Mark Cuban had a four-letter reaction, alright
February 3, 2025 7:05 AM Subscribe
The NBA was rocked this weekend by news that the Los Angeles Lakers have acquired Luka Dončić from the Dallas Mavericks -- a stunning move that could prove the most consequential sports deal of the decade.
What made this 100% not-a-hoax trade particularly extraordinary is that Luka -- a 25-year-old superstar who led the league in scoring last season while nearly averaging a triple-double -- never requested to leave Dallas.
In fact, the Mavs front office initiated the trade themselves, amidst alleged concerns over his conditioning and a reluctance to offer a $345 million 'supermax' extension.
Making matters more bewildering, Dallas didn't shop their franchise player around the league, instead dealing directly with the Lakers in a secret negotiation that left other teams' front offices (and even Mavs staff) completely blindsided.
The Lakers, continuing their historic tradition of landing generational talent (see: Wilt, Kareem, Shaq), now pair Luka with LeBron James in a dynamic that could reshape the sport for years to come.
(Title context)
(Title context)
Sad to see what the supermax has become—the whole point was supposed to be a way to allow home-grown stars to be retained by the teams that drafted them. But at this point, it seems a supermax deal becomes the impetus to get rid of a player rather than keep them, often as not.
The craziest part of this deal is that the Mavs GM Nico has confirmed that he didn’t seek offers for Doncic from any other team. Hard to see this as anything other than a sweetheart deal for the Lakers.
posted by skewed at 7:26 AM on February 3 [1 favorite]
The craziest part of this deal is that the Mavs GM Nico has confirmed that he didn’t seek offers for Doncic from any other team. Hard to see this as anything other than a sweetheart deal for the Lakers.
posted by skewed at 7:26 AM on February 3 [1 favorite]
Yeah this is all about getting a star to LA to help the league's TV ratings now and in the future. Parity works for the NFL, but NBA fans prefer to watch superpowers battle it out.
posted by Kibbutz at 7:30 AM on February 3 [1 favorite]
posted by Kibbutz at 7:30 AM on February 3 [1 favorite]
Every time I think I've maxed out on my hatred of the Lakers... at least Nick Wiger is (probably) happy about all of this. And boy, the Lakers thought they were making a lot of money on Bronny jerseys!
But yeah, just echoing so many others, this is such an astonishing and bizarre trade that it really has no parallel in league history. Really hard not to assume some significant shenanigans here.
posted by saladin at 7:32 AM on February 3 [4 favorites]
But yeah, just echoing so many others, this is such an astonishing and bizarre trade that it really has no parallel in league history. Really hard not to assume some significant shenanigans here.
posted by saladin at 7:32 AM on February 3 [4 favorites]
It's been pretty heartbreaking to watch all the Mavs' fan reactions on social media. I would certainly understand if some of them just gave up their Mavs or even NBA fandom after this. Billionaires are why we can't have nice things.
posted by obliterati at 7:35 AM on February 3 [3 favorites]
posted by obliterati at 7:35 AM on February 3 [3 favorites]
You can play general manager in the video game NBA2K, and this trade as structured isn't allowed there. The video game thinks it's too ridiculous to allow it. Shenanigans indeed.
posted by mcstayinskool at 7:42 AM on February 3 [12 favorites]
posted by mcstayinskool at 7:42 AM on February 3 [12 favorites]
I understand teams being reluctant to sign supermax contracts right now. The new collective bargaining agreement's "second apron" restrictions on teams' ability to sign and trade players is like a straightjacket for GM's. No bundling players in trades, no taking back even a dollar more in salary than you send out, and then you start losing draft picks. It's a LOT.
I also understand being reluctant to sign Luka in particular to the supermax - he has a significant inquiry history at just 25, and he is prone to letting his conditioning fall off and his weight get up, both complicating factors for future injury risk.
All of that said, Mavs' GM Nico Harrison really messed up, here. He had better have had buy in from ownership, because Luka is a generational talent. And bottom line, he traded away a guy who at 25 years of age is going to be one of the best players in the NBA for most of the next decade for an aging star who is probably only 85-90% as good as Luka at his best, which there's is maybe 2-3 seasons left of. He got a single draft pick coming back and no young players.
