# Clippers also looking SAR



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

http://www.nypost.com/sports/nets/49759.htm 



> Abdur-Rahim was in Sacramento yesterday, completing his visit with the Kings while another team, the Clippers, entered the picture, according to his attorney, Aaron Goodwin.





> And that is where the Clippers enter the scene. The Bucks are using that money on Clipper forward Bobby Simmons, so L.A. now is looking at Abdur-Rahim. The Clips, who may get a visit from Abdur-Rahim, join the Heat, Wizards, Kings and Nets as suitors.


----------



## Starbury03 (Aug 12, 2003)

He wont come here and I wouldnt really want him they need someone to strecth the defesne not play close to the basket.


----------



## Showtime87 (Jun 27, 2005)

Apparently the Clipps are only one of numerous teams which have extended this offer. If Shareef has already reportedly turned down the Mighty Bucks' offer of 47 mil, I doubt he's going to accept this one to come here and continue to play out of position for the next 5 years. If he comes to LA it will be to join the Lakers, a player of his intelligence will take a look at some players of his skill that joined the Lakers at a reduced rate and proceeded to compile championship rings. Wherever he goes it will be to a immediate contender, this poor guy has played with too many of the league's doormats, he deserves to play on a winner.


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

I am guessing SAR situation was just a backup if Mobley was not a Clipper. Looking now that Mobley is probably going to be a Clipper, I don't see any role for SAR.


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

Rumors have stated that the Clippers have offered SAR the MLE.


----------



## Mecca (Jul 3, 2005)

I Abdur-Rahim turned down a $47 million dollar deal, doews anybody think that he would accept a MLE?


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

Mecca said:


> I Abdur-Rahim turned down a $47 million dollar deal, doews anybody think that he would accept a MLE?



Who did SAR reject a 47 million contract from?


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

XTRA is reporting Clippers are talking with SAR for a big contract.


----------



## Mecca (Jul 3, 2005)

Weasel said:


> Who did SAR reject a 47 million contract from?


The Milwaukee Bucks... They offer him that deal before they signed Simmons so, if you want to blame somebody for Bobby's departure, it's him.





PS: How Much there talking about?


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

Hacksaw said that it was going to be big, but he didn't say any value only that it may be a 3 year deal.


----------



## Drk Element (Nov 10, 2004)

Weasel said:


> I am guessing SAR situation was just a backup if Mobley was not a Clipper. Looking now that Mobley is probably going to be a Clipper, I don't see any role for SAR.


yeah under brand.....that would suck.


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

I think XTRA just said Clippers offered SAR 5 years 40 mil.


----------



## qross1fan (Dec 28, 2004)

anyone think that they want to sign SAR to trade him and get Wright + from Nets?


----------



## Starbury03 (Aug 12, 2003)

They cant trade Shareff till December if they sign him I believe.


----------



## qross1fan (Dec 28, 2004)

they can't if they have him when season begins . .but they can sign and trade before the season

im not 100%s ure about this so if someone can correct me


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

I wonder if the Clippers are intending to sign both Mobley and SAR...


----------



## Mecca (Jul 3, 2005)

That what it sounds like to me.


----------



## qross1fan (Dec 28, 2004)

do u guys seriously thing Mobley or SAR will agree to coming off the bench? I think maggs will get traded sadly if we get them both because I don't think either will come off the bench


----------



## Mecca (Jul 3, 2005)

Why do you think Mobley will be on the bench?


----------



## qross1fan (Dec 28, 2004)

well SAR stated he wants to win or start . . he won't come off the bench and if he starts then Maggette or Mobley will head to the bench and Mobley after 6 years with HOuston won't come off the bench


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

qrich1fan said:


> do u guys seriously thing Mobley or SAR will agree to coming off the bench? I think maggs will get traded sadly if we get them both because I don't think either will come off the bench



You bring up a good point I have been thinking about. If Mobley and SAR sign, 1 will have to come off the bench. I am not sure what the Clippers are thinking right now. I hear Maggette is still on the block but he if he gets traded I expect another starter to come on board. So in that situation SAR or Mobley will still be coming off the bench. I think the Clippers are just exploring all their opportunities right now.


