Game 32: Los Angeles (18-13) @ Washington, D.C. (14-14)

[Ranma]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/DanWoikeSports/status/681659133485912064[/tweet]

[Wammy Giveaway]

What's the point of going to a full 15 on the roster instead of 14 when you're only going to fill it out with the likes of Chris Douglas-Roberts, Dahntay Jones, Nate Robinson, Jordan Hamilton, Ekpe Udoh, Jared Cunningham, Jordan Hamilton, Jordan Farmar, Nate Robinson, and Lester Hudson?

This was the epitome of how Doc's clueless roster-building undermined his ability to coach a complete team.

My initial reasoning for Doc Rivers wanting Jared Dudley in the first place was the hope that he could emulate Paul Pierce at the 3 spot. He couldn't get Pierce because the Clippers and Celtics agreed to a gag order after the coaching trade for Doc Rivers was completed. Doc wanted Dudley to cut like Pierce, shoot like Pierce, defend like Pierce. All those small forwards he acquired was in hopes that one of them would play just like Paul Pierce. He didn't want just quick and easy wins, he wanted wins that reminded him of his Big 3 Celtics days. Every single one of those small forwards failed - to Doc's eyes, anyway.

The only person who could emulate Paul Pierce... was Paul Pierce himself. He was the only small forward he ever knew and liked. He had to get him back.

[Ranma]

also, i think it's pretty clear that cole is instant impact off the bench. and what he does is clearly not something that disappears while you're in practice. what i don't understand is why doc was so willing to forsake cole's hustle/rebounding/defense/occasional offense/occasional passing. what coach in the world doesn't value that?

i've kind of wanted a cole aldrich jersey for a couple of games now

[tweet]https://twitter.com/DanWoikeSports/status/681657537943306240[/tweet]
[tweet]https://twitter.com/DanWoikeSports/status/681661022013280256[/tweet]

[Ranma]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/DanWoikeSports/status/681655947920424960[/tweet]
[tweet]https://twitter.com/DanWoikeSports/status/681656350250696704[/tweet]

[Ranma]

Neither the game or the poll duel was even close.

Paul Pierce: 9 points, 4 rebounds, 1 assist, 1 steal, +14

Jared Dudley: 0 points and -22

[tweet]https://twitter.com/DanWoikeSports/status/681661511413043201[/tweet]

[mkwest]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/ClipsNationSBN/status/681669003539050496[/tweet]
[tweet]https://twitter.com/LAClippers/status/681668902804275200[/tweet]
[tweet]https://twitter.com/isaaclowenkron/status/681662595623825409[/tweet]

[QRich3]

That dunk by Paul with the and 1 after splitting the P&R had me pretty f*cking HYPED!! great game, glad to see the team shows character whenever a guy goes down, and glad to see Paul is not going away any time soon

Didn't Dudley get traded because the team didn't know there was a hard cap and they used the MLE without a plan of how to fill the rest of the roster? Then they had to clear some space somehow.

Hard to justify that you traded Dudley just because he didn't perform as well as you wanted, but then you traded a draft pick and got nothing back, that's just a stupid trade if that was the reason.

They knew there was a hard cap, let's not exaggerate. What they did not know was that Dudley's possible WCF bonus would count against it, and neither did any cap analyst in the media or any of us. It was their job to know to be fair, but what happened is they cut it too close and exceeded the hard cap by a bit, but even then, they could have just not signed Big Baby and instead get an undrafted guy and remain under the hard cap keepin Dudley. So yeah, Dudley being gone was pretty much because he didn't play well, although giving away a 1st was pretty idiotic.

[Quake Griffin]

How was Dawson tonight guys?

I couldn't watch the game

[QRich3]

How was Dawson tonight guys?

I couldn't watch the game

He played 3 garbage time minutes and didn't have time for much. Doc had him guard Temple who's a guard and he couldn't keep up with him much. Had a nice chase down block at the end, but he also tried an awkward post up that got blocked by one of their smaller guys.

[nickhx2]

he looked like a 2nd rounder in garbage time. i was hoping he'd get his first nba bucket. next time, though.

[og15]

That dunk by Paul with the and 1 after splitting the P&R had me pretty f*cking HYPED!! great game, glad to see the team shows character whenever a guy goes down, and glad to see Paul is not going away any time soon

Didn't Dudley get traded because the team didn't know there was a hard cap and they used the MLE without a plan of how to fill the rest of the roster? Then they had to clear some space somehow.

Hard to justify that you traded Dudley just because he didn't perform as well as you wanted, but then you traded a draft pick and got nothing back, that's just a stupid trade if that was the reason.

