Chris Paul a Clipper

D-Dogg

A Whole New World
Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2003
Posts
45,193
Reaction score
1,475
Location
In The End Zone
and Renz, just answer me this one simple question: Which was the better trade? the Laker-Houston-Hornets trade or the Clippers-Hornets trade?

Both were good. Pretending that the Lakers offer wasn't good ignores everyone in the NBA that said they made out very well for a guy who was leaving. But the league used the power of the commissioner's office as leverage in a trade in order to suck out assets from the Clippers to make a better offer.

And yes, it is a better offer - however, when the league is negotiating AND approving the final offer, as well as managing (and knowing all of) the Billups bids which helped enable the Clips to make that offer, there is an incredible conflict of interest. That kind of leverage is dangerous, and something no team in the league can remotely match. When Demps, Morey and Kupchak work out a three team deal that the basketball minds agree works out for all parties, it isn't a horrible deal for any of them. It was a pretty good deal for all parties.

The party that should be the most pissed is the Rockets. They got their plans smashed into the dust.

Overall, its not that big of a deal. The Clips still have Sterling as the owner, and he'll ef it up as usual. The Lakers still have Jim Buss, who will start effing it up as his track record has consistently shown - everything he touches turns into dogcrap. The Lakers still need a real PG...nothing new there.
 

D-Dogg

A Whole New World
Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2003
Posts
45,193
Reaction score
1,475
Location
In The End Zone
Bills Simmons wrote that a potential buyer may have nixed the deal and that the buyer is staying low key until the Chris Paul issues were resolved.

That was a guess and he gave it a probability...he was pulling stuff out of his arse.

THEORY NO. 4: The league has a mystery Hornets buyer lined up and doesn't want to jeopardize the sale by not getting enough value for Chris Paul.

Possibility of being true: 60 percent. They'd rather keep Paul and let the new owner figure it out UNLESS someone blows them away. Translation: When you don't care if you trade someone, you can waste everyone's time making insane requests like, "Hey Houston, we'll let you get Pau Gasol in this revised three-team deal, but only if you give up six of your seven best assets" (100 percent true) and, "Hey Clippers, you can have Chris Paul, but only if you include Eric Gordon, the rights to Minnesota's unprotected 2012 no. 1 pick, Chris Kaman and last year's no. 1 picks (Al-Farouq Aminu and Eric Bledsoe)" for someone who, again, is leaving our team in seven months. It's like someone saying, "I know my house is worth a million dollars, and I know I have to sell it before the bank forecloses on it, but if you want to buy it, I'm gonna need $2 million in cash."
 

Cheesebeef

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Posts
92,491
Reaction score
71,193
Both were good. Pretending that the Lakers offer wasn't good ignores everyone in the NBA that said they made out very well for a guy who was leaving.

really? I said it RIGHT at the time of the trade that it was a pathetic trade because it didn't help the Hornets accomplish ANYTHING except be mediocre forever. That doesn't make it a good trade. Even the Lakers incredible rip off of Pau was better because at least it gave the Grizzlies flexibility, draft picks and a young big in Gasol. In the firts trade, they got NONE of that. How was it a good trade?

It was seemingly the first offer and Demps, like an idiot, jumped at it. Again, there were people saying it and just because the entire media froths at the mouth over the Lakers and the dream of another dream team, doesn't make it so.


And yes, it is a better offer - however, when the league is negotiating AND approving the final offer, as well as managing (and knowing all of) the Billups bids which helped enable the Clips to make that offer, there is an incredible conflict of interest. That kind of leverage is dangerous, and something no team in the league can remotely match. When Demps, Morey and Kupchak work out a three team deal that the basketball minds agree works out for all parties, it isn't a horrible deal for any of them. It was a pretty good deal for all parties.

I'm still waiting for a Laker fan to tell me how being MAXED out for years with a roster that might win 35-40 games for the foreseeable future is a good trade. I mean, the lockout JUST ended and the idea that that awful trade was the best that could get done is not only ridiculous, but it's been proven to be false. Demps put together a disaster of a trade, the media slobered all over it like they do anything Laker related, the league looked at the deal and realized how horrible it was and then did what any good franchise should do... kjill the deal and start using two teams against each other to leverage the better deal. All Demps appeared to do was jump at the first thing offered to him.

but hey, Laker fans are butt-hurt... and I will admit... that does make me happy.
 

D-Dogg

A Whole New World
Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2003
Posts
45,193
Reaction score
1,475
Location
In The End Zone
Sterling got raped by Stern. He played him like a violin. As mentioned in Simmons' article ""I know my house is worth a million dollars, and I know I have to sell it before the bank forecloses on it, but if you want to buy it, I'm gonna need $2 million in cash."

