Professional and College Basketball Forums banner

1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,582 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
What grade would you give the Clips for the moves they have done this offseason?

I would give them a C-. They had a poor draft in my opinon for immediate contribution. They need to win this year and they get a high school point:uhoh: and a second round point who seems to be more of a two. They havent upgraded there point guard position for right now but probably in the future. Also loosing Q and getting Kitlles was a lose in talent but could be better chemistry wise and for the future. But looking towards the futre had lasted way too long.I like the signing of Mikki Moore I think he will be a very good role player off the bench. I like Livingston for the future but they really should have gotten a veteran point to play ahead of him. I still dont believe Jaric is an answer as a starting point, he should be a verstaile bench player. Most of the improvment for next year has to be with the players on the team last year and their work that they have done in the off season.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
983 Posts
C+

Not a great offseason, but far from bad.

We did improve our PG position for this season.

A healthy Jaric, Livingston, and Chalmers is FAR superior to an injured Jaric, Doug Overton, and Keyon Dooling.

Even though it involves two youngers, both cannot possibly be worse than last years guys.

Also, why do the Clippers need to win now? I dont buy that won at all. Do you honestly expect them to turn from worst in the West to best in one season? That is unrealistic. With the talent and depth in the West, expecting them to turn things around in one season is not smart. As much as we do not like it, the best move is to play for 2/3 years down the road. That seems like its always the case, but some times, it is the best scenario. Its better to have a chance at greatness in 3 years than to always be below average. Not to mention, that there wasnt a player they could draft that would make them any more ofa winner now than Livingston would. Harris, Deng, etc are not good enough to make a big difference this year anyway. They too would be picks for 2/3 years down the road. Livingston happens to give us a different type of player, that is much rarer, and brings much more upside to it.

I like the Clips offseason. It could have been better, namely landing Kobe, but considering the lack of great players for us in FA, I think we did a good job. Next year's FA crop is something we need to make a run in. There are a few guys that can help us a lot, instead of just one like this year. I think bigger expectations are in order for this upcoming offseason.
 

·
Retired
Joined
·
17,913 Posts
I would give the Clippers a C+/B-. Why so high you ask? True, the Clippers didn't sign Kobe Bryant and made some moves that could have helped get Kobe that now look foolish. But the Clippers did make some right decisions. First they were able to trade their #2 for the #4 to get the player they wanted and did it by saving money, which is always good. Secondly, they made a giant trade to get Kittles for nothing, another great trade for the Clippers. This one though gets overshadowed by the fact that Q was no resigned by the Clippers. It was a big trade that doesn't get much credit. Thirdly, the Clippers filled some of the holes in their lineup by signing some players to short contracts that leaves another run at a big free agent next summer.

Not a great offseason, didn't get Kobe and didn't resign Q but it wasn't horrible. There was nothing more that could be done to get Kobe and Q was replaced by Kittles.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
983 Posts
Not getting Kobe means absolutely nothing to the Clippers grade.

Replacing Q with Kittles certainly does not mean a failing grade.

It basically sits it right at a C. The team did not get any worse, in fact, they upgraded their weaknesses and lost nothing in that swap.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,561 Posts
I say C-

Positive offseason moves:
Drafting Livingston
Getting Kittles

Negatives:
Dumping ely, house for nothing
Signing so many centers, while not (yet) getting depth at PF, SG, or SF.
Drafting Chalmers is a near negative, but we can only say that after a season.

Lets hold off on this thread until the start of the season. Then we will now the team the clipps end up with. Then lets revisit the thread after the season to see how things turned out
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
983 Posts
Drafting Chalmers is not near a negative. Thats ridiculous.

Chalmers was tearing it up in post season workouts and a lot of teams were after him. He was not a bad pick.

Even if he never does anything, he was a 2nd round pick, you never put any stock into a 2nd round pick failing.

As for trading House and Ely for nothing ... It was not nothing. 2 2nd round picks is not that big of a deal, but Eddie House absolutely sucks, and Melvin Ely never did a damn thing for this organization.

