ClipperBlog.com Blog for the Los Angeles NBA Clippers Fans » Mike Dunleavy

Clippers 2010-11 Unpreview

Jordan Heimer — Wed, 13 Oct 2010 15:57:07 +0000

One of my favorite movie lines of all time is in Bottle Rocket, during a scene where Owen Wilson is trying to convince Luke Wilson to join in a planned heist. “Here are a few of the ingredients,” he says, ticking off elements of the plan on his fingers. “Dynamite, pole vaulting, laughing gas, helicopters…can you see how incredible this is going to be?!?” The joke, of course, is that it’s a terrible plan — long on pole vaulting, short on logic. The Clippers enter the 2010-11 campaign with a new coach, a new general manager and a whole bunch of new parts, including last year’s top overall draft pick, the Completely Cleared for All Basketball Activities Blake Griffin. And the question is: Has Neil Olshey put together a workable plan or will it be another season of laughing gas and helicopters?

The New
The Clippers offseason has been described almost universally as “disappointing.” Disappointing compared to what? It’s completely clear now that LeBron James was never coming to Los Angeles. He was never going anywhere but Miami. The entire “process” was, in fact, a charade. Ripping the Clippers (as some did) for presenting the shortest and least involved “pitch” is like criticizing someone’s 3-Card Monte strategy — how you play the game is irrelevant when the game is rigged.

This time last year, there was a growing Nation consensus that although Coach Mike Dunleavy clearly had to go, General Manager Mike Dunleavy had shown his savvy, providing much needed depth with the acquisitions of Rasual Butler, Craig Smith and Bassy Telfair. Well, if last season’s off season was a success, then this one was an unqualified triumph. Telfair proved to be a pass-first, brick-second back-up point guard who didn’t like to play defense. Olshey re-signed Butler and Smith at discounts, then used the draft to add excellent young talent at positions of need with Aminu, Bledsoe, Willie Warren and unsigned pick-up Marquis Blakely.

While plenty has been written about Ryan Gomes already — his knowledgeable and deferential approach, ability to guard bigger 3s (something the Clips lacked last season) and strong shooting from beyond the arc — back up guard Randy Foye has been the less discussed signing. Perhaps he’s regarded as something of a bust, relegated to a backup role only four years after being the seventh selection in the 2006 draft. In fact, Foye is potentially undervalued. Before the selection of John Wall made Foye an afterthought in Washington, Foye was being discussed as someone who deserved a Ramon Sessions or Jared Jack type contract — 4 years, at least 4 million per. Flip Saunders described him as “coachable” and “a good guy.” Along with Gomes and Butler, Foye will help spread the floor for an inside-out game, and provide offense off the bench.

These moves aren’t flashy, but they’re coherent. Foye, Gomes, Bledsoe, Smith and Butler aren’t names that sell season tickets … but they also aren’t Al Thorton or Ricky Davis. Last year’s squad often felt like less than the sum of its parts, in part because of all the possessions wasted by Thorton, Outlaw, and the Davises. (And though Mardy Collins was one of my favorite Clips the last couple years, he had a terrible habit of bricking layups). Shot selection is a zero sum game — every jacked-up, off-balance, low-percentage heave is a shot taken away from a more efficient player. By assembling a squad of efficient role players, Olshey is playing with negative space, helping to guarantee that this season’s most important shots will be taken by his best players, and that everyone in the developing young core will have adequate touches.

The Improved
The Clippers return three starters. There’s not much to say about Chris Kaman — he was an All-Star last year and initial impressions from preseason suggest he’s in great shape and ready to have another standout year. With Baron, frankly, there’s almost too much to say — or, at least, nothing left to add. Either you believe Baron can change or you don’t. Either Dunleavy was the problem or Davis is an inveterate coach killer. Either Davis is savvy enough to realize changing his game is the only way to remain relevant or he’s been practicing 20 foot jumpers in Africa. We’ll see soon enough.

