Even when they stumble to a dismal 19-63 record, the Clippers manage to keep it interesting. Whether they’re lucking their way to the top pick in the draft, assembling a roster of high-priced malcontents, or deflecting another bizarre story about their owner, the Clips never deprive their fans and observers of stuff to talk about. Over the next week or so, Steve Perrin of Clips Nation and I will explore it all — the rebuilding process (or lack thereof), trade speculation, the trials of Nación citizenship (and postnationalism), Zach Randolph, and the “It’s the Clippers” shibboleth. Here’s our first installment:
From: Kevin Arnovitz
To: Steve Perrin
Date: June 3, 2009
Steve:
It’s hard to pinpoint exactly where to begin a dialogue about the state of the Clippers. Should we zero in on the upcoming draft and the prospect of Blake Griffin joining the team? Should we fully diagnose what the Clippers need to do on their long road back to respectability? Should we take a look at the franchise from 30,000 feet and survey all the destruction since the hopeful days of the youth movement and the 2005-06 run? Should we answer the persistent, facile “It’s the Clippers” rap that infects most discussions about the club? I suspect we’ll touch on all the above.
I hit a crisis point this last season trying to blog the Clippers. I started Clipperblog in the winter of 2006 because the team was playing quality basketball that was, by and large, going uncovered. The basketball is what lured me to the blogosphere and what kept me writing late into the night. The Clippers were only a middle-of-the-pack offensive squad that season, but more nights than not, they exhibited a coherent, watchable brand of basketball — and, man, did they play some good defense. Breaking down Clippers games was a fun exercise, and even when they played badly, the loss was part of a larger narrative that meant something.
Maybe I’m the fair-weather type, but if the basketball isn’t worth a thoughtful critical analysis, I have a difficult time maintaining interest. That might be more of a commentary on the craft of blogging than it is on the Los Angeles Clippers. I imagine most restaurant critics love their jobs — but what would happen if they were restricted to only the worst joints in town?
Last season, the Clippers ceased to be interesting from a basketball standpoint with a few exceptions — Eric Gordon’s maturation, the two or three Mike Taylor games, the challenge of getting a limited, but prolific shooter like Steve Novak shots. Apart from that, it was painful to dissect — much more so than the losing teams at the beginning of the decade. To put it in the simplest possible terms, I have no idea what the current team aspires to be, what it wants to accomplish on a given offensive possession, or hopes to deny on a defensive one.
There’s something instructive about having this conversation in the shadow of the NBA Finals. Over the past few weeks, we’ve seen a lot of good basketball played by smart, well-assembled teams who know what they’re doing. In contrast to what we had to endure for six months, Orlando has been a revelation of what an adroit system looks like in the hands of players who understand (and have been conditioned to understand) how to maximize their talents on the floor. It isn’t just the Magic. Houston demonstrated what a franchise can do by making good choices with empirical savvy. The Bulls, decimated by injuries and reconstructed on the fly, still achieved a measure of success, even with an unexceptional coach. The Nuggets weren’t expected to compete for anything this season, but by not being afraid to take risks, Mark Warkentien remade a team with a semi-toxic culture into a winner.
Let’s fast forward exactly one year. In an ideal world, is there a hypothetical sentence about the 2009-10 Clippers that could fit snugly at the end of the preceding paragraph?
25 Responses
“but if the basketball isn’t worth a thoughtful critical analysis, I have a difficult time maintaining interest.”
That is what is so great about basketball. It really can have a thoughtful analysis on any game. Even if it is a youth girls game, you can have critcal analysis.
The Clippers are on the high end of the analysis though as they have so much talent, but such a horrible team. It will be interesting to see what happens.
http://therookiecontract.com/
[Reply]
Posted on June 3rd, 2009 at 9:55 am
can we somehow waive zach randolph?