Simple as that. Unless CP3 signs an extension, they gave up a ton to rent him. They aren't winning a title in those two seasons, but they sure will be entertaining.
 

Mainstreet

Cruisin' Mainstreet
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Posts
120,181
Reaction score
60,746
Because NOBODY is going to give up anything of value for a washed out 38 year old.

I do not believe this is true.

IMO, Nash would be worth at least a first draft pick plus filler. However, I think Sarver (and perhaps Nash as well) see him retiring as a Sun. This seems to be the reason Sarver has not explored trading Nash. I'm not necessarily in line with this thinking (if true), but it would be admirable and similar to what happened with Kevin Johnson.
 

D-Dogg

A Whole New World
Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2003
Posts
45,193
Reaction score
1,475
Location
In The End Zone
I do not believe this is true.

IMO, Nash would be worth at least a first draft pick plus filler. However, I think Sarver (and perhaps Nash as well) see him retiring as a Sun. This seems to be the reason Sarver has not explored trading Nash. I'm not necessarily in line with this thinking (if true), but it would be admirable and similar to what happened with Kevin Johnson.

Sure, you can have the Lakers first rounder, a trade exception and Luke Walton.

:raccoon:
 

jlove

AZ Born and Bred!!!
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Posts
1,518
Reaction score
263
Location
Phoenix, AZ
Gotta love the fact that the Clippers are taking a book out of the Wolves book. Hmmmm, lets see here.....they have Mo Williams, Randy Foye and Eric Bledsoe playing the PG position and still under contract, but didn't trade a single one of them, yet pick up Billups and then trade for Paul. 5 PG's? The Clips are gonna have to look at other trades to rid themselves of some of these guards. WOW!
 

Mainstreet

Cruisin' Mainstreet
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Posts
120,181
Reaction score
60,746
Gotta love the fact that the Clippers are taking a book out of the Wolves book. Hmmmm, lets see here.....they have Mo Williams, Randy Foye and Eric Bledsoe playing the PG position and still under contract, but didn't trade a single one of them, yet pick up Billups and then trade for Paul. 5 PG's? The Clips are gonna have to look at other trades to rid themselves of some of these guards. WOW!

Maybe the Clippers will play two PGs together at times. I always liked the concept going back to the days when the Detroit Pistons played Isiah Thomas and Joe Dumars together.
 

Cheesebeef

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Posts
92,491
Reaction score
71,193
Gotta love the fact that the Clippers are taking a book out of the Wolves book. Hmmmm, lets see here.....they have Mo Williams, Randy Foye and Eric Bledsoe playing the PG position and still under contract, but didn't trade a single one of them, yet pick up Billups and then trade for Paul. 5 PG's? The Clips are gonna have to look at other trades to rid themselves of some of these guards. WOW!

Mo Williams isn't really a point guard. He's a short SG and should be used as such, ala the Microwave off the bench. Randy Foye is a non-entity. Bledsoe is hurt and the biggest difference between the rest of the Clippers PGs are they are All-Stars as opposed to complete and utter scrubs.

This Clipper team could be REALLY dangerous this year if they stay healthy. They're athletic as hell, have good PG depth and size up front to match up with anyone... and TWO leaders in Paul/Billups.

As an transplanted Phoenician turned Angeleno, I'm pretty excited to follow them this season since i could care less what this monstrocity of a suns team does.
 

TJ

Frank Kaminsky is my Hero.
Joined
Apr 2, 2005
Posts
35,300
Reaction score
21,679
Location
South Bay
Mo Williams isn't really a point guard. He's a short SG and should be used as such, ala the Microwave off the bench. Randy Foye is a non-entity. Bledsoe is hurt and the biggest difference between the rest of the Clippers PGs are they are All-Stars as opposed to complete and utter scrubs.

This Clipper team could be REALLY dangerous this year if they stay healthy. They're athletic as hell, have good PG depth and size up front to match up with anyone... and TWO leaders in Paul/Billups.

As an transplanted Phoenician turned Angeleno, I'm pretty excited to follow them this season since i could care less what this monstrocity of a suns team does.

You and me both, brotha!

I'm waiting to hear how Fred Roggin spins this one tonight. If anything I'm definitely going to a clips game this year; preferably when they play the Suns
 

Chris_Sanders

Arizona Sports Simp
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Posts
40,736
Reaction score
32,873
Location
Scottsdale, Az
It's still BS to say the first trade was canceled for "basketball reasons."

IMHO no team should start the year without proper ownership in place. Weak to have the league squashing one deal and accepting another like this.

:raccoon:

I agree.
 