Daniel Ikuta already did a nice job breaking down the impact of swapping Marcus Camby for Blake Griffin. This isn’t really another way to look at it, more an expansion on one of Ikuta’s points: Camby’s 12.8 percent usage ranked him 297th among qualified players last season, or, in other words, a mere 32 spots higher than Fabricio Oberto’s league low 7.2 percent. (An accurate measure of Camby’s offensive involvement would be even lower, since tip-backs account for a large number of his FGAs). Talk of Camby’s offensive efficiency is kind of beside the point – he’s an afterthought. The biggest difference between Griffin and Camby is that defenses will have to scheme for Griffin. There’s a critical mass to offensive weaponry in the NBA, and the best teams maximize the players on the court who can punish defenses for ignoring them. Also – this might be heretical – I’m not completely convinced Griffin will be a defensive downgrade. Camby struggled last season to stay in front of strong quicker PFs like Carlos Boozer, who took advantage of Camby’s slowing lateral movement. Certainly, Griffin won’t have Camby’s impeccable defensive instincts — at least not initially — but there’s not a power forward out there who will out-muscle him.

On a related note, Eric Gordon’s usage percentage was an (essentially) league average 20.2 percent. The hope in Clipperland this summer was that EJ “learned” something playing for his Team USA, that it finally “all clicked.” Usually, I’m skeptical of athletic epiphanies. Nine times out of ten, guys are held back less by “a lack of confidence” or “poor decision making” than a lack of talent. But Gordon’s USG percentage proves what Clipper fans already knew — he’s the rare player who would probably improve his team simply by hogging more of its possessions. What impressed about Gordon’s play in international play this summer wasn’t only his streaks of made 3s, but the way he continued to take open shots decisively even after he had missed a few. Gordon’s new confidence means fewer hesitations shooting open looks, and a less selfish surrounding cast will ensure that his opportunities come more consistently and more often.

The Brains
There’s been a race to the thesaurus, as basketball writers try to find new ways to describe Vinny Del Negro as an unknown quantity. So yes, we’re all in agreement — Del Negro is a mystery wrapped in an enigma, couched in a riddle, hidden in a conundrum. His strong playoff runs in Chicago have been widely cited as proof that he gets the most out of his players, that he “wins games when they count most.” Another way of looking at it is that for the better parts of two seasons he coached a pretty talented Bulls team to a losing record. Potato potato, as Christopher Walken might say. It’s all bland generality until we see what Vinny rolls out against Portland on opening night.

But I do know this — he’s not Dunleavy. Whatever merit Dunleavy’s basketball philosophies may have had, by the end Dunleavy had become a caricature of a losing coach: sweaty and red-faced, gesticulating maniacally in one of his tan-on-tan suits. More than once, I watched fans at the Staples Center conspiring to organize “Fire Dunleavy” chants behind the Prime Ticket postgame, hoping the audio might leak on-air. Dunleavy’s oft-quoted complaint that fans don’t analyze the game the same way coaches do was undeniably true; it just didn’t matter. Perception is reality, and the perception was that the Clippers couldn’t win with Dunleavy as their coach. Dunleavy may well have been holding together an overmatched team with x’s and o’s – but Clipper fans had passed that point of no return, beyond which fans only notice facts that already fit the conclusion. We knew Dunleavy was terrible, so all we saw were the erratic substitutions, the head-scratching time outs (or lack thereof) and Baron’s lackluster efforts.

In the long term, Del Negro will be judged on how successfully he transforms the theoretical into the actual. We don’t know how what offense he’ll run or how he’ll manage his rotations.But “not knowing — and perhaps being pleasantly surprised — beats “doomed to failure” any day. Perhaps our new coach will tailor a system to suit the talent, instead of demanding that the talent squeeze into the system – in which case, unknown will turn out to have been a blessing.

The Boss
Of course, the Clippers could have Red Auerbach leading the ‘92 Bulls onto the floor, and there would still be a vocal minority insisting that the team will never win as long as Donald Golden Sterling is still the owner. They insist that the Clippers will never be winners until there’s a change in ownership. Well, to those people, I say — Congratulations! It’s already happened.

I lived in New York in the late 80s and early 90s, when Yankee fans widely considered George Steinbrenner a cancerous owner — an owner who “could not” win. He meddled with personnel decisions, fired managers annually, and hired thugs to dig up dirt on Dave Winfield. Overnight hosts on WFAN 660 encouraged fans to mail back season ticket renewal requests with “NOT UNTIL GEORGE IS GONE” written on the backs of the envelopes. And yet, when he died recently, he was almost universally heralded as a “great owner.” How did the transformation occur? It wasn’t that George became such a nice guy. Throughout the 90s he continued to snipe at his general manager, criticize Derek Jeter’s social life, and insult Japanese free agents. But… 1. He began to let baseball people make baseball decisions. 2. He opened his checkbook when said baseball people asked him to. 3. The Yankees won. George’s occasional rantings were lost in the din of championship parades.

