After a last-minute trade deadline deal for Jeff Green, it turns out the Los Angeles Clippers rejected a previous offer from the Chicago Bulls for Tony Snell.
After landing Jeff Green moments before the NBA trade deadline last week, the Los Angeles Clippers finally have a new small forward. In an ideal world, where consistency has never been a problem for him, he uses his length and athleticism to defend at an elite level, and he always displays a killer instinct, he’s the missing piece. Yet, after the years have gone by, that clearly isn’t the case.
While he has a chance to succeed and replace Lance Stephenson who never fit into Doc Rivers’ plan anyway, a 2019 protected first-round pick was still too much to sacrifice.
Before delving deep into that discussion, though (you should go read Jeff Nisius’ piece on the matter here), it appears that Green wasn’t actually the Clippers’ only small forward option at the trade deadline. Of course, the deal that looked likely with the Orlando Magic for big man Channing Frye never materialized, but there was another wing on the table to address that weakness of the Clippers, too.
According to Dan Woike of the Orange County Register, the team actually received a notable amount of interest in C.J. Wilcox, and went as far as turning down a trade from the Chicago Bulls for Tony Snell.
"The Clippers received multiple inquries on second-year guard C.J. Wilcox, turning down a trade with Chicago that involved Wilcox and a second-round pick for Tony Snell."
As few rumors emerged of the Clippers being the recipient of trade offers, besides the absurd notion of the Denver Nuggets acquiring Blake Griffin, the rejection of the Bulls’ proposition is surprising. Not just because losing Wilcox and a second-rounder would be a far lower sacrifice than Stephenson and a first-round pick, but because for Wilcox to garner much attention is also startling, given his minimal role to showcase his ability.
That being said, in today’s NBA where three-point shooting reigns supreme around the league, it makes sense that Wilcox could draw interest from teams looking to keep up with the perimeter trend.
As for the Clippers turning down Snell, they made the right call. It goes without saying that it would have been far more beneficial for the team’s long-term standing if they didn’t lose a first-round pick for Green, but in a wing like Snell they wouldn’t receive a significant upgrade in any regard. Plus, if he’s actually given a chance, Wilcox still has the potential and shooting stroke to contribute in L.A., if he’s kept around long enough.
More from Clipperholics
- Grade the trade: Clippers shockingly land Trae Young in wild proposal
- 3 of the most overpaid players on the LA Clippers’ roster
- Trading for this player covers the Clippers’ biggest weakness
- How will the LA Clippers fare in the in-season tournament?
- Why the LA Clippers should steer clear of recent gold medalist waiver
While Snell is clearly a better perimeter defender than the likes of Paul Pierce and Jamal Crawford, he isn’t so superior that a trade is necessary. Plus, given Snell’s overall lack of consistency and offensive inefficiencies (shooting 37.5 percent this season) the Clippers were better off parting with Stephenson (who was never having a major role under Doc) in exchange for Green.
Acquiring Snell just wouldn’t have made enough difference to make it worthwhile and there certainly isn’t a need for him and Green. In contrast to someone like Wesley Johnson or Green (who can be used as a small-ball power forward for added versatility), it’s hard to see how someone who’s normally restricted to the two and three spots would be a better option.
Next: Clippers must choose: Doc the GM or Doc the coach?
Again, the long-term draft impact of the Green deal can’t be ignored, and he still isn’t the answer to all the Clippers’ problems. Yet, when weighing up his athleticism, talent, and potential to make an impact in a larger role with a contender, he’s the better choice if Doc was only going to make one deal at the deadline.