What? CP3 instrumental in getting CButler to Clips?

Apparently, in a conversation with Olshey regarding his interest in joining the Clips, CP3 mentioned Butler as someone he would like to play with. So Olshey got him. If thats true, good job Neil. It worked out well

5 months ago DocD 28 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

So the CP trade had been in the works for some time then...

by lovinglosangeles on Jan 10, 2012 1:36 PM PST reply actions

not that it would've been so bad having butler even without cp3

the convo with cp3 probably just meant there was a little extra umph in getting butler.

butler has been fantastic so far this season. everything we have needed.

by shap on Jan 10, 2012 2:38 PM PST reply actions

unless CP3 said something like

id rather play on a team with Butler than AK or Battier or Prince..then it should be taken with a grain of salt. there might have been some persuasion, but its really all on NO

CP3 also asked for Tyson…and we know how that worked

Ralph, "Last year so often with Blake Griffin you would see these things coming, with Paul, he's so crafty, all of a sudden boom there it is."

by KidJustin on Jan 10, 2012 4:13 PM PST reply actions

He got DJ, who he said looked like a young Tyson

Close enough I spose?

by Ricekrispy10 on Jan 10, 2012 4:17 PM PST up reply actions

talent wise yes

but CP3s original demand was to play with a friend/former teammate

in which DJ is not

Ralph, "Last year so often with Blake Griffin you would see these things coming, with Paul, he's so crafty, all of a sudden boom there it is."

by KidJustin on Jan 10, 2012 4:32 PM PST up reply actions

Dumb Question

Olshey could directly discuss players moves with CP3 while he was with NO Hornets? Isn’t that tampering? GMs can only talk with players’ agents right?

"After the first six minutes I was heavily winded"-Andrew Bynum

twitter.com/kanditam2001

by oasisman on Jan 10, 2012 4:56 PM PST reply actions

In situations like this, where the plater has essentially demanded a trade

The team losing the player can grant permission to the Clippers to talk to Paul. That way Olshey can know whether or not Paul will extend.

by LJ Hann on Jan 10, 2012 5:17 PM PST up reply actions

um

So Olshey knew the NBA would veto the Lakers trade? This makes no sense. Maybe it made him more open to playing for the Clippers but he didn’t have the Clips as his first choice.

Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.

by ClipperChuck on Jan 10, 2012 5:34 PM PST via mobile reply actions

I don't think it is saying that Caron wanted to come because he wanted to play with CP3

rather that CP3 told Olshey that he wanted Caron and Olshey did it to help ensure that CP would stay

by LJ Hann on Jan 10, 2012 5:48 PM PST up reply actions

how so?

Caron signed with the Clips before the trade. In fact he signed the day the Lakers hornets reached their trade deal. I don’t see how this signing influenced the trade

Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.

by ClipperChuck on Jan 10, 2012 6:00 PM PST via mobile up reply actions

I don't know

but here is the chain of events that I think would support this

1) Chris Paul asks for trade
2) Clippers and others start to negotiate for him
3) Hornets allow Clippers to talk to Paul
4) Paul tells Clippers he would like to play with Caron
5) Clippers sign Caron
6) Hornets decide to Lakers offer
7) Stern vetoes Lakers deal
8) Hornets begin negotiating with Clippers again. Because Clippers signed Caron, CP3 is willing to opt in to his player option.

I think that all of that could be correct/

by LJ Hann on Jan 10, 2012 6:09 PM PST up reply actions

makes sense to me

"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.

by Jax on Jan 10, 2012 10:32 PM PST up reply actions

This could have happened

but is terrible.

Last time we took advice from a non-rostered player at the time we got Randy Foye (and maybe Ryan Gomes?) and before that we got Baron.

So we sign Butler and hope all the other offers go south? Seems like signing Butler helped make CP3 more comfortable about coming to LAC (I’m sure assurances of retaining DJ and Blake’s presence helped as much if not more) but clearly the Clippers had to sign Caron with the expectation that CP3 was very unlikely to be coming at the time.

Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.

by ClipperChuck on Jan 11, 2012 2:55 PM PST up reply actions

Caron was a good signing anyways

by LJ Hann on Jan 11, 2012 3:04 PM PST up reply actions

maybe

might not feel this way in a year or two.