Granted, until the Clippers begin to win the rest is academic, but Sterling has already met points one and two. This isn’t the Donald Sterling of the early 90s who let Ron Harper walk, wouldn’t pony up for Danny Manning, and basically went a decade without a major free agent signing. In the last five years, beginning with the signing of Cuttino Mobley, Sterling has signed Baron Davis, attempted to re-sign Elton Brand, and built a state of the art practice facility in Playa Vista. These moves haven’t resulted in a consistent winner yet, but they do show that ownership has the will to win.

Sterling isn’t Sauron. His very presence does not cast a shadow of mediocrity over the Clippers. He may well be a troubled human being, prejudiced, reclusive, and strange, but I don’t think it’s too cynical to say most sports fans aren’t rooting for the morality of the owner. Once in a while he is going to open his mouth on record; often, the result will be something head-slappingly stupid. When Sterling admitted he couldn’t name his two new free agents, and questioned the window of the signings, Clipper fans were understandably appalled. Classic Sterling, went the thinking. Gomes and Foye hadn’t even had a chance to sign leases and they were already subject to the indignities of the Clipper experience.

Hyperbole aside, Sterling’s remarks were really more tacky than destructive, more crotchety than malevolent. It’s a sign of how detached Sterling has become from the day to day running of the team, kind of a basketball owner’s “Let them eat cake.” If Gomes or Foye turns out to be ineffective, it won’t be because he’s worrying that his owner doesn’t know his name. Unless you really believe that karma affects the outcome of basketball games, Sterling is playing the part of a good owner. The Clippers may continue to lose, but if they do, don’t blame it on the owner.

Optimism comes easy in October — and the more that needs to go juuust right, the more vulnerable it is. If this team goes on a losing streak, or suffers any significant injuries, it’s not hard to imagine meaningless February games dominated by Baron’s patented stop n’ pop 3-pointers. But in the meanwhile, there’s a plan. It’s not fool-proof, but it’s not just dynamite and pole vaulters either. The kids are the future, the adults are in charge. It’s your 2010-11 Los Angeles Clippers.

Copyright © 2009 ClipperBlog LLC
This feed is for personal, non-commercial use only.
The use of this feed without written permission on other websites breaches copyright. If this content is not in your news reader, it makes the page you are viewing an infringement of the copyright. (Digital Fingerprint:
f7b269c5d85f84cd1fc889e7aa23e3b5)

Dunleavy and Clippers in Arbitration

D.J. Foster — Thu, 22 Apr 2010 07:55:03 +0000

Since being fired earlier in the year, Mike Dunleavy has not received any of the money owed to him from his guaranteed contract, which reportedly totals upwards to $12 million dollars.

This isn’t exactly new territory for Donald Sterling. The Clippers fired Bill Fitch after the 1997-1998 season and proceeded to pay Fitch only $200,000 of the $4 million dollars owed to him. Fitch of course had to pursue legal action against the Clippers, which led to Sterling giving this deposition (via a story by Peter May in the Boston Globe in January 2003):

Q. Do you have an understanding whether the 1997 contract was guaranteed?

A. No.

Q. Sir, do you have any idea what a guaranteed contract is?

A. No.

Q. None?

A. No . . . I really don’t understand what the – what “guaranteed contracts” mean. I, I’m really not sure exactly what that means with relations to players.

Asked if he understood that coaches get paid if they get fired, subject to certain provisions, Sterling said, simply, “No.”

In Donald Sterling’s world, things like guaranteed contracts simply don’t exist. With that in mind, it must be terribly inconvenient for Sterling to have to pay these coaches who couldn’t live up to his standards. For Sterling, everything is as simple as this: Do a good job, and you get paid. Do a bad job, and you don’t. Of course that’s not how the NBA or most of society operates, but these things matter not to an owner.

And really, it’s hard to see that ever changing. This isn’t just blatant penny pinching here — this is a 77-year old man’s code of beliefs being tested. Sterling believes he shouldn’t have to pay someone who no longer works for him. So he won’t, at least not until someone forces him to.

The Clippers don’t really have a leg to stand on here, but that hardly seems to matter. This is a statement from the top, and it reads loud and clear: Donald Sterling will not pay for something he has already deemed inadequate. It doesn’t matter if we’re talking bathroom renovation or million dollar coaches. Sterling won’t do it.