The offseason was not great, as they could have gotten a better backup wing than Quinton Ross, maybe could have added another PF(though I think Moore can fit as a 3rd PF). But people are going overboard in some of the things they are criticizing them on. Criticizing them for a 2nd round draft pick that had great workouts is not justified in the slightest. Criticizing them for making moves necessary to get Kobe which involves no players in our rotation, is not justified.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,561 Posts
For the clippers he was a bad pick. Id take a poor mans house before i draft chalmers. Before, i thought ely's contract was up after next season. i didnt know he had two years left. Clippers should have drafted another position with that 33rd pick. Most had chalmers going toward the latter picks of the second round. Even if no matter what, they were going to get rid of house, they could have got better talent/fit for the team at that position, and then if they really needed a scrub PG, go pay the min for a FA PG, chalmers will be lucky to put up doug overton numbers.

House averaged 7 points a game in less than 20 minutes a game for the clippers. If you classify that as "absolutely sucks" then give me a few of your sucky players, we could make a team. He was able to play both guard positions, had only 1 TO a game as opposed to 2.5 assists and rebounds. If im not mistaken, he had a game winning shot or two, or game tying shot to put the game into OT, etc.

Unlike ANY of the current 1000 centers the clippers have on the roster, ely has extensive playing time at both front court positions. Did he put up monster numbers? No, but for that trade definately is a loss this year since they get nothing back for it, and then they can only salvage something next year if they get someone in the draft who can match his output with the pick they got for him. I sure hope they do, but until that happens, i cant view that as a positive since for AT LEAST this year, that move is a loss. Lets hope that they are able to pick up another back up PF, or properly convert one of the 7 footers they have to a platoon PF/C combo.

Did that trade have to be a negative? No, of course we all know about the bryant deal falling through, but others also rejected the clippers, who could have made the deal worthwhile, since it freed up room. but, the only thing the cilppers have to show from the extra cap room is rebraca, whom the jury will be out on until he can actually play a full year. Id take house and ely over rebraca and chalmers. At the end of the year, lets hope the new clippers output can be greater than ely and house, but it will definately be beating the odds.
 

·
Steal of the Draft
Joined
·
8,043 Posts
Man, you poor fans need to boycott the damn team. Make Sterling sell, and take his cheap *** too the nearest dollar store.

Q was worth that contract....What a fricking cheapass.

Atleast Maggette will have a breakout year, if he can get any better, which might I add, I think he will.

BFreak.

PS:B-.
 

·
Retired
Joined
·
17,913 Posts
Originally posted by <b>Blazer Freak</b>!

Q was worth that contract....What a fricking cheapass.
I remember hearing somewhere, not sure if it's true, but Dunleavy was the one that didn't want Q and was content with Kittles; Baylor was all in favor of resigning Q.
 

·
Let's Go Streaking!
Joined
·
6,994 Posts
Originally posted by <b>yamaneko</b>!
I say C-

Positive offseason moves:
Drafting Livingston
Getting Kittles

Negatives:
Dumping ely, house for nothing
Signing so many centers, while not (yet) getting depth at PF, SG, or SF.
Drafting Chalmers is a near negative, but we can only say that after a season.

Lets hold off on this thread until the start of the season. Then we will now the team the clipps end up with. Then lets revisit the thread after the season to see how things turned out
Add to the bad moves let Q. go
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,561 Posts
Man, you poor fans need to boycott the damn team. Make Sterling sell, and take his cheap *** too the nearest dollar store.
Get educated...sterling is great. Please, tell me what moves that he has been documented to have made that have hurt the team. Ill give you 5 that helped the team.

Q was worth that contract....What a fricking cheapass.
It was never a matter of what was worth it. Kittles contract this year is A LOT bigger than richardsons first year would have been.

Add to the bad moves let Q. go
If you look at the deal itself, letting him go to get kittles, it was a good move. They now have a ball handler at the 2, someone who also can play the point, and a GREAT defender. Q might have more potential becauase hes younger, but kittles is a perfect fit, better than q for the system that dunleavy wants to run.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
983 Posts
Originally posted by <b>yamaneko</b>!
For the clippers he was a bad pick. Id take a poor mans house before i draft chalmers. Before, i thought ely's contract was up after next season. i didnt know he had two years left. Clippers should have drafted another position with that 33rd pick. Most had chalmers going toward the latter picks of the second round. Even if no matter what, they were going to get rid of house, they could have got better talent/fit for the team at that position, and then if they really needed a scrub PG, go pay the min for a FA PG, chalmers will be lucky to put up doug overton numbers.
There is no such thing as a poor mans House. Eddie House is a poor player period.

