JOSH SMITH to Clippers

Lindecision · Post #41 » by **Lindecision** » Thu Jul 16, 2015 11:55 pm

Hoopshype is doggy doo doo. Use basketballinsiders.

But Wow. I thought Josh was a lock to go back to Houston. This is an awesome signing, even if it is for the vet min. We don't even have to trade Jamal now. Or at least hold off until something better comes up closer to the trade deadline. He should be better with more guys around him on the 2nd unit.

Post #42 » by **og15** » Fri Jul 17, 2015 12:04 am

Lindecision wrote:Hoopshype is doggy doo doo. Use basketballinsiders.

But Wow. I thought Josh was a lock to go back to Houston. This is an awesome signing, even if it is for the vet min. We don't even have to trade Jamal now. Or at least hold off until something better comes up closer to the trade deadline. He should be better with more guys around him on the 2nd unit.

There isn't enough minutes for everyone currently on the roster to be happy. Look at the roster and try to figure out the minutes, someone is going to be unhappy if no other moves are made

mj_shoefanatic · Post #43 » by **mj_shoefanatic** » Fri Jul 17, 2015 12:05 am

Nice backup for Griffin.

nickhx2 · Post #44 » by **nickhx2** » Fri Jul 17, 2015 12:07 am

Lindecision wrote:Hoopshype is doggy doo doo. Use basketballinsiders.

But Wow. I thought Josh was a lock to go back to Houston. This is an awesome signing, even if it is for the vet min. We don't even have to trade Jamal now. Or at least hold off until something better comes up closer to the trade deadline. He should be better with more guys around him on the 2nd unit.

not sure why you're so insistent on keeping the biggest trash can of the past year on this team.

Quake Griffin · Post #45 » by **Quake Griffin** » Fri Jul 17, 2015 12:19 am

Where do Jamaal and Wilcox fit?

Lindecision · Post #46 » by **Lindecision** » Fri Jul 17, 2015 12:23 am

og15 wrote:
Lindecision wrote:Hoopshype is doggy doo doo. Use basketballinsiders.

But Wow. I thought Josh was a lock to go back to Houston. This is an awesome signing, even if it is for the vet min. We don't even have to trade Jamal now. Or at least hold off until something better comes up closer to the trade deadline. He should be better with more guys around him on the 2nd unit.

There isn't enough minutes for everyone currently on the roster to be happy. Look at the roster and try to figure out the minutes, someone is going to be unhappy if no other moves are made

Yeh there is. PP will be minutes restricted. Josh will get his. Wes is a minimum guy that can't be relied upon. Jamal and Austin are gunners that have to be pulled if they're not hitting shots. And Lance might just flat out blow up in our faces.

nickhx2 wrote:not sure why you're so insistent on keeping the biggest trash can of the past year on this team.

I'm not. If there isn't a good trade to be had then there's no point.

nickhx2 · Post #47 » by **nickhx2** » Fri Jul 17, 2015 12:23 am

wilcox as injury replacement and jamal on any team that is not the clippers.

as much as i'd like to see wilcox get some burn, it's hard to see it happening unless doc wants to play lance exclusively as the backup 3, which, i could definitely go for.

Post #48 » by **og15** » Fri Jul 17, 2015 12:23 am

Quake Griffin wrote:Where do Jamaal and Wilcox fit?

Jamal doesn't fit, and along with Wilcox they get moved for picks, any picks

Post #49 » by **og15** » Fri Jul 17, 2015 12:24 am

Lindecision wrote:
og15 wrote:
Lindecision wrote:Hoopshype is doggy doo doo. Use basketballinsiders.

But Wow. I thought Josh was a lock to go back to Houston. This is an awesome signing, even if it is for the vet min. We don't even have to trade Jamal now. Or at least hold off until something better comes up closer to the trade deadline. He should be better with more guys around him on the 2nd unit.

There isn't enough minutes for everyone currently on the roster to be happy. Look at the roster and try to figure out the minutes, someone is going to be unhappy if no other moves are made

Yeh there is. PP will be minutes restricted. Josh will get his. Wes is a minimum guy that can't be relied upon. Jamal and Austin are gunners that have to be pulled if they're not hitting shots. And Lance might just flat out blow up in our faces.

nickhx2 wrote:not sure why you're so insistent on keeping the biggest trash can of the past year on this team.

I'm not. If there isn't a good trade to be had then there's no point.

Like I said, show me the minutes. I don't want you to tell me, show me how everyone gets what you'd consider adequate minutes when the roster is healthy if you keep Jamal. I don't see it, if you do, be my guest and show us.

playaloc916 · Post #50 » by **playaloc916** » Fri Jul 17, 2015 12:51 am

Wow, Doc really going all out. Going for the Hail Mary with Stephenson and Smith.

I like it. You can never have too much talent. Even though he has his shortfalls, Smith is a solid backup player.

To go from Hedo, Hawes, and Davis, to guys like Smith and Stephenson.... A pleasant surprise.

