RealGM

KL2 wrote:

og15 wrote:I had issue with you saying it was embarassing. Losing by 20 points with the team the Clippers had put there against a Nets team with Harden, shooters and finishers is not embarassing.

It would be embarassing if they showed no fight and lost by 40 points. The Clippers showed fight, they were simply out-talented most of the game.

Like I said, you want to get young guys minutes with experienced players whenever possible. This isn't the G-League Hinkie Sixers team. The Clippers goal is to have these young guys learning to play proper basketball and play roles as well as they can in preparation for next season when they will more likely than not be 9th or 10th men.

Boston and Coffey played around 10 minutes each in the first half, Johnson played 3. They were down 16 at half, they got beat 30-26 in the 3rd, so really not bad, but they just couldn't close the gap. Lue then played only bench players / young guys in the 4th.

So he gave the team a chance in the 3rd to work on playing from behind and trying to close a lead, then in the 4th he played the young guys.

My problem is complaining half way through the 3rd quarter that the coach hasn't thrown in the towel, doesn't make much sense.

The West is struggling, there are only 4 teams above 500, the NBA has the play in, the Clippers can't just tank, they can still push to keep themselves out of the bottom 5.

I’m not talking just about losses here. We’re about to pile up an obscene amount of them in January. My mistake for not clarifying. I’m talking effort, urgency, doing whatever it takes. I’m not seeing that from the coach and a good chunk of players. We’ll just have to agree to disagree on that.

As for the young players needing to learn to play the right way? They showed that all 4th quarter long. Ball movement, attacking, and communicating. Sure some slip ups but I think it was Brian Sieman who said the young guys were playing the right way. They showed more of that then some of the seasoned vets. They’re fearless and we could use some of that. Instead they’ll be reined in because of reasons.

Lue isn’t pushing the right buttons, too afraid to hurt feelings, or isn’t the coach on the fly people say he is.

They need a players only meeting or something. The head in the sand and hope for the best is not a good one imo.

I'm confused as to why you keep talking as if he has all the tools to be successful right now

Max Headrom wrote:I'm confused as to why you keep talking as if he has all the tools to be successful right now

He doesn’t. There’s a long list of other teams who don’t have it either. Some don’t even have their head coach. A lot of those teams are still finding ways. Some of this goes back to when we were healthy. Those losses to the Kings, Grizz, Pelicans, etc.. Teams we didn’t take seriously enough. Sure, you’re not going to win them all but there’s a theme with this team this year. It’s not a good one.

My point is a lot of teams are facing injuries, superstars in/out, health/safety protocols, unfair schedule. I just wish this team had the next man up mentality instead of whatever it is they’re doing. But hey, we can just hope other teams in our range lose and we’ll be A-ok. No need to actually work for those wins.

i gotta say, man. you complain about it ALL the time and then you say it's not complaining?

The team is literally at .500, 5th seed in the west, and competitive enough with a shot to win on any given night in spite of our two best players out. What's NOT realistic is to expect a team laden with capable veterans to accept rolling over and dying because you think they won't make the playoffs in very weak conference. And it's not realistic to expect an experienced HC to play his super-green rookies big minutes when he believes that making his players earn their time is the best approach to team chemistry and player development - vets included. Your expectations are not realistic at all. You keep projecting these personal expectations of yours that are not in-line with where the team is actually at, then complain about it, then complain others don't see what you see, then say you're not complaining. Like, seriously?

And the irony is that the two rawest guys are still getting a lot of burn even though most nights they're so often negatively or marginally impactful. Boston has mostly been godawful since his big game vs the celtics, and he's in danger of turning into a jamal crawford-like chucker which is the last thing this team needs. Johnson's at least playing with some defensive poise, but right now they're both just rookies with some flashes, and yet they're STILL getting court-time, so the irony is only furthered as you continue to complain. "Oh look why did we even bring the kids to the game, just watch, ty lue's not even gonna play them" **every single one of us watches as lue actually play them in games** "oh lue's not playing the kids enough" Like, that's literally you. FWIW boston's play is worthy of reduction in minutes because of poor shot selection and questionable decisions, yet he's continued to receive the green light. Imagine rewarding him even more for that though and ruining his trajectory as a player. Then consider how that alters team chemistry on a team with legitimate veterans where we already have enough shot-takers.