Lionel Chalmers was a player on the rise. From draftcity.com:

"Since there aren’t any scouting reports out there online about him, we’ll share a little bit of what we’ve been hearing over the past month or so. Chalmers is a scorer, and he’s one of the best in this draft at doing that. He’s extremely quick, with a great first step and enough strength and guts to finish strong at the basket when he gets to the hoop. In the NBA he will be a nice backup PG to bring off the bench in the 2nd and 3rd quarters to provide your team with instant offense, one of those rare guys that can create his own shot by killing you off the dribble, he creates for others mainly by creating for himself. He has an outstanding feel for the game; people say that if his teammate at Xavier Romain Sato (who is very robotic) had his excellent basketball instincts he would be a surefire first rounder. Chalmers is a terrific defender that loves to get in people’s chest. Best of all, he’s tough on both sides of the floor, mentally and physically. What they are saying about him (above) is true: he isn’t a true point guard and that his size is below average (6-0). In spite of that, Chalmers will almost certainly get drafted and if a team is looking for a scoring PG to bring off the bench for instant offense and defense, he is their guy. He has already surpassed Duhon and Burks on our and a few team’s draft boards to make him the best available PG in the 2nd round.

http://draftcity.com/articles/0052.htm

You can say he isnt good or he's a bad pick all you want, but its clear that it was not just the Clippers that liked Lionel Chalmers.

He is not a bad pick for this team. We had a pathetic PG situation last year, and all we did was bring in Shaun Livingston at the time we picked Chalmers. We needed another PG. With two 6'7 PG's, you need a PG that can cover quick point guards. Chalmers does that. He does that very well. With two pure, pass first point guards, you need a point guard that has a little ability to score on his own. Thats Chalmers best asset on offense. The Clippers needed on ball defense, period. Chalmers does that. EVERYTHING about Chalmers says he is a very good pick for the Clippers. He was a 2nd round pick for a reason, but as a 2nd round pick and 3rd PG, he is the IDEAL fit for this team. He was a better fit than a guy like Burks or a guy like Duhon or any other PG's out there.

As for taking another position, who was a better fit or pick?

At SG, we still were undecided. We could have had Q(or Im sure the team knew we would get a replacement for him or else we would have kept him), we had Maggette, we have Simmons, and we even have Jaric that can play SG. We also knew we could bring in Q. Ross because we had him last year, and Im positive we kept an eye on him). At C, we had Kaman, we own Sofoklis' rights, we have Josh Moore, and we have Chris Wilcox that can play minutes. We have our starter and our backup, and two projects. We didnt need another C project.

Now, I can see us taking a SF or a PF for depth. But, when you ask the question, what was our biggest weakness last year? I think every single one of us would agree that PG was a far bigger need. And while we added Livingston, we still had some issues(covering the smaller PG's, a 3rd PG etc) that needed to be addressed at that spot. So, the positions that we MAYBE should have address was PG, SF, and PF. But, at PF, with Brand and Wilcox, all we need simply is a body there. A 3rd PF that wont play unless he is hurt is a spot that can be had pretty easily. Also, any big man worth his height, is drafted considerably higher than a 2nd round pick.

Look at the players picked right after Chalmers:
Donta Smith 6'7 SG/SF, Andre Emmett 6'5 SG, Antonio Burks 6'1 PG, Royal Ivey 6'4 SG, Chris Duhon 6'2 PG.

Smith is 6'7, and with Maggette, Simmons, Q(or his replacement) we didnt need an undersized SF. So he didnt make sense. And that was the only other player that made any sense that went in Chalmers' range. The other guys were 2guards or PG's, so we clearly took the guy we felt was better(and the article above shows other teams were thinking the same thing). When you look further than the 5 picks after Chalmers, one was a PF that is not over this year(so it wouldnt have helped anyway), another was an undersized wing, another was a foreigner that is not coming over, etc. Afer that it was more and more guards. Look at the available options and Chalmers CLEARLY was the best fit for this team.

