This may be a silly question, but why did the deal with the Clips not go through at the trade deadline? What has changed about the situation now that makes it more likely? I guess I am wondering what end the "hold up" was on...
Pierce was still a Celtic and as a result wouldn't waive his no trade clause.
Do you mean KG? Pierce does not have a no-trade clause.
If so then yeah, KG reportedly refused to waive his no-trade clause. My understanding of the situation is that the only way KG will waive that clause is if Pierce is traded (or bought out) and KG is traded to the same team Pierce goes to.
If DA tries to trade KG anywhere else I believe he will refuse the trade, and if they manage to convince him that the team is better off without him then he will most likely retire.
I think there is very little chance of KG agreeing to play for any other team unless Pierce is there with him, and there are very few teams who would have both:
a) The interest in taking both Pierce and KG
b) Enough assets value to convince DA to make the deal
The Clippers does look like the most likely landing spot for Pierce and KG because they have assets that DA would be interested in (Bledsoe, Jordan, Butler's expring) and they are a Pierce + KG combo away from being a very legitimate title contender. Even Odom would honestly be a nice fit in Boston.
The idea of packaging Pierce with a high-potential young player with high upside (either AB or Sully) actually makes a lot of sense too though. Almost every team in the league would be interested in adding a talented youngster like Sully or AB on a small rookie contract, and if they take Pierce also in the trade they can either:
1. Keep him (if they are a potential contender) or
2. Buy out his contract for $5M (and clear $10m in cap space)
It's pretty much a win-win situation for any team that's far enough under the cap to absorb the initial $15M or so of Pierce's contract and then buy him out for the $5M guaranteed amount.