Weasel

http://www.latimes.com/sports/basket...rts-nba-clippe

Some excellent points in this article. First point that the Clippers will be actively persuing key free-agents. Second, Simmons wants to stay and likes Dunleavy and Baylor. Third, that Rebraca is wanted back and he WANTS to be back. Fourth, Mobley is interested in the Clippers.

__________________

CDRacingZX6R

First off, you need to get more sleep.. These late hours are unhealthy.

Second, I like the idea of Mobley coming to town. But at the same time the guys 30 years old.... If we have to give up signing a young up and coming Bobby Simmons for the guy that would just plain out suck.

Depends on the price.

__________________

Weasel

__________________

Free Arsenal

I like Rebraca, but not as much as I like Simmons.

__________________
Davis Davis Davis Davis

Starbury03

Rebracca and Simmons coming back are key to this teams future success. One guy I wold like the Clippers to take a look at who isnt a great shooter but decent is Maurice Evans from the Kings.

__________________
I front like my dudu don't stink.

qross1fan

keep Zeljko, i mean he got double teamed coming OFF the bench, not many other people do that

Free Arsenal

The downside about Rebraca, heart problems, if he didn't have them he could be damn well unstoppable.

__________________
Davis Davis Davis Davis

yamaneko

rebraca is ok but look how many games he missed last year. if he has recovered from his injuries and puts in a good 75-80 games for us at the same level as the last quarter of the season last year, then hes a decent backup, worth the price of admission (3.5 million-4 million)

__________________
08-09 Clippers - One more piece away from relativity

Showtime87

As far as I'm concerned, my approach this offseason is free agents be damned. More pressing issues are at hand for the Clippers. If in the end the Clippers brass decides to focus solely on re-signing all six free agents and putting the free agents on the back burner I would be more than content with that. Simply put, anybody who knows this team and it's inner-workings/keys to success last season/cohesiveness knows that priority one above all else is unquestionably the re-signing Bobby Simmons. There simply is no question about it, if they slack on this one and continue to pursue the "sexy" free agents rather than first taking care of their own, this team could end up badly scarred and set aback quite considerably.

Addition by subtraction is for those who are bad at math and for the ones who can't grasp the value of a player who possesses not only quality talent, but the work ethic, determination and willingness required to continually improve himself and contribute to the betterment of his team at the same time. Bobby Simmons is the very definition of this type of player, but the bittersweet dicotomy is that he's just beginning to scratch the surface on his limitless potential. Not only is he still a young player, he's a young player with experience who is still several years from the prime of his career. What more could you ask for? The man is willing to sacrifice without fail in order to see his team succeed, he doesn't question or criticize his coach or managerial authorities, nor does he complain about his contract. All he does is give his best effort 100% of the time when he laces up, that's something you cannot fake, nor can you put a pricetag on. My worst fear is seeing him let loose, watching him welcome to a contending team in full-embrace and subsequently seeing his game blossom over course of the next 3 to 5 years knowing how valuable such a contribution could have been to the Clippers.

My bottom line statement is this. Not landing a prized free agent will not hurt neary as much as it will to have to look back and realize that losing Bobby Simmons was a flat fatal mistake for this franchise. These players are the keys to success on any team, bar none. Can you even begin to quantify the value of Robert Horry's timely contributions and positive attitude over the years? While such numerous clutch performances are due in part to time and place respectively, it cannot be overlooked that every place he goes, his team is invariably in a prime position to win. That's not coincidental. I will continue to plea and prod, maybe on deaf ears as far as the Clippers organization is concerned, but I know that everybody how out there who cares about this team like I do feels where I'm coming from. After all, isn't Bobby Simmons at least a partial reason that Quentin Richardson was given a clear path out of town last year? It would be such a shame to make oneself look so impressively shrewd, then turn around and reveal nothing more than an ugly mask of ignorance.

yamaneko

COuldnt disagree more. Clippers for years have had teams with chemistry, players "wanting to work hard", , etc. etc. Where has it gotten them? no where. WHich is why 3 years ago sterling and baylor committed themselves to getting an all star/ SG/SF who could be a go to player. Clippers have tried every other combination of players, of talent, of coaching, etc., this is the only thing they have been lacking. Q rich has nothing to do with Bobby simmons. Qrich was let for for a number of reasons, 1. In order to lure Kobe, 2. the fact that if they signed him, they could not get the wanted go to player in this years FA crop, 3. injury concerns from the doctors. 4. his style of play did not make him a good fit to be paired with maggette.