House averaged 7 points a game in less than 20 minutes a game for the clippers. If you classify that as "absolutely sucks" then give me a few of your sucky players, we could make a team. He was able to play both guard positions, had only 1 TO a game as opposed to 2.5 assists and rebounds. If im not mistaken, he had a game winning shot or two, or game tying shot to put the game into OT, etc.
Points are not the only qualification for a players talent level. Eddie House has a horrible shot selection, played no defense, hell, he couldnt even run an offense at all. There was a reason why he was not in our rotation despite having a pathetic PG situation. We went with Doug Overton before House for christ sake. That alone tells you all you need to know about Eddie House.

Unlike ANY of the current 1000 centers the clippers have on the roster, ely has extensive playing time at both front court positions.Did he put up monster numbers? No, but for that trade definately is a loss this year since they get nothing back for it, and then they can only salvage something next year if they get someone in the draft who can match his output with the pick they got for him. I sure hope they do, but until that happens, i cant view that as a positive since for AT LEAST this year, that move is a loss. Lets hope that they are able to pick up another back up PF, or properly convert one of the 7 footers they have to a platoon PF/C combo.
Thats not true. Melvin Ely has NO extensive playing time at all, let alone at both frontcourt spots. Melvin Ely averaged 14 minutes per game for 2 years. I dont consider that extensive PT at all, let alone when you consider it was between two positions.

I am a big Melvin Ely fan. I loved when we drafted him. However, the guy was a disappointment in his time here.

Also, lets not forget the reason Ely was traded:

We were trying to get Kobe Bryant.

It was a move that had to be made to try and get Kobe. If we hadnt made that move, people would have been *****ing that we are so inept that we couldnt even clear out cap room to go for Kobe.

We got two picks for Melvin Ely. While they are not great picks, it is something.

We do NOT lose anything for this upcoming season because of losing Ely.

Do you realize that Mikki Moore put up BETTER numbers than Melvin Ely last year? Moore alone replaces the impact Ely had on the court. When you also consider that we added Rebraca AND Chris Wilcox deserves more PT, we have lost NOTHING at the 4 or 5. In fact, we are considerably BETTER at the 4 and 5 depth wise right now.

At the end of the year, lets hope the new clippers output can be greater than ely and house, but it will definately be beating the odds.
It wont be beating the odds. Mikkie Moore's career numbers are better and last years numbers were better. We already know Mikki Moore can provide the impact(and then some) that Melvin Ely did. There is no question there. And thats not to mention that Moore is behind Rebraca on the depth chart, which means Rebraca is better as well. As for Eddie House, a guy who does one thing at a very inconsistent rate is very easy to replace.

You are talking about our 11th and 12th men essentially. Our offseason is not going to be judged by losing two scrub players(which they were for the Clippers). We have already addressed and upgraded from those guys. The only issue that can draw any criticism at all is the drafting of Shaun Livingston and the replacing of Q with Kerry Kittles. Those are the big moves. I for one am positive about those players. I think Shaun unquestionably was the right pick, and I think Kittles will be more important for us than Q was for us because of the things he brings to the table(his strength are our weaknesses, and Q's strengths are things that we are still very strong in).

Im not trying to say that we had a great offseason by any stretch or that Lionel Chalmers is going to be a stud. I just think we are trying to reach for things to criticize the team for because we have been upset with some moves the team has made in the past. We are programmed to think every move this team makes is bad because of some of the moves in the past. But, I do think Dunleavy is putting his stamp on these moves, and I am hopeful in that. I believe that the moves we have made are not moves that are going to put us on a championship level in the next year or two, but I believe they are moves that have us in the right direction. Thats something we have not had lately, and that alone makes it a positive offseason IMO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,561 Posts
Draft city didnt even give a guarantee that he would be drafted at all. They said he "almost certainly" would be drafted. Someone who is expected to contribute in the nba in their first year usually does not have that said about them...Saying hes better than the other PG's in the second round isnt saying much. THe PG's in the second round this year were garbage, and he might be the better one of them all. As i said many times, i just dont think the cilppers should have gone point guard with their pick. I would have liked to see them keep house as the emergency guy, (which in itself they didnt need to do since kittles will get some PT there).

There are many the clippers could have picked up with their pick
Donta Smith, Ariza, Jin, or possibly another european player that they could let develop a la jaric/sofo. I would have liked to see the clippers get a 20 year old or less center who would be more ready to play than sofo. I think jin could have been that guy. Either him, or possibly one of the 6'11" guys who could play either front court position. I also would have liked to see them get smith or aria...players who would not contribute that much this year, but who might be better than whomever the clippers pick up at training camp. (they most likely will sign two more SG;s/SF's.

