What to Make of the Clippers' Decision to Pay Bradley Beal Instead of Bennedict Mathurin

The Los Angeles Clippers aren't entirely done constructing their roster for next season, but we at least have a good idea of what it will look like. Assuming the Kawhi Leonard trade goes through, that is.

One remaining big offseason decision for the Clippers was the restricted free agency of Bennedict Mathurin. Many assumed that he would be back in LA after just having been acquired from the Pacers at the trade deadline. After the arrival of Keaton Wagler and Max Strus and the re-signing of Bradley Beal, however, the writing was on the wall for Mathurin.

Yet, it was still shocking for some Clippers fans to see that Mathurin only signed a two-year, $16 million deal with the New Orleans Pelicans. This meant that the Clippers could have easily signed him to a similar contract without dipping into the luxury tax. Or, they could have just paid Mathurin instead of Beal.

Earlier in the offseason, the Clippers signed Beal to a two-year, $13 million contract. Similar to Mathurin's contract with the Pelicans, it has a player option in the second season.

These deals are as similar contracts as they come. But the Clippers chose to give it to a 33-year-old, injury-prone shooting guard rather than a 24-year-old player with some upside who plays the same position.

Why Would the Clippers Choose Bradley Beal Over Bennedict Mathurin?

There are some basketball reasons that make Beal a better fit. He is a far better shooter and playmaker than Mathurin. He can fit around other on-ball creators better than Mathurin. If he is physically fit, he may be a better defender than the former Pacer as well.

If the Clippers were trying to win a championship over the next two seasons, perhaps this would have made some sense. Taking a chance on Beal and hoping that he stays healthy could give your team a boost in title hopes.

But the Clippers are not a title contender. They are likely not even a playoff team. They need to focus on the future rather than the present. Even if we accept the notion that Beal is a better player when healthy, what is the point of the Clippers giving the same contract to a 33-year-old rather than a 24-year-old?

Let's say Beal had the best possible realistic season. He plays 60 games, averages 15 points and 5 assists on 60% True Shooting. The Clippers go .500 and make the Play-In Tournament. What does that really accomplish for the future of this franchise? Beal likely opts out of his player option and signs a lucrative, long-term deal, either with the Clippers or elsewhere.

And what even are the chances of that happening? Can Beal really have a more impactful and productive season than Mathurin at this stage of his career?

This suggests that there might be non-basketball reasons for this decision. When Beal's contract was bought out by the Suns last year, he gave back $13.9 million of his remaining $110 million in salary. He quickly proceeded to sign a two-year, $11 million contract with the Clippers. Despite spending the entire season sidelined and undergoing hip surgery, he opted out of his player option and signed a new deal with the Clippers that paid him more money.

In fact, the $13.2 million contract he just signed with the Clippers almost equals the amount he gave back to Phoenix. One can't help but think that there must have been an agreement in place already. What else would explain the pay raise Beal got when he played only six games last season?

Mathurin ended up being the sacrificial lamb of this likely wink-wink deal between the Clippers and Beal. Let's hope that the Clippers don't end up regretting this.

Add us as a preferred source on Google