I'd also point out that the team hasn't been so covid-ravaged that they've had to go halfsies with a g-league team. And that playing your best players is the definition of doing what it takes to win. So it's a conflicting comment when you say other coaches are using all hands on deck and doing whatever it takes to win, as if this team hasn't already dipped into the G-league for the former, all the while already aiming for the latter. Playing everyone you got is not a strategy to win, in and of itself. Or perhaps you're referring to some specific strategies or x and o's things lue's not doing that other coaches are doing? If that's the case, what should ty lue be copying from other coaches from a tactical standpoint that's currently lacking with this team? Or do you perhaps think it's a lack of lue properly firing up the team, and that he needs to be copying other motivational concepts or speeches from other coaches?

In all reality, the team is what it is: a middle of the pack team that's pretty decent on defense, but otherwise without a clear identity or a clear star to carry it despite its lack of identity. Teams with a clear identity will crush weaklings in the RS. Teams with a clear superstar will do the same. We have neither of those. What we do have is a team reliant on ensemble production to win games, and if one or both of kennard or mann aren't bringing it, we're gonna look lacking on most nights while they continue to try and figure it out. We're gonna beat some good teams some nights, lose to some bad teams some nights, and kinda limp and chug along otherwise. And just to be clear, kennard and mann are still developing players as well, even if they're already considered rotational pieces. The right guys are getting a lot of playtime. Rookie included.

Personally I have enough to complain about with lue if I feel the need. But none of it has to do with underplaying the young guys because that's not what's happening, and this is not a team that's gonna finish with a 25 win record. It's a team with a reasonable shot to make the playoffs, and as such it's fighting for its survival, which also happens to be a fantastic atmosphere for rookies to be learning from, imo.

madmaxmedia wrote:

og15 wrote:

MartinToVaught wrote:The Grizzlies just went 10-2 without Ja Morant. We've been a mediocre team hovering around .500 with Paul George.

I think it's safe to say that blaming everything on players being out is a copout. Everybody's dealing with it and some teams are dealing with it better than others. The front office really screwed up by bringing in Bledsoe and Winslow (just imagine how much better this team would be with productive players in those roster spots) and Lue has done a poor coaching job this year. Our biggest problem has been the long stretches of games where we just look utterly hopeless on offense, and that has been a consistent issue no matter who's playing or who our opponent is on any given night.

Odd comparison to the Grizzlies since Brooks and Banes played 11 of those 12 games, those are their 2nd and 3rd leading scorers. Then JJJ, their 4th scorer at 16 ppg was also in the lineup. They weren't decimated, they had one guy out, Clippers have had that the whole season. Morant being out for the Grizzlies is directly comparable to the Clippers whole season with Kawhi out. I'd buy this argument if they had Morant, Brooks and/or Banes all out and went 10-2.

Bledsoe who has struggled scoring is a leading scorer recently , and Boston who shot 36/30 in college has played 21 mpg over the last 10 games taking 9 FGA and shooting 36/30 and we're out here talking about not playing young guys? Come on!

The last time Marcus Morris was a first option on a team (and they had Julius Randle too), they were 14-29 in the games he played, and he's currently the best scorer active on the roster (and was out the previous 4 games) and you guys think there's some magic to coaching that can overcome lack of talent on offense?

Last 3 games:
Coffey: 24.5 mpg
Boston: 27.7 mpg
Johnson: 14.3 mpg

Interpretation: Coach is not playing the young guys, just like his 6 games at the start of the season in Cleveland obviously proved!

Get outta here with that stuff.

The team has had stretches looking hopeless on offense because the offensive talent has been weak.

Boston isn't really ready for 28 MPG even for developmental purposes, and Johnson is probably maxing out at this point at 15 MPG. At the very least we need to stagger their minutes against many teams. If that's their minutes for the next month, that's absolutely fine for them. If they get better over that period, then of course they can/should play more.

I mean they could play more right now, but how much developing are you really doing playing in a raw lineup that's regularly down 20 by halftime?

Coffey is an interesting situation, I think he's a really high floor but low ceiling guy. Like if he goes +20 in a game it will never be because of him, but if he goes -20 it won't be because of him either.

I agree, Boston is getting out there because injuries, covid, etc, etc, but he's a project. He averaged 11.5 ppg in college and shot 36/30, no one thought he was efficient or a positive player, which is why he went 51st. What was known was that he has talent that could be directed and developed, no one disagrees with that, but if he's playing 28 mpg on a team, that team is probably going to be losing a lot of those games, there's just no way around it in a league with this much talent.