----------



## Mecca (Jul 3, 2005)

Then they may take Mobley instead. SAR hated to be a bench player when he was in Portland behind Zach which I think Abdur-Rahim is better than Randolph.


----------



## qross1fan (Dec 28, 2004)

ok right now sign MArshall and Mobley, forget about Abdur


----------



## PAIDNFULL23 (Jul 9, 2005)

Why r the Clippers going after SAR. He is NOT what they need. He isn't a SG and he plays the same postion as our best player EB. Not only is he not a 2 but he is not a permieter player, he plays on the block and we have plenty of guys who can do that. Can anyone explain to me why they are going after SAR?


----------



## Kapt Clipper (Jul 9, 2005)

i don't understand why the interest in SAR also...i know he can score but EB is overall a better defensive presence with his rebounding and shot-blocking ability...and if Wilcox remains where does he fit in if he suddenly gets inspired and plays defense the way he should...


----------



## Mecca (Jul 3, 2005)

If Abdur-Rahim signs with Clips, BYE BYE "Mr. 357"


----------



## qross1fan (Dec 28, 2004)

ok ok i think i finally get what baylor and dunleavy are thinking, Nets want a big man, so baylor and mike are saying let's sign the player Nets want most in SAR, then we'll trade c-weezy(wilcox) for antoine wright or something along these lines


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

Any more comments on this? The radio stations were acting as if this was a big deal.


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

Here would be the lineup with SAR (no Mobley).

PG: Livingston
SG: Maggette
SF: SAR
PF: Brand
C: Kaman


----------



## qross1fan (Dec 28, 2004)

i seriously thinkg baylor and dunleavy are playing there cards right, no doubt in anyone's mind that Nets want SAR since they need help up front, so if we ink him, that means nets will have to look elsewhere and once we sign SAR, we can use him or Wilcox in a deal with Jersey to send Wright to LA, if im wrong, I won't mind adding SAR, just as long as we add Mobley and keep Maggette


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

Clippers Reportedly Pursue Abdur-Rahim 



> Abdur-Rahim's agent, Aaron Goodwin, did not return phone calls but told the New York Post this week that the Clippers were interested in his client, who has averaged 19.8 points and 8.1 rebounds in nine NBA seasons.
> 
> Abdur-Rahim, who will turn 29 on Dec. 11, reportedly also is being wooed by the Kings, New Jersey Nets, Miami Heat and Washington Wizards.





> With the Portland Trail Blazers last season, Abdur-Rahim made $14.6 million. But he is expected to take a substantial pay cut, perhaps agreeing to the mid-level exception, which last season was about $5.3 million.


----------



## Kapt Clipper (Jul 9, 2005)

Weasel said:


> Here would be the lineup with SAR (no Mobley).
> 
> PG: Livingston
> SG: Maggette
> ...


Weasel- wasn't most of the talk leaning toward moving Cory from SG to SF where he can use his athleticism to his advantage?...when he's a SG, his ball handling and outside shooting may not be his best attributes.


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

Kapt Clipper said:


> Weasel- wasn't most of the talk leaning toward moving Cory from SG to SF where he can use his athleticism to his advantage?...when he's a SG, his ball handling and outside shooting may not be his best attributes.



Yes you are right, that is why the move comes as some sort of surprise. At SG, Maggette avg. almost 3 TO's a game, so bring in SAR would still leave Maggette at SG where he didn't do so well.


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

Assuming we sign Mobley, I would rather not sign SAR. Giving Mobley a big contract to come off the bench isnt what we should be trying to accomplish. I say we sign someone who can fill a role in the backcourt as well as the front court. I would love to keep Wilcox around, but there is no way we will be able to resign him. We trade WIlcox for any decent pick we can get next year. IF we cant sign a quaility reserve and the front court or the backcourt, we need to be looking for a player to fill one of those spots in a WIlcox trade.


