The Celtic-Clipper trade talk (merged) - Clippers back out.

[BleedGreen1989]

After pushing for the Clippers to take back long-term contracts, the Celtics relented and have shown willingness to complete the deal for DeAndre Jordan and two first-round draft picks, sources said. The Clippers are willing to give the Celtics Jordan and one draft pick, but were resisting a second future pick, sources said.

The two teams are planning to talk again on Tuesday morning, and the fragile negotiations could climax over the draft pick compensation, sources said.

 The financial investment in this deal for Los Angeles is unprecedented for the franchise, and it could be giving it 11th-hour pause. The Clippers must pay a $3.5 million trade kicker on Jordan's contract and finalize an agreement with Rivers on a five-year deal worth approximately $35 million, league sources said.


 Boston has dropped its pursuit of guard Eric Bledsoe, but wants two draft picks as compensation for Rivers, sources said. Rivers has decided that he doesn't want to be a part of the Celtics' rebuilding process, and has requested that Boston work out a compensation package to allow him to go the Clippers. The Garnett-Jordan deal will simply be player for player, and the picks will serve as compensation for Boston to release Rivers of the three years and $21 million left on his contract.


 The Clippers believe that the Celtics don't want to bring Rivers back after this public negotiation and his clear desire to leave, nor does L.A. believe Rivers will walk away from the remaining money on his deal to make far less in television, sources said.

Rivers is still torn over whether he would stay with Boston should this deal fall apart, sources said. Boston runs the risk of being unable to find another team that Garnett, 37, will waive his no-trade clause to join. He's willing to accept the deal to the Clippers for several reasons, including his fondness for playing for Rivers and a chance to play for a contender near his Malibu home.

Discussions over a blockbuster deal reached an impasse on Saturday when Celtics general manager Danny Ainge held firm that Bledsoe had to be a part of package that included Jordan and a first-round pick, but sources say that Boston has shown a willingness to find another asset to supplant Bledsoe and complete the complicated deal, sources said.

Boston had to move Courtney Lee (three years, $16.2 million left on his deal) or Jason Terry (two years, $10.6 million), for the expiring contracts of Caron Butler ($8 million) or Willie Green ($1.4 million), but the Clippers refused to take on the additional salary in any combination and the Celtics eventually moved back to the Jordan and two draft pick offer on Monday.

[Casperian]

Can someone tell me why it feels like Doc has so much leverage?

Because people keep assuming that this deal is being made because of Doc.

Could you tell us what this deal is all about, then, if not Doc?

Getting assets for Garnett. Getting the best available assets for Garnett, to be precise.

Ah, ok. I misunderstood your first post. For some reason, I thought "Doc" actually meant "Doc and KG", possibly because that´s the deal we´re talking about the whole time.

In the end, whether it´s actually about Doc or KG doesn´t make a big difference to me. The fact remains that the people in this package are holding all the cards, so the dynamics stay the same.

So, should we ask ourselves why KG doesn´t come out and make an official statement like "I bleed green, I love the Celtics, and I couldn´t leave these guys if I weren´t sure they´re getting a fair return for me"?

Is KG controlling this deal, then? He´s the one with the no-trade clause, he´s the reason why the Clippers are the only franchise we can realistically trade with.

Would you agree with that?

[Roy H.]

^ From all accounts, Danny is getting bent over a barrel. 

(That's in reference to bleedgreen's post.)

[BleedGreen1989]

^ From all accounts, Danny is getting bent over a barrel. 

(That's in reference to bleedgreen's post.)

Yea, it seems he's in an extremely awkward spot and LA knows it.

First he wanted Bledsoe, LA says no.

Then, he wanted to dump a contract, LA says no.

Then, he wants two 1st rounders, LA is saying no.

Who does it seem really has the leverage in this deal?

[Rondo2287]

^ From all accounts, Danny is getting bent over a barrel. 

(That's in reference to bleedgreen's post.)

Yea, it seems he's in an extremely awkward spot and LA knows it.

First he wanted Bledsoe, LA says no.

Then, he wanted to dump a contract, LA says no.

Then, he wants two 1st rounders, LA is saying no.

Who does it seem really has the leverage in this deal?

As Chris had mentioned in another post, I think you are hearing alot of Clipper information leaks.  Im going to reserve judgement until it actually happens. 

[kozlodoev]

^ From all accounts, Danny is getting bent over a barrel. 

(That's in reference to bleedgreen's post.)

Let's revisit this again. We're trading an all-time great. We're trading an all-time great with a ton of mileage and at the tail end of his career.

It's a player that we kept on a strict minute schedule last season, and who was limited to 5 games over the month before the playoffs.

I understand he's still very good (but he did look disproportionately good last year not in a small part due to the fact that the remaining part of the Celtics' big rotation was god-awful), but how much do you think 2 years of a severely limited Garnett is _really_ worth?

[PhoSita]

^ From all accounts, Danny is getting bent over a barrel. 

(That's in reference to bleedgreen's post.)

re: "bent over a barrel"

I can't disagree with the point you're making, but I'd like to gently, and hopefully without controversy, point out that using vaguely rape-y metaphors isn't really necessary nor in best taste.

I know it's really common parlance to say things like that, but one of my personal things is I try to call people out on it and de-normalize it.

Nothing personal.

[Roy H.]

^ From all accounts, Danny is getting bent over a barrel. 

(That's in reference to bleedgreen's post.)

Let's revisit this again. We're trading an all-time great. We're trading an all-time great with a ton of mileage and at the tail end of his career.

It's a player that we kept on a strict minute schedule last season, and who was limited to 5 games over the month before the playoffs.

