Skip to content

Report: Clippers walk away from Chris Paul talks. Again.

Dec 13, 2011, 9:50 AM EDT

Chris Paul, Quincy Pondexter AP

“Like sands through the hourglass, so are the days of Chris Paul’s career with the Hornets….”

The Chris Paul soap opera continues. The Clippers have basically moved on from the Paul talks again, according to David Aldridge at (and Adrian Wojnaarowski at Yahoo).

This is the same thing that happened on Monday — the Clippers walked away because the price was too steep. After the Clippers walked away Monday the league — which owns the Hornets and has been driving the talks over the head Hornets GM Del Demps — tried hard to re-engage the Clippers on the deal. But things are not really different, Aldridge reports.

But a source directly involved in the negotiations said early Tuesday morning that it was doubtful the Hornets would compromise enough for Los Angeles to be interested.

“I don’t know that they can come back far enough,” the source said.

Trade talks go cold then get warmed up again more than leftover pizza at a fraternity house. So never say never, but the talks are dead for now.

The trade was supposed to include either Eric Gordon (who the Clippers do not want to give up but might) or Minnesota’s first-round pick this draft (the Clippers have the rights, unprotected), plus Chris Kaman, Al-Faroqu Aminu and Eric Bledsoe. The league wanted both Gordon and the pick, the Clippers would not give up both. And here we are.

The Clippers have Mo Williams and Bledsoe on the roster at the point, plus picked up Chauncey Billups on waivers after the Knicks used their amnesty on him. Billups now has to either report to the Clippers or retire (as he threatened if he was picked by a team he didn’t want), and there as of yet has been no decision by him.

The league faces consequences for this falling apart. One is that other teams are hesitant to deal with the Hornets — which may be fine with them in the Paul case, the league clearly wants to keep him on the roster even though he can walk away as a free agent in July and the Hornets get nothing.

Secondly, there is the threat of a lawsuit from the players union on Paul’s behalf. If Paul leaves as a free agent he will make about $26 million less guaranteed then if he were traded and re-signed. Combine that with David Stern killing the Paul trade to the Lakers — apparently under pressure from owners — could lead to collusion charges and legal action.

  1. sweetnlow44 - Dec 13, 2011 at 9:58 AM

    How does David Stern still have a job? The NBA is a complete joke.

    • yournuts - Dec 13, 2011 at 2:01 PM

      It’s no wonder that you guys don’t have a job in basketball. You want David Stern to trade away a franchise player for no value. This is a franchise player! You don’t trade a franchise player unless you get something INCREDIBLE in return. There is a huge amount of time between now and the end of the season. David Stern also has to keep prospective buyers of the Hornets abreast or involved of the CP3 situation. If someone is going to buy the franchise they should have the opportunity to address the Chris Paul situation.
      So put away your stupidity and your knives because CP3 wasn’t traded to the Lakers or the Clippers for what you think is enough but many think is not enough. David Stern has a tough job being babysitter to the players, and the NBAPA , let alone get toasted by bloggers that have absolutely no first hand knowledge of the situation.

      • hystoracle - Dec 13, 2011 at 2:32 PM

        League should not be owning any team.. Creates a serious conflict of interest. If you can’t find a buyer. Fold the team and have a draft or declare all their players free agents. Until the NBA no longer owns the Hornets nothing good will happen for that organization.

      • snoopy2014 - Dec 13, 2011 at 2:41 PM

        Disagree. Paul is phenomenal, but he is leaving. Getting something in return is better than nothing. If Stern keeps holding out, he’ll be left with nothing. Look at the history of trading franchise players. No one ever gets close to equal value in return.

        Shaq in 2004 was still a bigger impact player than CP3 now. The Lakers got Odom (a good starter), Butler (a good starter), and the craptastic albatross of Brian Grant’s contract.

        Denver got a GREAT haul for Melo considering they had no leverage: all serviceable starters, no All-Stars in the mix.

