Spurs should avoid reuniting with former Hall of Fame player at all costs

Player reunions often make a lot of sense, given the combination of familiarity with the players and scheme and the excitement it generates with fans. One reunion that must stay off the table, however, is Chris Paul returning to the San Antonio Spurs.

Last season worked out well for Paul and the Spurs. He joined the team and played in all 82 games, quite the feat for Paul in his age-39 season. He shot well enough from outside, sprayed assists around and was a part of the team's best lineups even as injuries and youth held them down.

This offseason, citing a desire to be closer to his family in Los Angeles, Paul left the Spurs and signed a one-year, minimum contract with the Los Angeles Clippers. That was a reunion itself, as Paul is arguably the best player in Clippers franchise history after spending seven seasons there.

Things have not gone well for Paul or the Clippers this season, however. Paul has been largely ineffective now that he is 40 years old, with his turnover rate going up and his assist and scoring rates going down. He is shooting just 33.3 percent from deep and a painful 30.8 percent from 2-point range; that latter number is a career-worst by a mile.

The Clippers are themselves in a freefall, 6-18 and in 14th-place in the Western Conference. The league's oldest team is one of its worst, and that is a recipe for disaster. With the Clippers losing, Paul's brand of barbed honesty and relentless pushing -- usually acceptable ingredients to baking a winning cake -- was not appreciated by a Clippers organization dealing with myriad crises.

The result? Paul was sent home, and the organization is looking to trade him.

The Spurs cannot trade for Chris Paul

Winning teams around the league should be asking themselves whether they should trade for Paul. He is on a minimum deal, easy enough to trade for, and he may still have something in the tank despite his horrible start with the Clippers this season. Given how poorly everyone on the team without an iconic beard is playing, Paul may do fine as a backup point guard in a different environment.

Should the Spurs be one of those teams to consider trading for Paul? While the benefits of adding a proven veteran who knows the playbook and has chemistry with most of the players seem fine on paper, once you peer closer, the answer reveals itself: No, the Spurs should not trade for Chris Paul.

On the list of needs for the Spurs, point guard help is at the very bottom of the list. De'Aaron Fox just signed his max extension, Dylan Harper looks like a future star, and Stephon Castle is trying his best to prove doubters wrong with a step forward this season. Even Jordan McLaughlin is a capable backup now slotted as the fourth-string point guard, and two-way guard David Jones Garcia blew up in the one game where he was pressed into full rotational duty.

Now add to the discussion that Paul influences the environment both on the court and off for any team he plays for, warping it to himself. Offenses play more slowly and deliberately when he is on the court; that worked when Paul was the pick and roll maestro of the league, but it's less effective now that he is a lesser player. And off the court, the Spurs organization doesn't want to sign itself up for Paul poking and prodding at every decision they make.

Paul is an underrated player in the all-time conversation, and he had a totally fine year on the Spurs last season. As he declines and the Spurs ascend, however, their breakup this summer was best for all sides. If the Clippers come calling, the Spurs need to say no and hang up the phone immediately. They cannot trade for Chris Paul.