Chris Paul Trade Rumors: The final deal (#133)

[Bendit]

per the sports guy:

'Just got word the Clips/CP3 trade is definitely off. Can only be revived if NBA bends on its super-steep asking price. This is I-N-S-A-N-E.'

Especially when one compares the Melo deal. These are jewels comparatively for a guaranteed 2 yrs. of Paul...like what happens if either Paul's or Griffin's knees gimp up...one of them may bail. After all the Clips invented the adage that "if things can go wrong then dont discount shit stains on our ceiling". Or something like that.

On the other hand Gilbert maybe holding Stern hostage with some pics of DS in skirt and lipstick. Tonite was deadline for a union threatened suit so there is still time.

[RaptorDan]

"if things can go wrong then dont discount shit stains on our ceiling". Or something like that.

While I'm not familiar with this adage, I like it, and I will try to work it into at least 3 conversations at the Christmas party this evening.

[LamarVannoy]

I actually didn't like the Lakers/Rockets/Hornets 3-teamer from NO's perspective, and thought it was reasonable to veto.

Scola/Odom/Martin/Dragic is a decent haul, but that would put NO directly in the dreaded no-man's land of ~.500 teams. Maybe good enough to make the playoffs as a 7 or 8 seed, but they'd end up drafting somewhere in the mid teens for the next couple of years, at which point Scola/Odom are too old to make an impact, and Martin's a FA. So the trade would basically boil down to whatever Dragic turns out to be, and I'm not holding my breath on that one.

But I can't believe they'd actually turn down an offer that included Eric Gordon (or Minny's 2012 pick), Cap Ballast.... I mean Chris Kaman, Aminu, and Bledsoe. That's either one very good young guy (Gordon), two roll the dice young guys with talent (Aminu, Bledsoe), and one see if he's got anything left in the tank guys (Kaman). Or else sub in a top 10 pick in a good draft for Gordon, since there's no way Minny will finish outside the 10 worst teams.

Insisting that BOTH Gordon and the Minny pick be included is kind of crazy. There's no way they get a better offer than what the Clips put on the table without a signed and sealed Paul extension.

[mcHAPPY]

A thought on Chris Paul situation.

What if the NBA are forcing superstars to choose. We've watched star player after star player not only go where they want but to get top dollar. Many teams have not gotten 'fair' compensation in return. I wonder if the league is only going to trade Paul if they get a crazy deal (Aminu, Bledsoe, Kaman, Gordon, and Minny 1st round classifies as crazy). If they don't get a crazy offer, maybe they keep him and let him walk away. However if he just walks away, how many teams are going to be able to offer him a max deal next summer? A few might but certainly not where he wants to go (NY, LA) and he would also be taking a 4 year approximately $75M contract versus a 5 year, $100M contract with NOH.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out but I am not ready to condemn the league just yet.

I still think the league should be leaving these matters to the governor they appointed but that is a different matter.

[Apollo]

West speaks out

Former Hornets forward David West, who reached agreement on a two-year, $20 million deal Sunday with the Indiana Pacers, expressed great sympathy for the plight of Demps and Hornets coach Monty Williams, who clearly favored the original three-team deal as a means to stay competitive without Paul and West.

"There just really is no direction with no legitimate owner, so that just makes it tough," West told The Associated Press on Monday. "It really made it tough for me to see myself going back there."

West suspects Paul wants out not only for that reason, but also because of "a series of events that transpired after (winning the Southwest Division in 2007-08 and coming within one game of the Western Conference finals) that sent Chris and myself into a different mindset in terms of what we really could get in New Orleans."

The Hornets "gave a cold shoulder," in West's words, to backup point guard Jannero Pargo, who had been Paul's best friend on the team.

"And (they) didn't consult Chris about anything," West said, referring to former Hornets general manager Jeff Bower.

West insisted that, before the hiring of Demps and Williams, Hornets upper management did not consult him or Paul about any major moves, such as the 2009 trade of center Tyson Chandler. The Hornets actually traded Chandler twice that year, first to Oklahoma City in a deal that was quickly rescinded and later to Charlotte for Emeka Okafor.

"It's nothing against Emeka, but from our perspective, being teammates with Tyson and knowing the type of impact he had on both of our careers at that particular time, I just felt like at that moment, things, in terms of the trust, the direction we were going, started to wane a bit," West said. "When you have a franchise guy like Chris, build a team around him, I'm under the impression that you've got to keep your franchise guy happy."

West said Demps and Williams constantly consulted him and Paul but added that he and Paul both struggled to envision a fruitful long-term future in New Orleans while the Hornets had no permanent owner nor an owner with a proven commitment to winning.