I just hope we can get a pick or another backup big for Crawford. I think it is best for both parties if we part ways.

Lindecision · Post #51 » by **Lindecision** » Fri Jul 17, 2015 12:53 am

og15 wrote:
Lindecision wrote:
og15 wrote:There isn't enough minutes for everyone currently on the roster to be happy. Look at the roster and try to figure out the minutes, someone is going to be unhappy if no other moves are made

Yeh there is. PP will be minutes restricted. Josh will get his. Wes is a minimum guy that can't be relied upon. Jamal and Austin are gunners that have to be pulled if they're not hitting shots. And Lance might just flat out blow up in our faces.

nickhx2 wrote:not sure why you're so insistent on keeping the biggest trash can of the past year on this team.

I'm not. If there isn't a good trade to be had then there's no point.

Like I said, show me the minutes. I don't want you to tell me, show me how everyone gets what you'd consider adequate minutes when the roster is healthy if you keep Jamal. I don't see it, if you do, be my guest and show us.

I don't see the point of me coming up with a bunch of arbitrary numbers. Some games he'll play 5 minutes, some games he'll play 25 minutes. I don't know. If anything, you guys are more insistent of getting rid of Jamal than I am willing to keep him. Jamal isn't the type to cause locker room problems. Nothing wrong with keeping him for now to see if something comes up down the road. Less minutes might even make him more effiecient, which will up his trade value. We've already got our backup big without having to lose anything in return, so trading away our depth just for the sake of it is a terrible idea.

og15 wrote:
Quake Griffin wrote:Where do Jamaal and Wilcox fit?

Jamal doesn't fit, and along with Wilcox they get moved for picks, any picks

Like so. Terrible idea. CJ will be worth more than any mediocre picks you get in return.

TheNewEra · Post #52 » by **TheNewEra** » Fri Jul 17, 2015 1:01 am

Would look to move Jamal for a C and use Pierce on the bench.

Ranma · Post #53 » by **Ranma** » Fri Jul 17, 2015 1:08 am

QRich3 makes astute points about the dangers of overpaying in free agency and the increased competition for the 2016 FA class, but I'm with nickhx2 in not wanting to limit our salary cap flexibility unless something irresistible comes along. Taj Gibson would be tempting but he's injured and likely unavailable, anyway. Our roster is deep enough for 2015-16 where we can now be more selective.

Yes, teams will be aflush with spending money next summer, but not everyone will be granted the privilege to have audience with Kevin Durant. Just like during LeBron's initial free agency, I would think that the Clippers will be among the select few teams granted the opportunity to make a pitch to him and you don't throw that chance away. Even if we strike out on KD, there's still some interesting names like: Al Horford, Nic Batum, Eric Gordon, Luol Deng, Joe Johnson, and Jeff Green to target. Now outside of Durant, nobody is really worth a max deal and not everyone is even worth a long-term investment. Of course, competition will necessitate that, but our primary pitch should be selling on a chance to win, anyway.

If we come away from FA shopping empty-handed, so be it. We'll just go on doing what we've been doing the past few seasons in filling out the roster with role players, but this time, we'll be armed with more spending power. Lest we forget, most of the non-core players on our roster will either be off the books or likely opt out, regardless. We're currently afforded the ability to contend for 2015-16 while also set up to be players in the summer of 2016. Not many teams are afforded such fortune, so I wouldn't be quick to take it for granted. Besides, our best chance to convince a big-name free agent is to win, so Doc better do what he can to forge this stacked team into a cohesive unit. Excuse for failure is not at all acceptable. It never was.

Here are a few videos exhibiting the bad and good of our new acquisition, Josh Smith:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wsqGTqlHrcM[/youtube]
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGD4xLGILzs[/youtube]
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57KSOrcXyMU[/youtube]

TheNewEra · Post #54 » by **TheNewEra** » Fri Jul 17, 2015 1:08 am

Lindecision wrote:
og15 wrote:
Lindecision wrote:
Yeh there is. PP will be minutes restricted. Josh will get his. Wes is a minimum guy that can't be relied upon. Jamal and Austin are gunners that have to be pulled if they're not hitting shots. And Lance might just flat out blow up in our faces.

I'm not. If there isn't a good trade to be had then there's no point.

Like I said, show me the minutes. I don't want you to tell me, show me how everyone gets what you'd consider adequate minutes when the roster is healthy if you keep Jamal. I don't see it, if you do, be my guest and show us.

I don't see the point of me coming up with a bunch of arbitrary numbers. Some games he'll play 5 minutes, some games he'll play 25 minutes. I don't know. If anything, you guys are more insistent of getting rid of Jamal than I am willing to keep him. Jamal isn't the type to cause locker room problems. Nothing wrong with keeping him for now to see if something comes up down the road. Less minutes might even make him more effiecient, which will up his trade value. We've already got our backup big without having to lose anything in return, so trading away our depth just for the sake of it is a terrible idea.

og15 wrote:
Quake Griffin wrote:Where do Jamaal and Wilcox fit?