He could have set up a bidding war and brought back a whole pile of picks and young players in addition to a win now piece like Davis. The fact that he didn't even try to do this, and doesn't seem to understand that he should have done so, to me would be a firable offense. If they don't win a championship this year or next year, this may not just cost him his job, but his career.
For my part, I doubt league interference here. It seems much more likely to be driven by a ham fisted owner, or by Harrison's own incompetence. Either way it sucks for everyone but Lakers fans, a sadly typical state of affairs in the NBA.
posted by Smedly, Butlerian jihadi at 7:51 AM on February 3 [3 favorites]
I also understand being reluctant to sign Luka in particular to the supermax - he has a significant inquiry history at just 25, and he is prone to letting his conditioning fall off and his weight get up, both complicating factors for future injury risk.
All of that said, Mavs' GM Nico Harrison really messed up, here. He had better have had buy in from ownership, because Luka is a generational talent. And bottom line, he traded away a guy who at 25 years of age is going to be one of the best players in the NBA for most of the next decade for an aging star who is probably only 85-90% as good as Luka at his best, which there's is maybe 2-3 seasons left of. He got a single draft pick coming back and no young players.
He could have set up a bidding war and brought back a whole pile of picks and young players in addition to a win now piece like Davis. The fact that he didn't even try to do this, and doesn't seem to understand that he should have done so, to me would be a firable offense. If they don't win a championship this year or next year, this may not just cost him his job, but his career.
For my part, I doubt league interference here. It seems much more likely to be driven by a ham fisted owner, or by Harrison's own incompetence. Either way it sucks for everyone but Lakers fans, a sadly typical state of affairs in the NBA.
posted by Smedly, Butlerian jihadi at 7:51 AM on February 3 [3 favorites]
My immediate reaction when I heard this was "this never would have happened if Mark Cuban was alive."
posted by Galvanic at 8:03 AM on February 3 [9 favorites]
posted by Galvanic at 8:03 AM on February 3 [9 favorites]
Billionaires are why we can't have nice things.
Especially the particular billionaire involved here - the genocidal widow of corrupt casino magnate Sheldon Adelson. (This is also why I'm okay with the Mavs under this particular ownership not getting to have nice things.)
posted by NoxAeternum at 8:20 AM on February 3 [6 favorites]
Especially the particular billionaire involved here - the genocidal widow of corrupt casino magnate Sheldon Adelson. (This is also why I'm okay with the Mavs under this particular ownership not getting to have nice things.)
posted by NoxAeternum at 8:20 AM on February 3 [6 favorites]
Yeah, this is all about Adelson not wanting to spend big on the Mavs while she tries to beat/bribe the Texas legislature into giving her the casino in Arlington (Dallas suburb, between Dallas and Fort Worth) that she wants to build. The casino would be part of an entertainment complex that would include a new arena for the Mavericks, whose contract with American Airlines Center is up in a few years.
The problem for her is that we already have billionaires who run the Lege and they're Christian nationalist types who hate gambling. I don't think she's going to get what she wants, certainly not in the near-term timeframe needed to take advantage of the upcoming renegotiation with AAC, and I think she's going to ruin the Mavericks over it. Or maybe take them out of Dallas if she can figure out how.
This is going to suck for the actual fans (I live here, and I will be sad if our team gets ruined/moved, but I'm not a fan by any means) but I think Cuban got out at the right moment to go do the other things he seems to be interested in, like GoodRx.
posted by gentlyepigrams at 8:56 AM on February 3 [4 favorites]
The problem for her is that we already have billionaires who run the Lege and they're Christian nationalist types who hate gambling. I don't think she's going to get what she wants, certainly not in the near-term timeframe needed to take advantage of the upcoming renegotiation with AAC, and I think she's going to ruin the Mavericks over it. Or maybe take them out of Dallas if she can figure out how.
This is going to suck for the actual fans (I live here, and I will be sad if our team gets ruined/moved, but I'm not a fan by any means) but I think Cuban got out at the right moment to go do the other things he seems to be interested in, like GoodRx.
posted by gentlyepigrams at 8:56 AM on February 3 [4 favorites]
Isn't the (nearly fact free and very much unsubstantiated) conspiracy theory that the Adelson's plan now is to destroy the Mavs to make it easier to move them to Las Vegas?
posted by inflatablekiwi at 9:09 AM on February 3
posted by inflatablekiwi at 9:09 AM on February 3
Yes, this is absolutely bonkers, as a Celtics fan this just stoked the fire of the Lakers/Celtics rivalry for many years to come.