        Go back in history and look at what the Bucks got for Kareem. The Barkley trade. It goes on and on. Everyone gets a pu-pu platter in return for a franchise player that wants out.

        If Stern had better options, it’d be one thing. He has no leverage. He’s made idiotic moves to eliminate that leverage. He’s handled this extremely poorly.

      • goforthanddie - Dec 13, 2011 at 3:45 PM

        Trade him for the best offer you can get, or lose him and get nothing. Not much of a choice, is it?
        Problem is, 29 teams know Paul’s gone at season’s end. Nobody’s going to put forth the type of offer Stern wants.
        And don’t speak of Stern’s concern for the NO franchise. He could have sold it to a multi-billionaire months ago. The owners would’ve made a profit, NO would have a very wealthy owner, Paul might want to stay, and you’d be spouting stupidity on another topic. Stern’s actions are making NO poison for teams to deal with. He’s also driving the team’s value down-and that’s with Paul still on the roster.

      • sonofsambowie - Dec 13, 2011 at 4:05 PM

        Yes! This is what most of the people fail to realize.

      • yournuts - Dec 13, 2011 at 6:39 PM

        I see that there are a lot of ignorant people here that know more about how the league should be run than the experts and the owners. So many experts here with absolutely no clue.

      • villagementality - Dec 13, 2011 at 7:09 PM

        This article is another example of the complete lunacy that is professional sports and the donkeys butts who continue to pay the prices to see these knuckleheads play.

        Professional sports in the 21st centuary has little redeeming social value because the idol is now the almighty dollar and many pro athletes don’t have a clue about civility or morality. Don’t believe me? Check out the treatment of Tebow…

        I’ll stick to college ball where it hasn’t been completely corrupted…..

      • slopmcflop - Dec 13, 2011 at 7:27 PM

        “I see that there are a lot of ignorant people here that know more about how the league should be run than the experts and the owners. So many experts here with absolutely no clue.”

        And you’re the one correcting these so called “self appointed experts”. Does that make you the expert on fake experts? Seriously guy, it doesn’t take much to see that Stern doesn’t really know what he’s doing in this situation, one he should have never been in in the first place.

      • yournuts - Dec 13, 2011 at 9:48 PM

        And you know what to do? Don’t make me laugh.

  2. billyhoyle4real - Dec 13, 2011 at 10:08 AM

    David Stern needs to lose his job.
    How will this make a potential owner more interested in buying the Hornets when his “SUPERSTAR” has no intention of resigning. The Hornets look way worse letting CP3 walk as a FA than they would making one of the proposed trades and for that Stern needs to be fired.

    • yournuts - Dec 13, 2011 at 2:05 PM

      I can see that your not a businessman are you? You have no idea of value. You would fold with a bluff when you have a winning hand because you can’t see the logic of not taking the first offer that is below market value.

  3. jvnyj - Dec 13, 2011 at 10:25 AM

    The deal with the Lakers was a terrible one. Scolia (3 yrs 39 million) a big baby in Odom and Kevin Martins expiring with a late 1st rounder, that would have been the coo of the century. The Clippers deal is a good one the league should drop Bledsoe and see if they can get Gorodon and Minnys first if they can and dont pull the trigger then we have collusion on our hands not now. The lakers deal was a bad one anyone who thinks otherwise needs to look at what NY gave up for Melo.

  4. jlinatl - Dec 13, 2011 at 10:32 AM

    The only way this could make sense is if the league thought they were close to selling the Hornets. Then it allows the new owner to negotiate with Paul. But there has been no rumour or that.

    • yournuts - Dec 13, 2011 at 2:07 PM

      I didn’t think the league needed to consult with you on what they are doing or not doing?

      • goforthanddie - Dec 13, 2011 at 5:09 PM

        Please post some more stupidity.

      • snoopy2014 - Dec 13, 2011 at 7:31 PM

        Please wait for your 13th birthday before you post again. You’re embarrassing yourself with all your posts.

