A lot of assumptions being made in the OP about what Paul will do and what other teams would do. Unless you have inside knowldge or know Paul personally you can't really state those assumptions as if they were facts. This whole thread is based on what you personally think and that can be a myth in itself. I dont believe you can prove something is a myth by using another myth.
Well, as i see it, this team as is will contend for a championship(with Yao ready of course). We don't need Paul for that. We already have one of the deepest teams in the league. Now having Paul and Okafor would drastically increase those chances, but like i said, we don't need him. Don't get me wrong. I'm really just in this to get Okafor seeing as we have Brooks already. Paul is always welcome over Brooks.
The idea that 'feelings' affect a top-level athletes performance is an overblown and empty one. It's fodder for fans, journalists, & analysts. The reality is 'true competitors' compete. They don't understand any other way. Look at the numbers a self admitted unhappy Oswalt is posting this year. I believe Paul is a 'true competitor.' Whatever court, regardless of uniform (Knicks, Magic, Rockets, even Hornets), he steps on will get his best effort and his best play. Players who let 'feelings' affect their play are immature or selfish or they simply aren't true competitors. Most end up not making it. Some are so gifted they make it, but they never truly max their potential (Francis, SheMac, etc.). There is a huge number of washouts in sports that possessed incredible athletic ability but didn't have the proper attitude or mental toughness to make it. There is a reason that Scola made it and Gerald Green failed. Chris Paul will give his all wherever he plays. He knows his livelihood depends on it, and I don't think he knows any other way to approach the game.
A couple of points: 1) Chris Paul hasn't said that he doesn't want to play for Houston. An article mentioned a few teams that were supposedly on his "list". We don't know if that's accurate, we don't know if those were the only teams on his list. In fact we don't really know that there even is a list. 2) Now to the idea that no team would trade for a player that didn't want to be there and could walk for nothing at the end of their contract. The OP is pretty adement that it couldn't happen. Could it? Yes, in fact it already has.The best example would be the case of Chris Webber. Webber was very happy playing in Washingto along side former Fab-5 teammate Juwon Howard. Washington finally got tired of Webber's off court issues and in the '98 offseason they traded him to Sacramento. Webber was quite vocal that he didn't want to go to Sacramento and that he felt that the Wizards were punishing him by trading him there. Here's an excerpt from an ESPN article from when Webber resigned with the Kings in '01: Webber said his free agency caused him to reflect on his time in Sacramento, which began with a trade from Washington in 1998. Webber nearly didn't report to his new team in Northern California, then cried on the plane ride out. But once Webber arrived, he immediately became the biggest part of a phenomenal turnaround in Sacramento, helping the exciting, fast-breaking Kings make the playoffs in the 1999 lockout season. With subsequent improvements the last two years, Webber feels the future can only get brighter. "At the time (of the trade), it was probably the worst time of my life," Webber said. "But this turned out to be the best place for me. Being sent here was a blessing, not a punishment." http://espn.starwave.com/nba/news/2001/0721/1229333.html Webber's play could have been been effected by his displeasure with the trade and he certainly could have left as a free agent. Sacramento knew this and they made the deal any way. At the time, Webber was a pretty inmature guy and very outspoken. If anyone was going to cause trouble because they didn't want to be there it was him. Turns out he fit well there and in '01 he resigned with Sacremento for the 2nd largest deal in NBA history.
Firsit off, you completely missed my point. All I said was Paul has leverage in where he wants to go, which contradicts what many people here think. People here are wishing that even though we're not on Paul's list of acceptable destinations, that we can somehow force our way on it. My opinion here is that it won't happen for reasons I stated later.
If it really is a myth, the OP hasn't done a particularly effective job of debunking it with his argument. Paul has no say where he goes. Period. If a team wants Paul badly enough, they'll risk having him walk after two seasons. In our case, Les might not be willing to pay him for much longer than that anyway. You really think the guy is going to mail it in because he's not in his ideal situation? 90% of all the players in the NBA probably aren't in their ideal situations! Come one.
Your a fool dude, my other choice of words were rather stronger too. What happens to an employee who doesnt perform up to specs. Sure his name is CPaul but now he is shady. He has leverage cause he wont play at full potential, LOLOLOL. No, he wants to win but he has to prove that too. Oh lookie, he just came off a half season injury! and for the last 2 years with the Rockets he sucked! Maybe he is really still hurt!?!??!
Indiana trades: Granger and Foster (2nd round pick) Indiana recieves: West and Martin Houston trades: Martin, Jeffries, Battier, Brooks, Andersen (one of the Knicks pick) Houston recieves: Paul, Granger and Okafer NO trades: Paul, West and Okafer NO receieves: Foster, Jeffries, Battier, Brooks and Andersen (2nd round and one of the Knicks picks) I actually like this 3 way trade... Would New Orleans do that though? Would that be enough back? I'm sure Indiana would consider getting West and Martin back... and getting rid of Foster. :grin:
And I'll laugh at you if you think Paul's going to let NO waste 2 more of years of his shortened prime after having his knee surgery. Tell me, how long did it take Kobe to demand a trade as soon as Shaq left and he had to carry that team alone?
You do realize that nobody knows if there really is a list and if so who's on it. So how can you repeatedly state that Paul doesn't want to come here. He hasn't said that. Even if you believe the reported list, those are his top choices. It doesn't mean that they are his only choices. I'd have to disagree that there aren't teams who aren't Paul's top choices who would still trade for him. As my previous post pointed out, Chris Webber didn't want to go to Sacramento. In fact Webber's quote about the trade was "I wasn't traded--I was sent to my room, put on punishment. They wanted to send me to Siberia," . You think Paul could have stronger feelings than that? Sacramento made the deal anyway and it was probably the best trade the franchise ever made.
You still didnt offer anything besides opinions. sure, he can say he doesnt want to come here, if we offer a deal, and NO likes it...but NO can still choose to ignore him and ship him here. I'm not sure what gave you the idea he'd pout and basically sabotage the deal or the team once he got here. That's not what CP has ever stood for. He's always been the modeal player, saying the right things and when needed. The only reason he's speaking up now is because they seem to be breaking up the team and rebuilding, so CP has every right to say he doesnt want to be on a rebuilding team. That is his true leverage. Houston isn't rebuilding. I highly doubt he'd come here and insist onbeing traded or not be happy. What would be his excuse? He didnt want to be here? Even though we're a contender? Again, that's not the CP we all know. The guy was all in for NO year after year, saying he'd ready to play and try to win a ring and during all that time when were they trule a contender? Maybe a year or two? A guy that is that loyal on a winning team that wasnt going anywhere isn't going to pout about being on this Rockets team. Players, especially franchise players, always have the option to voice their opinion and teams pretty much always take it into consideration, but he's not a FA and that severely reduces any leverage he has as to where he goes. He does, however, have a lot of leverage in justifying a trade, so technically the myth you're talking about is more of a fact than a myth.
NO would rather fold then accept that trade. Why would they trade away there 3 best players for a near all-star and expiring contracts?
It's funny that you bring this up because I was thinking that Sacramento should make a run at Chris Paul. They have the cap, players, and picks to make NO an interesting offer. I know everyone will say what about Tyreke? He is really SG and the best thing Sacramento can do for his and Cousins development is to get the ball out of his hands.
And what about when KG demanded that he go to Boston to team up with Ray and Pierce? Guess what ended up happening, despite LA offering a package centering around an up-and-coming Bynum?
Garnett didn't demand a trade to Boston. And apparently the Wolves (correctly) saw Jefferson as more of an up-and-comer than Bynum