We could put a whole team of people who give 110% together, but if they are all mark madsens, where would that get us? No where. Attitude, effort, etc. while important, only get you so far. Attitude does not make you a clucth player. Being a good citizen does not make teams double team you opening up options for your teammates.

This is why sterling and baylor have been pursuing a top calliber player for some time now. WIth the new makeup of the west, a SG/SF combo of simmons and maggette is not even close to a guarnatee at the playoffs. Of course its better than nothing, but there is no way the clippers make simmons the priority over allen, etc. this off season, otherwise simmons would be locked up already with a verbal deal.

Clippers lost more than 20 games last year 5 or fewer points. If you watched the clippers games you would notice that they alawys choked at the end of the games. No one wanted the ball, the ones who did didnt know what to do with it, turnovers, mental mistakes, no open shots because no one needed to be double teamed, etc. etc. When you have a pierce or allen, first of all, they are clutch players. They take over games at the end. Worst case scenario, the other team knows this, they double team that player, thus opening up wide open looks for the likes of brand, livingston, kaman, etc. THIS is what the clippers need. If they cant get a player like that, THEN, by all means, try to lock up simmoons for now, for at least trade bait for him or maggette to try and trade for a player like that down the road.

__________________
08-09 Clippers - One more piece away from relativity

Showtime87

While to some extent we definitely have differing philosophies, we also agree on many key points. Firstly, understand that I know as well as anybody how sorely in need were the Clippers in late-game situations. I saw each successive, painfully frustrating missed free-throw, poorly executed play and mismanagement of anything and everything on an uncanny, disturbing level. Now then, I also remember the ways in which the Clippers won their basketball games last year. I watched them execute flawless pick & rolls, I witnessed them passing the ball frenetically until finding the open man with the best look at the basket. In addition, I also know that the Clippers lost 19 games (I thought it was) by five or fewer points, the three most memorable by one point each to the Spurs, Jazz and Kings to whom the Clippers also giftwrapped a four-point loss to at home after holding the lead deep into the fourth quarter. Trust me, I'm familiar with the numbers, the blunders, most of the details I don't want to remember but can't seem to let go of.

The very funny thing about this sort of Jeckyll & Hyde personality is that there is rarely anything discernable between the execution in wins and the dysfunction in losses. A young team like this doesn't just "choke" games away because they revel in it, they gave those games away last year due in large part to a pure lack of experience and experienced winning players. What I'm saying is that one night you would see Jaric bring the ball up, throw a shoulder fake at the top of the key, slice to the hoop and either finish off the play or dish to a ready Brand/Moore/Kaman etc for the easy duece. The following night you would witness the identical play with the exception of one terribly youthful mistake. This time, rather than Marko shaking his defender and going to the hoop, he makes the identical move as the previous time. First slipping his defender at half-court off the in-bound pass, then a quick juke and determined advance to the goal, but somehow along the way instead of the effortless, masterful slice to the hoop, a twitch of the wrist or split second of indecision causes the ball to hit more sneaker than hardwood propelling it out of bounds or worse, into the hands of an opponent with momentum who starts the fast-break and converts on the other end, at the same moment killing all momentum and crushing the fragile psyche of a young player ill-equipped to the crucial point in the game called "winning time". make an ill-advised pass at the worst possible moment or pull up from 25 and launch a certified brick over an outstreched defender.

No stranger to these situations since arriving in the league was Corey Maggette. While Maggs made his share of game-saving buckets, he also cost the team just as many games by exhibiting a young player's lack of winning experience. A free-throw shooter hitting his throws at a rate of nearly 90%, Corey had a bad habit of losing focus at the most inopportune times. This simple lack of focus and experience proved fatal on more than one occasion. Again, you can't instill winning experience in a player, it has to be earned and cultivated with time. Bobby Simmons was guilty a few times, Rick Brunson, while a veteran, none-too-familiar with being on the floor at such crucial moments gaffed two games consecutively when he had better than averages looks at a moderately difficult, but very makeable shot. The instances are numerous, but the causes of the negative result are simple and correctable.

