Paul to Clipper deal submitted to League (and Reports say deal dead)

[Kane3387]

Thoughts on flipping the same package we were going to trade for West to NO for Kaman? NO might save some money and get a young player or two out of the deal.

Kaman when healthy would be a better fit here then West. Both have injury concerns but Kaman is an expiring and was an All Star the year before last. He would be a great upgrade over O'Neal and maybe a better one then West would have been.

I'm not all that high on Kaman.

More or less high than you are on JO?  

Regardless, though, there's no realistic way to get him.  He makes around $12.7 million, which isn't close to watch we can give, even with the 125% rule.

I thought the new CBA made it 150% rule + 5 mill?

Meanwhile, there are provisions that don't allow the big spenders to fully participate in this expanded trade market. One of the new toys that tax teams don't get to try out is the looser traded player exception that allows teams above the salary cap to take back the lesser of 150 percent of the salaries being traded plus $100,000, or 100 percent plus $5 million. Previously, teams were limited to receiving 125 percent plus $100,000 of the traded players' salary.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/page/trades-111129/let-wheeling-dealing-begin

I guess we are in the tax, so it doesn't apply to us then? I am unsure what we are allowed to do presently.

[dmny5000]

David Aldridge
Per a source who has been briefed on NO-LAC negotiations, the Hornets have to choose between the Minnesota pick and Gordon. Can't have both.

That's interesting, it's very debatable and impossible to know for sure which one is more valuable. I think I would take Gordon but you never know if the Minn pick is gonna be #1.

[Kane3387]

David Aldridge
Per a source who has been briefed on NO-LAC negotiations, the Hornets have to choose between the Minnesota pick and Gordon. Can't have both.

That's interesting, it's very debatable and impossible to know for sure which one is more valuable. I think I would take Gordon but you never know if the Minn pick is gonna be #1.

I am taking that pick

[Chris]

David Aldridge
Per a source who has been briefed on NO-LAC negotiations, the Hornets have to choose between the Minnesota pick and Gordon. Can't have both.

That's interesting, it's very debatable and impossible to know for sure which one is more valuable. I think I would take Gordon but you never know if the Minn pick is gonna be #1.

Yeah, I would take Gordon too.

But if this is the case, I am not sure it is as done a deal as is being reported.  

[Fafnir]

Thoughts on flipping the same package we were going to trade for West to NO for Kaman? NO might save some money and get a young player or two out of the deal.

Kaman when healthy would be a better fit here then West. Both have injury concerns but Kaman is an expiring and was an All Star the year before last. He would be a great upgrade over O'Neal and maybe a better one then West would have been.

I'm not all that high on Kaman.

More or less high than you are on JO? 

Regardless, though, there's no realistic way to get him.  He makes around $12.7 million, which isn't close to watch we can give, even with the 125% rule.

I thought the new CBA made it 150% rule + 5 mill?

+5 million! 

That'd make almost any trade possible, *drool*. Sadly that is not the case.

[Fafnir]

David Aldridge
Per a source who has been briefed on NO-LAC negotiations, the Hornets have to choose between the Minnesota pick and Gordon. Can't have both.

That's interesting, it's very debatable and impossible to know for sure which one is more valuable. I think I would take Gordon but you never know if the Minn pick is gonna be #1.

Yeah, I would take Gordon too.

But if this is the case, I am not sure it is as done a deal as is being reported.  

Yeah, there appears to be some serious wrangling still going on here.

[Chris]

I thought the new CBA made it 150% rule + 5 mill?

It is 150% OR $5 million (whichever is lower).  So, they can take on 150% of the salary they are sending out, if the difference is less than $5 million, however, if it is greater than $5 million, then they only get to take back $5 million more than they are sending out.  

[clawlin]

It would suck for the Celtics (owning the Clippers pick) but I really want to see the CP3/Gordon/Griffin core going forward.  I'm not as excited about Jordan or Butler, but they would be exciting to watch, no matter what.

If Gordon goes, it's still a fun team, but it would have some major holes.

The terms of this pick are as follows:

"Celtics receive the Clippers' 2012 first-round pick, via Thunder (Eric Bledsoe trade) (top 10 protected in 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2015, unprotected in 2016. In 2012, the Celtics would receive the lesser of the Clippers first-round pick or the T'Wolves' first-round pick (Marko Jaric trade)) (Jeff Green trade 02-24-11)"

-NBAdraft.net

The acquisition of Paul makes the Clippers a playoff team, maybe not top four but they could range anywhere from 5 to just missing the playoffs, depending on how changes in the West's elite have affected them.  So them being mediocre to good instead of bad is a plus for us, because it would guarantee us the pick in a deep draft.  There is PLENTY of talent to be had after the 10th pick: Brad Beal, Michael Kidd-Gilchrist, Austin Rivers, Quincy Miller, Thomas Robinson, etc.  All of these players could easily be starters in this league.

So the Clippers being a decent, exciting team could actually help us

[Roy H.]

Thoughts on flipping the same package we were going to trade for West to NO for Kaman? NO might save some money and get a young player or two out of the deal.

Kaman when healthy would be a better fit here then West. Both have injury concerns but Kaman is an expiring and was an All Star the year before last. He would be a great upgrade over O'Neal and maybe a better one then West would have been.

I'm not all that high on Kaman.

More or less high than you are on JO?  