[Reply]
Posted on June 3rd, 2009 at 11:06 am
i’m hopefull the sentence can at least be:
“With Eric Gordon and Blake Griffin playing better than could be asked for, the Clippers at least learned to close out the games they should and occasionally surprised the big boys.”
[Reply]
Posted on June 3rd, 2009 at 1:17 pm
They still ZR. This a long season you never know what will happen. If they decide to trade him, they still need another PF.
[Reply]
bootstrenf Reply:
June 3rd, 2009 at 2:53 pm
with a 4/5 rotation of griffin/novak/thornton/camby/kaman/jordan would be more than adequate….
zach randolph is not needed…..he is a 5th wheel, or in this case, the 7th wheel….
[Reply]
JOhn Reply:
June 3rd, 2009 at 4:38 pm
Am I alone in thinking that given the similar deficiencies of Thornton and Zach–coupled with the size of Zach’s contract and relative difficulty in moving it–that we’re better off trying to move Thornton? KA has written time and time again about how Thornton is not going to develop into the complete wing player that this team needs. Personally I like having Zach as a clip for what it’s worth, he is an efficient scorer and a dominant rebounder…i maintain the opinion that he can be an important piece on a playoff team.
[Reply]
James Reply:
June 3rd, 2009 at 5:03 pm
Couldn’t agree with you more. Z-BO played very well until Voskuhl mauled him and his dad began having the big health problems. Everybody complains about his D, but we knew that when he was aquired. His virtually impossible to guard, we should trade thornton while his value is high and get a defensive specialist or sign Ariza.
[Reply]
bootstrenf Reply:
June 3rd, 2009 at 5:25 pm
how is he impossible to guard???
double him in the paint, and sag off him one on one on the perimeter…
he’s too stupid to pass out of doubles when he’s posted….
when you sag off him on the perimter, he takes stupid long jumpers
that miss more often than make…..
he scores a lot yes, but he also takes a lot of shots…
mandru Reply:
June 4th, 2009 at 7:40 am
Ariza would never leave the Lakers for the Clippers. Any other team but the Clippers.
That would be humiliating…
mandru Reply:
June 4th, 2009 at 7:39 am
High trade value for Thornton? I think not… On any other team he’s an streaky energy guy/scorer off the bench. He’s just one fifth of a Ben Gordon in my opinion.
He only make 1.8/year too, so he wouldn’t even help us dump a contract. Comparing Z-Bo to Thornton in trade value is far-reaching.
Keep Thornton, he won’t be making more than 3/year if he doesn’t improve which is a decent price for the kind of role player he could be. Make a move with the big man for a more competent wing and put Al in his proper place on the bench.
No one but Mike Dunleavy will take Randolph off anyone’s hands. And he already has him… So unless MDSr somehow parasitically controls another GMs brain there’s no way of moving this crap bucket of a contract. I don’t think any team (even if they’re making a huge overhaul) would sacrifice two years of disgruntled fans and more revenue to get a salary-dumping contract like Z-Bo’s.
Do you think MDSr secretly wants to be Isiah Thomas? Also, why does Isiah Thomas sell his name “Isiah” and not “Isaiah”?
[Reply]
Posted on June 3rd, 2009 at 1:37 pm
Look at Houston’s run this year.
T-Mac out
Yao out
Dikembe out
They still took the Lakers to the brink. The BS excuses about injuries and the like coming from Dunleavys mouth are a bunch of crap. Good coaches can get their guys to respond. Adelman got a team that shouldnt have even gotten to the playoffs deep into the second round.
Then loo at the Mavs. For years the Mavs were worse than the Clippers, now they go to the playoffs every season. Theres something to be said for Mark Cuban being able to turn a perrenial loser into a highly profitable team that gets its name in the running for the title every season.
[Reply]
John Reply:
June 3rd, 2009 at 4:48 pm
Even without their stars Houston still had a more effective lineup than the Clippers…guys like Battier, Scola and Hayes are tough defenders and intangibles guys…outside of Camby the clips don’t have a lot of these guys.