"Ultimately, I think (Demps and Williams) got the bad luck of the draw because things were already sort of soured," West said of his and Paul's feelings before last season. "And it was just that idea of trying to build a relationship of trust in such a short period of time."

Source: ESPN.com

[yertu damkule]

A thought on Chris Paul situation.

What if the NBA are forcing superstars to choose. We've watched star player after star player not only go where they want but to get top dollar. Many teams have not gotten 'fair' compensation in return. I wonder if the league is only going to trade Paul if they get a crazy deal (Aminu, Bledsoe, Kaman, Gordon, and Minny 1st round classifies as crazy). If they don't get a crazy offer, maybe they keep him and let him walk away. However if he just walks away, how many teams are going to be able to offer him a max deal next summer? A few might but certainly not where he wants to go (NY, LA) and he would also be taking a 4 year approximately $75M contract versus a 5 year, $100M contract with NOH.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out but I am not ready to condemn the league just yet.

I still think the league should be leaving these matters to the governor they appointed but that is a different matter.

what you're suggesting has the scent of collusion...essentially, the owners working together (with stern as final arbiter) as a collective to restrict player movement until/unless said movement is punitive to the player in question.

[Apollo]

I love that idea. I have no pitty for the players on this issue. Every guy who's wanted out over the past year has been treated very, very well by their organization. I just feel they should be keeping Demps in on the strategy.

[Bendit]

I love that idea. I have no pitty for the players on this issue. Every guy who's wanted out over the past year has been treated very, very well by their organization. I just feel they should be keeping Demps in on the strategy.

I understand the L has also warned Billups that if he tries to circumvent the amnesty process (not reporting to the claiming team) there will be consequences (I paraphrase). I think his only option is retirement or sitting out the year without pay.

[Bendit]

I actually didn't like the Lakers/Rockets/Hornets 3-teamer from NO's perspective, and thought it was reasonable to veto.

Scola/Odom/Martin/Dragic is a decent haul, but that would put NO directly in the dreaded no-man's land of ~.500 teams. Maybe good enough to make the playoffs as a 7 or 8 seed, but they'd end up drafting somewhere in the mid teens for the next couple of years, at which point Scola/Odom are too old to make an impact, and Martin's a FA. So the trade would basically boil down to whatever Dragic turns out to be, and I'm not holding my breath on that one.

But I can't believe they'd actually turn down an offer that included Eric Gordon (or Minny's 2012 pick), Cap Ballast.... I mean Chris Kaman, Aminu, and Bledsoe. That's either one very good young guy (Gordon), two roll the dice young guys with talent (Aminu, Bledsoe), and one see if he's got anything left in the tank guys (Kaman). Or else sub in a top 10 pick in a good draft for Gordon, since there's no way Minny will finish outside the 10 worst teams.

Insisting that BOTH Gordon and the Minny pick be included is kind of crazy. There's no way they get a better offer than what the Clips put on the table without a signed and sealed Paul extension.

The problem/s with the LAL deal was that it would help create about 20 mill. of cap room for LA which was construed by the league to then allow them to facilitate a Howard move to LA. In addition it would have added salary expense of older players to NOH. This would have made Stern look like a goat after the lockout which was also about such player movement.

This position was articulated by the very talented Charles Barkley. He said he smelt something fishy.

[mcHAPPY]

what you're suggesting has the scent of collusion...essentially, the owners working together (with stern as final arbiter) as a collective to restrict player movement until/unless said movement is punitive to the player in question.

I don't see the collusion. The NBA is the owner of Hornets. They are only going to trade their top asset for what they deem reasonable. If they do not get what they deem reasonable, they have no obligation to trade him 'because he wants to be traded'.

If he wants to leave he will have every opportunity to do so this summer as a free agent. Until then he is under contract to the New Orleans Hornets.

I can see New Orleans ownership saying no to the original trade. Martin/Scola/Odom are only going to make them 7th/8th seed at best. Imagine the Raptors went out and got those two players. Personally I'd be pissed off because it would kill our shot at a high draft pick this summer. It would also kill our financial flexibility. It is no different for the Hornets.

[jimmie]

I think there is collusion, not to necessarily punish Chris Paul as an example to players trying to force their way to specific markets, but definitely to send a message to all players that the team currently holding a player's contract is under no obligation whatsoever to capitulate to trade demands. And if that's the case, it's not really collusion, but rather a majority of GMs simply saying that they're not willing to manage their business this way anymore. And thank God, because it's completely unsustainable.

In this case, the NBA wants to sell the NOH, and they think that will be easier to do if the Hornets are relatively unbound financially -- manageable salary situation, young players, etc. -- and thus more palatable to a buyer. As opposed to a roster that is semi-competitive on the floor, but is filled with aged cap ballast that makes it impossible to rebuild quickly under a new owner. I think that's a completely reasonable reason for the league (aka "owners") to veto any trade.