Joe L

The people's champ
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Posts
3,881
Reaction score
1,097
Location
Los Angeles
Wow, as a Clippers fan since the Ron Harper days, this is probably the best moment in Clippers history in terms of trades. Not out of the woods yet, got sign CP3 long term before his times up.
Kinda feel bad for Gordon. He was on a bus with ST Holders when he got the news. Good day for the underdog.
It's funny now that we've sold out the season and can't keep up with all the new members on our Clippers site. A lot of Lakers fans there too.
 

Joe L

The people's champ
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Posts
3,881
Reaction score
1,097
Location
Los Angeles
Sterling got raped by Stern. He played him like a violin. As mentioned in Simmons' article ""I know my house is worth a million dollars, and I know I have to sell it before the bank forecloses on it, but if you want to buy it, I'm gonna need $2 million in cash."

Simple as that. Unless CP3 signs an extension, they gave up a ton to rent him. They aren't winning a title in those two seasons, but they sure will be entertaining.

Not really. The trade was good. Aminu is going to be a bust. The Wolves can also diminish the value of the pick if they play well. Kaman couldn't stay healthy and played a fraction of the season. Plus, he wasn't going to stay here anyway. DJ's new contract made kaman expendable.
So basically, it was in my view, a lottery ticket, and Gordon.
By the way, Gordon was going to ask for max money in his extension talks which started today. Signing Gordon to that money would have prevented us from going after CP3 as a FA.
The deal was great. Once CP3 realizes how well he will mesh with BG and DJ, I think he signs.
 

Joe L

The people's champ
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Posts
3,881
Reaction score
1,097
Location
Los Angeles
Gotta love the fact that the Clippers are taking a book out of the Wolves book. Hmmmm, lets see here.....they have Mo Williams, Randy Foye and Eric Bledsoe playing the PG position and still under contract, but didn't trade a single one of them, yet pick up Billups and then trade for Paul. 5 PG's? The Clips are gonna have to look at other trades to rid themselves of some of these guards. WOW!

Bledsoe is out 8 weeks. Mo Williams will probably be our Jason Terry. Billups will probably play the 2. Foye will back him up. We can always trade Mo before the deadline.

CP3
Billups
Caron Butler
Blake Griffin
DeAndre Jordan

Pretty decent and experienced lineup right there
 

Covert Rain

Father smelt of elderberries!
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2005
Posts
37,107
Reaction score
16,286
Location
Arizona
looks like the league actually got this right. Demps agreed to what was a REALLY questionable trade that would help the Hornets be pertually mediocre at best and with zero hope the future, the league called the trade and Demps an idiot, took away his power, then got a king's ransom with a dynamic young scorer in Gordon, a likely top #3 lotto pick in the deepest draft in a decade, another lotto pick from last year and a big expiring contract... who also was an all-star C just a couple years ago.

bitch all you want Laker fans... but the League owns the Hornets and they actually made the right move killing a terrible trade for the Hornets and getting a killer one instead.

I am sorry but Stern got this right. It absolutely kills me to say it but he got it right. That deal was not good for the NBA or the Hornets. They are losing arguably the of the best younger PG in the entire NBA and that younger talent was not being replaced.

why? the basketball reason was the trade that Demps made was a REALLY BAD basketball trade. are you trying to tell me the Lakers-Houston trade was even CLOSE to being as good as what NO eventually got?

Absolutely. The rule has always existed that the NBA could nix trades. It was very seldom used. What is the point of having a rule like this in place unless your going to use it to better the league and save idiots from themselves? That is basketball reason enough.

Sucks for the Suns because they were clearly targeting free agency next year and were hoping to land Paul or Howard. As usual, the Suns Front Office didn't have the foresight to consider that those teams were not gong to let guys walk for nothing. I think they figured every front office was just like ours.

Prediction: Suns will fill this roster with 2nd tier guys next year, team will win 50+ games for a period of 5 years and we will be approaching 50 years without a title before you know it. But heck....were "entertaining".
 
Last edited:

JCSunsfan

ASFN Icon
Joined
Oct 24, 2002
Posts
22,115
Reaction score
6,551
I am sorry but Stern got this right. It absolutely kills me to say it but he got it right. That deal was not good for the NBA or the Hornets. They are losing arguably the of the best younger PG in the entire NBA and that younger talent was not being replaced.



Absolutely. The rule has always existed that the NBA could nix trades. It was very seldom used. What is the point of having a rule like this in place unless your going to use it to better the league and save idiots from themselves? That is basketball reason enough.

Sucks for the Suns because they were clearly targeting free agency next year and were hoping to land Paul or Howard. As usual, the Suns Front Office didn't have the foresight to consider that those teams were not gong to let guys walk for nothing. I think they figured every front office was just like ours.

