Blake Griffin: ‘Tough’ to learn of trade from Twitter, not Clippers

AP Photo/Paul Sancya

Blake Griffin said he doesn’t regret not pushing for a no-trade clause in the contract he signed last summer, which allowed the Clippers – mere months after touting his significance to the franchise – to deal him to the Pistons.

But Griffin isn’t completely satisfied with how the Clippers handled the trade.

Griffin, via Nick Friedell of ESPN:

“Basketball is a business, the NBA is a business, and they made a decision,” Griffin told ESPN. “The only thing I just wish I had known or had the opportunity to talk to somebody beforehand. Finding out through Twitter, through other people is a tough way to find out when you’ve been with a franchise for so long. But at the end of the day, basketball is a business, and I want to play where a team wants me. And that’s why I’m excited about being here.”

Adrian Wojnarowski on ESPN:

How quickly it came together was unusual. It went from no deal on Sunday to getting serious on Sunday night to the framework of a deal by Monday.

And I know this: I know Lawrence Frank, the Clippers’ president, sat down with Blake Griffin earlier in the day on Monday when Blake started to get word that something may be in the works. And I was told that Lawrence Frank sat down with him at the Clippers facility and told him that, “There is a possibility that we may trade you. We don’t have an agreement yet.” And then, once they had the agreement, they let Blake know that there was a trade.

And at that point, we were very shortly after that reporting terms of the deal.

Maybe the Clippers were up front with Griffin about the possibility of him getting traded, but he saw the completed deal first on Twitter, even if they told him directly after. That’s a narrow needle to thread, but it’s one that should exonerate the Clippers. Completing a trade, especially one of this magnitude, involves many people – including from the other team. It’s not necessarily fair to blame the Clippers that someone leaked it before they could inform Griffin directly.

But this mostly sounds like a he-said, he-said situation. Is Griffin or Wojnarowski’s source more trustworthy? I have no idea. But I at least appreciate Griffin, even if scorned, putting his name behind his side of the story.