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

I am pretty sure SAR will be out of the picture once Mobley commits. With Mobley the Clippers have another 8 million to spend on free-agents. SAR should get close if not 8 million.


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

Weasel said:


> I am pretty sure SAR will be out of the picture once Mobley commits. With Mobley the Clippers have another 8 million to spend on free-agents. SAR should get close if not 8 million.


His agent said he would take around the MLE, he got paid 5.3 mil last season. Im sure he wont be taking 5 mil from us to possibly start. I hope he signs with the Nets.


----------



## NOBLE (Apr 10, 2005)

I want a SNT with the Nets and nothing more. 'Reef in a Clippers jersey is bad mojo.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Only way Shareef gets more thn MLE is from a team under the cap or via S&Tsomehting Portland is reluctant to do, unless the manage to unload another contract....

So I need to ask would a deal like Ruben Patterson and Shareef for Brand make sense for the Clippers?


----------



## qross1fan (Dec 28, 2004)

Schilly said:


> Only way Shareef gets more thn MLE is from a team under the cap or via S&Tsomehting Portland is reluctant to do, unless the manage to unload another contract....
> 
> So I need to ask would a deal like Ruben Patterson and Shareef for Brand make sense for the Clippers?



nope sorry, Patterson isn't the "kobe stopper" and neither have the leadership as Brand and can get 20/10 with 2 blocks and get the 20 points while taking the third/fourth less shots per game (maggs, simmons, jaric) we either sign SAR or don't get him, do not trade for him


----------



## Quasi-Quasar (Jul 18, 2002)

I think SAR is the all time loosingest player (percentage-wise) to have his career averages. He's a modern Armen Gilliam...I don't want him around for even an femtosecond.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

qrich1fan said:


> nope sorry, Patterson isn't the "kobe stopper" and neither have the leadership as Brand and can get 20/10 with 2 blocks and get the 20 points while taking the third/fourth less shots per game (maggs, simmons, jaric) we either sign SAR or don't get him, do not trade for him


that's why I asked


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

Something interesting reported by XTRA sports. The Clippers might be interested in a Sign and Trade with Portland to get SAR for Chris Wilcox.


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

Weasel said:


> Something interesting reported by XTRA sports. The Clippers might be interested in a Sign and Trade with Portland to get SAR for Chris Wilcox.



In this move, the Clippers clear up almost 3 million in getting rid of Wilcox. Thoughts?


----------



## Starbury03 (Aug 12, 2003)

If they got him for Wilcox and then re-signed Rebracca and got a decent back-up point guard I dont see how they can mess that team up from not making the playoffs but it happen when Andre Miller came.


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

Starbury03 said:


> If they got him for Wilcox and then re-signed Rebracca and got a decent back-up point guard I dont see how they can mess that team up from not making the playoffs but it happen when Andre Miller came.


So you would do it?

SAR + Mobley with the current team might be interesting.


----------



## Starbury03 (Aug 12, 2003)

Yeah but Shareff is gonna come off the bench and play back-up 3 and 4. I not sure if that is what he want but maybe he does.


----------



## TheClipSHow11 (Jul 22, 2004)

This sounds pretty interesting. I want July 22nd to happen - so i can see what happens for real. Abdul can score - he would be a great 6th man along side Rebraca coming off the bench for instant scoring. He is from Cali originally isn't he? I know he went to Berkley.


----------



## Mecca (Jul 3, 2005)

Weasel said:


> Something interesting reported by XTRA sports. The Clippers might be interested in a Sign and Trade with Portland to get SAR for Chris Wilcox.


PULL THE TRIGGER BABY :biggrin:


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

Sounds like a favorable deal if it can be done.


----------



## qross1fan (Dec 28, 2004)

Pull the trigger man . . we will lose Wilcox next year so this way we get someone in return for him


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Didn't Wilcox recently get arrested?