Josh moore is a dud, and someone the clipps couldnt have had in mind when they were drafting. Other than that, they had drobniack to replace. SG/SF, they hadnt signed ross yet, and so they only ones they had signed were simmons, and magette, along with knowning they could get Q, bryant, or kittles. PF they could have gotten someone to back up wilcox as a 3rd stringer...Wilcox was not the backup center...clippers had only one center, unless we say that they didnt plan on trading ely until later.

I wouldnt call magette or simmons undersized forwards, because of their strenght and body type. By any means, chalmers was CLEARLY the wrong pick for the team. It would have been passable, if the clippers kept Q, and still got rid of house. They would have needed him, since they dumped dooling. If they werent sure if they were going to for sure give up house, get kittles, get bryant, etc. they should have stuck with that they knew they needed: Center, PF, or SG/SF.

House wasnt asked to run the offense hardly. He usually played SG, but also was the 3rd or 4th string PG. ANd he didnt hurt the team much when he was in there. Regardless of his shot selection, he still put up those points. Hes not a natural point, and i never said he was. Overton of course is the better point than him. However, for what he was called upon to do (the same as what chalmers M.O. will be) which is come in and play 20 minutes a game (chalmers most likely 3-5 mins to start), and play the SG and PG position, i dont see chalmers coming close to the output and clutch shooting that house could do. Better defense, most likely, but overall, id take house over chalmers 10 out of 10 times.

Ely DOES have extensive playing time at Center and powerforward inasmuch as he split almost 50/50 his minutes at those two positions. The guys the clippers have picked up have spent almost 100% of the time only at center. Thus they do not have extensive experience at the PF position, unlike ely who has played half of his career there.

We ARE loosing something by not having ely. were loosing the 3 points he can put up. He was traded for a draft pick which we wont get until next year. Saying miki moore did more than ely last year is meaningless. Were not just having to replace ely. Also the 6 points that drobniack contributed. Drobs also played both positions. To say that were more deep this year is a reach since thats dependent on one of the new guys to learn how to be the 3rd string PF as well. Its also contingent on them being able to replace the 10 points a game lost with ely and drobs. For PURE centers, were definately more deep since theres like 5 of them on the roster right now. But the front court as a whole i think is lacking until one of those guys can be moved to PF.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
983 Posts
Originally posted by <b>yamaneko</b>!

There are many the clippers could have picked up with their pick
Donta Smith, Ariza, Jin, or possibly another european player that they could let develop a la jaric/sofo. I would have liked to see the clippers get a 20 year old or less center who would be more ready to play than sofo. I think jin could have been that guy. Either him, or possibly one of the 6'11" guys who could play either front court position. I also would have liked to see them get smith or aria...players who would not contribute that much this year, but who might be better than whomever the clippers pick up at training camp. (they most likely will sign two more SG;s/SF's.
Why draft an undersized SF, when we already have a few of them? Donta Smith made no sense.

Ariza I could see. Although he was a big surprise where he was drafted because most thought he was a borderline draft pick at all, let alone a mid #2.

Jin makes absolutely no sense at all. A) We have enough young C's, B) we have enough project C's, C) he is the most unready of any player we would have if we would have taken him.

Jin is big, and thats about it. He is a HUGE project in terms of how long it will take for him to be ready to step on the court. If size were all that mattered, Moore would have been a fixture in our rotation from the getgo. Jin is not ready for any time at all in the NBA. So to say "someone ready for more time" doesnt make him the right pick, because he is not ready for any time at all.

You yourself said a 2nd round pick inst much, and you are trying to sit here and debate that a 2nd round pick was one of the reasons we had an unsuccessful offseason? A 2nd round pick has no bearing on the outcome of your offseason unless he is a great pick. Most 2nd rounders dont do jack, and it means nothing to how well your team plays. To criticize them for a 2nd round pick is really pushing it.