Personally, I don't see this as shenanigans as much as it was economics and incompetence.
This dimwit Harrison, the GM, has a history of being bad at his job: as the story goes, in 2013 Stephen Curry (pre-NBA title but clearly a superstar) was being pitched by Nike for a new shoe line.
Harrison was leading that pitch and among other things: 1.) Mispronounced Stephen's name calling him "Seth" (his brother) and 2.) Mistakenly used a presentation deck that was originally made for Kevin Durant, an amazing combination of insult and lack of attention to detail.
Curry ended up signing with upstart rivals Under Armour and went on to become the greatest 3-point shooter in history, winning multiple NBA championships and costing Nike god knows how much money in lost revenue.
So yeah, a classic case of failing upwards.
posted by jeremias at 9:18 AM on February 3 [8 favorites]
Personally, I don't see this as shenanigans as much as it was economics and incompetence.
This dimwit Harrison, the GM, has a history of being bad at his job: as the story goes, in 2013 Stephen Curry (pre-NBA title but clearly a superstar) was being pitched by Nike for a new shoe line.
Harrison was leading that pitch and among other things: 1.) Mispronounced Stephen's name calling him "Seth" (his brother) and 2.) Mistakenly used a presentation deck that was originally made for Kevin Durant, an amazing combination of insult and lack of attention to detail.
Curry ended up signing with upstart rivals Under Armour and went on to become the greatest 3-point shooter in history, winning multiple NBA championships and costing Nike god knows how much money in lost revenue.
So yeah, a classic case of failing upwards.
posted by jeremias at 9:18 AM on February 3 [8 favorites]
Wow, I had no idea that the Mavs GM was the same guy who did the infamous Steph Curry Nike sales pitch. That’s nuts.
posted by skewed at 9:51 AM on February 3 [1 favorite]
posted by skewed at 9:51 AM on February 3 [1 favorite]
A non-basketball related quid pro quo is the only explanation that makes sense. If the owner wants to be cheap that is one thing but you do not trade the 3rd best player in the league not yet his prime yet for 10 cents on the dollar while only talking to one team about a trade. It's not even smoke, we're looking right at the fire.
Sports teams in the past 15 years have started to shift from vanity objects for the ultra-wealthy into corporations unto themselves. With the switch you're starting to see the sports side becomes secondary to what is usually very large real estate development projects near the stadium the teams play in. The casino play or move to Vegas have been noted here and elsewhere.
posted by MillMan at 9:52 AM on February 3 [2 favorites]
Sports teams in the past 15 years have started to shift from vanity objects for the ultra-wealthy into corporations unto themselves. With the switch you're starting to see the sports side becomes secondary to what is usually very large real estate development projects near the stadium the teams play in. The casino play or move to Vegas have been noted here and elsewhere.
posted by MillMan at 9:52 AM on February 3 [2 favorites]
Man all professional sports has just degenerated into publicly subsidized corporate marketing spectacles. It’s like cheering for Wells Fargo vs Bank of America or Cargill vs ADM or Musk vs Zuckerberg. Go team.
posted by RandlePatrickMcMurphy at 10:41 AM on February 3
posted by RandlePatrickMcMurphy at 10:41 AM on February 3
As a lifelong Lakers fan, this makes the team watchable again. It was getting pretty ugly there...
posted by Chuffy at 11:07 AM on February 3
posted by Chuffy at 11:07 AM on February 3
If the Mavs go to Las Vegas, I'd bet the Thunder end up in Dallas.
That would make sense to me as the NBA's game plan anyway, because an NBA team in Oklahoma was never really viable in the first place.
posted by jamjam at 11:17 AM on February 3
That would make sense to me as the NBA's game plan anyway, because an NBA team in Oklahoma was never really viable in the first place.
posted by jamjam at 11:17 AM on February 3
FU Clay Bennett, and FU Thunder.