But the real point is personnel decisions shouldn’t be influenced by players not even under contract to the team. Its the Clippers FO’s job to make these decisions.

Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.

by ClipperChuck on Jan 11, 2012 4:00 PM PST up reply actions

I think he'll be fine

he reminds me of the Mobley signing. We paid a little more, but he’s still producing satisfying results.

"Things change when something is taken away from you" -BG32

by JackduhSun on Jan 11, 2012 11:39 PM PST up reply actions

Mobley is my favorite player ever

he was overpaid at the end

by LJ Hann on Jan 12, 2012 2:05 AM PST up reply actions

He's doing better than I thought he would

he’s shooting a lot more 3s and above his career average (though nowhere near the 44% clip he shot last year) and more importantly he’s been able to play 36 mpg which is more than I expected (which is great, that means less Ryan Gomes).

Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.

by ClipperChuck on Jan 12, 2012 3:17 AM PST up reply actions

most players butler's age are overpaid

at the end of their deal. Still, it is only a 3 year deal, so it shouldn’t cripple us.

Your capslock is stuck, please buy a new keyboard

by BelgianClipper on Jan 12, 2012 6:15 AM PST up reply actions

GO AWAY CRAZY PERSON

Oh, wait, sorry – Butler is a good signing – Billups and Mo, Caron on the wing. I’m fine with that.

Olshey did what he needed to do and we got CP3. Not sure how people who are not in the know can pick that apart on a blog reasonably.

"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.

by Jax on Jan 11, 2012 5:15 PM PST up reply actions

I agree with CC above on butler

I like him now, but I don’t know how I feel about him in 2 years. We will see.

by LJ Hann on Jan 11, 2012 5:21 PM PST up reply actions

then he'll be an expiring contract

With the new lux tax coming up to speed by then, it might be very valuable.

Your capslock is stuck, please buy a new keyboard

by BelgianClipper on Jan 12, 2012 6:17 AM PST up reply actions

Stop responding to my comments

Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.

by ClipperChuck on Jan 12, 2012 3:14 AM PST up reply actions

I hate using the term vetoed

Here’s my problem with it and most people can disagree:
Most of the time when something is vetoed, it has to be a agreed upon and formally announced, not by analysis or rumors. The fact that David Stern owns the Hornets means the trade had to go through him, and if he didn’t sign off on the trade, the trade was never finalized, thus it can not be vetoed. It was just never signed off. So when people say “I hate David Stern for screwing over the Lakers and vetoing the trade” I disagree heavily because the trade was never finalized. He did not veto the trade as an NBA commissioner, he just didn’t sign off on it as one of the acting NBA owners.

"Things change when something is taken away from you" -BG32

by JackduhSun on Jan 11, 2012 3:39 AM PST up reply actions

exactly

David Stern to the Chris Paul trade to the Lakers is like DTS to the Corey Maggette trade to the Mavericks. nothing more

Ralph, "Last year so often with Blake Griffin you would see these things coming, with Paul, he's so crafty, all of a sudden boom there it is."

by KidJustin on Jan 11, 2012 8:45 AM PST up reply actions

waiting for the tell all book

I want to know what the Clippers standing offer for CP3 was when the Lakers-Hornets reached a deal. If that was the package that was reached then what took so long?

Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.

by ClipperChuck on Jan 11, 2012 2:58 PM PST up reply actions

I think it is was more about the idea behind the trade

the Lakers deal would have made NOLA a first round and out team for the next few years. I think Stern felt that the trade would have hurt market value of the team. It is more appealing to say to the new owner: “here we have a few decent young talent and some caps space to do your own thing” instead of: “here we have a team that will be OKish and after 3 years you can start the rebuild”.

Your capslock is stuck, please buy a new keyboard

by BelgianClipper on Jan 12, 2012 6:23 AM PST up reply actions

That's not what I was talking about

I’m curious to what the Clippers were offering the Hornets at the time. Did they never make a firm offer because CP3 had the Lakers higher on the list? When did CP3 agree to exercise his option? This is important to know whether the Clippers essentially backed/lucked into this deal.

Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.

by ClipperChuck on Jan 12, 2012 4:10 PM PST up reply actions