PDA

View Full Version : Elton to the Sixers?



Turk
07-08-2008, 05:08 PM
ESPN has an article up saying the Sixers are going to try to make a run to sign Elton and pry him away from the Clips. If it happens, huge add for Philthy; bad news for Baron Davis...

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3477424

mr. synellinden
07-08-2008, 05:27 PM
Perhaps Elton Brand, aspiring movie producer, would want to keep in the good graces of Baron Davis, aspiring film critic.

Clipsfan
07-08-2008, 07:16 PM
There has been some talk that the Davis deal was struck under the table with Brand also agreeing to come back. If at all true, all these other negotiations could just be to cover up the tracks. Either way, odds are he'll stay a Clipper (at least I hope so!)

pfrduke
07-08-2008, 07:56 PM
There has been some talk that the Davis deal was struck under the table with Brand also agreeing to come back. If at all true, all these other negotiations could just be to cover up the tracks. Either way, odds are he'll stay a Clipper (at least I hope so!)

And even if the Clips get a Joe Smith-sized penalty for this, it's not clear whether taking first round picks away from the Clippers would be any worse than a normal draft - ba-zing!

arnie
07-08-2008, 09:36 PM
ESPN just announced that Brand has verbally agreed to an $85 Million contract with the Sixers. And Magette to the Warriors.

dukemsu
07-08-2008, 09:54 PM
ESPN just announced that Brand has verbally agreed to an $85 Million contract with the Sixers. And Magette to the Warriors.

Yep, Elton to Philly has been reported.

It will be interesting to see how this gets spun in the press. I can see it being written by some (Doyel, etc) that another Dukie goes back on his word (after the Boozer mess). At the same time, Elton has built up quite a bit of cred with the media over the years. Save for the flap with the email when he declared for the draft, I can't remember a single unfavorable word being written about Elton. Boozer, rightly or wrongly, seems to be portrayed as a bit more aloof.

IMO, Elton is a pro who can make his own calls, but he may catch some flak for this. I'm sure he knew that and weighed it along with all the other factors while making his decision.

Best of luck to Elton in Philly.

dukemsu

yancem
07-08-2008, 10:19 PM
Yep, Elton to Philly has been reported.

It will be interesting to see how this gets spun in the press. I can see it being written by some (Doyel, etc) that another Dukie goes back on his word (after the Boozer mess). At the same time, Elton has built up quite a bit of cred with the media over the years. Save for the flap with the email when he declared for the draft, I can't remember a single unfavorable word being written about Elton. Boozer, rightly or wrongly, seems to be portrayed as a bit more aloof.

IMO, Elton is a pro who can make his own calls, but he may catch some flak for this. I'm sure he knew that and weighed it along with all the other factors while making his decision.

Best of luck to Elton in Philly.

dukemsu

Everyone seems to be making the assumption that Baron Davis wouldn't have agreed to sign with the Clippers if Brand wasn't already as good as signed. Has anyone read anything about how why Davis ended up a Clipper that inferred that he had discussed things with Brand? I haven't. Everything I've read made it sound that Davis wanted to be in LA. I haven't seen any comments by him that even mention Brand.

Now Brand may have made Davis a promise, but his public comments have always been that he would like to stay in LA but was going to see what would be the best situation for himself. Making a promise and then going back on it doesn't sound like something Brand would do. If there ends up being any sour grapes then that's a shame. Philly offered almost 50% more money than the Clippers and unlike the Boozer situation, which Cleveland let him out of his contract in a "good faith" gesture and in hopes of signing him for less than market value, Brand opted out of his contract which should have clued people in that resigning him wasn't a given.

Uncle Drew
07-08-2008, 10:58 PM
Okay I don't follow the NBA as much as I do college. Would someone please explain in their opinion if this is a good move for Elton and Philly? I mean I can see it being good for the 76ers picking up a great player. But how does he fit in on the team they have right now? If he returns to pre-injury form I would hope he could contend for an Eastern All-Star spot.

geraldsneighbor
07-09-2008, 12:08 AM
EB coming to Philly (my place of residence) is like Christmas morning to me. Elton's days at Duke were great and I am really excited to get to watch him every night in a Sixer uniform. I am dieing for a championship and maybe just maybe we are starting to put something together in Phila.

yancem
07-09-2008, 12:19 AM
Okay I don't follow the NBA as much as I do college. Would someone please explain in their opinion if this is a good move for Elton and Philly? I mean I can see it being good for the 76ers picking up a great player. But how does he fit in on the team they have right now? If he returns to pre-injury form I would hope he could contend for an Eastern All-Star spot.

Its a little difficult to tell how smart of a move this is for Brand. If he had stayed with the Clippers he could have run with Baron Davis and been part of a solid frontcourt of Chris Kaman and Al Thorton. The Clippers also drafted Eric Gordon who could become a real stud and when he get used to the nba would round out a solid starting 5. The down side of LA is well they're the Clippers and they are in the tougher western conference. Also, Davis while dropping a solid number of dimes a game also shoots a lot. Gordon is also likely going to shoot frequently. This might not have let Brand get the same number of touches that he is used to getting. Plus with the departure of Maggette, he would no longer have one of his best friends on the team.

In going to Philly, he will still be part of a solid front court featuring Samuel Dalembert and Andre Iguodola. Andre Miller, while not as good as Davis is a solid point guard that passes the ball and runs the offense well. Philly has generally been a better franchise (although not top tier recently) and by playing in the weaker eastern conference he has a better shot at the playoffs and the all-star team.

I guess, in a way, I am disappointed because it would have been cool for Brand to carry the Clippers to relevance but in the end I have always kind of liked the 76's (big Dr. J fan) and think that in the long run he has a better chance at success.