When you have a team with an average age of 26 years and change, a composite winning percentage around .300 and as much big game NBA experience as the little old ladies from the nursing home, the fact is you're simply going to have to take some tough beats before you see a polished winning machine which executes with the slightest amount of confidence. Sure, Ray Allen may theoretically hit two or big shots to put the Clippers over the top when they need it. But, by the same token how do you guarantee that the ball is in his hands in every clutch situation? How do you help him beat coverage from an opponent like Bruce Bowen? I did not at all like the loss of composure that I saw from him when Bowen covered him so tightly that he couldn't even see the basket, let alone get a clear, squared look at his signature jumer in the late minutes. He was essentially rendered void, his head was not where it should have been. At that point you might as well have had the most splinter-laden bench jokey out there in his place.

Essentially, what I'm trying to relay here is that a team is going to win and lose games for numerous reasons, mostly of which are not attributable to the heroic glory of a buzzer-beating jumpshot. Teams are conscious of who should or should not be denied the ball late in the game. While Corey Maggette due to his lack of experience in such situations will not be keyed on as closely in such situations, due to his tendency to falter under pressure. A player with Ray Allen's reputation will conversely attract tight, primary coverage and will be denied the opportunity to be the closer much more often than not. I know this through personal experience if nothing else, my game was all perimeter when I began playing serious, competitive basketball. Due to my lack of a more well-rounded game I could get by unnoticed for the most part sinking threes and long jumpers at will, then when crunch time came I began to draw the toughest defender who shadowed me at the expense of giving up occasional outnumbered opporunities. It goes without saying, that while I could sometimes get control of the ball, the strength of my game was taken away almost completely. I was forced to pass out of coverage and do everything possible just to hit the boards at a considerable height disadvantage just to pick up a few garbage points for my team. Perimeter players are a valuable commodity in today's game, but if their reputation is that of a shooter and they're high-profile, they'll be doomed to a career of late-game frustration. The only able to overcome this are the rare players with the speed and elusiveness like Reggie Miller and Rip Hamilton. Jordan also did it, but he was Jordan.

It's just a bad idea to dole out maximum contracts for high-priced free agents who, coincidentally bring zero championship experience nor exemplary leadership qualities to the table. It does not make an also-ran into a champion. It simply makes them a slightly better also-ran. A team who ends up capped out and unable to re-sign young players who have emerged within those five seasons. Now you end up with unhappy pampered stars who have huge contracts and are completely void of inspiration due to the team's struggles. It also doesn't do much for team morale to bring in an outsider and hand him the keys to the mansion when you've been sweeping the floors and paying your dues just to get the contract that you rightly deserve.

Why cripple your franchise for a shot at improving yourself to a questionable degree? Now if you're knocking at the door and the only thing lying between you and a ring is one more dependable shooter, that is definitely a different story. The reward is more likely to be worth the risk in that case. But taking a step back, do the Clippers honestly strike you as that kind of team? Do you see a team that by virtue of adding one blockbuster name will be catapulted to the upper echelon of the western conference? Or, more realistically the will they improve slightly while creating a bit more of buzz in the media which is really nothing more than bloated hype? The latter tends to be the result in cases where teams try to go straight into a full-sprint rather than stacking their blocks to success one by one.

One thing that will always hold true and separate a winning team from a contending team. Leadership and drive, these qualities start with the top man on the ladder, reinforced by his support system of coaches and transferred to the leader(s) among the players on the floor. These teams do not succeed based exclusively one or two players with multi-million contracts and household names. They're teams in a truest sense. A team like the Pistons, coached by one of the greatest strategists and basketball minds in the game's history Larry Brown. The San Antonio Spurs, driven by the strong experience, discipline and leadership qualities from the head coach Gregg Popovich and right down the line from assistants to floor leaders. The Lakers of the past decade were another example. While different in that they were fortunate enough to have the two most dominant forces in the front and back court who together were also driven by ego and competitive spirit. Though these two would never have reached the level of success that they enjoyed without the support of surrounding reinforcements like Derek Fisher, Robert Horry, Rick Fox, Devean George and numerous others.

The secret to perennial success with such franchises lies in the fact that they:

1) Build around their cornerstone players, often "homegrown" players drafted and acclimated to that their teams from the inception of their career. Must have a determined attitude in terms of winning and be highly driven to compete and succeed.