In his deposition during Fitch’s contract dispute, Sterling was asked if he had known Bill Fitch to lie. He answered “no.” Sterling was then asked the same question about Andy Roeser and Elgin Baylor. His answered remained the same. Finally, Sterling was asked about Bob Weiss, who coached the Clippers during the 1993-1994 season.

Q. How about Bob Weiss? Have you ever known him to lie?

A. I don’t know who he is.

Just a few years prior, Weiss had taken Sterling and the Clippers to court for, you guessed it, refusing to pay out a guaranteed contract.

It’s easy to interpret this situation as the organization slapping Dunleavy in the face. It is not. That slap was delivered with one of the most vindictive press releases in recent memory. That slap was not telling Dunleavy he was fired before releasing the news during a Clippers broadcast. This? This is just an old man sticking to his code. It doesn’t matter if he’s known you for seven years or barely knows your name — if he fired you, he’s not paying you. No way, no how.

So…who wants to come coach the Clippers?

Afternoon Roundup

D.J. Foster — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 23:43:44 +0000

Our friends at ClipsNation.com are having a big sponsored game night Saturday, April 10th against the Warriors. After reading Steve’s teaser, it’s hard not to get excited. All the information about the event can be found here. I’ll definitely be there – should be a very fun evening.

Lisa Dillman at the Times introduces you to new new General Manager, Neil Olshey.

Since Mike Dunleavy stepped down as coach and Marcus Camby was shipped to Portland, the Clippers have had only two games where they’ve posted a defensive efficiency number under 100. Even worse, both were against bottom dweller Sacramento. Remove the head, and the body will still flail around a bit. Remove the head and the body, and what are you left with?

Adrian Wojnarowski of Y! Sports talks about Donald Sterling: “Donald Sterling has always talked a big game, but he’s never gone after a star GM in his prime. Dunleavy leaves the franchise set up in some good ways, but Sterling doesn’t understand that winning in the NBA doesn’t come from empty words in absurdly worded press-release firings, doesn’t come with throwing red meat to a fan base that wanted the old GM embarrassed and fired on the spot.”

Bill Plaschke, doing some true California dreamin’: “Now introducing, Clippers forward LeBron James and two of his high school chums as general manager and coach. Crazy, too, but that’s the thing about what happened Tuesday. The Clippers didn’t lose a general manager, they gained a world of possibilities.”

On the Dunleavy Firing

Kevin Arnovitz — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 07:26:27 +0000

From my story at TrueHoop:

Sources around the league maintain that with Dunleavy focused primarily on his coaching responsibilities, Olshey has been the main pipeline into the Clippers’ organization for a while now. Though Dunleavy — and Clippers president Andy Roeser above him — had veto power over any personnel moves, Olshey was the guy you called when you wanted to discuss deals. If that premise is correct, then Olshey had a big hand in getting the Clippers where they want to be financially heading into the summer.

The Clippers are placing a premium on flexibility as they strip their personnel down to the bare essentials in preparation for an active offseason. Only Baron Davis, Eric Gordon, Blake Griffin, Chris Kaman and DeAndre Jordan are under contract for 2010-11, and the organization will have somewhere in the neighborhood of $15-16 million to spend in free agency. Removing Dunleavy further enables them to reformulate, rebrand and reload.

In addition to extending a hefty contract to an elite player, might the Clippers also be looking for big names to preside in the front office and on the sidelines? Hours before the Clippers announced Dunleavy’s termination, a report surfaced that Larry Brown reached out to the Clippers regarding a possible return to Los Angeles. Given the outcome in Charlotte’s ownership situation, the likelihood of Brown taking a second tour with the Clippers seems unlikely, but the rumor does speak to the Clippers’ desire for a complete makeover.

The timing of Dunleavy’s firing is interesting considering that the Clippers are playing out the string under an interim coach. Evidently, the organization decided that even with one year remaining on his four-year, $22 million contract extension, Dunleavy’s presence no longer offered value for the future. Personnel decisions of this magnitude are usually couched in conciliatory language, but the Clippers’ press release was especially pointed:

The organization has determined that the goal of building a winning team is best served by making this decision at this time. The team has simply not made sufficient progress during Dunleavy’s seven-year tenure. The Clippers want to win now. This transition, in conjunction with a full commitment to dedicate unlimited resources, is designed to accomplish that objective.

