I don't follow NBA much these days, but from what scant stuff I've read, it sounds like NO's owner sold the team to the league, who then overruled the team's GM when he engineered a 3-team trade with Houston and LA.

All I see in the aftermath is a busted deal, lots of pissed off players with hurt feelings b/c they were trade bait. Now the league is forcing them to be traded anyway, just not to the same teams as before?

Either way, Stern sounds like a petulant douche on TV.

There is no reason the league owns the Hornets, either get a buyer or contract them, but this is ridiculous.

This is two trades, legitimate trades, that have been axed. So now, instead of actually getting something for him, the Hornets will lose him for free next year. No wonder the NBA is in trouble, if this is how they do business.

A proposed deal Monday that had Paul going to the Los Angeles Clippers in exchange for guard Eric Bledsoe, forward Al-Farouq Aminu, Chris Kaman and an a first-round pick

Honestly that doesn't seem like that great of a trade for the Hornets. Who knows where that first round pick ends up being, who's available, if the player pans out as projected, etc.

Last Thursday, NBA Commissioner David Stern nixed a trade that initially had Paul going to the Lakers with the Hornets' acquiring guards Kevin Martin, Goran Dragic, forward Luis Scola and a draft pick from the Houston Rockets and forward Lamar Odom from the Lakers. The Rockets would had acquired Pau Gasol from the Lakers.

That's the one that has me scratching my head. Maybe he nixed it because he doesn't like the perception that the Lakers always get all the stars or whatever, but as far as acting in the Hornets' best interest -- I'm not sure they're going to get a better offer for Paul than that. Hell the Clips won't even want to part with the above + Eric Gordon.

tallguywithglasseson: Who knows where that first round pick ends up being, who's available, if the player pans out as projected, etc.

It's the Clippers, I'm going to go out on a limb and say it's lottery pick, and this is going to be one of the strongest drafts in recent memory, so chances are they'd get a pretty solid pick.

mitchcumstein1: This is two trades, legitimate trades, that have been axed

Well in this case it was the Clippers pulling out because the negotiations broke down.

The 3-way trade with the Rockets and Lakers was actually agreed to, then vetoed, in "how the fark does David Stern keep this job" fashion.

tallguywithglasseson: mitchcumstein1: This is two trades, legitimate trades, that have been axed

Well in this case it was the Clippers pulling out because the negotiations broke down.

The 3-way trade with the Rockets and Lakers was actually agreed to, then vetoed, in "how the fark does David Stern keep this job" fashion.

They backed out because the league wanted Eric Gordon to be thrown in. It's horseshiat.

David Stern keeps his job because he's currently doing the owners bidding, and they're the ones who employ him.

tallguywithglasseson: A proposed deal Monday that had Paul going to the Los Angeles Clippers in exchange for guard Eric Bledsoe, forward Al-Farouq Aminu, Chris Kaman and an a first-round pick

Honestly that doesn't seem like that great of a trade for the Hornets. Who knows where that first round pick ends up being, who's available, if the player pans out as projected, etc.

Well, first of all I heard that it was Eric Gordon (23 years old, avg. 22.3ppg and 4.4 apg), Chris Kaman's expiring deal, Aminu and Minnesota's unprotected first round pick which, given that Minnesota is garbage, has a new coach and will be breaking in chronically overrated Ricky Rubio, could be the #1 pick in the draft. Then they wanted to add Eric Bledsoe (another first round pick, 18th, who would have been lottery if he stayed another year at Kentucky) to the deal. That really is too much.

Sounds great for a team who is rebuilding. Three young, top 10 draft picks (Gordon-7th, Aminu-8th and likely a top 10 of their choosing) for a guy with balky knees who is going to leave anyway.

mitchcumstein1: contract them

This is what is happening. They want to get rid of some of the smaller income teams and lottery off the players from them. NO has bad attendance and is owned by the league, so it's a perfect fit for contraction. This theory makes more sense than anything else.

