Page 1 of 1
Should we be interested in Earl Watson
Posted: Fri Jul 17, 2009 10:16 pm
by bigalexx
Watson was just waived by OKC Thunder. He is an average backup PG, who is an above average defender. Taylor has not been impressive in anyway in the summer league, should the Clippers be interested in signing him, they can probably sign him pretty cheap.
Re: Should we be interested in Earl Watson
Posted: Fri Jul 17, 2009 10:36 pm
by illastrate
Yes, definitely. If we don't wanna affect our 2010 cap room and get a quality PG, he's our guy. A one year deal won't hurt at all.
Re: Should we be interested in Earl Watson
Posted: Fri Jul 17, 2009 11:37 pm
by ClipperDomination
I'd rather give that time to Mike Taylor and see him develop than give a deal to a career mediocre backup PG in Watson.
Re: Should we be interested in Earl Watson
Posted: Sat Jul 18, 2009 1:47 am
by jgustav1
I'd rather go after Sessions and forget about Watson and Mike Taylor as potential backup PGs.
Re: Should we be interested in Earl Watson
Posted: Sat Jul 18, 2009 1:54 am
by Forte IV
Watson si gone, he reportedly will sign a 1 year deal with the Pacers once he clears wiavers
Re: Should we be interested in Earl Watson
Posted: Sat Jul 18, 2009 2:23 am
by ClipperDomination
jgustav1 wrote:I'd rather go after Sessions and forget about Watson and Mike Taylor as potential backup PGs.
Well, this too.
Re: Should we be interested in Earl Watson
Posted: Sat Jul 18, 2009 8:09 am
by jflipclip
ClipperDomination wrote:I'd rather give that time to Mike Taylor and see him develop than give a deal to a career mediocre backup PG in Watson.
Coming from the guy who wants to give a deal to a career mediocre backup F in Barnes rather than give Al Thornton time to establish his role in a new offense.
In all seriousness though, we should be looking for a backup guard. Not sure if Watson is the answer, but any speculation is a good sign.
Re: Should we be interested in Earl Watson
Posted: Sat Jul 18, 2009 8:27 am
by ClipperDomination
jflipclip wrote:ClipperDomination wrote:I'd rather give that time to Mike Taylor and see him develop than give a deal to a career mediocre backup PG in Watson.
Coming from the guy who wants to give a deal to a career mediocre backup F in Barnes rather than give Al Thornton time to establish his role in a new offense.
In all seriousness though, we should be looking for a backup guard. Not sure if Watson is the answer, but any speculation is a good sign.
Another discussion for another time, but hey why not.
Barnes is an above average player. If you think Barnes as a SF/SG is on the same level as Watson is as a backup PG and not on a higher level, then I don't know what kind of basketball you watch.
The one thing we can all agree on is that this is THE make or break year for Thornton, but I don't have my hopes real high. At all.
Re: Should we be interested in Earl Watson
Posted: Sat Jul 18, 2009 12:52 pm
by mj_shoefanatic
Nope. We need to focus in on acquiring A.I.
Re: Should we be interested in Earl Watson
Posted: Sat Jul 18, 2009 2:53 pm
by thanumba2clippersfan
Looks like Watson is going to join the Pacers, oh well
Re: Should we be interested in Earl Watson
Posted: Tue Jul 21, 2009 12:10 am
by laduane1
He signed with another team.