Game 53: Los Angeles Clippers (31-21) @ New York Knicks (22-31) - 8:00 PM ET

[GuyverX]

WTH Crawford takes a 3 and actually makes it, it's only good because it went in.

We now lead by 5 with less than 1 minute left.

Yeah this is the good Crawford. Unfortunately we get to see bad Crawford for a few weeks probably.

And I love seeing Spike Lee going around high fiving everybody at the Garden including John McEnroe like this was a playoff game. And then the Clippers went on a 7-0 run. lol

[mkwest]

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

[og15]

Lol, guess Mike Smith has been harassing them about the defense

[og15]

You can't win with only one 20-point-per-game scorer in this league anymore.

Yep, we badly need Melo.

Depends on how much winning you are referring to. Boston, OKC, Houston, Memphis and San Antonio would all challenge the conclusion

Of course with SA, Aldridge has been in the past, but the statement is what it is.

...then Atlanta asks what about zero 20 ppg scorers?

[Akklaim1]

You can't win with only one 20-point-per-game scorer in this league anymore.

Yep, we badly need Melo.

Depends on how much winning you are referring to. Boston, OKC, Houston, Memphis and San Antonio would all challenge the conclusion

Of course with SA, Aldridge has been in the past, but the statement is what it is.

...then Atlanta asks what about zero 20 ppg scorers?

And none of those teams have a chance in hell at beating GSW. Yep, not even SAS.

[illastrate]

FINALLY.

[og15]

You can't win with only one 20-point-per-game scorer in this league anymore.

Yep, we badly need Melo.

Depends on how much winning you are referring to. Boston, OKC, Houston, Memphis and San Antonio would all challenge the conclusion

Of course with SA, Aldridge has been in the past, but the statement is what it is.

...then Atlanta asks what about zero 20 ppg scorers?

And none of those teams have a chance in hell at beating GSW. Yep, not even SAS.

Seems like the goal post moved . So by "win" you actually mean beat GS. In that case it has little to do with having two 20 point per game scorers, and more to do with having a great team whether or not more than one person is scoring 20+ ppg. Toronto has two and they aren't going to beat them, let alone some of the other teams with only one, Minnesota can't even make the playoffs, and Portland is struggling to stay in the playoff race.

[Akklaim1]

Depends on how much winning you are referring to. Boston, OKC, Houston, Memphis and San Antonio would all challenge the conclusion

Of course with SA, Aldridge has been in the past, but the statement is what it is.

...then Atlanta asks what about zero 20 ppg scorers?

And none of those teams have a chance in hell at beating GSW. Yep, not even SAS.

Seems like the goal post moved . So by "win" you actually mean beat GS. In that case it has little to do with having two 20 point per game scorers, and more to do with having a great team whether or not more than one person is scoring 20+ ppg. Toronto has two and they aren't going to beat them, let alone some of the other teams with only one, Minnesota can't even make the playoffs, and Portland is struggling to stay in the playoff race.

I didn't really move the goal post. We have a losing record since CP went down.

[og15]

And none of those teams have a chance in hell at beating GSW. Yep, not even SAS.

Seems like the goal post moved . So by "win" you actually mean beat GS. In that case it has little to do with having two 20 point per game scorers, and more to do with having a great team whether or not more than one person is scoring 20+ ppg. Toronto has two and they aren't going to beat them, let alone some of the other teams with only one, Minnesota can't even make the playoffs, and Portland is struggling to stay in the playoff race.

I didn't really move the goal post. We have a losing record since CP went down.

You moved the goalpost in relation to the other examples since it was a blanket statement, not just about the Clippers. You said you can't win with only one 20 point scorer. I named 6 teams, all playoff teams, including both the 2nd seeds in the EC and WC as well as the WC 3rd, 6th and 7th seed. That disproves that you can't "win" without two 20 ppg scorers unless you have a different definition of winning which is why I asked. That list includes teams on pace for 63 (SA), 57 (HOU) and 52 (BOS) wins. You responded saying "well they can't beat GS" which based on what I said suggests that by winning you meant beating GS, which is a new goalpost compared to simply saying "win" which would more likely mean be over .500, be a good team, be a very good team, etc.

That's moving of the goalpost unless you original intent in saying winning was "beating GS". Now you responded saying well we aren't over .500 without CP, again suggesting that by win you meant just being over .500, but if that's the case then it is a false claim because half the playoff teams don't have two 20+ ppg scorers. That poor record without CP has nothing to do with simply having another 20 PPG scorer. Without CP firstly is a flawed sample size because Blake has also been out. Now of course the team is still just 2-5 since Blake's return, but 2 of those games were against GS, games they probably lose anyways. Two others were road games vs BOS and TOR back to back, which would be tough even with CP, but they probably at least go 1-1. Take out the GS games they would probably (likely) lose anyways, and they are 2-3. 5 games is a tiny sample size because if they go 2-1 in their next three games then they are now 3-3 in non GS games without CP.

Of course the team is best with CP back, but that blanket statement is just not accurate at all and can't really pass any scrutiny, that was just my point. The team would be better off playing better defense than having someone else scoring 20 ppg right now.

They've given up:
115 pts / 118.0 Ortg- W
118 pts / 125.4 Ortg - L
107 pts / 109.6 Ortg - L
133 pts / 132.6 Ortg - L
114 pts / 112.6 Ortg - W
144 pts / 147.2 Ortg - L
121 pts / 126.9 Ortg - L

The team over the last 10-15 games went from ranked about 6th or 7th in Drtg down to 17th (108.6 Drtg), they dropped like 3-4 pts/100 possessions or so. Their problem right now is not more scoring.

[Akklaim1]

Yes, by win I mean a legitimate shot at the championship.

And I don't believe that just because we're putting up good offensive numbers, it means we are an actual good offensive team.

Good team basketball can only do so much, but it's different when you have great individual players who play good team basketball (GSW).

[og15]

Well if that's the case that you mean legit championship shot and don't think even SA has a chance, then to you there's really no solutions for the Clippers or anyone except Cleveland. It's kind of a random comment to just make in the thread though, lol

Adding another 20 PPG scorer (eg: Anthony) does not make the Clippers as good as GS. Doesn't even make the Clippers favourites vs SA tbh.

I guess we're just fighting to get to lose in the conference finals right now.

I haven't really looked at the offensive numbers, don't care that much, what concerns me is the defensive numbers. Clippers have been playing like one of the league's worst defensive teams recently as the numbers I posted show. As a whole they have dropped to below average

[mkwest]

Read on Twitter