Prediction: Suns will fill this roster with 2nd tier guys next year, team will win 50+ games for a period of 5 years and we will be approaching 50 years without a title before you know it. But heck....were "entertaining".

This wasn't about an NBA rule that allows nixing trades. It was about Demps making a trade that devalues a franchise that the league owns and is trying to sell. Stern stepped in as an owner, not as a commissioner.

I disagree. No way we'll put together 50 win teams with second tier talent.
 

Covert Rain

Father smelt of elderberries!
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2005
Posts
37,107
Reaction score
16,286
Location
Arizona
This wasn't about an NBA rule that allows nixing trades. It was about Demps making a trade that devalues a franchise that the league owns and is trying to sell. Stern stepped in as an owner, not as a commissioner.

I disagree. No way we'll put together 50 win teams with second tier talent.

I disagree. Balance in the league was a hot topic in the NBA during the entire lockout and I am sure fresh in his mind. Aside from "the letter" there were calls made to him by several teams. Not saying the other stuff was not a factor.

I guess we can disagree on his motive but it doesn't change the fact that it was good for the league.

Also, I should have been more clear. The Suns have for years put together roster with 2nd tier STARS in this league and been successful. That will be the MO for this franchise next year. Mark it down.
 

JCSunsfan

ASFN Icon
Joined
Oct 24, 2002
Posts
22,115
Reaction score
6,551
The one thing about this trade. I see no indication of Chris Paul signing a long term deal or committing to a long term deal. If he bolts after this year, it is absolutely disastrous for the Clippers.

Paul, Deron Williams, and Dwight Howard are all still FA's this summer. Hmm.
 

AzStevenCal

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2004
Posts
36,996
Reaction score
16,883
The one thing about this trade. I see no indication of Chris Paul signing a long term deal or committing to a long term deal. If he bolts after this year, it is absolutely disastrous for the Clippers.

Paul, Deron Williams, and Dwight Howard are all still FA's this summer. Hmm.

I think he agreed to take his player option for another year before the deal was finalized.

Steve
 

slinslin

Welcome to Amareca
Joined
Jun 28, 2002
Posts
16,855
Reaction score
562
Location
Hannover - Germany
This trade is 10x better than the worthless crap they would have gotten stuck with in the Lakers deal.

Hilarious to see Lakers fans here that still want to make people believe their trade would have been good for the Hornets.
 

D-Dogg

A Whole New World
Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2003
Posts
45,193
Reaction score
1,475
Location
In The End Zone
This trade is 10x better than the worthless crap they would have gotten stuck with in the Lakers deal.

Hilarious to see Lakers fans here that still want to make people believe their trade would have been good for the Hornets.

Bill Simmons thought the trade was good for the hornets, and he effing hates the Lakers to death and beyond.

Fact: That trade was totally, undeniably, 100 percent defensible.

Fact: Of the three teams involved, New Orleans made out the best. Repeat: the best. By my calculations, it landed one of the better offensive big men in basketball (Luis Scola), one of the better scoring 2-guards in basketball (Kevin Martin), a playoff-proven forward who can play either spot (Lamar Odom), a scoring point guard with upside (Goran Dragic), and a 2012 no. 1 pick (via the New York Knicks). Can you do better for someone who was leaving in seven months anyway? I hate trading superstars, but if you HAVE to trade a superstar? That's pretty good.

Would suck to be one of the 10,000 Hornets ticketholders right now...that team is going to be atrocious to watch. You've got pros and cons for both deals. Build for the future (potentially) and suffer for the short term, or field a watchable team but not a contender.

I can't say I blame the Hornets for going all in on potential, but that can backfire just as easily. Twolves won't be as bad as people think with Adelman (who I wanted the Lakers to hire). They will suck for sure, so that pick will get lots of lotto balls, but drafting is drafting. They could easily pick an Oden over a Durant. But I admire the gamble aspect of it. It could pay off in spades.

So much is talked about the salaries, but Odom would be a tradeable asset before the deadline (March) to any contender, so they could move him easily, even for a trade exception for a full $9m salary wash.

BTW, Gordon is a RFA at the end of the year too. Is he going to stay there? Or is he going to try to broker a deal somewhere after languishing in a bad system?

There are pros and cons from the Hornets' side on both deals. The upside is MUCH higher on the Clippers deal, but it's silly to act like the Lakers were getting a Pau Gasol type trade there. In fact, IMO they were worse off and would have desperately needed to land Howard. Could have been a big backfire (not to mention Paul's knee - which is good for the Clippers that he already got the required knee injury out of the way on the Hornets' dime).
 
Last edited:
Top