I understand he's still very good (but he did look disproportionately good last year not in a small part due to the fact that the remaining part of the Celtics' big rotation was god-awful), but how much do you think 2 years of a severely limited Garnett is _really_ worth?

I think that the guy who could ultimately win the Clippers a title is worth more than a mediocre big man on a big contract.

[paidthecost2betheboss]

So, should we ask ourselves why KG doesn´t come out and make an official statement like "I bleed green, I love the Celtics, and I couldn´t leave these guys if I weren´t sure they´re getting a fair return for me"?

Is KG controlling this deal, then? He´s the one with the no-trade clause, he´s the reason why the Clippers are the only franchise we can realistically trade with.

Would you agree with that?

I did a thread on just this. Got flamed.

K.G. and his silence say a lot, it's not like any utterances could make this any worse. K.G. and Doc drive the train and Danny is getting hosed because of them and himself but Garnett is holding the hose with Doc. Sometimes the easiest explanation really is the best one. Your comment nails it.

[Roy H.]

^ From all accounts, Danny is getting bent over a barrel. 

(That's in reference to bleedgreen's post.)

re: "bent over a barrel"

I can't disagree with the point you're making, but I'd like to gently, and hopefully without controversy, point out that using vaguely rape-y metaphors isn't really necessary nor in best taste.

I know it's really common parlance to say things like that, but one of my personal things is I try to call people out on it and de-normalize it.

Nothing personal.

The phrase has nothing to do with rape.

http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ove2.htm

[kozlodoev]

^ From all accounts, Danny is getting bent over a barrel. 

(That's in reference to bleedgreen's post.)

Let's revisit this again. We're trading an all-time great. We're trading an all-time great with a ton of mileage and at the tail end of his career.

It's a player that we kept on a strict minute schedule last season, and who was limited to 5 games over the month before the playoffs.

I understand he's still very good (but he did look disproportionately good last year not in a small part due to the fact that the remaining part of the Celtics' big rotation was god-awful), but how much do you think 2 years of a severely limited Garnett is _really_ worth?

I think that the guy who could ultimately win the Clippers a title is worth more than a mediocre big man on a big contract.

Not sure how this is relevant, given that the proposed deals is for more than Jordan already.

[Snakehead]

^ From all accounts, Danny is getting bent over a barrel. 

(That's in reference to bleedgreen's post.)

Yea, it seems he's in an extremely awkward spot and LA knows it.

First he wanted Bledsoe, LA says no.

Then, he wanted to dump a contract, LA says no.

Then, he wants two 1st rounders, LA is saying no.

Who does it seem really has the leverage in this deal?

As Chris had mentioned in another post, I think you are hearing alot of Clipper information leaks.  Im going to reserve judgement until it actually happens.

Such an underrated point in this, as well.

We've heard a lot from guys that are probably plugged in with Chris Paul and Doc to a lesser extent, as well as in general LA.  No one works the media like LA.

[CelticG1]

^ From all accounts, Danny is getting bent over a barrel. 

(That's in reference to bleedgreen's post.)

Let's revisit this again. We're trading an all-time great. We're trading an all-time great with a ton of mileage and at the tail end of his career.

It's a player that we kept on a strict minute schedule last season, and who was limited to 5 games over the month before the playoffs.

I understand he's still very good (but he did look disproportionately good last year not in a small part due to the fact that the remaining part of the Celtics' big rotation was god-awful), but how much do you think 2 years of a severely limited Garnett is _really_ worth?

I think that the guy who could ultimately win the Clippers a title is worth more than a mediocre big man on a big contract.

Mediocre is generous.

Isn't it the Clippers who originally wanted Garnett? All I've heard for the entire year and until now is that the Clippers want Garnett (and Doc). Ive heard a lot less from the Celtics side and the one prospect we actually are interested in Is off limits.

I think if this deal doesn't go through the Clippers will be the ones devastated-not us

[GreenEnvy]

So, should we ask ourselves why KG doesn´t come out and make an official statement like "I bleed green, I love the Celtics, and I couldn´t leave these guys if I weren´t sure they´re getting a fair return for me"?

Is KG controlling this deal, then? He´s the one with the no-trade clause, he´s the reason why the Clippers are the only franchise we can realistically trade with.

Would you agree with that?

I did a thread on just this. Got flamed.

K.G. and his silence say a lot, it's not like any utterances could make this any worse. K.G. and Doc drive the train and Danny is getting hosed because of them and himself but Garnett is holding the hose with Doc. Sometimes the easiest explanation really is the best one. Your comment nails it.

I think Doc and Kevin both know DA is not interested in Paul returning next year. That said, KG is done here and Doc doesn't want any part of the mess that will take place the next few years.

DA is the driving force behind all of this. Not Doc, and certainly not KG.

If it was up to KG/PP/Doc, I think they all return next year. But DA does not want one of those players (or both?) back next season.

[CelticG1]

^ From all accounts, Danny is getting bent over a barrel. 

(That's in reference to bleedgreen's post.)

Let's revisit this again. We're trading an all-time great. We're trading an all-time great with a ton of mileage and at the tail end of his career.

It's a player that we kept on a strict minute schedule last season, and who was limited to 5 games over the month before the playoffs.

I understand he's still very good (but he did look disproportionately good last year not in a small part due to the fact that the remaining part of the Celtics' big rotation was god-awful), but how much do you think 2 years of a severely limited Garnett is _really_ worth?

I think that the guy who could ultimately win the Clippers a title is worth more than a mediocre big man on a big contract.

Not sure how this is relevant, given that the proposed deals is for more than Jordan already.

Well you were just saying that late firsts are a crapshoot anyway. Does that make it much better?