Uncle Drew
07-09-2008, 12:43 AM
Its a little difficult to tell how smart of a move this is for Brand. If he had stayed with the Clippers he could have run with Baron Davis and been part of a solid frontcourt of Chris Kaman and Al Thorton. The Clippers also drafted Eric Gordon who could become a real stud and when he get used to the nba would round out a solid starting 5. The down side of LA is well they're the Clippers and they are in the tougher western conference. Also, Davis while dropping a solid number of dimes a game also shoots a lot. Gordon is also likely going to shoot frequently. This might not have let Brand get the same number of touches that he is used to getting. Plus with the departure of Maggette, he would no longer have one of his best friends on the team.

In going to Philly, he will still be part of a solid front court featuring Samuel Dalembert and Andre Iguodola. Andre Miller, while not as good as Davis is a solid point guard that passes the ball and runs the offense well. Philly has generally been a better franchise (although not top tier recently) and by playing in the weaker eastern conference he has a better shot at the playoffs and the all-star team.

I guess, in a way, I am disappointed because it would have been cool for Brand to carry the Clippers to relevance but in the end I have always kind of liked the 76's (big Dr. J fan) and think that in the long run he has a better chance at success.

I must say with all the speculation around draft time where various players could end up, the last few weeks have played out very weird for lack of a better term.

I was thinking Davis to the Clippers was a move to make them better when they kept Brand or perhaps Maggette. Now that both players are gone I can't see them being much better than last season but I could be wrong. And in bringing in Davis it looks like Clipper management has doubts about Livingston ever coming back near his potential.

Then with Corey I'd heard rumours about him going to a contender in a backup role. I was looking forward to seeing which team and hoping another Duke guy might earn an NBA ring. But his move to the bay area seems like a lateral move for money. If that's the case so be it, I'm sure he'll be living in a nicer retirement home than me either way.

As far as Brand goes some were talking about a return to the Bulls after next season (or Boozer) and honestly other than cash the main benefit to joining the 76ers is an easier night in the weaker Eastern Conference on average. But my hope is he is a building block in the rebuilding process and Philly can get some more tallent around him. This free agency thing seems even harder to predict than recruiting!

blazindw
07-09-2008, 01:22 AM
Everyone seems to be making the assumption that Baron Davis wouldn't have agreed to sign with the Clippers if Brand wasn't already as good as signed. Has anyone read anything about how why Davis ended up a Clipper that inferred that he had discussed things with Brand? I haven't. Everything I've read made it sound that Davis wanted to be in LA. I haven't seen any comments by him that even mention Brand.

Now Brand may have made Davis a promise, but his public comments have always been that he would like to stay in LA but was going to see what would be the best situation for himself. Making a promise and then going back on it doesn't sound like something Brand would do. If there ends up being any sour grapes then that's a shame. Philly offered almost 50% more money than the Clippers and unlike the Boozer situation, which Cleveland let him out of his contract in a "good faith" gesture and in hopes of signing him for less than market value, Brand opted out of his contract which should have clued people in that resigning him wasn't a given.

I concur. I have heard nothing but complaints from my friends about another Duke player that supposedly has turned back on a promise (bringing up the Boozer situation again), but there is absolutely nothing that states that B-Diddy wouldn't go to the Clips unless Brand re-signed. Like you said, B-Diddy wanted to be in LA, where he's from. The Clips offered him a deal he couldn't pass up to return home. Brand said he would be happy to stay in LA but had to see what's out there. Philly gave him $85 million, while LA offered $75 million, I believe. Golden State reportedly offered $90 million. He went with Philly, and they seem like they will have a really good team with a nice mix of young talent and seasoned veterans like Brand. I think their starting lineup consists of 5 players who all averaged over 14 points per game last year. In the East, that could cause the Sixers to do some damage next year.

weezie
07-09-2008, 09:01 AM
B-Diddy...good one. :)
But I would have liked him as Piston instead.
Good for Brand to be coming home. Commentators were saying the Clipperdome is haunted.

duke74
07-09-2008, 09:31 AM
B-Diddy...good one. :)
But I would have liked him as Piston instead.
Good for Brand to be coming home. Commentators were saying the Clipperdome is haunted. (emphasis added)

Philly is not home. New York (Peekskill) is. Wish he were a Knick!

Carlos
07-09-2008, 09:50 AM
My memory may be a bit clouded on this but I'm pretty sure that when Coach K's mother died it was right in the middle of one of those peak recruiting periods where coaches could actively contact players. Of course, everyone here knows how much Emily Krzyzewski meant to Coach K so it should come as no surprise that he took some some time away from recruiting to deal with the situation. He had his assistants contact each of the guys that Duke was pursuing and only one of the recruits complained that he wasn't getting attention from Coach K.... that would be Baron Davis.

Baron went off and signed with UCLA for the chance to play for legendary Jim Harrick and a hot deal on a used Blazer. I've always viewed him as a putz since then so if he feels that he's been duped here I'm really pressed to find a way to measure my apathy for him.

As for the Clips and Davis feeling that Brand went back on his word I guess the bigger question here is if it was so important to those parties to have Elton in place in order to make the move for Davis then why didn't they just wait to sign Davis until after they had wrapped up a deal with Elton? Why is it incumbent on Elton to sign for considerably less than his market value? If the Clips had offered him $5.50 an hour to play for them would he still be a bad guy for taking a different offer?

duke74
07-09-2008, 10:13 AM
As for the Clips and Davis feeling that Brand went back on his word I guess the bigger question here is if it was so important to those parties to have Elton in place in order to make the move for Davis then why didn't they just wait to sign Davis until after they had wrapped up a deal with Elton? Why is it incumbent on Elton to sign for considerably less than his market value? If the Clips had offered him $5.50 an hour to play for them would he still be a bad guy for taking a different offer?(emphasis added)

Carlos,

You know way more about this than I do, but I think that no one was actually "signed' at that time based on league rules. It is more of a verbal, to be memorialized when signings are permitted (yesterday I believe). There actually were discussions on ESPN last night as to whether Baron could "back out" and sign with another team (assuming a "deal" had fallen through with EB). The consensus was that he wouldn't based on the comp he got from the Clips vs that t be offered by any other team.

bluedev_92
07-09-2008, 10:23 AM
Elton,

WELCOME to Philly! Couldn't have a better addition & I can't wait to cheer you on.