They knew there was a hard cap, let's not exaggerate. What they did not know was that Dudley's possible WCF bonus would count against it, and neither did any cap analyst in the media or any of us. It was their job to know to be fair, but what happened is they cut it too close and exceeded the hard cap by a bit, but even then, they could have just not signed Big Baby and instead get an undrafted guy and remain under the hard cap keepin Dudley. So yeah, Dudley being gone was pretty much because he didn't play well, although giving away a 1st was pretty idiotic.

I didn't make that up though, there was an article last season about the front office which made that statement. Maybe they made it up though.

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/72718/truela-trouble-with-doc-rivers-orders

Dudley's bonus was based on making the WCF like you said, but what would be the penalty if the team ended up making the WCF and that bonus now got added to the salary?

The NBA answered my question. They would’ve allowed the Clippers to exceed the hard cap by virtue of Jared Dudley’s unlikely bonus.

That means the Clippers really faced no imminent hard cap issues at all.

http://heathoops.com/2014/08/los-angeles-clippers-salary-cap-maneuvering-in-action/

That has a good summary of the whole situation in general, including some hindsight analysis.

I think having a 1st round pick for 2017 and the ability to trade them in general before draft days until 2019 would've been nice, but what's done is done.

[QRich3]

That dunk by Paul with the and 1 after splitting the P&R had me pretty f*cking HYPED!! great game, glad to see the team shows character whenever a guy goes down, and glad to see Paul is not going away any time soon

Didn't Dudley get traded because the team didn't know there was a hard cap and they used the MLE without a plan of how to fill the rest of the roster? Then they had to clear some space somehow.

Hard to justify that you traded Dudley just because he didn't perform as well as you wanted, but then you traded a draft pick and got nothing back, that's just a stupid trade if that was the reason.

They knew there was a hard cap, let's not exaggerate. What they did not know was that Dudley's possible WCF bonus would count against it, and neither did any cap analyst in the media or any of us. It was their job to know to be fair, but what happened is they cut it too close and exceeded the hard cap by a bit, but even then, they could have just not signed Big Baby and instead get an undrafted guy and remain under the hard cap keepin Dudley. So yeah, Dudley being gone was pretty much because he didn't play well, although giving away a 1st was pretty idiotic.

I didn't make that up though, there was an article last season about the front office which made that statement. Maybe they made it up though.

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/72718/truela-trouble-with-doc-rivers-orders

Dudley's bonus was based on making the WCF like you said, but what would be the penalty if the team ended up making the WCF and that bonus now got added to the salary?

The NBA answered my question. They would’ve allowed the Clippers to exceed the hard cap by virtue of Jared Dudley’s unlikely bonus.

That means the Clippers really faced no imminent hard cap issues at all.

http://heathoops.com/2014/08/los-angeles-clippers-salary-cap-maneuvering-in-action/

That has a good summary of the whole situation in general, including some hindsight analysis.

I think having a 1st round pick for 2017 and the ability to trade them in general before draft days until 2019 would've been nice, but what's done is done.

That article doesn't have Doc quotes though, not even sources. It's just an ESPN guy assuming things like that and that he traded Bullock to Phoenix just because he had to be friends with McDonough from their time in Boston. Lots of conjecture and not much substance, I don't believe for a second they didn't know something so simple any casual fan heard about it.

Not trying to defend the move, it was stupid and set us back, and it's one of the main reasons of our current and past lack of depth. But wouldn't the league confirming the bonus didn't count against the cap give validity to what Doc said yesterday that he traded Dudley cause he wasn't performing?

[thanumba2clippersfan]

Good win last night, we seemed to be in control of the game from the tip. Glad that we've won a couple in a row after those loses. Would be nice if this team could find some consistency.

[og15]

That dunk by Paul with the and 1 after splitting the P&R had me pretty f*cking HYPED!! great game, glad to see the team shows character whenever a guy goes down, and glad to see Paul is not going away any time soon


They knew there was a hard cap, let's not exaggerate. What they did not know was that Dudley's possible WCF bonus would count against it, and neither did any cap analyst in the media or any of us. It was their job to know to be fair, but what happened is they cut it too close and exceeded the hard cap by a bit, but even then, they could have just not signed Big Baby and instead get an undrafted guy and remain under the hard cap keepin Dudley. So yeah, Dudley being gone was pretty much because he didn't play well, although giving away a 1st was pretty idiotic.

I didn't make that up though, there was an article last season about the front office which made that statement. Maybe they made it up though.

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/72718/truela-trouble-with-doc-rivers-orders

Dudley's bonus was based on making the WCF like you said, but what would be the penalty if the team ended up making the WCF and that bonus now got added to the salary?

The NBA answered my question. They would’ve allowed the Clippers to exceed the hard cap by virtue of Jared Dudley’s unlikely bonus.

That means the Clippers really faced no imminent hard cap issues at all.

http://heathoops.com/2014/08/los-angeles-clippers-salary-cap-maneuvering-in-action/

That has a good summary of the whole situation in general, including some hindsight analysis.