Over/under on average league attendance this year because of all the damage all sides are doing? I'm saying under 10k even.

mitchcumstein1: It's the Clippers, I'm going to go out on a limb and say it's lottery pick

Clippers with Blake Griffin, Chris Paul, plus their roster minus the above? I wouldn't bank on it.

Plus "lottery pick" be pick could be 7, 8... 14... and my point is if you look through the NBA draft history, there are plenty of busts who were projected to be good players, who were drafted in that range. Doesn't always pan out, regardless of what the scouts are saying now... even if they get a high pick.

Bad trade for the Hornets. With Gordon it favors the Hornets a little more but it's close to even than without him... Hornets should probably have offered something in addition to even it out... but this one is much more understandable.

The previous one, just stupid.

mitchcumstein1: tallguywithglasseson: mitchcumstein1: This is two trades, legitimate trades, that have been axed

Well in this case it was the Clippers pulling out because the negotiations broke down.

The 3-way trade with the Rockets and Lakers was actually agreed to, then vetoed, in "how the fark does David Stern keep this job" fashion.

They backed out because the league wanted Eric Gordon to be thrown in. It's horseshiat.

David Stern keeps his job because he's currently doing the owners bidding, and they're the ones who employ him.

They wanted Bledsoe to be thrown in on top of the rest from what I understand. No way that deal gets done without Gordon being the centerpiece of the deal. But that would leave the Clippers with no backup PG to alleviate Paul's minutes.

bighasbeen: Minnesota's unprotected first round pick which

Ahh... I didn't know that. It will definitely be a lottery pick.

And since it's being drawn for someone other than Minnesota, it might just end up being a high pick after the lottery.

bighasbeen: another first round pick, 18th, who would have been lottery if he stayed another year at Kentucky

That doesn't really add value to a player.

Now I was wondering what exactly we got from the Clippers for that pick.

Marko Motherfarking Jaric.

God damn you McHale. God I farking hate you so much. I hope they have "Energizer Presents: Free D Batteries Day" at the Target Center when Houston is in town.

tallguywithglasseson: bighasbeen: Minnesota's unprotected first round pick which

Ahh... I didn't know that. It will definitely be a lottery pick.

And since it's being drawn for someone other than Minnesota, it might just end up being a high pick after the lottery.

No, it is picked as if it was Minnesota, then given to the Clippers. That's why you'll see things like "lottery protected" on first round picks which are traded. This is a completely unprotected pick, like the one the Cavs got from the Clippers in the Baron Davis/Mo Williams deal (which ended up being #4 Tristan Thompson).

Also, I forgot the Clippers had Mo Williams to back up/play point.

tallguywithglasseson: bighasbeen: another first round pick, 18th, who would have been lottery if he stayed another year at Kentucky

That doesn't really add value to a player.

No, it doesn't add value. But it does show that anyone asking for 4 high draft picks for one guy, especially when one of them is already a 20+ scorer and getting better shouldn't be taken seriously.

tallguywithglasseson: mitchcumstein1: It's the Clippers, I'm going to go out on a limb and say it's lottery pick

Clippers with Blake Griffin, Chris Paul, plus their roster minus the above? I wouldn't bank on it.

Plus "lottery pick" be pick could be 7, 8... 14... and my point is if you look through the NBA draft history, there are plenty of busts who were projected to be good players, who were drafted in that range. Doesn't always pan out, regardless of what the scouts are saying now... even if they get a high pick.

Bad trade for the Hornets. With Gordon it favors the Hornets a little more but it's close to even than without him... Hornets should probably have offered something in addition to even it out... but this one is much more understandable.

The previous one, just stupid.