The Clippers have placed themselves in a unique and advantageous position. Last month, they signaled that there’s a potential opportunity for a top free agent to name his own coach. On Tuesday, that hypothetical was extended even further — name your own coach and general manager.

If only the Clippers could say, “Name your owner.”

Initial Reactions on Dunleavy’s Release

D.J. Foster — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 03:48:20 +0000

Mike Dunleavy being let go from his duties as General Manager is obviously shocking. Poor Kim Hughes found out about it after the game through Dain Blanton, the sideline reporter for Fox Sports Prime Ticket. According to an agent that spoke with Adrian Wojnarowski, Dunleavy himself may have had no idea he was being released up until just recently. The whole move feels a bit impulsive. Early conclusions would lead one to believe this was fully a Sterling orchestrated firing, right down to it being announced during a game broadcast.

News of Dunleavy’s release leads to a bunch of questions that will soon be answered. What does this mean financially for Dunleavy and the Clippers? Was there some sort of buyout involved, or will Dunleavy get paid the full remainder of his contract? Does Donald Sterling have someone in mind to replace Dunleavy? Why do this now and not a month ago? Were Dunleavy’s trade deadline deals, where he seemingly improved the outlook for the Clippers’ future and netted Sterling a few million in the process, deemed “bad” moves by ownership?

Regardless of whether or not Dunleavy deserved to be let go for his performance as GM, one thing remains clear: This is a step in the right direction, and that has plenty more to do with Sterling than it does with Dunleavy. For years Sterling was reluctant to open up his wallet and build a winner. He wouldn’t sign free agents. He wouldn’t buy players or coaches out of contracts. He’d basically do nothing that didn’t make perfect sense financially for him. Well, this move doesn’t make a whole lot of sense financially for him, but Sterling did it anyway for what he believes to be the betterment of the franchise. That’s progress.

It will be interesting to see if the Clippers shy away from their follies of the past. Having one man be both Head Coach and General Manager clearly didn’t work out the first time, and though some will blame that solely on Dunleavy, it’s hard to argue that the sharing of those titles in today’s NBA is ideal.

We’ll have plenty of more reaction, analysis, and updates on this situation as more details unfold. Stay tuned.

Mike Dunleavy out as GM

D.J. Foster — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 01:45:36 +0000

From Clippers.com:

The Los Angeles Clippers and General Manager Mike Dunleavy today have severed ties. Dunleavy previously also served as the team’s head coach from 2003-04 until February 4, 2010, when he resigned as head coach.

The organization has determined that the goal of building a winning team is best served by making this decision at this time. The team has simply not made sufficient progress during Dunleavy’s seven-year tenure. The Clippers want to win now. This transition, in conjunction with a full commitment to dedicate unlimited resources, is designed to accomplish that objective.

Neil Olshey, presently the Clippers’ Assistant General Manager, will assume the duties created by Dunleavy’s departure. He joined the organization as Director of Player Development for the 2003-04 season. He served as an Assistant Coach in 2004-05, and was elevated to the position of Director of Player Personnel from 2005-06 through 2007-08. He assumed the role of Assistant General Manager prior to the start of the 2008-09 season.

Olshey has played an important role in the completion of several significant team transactions, including the deals which brought Marcus Camby, Craig Smith, Rasual Butler, Steve Blake, Travis Outlaw, and Drew Gooden to the Clippers, among others. He also played a integral part in administering all preparation for the Clippers’ last four NBA Drafts, which produced Al Thornton, Eric Gordon, DeAndre Jordan, and last year’s #1 overall pick, Blake Griffin.

We’ll have more coverage on this surprising move after tonight’s game.

Afternoon Roundup: Interview Edition

D.J. Foster — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 20:09:52 +0000

Marcus Camby on his new situation: “Anytime you get traded it’s always an awkward situation, especially when you’ve been in a place for a couple of years, you’re used to your surroundings, you know, you enjoy the situation that you’re in. But then to find out you’re traded and you have to move on to new surroundings, it’s always difficult. But once you sit back and digest the situation and take a moment to yourself to analyze how things are – where you’re at and where you’re going – it’s a no-brainer. The Clippers are going in opposite direction than what I would have liked in my career. Coming to Portland and being surrounded by the great players that we have – Brandon Roy, LaMarcus Aldridge – it was a no-brainer. I definitely welcome the situation to be in playoff contention again, and I definitely can’t wait to get started.”

