Are the LA Clippers the worst organization in professional sports?

I posted above what Art Thompson wrote, and none of it conflicts with Heisler's reporting. Here's what Randy Hill at Fox Sports has to say:

Again, this dovetails with Heisler's reported scenario.

I think you owe Mark Heisler an apology ... not to mention an adjustment of your biases.

 

Cleveland is the worst franchise in the NBA. I think this will come out unequivocably next year.

Sterling may well be the Worst Owner, but George Shinn gives him a good run for the money.

Other terrible franchises/bad owners - GS, Jazz, maybe Spurs. Toronto. No free agent will ever want to work there.

Other terrible management/bad GMS - NYK (x2!), Bullets, Nuggets, Jailblazers, Sonics, GS, Phoenix. Botch, botch, botch (repeat).

Sterling is a terrible owner, and Baylor a terrible GM, but they have competition for the booby prize.

p

 

I think you mean the Wizards, not Bullets.

 

Swopa-- good work digging up those articles. Hill does seem to indicate that a trade involving Odom was in the works, which was contrary to my beliefs. Here's the <a href=http://foxsports.lycos.com/content/view?contentId=555712>original article</a> I had read. Note this quote:

"The idiots who question this week's selections (gee, they already have Elton Brand) don't realize an NBA team can't possess too many big, talented athletes."

Which is clearly directed at Heisler. You probably don't follow the LA media much, but that guy is as big of a hater as they come. He's still bitter that Sterling has granted multiple interviews to fellow LA Times comic T.J. Simers. Heisler has posted scathing, inconsistent critiques of the Clippers. He wanted to keep Taylor and Anderson in order to establish and identity for the team, and now that they finally have (built around Odom), he wants the pieces to be traded away.

I don't see any indication of an Odom swap from Art Thompson's piece; if he did mention it explictely, I would believe it, because that guy knows the Clippers inside and out. He does say that the Clippers were reluctant to trade Odom, and that to me indicates that they would never go for an Odom+8+12 <--> Miller, since that is clearly giving up a lot.

But the main reason that I think no trade blunder occurred is that it's just illogical. As incompetent as you may want to believe that the Clipper or Cavs management is, there is no way that they hadn't worked out these scenarios ahead of time. There were only a number of possibliities (which we had all covered, as fans, in our discussion boards), and there are people devoted full-time to uncover them. It just doesn't jibe to think that this all came down to the last phone call.

And if I am wrong, well, then this was a heck of a blessing in disguise. That would have been a horrible, horrible trade. If the Clippers really want Miller, they can get him for a cheaper price during the season, when the Cavs get desperate to unload him for something. They won't get a better offer than Maggette+Dooling+Wilcox, which would be reasonable. The Clippers may reconsider though, considering that they certainly can't afford the contract situation if this were to occur.

As far as the Brand situation goes, it'll come down to Sterling's word against Lawrence's questionable reporting. Here's a quote from Sterling's latest interview, in the LA Times:

"The team could wait two years from now to match an offer for Brand if he was successful in securing one as a restricted free agent, but Sterling suggested the Clippers intend to be very aggressive and spend more than $80 million to make Brand a long-time Clipper beginning this summer.

'We would like to sign him for six years [a maximum contract],' Sterling said. 'I'm sure that's Elgin Baylor's plan to sign him, and to do it this year. Elton is a quality player and a quality person, and of all the players we have, there is a clear consensus he belongs here as a cornerstone of the franchise.'"

If he really didn't intend to sign Brand to a big contract, I don't know why he would have stated so in an interview just a few days ago. All that will do is anger the loyal fan base that has been selling out games. Again, it's just illogical.