The Clippers had Elton Brand and Baron Davis and I think went to playoffs once, maybe? It's the Clippers, they're going to do what they do. And it could be the 14th pick, or it could be 1st, either way it's going to be a whole hell of a lot more than what they're going to get when he leaves as a free agent. Yeah it's not a good as the Rockets trade, which was actually a pretty fair trade, but it's better than what's going to happen.

bighasbeen: They wanted Bledsoe to be thrown in on top of the rest from what I understand. No way that deal gets done without Gordon being the centerpiece of the deal. But that would leave the Clippers with no backup PG to alleviate Paul's minutes.

FTFA: The Clippers backed out of the deal because the league wanted guard Eric Gordon included in the trade package, along with the first-round pick

FTFA: The Clippers backed out of the deal because the league wanted guard Eric Gordon included in the trade package, along with the first-round pick

Huh... they were reporting the exact opposite on ESPNLA this morning, that it was the addition of Bledsoe which caused the Clippers to balk. If it was the addition of Gordon that the Clippers were resisting... well... that would be a bad deal for the Hornets.

bighasbeen: No, it is picked as if it was Minnesota, then given to the Clippers. That's why you'll see things like "lottery protected" on first round picks which are traded. This is a completely unprotected pick, like the one the Cavs got from the Clippers in the Baron Davis/Mo Williams deal (which ended up being #4 Tristan Thompson).

I'm not sure what exactly you think I meant.

What I meant was, if the T'Wolves were keeping the pick, I'm sure it would end up being a much lower pick than would be predicted by the odds in the lottery (the T'Wolves usually move down, and have never in team history moved up).

But since it's going to someone else I'm sure it'll end up being #1 or something (shakes fist at McHale).

bighasbeen: No, it doesn't add value. But it does show that anyone asking for 4 high draft picks for one guy, especially when one of them is already a 20+ scorer and getting better shouldn't be taken seriously.

I think they could have still counter-offered. The trade as presented without Gordon doesn't leave New Orleans with much of a squad. Not sure it's a good move for NO -- but it's a much better offer than I'd thought when I still believed we were talking about the Clips own pick (rather than MN).

Not sure what else the Hornets could have thrown it to even it back out (or had the Clips held on to Bledsoe, etc). Apparently, nothing the Clippers (or maybe Hornets) were interested in doing - they weren't parting with the T'Wolves pick (much more valuable than their own pick) and Gordon. Still, Gordon's a nice player, but Paul is an all pro.

shiat happens. Sometimes trade negotiations break down.

mitchcumstein1: it's going to be a whole hell of a lot more than what they're going to get when he leaves as a free agent

And Paul can also kind of tie the Hornets' hands as far as where he gets traded to, at least to an extent.
He can go somewhere he likes and sign an immediate extension and have more value (like 'Melo to the Knicks), otherwise he's got less value (like DWill to the Nets).

I agree to a point, but "we're going to lose him anyway so let's just take this" isn't good negotiating.
They've still got to try to get the most they can for him- obviously when the other side walks away you asked too much, but I'm sure they're not done trying.
Also reconsidering that 1st rounder being MN's makes it a better trade for the Hornets than I'd thought.

I think the Lakers/Rockets may have been a stronger offer. I really like Dragic, no idea why he's being bounced around so much, and with Odom and Scola's hair, they'd have had a decent squad.

I farking couldn't believe the Clippers were going to give up Eric Gordon - that's a crazy high price. AND THE NBA STILL SAID NO?!?!

bighasbeen: Huh... they were reporting the exact opposite on ESPNLA this morning, that it was the addition of Bledsoe which caused the Clippers to balk. If it was the addition of Gordon that the Clippers were resisting... well... that would be a bad deal for the Hornets.

That's what I'm saying. You've got to at least get Gordon + pieces for Paul, or Gordon + pieces for Paul + pieces. Not unproven but promising prospects + unproven draft pick for Paul. A little too risky, they should at least get a good caliber starter + stuff.

tallguywithglasseson: bighasbeen: Huh... they were reporting the exact opposite on ESPNLA this morning, that it was the addition of Bledsoe which caused the Clippers to balk. If it was the addition of Gordon that the Clippers were resisting... well... that would be a bad deal for the Hornets.