I think having a 1st round pick for 2017 and the ability to trade them in general before draft days until 2019 would've been nice, but what's done is done.

That article doesn't have Doc quotes though, not even sources. It's just an ESPN guy assuming things like that and that he traded Bullock to Phoenix just because he had to be friends with McDonough from their time in Boston. Lots of conjecture and not much substance, I don't believe for a second they didn't know something so simple any casual fan heard about it.

Not trying to defend the move, it was stupid and set us back, and it's one of the main reasons of our current and past lack of depth. But wouldn't the league confirming the bonus didn't count against the cap give validity to what Doc said yesterday that he traded Dudley cause he wasn't performing?

It might give validity to that, but sadly that is a worse situation than being forced to trade him in order to avoid the hard cap since they knew Dudley was injured and having to trade him for lack of performance had no imminence to it.

Are we sure the FO asked the NBA? The general assumption would be that his bonus does count, they likely made that assumption without checking.

If it was just lack of performance then logically you wait and see how he does in training camp, you wait and see how he does in the new season, and you certainly don't trade him along with a pick for an injured guy and the privilege of waiving two players and adding minimum guys. I'd like to believe Doc, but believing him suggests that his front office is pretty stupid and he allowed them to be stupid.

I think in reality Doc is trying to prevent himself from looking bad, which let's be honest is something he does a lot. In this case though, it obviously wasn't thought through because it makes him as the President of Basketball Operations look worse than the alternative "no option, we were between a rock and a hard place" situation.

Remember how he said that we would fall off our chair if we heard of some of the trades they couldn't do in year one because of Sterling?

Then he said that the team has had struggles building because he came to a team with bad contracts.

Then he basically deflected all responsibility for trading for Austin and essentially said it was his FO that made him do it, that is until Austin's big playoff game, then suddenly he was actually the one.

We have to admit, Doc is pretty good at finding ways to remove himself from fault and is a pretty good salesman for himself.

[QRich3]

Oh there is no doubt about that, they are stupid enough

And no doubt either about him being a cheap politician when it comes to selling the public on what he does.

That's why I say there's no need to exaggerate his deeds, the Dudley trade was bad enough by itself without painting Doc as an illiterate who didn't bother reading the CBA.

That said, let's not take Dudley for any sort of high impact guy right now. He improved from what he was here, but I don't care what his RPM says, he's a suspect defender that shoots mildly well and does nothing else. He was a lot better in Phoenix than he's ever been since he left here. If he had stayed he might have lost the starting spot to Barnes anyway. And that's on Dudley, not on Doc.

[og15]

He does smart things defensively, but it did seem like his lateral quickness got even worse so his individual defense was harder to be content with. The combo of him and Barnes when healthy was good though, and there was no backup SF last season.

He would have been useful off the bench, his best role here would probably have become a small ball PF if you pair him with a guy like DJ at C and play spread, basically what Pierce is doing now.

He can still shoot though, 49/48 for the Wizards this season, 47/39 for the Bucks last season, and his contract certainly is not one to hold a team down. Really wish they didn't trade that pick, sigh....

[nickhx2]

i agree, but i think doc would have squandered that pick somehow anyway. he doesn't really value rookies, he doesn't draft well, late first rounders are crap shoots, etc. or think of it like this: if doc was willing to burn up a first rounder to get rid of dudley, he would have found a way to light it on fire had he kept dudley anyway.

i just don't think it would have amounted to anything. with doc, a first round draft pick has a certain kind of fate.

[og15]

Funny thing is that I actually was thinking of it more in the sense of being a trade chip than the team drafting someone. With how the draft picks have gone, the team would have been better off trading both the Bullock and Wilcox pick on draft day to try and get a more established player than to keep them. Package someone or some players with a draft pick to actually get players you want back. It was a waste to use to draft pick to dump a contract and not even get an equal or better player back. If they had been patient and even if they still wanted to dump Dudley, they could have packaged him to a team with young players for a similar or more talented player with a smaller contract with the draft pick as the incentive for such a team.

Obviously it wasn't a forward thinking move. I really do think that Doc would have benefitted himself and the team a lot by actually hiring a good team of people who have experience in good front offices, especially in the early stages or transitioning to a front office role.

[Ranma]

Doc's ineptitude is not just because of his inexperience in the role but from an apparent lack of common sense. He's been involved with the NBA both as a player and coach for 27 years. He should be aware of the value of draft picks and developing young players, not to mention fits to a team. Honestly, Doc and his team of personnel managers have made moves that most casual NBA fans would have known better than to execute. The fact that he didn't seem to learn anything during those years in collaborating with Danny Ainge says quite a bit about his lack of aptitude in this particular area and I've been a critic of Ainge's for most of his GM career until Doc's departure from Boston.