Stein official: Stephenson for Hawes and Barnes

[basketballwacko2]

Plus Hawes is a PF...already have Vonleh, Zeller, Marvin...maybe we have a 2nd trade planned

Hawes is not a pf. Hawes has never been a pf. He is a not so mobile 7 footer.

They played him some at PF when Blake Griffon was out last year, but you're right he's been a center most of the time.

I'd suspect a 2nd deal or better yet an expansion of this one to send Barnes with Al Jefferson and Roberts for Joe Johnson. The Nets can cut Barnes and pay him $1 million the total savings would be about $6 million plus something like $15 million in tax.

[basketballwacko2]

Not a huge fan of Hawes contract...Barnes is straight...would rather have Crawford

of course you would rather have Crawford. This is a trash for trash deal. Both signings turned into busts and your hoping a change of scenery benefits both guys.

The only way to move Lance without giving up a pick is to take on someone else's bad contract.

It's better to have Lance's bad contract for 1 year than Hawes bad contract for 3 years.

I agree totally and Lance may bounce back with the change of address. I expect the Clippers to move Crawford now. Does lance start or come off the bench? Who is their SF? Lance could play SF he's a bit under sized but the the guy is very physical, he'd work well in a small ball lineup.

[basketballwacko2]

Is Lance really this much of a lockeroom cancer?

If he's not happy with the situation he could be. He's kinda immature.

[basketballwacko2]

Since it's so early - the deal can still be expanded right?

Char - Al, Lance
Char - Hawes, Joe
Brooklyn - Joe, Jefferson
Brooklyn - Al, Barnes
LAC - Hawes, Barnes
LAC - Lance, Jefferson

Just bc of poll obviously..

I'm not following what you're saying here, who gets what?

[basketballwacko2]

Yeah, I get the feeling Doc may know something w/ Pierce after this too.

one other wrinkle:

barnes, since he's being cut, potentially might be able to re-sign with clips since the season is still ongoing. larry coon answered someone else's question and said it has to be next year, but it might bear a closer look.

so when these finals end and the new FA season opens up, it might technically qualify as the next season, allowing barnes to just come back.

and if it is indeed the case, then that's just genius lol. and a commendation for doc being the ultimate nba sleazeball.

also definitely gonna open up an investigation by the NBA lol

https://twitter.com/H_2_C_/status/610659437158600706/photo/1

Its gonna be like the big Z thing in the next CBA I assume.

Won't he have the 12 month trade restriction no resigning.

[NBADraft2003]

Thats what I thought, but I saw the tweets, and the weird timing may allow it. It says either one year or one season, whichever is sooner I believe, and the season ends in July.

I'm confused lol

This was the question, but I'm confused b/c some seem to say yes and some no...
[tweet]https://twitter.com/LarryCoon/status/610661376361562112[/tweet]

So if he's waived before FA begins, then there's a real possibility of him being eligible of returning to LAC? Like it for LAC, hope Matt gets to go back. They need another backup big too.

[HartfordWhalers]

I'm confused lol

This was the question, but I'm confused b/c some seem to say yes and some no...
[tweet]https://twitter.com/LarryCoon/status/610661376361562112[/tweet]

So if he's waived before FA begins, then there's a real possibility of him being eligible of returning to LAC? Like it for LAC, hope Matt gets to go back. They need another backup big too.

No, his contract goes till June 30th 2016, so the July 1st following the end of the contract is July 1st 2017, not 2016.

[Scoot McGroot]

I'm confused lol

This was the question, but I'm confused b/c some seem to say yes and some no...
[tweet]https://twitter.com/LarryCoon/status/610661376361562112[/tweet]

So if he's waived before FA begins, then there's a real possibility of him being eligible of returning to LAC? Like it for LAC, hope Matt gets to go back. They need another backup big too.

Well, possibly, but unlikely. As Larry Coon stated, it's one season from when the original contract "ends". So, since it's a partial guarantee, and not an option, that contract will "run" through next season, and likely won't be allowed to return to the Clippers until the season after that. I would imagine 2016-17.

Now, if it was a team option instead, where the contract "ends" this season (June 30)? Maybe that'd be different.

[HartfordWhalers]

This was the question, but I'm confused b/c some seem to say yes and some no...
[tweet]https://twitter.com/LarryCoon/status/610661376361562112[/tweet]

So if he's waived before FA begins, then there's a real possibility of him being eligible of returning to LAC? Like it for LAC, hope Matt gets to go back. They need another backup big too.