That's what I'm saying. You've got to at least get Gordon + pieces for Paul, or Gordon + pieces for Paul + pieces. Not unproven but promising prospects + unproven draft pick for Paul. A little too risky, they should at least get a good caliber starter + stuff.

I had also heard all along that Gordon was the main piece. Not sure why its now being flipped around where he was the addon.

No one in their right mind asks for Eric Gordon as an "add on". He's a centerpiece.

But there is only one of the seven wonders of the ancient world.

tallguywithglasseson: I'm not sure what exactly you think I meant.

What I meant was, if the T'Wolves were keeping the pick, I'm sure it would end up being a much lower pick than would be predicted by the odds in the lottery (the T'Wolves usually move down, and have never in team history moved up).

But since it's going to someone else I'm sure it'll end up being #1 or something (shakes fist at McHale).

Ah ha ha I get it now. That's just some hard, hard core cynicism. When I'm talking NBA I'm generally optimistic, being a Lakers fan. Had we been talking baseball (Dodgers) or college sports (UCLA) I would have been on the right wavelength to pick up on that.

tallguywithglasseson: I think they could have still counter-offered. The trade as presented without Gordon doesn't leave New Orleans with much of a squad. Not sure it's a good move for NO -- but it's a much better offer than I'd thought when I still believed we were talking about the Clips own pick (rather than MN).

I had been operating on the erroneous information that Gordon was in the deal all along and it was the addition of Bledsoe that had the Clippers saying, "Too much". But without Gordon that deal is a nonstarter.

At this point most of the league doesn't even know who they are negotiating with:

WojYahooNBA Adrian Wojnarowski
Prominent agent: NBA has rendered Hornets front office "inoperable" and has given up doing even minor signings with them now.

DamnYankees: tallguywithglasseson: bighasbeen: Huh... they were reporting the exact opposite on ESPNLA this morning, that it was the addition of Bledsoe which caused the Clippers to balk. If it was the addition of Gordon that the Clippers were resisting... well... that would be a bad deal for the Hornets.

That's what I'm saying. You've got to at least get Gordon + pieces for Paul, or Gordon + pieces for Paul + pieces. Not unproven but promising prospects + unproven draft pick for Paul. A little too risky, they should at least get a good caliber starter + stuff.

I had also heard all along that Gordon was the main piece. Not sure why its now being flipped around where he was the addon.

No one in their right mind asks for Eric Gordon as an "add on". He's a centerpiece.

I can see how national writers outside of LA and Indiana may have mixed up the two. No one knows anything about the Clippers past Blake Griffin and even then they don't really know what his actual skill set is, which is to say, not really anything past freak athleticism. Hell, I live and work in LA County, follow the NBA and I forgot Mo Williams was a Clipper.

tallguywithglasseson: mitchcumstein1: it's going to be a whole hell of a lot more than what they're going to get when he leaves as a free agent

And Paul can also kind of tie the Hornets' hands as far as where he gets traded to, at least to an extent.
He can go somewhere he likes and sign an immediate extension and have more value (like 'Melo to the Knicks), otherwise he's got less value (like DWill to the Nets).

I agree to a point, but "we're going to lose him anyway so let's just take this" isn't good negotiating.
They've still got to try to get the most they can for him- obviously when the other side walks away you asked too much, but I'm sure they're not done trying.
Also reconsidering that 1st rounder being MN's makes it a better trade for the Hornets than I'd thought.

I think the Lakers/Rockets may have been a stronger offer. I really like Dragic, no idea why he's being bounced around so much, and with Odom and Scola's hair, they'd have had a decent squad.

No it's not good negotiating, but losing him and getting nothing is just bad business. Maybe they're not done trying to move him, but I've got to imagine this whole fiasco has soured some people on doing business with the Hornets. Dell Demps obviously ain't running the show over there.

I liked the Rockets deal a lot, I thought there was some real value there for everybody involved.

bighasbeen: Mo Williams was a Clipper.