Regardless, though, there's no realistic way to get him.  He makes around $12.7 million, which isn't close to watch we can give, even with the 125% rule.

I thought the new CBA made it 150% rule + 5 mill?

Meanwhile, there are provisions that don't allow the big spenders to fully participate in this expanded trade market. One of the new toys that tax teams don't get to try out is the looser traded player exception that allows teams above the salary cap to take back the lesser of 150 percent of the salaries being traded plus $100,000, or 100 percent plus $5 million. Previously, teams were limited to receiving 125 percent plus $100,000 of the traded players' salary.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/page/trades-111129/let-wheeling-dealing-begin

I guess we are in the tax, so it doesn't apply to us then? I am unsure what we are allowed to do presently.

We're in the tax, so we can only take back 125% + $100k.

Also, for clarification, there's no circumstance where a team can take back 150% + $5 million.  It's either 150% + $100k, or 100% + $5 million, whichever is lower.

[Roy H.]

It would suck for the Celtics (owning the Clippers pick) but I really want to see the CP3/Gordon/Griffin core going forward.  I'm not as excited about Jordan or Butler, but they would be exciting to watch, no matter what.

If Gordon goes, it's still a fun team, but it would have some major holes.

The terms of this pick are as follows:

"Celtics receive the Clippers' 2012 first-round pick, via Thunder (Eric Bledsoe trade) (top 10 protected in 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2015, unprotected in 2016. In 2012, the Celtics would receive the lesser of the Clippers first-round pick or the T'Wolves' first-round pick (Marko Jaric trade)) (Jeff Green trade 02-24-11)"

-NBAdraft.net

The acquisition of Paul makes the Clippers a playoff team, maybe not top four but they could range anywhere from 5 to just missing the playoffs, depending on how changes in the West's elite have affected them.  So them being mediocre to good instead of bad is a plus for us, because it would guarantee us the pick in a deep draft.  There is PLENTY of talent to be had after the 10th pick: Brad Beal, Michael Kidd-Gilchrist, Austin Rivers, Quincy Miller, Thomas Robinson, etc.  All of these players could easily be starters in this league.

So the Clippers being a decent, exciting team could actually help us

Before, with Gordon + Griffin, the Clippers could hope to finish somewhere between 10th and 15th, assuming everything went well.

With CP3 + Gordon + Griffin, I think it's reasonable that they'd be able to finish in the top five in their conference.  It's not going to shock me if the Clippers pick ends up somewhere between 20th and 25th, if Gordon stays in LA.  That's not a good thing for us, in my opinion.

[clawlin]

Well even down there, there is great talent that could potentially be starters, if not, contributing bench players who are a big part of the rotation: William Buford, Mason Plumlee, Tyler Zeller, John Henson, Khris Middleton, Tim Hardaway Jr.

This was the best draft in recent years in terms of the wealth of talent, and it is a great draft to have two picks in the first round (I believe we own Cleveland's secound-rounder as well, as per Semih/Harangody trade?)

[Chris]

Thoughts on flipping the same package we were going to trade for West to NO for Kaman? NO might save some money and get a young player or two out of the deal.

Kaman when healthy would be a better fit here then West. Both have injury concerns but Kaman is an expiring and was an All Star the year before last. He would be a great upgrade over O'Neal and maybe a better one then West would have been.

I'm not all that high on Kaman.

More or less high than you are on JO?  

Regardless, though, there's no realistic way to get him.  He makes around $12.7 million, which isn't close to watch we can give, even with the 125% rule.

I thought the new CBA made it 150% rule + 5 mill?

Meanwhile, there are provisions that don't allow the big spenders to fully participate in this expanded trade market. One of the new toys that tax teams don't get to try out is the looser traded player exception that allows teams above the salary cap to take back the lesser of 150 percent of the salaries being traded plus $100,000, or 100 percent plus $5 million. Previously, teams were limited to receiving 125 percent plus $100,000 of the traded players' salary.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/page/trades-111129/let-wheeling-dealing-begin

I guess we are in the tax, so it doesn't apply to us then? I am unsure what we are allowed to do presently.

We're in the tax, so we can only take back 125% + $100k.

Also, for clarification, there's no circumstance where a team can take back 150% + $5 million.  It's either 150% + $100k, or 100% + $5 million, whichever is lower.

Random aside, but is there any cap (like that $5 million) for teams over the tax line?

Because if there isn't, this new rule actually benefits teams over the tax when it comes to mega deals.  On any deal where the team is sending out more than $20 million, the teams will actually be able to take back more salary using the 125% calculation than under the 100%+ 5 million calculation.  I wonder if this is an actual loophole, or just something so obscure no one has reported?

[snively]

If I'm the Hornets I take that pick.  4 cost-controlled years as opposed to one year of Gordon then RFA (and I'm almost positive he'll be looking for and getting the max).  Then hope that Rubio doesn't turn in a Magic Johnson rookie year.

[Kane3387]

If I'm the Hornets I take that pick.  4 cost-controlled years as opposed to one year of Gordon then RFA (and I'm almost positive he'll be looking for and getting the max).  Then hope that Rubio doesn't turn in a Magic Johnson rookie year.

I agree

[Roy H.]

I just saw an interesting musing on twitter...  if the Clippers don't do the Baron Davis / Mo Williams trade, and end up with the #1 pick in last year's draft, is it possible for them to end up with both CP3 and D12?

It certainly would have strengthened their chances, that's for sure.