[Reply]
Posted on June 3rd, 2009 at 3:15 pm
team success starts at the top and we have the worst owner/gm/coach triumvirate in the league…..
sterling/dunleavy/dunleavy
does that look like a winning combination to anyone???
we need sterling to die and maybe we can get a new owner who actually cares about winning…..anything short of death will not work, as we all know sterling would never sell while the franchise is still profitable…..
and dunleavy needs to make two major moves……fire himself from the coaching position, and then step down from the GM position……sadly, these two moves would be the best two moves he has ever made…..
dunleavy is a horrible GM because of how shortsited he is, and the randolph for thomas/mobley just proves me right……
imagine if we had never made that trade…..
pg: baron davis
sg: eric gordon
sf: al thornton
pf: blake griffin
ce: marcus camby
and about 23 million coming off the books in 2010 with the contracts of thomas/mobley/kaman
so many tradable assets and the capspace to sign a true superstar……
but with one stupid move, he hamstrung the franchise for years……
i truly don’t understand how he doesn’t get fired just for the randolph trade alone…..this is professional sports, and he managed to sink a franchise with one deft move……he’s so bad, that it’s almost as if he was doing this shit on purpose……
[Reply]
bootstrenf Reply:
June 3rd, 2009 at 3:39 pm
and about 23 million coming off the books in 2010 with the contracts of thomas/mobley/kaman
correction : replace kaman with camby
[Reply]
Posted on June 3rd, 2009 at 3:37 pm
IMO Utter Nonsense.. Houston losing two long time guys Mutumbo and Yao in the last two games of the second round of the playoffs is nothing like losing brand new guys at the beginning of the first season together as a team. Big big difference. The rhythm of the team and the chemistry was already long established. We had a whole new team last year and Baron fell on his back a month in and played sore after that. Kaman had injuries, Zach was traded then lost his dad, there was absolutely no cohesion. Blaming the coach for that is just not right. The last two years I can’t fault the draft picks and okay maybe the trades don’t look so rosy. What would have happened had we signed Elton for all that money and years just to have him injured?
[Reply]
bongstradamus Reply:
June 3rd, 2009 at 4:39 pm
The injury excuse is played out and ineffective. im sorry, i dont buy it. Shane Battier was out the whole freaking season, comes back and is stellar for the Rockets after all their major stars were down.
The lack of cohesion is directly attributable to the coach. He’s the teams leader, he needs to be able to find the ways to get them to work together.
Any other excuse is just a cop out.
[Reply]
bongstradamus Reply:
June 3rd, 2009 at 5:01 pm
Slax, get some perspective. Lets try and address these points.
Kaman out would have still been Kaman out. id still be saying trade the guy. His injury didnt make us a 19 win team. Sure we might have won 21 games, but Kamans injuries didnt keep us from the players.
You ask, what would have happened had we signed Elton for all that money? Short Answer: no Zach, no Camby, No Dunleavy. See, if Elton came back and we still put up 19 wins, dunleavy would have totally been fired. You dont go dropping 160m over 5 years on 2 guys and win 19 games and get to keep your job. So this is eggs on Dunleavys face again. Even more if you count that Dunleavy just let two of his best assets walk away and got nothing in return for them except being forced to make a trade for Zach Randolph and his ridiculous contract and whopping 4 inch vertical. Sure hes an ouble-ouble with no D. But hes just a fragment of Brand. We traded down with Zach vs. Elton. We couldve signed and traded Corey for someone decent as well. instead we just let the cash walk out the door, and brought a bunch of trash in to replace it.
[Reply]
Posted on June 3rd, 2009 at 4:23 pm
I hope the sentence that you asked for Kevin goes something like this.
“The Clippers learned a lot in 2009-2010, mostly good news surprisingly. First off Gordon and Griffin are a superstar tandem not in the making but already. Second is that dumping Dunleavy at the mid-point of the season was the best decision they could have ever made as they almost made the playoffs after the decision to let him go. And finally that next year they will be in the playoffs as they surprised the world and get the #1 draft pick two years in a row and will take John Wall (don’t even get me started on how luck went there way when they traded Randolph at the trade deadline to open up more space for Griffin).