Mo Williams is a Clipper?

bighasbeen: That's just some hard, hard core cynicism. When I'm talking NBA I'm generally optimistic, being a Lakers fan

I'm a Timberwolves fan.

//happy about signing Barea today
//WE HAVE TWO SPANISH SPEAKING POINT GUARDS
//NO ONE WILL BE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND THEM
//WE ARE UNSTOPPABLE

David Stern should die of gonorrhea and rot in hell.

How about this reality - DAVID STERN FARKED OVER THE LAKERS BEYOND BELIEF.

Seriously, they basically had to give up their third best player for NOTHING because of the damage that was done to their clubhouse and Odom's morale. They are completely farked now.

mitchcumstein1: bighasbeen: Mo Williams was a Clipper.

Mo Williams is a Clipper?

I think he still is. I know they got him and Jamario from Cleveland for Baron Davis and their unconditional 1st rounder in 2011. I'm pretty sure he's still on their team...

Yup. Still on the Clippers page on NBA.com.

tallguywithglasseson: bighasbeen: That's just some hard, hard core cynicism. When I'm talking NBA I'm generally optimistic, being a Lakers fan

I'm a Timberwolves fan.

//happy about signing Barea today
//WE HAVE TWO SPANISH SPEAKING POINT GUARDS
//NO ONE WILL BE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND THEM
//WE ARE UNSTOPPABLE

Darko chupa más que Jenna Haze en el espacio.

MayoSlather: I don't understand why the Clippers wanted to make a deal so bad anyways. They have a lot of good young players and making a big trade is a very Clippers thing to do. Let your young talent develop and give guys some time to form some chemistry then if you still suck blow up the team in a trade.

Blake Griffin + Chris Paul = orgasmic basketball.

I think its really that simple.

A Fark Handle: DamnYankees: I farking couldn't believe the Clippers were going to give up Eric Gordon - that's a crazy high price. AND THE NBA STILL SAID NO?!?!

the clips said "go fark yourself stern" and walked away. the nba didn't reject the deal.

also, why would the nba want paul to go to that racist slumlord owner's team? oh maybe that's why the price was so farking high for the clips. a little fark you sterling from stern.

Even if all this is true, it just speaks to the insane conflict of interest in the NBA owning this team. The idea that the owner of a team should be caring about "punishing" Donald Sterling for being a piece of crap, rather than trying to get the most to help their own team, is ridiculous.

bighasbeen: Yup. Still on the Clippers page on NBA.com.

The Clippers have a webpage?!?!

Darko chupa más que Jenna Haze en el espacio.

I don't know what that means, but I'm intrigued by it.

DamnYankees: How about this reality - DAVID STERN FARKED OVER THE LAKERS BEYOND BELIEF.

Seriously, they basically had to give up their third best player for NOTHING because of the damage that was done to their clubhouse and Odom's morale. They are completely farked now.

I like Lamar's skillset and always thought he had all the talent to be one of the top 20 or 25 guys in the NBA.

That being said, I'm not going to miss his inconsistency, terrible shooting and absolute refusal to step up and be a game changer. He only scored 20 or more points 14 times last year while playing essentially starter's minutes. He only produced 28 double doubles. A guy like Lamar should have almost twice that many. And he doesn't elevate his game in the playoffs. At the very least now the Lakers can offer $9 million of "any player you might want" to a team instead of it having to be 32 year old Lamar Odom.

HaywoodJablonski: Demps should resign effective immediately

Demps should burn that motherfarker down, then quit.l

mitchcumstein1: I don't know what that means, but I'm intrigued by it.

I feel it is a pointed and accurate analysis of the basketball skills of a particular #2 overall pick.

HaywoodJablonski: Demps should resign effective immediately

He almost did after the first trade was nixed.

It's hard to say which job is worse: this one, or the one for which poor Elgin Baylor sacrificed his legacy as a player.