At BarkingCarnival, a look
at the underlying issues behind the NBA's veto of the Chris Paul trade:
While the fact that the other owners blocked the Lakers’ acquisition of Paul out of pure spite is both amazingly petty and rather humorous, especially when the trade would have actually hurt the Lakers, it’s a rather unique scenario that has little chance of ever repeating itself. The only reason the other 29 owners could block this trade at all was because they actually own the New Orleans Hornets.
The real story here is not the motivations of some of the NBA’s owners, no matter how small-minded they might be, but the fact that the league itself has had to own this franchise without a viable buyer for an entire year.
Stern, leery of the PR hit the league would receive for abandoning the city in the aftermath of Katrina, has been determined to find a buyer willing to keep the city in New Orleans. When he could not find one, the league bought the franchise, setting themselves up for the situation with Chris Paul they are in now.
But while the inherent conflict of interest created by owning one of their competitors is going to force the owners to sell the team to a buyer who will probably move it, Stern has good reason to avoid that scenario. When the Hornets came to New Orleans, they made a series of implicit and explicit promises to the region, and they are playing in a 100% publicly financed stadium. Abandoning the taxpayers of New Orleans and leaving them with a NBA stadium they no longer need is an immoral thing to do, and it points to the heart of the real problem with the structure of sports ownership in the United States.
The owners aren’t running private enterprises; they are running public trusts. This is the fundamental mismatch at the heart of the problems in professional sports in the United States today: the owners of the NBA, NFL and MLB have been allowed to profit off a public good (the stadiums they play in).