NBA What If's Volume Two - What if David Stern Doesn't Veto Chris Paul to the Lakers?

When you look at every major moment that's happened in the NBA in the 21st century, there aren't very many you can look back at with more confusion than David Stern vetoing the blockbuster trade to send Chris Paul from the Hornets to the Lakers in December of 2011. A commissioner veto simply isn't an obstacle you consider wen it comes to trades - these are billion-dollar organizations being operated by guys making millions to make the right trades for their franchises - it feels like anything they agree on should be fair game. But here's the catch - the Hornets at the time didn't have an owner, meaning the franchise was under ownership from the NBA, and therefore David Stern, who deemed the trade too trade unfair for the New Orleans, stepped in and vetoed it from an ownership position. It was quickly revealed that Stern expected the trade to be re-done and send Paul to the Lakers anyway, but a key asset in the deal Lamar Odom was traded just days later, and the discussions fell apart. Six days later, the Hornets sent CP3 to the Clippers. Was this solely done for Stern looking out for the Hornets? It's certainly worth mentioning the league was working out of a 161-day lockout and had spent months negotiating a new CBA, and it would make sense that other owners weren't pleased that a new CBA designed to help small markets would see its first move be a small market sending one of the league's best players to a major market already possessing a contending roster. And not to mention the confusion Lakers owner Jeannie Buss revealed with the league-owned Hornets making the trade with all the league representatives in New York to ratify the new CBA, all because former GM Dell Demps had pulled the trigger on his own.

It's the type of saga you very well might never see in the NBA again, and one we could all do without re-witnessing. Instead of acquiring a 26-year old superstar in Paul to pair alongside Kobe Bryant the Lakers stayed stagnant, never really recovered, and had to settle for a 38-year-old Steve Nash the ensuing offseason. Paul ended up going to the Clippers, who spent years as contenders in the West but never quite got over the hump, while New Orleans entered a full rebuild that would culminate in drafting Anthony Davis 1st overall in the ensuing draft. So what if the unthinkable didn't happen? What if the commissioner turned Hornets owner didn't do what he did, and Chris Paul ended up with the Lakers in exchange for star power forward Pau Gasol and well-established role player Lamar Odom? The trio of Chris Paul, Kobe Bryant, and Andrew Bynum instantly becomes one of the very best in basketball and more than capable of winning a title. Kobe's prime undoubtedly extends at least a couple more years, and the Lakers could have still made the Dwight Howard trade work later down the line - they would still have Andrew Bynum and the 1st-round pick that they traded for Howard a year later. The Lakers weren't true contenders with this trade not going though but does Paul close the gap? They instantly become the hot new destination for anyone looking to latch onto a contender, so I have faith they build a competent bench. It's fair to question Kobe working alongside a ball-dominant point guard for the first time ever, but they said the same thing about James Harden, and Paul made it work with him and then again with Devin Booker. I think this gets them through Oklahoma City and San Antonio in year one, setting up a matchup for the ages with LeBron and Miami. LeBron still doesn't have a ring at this point and has a world of pressure on his shoulders. And it's not a team led by 23-year-olds he gets to go against, it's a 5-time champion now loaded with the best game manager and backcourt partner he's ever had. The Lakers get it done, elevating Kobe into legitimate GOAT talks with his 6th ring while Chris Paul ends the no ring discourse long before it begins. I don't even think the Lakers try to get Howard - Paul should make Andrew Bynum look better than ever. Paul has never had any trouble adapting to new star teammates right away, and I give it about a three-year window before Father Time begins to catch up with Kobe. I think the duo maxes out at one though. I'll say LeBron is still good for one with the Heat, and the 2013-14 Spurs roster is constructed perfectly to handle this hypothetical Lakers team. But do the Thunder still feel comfortable trading Harden? Does the universe survive back-to-back Finals losses when LeBron gets to Miami? I think the most exciting part of all of this becomes Kobe's legacy spot. The top-5 has to be a given, and how long does it take LeBron to pass him, if he even does? LeBron is probably ending up in the top-3 all-time either way, but does beating him at the peak of his powers give Kobe an extra boost that MJ never had? And there's surely a huge portion of Kobe fans that would never accept him behind LeBron if he beats him head-to-head. There's endless hypotheticals that could've come of this, but it's all what could've been once David Stern got in the mix.