Mike Dunleavy speaks about the possible return of Marcus Camby: “We love Marcus as a player. Everything about his game and what he does for this team. Like I said, we’ll see how things go forward. Marcus is a free agent. We have a lot of cap space this summer — and you never know how things work out.

Chris Kaman riffs on roster turnover: “That’s why I trust, I have to trust, that the decisions they make are the right ones for the team long term. Obviously we didn’t perform the way we were capable of this season. I’m not saying that it’s over but it’s going to be tough to come back and win games when everybody is on different pages and new players are shuffling in and out of the locker room and in the lineups…and Kim is having to deal with all that. It’s just tough.

Kim Hughes gives some insights on Chris Kaman emotions in his first pre-game interview: ” I’ve talked to Chris, and let me preface this by saying Chris is retarded. …He’s really not. He’s emotionally handicapped, actually. Chris is a wonderful, caring person.”

Byron Scott on the Clippers job: “Man I will tell you what… You have seen me there every day. I am at the gym and having a great time. It is the first time since I have been playing or coaching that I have had this type of time where I can enjoy my family, my wife she goes to the gym everyday as well, and kind of just relax. To be honest with you for the past two months I really haven’t been thinking about coaching or anything like that until the last couple of weeks. You get that itch, especially when it gets close to playoff time. I am just going to kind of sit back until April or May and survey what is going on out there because there is obviously three jobs available right now. One I already had obviously in New Orleans and you have got Jersey and you have got the Clippers… There is going to be three or four more when the season is over that is going to be available as well. So I am just going to kind of sit back and take a look at the teams, do a couple of interviews and just kind of pick the team that is the best fit for me. I do think the Clipper job is a pretty good job for me. They have got some young talent. Obviously they are going to have a lot of cap room and another lottery pick coming in. So I think it is a pretty good job. I am just going to sit around and just kind of evaluate everything that is going on and try to make a decision I think that will be best for my family.”

Condemned to Freedom

Kevin Arnovitz — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 21:53:22 +0000

From my column at ESPN Los Angeles:

The debacle in Oakland Wednesday brought into focus the fallacies of the Clippers’ new strategy. Hughes and Davis have been diplomatic with regard to Dunleavy, but both men seem to subscribe to a syllogism that goes something like this: (A) The Clippers’ offense under Dunleavy was a failure. (B) Dunleavy’s offense was very structured. (C) Therefore, a structured offense is a recipe for failure.

It’s bad logic. The best course of action for the Clippers would be to accept their strengths and seek to exploit them. Whatever tonal issues they had with Dunleavy, the Clippers were generally most successful utilizing their superior size and Davis’ ability to feed fellow scorers in the half-court game. The staleness that grabbed hold of the offense under Dunleavy can be remedied without throwing out those basic principles.

A two-man game with Kaman and a perimeter shooter like Eric Gordon or Rasual Butler presents a difficult choice for defenses. During the team’s strongest stretch of games around New Year’s Day, Davis and Kaman were tormenting opponents with a well-tuned pick-and-roll action, while Gordon shot a blistering 61 percent by taking advantage of the space afforded him by those schemes. Among power forwards, Marcus Camby leads the league in assist rate, and has been a master of the high-low game. Burly reserve Craig Smith can brutalize defenders one-on-one from 15 feet in, but he’s not much help in the open court.

Davis fashions himself a master of improvisation, a point guard who works best in a transition offense. He stated last Friday that the Clippers hadn’t had much fun in the previous system. In the three games since the changing of the guard, Davis has amassed 14 turnovers against 25 assists and only 10 field goals. There are a variety of causes for this: carelessness, an inability to flatten defenses on the break (and nothing resembling a secondary break), teammates who don’t fill up the lanes in transition as quickly as they need to, and Davis’ failure to finish at the rim.

Davis is a talented point guard, but he’s also stubborn in not recognizing the full range of his game. However much fun he has running the break, Davis would be smart to maximize his most valuable assets. Davis is bigger and stronger than most of his counterparts at the point and has the opportunity to post up opposing point guards at will. He also has an uncanny ability to find angles and make the late pass. These are two gifts that can be realized most effectively in the half court.

There was a lot that didn’t work under Dunleavy — the Clippers ranked 23rd in offensive efficiency. But the proper remedy isn’t to toss out the playbook. The Clippers should come up with an abridged version — and give Davis a strong voice in that process. And they must commit themselves to the prosaic tasks that create opportunities. Just because the messenger was overbearing doesn’t mean the message lacked value.