Boston has not shown he deserves minutes ona good team, his shot selection is still poor, he has a lot to learn. I actually agree that he shouldn't be playing close to 30 mpg with his on court play, hence why I'm confused about the minutes complaint when he's at 15 mpg for the season and 20+ over the last 10 games.

Letting rookies play tons of minutes and do whatever they want is not development, so I certainly don't want Lue doing that. Players for the most part should earn minutes by playing well and playing right and by how effective they are.

og15 wrote:

madmaxmedia wrote:

og15 wrote:Odd comparison to the Grizzlies since Brooks and Banes played 11 of those 12 games, those are their 2nd and 3rd leading scorers. Then JJJ, their 4th scorer at 16 ppg was also in the lineup. They weren't decimated, they had one guy out, Clippers have had that the whole season. Morant being out for the Grizzlies is directly comparable to the Clippers whole season with Kawhi out. I'd buy this argument if they had Morant, Brooks and/or Banes all out and went 10-2.

Bledsoe who has struggled scoring is a leading scorer recently , and Boston who shot 36/30 in college has played 21 mpg over the last 10 games taking 9 FGA and shooting 36/30 and we're out here talking about not playing young guys? Come on!

The last time Marcus Morris was a first option on a team (and they had Julius Randle too), they were 14-29 in the games he played, and he's currently the best scorer active on the roster (and was out the previous 4 games) and you guys think there's some magic to coaching that can overcome lack of talent on offense?

Last 3 games:
Coffey: 24.5 mpg
Boston: 27.7 mpg
Johnson: 14.3 mpg

Interpretation: Coach is not playing the young guys, just like his 6 games at the start of the season in Cleveland obviously proved!

Get outta here with that stuff.

The team has had stretches looking hopeless on offense because the offensive talent has been weak.

Boston isn't really ready for 28 MPG even for developmental purposes, and Johnson is probably maxing out at this point at 15 MPG. At the very least we need to stagger their minutes against many teams. If that's their minutes for the next month, that's absolutely fine for them. If they get better over that period, then of course they can/should play more.

I mean they could play more right now, but how much developing are you really doing playing in a raw lineup that's regularly down 20 by halftime?

Coffey is an interesting situation, I think he's a really high floor but low ceiling guy. Like if he goes +20 in a game it will never be because of him, but if he goes -20 it won't be because of him either.

I agree, Boston is getting out there because injuries, covid, etc, etc, but he's a project. He averaged 11.5 ppg in college and shot 36/30, no one thought he was efficient or a positive player, which is why he went 51st. What was known was that he has talent that could be directed and developed, no one disagrees with that, but if he's playing 28 mpg on a team, that team is probably going to be losing a lot of those games, there's just no way around it in a league with this much talent.

Boston has not shown he deserves minutes ona good team, his shot selection is still poor, he has a lot to learn. I actually agree that he shouldn't be playing close to 30 mpg with his on court play, hence why I'm confused about the minutes complaint when he's at 15 mpg for the season and 20+ over the last 10 games.

Letting rookies play tons of minutes and do whatever they want is not development, so I certainly don't want Lue doing that. Players for the most part should earn minutes by playing well and playing right and by how effective they are.

I think the best thing Boston could have done for himself is stay for his sophomore year. I think he probably would have caught up and been deserving of a primary role, and set himself up to be a lottery pick in the upcoming draft. Of course I am fine with his choice- I do think we got a great prospect in the second round! But it is likely going to take an extra year before he becomes a consistently positive contributor for us (which is absolutely more than fine for a 2nd round pick...)

It is telling that there seems to be more of a vibe around Brandon than Keon. But Keon was a prospect type as well, just drafted at a higher position.

KL2 wrote:

Max Headrom wrote:I'm confused as to why you keep talking as if he has all the tools to be successful right now

He doesn’t. There’s a long list of other teams who don’t have it either. Some don’t even have their head coach. A lot of those teams are still finding ways. Some of this goes back to when we were healthy. Those losses to the Kings, Grizz, Pelicans, etc.. Teams we didn’t take seriously enough. Sure, you’re not going to win them all but there’s a theme with this team this year. It’s not a good one.