Edouble
07-09-2008, 10:38 AM
My memory may be a bit clouded on this but I'm pretty sure that when Coach K's mother died it was right in the middle of one of those peak recruiting periods where coaches could actively contact players. Of course, everyone here knows how much Emily Krzyzewski meant to Coach K so it should come as no surprise that he took some some time away from recruiting to deal with the situation. He had his assistants contact each of the guys that Duke was pursuing and only one of the recruits complained that he wasn't getting attention from Coach K.... that would be Baron Davis.

No, your memory is not clouded. That's the way it happened. The staff soured a bit on him after this and really never pursued him with the same zeal that they had begun his recruitment with.

Cormac
07-09-2008, 10:54 AM
For what its worth, Mike and Mike and Cowherd have all been very supportive of Brand's decision to get out of the "haunted" franchise. I agree with them. He gave them 7 years (very good years actually), which is basically a career in professional sports and the best they ever finished? SIXTH in the West. Brand averaged finishing 28 games out of the playoffs. OUCH. Cowherd pointed out that he's terrible at the same thing all guys are: Exits, but that he did the right thing in terms of trying to win. I guess I just wanted to point out that not all of the national attention is negative towards Brand right now. Anyway, good for him. He cashed in and moved to a better team in a weaker conference.

Schwarz
07-09-2008, 11:01 AM
As a Sixers fan, this is sensational news! I am going to have to get the NBA League pass this season. The Sixers biggest need was offense in general and post offense in particular. Essentially he replaces Reggie Evans who averaged 5.2 points and 7.5 rebounds per game. (No, I didn't get those reversed.)

C Samuel Dalembert 10.5ppg, 10.4 rpg, 2.3bpg
PF Elton Brand 20ppg, 10rpg
SF Thad Young 8.2ppg
SG Andre Iguodala 19.9ppg, 4.8apg
PG Andre Miller 17.0ppg, 6.9apg

Bench
Louis Williams 11.5ppg, 3.2apg
Willie Green 12.4ppg, 2.0apg
Marreese Speights
Jason Smith 4.5ppg, 3.0rpg
Anyone but Kevin Oliie

Not too shabby. They will still need to win with defense, and Brand will have to do his part there. Outside shooting is still a glaring weakness, with Louis Williams being the only reliable long range shooter. But still, I am actually optimistic about the Sixers for the first time in many years.

BD80
07-09-2008, 12:10 PM
it was so important to those parties to have Elton in place in order to make the move for Davis then why didn't they just wait to sign Davis until after they had wrapped up a deal with Elton?

By opting out of his contract, Elton freed up money for the Clips under the cap to sign a free agent (Baron). Once Baron was signed under the cap (today I believe), the Clips could go over the cap as far as they want to resign their own free agent (Elton) per the Larry Bird rule.

What I haven't heard is anyone from the Clippers organization saying they were willing to pay Elton the same $ he got from Philly. They were going to give him a raise, but I think they were still a few million a year below the Sixers.

Elton will feast in the east. I doubt the Celtics will return with the same desire at their collective age. The rest of the east has relatively young talent at the "4" or "5" that Elton will school for at least a year or two. Elton v Bosh and KG and Howard and Smith and Jamison and Beasley will be fun to watch. Maybe Elton will even get Rasheed to wake up for a game or two.

Sixers will vie for home court in the first round of the playoffs, and with the Raptors, will make the Celtics work for the division.

TampaDuke
07-09-2008, 01:34 PM
As for the Clips and Davis feeling that Brand went back on his word I guess the bigger question here is if it was so important to those parties to have Elton in place in order to make the move for Davis then why didn't they just wait to sign Davis until after they had wrapped up a deal with Elton?

Given that he just did this exact thing to Golden State, I doubt Davis has grounds to feel all too bad.

Clipsfan
07-09-2008, 02:25 PM
By opting out of his contract, Elton freed up money for the Clips under the cap to sign a free agent (Baron). Once Baron was signed under the cap (today I believe), the Clips could go over the cap as far as they want to resign their own free agent (Elton) per the Larry Bird rule.

What I haven't heard is anyone from the Clippers organization saying they were willing to pay Elton the same $ he got from Philly. They were going to give him a raise, but I think they were still a few million a year below the Sixers.

Elton will feast in the east. I doubt the Celtics will return with the same desire at their collective age. The rest of the east has relatively young talent at the "4" or "5" that Elton will school for at least a year or two. Elton v Bosh and KG and Howard and Smith and Jamison and Beasley will be fun to watch. Maybe Elton will even get Rasheed to wake up for a game or two.

Sixers will vie for home court in the first round of the playoffs, and with the Raptors, will make the Celtics work for the division.

What I've read is that the Clips were in the same ballpark as Philly ($81 mil vs 82 mil for 5 years) while Golden State went as high as $90MM. It wasn't about the money.

Kfanarmy
07-09-2008, 05:08 PM
This is not an evaluation of right and wrong, but an observation....

NBA fans should not be at all surprised when a professional player who left college early to join the NBA, doesn't chose loyalty to team, ownership and fans over opportunities for glory or $ elsewhere.

skitelz
07-09-2008, 09:21 PM
dude, that is not cool...sorry, but im pretty sure that elton chose loyalty to FAMILY over team, ownership and fans. he didnt just go to the nba. he went to the nba after a poy year to help care for his family and be a man, with k's blessing.

ice-9
07-09-2008, 10:41 PM
Brand has a much better chance of reaching the championship with the 76ers than with the Clippers -- that's probably the major driving factor for Brand's decision to leave the Clippers. It ain't about the money...

BD80
07-10-2008, 09:39 AM
What I've read is that the Clips were in the same ballpark as Philly ($81 mil vs 82 mil for 5 years) while Golden State went as high as $90MM. It wasn't about the money.

