RealGM

Do you guys see any specific reason why the team and Blake in particular are not rebounding the ball well?

Also, were you guys this dedicated to high pick and roll with CP3/Blake seemingly every possession last season?

From games I've watched Blake plays like it's not his role to grab rebounds. Frustrating and I don't understand.

He's stopped crashing offensive glass like he used too especially

Blake can't get in position to grab offensive boards because he takes shots further away from the basket than he did last season.

Beyond that Blake is often positioned awfully or missing defensive assignments and has to spend time trying to recover, which is limiting him from even putting an effort into defensive rebounding. He's looked oblivious out there on the defensive end all year.

mike3 wrote:From games I've watched Blake plays like it's not his role to grab rebounds. Frustrating and I don't understand.

He's stopped crashing offensive glass like he used too especially

Offensive rebounds is a system thing. He's tasked to get back on defense more than to crash the offensive glass. His first two seasons he did 3.2 OREB/36, last season, 2.4 OREB/36, this season so far 2.3 OREB/36. The drop is understandable if he's being made to get back on D.

On the other hand, his defensive rebounding this season has been affected by too much of a willingness to be ahead of the pack and lead transition. First 2 seasons 8.0 DREB/36, last season, 7.1 DREB/36. Last season was actually not that bad, but this season so far, 3.9 DREB/36 after the first 5 games which would have Chris Paul outrebounding Blake on the defensive glass.

The good thing is that it is 6 games. The bad thing is that even if he's better, the team still needs more rebounding help from the wings.

The lack of rebounding really killed them in the final 5 minutes against the Spurs. It looked like Rivers was stressing getting back rather than crashing the glass, That's a bad strategy when you have one of the best rebounding front-courts in the league.

Matte Barnes needs to start closing the games, he's certainly missed when they weren't coming up with defensive rebounds.

The Paul-Crawford-Barnes-Griffin-DeAndre lineup had the greatest point differential of every lineup last season. I don't think Reddick should be closing games anymore unless they need a last second shot.
http://www.82games.com/1314/1314LAC2.HTM

Blake needs to hit harder and we need a 3 who will rebound.

yesterday was Blake's 1st 10 rebound game.

Master Ze wrote:The lack of rebounding really killed them in the final 5 minutes against the Spurs. It looked like Rivers was stressing getting back rather than crashing the glass, That's a bad strategy when you have one of the best rebounding front-courts in the league.

If that's the case, do you think Doc Rivers should ditch the system the Clippers are currently using, which is the same system he used with the Big 3 Celtics, and create a new system that is exclusive to this team?

If the Clippers are indeed having an identity crisis, it could be of Doc trying too hard to make L.A. look like the Big 3 Celtics. He even brought in Big Baby Davis just so that the Clippers can understand how his system worked. This team does have the basic principals to play Doc's style, but to me, it doesn't fit with them. Had they brought in one of Doc's Big 3 in Paul Pierce, Ray Allen or Kevin Garnett, then maybe Doc's system will work here. But the truth of the matter is, this is a run-gun-and-fun team. They're taking their games too seriously. Where are the highlight reel dunks, the showstopping posters, the crossovers, ridiculous 4-point plays, and lob-jams?

This team needs to get Mike D'Antoni or George Karl, both of whom implement a fast up-tempo game. Karl can get them to the Finals, D'Antoni will give them a conference appearance. But right now, this team is lifeless.

So lifeless, Stephen A. Smith of First Take proposed a rumor that the Clippers will be looking into trading for Iman Shumpert or Kenneth Faried. That's how bad the rebounding is.

Wammy Giveaway wrote:

Master Ze wrote:The lack of rebounding really killed them in the final 5 minutes against the Spurs. It looked like Rivers was stressing getting back rather than crashing the glass, That's a bad strategy when you have one of the best rebounding front-courts in the league.

If that's the case, do you think Doc Rivers should ditch the system the Clippers are currently using, which is the same system he used with the Big 3 Celtics, and create a new system that is exclusive to this team?

It's too early to fire Rivers, not to mention highly unlikely as he's the president of basketball operations.

But yes, he needs to implement a new system or push for a wing player via trade. The Clippers indeed are a fast break team that are best when they push the ball but Rivers has them playing a half court style offense.

The next 10 games should be the real test, if they go anything less than 5-5 something drastic needs to happen.

Master Ze wrote:It's too early to fire Rivers, not to mention highly unlikely as he's the president of basketball operations.

I never hinted on a firing of Doc Rivers; just that he needs to restructure his coaching staff by adding D'Antoni or Karl to be their offensive coordinator.