I only posted here to defend this Clipper organization, which gets a lot of flack from fans who only casually follow their somewhat dismal tenure in this league. After many years, the team has finally built a solid core of talent comprised of players who are all, happy to be Clippers. I cannot stress to you how important this is for a franchise. This is why it would be stupid to trade the core members away for a new player, like Andre Miller, even if he does fit the need on paper. Basketball isn't always about filling all of the positions; sometimes it's about building experience and chemistry among a group of players that may not be the very best. Look at your very own situation with Houston. Barkley and Pippen were all-stars that should have won the championship when paired with an already solid Houston team, but they failed because the chemistry wasn't there. On paper, those teams were among the best in Houston's history, but in practice, the champions were otherwise. I feel that the Clippers have a wonderful core that, due to injuries last year (Dooling out the entire year, Odom out most of the year) hasn't been put to the test. Now is not the time to tweak it.

 

Wasn't the Clipper acquisition of Miles a fluke because they were going to trade him to Orlando, and Orlando was going to draft Stromile Swift?

Given Elgin's tendency to draft power forwards, he can probably muster a smile or two with this trade disaster...

The recent Clipper success isn't that much different than what they usually do. Become a stooge for some other team to trade lotto picks, get their guy, and save a buck or two in the process. Just like when Elgin traded away the rights to Antonio McDyess. They just got lucky this time.

They are changing their ways, like that trade for Elton Brand, but there's still that perception that Sterling's is keeping this franchise like some pet hobby who he shows off to his other rich buddies from time to time.

 

You know, I was actually hoping that the Sterling WOULD grease the hinges on his checkbook. It's always great to see a franchise that struggles for many years to finally get it together and start playing well, like the Mavs and the Kings.

When you think about it, though, there really isn't a motivation for Sterling to pay his players. With their low payroll, the Clippers are one of the most profitable teams in the league. Plus, he gets to play in one of the best arenas in the league for only about $6 million per year rent

 

LA drafted Miles with the intent to trade him to the Magic for Marcus Fizer. However, when Krause heard about the arrangement, he decided to screw it up (b/c he wanted Miles)... so he drafted Fizer (even though he had no need for him) and the Magic instead drafted Miller... thus the trade fell through and each team kept their own draft pick.

 

Not that I'll even concede the point, but having an owner that is good at making money is of next to no use for fans of the team. Fans want the owner to field a competitive product. What is the good of rooting for a team that is perennially lottery-bound but financially solvent? Some people just like the hype and want to shell out to wear Odom jerseys or whatever. But that doesn't have much to do with the actual sport and, as a result, of no concern to me. Maybe this racket is working out great for Sterling, but it does not endear him to me. That's what makes him the worst owner in sports, business-sense notwithstanding.

He hasn't had good franchise players to pay max money to? That's why he's cheap? This isn't an issue of the luck of the draw. Just like in poker, your hand is what you make of it. Maybe a particular offseason doesn't work out or a lotto-pick falls flat. That happens. But to consistently lose for decades; to consistently make bad choices on draft-night; to consistently be unable to find franchise players by free agency, trade or draft: that is an error of management, not luck. If the best player to blow through Clipper-land is Danny Manning, that's because Clipper management isn't doing the requisite work to find and bring those franchise players. The NBA business is too high in its stakes to sit and wait for success to fall in your lap. Other proactive teams will take what successes you do have away from you. The Clips aren't successful because they haven't tried to be.

 

Fizer was drafted because the Bulls thought he was the best player left on the board.

Floyd wanted his old player too. And no one at that predicted Miller to be ROY.

 

If Mitch Lawrence was correct, and Sterling actually told David Falk he wouldn't pay his clients the max, then yes, the Clippers organization is the worst in sports franchise history.

If that dumbass miser owner Donald Not-so-Sterling would spend some money on his players, then he'd have a contender.

So, the question is, was a mistake made on draft day? Or, with Brand possibly not long for the team, did they "fumble" the draft and "accidentally" take Wilcox; or will Wilcox soon be the team's starting power forward?

Hottoddie, you called it: the Clippers, best farm team the NBA can put together.

Outlaw, I'm with you (not that it's gonna happen): Griffin for Brand. I love Eddie, but God, if Sterling's gonna screw this up again...

It almost makes you mad, although it helps us into the playoffs. Imagine Miller (or Davis) with their current team, virtually intact.