Here in Seattle, the rumor is that both Seattle and Las Vegas are the next two cities for expansion, so not sure about either of those.
posted by Windopaene at 11:25 AM on February 3
Here in Seattle, the rumor is that both Seattle and Las Vegas are the next two cities for expansion, so not sure about either of those.
posted by Windopaene at 11:25 AM on February 3
Yeah, this is all about Adelson not wanting to spend big on the Mavs while she tries to beat/bribe the Texas legislature into giving her the casino in Arlington (Dallas suburb, between Dallas and Fort Worth) that she wants to build. The casino would be part of an entertainment complex that would include a new arena for the Mavericks, whose contract with American Airlines Center is up in a few years.
The problem for her is that we already have billionaires who run the Lege and they're Christian nationalist types who hate gambling. I don't think she's going to get what she wants, certainly not in the near-term timeframe needed to take advantage of the upcoming renegotiation with AAC, and I think she's going to ruin the Mavericks over it. Or maybe take them out of Dallas if she can figure out how.
#letthemfight
both of these entities are spectacularly malign for the world. may they spend their productive time destroying each other.
posted by lalochezia at 12:23 PM on February 3
None of this really adds up. Saying you're concerned about Luka not staying in shape, and then trading for Street Clothes? It's true the Mavs often treated Luka like a child, but there are ways to convince NBA players to try to stay fighting fit, especially when they're only 25.
The Athletic reported "If a trade didn’t materialize, then they (the Mavs) believed the prospect of being left with a disgruntled franchise centerpiece could be disastrous." Which is like- you really think that no one else in the NBA would take that "disgruntled centerpiece" off your hands?
My feeling is that the Mavs kept this extremely quiet because they knew their fans would absolutely lose their shit if they knew their team was trying to trade their future away for what the Mavs have said is a vague worry about Luka's not being able to remain in shape when it's important, but is probably ultimately about saving money. Which is frankly deranged when you went to the Finals last year, but billionaires don't think about things like non-weirdos.
posted by oneirodynia at 12:27 PM on February 3
The Athletic reported "If a trade didn’t materialize, then they (the Mavs) believed the prospect of being left with a disgruntled franchise centerpiece could be disastrous." Which is like- you really think that no one else in the NBA would take that "disgruntled centerpiece" off your hands?
My feeling is that the Mavs kept this extremely quiet because they knew their fans would absolutely lose their shit if they knew their team was trying to trade their future away for what the Mavs have said is a vague worry about Luka's not being able to remain in shape when it's important, but is probably ultimately about saving money. Which is frankly deranged when you went to the Finals last year, but billionaires don't think about things like non-weirdos.
posted by oneirodynia at 12:27 PM on February 3
I think Cuban got out at the right moment to go do the other things he seems to be interested in, like GoodRx.
I suspect that given his disgust for TFG, a run for office might be in order.
posted by Ber at 1:06 PM on February 3
I suspect that given his disgust for TFG, a run for office might be in order.
posted by Ber at 1:06 PM on February 3
Yeah, I always thought the Las Vegas expansion was going to LeBron. Mexico City has been floated as a possibility too, but I think that's just to keep Seattle and Vegas on their toes.
Apparently Dalton Knecht and the Lakers' other first round pick were part of the original deal, but Pelinka harped on how fat and lazy Luka is and got to keep both. This is what happens when you play in close to the chest, but Harrison is probably correct in assuming that Dallas fans and Luka's agent would railroad his dumb ass if word got out before the trade was complete.
Sports teams being fronts for gambling/real estate schemes, airlines being fronts for loyalty point / credit card marketing, Ivy League universities being fronts for hedge funds, etc. feels like a kind of corruption, but under capitalism I guess the point of these social projects is just to make money.
posted by Hume at 1:14 PM on February 3 [3 favorites]
Apparently Dalton Knecht and the Lakers' other first round pick were part of the original deal, but Pelinka harped on how fat and lazy Luka is and got to keep both. This is what happens when you play in close to the chest, but Harrison is probably correct in assuming that Dallas fans and Luka's agent would railroad his dumb ass if word got out before the trade was complete.