2) Consistently have balanced, complete rosters from top to bottom. These teams have players on the end of the bench who will be called upon to answer the bell when needed. These players are almost always veterans in or nearing the twilight of their careers but still possessing solid talent, experience, intelligence and game-savvy.

3) Consistently have teams drilled in fundamentals and experienced in every game situation. Teams like this do not get rattled when the game is on the line, no matter the stakes. This is something that is gained via experience, inexeperienced teams cannot not gain this valuable knowledge without earning it first hand. You can't teach it, you can't preach it, you can't bottle and sell it. Real-game situations are a must in order for the player to internalize, compute and hopefully correct the mistakes and poor decisions all the while subconsciously polishing their mental and reflexive skills. This is why teams such as the United State's last Olympic unit failed so thoroughly when challenged by experienced team-oriented opponents drilled fundamentally and far more polished and savvy than the talent on the team USA roster.

Now, in an effort to continue the beating of the horse: I don't think that adding a player like Ray Allen ever necessarily harms your team, but I simply don't feel that he's anywhere near a necessity for the Clippers at this moment. The order of the day should be to maintain this current team who has not only the chemistry you alluded to (which, I'm sorry to disagree has not always been present in Clipperland) combined with the workmanlike mentality and toughness they possess. I think you may be mistaking a collection of vagabonds who have accepted the fact that they've never been on winning teams and they likely never will. They are all accustomed to similar roles of very limited responisibilty due either to their lack of overall skillfulness, or possibly their lack of motivation which therefore leaves these them feeling entitled to their carefree, just collecting a check attitude. These players have been staples of the old Clipper teams, I agree with you there. LOL. Otherwise, this team doesn't have any oafs taking up space on the bench. Dunleavy would most assuredly smell somebody like that and make sure they were disposed of properly.

Maybe I'm a lifelong basketball fan who knows absolutely nothing about the game and prefers a happy blissful ignorance, but what I see here is a unique combination of players who are young and raw for the most part, but with the ability to do great things. Strong leadership is intact, now if only the majority of them at least can be retained, they can start to gain the comfort and ease of knowing each other's game and abilities. Maybe perfecting strategies that maximize their strength and minimize their weaker points. The fine tuning of the game can be a moderately important building block as well, I've never seen it hurt a team. That's usually how you start on the road to success, but I may be totally offbase with that theory.

Hey, of course a tweak here and there is bound to be necessary, but don't blow the thing up because of a few percieved setbacks or lack of patience. A funny thing can happen when players aren't permeated by preconcieved notions, and self-doubt. One thing leads to another, they start to develop the self-fulfilling quality that comes with the belief in oneself. That sometimes catches on and spreads throughout the entire team, infecting even those on the injured list and in rare cases possibly even a few scattered fans of the team. Losers will always be losers because they have accepted losing. They think like losers and perform accordingly. This team doesn't portray that attitude, some may lack the experience right now, they just need time. No sense in breaking the bank and upsetting the ship for a shot at adding a player who lights up the scoreboard with no substantial history or reputation for doing anything other than that alone. It's a needless quick-fix theory which will not work in the long run.

Re-sign Simmons, Rebraca, Moore and Brunson. Stick with the guys who have brought you this far, while keeping in mind that you went without nearly all of them at some point in the previous season in successive order and still managed to stay competitive. Maybe it's not a fluke? Go after two veterans, one PG like an Earl Watson or Brevin Knight and possibly a veteran SG like Cuttino Mobley, who at 30 years old is NOT EVEN CLOSE to being done. These are his prime years physically and game-wise as well. Take an "old-man's" word, a dog doesn't forget how to scratch and a shooter doesn't forget how to shoot. Trite, but every bit the truth. One other interesting perk also begins to pop up as age catches up with us, an innate combination knowledge and experience that in some ways fosters precognitive (anticipation) abilities which help to compensate for aging joints and sore muscles. I'm not saying that I am an authority on anything, these are simply the opinions I've formed from many years of living, studying and playing the game I love. It would be quite a bore to receive nothing but agreeable comments and retorts to everthing. That's the beauty of intelligent, informed banter between worthy adversaries. Nobody loses in the sharing of concepts and ideas. It's all about knowledge.

PS - I am prone to the occasionaly unprevoked flip comment every now and then. It's all in good fun, I never intend to insult or demean anybody's thoughts, ideas, opinions or any differing concept. I really just lik