You can find the entire piece here.

Between Intuition and Structure

Kevin Arnovitz — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 23:37:03 +0000

One of my closer friends is a musical conductor and through osmosis, I’ve learned a teeny bit about musicology. He once lent me composer/conductor Pierre Boulez’s “Orientations: Collected Writings” when we were stranded on a rainy beach in West Africa, both completely out of reading material (I think he ended up with Dean Oliver’s “Basketball on Paper.”).

Why is this relevant? For reasons ClipperBlog reader Krai Charuwatsuntorn beautifully laid out after the Clippers’ loss to San Antonio Saturday night. Responding to my conclusion, “The Clippers are a team in transition, engaged in a dialectic between the more formal offense of Dunleavy and the run-and-gun style professed by Hughes,” Charuwatsuntorn responded:

It reminds me of something Stravinsky wrote in the Poetics of Music; something to the effect that it is only through a formal system that true creativity can be unleashed. If you have the illusion of freedom in every direction, where every choice is the same as any other, then you don’t really have any freedom at all, and creativity withers.

I asked Charuwatsuntorn if he’d like to expand on this tension between structure and freedom, and he kindly composed this for ClipperBlog:

With Mike Dunleavy stepping down as head coach and his long time assistant Kim Hughes taking over the reins, the Clippers find themselves in an interesting situation. When a team or any organization is underperforming, there tends to be a natural knee jerk reaction toward the opposite direction when a new regime assumes power. For the most part, disciplinarian coaches will usually be replaced by “player-coaches” and vice versa. Players will generally embrace the new discipline/freedom and then play with a renewed sense of purpose for a little while. The transfer of power from Dunleavy to Hughes is a bit different though. Neither men are known to be players’ friends or a strict disciplinarian in a classical sense, and Hughes has been a Dunleavy assistant and protégé for many years. Where they seem to part ways is in coaching philosophy; that age old divide between a tightly controlled, structured offense, and a free flowing running game that allows players more freedom to create their own shots. But are the two extremes really polar opposites? Or is that tension between a well structured offense and maximizing a player’s intuition a necessary ingredient for good basketball teams?

Perhaps more so than any other sport, basketball exemplifies this creative tension between structure and intuition in its purest form. The free flowing rhythm of the game, the spacing of the floor, and the ability of great players to see and anticipate things a split second before they happen, testify to this raw display of creativity within tightly controlled parameters. If there is a team that the Dunleavy’s Clippers aspired to, or most closely resembled in the NBA; it’s the San Antonio Spurs. Both teams are predicated on a dominant big man posting up and a well-structured half court offense that plays inside-out. But there is one crucial difference. Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili have grown and expanded their game within the constraints of Gregg Popovich’s system, and Pop, himself, has loosened up the offense just enough to maximize the talents of his two wild cards. The growing pains of Tony Parker and, to a lesser extent, Ginobili to fit into Popovich’s system prior to their championship run is well documented. In their early years together, Pop can be seen pacing the sidelines in utter frustration when Parker freelanced and made questionable decisions on the floor. The maturation of Parker; the willingness to rein in his intuition and allow it to flow within the structure of Pop’s offensive sets, and the maniacal intensity of Ginobili to exert his will upon the game in crunch time, which transcended Pop’s set plays, elevated the Spurs from an efficient, well-executed, if predictable team, into a dynamic and dominant team of the last decade.

Whether the Clippers currently have players of such caliber is an important question. The closest Dunleavy’s squad ever came to replicating the Spurs was the magical Brand-Cassell year in 2006, when Elton had his best year as a pro and Cassell had the confidence and the uncanny ability to know when to freelance and when to tightly execute Dunleavy’s offensive plays. Sam’s ability to manage the flow of the game, his confidence to step up and hit a crucial shot outside the system, or see a sliver of passing lane when offensive spacing is scrambled, allowed the team to pull out victories in games they would have otherwise lost in previous years. It remains to be seen if the Baron Davis led Clippers will succeed in balancing their newly professed dedication to the running game upon the remnants of Dunleavy’s half court sets. Truth be told, the team seems to have found the right balance of half court structure and opportunistic fast break points during their most effective stretches this season, with the Baron and Dunleavy relationship seemingly stronger than last year’s disastrous campaign…at least until the most recent road trip. With Dunleavy resignation and Kim Hughes ascension, the direction of the team is clearly now in Baron’s hands. And perhaps Baron believes, all along, that his skills are best utilized in the open court, where his intuition is allowed to roam unfettered. He would not be the first to resent sublimating his considerable skills to the restraints of a structured system.