Name one of these 6'11 players that can play both froncourt spots that we could have had in the 2nd round? Players with any type of talent and that versatility are long gone. There was no one taken in the 15 picks after Chalmers that fits that description. Our 2nd round pick was essentially a low first rounder since it was so high. We took a talent that has been pointed out many teams coveted in this range. But you want to take a player that was on the verge of going undrafted, just to take a big man? If those guys had any talent, they would not be on the board at the end of the 2nd round. Its very rare to find a talent down that low. It is possible, but you are much more likely to get a better talent in the early 2nd round, and clearly, the Clippers rated Chalmers that high, and other teams felt the same way.

Josh moore is a dud, and someone the clipps couldnt have had in mind when they were drafting. Other than that, they had drobniack to replace.
Josh Moore is every bit the talent Jin is, along with more mobility. If Moore is a dud, then Jin is a dud.

Moore is a project, and even though he hasnt done much yet, doesnt mean anything. A lot of big men dont turn into contributors until after a few years in the league to develop. He is a guy that should factor in if you are looking at a project C, because thats exactly what he is, and he is still very young himself. He may not factor into a key player in our future, but strictly speaking of taking a project C, we have him, and we have Sofo overseas. There was absolutely no point at all to drafting a C when we had other spots to fill.

SG/SF, they hadnt signed ross yet, and so they only ones they had signed were simmons, and magette, along with knowning they could get Q, bryant, or kittles. PF they could have gotten someone to back up wilcox as a 3rd stringer...Wilcox was not the backup center...clippers had only one center, unless we say that they didnt plan on trading ely until later.
We've kept our eye on Ross for the past year. We had him in camp last year. We knew we could have him if we wanted. His talent is basically that of a 2nd rounder - Some talent, but things to work on, but some upside possibly. There was no point in drafting a 2nd round swingmen when we knew we had him in the wings. You even say we knew we had our two starters, and a key backup, so why take another swingman when we know we can get a similar talent without taking a pick in Ross? If there was a taller SF available, I could see the point, but all the guys around our range were similar to guys we already have.

I wouldnt have minded grabbing a PF to backup Wilcox. But, for what? Him and Brand will take up just about eveyr minute at PF as long as they are healthy. If one of them go down, its not like we are going to rely on a 2nd round draft pick PF to step into the rotation. We might as well target a player in FA to be a 3rd string PF, since they are more ready to play than a 2nd round draft pick PF(because talented bigs who are ready always go higher). There was no need to waste the pick. We already have our starter, and a young player with huge upside at PF. All we needed was someone to provide depth, and you can get that in FA, and we did in Mikki Moore.

Wilcox WAS the backup C. He even started games at C. He certainly does factor into the C rotation, because he playd there quite a bit last year.

I wouldnt call magette or simmons undersized forwards, because of their strenght and body type.
Being 6'6 or 6'7 clearly makes you an undersized forward. No matter how strong you are, the 6'9/10/11 SF's in the league ATE up Maggette and Simmons. They can shoot right over them on the perimeter and in the post. These players are good off the dribble, but when they go up against the taller SF's, they struggle. There is no debating that.


By any means, chalmers was CLEARLY the wrong pick for the team.
Nope. Ive pointed out specific reasons why he was a good fit and pick for this team. You're just too stubborn to realize it and acknowledge it. I even admitted I wouldnt have minded a taller SF or a PF, admitting that you do bring up a good point. But, there wasnt anyone drafted around our range that fit that mold, and we did make the right pick.

House wasnt asked to run the offense hardly.
Because he couldnt. House clearly has to play PG to get any legit PT in the NBA. ANd the fact that we went with Doug Overton over him shows how much we thought of him. House could take spot minutes at SG, but he couldnt do anything more than that because he is a huge liability on the floor. The amount we played him shows how much we thought of him - at PG or SG.

Ely DOES have extensive playing time at Center and powerforward inasmuch as he split almost 50/50 his minutes at those two positions. The guys the clippers have picked up have spent almost 100% of the time only at center. Thus they do not have extensive experience at the PF position, unlike ely who has played half of his career there.
Ely has not played extensive minutes in the NBA. Period. Averaging 14 minutes over two seasons does not quality as extensive minutes. So you say he split time at both spots, so 7 minutes at PF and 7 minutes at C qualifies as extensive minutes? How does that work? 14 minutes for a developed, 5 year collegian draftedi n the lottery shows he's been a flop with us.