Sports teams being fronts for gambling/real estate schemes, airlines being fronts for loyalty point / credit card marketing, Ivy League universities being fronts for hedge funds, etc. feels like a kind of corruption, but under capitalism I guess the point of these social projects is just to make money.
posted by Hume at 1:14 PM on February 3 [3 favorites]
Yeah, this is all about Adelson not wanting to spend big on the Mavs while she tries to beat/bribe the Texas legislature into giving her the casino in Arlington (Dallas suburb, between Dallas and Fort Worth) that she wants to build
That doesn’t make any sense. She’s going to win over the Texas legislature by destroying the Mavericks? Trading a great white star for a less great black one?
Nope. Not plausible.
Also, I just read this:
https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/43676830/how-stunning-luka-doncic-anthony-davis-trade-came-together-los-angeles-lakers-dallas-mavericks
And it just makes it seem from even more stupid.
posted by Galvanic at 2:09 PM on February 3
That doesn’t make any sense. She’s going to win over the Texas legislature by destroying the Mavericks? Trading a great white star for a less great black one?
Nope. Not plausible.
Also, I just read this:
https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/43676830/how-stunning-luka-doncic-anthony-davis-trade-came-together-los-angeles-lakers-dallas-mavericks
And it just makes it seem from even more stupid.
posted by Galvanic at 2:09 PM on February 3
From an audience standpoint, it’s brilliant though. I might have to pay attention to the NBA again, because while I’ve loved every team LeBron has ever anchored, it hasn’t been the same in recent years. I’d def watch King James pass the torch to Luka.
posted by ifatfirstyoudontsucceed at 3:34 PM on February 3
posted by ifatfirstyoudontsucceed at 3:34 PM on February 3
Are NBA players allowed to take semaglutide?
posted by kickingtheground at 5:45 PM on February 3
posted by kickingtheground at 5:45 PM on February 3
That doesn’t make any sense. She’s going to win over the Texas legislature by destroying the Mavericks? Trading a great white star for a less great black one?
No, she just isn't going to spend big and buy/keep a winning team until/unless she gets her casino.
Trying to get the Lege to approve gambling has been an ongoing fight here in Texas for decades. But as long as Wilks and Dunn (two of our crazy billionaires) are running the Texas Senate, it's not going to happen. Our Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick is against it, and because of the way our Reconstruction state constitution is built, he's the guy with a lot of power, really even more than the governor. He controls the state Senate. And he doesn't want it to happen and he's got the votes for this session (we have 6 months in session every 2 years, which is happening now) and it would be a low priority even if he did want gambling. What the Republicans want this session, apart from the budget and dealing with the sunsetted agencies (we sunset agencies and have to reauthorize them regularly) is school vouchers. Gambling isn't anywhere in sight. We just had the governor's state of the state address; it's not on the agenda.
Honestly I thought when Adelson bought the Mavs that it was billionaire delusion. The only way that purchase makes sense is if she gets that casino, or moves them to Vegas, which I guess could be her backup plan? But the scuttlebutt here in DFW is that they have the land and are starting to do the planning for a complex in Arlington, so I think she really believes she can get a casino here. I think she's wrong though.
#letthemfight
both of these entities are spectacularly malign for the world. may they spend their productive time destroying each other.
Better than them and their peers continuing to destroy this state and the rest of the country.
posted by gentlyepigrams at 5:58 PM on February 3 [1 favorite]
No, she just isn't going to spend big and buy/keep a winning team until/unless she gets her casino.
Trying to get the Lege to approve gambling has been an ongoing fight here in Texas for decades. But as long as Wilks and Dunn (two of our crazy billionaires) are running the Texas Senate, it's not going to happen. Our Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick is against it, and because of the way our Reconstruction state constitution is built, he's the guy with a lot of power, really even more than the governor. He controls the state Senate. And he doesn't want it to happen and he's got the votes for this session (we have 6 months in session every 2 years, which is happening now) and it would be a low priority even if he did want gambling. What the Republicans want this session, apart from the budget and dealing with the sunsetted agencies (we sunset agencies and have to reauthorize them regularly) is school vouchers. Gambling isn't anywhere in sight. We just had the governor's state of the state address; it's not on the agenda.