Jamal doesn't fit, and along with Wilcox they get moved for picks, any picks

Like so. Terrible idea. CJ will be worth more than any mediocre picks you get in return.

Jamal will destroy the potential ball movement of the second unit. I think you dump him for the best C possible and bench Pierce.

Angel strike1 · Post #55 » by **Angel strike1** » Fri Jul 17, 2015 1:26 am

PERFECT and we keep craw (or trade him for more parts)

he can come of the bench so blake dont got to play 45+ in playoffs.
he also can sub in for dj when they go hacka dj end of games.

if blake works on his shot more he can shift to sf(for a big line)

also he can heat up just remember what he did to us.
he also not great defender but underrated. i do remember him going 1-1 vs blake and doing really good job defending him.

GOOOOO CLIPPERS!

McAdoo · Post #56 » by **McAdoo** » Fri Jul 17, 2015 1:33 am

TheNewEra wrote:
Lindecision wrote:
og15 wrote:Like I said, show me the minutes. I don't want you to tell me, show me how everyone gets what you'd consider adequate minutes when the roster is healthy if you keep Jamal. I don't see it, if you do, be my guest and show us.

I don't see the point of me coming up with a bunch of arbitrary numbers. Some games he'll play 5 minutes, some games he'll play 25 minutes. I don't know. If anything, you guys are more insistent of getting rid of Jamal than I am willing to keep him. Jamal isn't the type to cause locker room problems. Nothing wrong with keeping him for now to see if something comes up down the road. Less minutes might even make him more effiecient, which will up his trade value. We've already got our backup big without having to lose anything in return, so trading away our depth just for the sake of it is a terrible idea.

og15 wrote:Jamal doesn't fit, and along with Wilcox they get moved for picks, any picks

Like so. Terrible idea. CJ will be worth more than any mediocre picks you get in return.

Jamal will destroy the potential ball movement of the second unit. I think you dump him for the best C possible and bench Pierce.

I don't completely agree, Jamal in the past has played a lot of point guard and did it well. He has been a major ball stopper in recent years because... well lets face it, when playing with the bench he didn't have anyone worth a damn to pass it too :lol:

I do have to agree that Jamal might not fit in really well with this new bench, but I don't think he needs to be moved if there is nothing worth it coming back. If there is something out there then by all means pull the trigger.

Lindecision · Post #57 » by **Lindecision** » Fri Jul 17, 2015 1:37 am

TheNewEra wrote:Jamal will destroy the potential ball movement of the second unit. I think you dump him for the best C possible and bench Pierce.

I know what you mean, but Jamal is actually a very smart guy. You see it in all his interviews. Surround him with better guys on the 2nd unit and I think he recognizes playing more team ball is more benefitial for everyone. With our bench so thin the past couple years, he hasn't really had a choice but to do his crossover and chuck routine.

Post #58 » by **mkwest** » Fri Jul 17, 2015 1:44 am

[tweet]https://twitter.com/LAClippers/status/621855908272812032[/tweet]

nickhx2 · Post #59 » by **nickhx2** » Fri Jul 17, 2015 1:51 am

Lindecision wrote:
og15 wrote:
Lindecision wrote:
Yeh there is. PP will be minutes restricted. Josh will get his. Wes is a minimum guy that can't be relied upon. Jamal and Austin are gunners that have to be pulled if they're not hitting shots. And Lance might just flat out blow up in our faces.

I'm not. If there isn't a good trade to be had then there's no point.

Like I said, show me the minutes. I don't want you to tell me, show me how everyone gets what you'd consider adequate minutes when the roster is healthy if you keep Jamal. I don't see it, if you do, be my guest and show us.

I don't see the point of me coming up with a bunch of arbitrary numbers. Some games he'll play 5 minutes, some games he'll play 25 minutes. I don't know. If anything, you guys are more insistent of getting rid of Jamal than I am willing to keep him. Jamal isn't the type to cause locker room problems. Nothing wrong with keeping him for now to see if something comes up down the road. Less minutes might even make him more effiecient, which will up his trade value. We've already got our backup big without having to lose anything in return, so trading away our depth just for the sake of it is a terrible idea.

og15 wrote:
Quake Griffin wrote:Where do Jamaal and Wilcox fit?

Jamal doesn't fit, and along with Wilcox they get moved for picks, any picks

Like so. Terrible idea. CJ will be worth more than any mediocre picks you get in return.

i don't think you get it. crawford is terrible and no matter what capacity he is used on with this team, he will hurt it. doc has shown he has zero ability to rein him in and over the course of last year it hurt us repeatedly. doc can't stop himself and letting him stay on the team is just enabling him to be self (team) destructive.

Lindecision · Post #60 » by **Lindecision** » Fri Jul 17, 2015 2:24 am

Oh I get it. I'm just not being irrational about it like some of you. Trading away Jamal just for the sake of it is a bad idea. Trading away CJ just to get a team to take Jamal is a terrible idea.