  5. Chris Fiorentino - Dec 13, 2011 at 10:34 AM

    Once again…it is not collusion when the league owns the team. Period. There is no legal standing for the Union as Paul is not being cut, fired, removed from his contracted position or anything like that. There is no “right to be traded to the team of your choice” in America…at least as far as the legal system that I am aware of. I guess the union can sue and do whatever they want, but in the end, the owners of an NBA team decided not to trade Paul to the Lakers for a couple guys in their 30’s, and a couple journeymen, and a pick in the mid 20’s. Unfortunately, Chris Paul will have no choice but to leave the Hornet next year, to the team of HIS CHOICE, for a year and $25 million less. Then the Hornets can bottom out, get a couple picks in the top 3, and rebuild that way instead of staying in the 7-13 range and never getting any better.

    • idontevenwannaknow - Dec 13, 2011 at 11:03 AM

      Exactly, that Lakers trade would have looked awful in a couple years, Scola and Martin are decent players right now, but they are getting old, and then the league overplayed their hand with the clippers, it can still be done, but demands need to be changed.

      I also think the ‘melo trade last year set an unusually high standard for a star to be traded. The nuggets made out well in that trade and the league seems to think that they can pillage the clippers like what happened between the nuggets and knicks.

      The clippers trade looked like a good trade for all involved, clippers would have received a legit pg to pair with griffin, and the hornets would have received an expiring contract, young players with potential, and a possible high pick.

      Come on NBA, this would make the hornets attractive to a buyer, if that’s what you are really interested in, but after the last couple days, maybe you are more interested in contraction.

      • Chris Fiorentino - Dec 13, 2011 at 1:57 PM

        I think the Nuggets got robbed in the Carmelo trade, but that’s just my opinion. I do agree that the first Clippers trade was a superior one to the Lackers trade, because of the inclusion of either Gordon or the Minn unprotected pick. I would take the pick, and in a draft this deep, NO, if they finish as poorly as I think without Paul and a bunch of young guys, could end up with 2 picks in the top 5…which is the best way to kickstart a franchise. Not by getting older guys who are going to put you in the 10-12 range in the draft.

      • Chris Fiorentino - Dec 13, 2011 at 1:59 PM

        Not to mention a team with two picks in the top five of a talented draft would be a huge selling point for the team. The chance to come in, bring in your own GM and coach, and have two of the top picks in the draft? Sweetens the sale a little more in my opinion.

      • yournuts - Dec 13, 2011 at 2:09 PM

        No it would not look attractive to any buyer.

      • yournuts - Dec 13, 2011 at 8:49 PM

        ZThe Nuggets totally got robbed in the Carmelo trade. Idontevenwannaknow makes no sense to me. The Hornets will be fine with CP3. He wont go so fast. 30 million reasons for this NOT to happen. If you think that CP3 value will go down before it goes up your smoking to much dope. Don’t try to figure out what a Billionaire already knows. Your not in the same league, your talking with your heart, not your head.

    • yournuts - Dec 13, 2011 at 8:56 PM

      Finally sanity in thought. He might stay too. Who knows?

  6. Mr. Jones - Dec 13, 2011 at 10:43 AM

    Stern and the other owners to be looking out for the best interest of the team but they let their starting power forward David West walk away and did nothing about it. Stern dropped the ball big time. He needs to leave at the end of the season.

  7. kpow55 - Dec 13, 2011 at 10:57 AM

    Wow! Stern is so bad, he makes Sterling look good.

    I understand the attracting a potential buyer thing but at this point any intelligent potential buyer has to be sitting on the sidelines holding off till this mess gets resolved.

    I would think the NBA could get more from the current team of scrubs paired w/ moveable assets acquired in a trade this year in today’s market than said team of scrubs and nada (after Paul walks) next.