The Clippers got Falked. From one of the stories linked on the front page:


Falk said that he found out, belatedly, that the Clippers had been negotiating with Brand without his agent. "I didn't know it then, I know it now," Falk said. "I know it after the fact. It's probably the reason that the deal fell apart." ...

Said Dunleavy: "I don't know what poisoned Elton against us. But obviously something did. ...

Late last week, after the Warriors offered Brand $90 million, the Clippers upped their offer to $75 million. Then, Tuesday, the 76ers made a trade to clear some cap space for Brand. That was when the Clippers offered him an $81-million deal for five years, a deal, Falk said, that was only extended after the organization knew they had accepted Philadelphia's offer.

Brand reiterated that he felt the Clippers' first offer was a take-it-or-leave it demand: ..."

Dunleavy said the Clippers never got the proper chance, because the communication lines had been cut.

http://www.latimes.com/sports/basketball/nba/clippers/la-sp-clippers10-2008jul10,0,2055853.story

Once Falk got involved things went to chapel hill for the Clippers.

SoCalDukeFan
07-10-2008, 12:28 PM
1. Evidently he led the Clippers to believe that he would resign with them, yet he probably really wanted to play elsewhere.

2. He never should have negotiated without his agent.

He was regarded as a good guy in Los Angeles. Not any more.

SoCal

skitelz
07-10-2008, 12:34 PM
i might be in the minority here but i totally side with elton.

yes, elton did tell them he would resign with them less money, but that does not give the clippers the right to low-ball offer him. they originally told him that the 70 mil deal was take it or leave it and sterling told him that he didnt care what elton decided. betcha if the clips had been willing to negotiate to something closer to the 90 mil, elton would still be a clipper. but no, they held fast to a stupid deal that anyone with brains should have known elton could not go for. obviously it is not all about money either b/c elton still went to the phillies who also offered significantly less than the warriors (82 mil). he went to the phillies because the phillies showed that they would do whatever it takes (like giving up their first round pick next year and rodney carney) to get rid of cap space.

Classof06
07-10-2008, 01:54 PM
I'm on Elton's side for sure, moreso after what I read today.

The Clips (or rather Donald Sterling) made 2 mistakes:

1) Giving Brand a "take it or leave it" deal - According to the AP article, the Clips gave a "take it or leave it deal" to Brand on 6/30 which was $20 million less than Philly's offer. This is a very risky proposition. You can say Brand had an implicit agreement to take less money so they could sign Baron Davis but all that looks like to me is a convenient excuse for Sterling, hiding his attempt to low-ball Brand. Elton said he never made that kind of agreement and given his track record vs. the laundry list of front office blunders by Donald Sterling, I'll believe Brand.

2) Sterling telling Brand he'd be happy no matter what Brand decided to do - Where do I start with this one? If this is true, then it should be no surprise Brand left. How do you go into business negotiations for someone you want only to tell the other party you don't care what happens? Either Sterling is stupid or he honestly didn't care if Brand resigned, take your pick. That couldn't have made Brand feel very wanted and if he was leaning towards Philly, this sealed the deal.

Sterling illustrated once again why the Clippers are.....well, the Clippers.

Kfanarmy
07-10-2008, 02:23 PM
I appreciate the point of view that anything he wants to do, that is legal is ok and have no problem with that...as I said I wasn't making a judgement as to right and wrong. I have no problem with his actions; I simply believe that you can predict the potential of a player behaving this way based on the decisions they've made in the past--

1. your argument that
elton chose loyalty to FAMILY over team, ownership and fans. he didnt just go to the nba. he went to the nba after a poy year to help care for his family and be a man, with k's blessing is odd...because the loyalty your speaking of to family was to get $...not to go home and represent in the family business, not to go personally take care of a sick family member, not to do something that dad/mom wanted him to different than what he wanted...it is about $ and the ability that brings to help himself and his family, assuming that has happened. (It is hard to believe the NBA helped him in anyway "be a man." )


that whole argument is simply ludicrous given that you later imply that his sole reason for changing NBA teams was the difference in money...unless you think he needed the extra $15 million in order to feel he had enough to spend some on his family?
betcha if the clips had been willing to negotiate to something closer to the 90 mil, elton would still be a clipper

if you feel he can do whatever he wants and that is ok with you fine...but don't proffer reasons on his behalf that indicate he is/has moved on only for family's sake...

MarineTwinsDad
07-10-2008, 03:26 PM
Living in close proximity to Philadelphia, I've had to read too much in the sports pages about the sad state of their football, baseball, and basketball teams. I really hoped that Shav Randolph was going to be able to play for the 76ers, as it would be great to have a Duke tie-in.

But the basketball team is getting better. They got a quality coach in Mo Cheeks, who alwayseems to support his players when they need it. His coaching through the playoffs was great, and they lasted a lot longer than most would have given them credit. Now Brand is coming, and will be playing with a good point guard, a couple of athletic wings, and a center who's still learning the game. The team is no longer the me-first Iverson model. Brand is a quality gentleman, and will provide leadership as well as someone to build on.

Comments posted here trying to tear down his character are "simply ludicrous" for the simple fact that no one in the press, or even on his former team, or anyone else who ever knew him, would ever say he was like that. It's all very easy to hide behind an internet posting to cut someone down, but, really, before someone posts a defaming post here, shouldn't they have some sort of proof? What do they really know about Brand? Have they lived next door to him, or talked about these things with him? I have nothing but respect for him because of the life that he has lived, and because of what anyone who knew him says about him. No, I don't know him, and have never had a conversation with him. But I have read a bit about him, and wish him every success and happiness as it seems to be that he is deserving of nothing but the best. And it's going to be great to read how he will be improving the Philadelphia basketball team.

hq2
07-10-2008, 03:55 PM
Well, I'm happy for Elton. Philly is getting better; they improved a lot in the second half of last year, and Elton should make them a serious Atlantic division contender (does that mean anything?). I'm looking forward to a renewed Boston-Philly rivalry.