But now that you mentioned firing, I could see Doc getting to the Clippers by basically using an ultimatum. Something like "Unless you can show me that you can win games with me, you're on your own without me." Maybe like take a temporary leave of absence and have one of the coaching staff be Doc's figure man for a couple games. If the Clippers can prove that they need Doc by winning a certain number of games in a row, then Doc may come back and coach. It's one of those "harsh reality" things.

(The above feels like only something Phil Jackson could pull.)

There is no 'best method' of coaching to consistently win, instead a good coach is someone like Pop who builds a system and then over the years accumulate players who will flourish in the system, or a coach similar to lionel hollins (bad example) who changes his coaching style to suit the team and players (Memphis: slow grinding, breaking tempo; Nets: fast tempo). VDN was a terrible coach but he encouraged a run-and-gun offense which suited our style of play with Griffin/Jordan/Bledsoe.

What I don't understand is how the head coach of the 08 Celtics with their solid defense, cannot even produce an average defensive scheme. All too often we give away easy buckets or rebounds with our players just standing around looking at each other. Surely Doc has some notes from his days with Thibs about defense.

We still have a lot of elements of a run-and-gun team but it is stopped by other teams simply getting easy baskets from our bad defense. Fix the defense. Get stops. Lob City.

LACtdom wrote:What I don't understand is how the head coach of the 08 Celtics with their solid defense, cannot even produce an average defensive scheme. All too often we give away easy buckets or rebounds with our players just standing around looking at each other. Surely Doc has some notes from his days with Thibs about defense.

Because the personnel isn't the same, and we barely have any good defenders. DJ looked like he had improved at the end of last season, but here we are at the start of this one, and he's even more terrible than he's ever been. Blake seems like he's regressed as well, like he's not paying enough attention on P&R defense, and our wings... well, we all know how awfully challenged our wings are on defense. I know narrative says all the credit to Boston's defense must go to Thibbodeau, but the Doc-Frank pairing actually improved Boston's defensive numbers when Thibs was gone. And Doc by himself improved it again when Frank was gone too. He's a great defensive coach, as is Frank, but they can't do much if the players are not paying attention and are not very talented on that end to begin with.

And that's one of the reasons he's right on keeping his philosophy of not crashing the offensive glass, we are already awful defensively, imagine if we disregarded transition defense to have a better chance at offensive rebounds...

As for us playing mostly on the halfcourt, that's not true, last season we played at the 7th fastest pace in the NBA, and this year we're still above average and we'll probably end up nearly top 5 again.

I know a lot of guys here think the problem is Woodson and he'd be better substituted by a big name coach like Karl or D'Antoni, but the truth is, our offense will be fine when we start executing a bit better (and we will pretty soon, probably), but our defense will keep being the main obstacle for us to be a full fledged contender. And we already have the guy that coached the best defense in the history of the league (post-handchecking), and the assistant that helped him do it. The players are the problem, not the coaches.

Question for the OP since he's a Warriors fan: what would your opinion be on an Iguodala-for-Crawford swap? I think it would actually be beneficial for both teams.

MartinToVaught wrote:Question for the OP since he's a Warriors fan: what would your opinion be on an Iguodala-for-Crawford swap? I think it would actually be beneficial for both teams.

Not that I think they would do it, but before that it doesn't work contract wise. Also we can't go over the ~$82 mil hard cap, so even if we added other pieces (which also would be asking Golden State to either take on salary to waive the player or drop one of their current guys due to lack of roster spots), we still can't really take on more salary.

If we're trying to do an offense for defense swap some teams that are candidates would be teams like Philly, Milwaukee, Orlando, Detroit, Charlotte, maybe Denver as they are struggling so far on offense and of course Indiana. Philly for the most part is trying to tank, so they probably aren't that interested.

Philly has Mbah-A-Moute who is a defensive SF/PF, but his outside shot isn't there and he makes more than Barnes for a trade like that to work. Milwaukee's defensive guys are mainly young guys they don't want to trade and our old pal Dudley is doing more for them on defense than he could here.

Orlando has Harkless, and I like him, but I wouldn't swap Crawford for him. If we hadn't traded all our picks

Detroit doesn't have anyone that makes sense here and is trade-able, unless I'm not looking well.

Denver has Chandler, but that's a borderline one as to whether it is worth it, and they do have a good amount of guards already. Lawson/Afflalo/Foye/Robinson/their rookie SG. They are an option.