I can dream, right?
[Reply]
Posted on June 3rd, 2009 at 4:56 pm
I think that Zach Randolph is a valuable piece on a team that is dedicated to playing defense. I was hopeful that Marcus Camby could have been a catalyst in much the same way KG helped the Celtics (Was Paul Pierce or Ray Allen really known for their D before last year?). Unfortunately, Camby doesn’t have the intensity or presence of a KG to make that big an impact. I look at the Clippers situation as extremely hopeful. They certainly have some interesting pieces. How about this deal … Marcus Camby and Chris Kaman to the Rockets for T-Mac? The Rockets get another defensive cog to add to Battier and Artest in Camby. And they get Ming insurance with Kaman (now that Dikembe is retiring). It’s clear that the Rockets play much better without T-Mac. But lost in all that qualitative evidence is that T-Mac is a top player in this league when healthy, and might be the perfect 2nd banana behind Baron Davis.
[Reply]
Steve Reply:
June 4th, 2009 at 7:28 am
If I was him I would retire or force a trade. No way that happens, and even if it did, who are we really left with down low? Doesn’t make any sense, but oh wait, that fits right in with how the Clips make their decisions.
[Reply]
Ty Reply:
June 4th, 2009 at 9:00 am
See, I think this is a major error in the mindset of how to construct a team. Who cares who you’re left with down low. The Clippers aren’t winning the finals next year anyway. So play small ball for a season with Randolph at the 5. And you can address adding size in next year’s draft or thru a trade during the season or signing a free agent. Let me ask you … who was the center for the Warriors? Who was the center for the Bulls? You run Baron, Gordon, Thornton, T-Mac and Randolph or you could go slightly bigger by starting Griffin instead of Thornton (which you probably should do). T-Mac is a nice risk/reward … maybe he gets healthy, returns to his old form and likes playing on the Clippers? Worst case … you traded away Kaman’s 4 year deal and you have a 20 million dollar salary that you can trade for someone else in the season or just let expire to create some cap space for one of the best free agent classes ever to hit free agency in next off-season.
[Reply]
ghost_ride Reply:
June 4th, 2009 at 9:44 am
Actually, if you look at last year we went in trying to play without a true PF and the results were disastrous. When we brought Zach in, for better or for worse we looked like a .500 team.
If we brought T-Mac in, i’m just not sure there’s enough shots for everyone…our team would look like a circus. Plus, i’d prefer to put the ball in EJ’s hands, and Blake Griffin’s. Let them develop, let BD distribute, Camby rebound, ZBO will do his thing in the post. The only thing I don’t have an answer for is Thornton…hopefully he improves if we keep him.
[Reply]
Clipper Derrick Reply:
June 5th, 2009 at 11:47 am
T-Mac? Ugg. Injury prone lazy bones. We shouldn’t even be talking about him here.
[Reply]
Posted on June 3rd, 2009 at 11:56 pm
Getting T-Mac would be terrible. When he is trying, which is seldom, he totally dominates the ball and doesn’t get anyone involved. The Rockets were better without him. Plus he is always injured and doesn’t seem that interested in basketball anymore. We already had that last year with Baron, T-Mac would be more of the same but worse. He seems like a good guy personally but would be terrible for the Clips.
[Reply]
Ty Reply:
June 4th, 2009 at 10:45 pm
Okay, forget about T-Mac the player … wouldn’t you like to have a $20 mill expiring contract next year? and get out from under Kaman or Randolph’s deal? That was my point … if T-Mac ends up working out … that’s the cherry on top. The real point is to clear some cap space and, more importantly, PT for Griffin and Gordon.
[Reply]
Posted on June 4th, 2009 at 11:32 am
Add A Comment