JOSH SMITH to Clippers

Angel strike1 · Post #101 » by **Angel strike1** » Sat Jul 18, 2015 4:38 am

og15 wrote:
Angel strike1 wrote:
og15 wrote:Mmmmm....

well rules wont change and dj prob wont start shooting 60% fts so ya
Lol, you missed my point:

http://registerguard.com/rg/sports/32967332-81/hack-a-smith-pays-off-for-spurs.html.csp

Josh Smith was a 49.8% FT shooter last season...

That still better then dj sadly

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Lindecision · Post #102 » by **Lindecision** » Sat Jul 18, 2015 7:11 am

Trading someone before you know what you have is even more illogical. Being so dismisive to the contrary kind of proves the point I'm making. As much as some of you think you know how everything will play out in the future, you don't. We finally have our backup big in Smoove so there's no urgency in making another trade. Not unless something that makes sense becomes available. Doc said in an interview I read somewhere that he would round out free agency the next few days then take a break. We are almost at that point, so hopefully Doc sees sense in my side of the argument and wants to see what he has before trading Jamal so hastily.

Post #103 » by **og15** » Sat Jul 18, 2015 7:55 am

Angel strike1 wrote:
og15 wrote:
Angel strike1 wrote:

well rules wont change and dj prob wont start shooting 60% fts so ya
Lol, you missed my point:

http://registerguard.com/rg/sports/32967332-81/hack-a-smith-pays-off-for-spurs.html.csp

Josh Smith was a 49.8% FT shooter last season...

That still better then dj sadly

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Definitely, but not enough to counteract the hack strategy. Hopefully he goes back up to a respectable percentage because at 49% they will both be have moments where they are sitting later in the 4th until the 2 minute mark

Ranma · Post #104 » by **Ranma** » Sat Jul 18, 2015 8:30 am

Lindecision wrote:Trading someone before you know what you have is even more illogical. Being so dismisive to the contrary kind of proves the point I'm making. As much as some of you think you know how everything will play out in the future, you don't. We finally have our backup big in Smoove so there's no urgency in making another trade. Not unless something that makes sense becomes available. Doc said in an interview I read somewhere that he would round out free agency the next few days then take a break. We are almost at that point, so hopefully Doc sees sense in my side of the argument and wants to see what he has before trading Jamal so hastily.

I really don't get this. We've already seen what Jamal has done. He was known to disappear in the playoffs before coming here and he's done nothing but that as a Clipper as well. He was also a ball-dominant iso player who primarily called his own number before becoming a Clipper and he's been just that as a Clipper. So how can you say it is logical to expect different results? He's never been anything more than he is and he's 35 years-old. What sign other than blind hope indicates to you that he even wants to change, much less will change?

The flip side to this kind of optimism is that Doc can change Marvin Williams to be more than he has been. It's just as--actually more--believable given that Williams never played for Doc before and he's younger. Both are unlikely scenarios, but the Williams one at least has a more realistic chance of happening.

The Stephenson-Austin backcourt may not work at all, but that doesn't mean I want Crawford stepping in either. Even with our lack of depth from the bench this past season, the team was better off not going to him precisely because, like I said, it was Jamal Ball with everyone else standing around. The overall detriment was not offset by his occasional hot streak. The team is better off without Jamal Crawford on it regardless of our roster make-up. Even if another team benefits from his presence, it doesn't help us to hold onto him.

Expecting him to be something different from what he has been before being and as a Clipper is really illogical. For some reason, Doc has a blind spot for him where he won't rein him in or sit him despite killing any semblance of a structured offense. If Crawford is still on the roster when the 2015-16 season begins, I'm actually afraid of Doc continuing to play him.

Lindecision · Post #105 » by **Lindecision** » Sat Jul 18, 2015 8:50 am

I'd like to actually see Lance and Jamal play together before making that call, thanks.

Ranma · Post #106 » by **Ranma** » Sat Jul 18, 2015 9:18 am

Lindecision wrote:I'd like to actually see Lance and Jamal play together before making that call, thanks.

Even at the expense of wins in the tough and highly competitive Western Conference? A few losses may mean the difference between favorable seeding and a tougher road in the postseason. The Warriors, although worthy champions, had a much easier road to the Finals than the Clippers, who collapsed under the weight of a lack of depth and multiple extended playoff series. Even with the revamping of the playoff seeding, the point still stands.

No thanks. You may be cavalier in indulging in such a futile exercise, but most of us have a priority of trying to win. We already have our hands full with trying to form a cohesive unit with a roster full of newcomers. There's no time and limited resources to waste on a player who's already shown in clear fashion to be a bad fit for the team and who will likely be a temporary member of it, anyway.