Honestly I thought when Adelson bought the Mavs that it was billionaire delusion. The only way that purchase makes sense is if she gets that casino, or moves them to Vegas, which I guess could be her backup plan? But the scuttlebutt here in DFW is that they have the land and are starting to do the planning for a complex in Arlington, so I think she really believes she can get a casino here. I think she's wrong though.
#letthemfight
both of these entities are spectacularly malign for the world. may they spend their productive time destroying each other.
Better than them and their peers continuing to destroy this state and the rest of the country.
posted by gentlyepigrams at 5:58 PM on February 3 [1 favorite]
No, she just isn't going to spend big and buy/keep a winning team until/unless she gets her casino.
As I said, that doesn't make any sense. She's definitely not going to change the Texas government's mind by driving the Mavericks off the cliff. "Hey, I just traded away maybe the best player in the world* for a bucket of bolts. How about now with that casino?"
Nope.
*Non-Jokovic edition.
posted by Galvanic at 6:06 PM on February 3
As I said, that doesn't make any sense. She's definitely not going to change the Texas government's mind by driving the Mavericks off the cliff. "Hey, I just traded away maybe the best player in the world* for a bucket of bolts. How about now with that casino?"
Nope.
*Non-Jokovic edition.
posted by Galvanic at 6:06 PM on February 3
She's definitely not going to change the Texas government's mind by driving the Mavericks off the cliff.
That's not what I said and I don't understand how you're getting there from what I did say. But to be clear: I think Adelson intends to change the minds of Texas elected officials in the usual way, which is to say money. Having a winning team will be a great attraction for a casino complex if she can get one built/opened, but it's not important right now toward getting the casino open. That's my guess about what's driving the trade: offloading an expensive asset when she has better things to do with her money, like spending it on campaign contributions to lawmakers who would vote on allowing gambling/her casino.
The performance of the team isn't directly related to trying to get the Lege to legalize gambling. There are elected officials who care about the Mavericks, but they're all local to DFW. To the extent she can buy the votes of local officials with campaign contributions, I assume she already has done so. The rest of the state doesn't care unless they're paid to (with campaign contributions).
posted by gentlyepigrams at 8:17 PM on February 3
That's not what I said and I don't understand how you're getting there from what I did say. But to be clear: I think Adelson intends to change the minds of Texas elected officials in the usual way, which is to say money. Having a winning team will be a great attraction for a casino complex if she can get one built/opened, but it's not important right now toward getting the casino open. That's my guess about what's driving the trade: offloading an expensive asset when she has better things to do with her money, like spending it on campaign contributions to lawmakers who would vote on allowing gambling/her casino.
The performance of the team isn't directly related to trying to get the Lege to legalize gambling. There are elected officials who care about the Mavericks, but they're all local to DFW. To the extent she can buy the votes of local officials with campaign contributions, I assume she already has done so. The rest of the state doesn't care unless they're paid to (with campaign contributions).
posted by gentlyepigrams at 8:17 PM on February 3
I should add, one of the things that makes me think this is about money is the part where she offloaded the expensive guy for, among other things, a 2029 draft pick. That's four years of someone's salary the Mavericks will not have to pay.
posted by gentlyepigrams at 8:44 PM on February 3
posted by gentlyepigrams at 8:44 PM on February 3
think Adelson intends to change the minds of Texas elected officials in the usual way, which is to say money. Having a winning team will be a great attraction for a casino complex if she can get one built/opened, but it's not important right now toward getting the casino open.
I understood what you said, and my point is that she can show up with as much money as she wants and the first thing they're going to say is "what the f*(&(&(&(& was that trade?" She just tainted herself in Texas .
The idea that it's not important *right now* is just silly when there are Mavs fans showing up to the stadium with fake coffins to protest the trade. Maybe in a couple of years if Davis does well on the Mavs and Luka becomes Joel Embiid (western version) she would be in better position but at this moment? She and Marge Schott are in a duel for highest toxicity level, female owner, all time division.
posted by Galvanic at 9:08 AM on February 4
I understood what you said, and my point is that she can show up with as much money as she wants and the first thing they're going to say is "what the f*(&(&(&(& was that trade?" She just tainted herself in Texas .