  8. cancionisimas - Dec 13, 2011 at 10:58 AM

    You never, never can understimate the power of money, and Stern knows it: 26 millions are a lot of money. For every player who claims that he never resign with his franchise… well, we’ll see. And i think Stern is looking at this moment, next summer, when Paul has to leave 26 million on the table… we’ll see.

    • therealhtj - Dec 13, 2011 at 12:01 PM

      You’re leaving a key point out of the equation, that 26 million difference is in a 5 year contract if he resigns or a 4 year contract if he leaves as an unrestricted free agent. He really only gets screwed if he has a career-ending injury, but I don’t think CP3 is terribly concerned about it. If it comes to it, he’ll sign a 4 year deal with a Player Option to get out after 3 and sign a fat extension after that with the team of his choice and leave the Hornets with nothing. I know that’s what I’d do if they tooled me the way they’re doing him.

      CP3 is not Allen Iverson (who’s already having money problems). I’d guess Chris Paul could retire today with what he’s already earned and never work another day in his life.

  9. chargerdillon - Dec 13, 2011 at 11:01 AM

    It’s a simple conflict of interest. You have David Stern who’s job is to make 30 owners happy. In blocking the deal with the Lakers, he had 29 owners who were happy.

    1 owner is really pissed, but he can’t do anything about it because of the conflict of interest in the league owning the stupid worthless Hornets says that Stern has to make 29 owners happy before he makes 2 owners happy and 28 owners pissed.

    If you really think Stern should be fired, the better suggestion for you would be to stop watching the NBA and go watch college basketball only.

    The NBA is a vile and corrupt business, it has been forever and it always will be. The people making money in the NBA will continue to make money, and until there is a serious change in fan attendance/money to be made, nothing REPEAT NOTHING, will change

  10. chadinkc30 - Dec 13, 2011 at 11:15 AM

    The Nuggets got a great deal? No freaking way, that trade isn’t even close to every trade Stern has vetoed for Paul! That trade is terrible and the reason why no team is gonna give up a kings ransom for Paul or Howard! Why would u, they are gonna be free agents in a half of a year

  11. jolink653 - Dec 13, 2011 at 11:21 AM

    the more i read about this chris paul situation the more i think that david stern is actually trying his best to make the hornets better than they are now rather than just blocking chris paul from going anywhere…i guess he didn’t think the lakers package was good enough and he was trying to get as much as possible from the clippers so that the hornets aren’t completely crippled for the next ten years…let’s face it martin scola and odom are nice players but what kind of team could you build around them other than an average 9th or 10th best team in the west? the clippers package is for young stars and maybe a pick so i think eventually stern will accept that…can’t really blame him for trying to get everything he can get to help the hornets build a winner and i think he’ll eventually pull the trigger on a deal

    • hoytdadd64 - Dec 13, 2011 at 12:23 PM

      That’s a great concept if Stern wasn’t the commissioner. No way should the commissioner have a hand in making any team better. Let’s not forget the conflict of interest that is happening here. It’s too thin of a line between commissioner and owner, you can’t tell me he’s not walking on both sides right now. Stern is a puppet being controlled by angry small market owners and he’s using Paul and the Hornets to send a message. No way should he have his hands in these negotiations like this. In no way shape or form should any commissioner of any league play a hand in making ONE team better. No matter which trade you or I or anyone feels is the better deal, Stern has no right playing this hand.