Edouble
07-10-2008, 04:32 PM
Elton said he never made that kind of agreement and given his track record vs. the laundry list of front office blunders by Donald Sterling, I'll believe Brand.


Elton also said that he didn't write that email, so you never know if he's telling the truth.

Oh, and Kfanarmy, I agree with your argument... well put, sir.

murpho
07-10-2008, 04:41 PM
http://www.latimes.com/sports/printedition/la-sp-plaschke10-2008jul10,0,6630786.column
LA press take

Edouble
07-10-2008, 04:51 PM
http://www.latimes.com/sports/printedition/la-sp-plaschke10-2008jul10,0,6630786.column
LA press take

Hmmm, the author seems somewhat displeased.

Did the Clippers really offer $81 million?

I don't think Elton is obligated to tell the Clippers that he does or does not want to stay, the biggest reason being that he needs to retain some bargaining leverage in free agency. If other teams think that he has some desire to stay with the Clippers, they'll have to offer a little more to get him to leave. If they think he's trying to skip town at any cost, then of course they won't put as much bread on the table.

But, if Elton was recruiting Davis to come to L.A. (which I don't think he was, it seemed pretty clear that Baron Davis wanted to come home), or telling Dunleavy that he would be back as a Clipper, it seems that Elton was a bit dishonest, especially if he said that he would be back, and he was offered $81 million.

sagegrouse
07-10-2008, 05:12 PM
Well, I'm happy for Elton. Philly is getting better; they improved a lot in the second half of last year, and Elton should make them a serious Atlantic division contender (does that mean anything?). I'm looking forward to a renewed Boston-Philly rivalry.

I'm happy for me. Brand was buried with the Clips, was never part of nationally televised games, and visited the East coast markets only once a year.

This will be much better for most of his fans.

sagegrouse

Newton_14
07-10-2008, 08:51 PM
Elton was on Mike and Mike in the Morning today. He spelled it out pretty clearly...

- He opted out of his contract to allow them to sign Davis, and his intention was to resign with the Clippers. He had no interest in testing the market.

-Once they signed Davis and started working on Elton's new contract, Elton stated the money they offered was fine with him. He had no issues with the 1st offer. HOWEVER, he asked for other, non-monetary items in the contract and the Clippers basically said "No Chance". They would not budge and Elton and Falk were not at all pleased with the Clippers stance

-Falk made a couple of calls, and in very short time had offers on the table from the Sixers and Warriors..

-They gave the Clips one last shot and the Clips increased the money but still would not agree to the other things Elton was asking for, so he then took the Philly offer.

It was not about money.. take it for what it's worth, but that is what Elton stated in his own words this morning. He told the Mikes he truly wanted to remain a Clipper but felt slighted at their stance and walked..

I have no issue with the move at all.. Elton is a stand up guy and I for one will always like him and pull for him no matter what team he is on..

Edouble
07-11-2008, 12:50 PM
HOWEVER, he asked for other, non-monetary items in the contract and the Clippers basically said "No Chance".

What exactly are non-monetary items? Can anyone tell me what sort of non-monetary items could be so important in a contract that Elton would want to go elsewhere? I'm not asking for blind speculation, but I'm really not sure what non-monetary items are generally included in NBA contracts.

jgehtland
07-11-2008, 01:51 PM
I saw it reported elsewhere that one thing Brand could get from the Clippers was a no-trade clause. The only other play in the league who has one is Kobe. There are all kinds of bars you have to meet in order for the league to allow it. I can't remember what they all are, but Brand would have been eligible with the Clips.

Of all the non-monetary things I can think of, its the only one that seems big enough *by itself* to warrant the argument.

Schwarz
07-11-2008, 01:55 PM
What exactly are non-monetary items? Can anyone tell me what sort of non-monetary items could be so important in a contract that Elton would want to go elsewhere? I'm not asking for blind speculation, but I'm really not sure what non-monetary items are generally included in NBA contracts.

Elton was eligible for a no trade clause from the Clippers. No other team was allowed to offer him one.

I have to think that non-monetary things like luxury boxes would still have to count against the salary cap.

Clipsfan
07-11-2008, 03:07 PM
I saw it reported elsewhere that one thing Brand could get from the Clippers was a no-trade clause. The only other play in the league who has one is Kobe. There are all kinds of bars you have to meet in order for the league to allow it. I can't remember what they all are, but Brand would have been eligible with the Clips.

Of all the non-monetary things I can think of, its the only one that seems big enough *by itself* to warrant the argument.

The no-trade clause is probably the right answer and I can understand why he would be upset if he was willing to stay a Clipper for less money (I believe it when he says that they didn't increase their offer until after there was already an agreement with Philly, i.e. too late) yet they weren't willing to commit to him by saying that they wouldn't trade him. They wanted to underpay him and then be able to ship him out if they so desired.

There are multiple barriers to being able to sign a no-trade clause and Elton is one of the few players who would qualify. You need to be a free agent (most top players are resigned while still under contract). You need to have been in the league for 8 years. You need to have been on the same team for 6 or so years. Almost no players who would be in discussions for a no-trade clause match those criteria...it only happens when a top player who has been a franchise player opts out like Kobe did a couple years ago and Brand did this summer.

tommy
07-12-2008, 07:18 PM
The no-trade clause is probably the right answer and I can understand why he would be upset if he was willing to stay a Clipper for less money (I believe it when he says that they didn't increase their offer until after there was already an agreement with Philly, i.e. too late) yet they weren't willing to commit to him by saying that they wouldn't trade him. They wanted to underpay him and then be able to ship him out if they so desired.

There are multiple barriers to being able to sign a no-trade clause and Elton is one of the few players who would qualify. You need to be a free agent (most top players are resigned while still under contract). You need to have been in the league for 8 years. You need to have been on the same team for 6 or so years. Almost no players who would be in discussions for a no-trade clause match those criteria...it only happens when a top player who has been a franchise player opts out like Kobe did a couple years ago and Brand did this summer.