Charlotte has Gerald Henderson @ $6M. Wouldn't trade Crawford for him though, but they could be an option if other pieces are in there, maybe, but they do have Gary Neal as their bench guard that can get shots up.

I thought the other day about an Iggy+Ezeli for Crawford/Hawes/Hedo or Farmar, but I'm not sure if the numbers work, they'd be very close. Or if they value Iggy too much, maybe a Crawford+Wilcox for Barnes+Speights? they seem to think Barnes is stinky trash over at their forum, but I think he'd work miracles with us, considering what we're working with. In any case though, none of the Clippers or the Warriors front offices would be cool with making one of their main rivals stronger, even if it's at the expense of not getting better themselves.

There's not many decent options left for us to trade for at SF. Most of the guys I'd been watching are playing well and their value is way higher than anything we can offer (Terrence Ross, MKG, Harkless)

Afflalo, Chandler or Jeff Green could be available, but if they are, their teams are looking for quality youth or picks for them and we can offer none, they're not gonna want to hear about our Crawford/Barnes offer. Maybe the Wizards are receptive to an offer for Otto Porter if they need veterans to make some playoff noise? Not that he's very good, but he's one of the better options I can think of...

On the other hand, KJ McDaniels is looking like a solid SF who'll be ready to contribute this year or the next, and we passed on him for Wilcox who's still to play his first minutes in the league, even though most of us here were claiming for Doc to pick McDaniels before draft night

og15 wrote:Orlando has Harkless, and I like him, but I wouldn't swap Crawford for him. If we hadn't traded all our picks

I'd do it in a heartbeat, even if he's shooting awfully from deep. I'm of the thought that just taking Crawford out will make our defense better, and what he does on offense can be mitigated by staggering Paul and Blake's minutes and using Redick in more of a playmaker role, which he's good at. And Harkless has been a favorite of mine since he came into the league, he's just what we need at SF, a young athletic good defender than can score if you leave him open. But just like Denver or Boston, the Magic have no use for Crawford/Barnes/Hawes or any of our veterans, and we have no picks cause we like to give them away...

A reminder: Jared Dudley cannot be traded back to the Clippers this season. He was traded on August 26 to get back their 2nd round pick and waive Carlos Delfino and Miroslav Raduljica. Dudley will be eligible to return next season.

QRich3 wrote:In any case though, none of the Clippers or the Warriors front offices would be cool with making one of their main rivals stronger, even if it's at the expense of not getting better themselves.

On the contrary, sometimes trades are used to cripple opponent's playoff chances while improving their own. The Kwame Brown trade for Pau Gasol is a great example - Lakers made the Finals, Grizzlies missed the playoffs completely.

I am weary of rivals trading with each other. The Warriors know that the Clippers are desperate for a small forward, and Doc would do anything to get that guy. Jamal Crawford, J.J. Redick and Matt Barnes will not be enough. What if the Warriors force them to take on another contract like David Lee or Andrew Bogut? That would mean the Clippers will be forced to give up DeAndre Jordan.

Their second end game, and nobody is talking about this, is Ray Allen. Doc is trying to get one of his Big 3 guys back, and the Warriors know that if Ray Allen joins the Clippers, they'll be title contenders. This is where the extra contract comes into play - they've already shed themselves of Nemanja Nedovic to open up a roster spot, and by adding Bogut or Lee to the bargaining table, the Warriors will add themselves of a roster space which they can then use to steal Ray Allen from under Doc River's fingers. Allen to the Dubs would make the Splash Brothers invincible.

I would personally avoid trading with the Warriors. They've have to find another trading partner. Besides which, Alex Kennedy reported this yesterday:

[tweet]http://twitter.com/AlexKennedyNBA/status/532331849456955392[/tweet]

Yeah but the difference is the Grizzlies were looking to tank and the Lakers were looking to contend, that's not the case with us and the Warriors, that's why I said rivals. We could definitely make a trade with the Nuggets, Jazz or Lakers if we had youth or cap relief to offer them, but we don't. And the Warriors are not letting go of Bogut, and neither are we of Jordan, unless we could get a better defensive C than him.

Allen would be an ok addition I guess, if we were able to trade one of our SG's for a SF, but that's the difficult thing. There's not many teams out there that can be interested in Crawford or Redick and have a decent SF they would offer.

Artest is done, and the fact that we might be looking at him speaks volumes about how desperate we are.

I think we need to take a gamble on a young athletic SF who maybe only has 2 or 3 years experience in the NBA.

LACtdom wrote:I think we need to take a gamble on a young athletic SF who maybe only has 2 or 3 years experience in the NBA.

What are some options?