So, where are Howard and Paul gonna end up?

I think Howards nailed on for Lakers, Shaq #2. Lakers will waive Ron Artest, and then will use Howard in a trade with Bynum to get an upgrade, and some of that defensive steel that they will lose with Artest.

Unfortunately for Paul, I can't see a scenario where he will play at Madison this year. They knicks used up all their trade options to get Melo, they have nothing left to give. Where does Paul then end up? Maybe if Howard goes elsewhere than the Lakers, then they'll look to Paul as an upgrade over Fisher. Either way the Lakers need some younger superstars, and they have the most options in regards to a trade. Bynum is a good player, but definately tradeable, and with a superstar like Paul available you'd be willing to Gasol (although NO aren't really in need of him).

I'd love to see the Clippers get a big name alongside Griffin, but the owners is such a douche he'll probably scare them off!

The Clippers either need a wing to handle the ball (I know Aminu is seen as a long term project, but they could do with somebody now), or they need Mo Williams to really step up from point guard. IMO, Williams is a decent player, but isn't the solution if they want a long term success. Imagine Griffin playing with somebody like Steve Nash? I know Nash is getting on, but a player like Griffin would thrive off him, just like Stoudemire did. I know Williams will score a bit, but surely now with a good young crop (Griffin, Aminu, Jordan) they should look at signing experienced team players. Chalmers just doesn't strike me as that, as decent as he is, they should be looking for a veteran or a superstar. Would love to see Paul at the Clippers, but it won't happen.

Big fan of Mo personally, think he can average 15-20 ppg this year, and I agree if they get another outside shooter to take advantage of the space available they could be a tricky outfit.

Mike Miller could end up being an OK fit, the Heat are bound to waive his contract under the Amnesty clause and he'd fit the bill as a decent (and probably cheap) outside shooter.

Eric Gordon, very underated. Could be used to get Howard or Paul. They have the pieces to get a trade done alomg with picks.

Definately, but I have absolutely no faith in the management to get the big deal done that will turn them into slight contenders.

What about OKC, young team, tonnes of potential, full roster with good potentially trade worthy players. Would they interest any superstars?

I don't think a team with KD needs a superstar. Westbrook is a good player but he needs to accept he's number 2. Watching him take shot after shot for OKC in the playoffs was painful. He definitely needs to learn the PG game more, but that was always going to happen being a natural SG. They'll be looking for big seasons from Harden and Ibaka, while Perkins will definitely have to settle in with their game. They'll definitely compete, Durant is too good a player for his side not to, but again, you just wonder if they need to bring in a bit of experience for immediate success, or play the waiting game and try free agency for a couple of seasons whilst players develop.

just been reading and it seems like the lakers want too go back too the glory days. Was readin about tey want too trade for Howard and Paul and they have the players too do tat. Gasol too the hornets and Bynum and Odom too the Magic. Kobe Howard and Paul is frightenin too think about

If rumours are to be believed, this will be our starting 5 in two weeks time. Defence could be back in the garden, back to the days of Harper, Starks, Oakley, Mason, Ewing etc. New York Basketball.

C - Tyson Chandler
PF- Stoudemire
SF- Melo
SG- Grant Hill
PG- Jamaal Tinsley

bench -
Jeffries
Williams
Fields
Douglas
Shumpert

Chandler alone would make a big difference, not sure on Hill, decent player but would still have to pay a sizeable amount for a seasoned vet, when you already have a lot of experience on the roster.

I'd use the cap space to get a better PG than Tinsley, and sacrifice a bit of experience in the SG position. Fields still has potential, he lacked consistency and fell away towards the end of last year but I have faith in him to improve now he's not a rookie.

Hill would provide leadership and great perimeter defence. Great addition. You may be too young to remember the early 90's knicks teams but we had loads of old vets whi could play D. Teams were scared.

Stern vetoed a trade that would have sent CP3 to the Lakers.

What a joke.

If anything, the team coming out of that trade worst would have been the Lakers (obviously before any trade for Howard).

NO would have got the best deal they could out of that, especially when the scenario now is that Paul is going to leave and they'll get nothing in return.

And Houston got Pau, would have given them some sort of presence where its massively needed.

And the claim it's for "basketball" reasons, all 3 would have been stronger!

Although I agree that the Hornets would be getting the best deal they possibly could, I fully understand the reason for Stearn blocking this trade. I agree that the Rockets and Hornets would be getting some talent, but I have to disagree about the "Lakers coming out of the trade worst". Over the 3 years that deal would save the Lakers roughly $20mil in salaries and a similar amount in luxury tax and still get the best player in the trade whilst preserving draft pick to potentially use as bait for Howard.