Most of our creative disciplines also struggle with this tension between system and intuition. But young musicians, artists, designers, engineers, and architects often learn very early on that the allure of absolute freedom can paralyze your creativity and diminishes your work instead of empowering it. On the contrary, it is when you are pressed by multiple constraints, that you are forced to go deeper within yourself to find a creative solution; one that is free of preconceptions and is clear and concise in its expression. Likewise, a good chess player or boxer will tell you that it is often when their situation is most dire; when a formidable opponent has pushed them to the brink, that they find something unexpected and pure within themselves, that often define their most memorable win or loss, and ultimately define their sense of self. It is only then, at that crucial moment, that the game becomes more than a chess match, a boxing match, or a basketball game. And a performance that was borne out of constraints; of endless repetition in the gym, of endless video study and strategy sessions, will have transcended all those limitations into something deeper and more enduring. It is for these rare moments that we watch hundreds of hours to catch a glimpse of. Sadly, our Clippers have not provided many such moments over the years. One can only hope that Kim Hughes and Baron Davis will be capable of such performances one day…before their clock runs out.

More Reaction on Dunleavy

D.J. Foster — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 02:30:11 +0000

Yesterday I was asked by a friend if I thought Mike Dunleavy was a bad basketball coach. It was a good question.

Dunleavy’s tenure with the Clippers is tough to ignore. He’s had one winning season in six years and one of the worst overall winning percentages in NBA history during that time frame. In the most important aspect of coaching, wins and losses, Dunleavy failed quite a bit more than he succeeded.

But you know what? That doesn’t necessarily qualify Dunleavy as a bad coach. Good coaches fail magnificently all the time. Good coaches get fired all the time. Sometimes, for whatever reason, it just doesn’t work.

Just take a look at the resume of one of the best head coaches in professional sports in Bill Belichick. For 5 years, Bill Belichick was head coach of the Cleveland Browns, a franchise permanently hampered with an inordinate amount of bad luck, just like the Clippers. Belichick’s tenure as Browns head coach was pretty similar to Dunleavy’s tenure as Clippers head coach. Belichick had just one winning season in 5 years highlighted by a lone playoff win and a lackluster overall winning percentage of 46%. No one openly blamed the Browns when they let Belichick go. He didn’t produce wins. He deserved to get fired. Did that make Belichick a “bad” coach? Of course not. He was still young and in a less than desirable situation. Dunleavy’s on the opposite end of the spectrum as far as age goes, but he too walked into one of the worst situations in all of sports. Look, I’m not saying Dunleavy is anywhere near the level of coach that Belichick is. All I’m saying is that there are numerous factors that go into being a “good” coach and “bad” coach. The line between success and failure in professional sports is a very thin one. Even the best coaches can find themselves on the wrong side of the line.

Mike Dunleavy is still widely regarded around the league as one of the best X’s and O’s guys out there. He’s an insanely hard worker who puts a ridiculous amount of time into preparation. His post-centric offense and emphasis on defense is a smart formula for winning when executed properly. Despite all this, Dunleavy had trouble consistently winning games. Throughout last season it looked like the players had tuned him out completely by playing uninspired basketball most every night. Like every other follower of the Clippers, I was adamant about Dunleavy being released of his coaching duties. He didn’t have the players’ ears any more. It appeared he had lost the team.

It didn’t look like that was the case this season. Even in the most embarrassing losses of the year, the Clippers fought hard to get back in the game, most notably when none other than Baron Davis scored 23 points in a single quarter in a comeback attempt against Minnesota. I don’t think Baron or the rest of the team ever quit on Dunleavy or the season itself. Unlike prior years, both parties fulfilled their duties. The players played hard, and the head coach tried everything he could to make it work. It just never happened…and maybe it never would have. Sometimes a team needs to hear a new voice, needs that fresh start, needs to have a renewed sense of faith in their leader. I understand that. Mike Dunleavy understands that.

Did Dunleavy deserve to be released from his head coaching duties? Absolutely.

But does that make him a bad coach? I don’t think the answer to that is as cut and dry as it seems.