The idea that it's not important *right now* is just silly when there are Mavs fans showing up to the stadium with fake coffins to protest the trade. Maybe in a couple of years if Davis does well on the Mavs and Luka becomes Joel Embiid (western version) she would be in better position but at this moment? She and Marge Schott are in a duel for highest toxicity level, female owner, all time division.
posted by Galvanic at 9:08 AM on February 4
I understood what you said, and my point is that she can show up with as much money as she wants and the first thing they're going to say is "what the f*(&(&(&(& was that trade?" She just tainted herself in Texas .
You have a very different understanding of how politics work in Texas than I do. I don't think the Texas Legislature cares whether one team wins or loses. If they did, somebody would have lit a fire under Jerry Jones a long damn time ago. So I don't think there's anything more to say between you and me on this point and I'll be interested in what other folks have to say.
posted by gentlyepigrams at 9:14 AM on February 4
You have a very different understanding of how politics work in Texas than I do. I don't think the Texas Legislature cares whether one team wins or loses. If they did, somebody would have lit a fire under Jerry Jones a long damn time ago. So I don't think there's anything more to say between you and me on this point and I'll be interested in what other folks have to say.
posted by gentlyepigrams at 9:14 AM on February 4
I don't think the Texas Legislature cares whether one team wins or loses
"Shockwaves of Luka Doncic trade reached all the way to the Texas Governor’s Mansion"
posted by Galvanic at 10:17 AM on February 4
"Shockwaves of Luka Doncic trade reached all the way to the Texas Governor’s Mansion"
posted by Galvanic at 10:17 AM on February 4
I saw something interesting wrt to actual gambling policy from Gov. Abbott today in the Houston Chronicle: Exclusive: Gov. Greg Abbott says he supports Texas legalizing sports gambling
If you read the actual article, though, what he says is he "doesn't have a problem" with online sports betting, which is not going to help Adelson. Other than that the article is pretty solid and gives a decent overview of the problems with legalizing gambling, including a possible destination casino in Arlington. There is a slow push toward gambling legalization over the last few years, but it's not a priority despite the money that folks like the Adelsons and Tilman Fertitta (one of our homegrown billionaires) have put in. Plus they're going to have to pry the plank against gambling out of the Republican Party platform, which will take a lot of money and possibly a lot of primary fighting. So: maybe sports betting online in the next couple of (biennial) sessions? but actual casinos are much further down the line.
posted by gentlyepigrams at 4:36 PM on February 5
If you read the actual article, though, what he says is he "doesn't have a problem" with online sports betting, which is not going to help Adelson. Other than that the article is pretty solid and gives a decent overview of the problems with legalizing gambling, including a possible destination casino in Arlington. There is a slow push toward gambling legalization over the last few years, but it's not a priority despite the money that folks like the Adelsons and Tilman Fertitta (one of our homegrown billionaires) have put in. Plus they're going to have to pry the plank against gambling out of the Republican Party platform, which will take a lot of money and possibly a lot of primary fighting. So: maybe sports betting online in the next couple of (biennial) sessions? but actual casinos are much further down the line.
posted by gentlyepigrams at 4:36 PM on February 5
« Older Remembering Jaune Quick-to-See Smith (1940–2025) | Dance! The computer commands it! Newer »
This, combined with the absolute doo-doo platter of a trade return (sorry AD) and the extreme secrecy of the process, makes it very hard for me to believe there wasn't some backroom shenanigans involving owners and the league office. The GM, Nico Harrison, has spoken to sports media about this trade and seems to be positioning it as strictly his decision and his alone. Which, in this context, smells a bit fishy--often GMs serve their final function as the fall guy for unpopular and/or ill-conceived decisions made by ownership (hi James Dolan), and if that's what's happening here then Nico's doing a mighty valiant job of it.
All of that to try and convey how disorienting this trade has been. As a lifelong NBA fan, I say without hyperbole or exaggeration: this is by several thousand miles the most unexpected and consequential trade probably in the history of the NBA. Some trades have been just as unexpected (e.g. Pau Gasol in 2008, incidentally also to the Lakers), and others have been as consequential (e.g. any time LeBron changed teams, even if technically they weren't trades)...but never both at once in the same transaction. Like, wow.
posted by obliterati at 7:24 AM on February 3 [8 favorites]