It wasn't a "no-trade" per se, but rather something called an Early Termination Option, or ETO. This is the extra that Elton asked Dunleavy for via text message from D.C. at 8 or 9 PM on whatever the night was. By 8 AM the next morning, Dunleavy texted him back and said, "Yes. You got it."

He never heard back from Elton again, never receiving any returns from subsequent texts, cell calls, or anything.

Dunleavy says he retained the texts. Now why would he lie about that -- either he has the hard evidence or he doesn't, and I don't know why he would claim to have it if he won't produce it. Then he'd look like a liar and an idiot.

So this thing comes down to the fact that Elton got exactly what he wanted, but he was negotiating without his agent. When Falk found out about it, he went ballistic, as he regularly does, and convinced Elton that he shouldn't be part of an organization that goes around the back of its players' agents.

Elton has always been one of my favorites. But he didn't have the courage to say to Falk, "Sorry, Dave, I shouldn't have done that, but I've given them my word. I asked for something as being the last thing they needed to do for me to get me to sign there, and Dunleavy got it for me overnight. It's plenty of money. This is my life, and my word means a lot to me."

Then Elton compounded the problem by not being truthful about it. Even if none of this had gone down and he just wanted out of LA, just say that. Say you've given LA 7 prime years and wanted a chance to play closer to home, in the East, where your team will be closer to the top of the heap and you'll be a perennial all-star. No one would've begrudged him that, not with the reputation he had.

I'm sorry to say it, but Elton has tarnished his rep in all of this. Yes, it's Falk's fault too for putting his own selfish interests in not being marginalized over the interests of his client as he may have seen them, but Elton didn't step up to the plate here. It's too bad.

duke74
07-12-2008, 07:38 PM
It wasn't a "no-trade" per se, but rather something called an Early Termination Option, or ETO. This is the extra that Elton asked Dunleavy for via text message from D.C. at 8 or 9 PM on whatever the night was. By 8 AM the next morning, Dunleavy texted him back and said, "Yes. You got it."

He never heard back from Elton again, never receiving any returns from subsequent texts, cell calls, or anything.

Dunleavy says he retained the texts. Now why would he lie about that -- either he has the hard evidence or he doesn't, and I don't know why he would claim to have it if he won't produce it. Then he'd look like a liar and an idiot.

So this thing comes down to the fact that Elton got exactly what he wanted, but he was negotiating without his agent. When Falk found out about it, he went ballistic, as he regularly does, and convinced Elton that he shouldn't be part of an organization that goes around the back of its players' agents.

Elton has always been one of my favorites. But he didn't have the courage to say to Falk, "Sorry, Dave, I shouldn't have done that, but I've given them my word. I asked for something as being the last thing they needed to do for me to get me to sign there, and Dunleavy got it for me overnight. It's plenty of money. This is my life, and my word means a lot to me."

Then Elton compounded the problem by not being truthful about it. Even if none of this had gone down and he just wanted out of LA, just say that. Say you've given LA 7 prime years and wanted a chance to play closer to home, in the East, where your team will be closer to the top of the heap and you'll be a perennial all-star. No one would've begrudged him that, not with the reputation he had.

I'm sorry to say it, but Elton has tarnished his rep in all of this. Yes, it's Falk's fault too for putting his own selfish interests in not being marginalized over the interests of his client as he may have seen them, but Elton didn't step up to the plate here. It's too bad.

That was the account on ESPN this morning, including an interview with Dunleavy. Hate to say it as a big EB fan, but he DOES look bad here...and Falk looks worse.

sagegrouse
07-12-2008, 11:12 PM
That was the account on ESPN this morning, including an interview with Dunleavy. Hate to say it as a big EB fan, but he DOES look bad here...and Falk looks worse.

Lemme see if I have this right. Elton was a free agent. He received offers from the Clippers, Warriors and Sixers over the course of a week. He decided, as a free agent, to sign with Philly for $80M.

Therefore, he is a dirty rotten scoundrel.

Do I have this right? Pardon me while I giggle.

WRT the allegation that David Falk forced him to sign with Philly, I say "puh-leese." Falk can't sign the contract; Elton must. Falk won't play for Philly; Elton will. There is no way to know what discussions went on between an agent and a player (or between a lawyer and client). If Elton, who has been in the league for nine years, didn't want to play for Philly, he wouldn't have agreed to sign the contract.

And if Donald Sterling and Baron Davis are left in the lurch, why would this possible bother anyone outside of their immediate families? Give me one incident or argument that qualifies either of them as praiseworthy.

sagegrouse

darthur
07-13-2008, 01:52 AM
Lemme see if I have this right. Elton was a free agent. He received offers from the Clippers, Warriors and Sixers over the course of a week. He decided, as a free agent, to sign with Philly for $80M.

Therefore, he is a dirty rotten scoundrel.

Do I have this right?

Not really... The argument against Brand is that he promised all along he would sign with the Clippers if they met some conditions, they did meet those conditions, but then he didn't sign. If that's true (it's probably an oversimplification at best), does it make him a dirty rotten scoundrel? Not exactly. But it isn't very nice either.

My take at what actually happened:
- Brand promises to sign with Clippers under certain conditions
- LA balks at some of the conditions
- Brand is insulted and looks elsewhere
- LA then decides to meet the conditions
- Brand and Falk decide that the conditions are still not right in the contract, and Brand just says screw it
Just a guess, but it's the best one I have. Brand is perhaps being too sensitive, LA is perhaps being cheap and/or incompetent, and the breakup happens.

sagegrouse
07-13-2008, 08:28 AM
Not really... The argument against Brand is that he promised all along he would sign with the Clippers if they met some conditions, they did meet those conditions, but then he didn't sign. .