If the NBA were to allow this deal, the vast majority of owners, especially of smaller market teams, would be wondering why the feck they ever bothered with the lockout.

But Lakers have had to lose 2 big players to get 1. Odom still played a big role and Gasol was the 2nd star behind Kobe. As it stands, if the trade were to go through, they would be weaker.

NO getting Odom, as well as the 3 very solid players from Houston was fantastic when faced with the prospect of getting nothing for Paul in a years time (which is now likely to happen).

Same for Houston, they've shed some players they didn't need, and were getting a bonafide superstar in Pau Gasol to replace Ying.

New Orleans were going to be no weaker after the trade, if anything a tad stronger across the park, Houston were definately getting stronger as well as getting that franchise player, and the Lakers were left with only Bynum that is any good around the basket.

As for the "small owners" getting their way, New Orleans and probably Houston also are definately in that category, this deal made them bigger, but yet it was blocked. New Orleans in particular are now going to lose out so much more.

Whats the alternative though? Paul is ONLY likely to go to the Lakers, Boston or NY. This is the best deal that NO could have got, as well as strengthening another small market team in Houston.

Absolutely ludicrous decision. And whats worse, Dan Gilbert was one of those to complain, so now he's just created a situation where another franchies is going to be LeBron'd.

Thing is, NO wanted the deal to go through, but because the league owns them, for whatever reason, they overruled the GM.

I can see why LA want Paul, a lot of teams are taking the PG route and there aren't many better than Paul. With Kobe aging and a 1st overall pick massively unlikely, they may as well look for a new franchise player and get rid of some players that were partly blamed for the humiliation against Dallas.

I just can't believe that three teams were able to work out a trade that worked for all of them, only for the league to turn around and say no, it defies the point of the trade market and it's extremely unfair on teams and players. What is the LA coach supposed to say to Odom and Gasol now? Likewise with Houston.

Exactly.

No one was a loser in this deal. As I've mentioned, if anything the two "smaller market" teams which the new deal was supposed to protect, and the reason why the league overrules it, came out better than the big market team.

LA would still need to make further deals to stay at the same level as before, the other two already were stronger.

I understand that this trade was the best deal that NO will more than likely get, and the fact that both they and the rockets would have got better. However I have to stress that everybody knows that the lakers would have only been weaker for the few day before they went and got Howard, and this is the real stumbling block.

This whole lock out has been about the league losing millions of dollars every year. The easiest way to stop the wrot is to make the league more competative instead of having a league where only around half a dozen teams (usually the same half dozen) have a real shot at winning the championship. If this deal had been allowed to go through it would have been another example of the "rich getting richer". It the short term it mat seem a strange decision, but for the long term I 100% believe that this is the best decision for the NBA going forward.

Chandler to knicks almost done.
Hill resigns with Suns, due to Knicks losing mdi-level exception
Brandon Roy retires
Arenas amnesty
D12 to Nets expected soon
Billups expected to be released(amnesty)


I expect the CP3 trade to go through after D12 is traded, albeit with a slight tweak.

The commissioner can't veto the deal because the Lakers MIGHT then do an additional trade.

This trade, on a stand alone basis, doesn't make a new superteam, doesn't destroy a small market team. It doesn't do any of that.

THIS DEAL WOULD HAVE PLEASED ALL THE TEAMS INVOLVED.

What on earth else do they want? If they aren't going to allow Paul to go to the Lakers, they won't want him going to the Knicks, to the Celtics. So they are effectively screwing the type of side that the whole deal was supposed to protect and improve.

New Orleans are more likely to be competitive with Odom, Scola et al, than being a complete mess next season when they lose Paul for nothing. Which is now what will happen.

What do you make of the D12 nets? Similar to Deron Williams in that they're the only team willing to take on an expiring contract without any guarantees of an extension?

Probably worth the risk for them as it makes it a heck of a lot more likely both will sign than just a single one of them. They would instantly become contenders imo.

A lot of speculation that NYK are still in pole position for next years free agency, with Deron Williams + possibly CP3 still available.

Surely signing Chandler means that they won't have room for another max level player? If they are having to amnesty Billups contract to get Chandler in then what hope do they have next year?

Bibby? Really? Rather just go with Douglas + a rookie!

Defence and 3 point shooting.

NBA league pass free from 25th dec to 9th Jan...enjoy.

Clippers get Billups for just $2mil. Bargain. Now it's just a question of whether he'll actually show up.