We ARE loosing something by not having ely. were loosing the 3 points he can put up. He was traded for a draft pick which we wont get until next year. Saying miki moore did more than ely last year is meaningless. Were not just having to replace ely. Also the 6 points that drobniack contributed.
Saying Moore did more than Ely is not meaningless. Its only meaningless because it is irrefutable evidence that losing Ely does not make this team worse. Mikkie Moore IS replacing Melvin Ely. He is our 3rd string C and 3rd string PF - The exact role Ely played, and he put up better numbers last year and during his career. We have lost NOTHING.

We have to replace DRobo .... And we brought in Rebraca. Its not like we are replacing Drobo and Ely with one player. We brought in two specific players to replace them. And the point issue is a non issue. All you keep pointing to to compare guys is points. Since when is points the only factor to figure in? So what, we lose 9 points? Big deal? That is very easy to cover up. I guarantee you that Rebraca and Moore will replace the 9 points a game those two put up. But, they will also bring considerably better defense(as Drobo was a woman in the paint, and played no D at all) and rebounding. The overall game of our backup big men has improved. Also, this is not to mention that the points we lose by letting Drobo and Ely go, will also be replaced by the development and more playing time of Chris Kaman at the 5. Also, Chris Wilcox since he plays both spots.

There is not one thing you can point to and say we lost at the PF/C positions. The only thing you can point to are things that we improved on. That means we improved, we did not get worse.

For PURE centers, were definately more deep since theres like 5 of them on the roster right now. But the front court as a whole i think is lacking until one of those guys can be moved to PF.
We are deeper with pure C's sine last year we only had one. This year we have 3, though only two should be playing(Kaman and Rebraca). N'Diaye or Moore(I dont know if both make the roster) shouldnt be playing. Mikkie Moore is not a true C, and he fills the exact role that Melvin Ely did, except he does it better. Thats how we are better at the 4 and 5. If we replace the guy that played that role with someone who puts up better numbers, explain how we have not improved?

You are really stretching for things to criticize and refuse to acknowledge when someone else brings up a point to prove you wrong. The things you criticize in this post, are completely off base. Thats on top of the fact that criticizing them for a 2nd round pick and for their 11 and 12 men is pretty ridiculous. Those are the easy moves to make, and its clear that inthose moves, we have made distinct upgrades. The big moves are the ones that make your offseason a failure or success. And the only big moves we made was drafting Shaun Livingston and getting Kerry Kittles. And by your own admission by looking through posts, both moves were good. So if our two big moves were good, and we improved on the bottom level talent of our team, how is it a bad off season at all?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,582 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
The Clips should have chosen Minard,Pickett,Emmet over Chalmers I think all three will be solid 2 in their careers and already are better than Ross. Point guards all over the place Europe,CBA. Look at the players they have developed out of the Minor Leages-Hudson and McInnis. I would rather try that than get a point with that high of a second round pick.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
983 Posts
A PG is considerably harder to find than a SG.

Obvioulsy many other teams felt that Minard and Pickett were not worth a high 2nd round pick, as both players were taken in the last half of the 2nd. Emmett was taken right behind Chalmers, but I fail to see the point of drafting a wing thta has the game of a 3, but the size of a 2. We already have two of those(and at the time, Q was in consideration, making it potentially 3). He would have served no purpose for this team. The other two were undersized two guards, and again, I dont see the reason why they would be a better fit on this team.
Hell, we worked out Minard twice and obviously Chalmers outplayed him or we wouldnt have taken Chalmers over him.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,922 Posts
Originally posted by <b>RD</b>!
Hell, we worked out Minard twice and obviously Chalmers outplayed him or we wouldnt have taken Chalmers over him.
That would be true if that were known for a fact..

However what I heard from someone who was actually at the Livingston, Minard, Chalmers, and Gordon workout right before the draf,t fact disputes your theory.

Minard was considered #2 at that workout.

Regardless, I totally agree with Yama, Chalmers is a yawn pick, if we were that in love with Chalmers, why was Dunleavy flying to New York to watch Kareem Reid workout just a few weeks ago?

We already had a Chalmers, and that was Eddie House, who was better and maybe a whole $500,000 more expensive.

The Knicks are going to look really good in 2 years for picking Ariza, I would have taken him, Minard, Emmett, and I said all along, if we wanted a PG in the 2nd round, we should have taken Antonio Burks instead of Chalmers.
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Top