Here's a different interpretation. Brand was a free agent and, in any conceivable case, was going to talk to other teams. Of course, he told the Clips what was important to him. And... there were some hiccups in getting what he wanted. Not too surprising given the fact that the Clips thought they had the upper hand and also given the fact that the Clips screw up everything.

I don't think that was the deciding factor. In any multi-party negotiation, the professional approach for agent and player alike is to let each bidder state its case, ask questions, and think through its offer. In this case, he liked what he heard (the bucks) and liked what he saw (a young and inproving team). Is it surprising that he learned something in the process? Is it surprising that he ended up making a different decision than he and others expected at the beginning of the process? Not surprising to the first and mildly surprising to the second, I would say.

I think the emphasis in the aftermath should be on the Sixers and what they were able to offer in terms of basketball and not the Clips. WRT to Brand saying he would sign with the Clips if they met his conditions, well, just well. What does it mean to be a free agent? He listened to three offers and picked one, and not the one he expected to select at the beginning of the process. Sounds like two-thirds of all job recruiting and competitive bid processes that happen outside the basketball world.

And why should this make him look bad. For six months or longer every contact with a sports reporter has involved the same question. Brand understandably had a pat answer -- I want to remain with the Clippers in LA. 99 percent of players would handle it the same way; only Brand is a lot more persuasive and believable than the others. He hadn't given up his basic freedom to make an independent decision.

I give the credit to the Sixers.

sagegrouse

BluBones
07-13-2008, 10:12 AM
It wasn't a "no-trade" per se, but rather something called an Early Termination Option, or ETO. This is the extra that Elton asked Dunleavy for via text message from D.C. at 8 or 9 PM on whatever the night was. By 8 AM the next morning, Dunleavy texted him back and said, "Yes. You got it."

He never heard back from Elton again, never receiving any returns from subsequent texts, cell calls, or anything.

Dunleavy says he retained the texts. Now why would he lie about that -- either he has the hard evidence or he doesn't, and I don't know why he would claim to have it if he won't produce it. Then he'd look like a liar and an idiot.

So this thing comes down to the fact that Elton got exactly what he wanted, but he was negotiating without his agent. When Falk found out about it, he went ballistic, as he regularly does, and convinced Elton that he shouldn't be part of an organization that goes around the back of its players' agents.

Elton has always been one of my favorites. But he didn't have the courage to say to Falk, "Sorry, Dave, I shouldn't have done that, but I've given them my word. I asked for something as being the last thing they needed to do for me to get me to sign there, and Dunleavy got it for me overnight. It's plenty of money. This is my life, and my word means a lot to me."

Then Elton compounded the problem by not being truthful about it. Even if none of this had gone down and he just wanted out of LA, just say that. Say you've given LA 7 prime years and wanted a chance to play closer to home, in the East, where your team will be closer to the top of the heap and you'll be a perennial all-star. No one would've begrudged him that, not with the reputation he had.

I'm sorry to say it, but Elton has tarnished his rep in all of this. Yes, it's Falk's fault too for putting his own selfish interests in not being marginalized over the interests of his client as he may have seen them, but Elton didn't step up to the plate here. It's too bad.

But... why is Dunleavy negotiating w/ Brand at all? Because he knows he can trade against their personal relationship and get sweeter terms than he could w/ Falk. This was a violation of the Collective Bargaining Agreement. Brand is represented by Falk; the Clips should be talking to no one but Falk. Period.

jgehtland
07-13-2008, 10:26 AM
I think a lot of people are twitchy about all this because of the context of Boozer's exit from Cleveland, and a lot of the "EB's rep is tarnished" talk seems to stem from the idea that Brand somehow got the Clips to do something they otherwise would not have done. Take, for example, Boozer convincing Cleveland to let him out of his contract so he could negotiate a new one.

However, in Brand's case, he simply opted out. There was nothing the Clips could have done to prevent him, it was a *player option*. The Clips went out and signed Baron Davis; perhaps that was to appease Brand, but it isn't like the guy is chopped liver. They are plenty glad to have him now that Brand is gone, I assure you.

So, in the long run, the ONLY thing going against EB here is that he told the Clips he really wanted to be there, but ended up going elsewhere. In every other respect, he exercised options within his rights, and the Clips did not get "tricked" into doing anything they weren't otherwise going to do. I just don't see why all the ruckus.

Compare this to 2003. EB signs an offer sheet with the Heat and expresses clear desire to be allowed to go. Sign-and-trade offers are on the table. Instead, LA matches the offer after taking, if I recall, the entire allowable time to think about it. In the end, the Clips ended up doing exactly what Brand did not want. However, it was totally at their option, and nobody raked them over the coals for a month because they didn't make EB happy. What's so different here?

Devilsfan
07-13-2008, 10:42 AM
Dunleavy Sr. seems very angry about the departure. I can understand his being upset in losing his BEST player.
As I remember Dunleavy Jr. left Duke early and surprised alot of people. Not saying his early departure was wrong just wondering if he surprised Coach K?
Elton's going to a team where he seems to be wanted more by the owners and will be "better compensated".
Way to go Elton!!!!
You seemed to have made the decission that was right for you and your family.

Edouble
07-13-2008, 11:43 AM
It seems that with the Elton supporters that there are no two-way streets in this situation. Dunleavy is "bad" because he talked to Elton when he knew that he should be dealing with Faulk. OK, but no one has said that Elton was wrong for talking to Dunleavy when he knew that Dunleavy should be talking to Faulk. If it bothered Elton that much that the team was trying to negotiate with him, then why did he engage in those negotiations? Elton negotiates with the Clips, then when the negotiations are finished he says he won't sign with them because they didn't negotiate with his agent? If the Clips had negotiated with Faulk, Elton would probably be complaining that they hadn't involved him more in the negotiations. Regardless of how tarnished Elton's reputation is, he ends up looking overly sensitive and like he can't stick to his guns. He's texting Dunleavy back and forth, and then goes and signs with Philadelphia because Dunleavy was texting him?

