Memphis Grizzlies v Los Angeles Clippers - Game Five

Vinny Del Negro rips DeAndre Jordan after Clippers’ loss


We said this before the season and we said it before the start of the playoffs — the fate of the Clippers really hinged on two things:

1) Playing good defense (they allowed the Grizzlies more than 100 points In Game 5 and had a defensive rating of 111.3).

2) DeAndre Jordan needed to play big for them.

With Blake Griffin hobbled by injury Los Angeles especially needed Jordan on Tuesday night and he had a very pedestrian night — 6 points on 3-of-7 shooting and 8 rebounds in 31 minutes. And that line doesn’t address his defensive struggles against the Grizzlies bigs. Now the Clippers are down 3-2 in the best of seven and have to win Game 6 on the road.

Vinny Del Negro was frustrated after the game and vented a little, reports the Daily News.

“I don’t know if crossroads is the right (word) but there’s definitely a level you have to play at right now that is much different,” Clippers coach Vinny Del Negro said. “He has a much different responsibility now. He understands it. I haven’t seen the consistency that I like. He hasn’t seen the consistency he would like….

“I didn’t see him controlling the game the way I thought he needed to, and at that stage you have to go with someone you feel can,” Del Negro said….

“Defensively, offensively, being a threat out there on the glass, using his length, athleticism,” Del Negro said. “But it’s up to him to get out there and earn his minutes and work through anything that’s thrown at him during the game.”

Now for some context. First, Del Negro’s job is on the line here, he doesn’t have a contract past the end of this season and if the Clippers are bounced the odds he gets a new contract drop. Ultimately, a nod from Chris Paul either way could decide Del Negro’s fate, but you know a competitive guy like CP3 is going to be frustrated.

Also remember at the trade deadline when there was a lot of “the Clippers would trade DeAndre Jordan for Kevin Garnett” talk? That was pushed by Del Negro talking to Danny Ainge, not the rest of the Clippers front office. The guys upstairs in the suits had no interest in moving Jordan (and the Celtics were not likely to make that deal anyway). But that created friction between Del Negro and the front office, and this little show is tied to that.

Just remember that as the fate of Del Negro is decided in the coming weeks. Unless Jordan has a monster game in Memphis for Game 6 and keeps his team alive.

Report: Rockets will try to sign Alessandro Gentile next summer

Alessandro Gentile, Paulius Jankunas
1 Comment

The Rockets tried signing Sergio Llull this summer, but he opted for a long-term extension with Real Madrid.

So, they’ll just turn to another player in their large chest of stashed draft picks – Alessandro Gentile.

Marc Stein of ESPN:

Gentile, who was selected No. 53 in the 2014, is a 22-year-old wing for Armani Milano. He’s a good scorer, but he primarily works from mid-range – an area the Rockets eschew. He can get to the rim in Europe, but his subpar athleticism might hinder him in the NBA.

If Gentile comes stateside, he’ll face a steep learning curve. But he’s young enough and talented enough that he could develop into a rotation player.

Report: Hawks co-owner made more money by exposing Danny Ferry’s Luol Deng comments

Michael Gearon, Bruce Levenson
Leave a comment

A terribly kept secret: Hawks co-owner Michael Gearon Jr. wanted to get rid of general manager Danny Ferry.

Many believe that’s why Gearon made such a big deal about Ferry’s pejorative “African” comment about Luol Deng – that Gearon was more concerned about ousting Ferry than showing real concern over racism.

Gearon had another, no less sinister, reason to raise concern over Ferry’s remarks.

Kevin Arnovitz and Brian Windhorst of ESPN:

While Gearon felt that Ferry, as he wrote in the June 2014 email to Levenson, “put the entire franchise in jeopardy,” Gearon also figured to benefit financially from a Sterling-esque fallout.

In the spring of 2014, Gearon was in the process of selling more of his interest in the team to Levenson and the partners he had sold to in September. The agreed-upon price for roughly a third of Gearon’s remaining shares valued the Hawks at approximately $450 million, according to reports from sources.

“We accept your offer to buy the remaining 31 million,” Gearon wrote in an email to Levenson on April 17, 2014. “Let me know next steps so we can keep this simple as you suggested without a bunch of lawyers and bankers.”

Approximately five weeks later — just a little more than a week before the fateful conference call — Steve Ballmer agreed to pay $2 billion for the Clippers, a record-smashing price that completely changed the assessed value of NBA franchises. Gearon firmly maintains he was acting out of the sincerity of his convictions to safeguard the franchise from the Sterling stench, but such a spectacle also allowed him to wiggle out of selling his shares at far below market value.

Gearon and his legal team later challenged the notion that the sell-down was bound by any sort of contractual obligation and that any papers were signed. Once the organization became involved in the investigation, the sale of the shares was postponed.

Arnovitz and Windhorst did an incredible amount of reporting here. I suggest you read the full piece, which includes much more background on the Gearon-Ferry rift.

Considering the Hawks sold for $850 million, Gearon definitely made more money than if he’d sold his shares at a $450 million valuation.

Did that motivate him? Probably, though it doesn’t have to be one or the other. Most likely, his actions were derived from at least three desires – making more money, ousting Ferry and combating racism. Parsing how much each contributed is much more difficult.

What Ferry said was racist, whether or not he was looking at more racism on the sheet of paper in front of him. His comments deserved punishment.

But if Gearon didn’t have incentive to use them for his own benefit, would we even know about them? How many other teams, with more functional front offices, would have kept similar remarks under wraps or just ignored them?