Well, possibly, but unlikely. As Larry Coon stated, it's one season from when the original contract "ends". So, since it's a partial guarantee, and not an option, that contract will "run" through next season, and likely won't be allowed to return to the Clippers until the season after that. I would imagine 2016-17.

Now, if it was a team option instead, where the contract "ends" this season (June 30)? Maybe that'd be different.

If it were a team option, then he could not be traded unless it had already been exercised. The loophole is fully closed.

[TheNewEra]

So what 20 something year old athletic SF can the Clippers get for Jamal Crawford (partially guarneteed) and C.J. Wilcox?

Dudley's 29

Athletic though and that is for sure a burned bridge with Doc. Need a guy who can get to the rim and explode if his shot isn't falling.

[Scoot McGroot]

So if he's waived before FA begins, then there's a real possibility of him being eligible of returning to LAC? Like it for LAC, hope Matt gets to go back. They need another backup big too.

Well, possibly, but unlikely. As Larry Coon stated, it's one season from when the original contract "ends". So, since it's a partial guarantee, and not an option, that contract will "run" through next season, and likely won't be allowed to return to the Clippers until the season after that. I would imagine 2016-17.

Now, if it was a team option instead, where the contract "ends" this season (June 30)? Maybe that'd be different.

If it were a team option, then he could not be traded unless it had already been exercised. The loophole is fully closed.

Haha...right! There we go!

[bondom34]

I'm bumping this because I think in hindsight it was equally bad for LA. Though hindsight is 20/20.

[Lindecision]

I'm bumping this because I think in hindsight it was equally bad for LA. Though hindsight is 20/20.

I disagree. I'm not forgetting that Doc's terrible GM-ing is what really screwed this team's cap situation in the first place, though that being said we weren't winning a title as constituted anyway so the Lance trade was a risk worth taking. Hawes has 3 years remaining on his deal whereas Lance only has 1 if we decline his TO. That alone was worth it as we now have max cap space in 2016. And Matt Barnes is like 35 years old. Love him to bits but y'know.

[bondom34]

I'm bumping this because I think in hindsight it was equally bad for LA. Though hindsight is 20/20.

I disagree. I'm not forgetting that Doc's terrible GM-ing is what screwed us in the first place, though that being said we weren't winning a title as constituted anyway so the Lance trade was a risk worth taking. Hawes has 3 years remaining on his deal whereas Lance only has 1 if we decline his TO. That alone was worth it as we now have max cap space in 2016. And Matt Barnes is like 35 years old. Love him to bits but y'know.

Good point, and honestly whoever they end up w/ may be better than Hawes anyway.

[Lindecision]

I'm bumping this because I think in hindsight it was equally bad for LA. Though hindsight is 20/20.

I disagree. I'm not forgetting that Doc's terrible GM-ing is what screwed us in the first place, though that being said we weren't winning a title as constituted anyway so the Lance trade was a risk worth taking. Hawes has 3 years remaining on his deal whereas Lance only has 1 if we decline his TO. That alone was worth it as we now have max cap space in 2016. And Matt Barnes is like 35 years old. Love him to bits but y'know.

Good point, and honestly whoever they end up w/ may be better than Hawes anyway.

He was giving us goose eggs. Granted so was Lance with the Hornets but the contracts involved made it a no brainer win for us. I don't know if you checked out the Hornets board when the trade happened, but yeh. Now we even have enough cap space to absorb Melo's post trade kicker salary of $28,243,287 (!!!) and still have $5.5M left.

[bondom34]

I disagree. I'm not forgetting that Doc's terrible GM-ing is what screwed us in the first place, though that being said we weren't winning a title as constituted anyway so the Lance trade was a risk worth taking. Hawes has 3 years remaining on his deal whereas Lance only has 1 if we decline his TO. That alone was worth it as we now have max cap space in 2016. And Matt Barnes is like 35 years old. Love him to bits but y'know.

Good point, and honestly whoever they end up w/ may be better than Hawes anyway.

He was giving us goose eggs. Granted so was Lance with the Hornets but the contracts involved made it a no brainer win for us. I don't know if you checked out the Hornets board when the trade happened, but yeh. Now we even have enough cap space to absorb Melo's post trade kicker salary of $28,243,287 (!!!) and still have $5.5M left.

That would be a really interesting and great trade next offseason for you guys.

[basketballwacko2]

Who is gonna play center for the clippers?

[nickhx2]

if doc decides to revamp his system then blake.

if not then probably javale. maybe sanders if he thinks it might be fun to play basketball again.