Two days ago the reason he signed with the Sixers is because they offered him more money, and he was being low-balled by the Clippers. It turns out that wasn't really true. One day ago, the reason he signs with the Sixers is because the Clips wouldn't offer him certain non-monetary items. It turns out that wasn't really true either. Now, the current story is that he wouldn't sign because Dunleavy was texting him?

What's the story Elton? Be a man and stick to your guns! Is Elton that conflict avoidant that he has to keep fabricating story lines about why he didn't resign with the Clippers when the truth is that he just doesn't want to play for the Clippers? Fine! Nobody really dreams about a career with the Clippers... but be a man and say so!

jgehtland
07-13-2008, 09:13 PM
First of all, as far as I can tell, *Elton* has said exactly one thing: it wasn't about the money, it was about non-monetary items and the attitude the Clippers took to the negotiations.

Dunleavy is the one who said it was about the money. Faulk is the one who said it was about going behind his back. EB has told only one story.

Secondly, the whole point of the CBA outlawing teams negotiating directly with players is because the team can use undue influence, familiarity, etc. with the player during negotiations. Whether or not you agree with the CBA's rules, they exist and for this exact reason. Now that negotiations have gone sour, the team (and its large executive staff, marketing department, fleet of lawyers, etc.) can wage PR war against the player (why, I don't know, what possible purpose is it serving them right now???). If you just negotiate with the agent, none of this happens.

Lastly, again, WHY does EB's reason MATTER? He opted out. He examined his options. He was an unrestricted free agent. The Clips did not get "tricked" into being in any position they could have avoided being in. So, who cares why EB left? Corey did EXACTLY what EB did. Except he never said he wanted to stay. In every other respect, the situations are identical. So why is EB the bad guy?

gep
07-13-2008, 10:57 PM
My take at what actually happened:
- Brand promises to sign with Clippers under certain conditions
- LA balks at some of the conditions
- Brand is insulted and looks elsewhere
- LA then decides to meet the conditions
- Brand and Falk decide that the conditions are still not right in the contract, and Brand just says screw it


To me, this is the key... LA initially balked at Elton's conditions... then accepted the conditions when they see Elton possibly going elsewhere..


And... there were some hiccups in getting what he wanted. Not too surprising given the fact that the Clips thought they had the upper hand and also given the fact that the Clips screw up everything.


My take on this is that Elton didn't feel like he was respected and appreciated in LA. If LA really respected and appreciated Elton, they would have at least discussed the conditions with him (but, I don't know if this ever happened... just assumed it didn't based on what I've read so far). For me, appreciation and respect are most important, even if the "money" for me is not even in the same universe as Elton's.:) I don't know... I may just be living in the "ideal" world, but that's probably how I would feel...

Classof06
07-14-2008, 02:04 PM
I think a lot of people are twitchy about all this because of the context of Boozer's exit from Cleveland, and a lot of the "EB's rep is tarnished" talk seems to stem from the idea that Brand somehow got the Clips to do something they otherwise would not have done. Take, for example, Boozer convincing Cleveland to let him out of his contract so he could negotiate a new one.

However, in Brand's case, he simply opted out. There was nothing the Clips could have done to prevent him, it was a *player option*. The Clips went out and signed Baron Davis; perhaps that was to appease Brand, but it isn't like the guy is chopped liver. They are plenty glad to have him now that Brand is gone, I assure you.

So, in the long run, the ONLY thing going against EB here is that he told the Clips he really wanted to be there, but ended up going elsewhere. In every other respect, he exercised options within his rights, and the Clips did not get "tricked" into doing anything they weren't otherwise going to do. I just don't see why all the ruckus.

Compare this to 2003. EB signs an offer sheet with the Heat and expresses clear desire to be allowed to go. Sign-and-trade offers are on the table. Instead, LA matches the offer after taking, if I recall, the entire allowable time to think about it. In the end, the Clips ended up doing exactly what Brand did not want. However, it was totally at their option, and nobody raked them over the coals for a month because they didn't make EB happy. What's so different here?

The Boozer situation is very similar to the Brand situation but as a Cavs fan, I can tell you that is not how the Boozer situation unfolded. Boozer didn't convince Cleveland to let him become a restricted free agent, John Paxson (the worst GM in the history of the NBA) let him out of his then-current contract, assuming Boozer would sign a six-year, $39MM deal and they could keep him on the cheap while watching him become an all-star. They let Boozer become a restricted free agent and the Jazz offered him a six-year $70MM deal. Boozer, being a rational human being, took the deal with the Jazz, which the Cavs could have matched if they really wanted to. Paxson didn't think anyone would offer Boozer that much money. Much like the Clippers "take it or leave it" offer to Brand, Paxson gambled and lost.

After all this, the Cavs' front office tried to save face by saying Boozer cheated them and they had Gordon Gund (our former blind owner--literally blind) come on TV and state his case, manipulating the emotion of local Cleveland fans, who decided to overlook the absolutely terrible decisions management had been making for decades, take the Cavs' side and turn against Boozer.

As a Cavs fan, I'm sick over the fact that we could (and should) have had Boozer and Lebron in Cleveland for the prime of their careers. But I have absolutely no ill will towards Boozer. What would you have done?

jgehtland
07-14-2008, 04:29 PM
I was always a "Boozer defender" back when all that happened. However, the (however misplaced) ill-will against Boozer has always stemmed from the fact that he was under contract for another year, and the team decided to allow him out of that contract, even though they were under no obligation to do so. They ended up regretting that decision mightily. I think Boozer did what he should have done, but whether he asked to be released, or Paxson decided it on his own, one way or another the Cavs gave up something they didn't have to and got nothing in return.

This is not at all what happened with Brand. He opted out, which was entirely his right to do so, and ended up taking another offer.

I think both decisions were reasonable. But I can at least see why Cavs fans might be upset with Boozer. I just don't understand it at all in EB's case.