I think the league would *like* to get something back for Paul, but that they're equally ready to let him walk for nothing, and call that a success in terms of maintaining the saleability of the franchise.

I agree, the league (and esp. Stern) are losing the PR battle on this one, but I really don't think they care anymore. This is more about principle than it is about who wins the battle for the hearts of fans.

People are way-overblowing this. Chris Paul never had any right to be sent to a team he likes. Dwight Howard never had any right to expect the Orlando management team to include him in plans for the team's future, or at the very least, no right to expect them to do exactly what he thought needed to be done to improve the team (and thus keep him in Orlando vs. requesting a trade). The players have become way too entitled, and the new CBA didn't go nearly far enough to curtail it, obviously.

[Apollo]

I understand the L has also warned Billups that if he tries to circumvent the amnesty process (not reporting to the claiming team) there will be consequences (I paraphrase). I think his only option is retirement or sitting out the year without pay.

The Knicks have to pay him the full contract as per the CBA.

[yertu damkule]

I don't see the collusion. The NBA is the owner of Hornets. They are only going to trade their top asset for what they deem reasonable. If they do not get what they deem reasonable, they have no obligation to trade him 'because he wants to be traded'.

If he wants to leave he will have every opportunity to do so this summer as a free agent. Until then he is under contract to the New Orleans Hornets.

I can see New Orleans ownership saying no to the original trade. Martin/Scola/Odom are only going to make them 7th/8th seed at best. Imagine the Raptors went out and got those two players. Personally I'd be pissed off because it would kill our shot at a high draft pick this summer. It would also kill our financial flexibility. It is no different for the Hornets.

we'll have to agree to disagree. i saw the deal as more than fair for NO, when all factors were considered...chiefly, that they are GOING TO LOSE CHRIS PAUL FOR NOTHING IF THEY DON'T TRADE HIM. that will REALLY show the players.

going further, i have a serious issue with something Apollo mentioned - that part of the stink about the LA/Hou/NO trade was that it would free up LA to make other moves, and this would be seen as helping the rich get even richer. uh...wtf? so now the league as a collective can act preemptively to limit a team's ability to make moves because of moves that team could make in the future? something smells, chuck was right about that, but the stench is the BULLSHIT emanating from the commissioner's office. steve kerr had a good point - it's pretty convenient for the L to come in & veto a trade based on 'basketball reason' now...where has that thought process been for the last decade? when he (kerr) had to trade kurt thomas & TWO 1st round picks to the sonics to save tax $ (for doucher salver), where was the veto then? when LA dumps odom on the mavs for nothing, that's an acceptable move from a 'basketball reasons' standpoint?

IMO, paul is doing the hornets a huge favour here. he could be a douche & be non-committal & leave them twisting in the wind, but he knows that the planet would see through that in a nano-second (because WHY THE FUCK WOULD ANYONE ACTUALLY CHOOSE TO STAY IN NEW ORLEANS UNDER THE CURRENT SITUATION). if he's not traded, he's not going to pout & be a little bitch about it. he's just going to be the best PG in the L, then walk away. how's that better for NO? they seem to be under some delusion that there's some chance he'll opt into the final year of his deal. at least this way, he's giving the hornets a chance to make a deal for him that will help their franchise start to rebuild. regardless of whether any of the packages have been 'enough' for him, we have to concede that the offers have been FAR FAR FAR FAR better than what any of the previous teams got for their superstars-who-were-going-to-leave-via-free-agency anyway. now...i don't know who pulled out of the last deal - my hunch is it was the clips, and if so, holy shit, the clips may actually know what they're doing - but stern is slowly backing himself into a corner in this situation. there really aren't any teams left for him to deal with. if the clips have any brains, they'll hold out - i think they're pretty eff'n good now without paul anyway.

[yertu damkule]

The Knicks have to pay him the full contract as per the CBA.

isn't it his full contract (pro-rated) less the amnesty bid ($2M)...i'm confused as to whether the amnesty bid is pro-rated for this year, and further whether the bid amount is deducted from his full contract, or his pro-rated one.

[mcHAPPY]

isn't it his full contract (pro-rated) less the amnesty bid ($2M)...i'm confused as to whether the amnesty bid is pro-rated for this year, and further whether the bid amount is deducted from his full contract, or his pro-rated one.

All contracts this year will be pro-rated to 66 games.

Whatever that works out to is Chauncey's salary this year ($14M x 66/82)

The Knicks pay whatever the Clippers did not pick up.

Reportedly the CLippers bid $2M so NYK are on the hook for $12M - all numbers pro-rated of course.