My point is a lot of teams are facing injuries, superstars in/out, health/safety protocols, unfair schedule. I just wish this team had the next man up mentality instead of whatever it is they’re doing. But hey, we can just hope other teams in our range lose and we’ll be A-ok. No need to actually work for those wins.

Not everyone's situation is made equal though, what teams have their top 3 scorers all out and didn't have their 4th best scorer for the last 4 games and is playing well? If you're simply saying teams have it bad also and are still sucking, how is that different though?

You cited these teams earlier:

Hawks (15-18), Young, Capela, Collins played 30+/33 games, last 10 games, 3-7

Boston (16-18), Tatum and Smart played 33 and 32/34 games, last 10 games, 3-7

Nets (23-9), have a superstar still playing, Durant, Irving and Harris were in protocols and Durant has played most games

Cavs (20-13), Garland missed two early in the season, none lately, but will now since he's in protocols, Sexton out for season still had Garland, Rubio, Love, Markennen last game and played the G-League Raptors, if they have this for 5-10 games we can judge, but Okoro and Mobley are back.

Kings (13-21), Fox, Halliburton, Barnes and Hield have all played 29+/34 games, they are 3-7 in their last 10 games, Fox out 4 of last 5, they are 1-4.

Blazers (13-20), still have Lillard recently, but a lot of guys out, 2-8 in their last 10 games

So teams that are playing like trash except for the Nets who have a superstar Harden with shooters and finishers and haven't even had Durant out much and the Cavs whose top scorer just entered protocol today and they had most of their offensive depth present as well as a PG to run things. Now they have two other guys back. So basically the teams that would be comparable to the Clippers with PG....


Clippers haven't shown fight and grit?
Clippers are 5-5 in their last 10, George played three of the 10 games. They are 3-4 without George in the recent stretch. Utah trounced them without George, big deal. They beat Phoenix who still had Paul, how is that not impressive? They only lost by 3 to Denver who had Jokic without George, Morris and Jackson. Down 9 at half, took the lead with a great 3rd, then just couldn't get enough buckets in the 4th. They lost to OKC on a poor defensive read by Batum playing the drive. They literally could have two more wins and have gone 7-3 in their last 10 games, so you can see why I'm a bit confused at this whole no effort, no next man up, when that is exactly what they are doing.

It seems like your expectation is that a decimated team is not going to get blown out, and that's my point, you think they can just use energy to cover the offensive talent gap every game, but that's not realistic. The Clippers aren't a top 5 defense without energy. That's effort, communication and energy, but you can't stop everyone, and on nights where you can't contain and also can't get buckets, you will lose by double digits. Energy doesn't work the same way on offense as on defense, offense is still about talent, hence why GSW's great system produced the 30th ranked offense in 19-20 without Curry.

Maybe due to being invested in the team as fans we think our team is doing worse than comparable teams or other teams are doing better than they actually are. On average those teams have been at around 30% winning.

Winning vs Competing
Okay, so we say it's not specifically about winning or not, but being competitive. But, the Clippers are a solid 3-4 recently which could be 5-2 without PG, Morris missing some of those, and Reggie too.

Blazers without Lillard recently beat Detroit, then lost by 31, 28, 10 and 12. Last two games with Lillard and a mix of G-League, they lost by 14 and 15 to New Orleans and no Doncic Mavs.

The Hawks are 1-4 in their last 5, they have lost by 18, 14 and 12 in 3/4 losses.

Kings 1-4 in their last 5, lost by 19, 15, 16, 25

Clippers are out competing all these other teams on a nightly basis, so maybe your expectations needed more context in terms of what these other teams are actually doing.

og15 wrote:

KL2 wrote:

Max Headrom wrote:I'm confused as to why you keep talking as if he has all the tools to be successful right now

He doesn’t. There’s a long list of other teams who don’t have it either. Some don’t even have their head coach. A lot of those teams are still finding ways. Some of this goes back to when we were healthy. Those losses to the Kings, Grizz, Pelicans, etc.. Teams we didn’t take seriously enough. Sure, you’re not going to win them all but there’s a theme with this team this year. It’s not a good one.

My point is a lot of teams are facing injuries, superstars in/out, health/safety protocols, unfair schedule. I just wish this team had the next man up mentality instead of whatever it is they’re doing. But hey, we can just hope other teams in our range lose and we’ll be A-ok. No need to actually work for those wins.