You know what I'd actually like to see? The Clippers having a formidable defense to go along with a topnotch offense. Also, a capable 2nd unit that has multiple contributors along with a complete starting lineup. Jamal Crawford helps with none of that, just like he didn't during his time here.

Ranma · Post #107 » by **Ranma** » Sat Jul 18, 2015 9:23 am

[tweet]https://twitter.com/EricPincus/status/622243457210265600[/tweet]
[tweet]https://twitter.com/EricPincus/status/622243732033638400[/tweet]

Lindecision · Post #108 » by **Lindecision** » Sat Jul 18, 2015 9:27 am

Well, if it doesn't work we'll know pretty quickly. Couple games at most. Doc might realize it doesn't work as soon as training camp so who knows. Those tweets related? Or is it stuff about Smoove?

Ranma · Post #109 » by **Ranma** » Sat Jul 18, 2015 9:38 am

Lindecision wrote:Well, if it doesn't work we'll know pretty quickly. Couple games at most. Doc might realize it doesn't work as soon as training camp so who knows. Those tweets related? Or is it stuff about Smoove?

Just stuff about J-Smoove with regards to the set-off in salary he's receiving from the Pistons where it can only apply for the length of his original deal, I believe through the 2016-17 season, instead of for the life of his stretched out payments, which I believe has five more seasons (through 2019-20) instead of the original two that remained. This only applies should we want to sign Josh Smith at the minimum again with Detroit footing the bill as that can only be done for one more season after the upcoming one.

Eric Pincus ✔@EricPincus
BTW - set-off for Josh Smith is complex - it's not quite what you might think, the set-off itself is stretched over life of deal
8:16 PM - 17 Jul 2015

Eric Pincus ✔@EricPincus
Pistons and Josh Smith are also only eligible for set-off in years he was under contract, not the years stretched beyond original deal
8:17 PM - 17 Jul 2015

Ranma · Post #110 » by **Ranma** » Sat Jul 18, 2015 9:48 am

Also, I keep forgetting that you can't view tweets, so here are the recent tweets of Jamal's passive-aggressive pouting I posted in the other thread accompanied with the text versions below:

Ranma wrote:[tweet]https://twitter.com/JCrossover/status/621174438076137472[/tweet]
[tweet]https://twitter.com/DanWoikeSports/status/621221361348820992[/tweet]

Jamal Crawford ✔@JCrossover
"@seshkelvyn: @JCrossover are you still with the Clippers?"--i think
9:28 PM - 14 Jul 2015

Dan Woike ✔@DanWoikeSports
Hmmmmmm https://twitter.com/jcrossover/status/621174438076137472 …
12:34 AM - 15 Jul 2015

Ranma wrote:[tweet]https://twitter.com/JCrossover/status/622074505695891456[/tweet]
[tweet]https://twitter.com/JCrossover/status/622078296671387649[/tweet]
[tweet]https://twitter.com/DanWoikeSports/status/622079678946226176[/tweet]

Jamal Crawford ✔@JCrossover
"@ThatGuy_Sammie: @JCrossover sooo you gonna stay a clipper or join the cavs? ��"-I'm not a f/a, wish but I'm not.. Soo u gotta ask Doc.....
9:04 AM - 17 Jul 2015

Jamal Crawford ✔@JCrossover
"@BROY_1117: @JCrossover If he were a F/A you guys would stop asking him if he is getting traded."--ur smart, you figured that out..
9:19 AM - 17 Jul 2015

Dan Woike ✔@DanWoikeSports
To be fair, I'm sure Jamal Crawford isn't the only player who wishes he was a free agent in this market.
9:25 AM - 17 Jul 2015

Post #111 » by **QRich3** » Sat Jul 18, 2015 12:05 pm

Lindecision wrote:Trading someone before you know what you have is even more illogical. Being so dismisive to the contrary kind of proves the point I'm making. As much as some of you think you know how everything will play out in the future, you don't.

Can't that be said about every trade ever done?

The Jamal-Lance pairing is as simple an evaluation as it can get, you really don't need to see it play out to foresee how it's gonna go. You have 5 ball-dominant guards on a team that already has the best on-ball big man creator we've seen for a long time. A team that still lacks depth at SF and C. Two of those guards, you just signed/traded for, and the other two are the clear starters and best two players of the bunch. It's really not a hard decision, rarely a roster move is so evident to see. You're just looking as a Crawford homer at this point.

Quake Griffin · Post #112 » by **Quake Griffin** » Sat Jul 18, 2015 1:17 pm

I'm not interested in seeing Lance and Jamal play together.

by that time Jamal could be deadweight and unmovable (for value) altogether. That's much more likely than him turning out as a net positive because him and Lance have chemistry.