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

Schilly said:


> Didn't Wilcox recently get arrested?



Yes.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

I am wondering if maybe the Station is getting mixed signals....Maybe this could be part of a 3 team deal that owould send Shareef to NJ the TE and a pick to LA and Wilcox to Portland....

But the Arrest could be a big problem for a team trying to remake their Image.


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

Just reported that the Nets are offering their number 1 and their 5 mil trade exception for SAR.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Weasel said:


> Just reported that the Nets are offering their number 1 and their 5 mil trade exception for SAR.


Where is that report...If on the radio or TV I won't demand a link


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

Radio...
Xtra Sports 570


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

K thanks for the heads up


----------



## DeezNets (Aug 12, 2002)

Weasel said:


> Radio...
> Xtra Sports 570




Thanks for the news Weasel.


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

Weasel said:


> Just reported that the Nets are offering their number 1 and their 5 mil trade exception for SAR.



I hope it doesn't go through, I like the SAR for Wilcox better. :razz:


----------



## PAIDNFULL23 (Jul 9, 2005)

Are the Clippers going to get a #1 and the TE for SAR or Portland is? And if the TE goes to the Clips, what would they do with it that could help?


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

Portland.


----------



## PAIDNFULL23 (Jul 9, 2005)

Why are the Clips going after SAR in the first place? He would back -up EB and I don't think that he would come here to be a back-up on a team that isn't currently a winner, I thought he wanted to play for a winner such as SA or MIA.


----------



## NOBLE (Apr 10, 2005)

PAIDNFULL23 said:


> Why are the Clips going after SAR in the first place? He would back -up EB and I don't think that he would come here to be a back-up on a team that isn't currently a winner, I thought he wanted to play for a winner such as SA or MIA.


 S&T, homie.


----------



## PAIDNFULL23 (Jul 9, 2005)

Good lookin' out Noble, but 4 who?


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

It was reported Wilcox for SAR in a sign & trade. But also there is a rumor about a Nets-Blazer deal that is better than the Clippers.


----------



## PAIDNFULL23 (Jul 9, 2005)

Weasel, can u tell me why the Clippers r interested in SAR in the first place?


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

Not sure, really. Lets pretend there is no Mobley. Lineup would be Livingston, Maggette, SAR, Brand, Kaman. With Mobely, I would assume the lineup could be Livingston, Mobley, SAR, Brand, Kaman. I don't know if the Clippers want both Mobley or SAR or just one. SAR could be a backup plan if Mobley wasn't signed. But with Mobley and SAR both on the team there could be a lot of flexibility.


----------



## Mecca (Jul 3, 2005)

Darn right there will be some flexibitilty on the bench with just SAR on the team.


----------



## drazen03 (Feb 5, 2005)

Weasel said:


> It was reported Wilcox for SAR in a sign & trade. But also there is a rumor about a Nets-Blazer deal that is better than the Clippers.


The Blazers have made it clear they do not want a player in return. They are cutting salary. That is partly why the Nets TE does not help them because they don't want to add a player. They want picks. So this rumor makes zero sense.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

No, that is not corrrect Drazen...Nash has stated they would take n a player if it made sense ...Wilcox makes sense...he is young, his contract will be up shortly (next year right?...and he can play PF behind Zach which is a hole on the team right now.

What Nash is not interested in, is acquiring a marginal player with a few years left on his contract...Wilcox, may or may not be a marginal NBA talent, but he IS young and POR is fully embracing the youth movement so he fits in with that philosophy...

As a POR fan, I hope they can swing a deal....

BTW, is Maggette on the outs with mgmt or something? I can't believe they would consider trading him,


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

i would think that portland wants nothing to do with wilcox. havent they been trying to clean up their image the last two years? I dont see how they would add someone with pending gun charges.


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

In the newest LA times article it states that the Clippers believe they have a shot at SAR.