      • jolink653 - Dec 13, 2011 at 3:12 PM

        it’s a valid point you’re making but who is supposed to run this team if he doesn’t? the league had to buy the hornets because the last owner ran out of money and the league had to float the team monetarily so one way or another the league was going to have a hand in this trade until the hornets get another owner and who knows when that will be…i don’t think stern is controlled by any of the owners but i do think he’d like to maintain competitive balance for the sake of the sport and to keep the fans interested so he has to give the smaller teams some leeway here or there…bottom line is i think he wants to make the hornets as good as possible from trading chris paul so i don’t think he deserves as much criticism as he’s been getting

  12. anythingbutyanks - Dec 13, 2011 at 11:42 AM

    At this point the only way that I can see for this to be resolved and Stern to regain just some of his credibility is to hold a blind auction for CP3. Each team that is interested can submit one trade offer within a week, but there can be no communication between teams with competing offers, and Stern must agree to let Demps decide which offer is best. If CP3 says he doesn’t like the team he is going to and won’t sign an extension then that team has the chance to back out and CP3 is stuck in NO until his contract is up. If the team is able to extend CP3 or is willing to complete the trade without the promise of an extension, then the trade goes through. Hornets get the highest bid, CP3 gets one chance to say whether he wants out or not, Stern gets a chance to get out from under this mess he created, and every team has a chance to make one play for CP3.

    • Mr. Jones - Dec 13, 2011 at 11:51 AM

      Sounds good, but it won’t happen. If teams had a problem with the Lakers, who’s to say that a move to the Mavs, Bulls or Knicks would not get shut down.

  13. chadinkc30 - Dec 13, 2011 at 12:40 PM


    • yournuts - Dec 13, 2011 at 2:14 PM

      There is no doubt that the Knick did better than the Nuggets on the Carmelo trade. Everybody here thought that the Knicks paid to much but in reality the Knicks got a bargain.

    • jolink653 - Dec 13, 2011 at 3:15 PM

      chandler’s a free agent and felton will be a free agent after this season and they also essentially turned billups into chandler so it seems like the knicks got the better end of it but i’m also a knicks fan so i’m slightly biased…gallinari was a good piece and i hated having to give him up but i hope he does really well and makes the nuggets better

    • yournuts - Dec 13, 2011 at 8:55 PM

      The bar has been set for better offers. Time will tell the tale. My bet is CP3 stays with the franchise no matter what he says now.

  14. jikkle49 - Dec 13, 2011 at 2:04 PM

    The core problem is that Stern is supposed to be acting in the best interest in the Hornets and right now you can argue he’s not.

    He wants Chris Paul on the team to make it more lucrative to sell to a potential buyer and he wants to appease the owners who want to send a message of trying to force players to stay in small markets.

    So Stern is setting the bar so high that no team is stupid enough to give up what he wants so Stern can say “hey we are trying to trade him” all the while forcing CP3 to play for the Hornets.

    Getting nothing for CP3 is not in the best interest of the Hornets and in the end the franchise is going to get screwed.

    • yournuts - Dec 13, 2011 at 6:49 PM

      You are arguing that Davis Stern is not acting in the best interest of the Hornets. It is your opinion, Many other opinions say that in order to get CP3 someone has to give up something of comparable value now. The new owners will have a much more valuable commodity with CP3 and not 2nd or 3rd tier old players. This is where we disagree! If I was to be interested in buying the Hornets I would want the opportunity to have CP3 under control and be able to offer him more than he can get in the open market next year. The estimation is about 30 million over 5 years more. It is my opportunity as a potential buyer, not the Lakers or Clippers or David Stern’s.
      You would be giving away a premiere players and nobody would want to buy the Hornets without some assets.

  15. chadinkc30 - Dec 13, 2011 at 3:33 PM

    Mark my words, the offers for Paul are only getting worse from here on out, and any second Paul is gonna come out and say “I’m not signing anywhere until next offseason” which is what he should do, and would leave the commish, the whiny owners, and the hornets completely screwed! Then he can go to a loaded Laker team in offseason and they can get him for free!

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Top 10 NBA Player Searches
  1. D. Rose (2323)
  2. K. Irving (1896)
  3. A. Davis (1715)
  4. L. James (1570)
  5. K. Durant (1530)
  1. K. Bryant (1506)
  2. R. Rubio (1327)
  3. T. Thompson (1317)
  4. A. Aminu (1306)
  5. M. Leonard (1271)