Lindecision · Post #113 » by **Lindecision** » Sat Jul 18, 2015 2:29 pm

Thanks for the support guys!

nickhx2 · Post #114 » by **nickhx2** » Sat Jul 18, 2015 3:01 pm

Not really sure what you expected people to say though? People don't agree and i think it is plain to see the on-court reasons why they wouldn't work together.

It's like what most everyone else is saying. It's a basic evaluation of basketball player to player fit and team fit.

Player to player fit:

1. Team has too many ball dominant players
2. Crawford has a history of being a consistent, effective player off the ball
3. When he has the ball, the other ball-needy players are much less effective
4. The team operates better when they are allowed to dominate the ball than when he dominates the ball.

Team fit:

1. His playstyle is to take inefficient shots and disrupt the team's otherwise very efficient offense and he hasn't shown any ability to do otherwise. IMO this is a gigantic team issue because it scuttles what could be a league historic offense and over the last season it forced our starters back into the game whenever the bench unit faltered. It's not discussed enough.
2. The lack of anything else substantive from his game doesn't help to make up for his inefficiencies. I.e. he doesn't look to pass, he doesn't rebound, and his defense causes full on breakdowns for his own team.
3. His actual skills don't do anything for the team. We already have slashers, ball-handlers, and dribblers. Plus, if his version of shooting is taking contested 20 footers over and over then that's not the kind of shooting/spacing that benefits a team, to say the least.

Basketball's not like a blind date reality tv show where some odd couple gets together and makes magic happen. While you can't 100% tell how guys work out together, you can have some near certainty based on past history and current skill sets. And even ignoring that, you can just easily reason out if a team needs a skills that the one player brings.

In this case it's a combination of all of that, and now with crawford's ever-growing mutinous tweets, the chances he works out here is heading from very slim to none.

Neddy · Post #115 » by **Neddy** » Sat Jul 18, 2015 3:21 pm

hey Lin, nobody is getting up on you personally, we are just telling you that a net zero player at his best, which was his first two seasons as a clipper, who at age 35 sports a career net negative number isn't about to do much better. even with what appears to be a spectacular offensive output at times, his defensive rating is actually worse than his offensive rating per 100 possession. you are talking not just a liability but a defensive black hole, whom we all have seen play matador defense when matters most. his defensive rating for playoffs is whopping double digit worse than his offensive rating. his career VORP during playoffs is negative. he is statistically worse than Lester Hudson during playoffs, who has at least net zero VORP during playoffs.
what did we learn that we need during the last couple of playoff runs?
depth, teamwork, both on court and off, better defense at the wing position, better defense with the second unit.
iso player - check
passive aggressive social media tweets(locker room malcontent) - check
no defense - check mate.
what's the strength of Lance's game?
playmaker, hustle player on D, emotional player, strong transition game and finisher. does any of his traits scream compatibility with Jamal's game which is exact opposite? in fact, watching jamal's defense would make Lance's head explode, like he has done in the past with his teammates, if you remember.

Neddy · Post #116 » by **Neddy** » Sat Jul 18, 2015 3:29 pm

also, waiting until the season starts to consider a trade of a 35 year old malcontent volume shooter only has one trade scenario, which is for another team to dump salary by trading away a long term, under performing player like last year's Hawes for Jamal's expiring. no rebuilding team is going to want Jamal, not many playoff teams have needs at backup 2 guard position other than the Miami Heat but they want salary relief more. trading him now allows a better scenario, such as that Branden Haywood's contract and flip it to more needs such as Birdman and one of heat's excess point guard. by holding on to Jamal until the season starts, all these potential scenarios evaporate and we will just have to give Jamal away along with a draft pick, ala Dudley deal once again.

Lindecision · Post #117 » by **Lindecision** » Sat Jul 18, 2015 4:34 pm

Haha I'm cool man, it was a tongue-in-cheek joke. Hence the Carlton gif. Its good to disagree and air out our thoughts. I found it really funny how lop sided this became, and how unanimously you're all against starting the season with Jamal just to see how it goes before pulling the trigger. Been reading the leagues worst contracts thread on T&T.

Akklaim1 · Post #118 » by **Akklaim1** » Sat Jul 18, 2015 5:54 pm

Crawford was pouting the same way he did during the 2013 offseason when we signed Redick. He was giving signs on Twitter that he didn't like the signing because it meant he would stay as a 6th man again.

mattd13 · Post #119 » by **mattd13** » Sat Jul 18, 2015 7:40 pm

we know what jamal brings. he will win some games. he just needs to be watched. the bigger concern will be what Austin and lance bring. those two need to step up and preform every night for us to get deep in the playoffs. my biggest concern is a long term injury to a key player. most always struggle when they return late in the season.

theFRANCHISE · Post #120 » by **theFRANCHISE** » Sat Jul 18, 2015 8:44 pm

smith said he chose the clippers because of his defined role. Then bench looks decent, upgrade over last years travesty.