 

Mitch Lawrence: The Clippers are up to their old tricks. At the last minute on draft night, they backed out of a deal for Baron Davis.

AP: Bob Bass, Hornets vice president for basketball operations, has said several teams have contacted the Hornets about trading for Davis since Davis said he would rather play in Los Angeles, Chicago or New York than in New Orleans next season. But Bass said he rejected all offers and did not intend to deal Davis under any circumstances.

Mitch Lawrence: Always looking to take the cheap way out, they also recently informed Elton Brand that he's not getting "max money.

LA Times: The team could wait two years from now to match an offer for Brand if he was successful in securing one as a restricted free agent, but Sterling suggested the Clippers intend to be very aggressive and spend more than $80 million to make Brand a long-time Clipper beginning this summer.

Clearly, someone's credibility is at stake here, and from the sounds of things (two independent, conflicting reports), it's Mr. Lawrence's. I reiterate, don't believe everything the media prints. Well, you guys can believe what you want. Just don't cry when the Clipper "farm team" beats up on Houston and the other "powerhouses" out West.

 

The thought that 'All-Star caliber players don't want to play for Krause' just went flying out of the window...

 

Really? Because the rest of the league was dumbfounded by the fact that their best player played the same position as Fizer, so the beat writers credited it to spite by Krause because he couldn't get Miles. Clippers whether they wanted Miles originally or not had this gift fall on their laps...

There's always the possibility of the GM trying to spin it, even if the leak beforehand is true, into a situation that's best for his team and his players morale. Just a possibility among many though...

 

Statman,

I understand where you're coming from and, if I were a Clips fan, I'd want to believe Sterling will pay out as well. But what they pulled on draft night indicates either gross incompetence or their same-ole same-ole.

I don't want the competition out West, but the Clips would be an awesome team if they landed Baron Davis or Andre Miller; but the team can't even decide who to include in the deal? Maggette + picks is a BS throwaway offer. How tough can it be to trade Miles + Wilcox for Andre Miller?

Of course now the uberagent Falk is involved, probably threatening the Clips: if you trade my client (Miles) to Cleveland, Brand (my other client) will also leave.

And now this comes back to, is Mitch Lawrence correct?

Wow...arguing in a circle!

We'll see how this shakes out, but if Sterling doesn't unbend that wallet, he will have revealed himself to be a complete clown.

 

Statman you make some good points but at the end of the day, you have to see that the Clippers are screwing fans like you. Sterling only wants to turn a profit and doesn't even mind being the Laker's JV. Don't think that Sterling nixed those trades b/c of "team chemistry", he just didn't want to pay them. Miller or Davis would want the Max after next season and he doesn't want to pay it.

How can a player who led the NBA in assists hurt the team? All you had to do was get rid of Odom (you already have Magette & Miles ready to take over) and a couple of draft picks you don't need b/c you have enough young talent. 17 & 6 Odom or 17 & 11 Miller, which would you take? He also said that he's not gonna pay the team's leader, best player, & All-Star the max. He won't pay a guy wh is potentialy the next KG the max either so it looks like those 2 will be gone in a year. Oh, and Odom pissed so he'll be out after the season. Hell, Olawinkandi dissed the orginization and got a 50k fine so he's probably out. That leaves your team in shambles. How is that the mark of a good owner or a good orginization?

 

2nd place should go to the Cubs. Plenty of money but never any champions.

 

I just can't believe it's coincidence that the Clippers have been the worst team in the NBA during Sterling's tenure. Nobody gets that unlucky. Over a 5 year span - sure. But not that length of time.

 

What I don't understand is how the Clips botched the Cleveland trade. The Cavs would have received Caron Butler and, say, Lamar Odom for Andre Miller. Can you imagine how much better both teams would be (even considering a subsequent trade to get something of value for Odom, who didn't want to go to Cleveland?)

There is really no great explanation, except Sterling balked at getting a player at whom he would have to throw the max (right away, unlike hemming and hawing over Kandi's and Brand's extensions).