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-heisler14jul14,1,6081013.column?coll=la-headlines-sports



> Mobley's deal starts at about $7.5 million, leaving them a $5-million slot, big enough to fit in one more front-line player. They think they have a shot at Shareff Abdur-Rahim, but I'll believe that when I see it.


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

Well people are saying that rumor that I mentioned in this thread about the Nets giving their TE and 1 rounder for SAR might be false so the Clippers still might have a chance at him if they want him.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Here's another point...If Portland were to trade Shareef to LA for Wilcox, LA could sign Shareef for a deal of the 5mil to play with in addition to the 2.8 mil Wilcox is under contract for, so he could start out at close to 8mil a year.

Why the Clippers would do this, I don't really know, unless they have interest in trading Brand for Marbury...


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

_I like seeing my avatar hence the double post_


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

Schilly has the Wilcox rumor even been rumored up in Portland?


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Weasel said:


> Schilly has the Wilcox rumor even been rumored up in Portland?


Haven't heard anything other than that the Clipps have had interest


----------



## leidout (Jul 13, 2005)

Schilly said:


> Here's another point...If Portland were to trade Shareef to LA for Wilcox...
> 
> Why the Clippers would do this, I don't really know, unless they have interest in trading Brand for Marbury...


uh... what? clipper fans would burn down the house if we traded brand (the backbone & leader of the team) for marbury.... that would ruin both our power forward spot and the most promising young PG the clippers have ever had.


----------



## DaFranchise (Jun 29, 2005)

Thats Ludicrous. Knicks Fans Are Wishing That We Trade Brand For Starbury. We Already Got Livingston At Pg We Dont Need That Shoot First Pg


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Hey I didn't hear it anywhere, nor am I a knicks fan I myslef am simply trying to figure why the Clipps would be interested in Shareef when they have Brand and like wise Shareef in the Clipps, unless the Clipps are looking to move Brand for a Piece that can help them.

Wasn't trying to dis on Livingston either


----------



## Biggestfanoftheknicks (Apr 14, 2005)

Anything that takes away minutes from Kaman is a bad idea, and we all know Shareef cannot play the 3.


----------



## DaFranchise (Jun 29, 2005)

Sar Would Be Coming Off The Bench. The Starting 5 Is Set. We Are Not Trading Brand. Where Do U Guys Get This Stuff?


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

DaFranchise said:


> Sar Would Be Coming Off The Bench. The Starting 5 Is Set. We Are Not Trading Brand. Where Do U Guys Get This Stuff?


That's why I was asking. 

Y in Da Hell would they Trade Brand to bring in Shareef?

Y N Da hell would Shareef sign with the CLippers to come off the bench when he is getting offers to start elsewhere.


----------



## leidout (Jul 13, 2005)

Schilly said:


> Hey Pay attention....That's why I was asking.
> 
> Y in Da Hell would they Trade Brand to bring in Shareef?
> 
> Y N Da hell would Shareef sign with the CLippers to come off the bench when he is getting offers to start elsewhere.


they would not trade brand, he's a top 5 power forward at least.

maybe shareef is just playing the free agent game to get the best contract(my personal opinion). or maybe he likes l.a. (possible), or maybe he sees the clippers and likes the roster... 

shareef has always been known as one of the nba's best citizens, except for maybe san antonio, the clippers have one of the best group of personalities in the league. except for .357 (who's on his way out) we've got a squeaky clean team, ya never know what he's thinking til he signs the dotted line.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

leidout said:


> they would not trade brand, he's a top 5 power forward at least.
> 
> maybe shareef is just playing the free agent game to get the best contract(my personal opinion). or maybe he likes l.a. (possible), or maybe he sees the clippers and likes the roster...
> 
> shareef has always been known as one of the nba's best citizens, except for maybe san antonio, the clippers have one of the best group of personalities in the league. except for .357 (who's on his way out) we've got a squeaky clean team, ya never know what he's thinking til he signs the dotted line.


I agree with you, I think Goodwin is trying to pressure Portland and NJ to get a move on.


----------

