy they trade him to the Nets. I believe he tried this before with the Magic which is why he opted in last year and then subsequently claimed they lied to him.

 

Won't happen. First of all Stern would block it citing circumvention, which it is. Secondly, Lakers wouldn't agree to those terms. Why should they? If they want to sign and trade him, they can do it nice and legal. Get a third team involved willing to take on around $5-7 million of salary, then S&T him to Brooklyn and get Brooklyn under the apron at the same time. Pretty far fetched scenario. Lakers would have to value a package of Lopez/MarshonBrooks/Humphries highly enough to do it. And like I said, they gotta find a 3rd team willing to take on salary.

 

Stern can't block trades that conform to the CBA. The only reason he was able to block the CP3/Gasol trade was because the NBA owned the Hornets. The NBA does not own the Nets or the Lakers. Now obviously this would not be written into any contracts, but words of honor can be given.

The last thing the Lakers want is for Dwight to walk for nothing. The Lakers pitch is that things will be better than they were last year when the team was a disaster. If you are Dwight, why would you believe things would get better and take that change unless you have an out, which is something he could very well try and negotiate informally. The better question is why wouldn't the Lakers agree to those terms? Its better than him walking for nothing and you get a chance to appease him in the mean time.

 

I think this is part of what Rudolph refers to when he says Dwight will not be repeating the same mistakes he made in Orlando. It puts way too much faith into the Lakers organization, when all they really need to do is turn around and say, "The Nets aren't giving us a fair offer for you. Sorry." There's no proving anything, and Dwight would then be locked into the deal for the entire length of the contract. He's going to make his decision based on the facts in front of him instead of trying to manipulate the situation in his favor after the fact. Once that ink dries on the paper, he's going to be fully dedicated to being the best basketball player he can be for that team. At least that's the image he's trying to portray. We'll see once July 1 comes around, and he can actually start breaking down his options.

 

Another good question is whether Dwight would trust a Front Office with a non-binding promise if he already got burned once by Orlando.

 

Sooo, cyberx, hearing anything new?!?

 

http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q103

103. Can teams find loopholes in the CBA and do things the league never intended to allow? What is circumvention?

As any league executive will tell you, the CBA isn't a list of the things teams can't do, it's a list of the things teams can do. The league operates in a "disallow by default" mode -- actions are not allowed except where the CBA specifically permits them.

In other words, teams aren't allowed to put anything into a player's contract that wasn't negotiated between the league and players association and included in the CBA. For example, a team signing a known drug offender couldn't insist on a "one strike and you're out" agreement or that the player attend mandatory drug counseling -- instead they must follow the negotiated drug program (see question number 106).

The CBA also has a general prohibition on circumvention which states that the rules exist to preserve the benefit derived by the teams and players, and that nobody shall do anything to defeat or circumvent the intent of the agreement. The league can use this prohibition to disallow a trade that they feel circumvents the CBA, even though that trade is not specifically prohibited by the agreement.

Examples of conduct considered to be circumvention include:

A team owner allowing a player to invest in a business or investment fund controlled by the owner or a friend of the owner.
A team executive assisting a player in obtaining a product endorsement.
Any "under the table" promises for a future contract (see question number 30).
A team's arena renting retail space to a player on the team.
A team selling a sponsorship to a business in which a player has an interest.
A team hiring a player's relative or business partner as an employee.
A team owner allowing a player the use of his private plane.
A company affiliated with a team's owner making a home available to one of the team's players.
Whenever a contract is signed, extended, renegotiated or otherwise amended, the team, player, and player's agent must certify, under penalty of perjury, that there are no side agreements or understandings of any kind relating to:

Any future contract, or future extension, renegotiation or amendment of the player's current contract.
Any outside compensation, investment, business opportunity or anything else of value furnished to the player or any other person or entity controlled by, related to, or acting on behalf of the player.
The intent of these rules is to ensure that the only agreement from which either the player or the team can benefit is the current, signed player contract. The rules extend to sponsors, business partners and other team affiliates, and to player agents, representatives and family members.

 

The last thing the Lakers want is to fill up their salary cap with mediocre players and have no room or trade possibilities to acquire elite players.

Yes, Dwight is going to have to make a decision. Bank on things to get better because it's the Lakers or move to a more up to date team with other players already in place.

The Lakers would only agree to those terms if it left them in a situation to acquire another great player for Dwight and if the league would allow it. Which they won't because it's circumvention. It's a way for a player to get the 5th year and still move to the team that he desires which is circumventing the cba. It's inevitable if there was a deal like that in place that he is going to demand a trade as soon as possible. It's an illegal side agreement that circumvents the cba and the disadvantage put in by the cba to help smaller market teams retain their superstar players.

 

Bolded the relevant part for you.

Go re-read what I wrote, and then research why Barkley hates the Rockets.

 

Barkley doesn't matter. That was years ago. Stern won't let this happen.

 

If the Lakers sign him and then decide to trade him later, the market for him will be much better than Lopez and Marshon Brooks. They'd probably send him to Minnesota for Love straight up.

 

Dude are you dense?

If Howard asks the Lakers for their word they will trade him to his destination of his choice if he and MDA can't make it work, or they don't land a big name player in 2014, its not going to be written into a contract.

Stern has no power to block trades between two independently owned franchises if the trade conforms to CBA rules.

The Barkley reference is an example of an agreement outside of a written contract.

 

Dwight Howard is not naïve enough to go through this idiotic process. This is like some tin foil hat ish, guy.

 

Stern would probably never know about the agreement.

However, it would be a PR nightmare on Dwight's part since the public backlash would be extremely high. The Lakers would obviously feign complete innocence, and act like they are being strong-armed by Dwight into trading him to Brooklyn, and come out smelling like roses in the process. It would be Dwight who would have to answer the litany of questions, which is why I think he's giving up on the idea of going to Brooklyn.

 

Dwight and Deron have both admitted that they have completely stopped talking to eachother.

Dwight: "That’s my decision. It’s my life so if he’s upset because I made a decision for me, so be it. If he doesn’t want to be friends because I’m on another team, then so be it. There’s no need to smooth things over, you know?”

 

Circumvention would be going around the contract. So of course it wouldnt be written in the contract. Just saying his point is valid, if the NBA has reasonable evidence that there was an agreement under the table they would have the ability to veto the trade. According to the rules of circumvention. Or that is my understanding from what I read.

But I dont think that it is likely they would...because I think what miami did was probably something similar. The Heat management would have had to known they were going to get all 3 players before they gutted their team...and the NBA didnt look into it. So I highly doubt they would investigate this.....just saying. :grin:

 

The Lakers would never honor the agreement. Dwight would have no recourse but to admit to perjury.