Not everyone's situation is made equal though, what teams have their top 3 scorers all out and didn't have their 4th best scorer for the last 4 games and is playing well? If you're simply saying teams have it bad also and are still sucking, how is that different though?

You cited these teams earlier:

Hawks (15-18), Young, Capela, Collins played 30+/33 games, last 10 games, 3-7

Boston (16-18), Tatum and Smart played 33 and 32/34 games, last 10 games, 3-7

Nets (23-9), have a superstar still playing, Durant, Irving and Harris were in protocols and Durant has played most games

Cavs (20-13), Garland missed two early in the season, none lately, but will now since he's in protocols, Sexton out for season still had Garland, Rubio, Love, Markennen last game and played the G-League Raptors, if they have this for 5-10 games we can judge, but Okoro and Mobley are back.

Kings (13-21), Fox, Halliburton, Barnes and Hield have all played 29+/34 games, they are 3-7 in their last 10 games, Fox out 4 of last 5, they are 1-4.

Blazers (13-20), still have Lillard recently, but a lot of guys out, 2-8 in their last 10 games

So teams that are playing like trash except for the Nets who have a superstar Harden with shooters and finishers and haven't even had Durant out much and the Cavs whose top scorer just entered protocol today and they had most of their offensive depth present as well as a PG to run things. Now they have two other guys back. So basically the teams that would be comparable to the Clippers with PG....


Clippers haven't shown fight and grit?
Clippers are 5-5 in their last 10, George played three of the 10 games. They are 3-4 without George in the recent stretch. Utah trounced them without George, big deal. They beat Phoenix who still had Paul, how is that not impressive? They only lost by 3 to Denver who had Jokic without George, Morris and Jackson. Down 9 at half, took the lead with a great 3rd, then just couldn't get enough buckets in the 4th. They lost to OKC on a poor defensive read by Batum playing the drive. They literally could have two more wins and have gone 7-3 in their last 10 games, so you can see why I'm a bit confused at this whole no effort, no next man up, when that is exactly what they are doing.

It seems like your expectation is that a decimated team is not going to get blown out, and that's my point, you think they can just use energy to cover the offensive talent gap every game, but that's not realistic. The Clippers aren't a top 5 defense without energy. That's effort, communication and energy, but you can't stop everyone, and on nights where you can't contain and also can't get buckets, you will lose by double digits. Energy doesn't work the same way on offense as on defense, offense is still about talent, hence why GSW's great system produced the 30th ranked offense in 19-20 without Curry.

Maybe due to being invested in the team as fans we think our team is doing worse than comparable teams or other teams are doing better than they actually are. On average those teams have been at around 30% winning.

Winning vs Competing
Okay, so we say it's not specifically about winning or not, but being competitive. But, the Clippers are a solid 3-4 recently which could be 5-2 without PG, Morris missing some of those, and Reggie too.

Blazers without Lillard recently beat Detroit, then lost by 31, 28, 10 and 12. Last two games with Lillard and a mix of G-League, they lost by 14 and 15 to New Orleans and no Doncic Mavs.

The Hawks are 1-4 in their last 5, they have lost by 18, 14 and 12 in 3/4 losses.

Kings 1-4 in their last 5, lost by 19, 15, 16, 25

Clippers are out competing all these other teams on a nightly basis, so maybe your expectations needed more context in terms of what these other teams are actually doing.

This team has been on mini-runs (winning and losing) all year, which TBH doesn't surprise me as our margin is thin. Guys like Kennard and Mook can run hot or cold, when you go 5 for 8 from 3 it's easy to be a key contributor to a win. But there will also be those 1 for 8 nights, and with our big guns down we're going to lose our share of games (the same goes for the young guys who are still learning.) I love Reggie, but when he's not shooting well he's often not a net positive player either.

The superstars or at least bonafide 2-way players are the ones who can have off-shooting nights but still play a significant role in a win, and they're both out.

We were massively outgunned in this game, but it was pretty even for quarters 1, 3, and 4. You could see the game get away from our guys about 6 or 7 minutes into the 2d quarter.

Harden seemed unstoppable.

As a bunch of posters have said, this loss is nothing. We are missing half the team. The fact that we held our own for 3 of 4 quarters against the Nets is pretty ok. We go .500 for this stretch without PG13, I'm very happy. We start getting other guys back, out of health protocols, etc, I think the team can do .500 for sure until the big guys return.