Game 69: Clippers (37-31) host Trail Blazers (43-26) on 03/18 @ 10:30 PM

[ducler]

[og15]

Blazers have been in a roll let's see if the Clippers can score them down. I don't know if the team can contain their backcourt well enough though.

[Akklaim1]

I think we are officially on our way back down to earth unfortunately.

[Roscoe Sheed]

It is unfortunate that the clippers are so short handed. They really need Bradley’s defense and Gallinari’s offense. It also doesn’t help when their opponent can’t seem to miss a shot

[esqtvd]

Team loss.

Our bench was in the plus but that's because they were out there while Lillard was getting a blow. Against Lillard our starters were about minus-25. I don't want to blame Sindarius, who did well attacking the ball, but we're already hamstrung offensively with DJ [and somewhat with Milos, who was 2-7], and at SF Sindarius [also 2-7] is only a 6'5" version of Luc. This also bumped Tobias over to PF, which he ain't, and he had a nothing night--11 points, 5-14 shooting, and only 3 rebs. Among the starters, only Austin [15 points] had a decent night offensively.

Had Gallo been available at PF, that would have filled two holes--given us three offensive weapons instead of two, and also Tobias not having to play out of position. We were just a bullet short against a very good team.

And they hit 48% [14-29] from distance. I didn't think we were particularly lax on the perimeter, I thought the Blazers hit their shots--a lot of them heartbreakers after we played 20 seconds of scrappy D. We didn't really throw the ball away [13 TOs] and outrebounded them 47-38.

Hey, they beat us. Their 13th in a row. These guys are pretty good. Onward.

[esqtvd]

It is unfortunate that the clippers are so short handed. They really need Bradley’s defense and Gallinari’s offense. It also doesn’t help when their opponent can’t seem to miss a shot

Well wrote, bro. You posted this while I was doing the long version.

[MartinToVaught]

It is unfortunate that the clippers are so short handed. They really need Bradley’s defense and Gallinari’s offense. It also doesn’t help when their opponent can’t seem to miss a shot

Well wrote, bro. You posted this while I was doing the long version.

Are you ready to admit that I was right about Ty Wallace yet?

[esqtvd]

It is unfortunate that the clippers are so short handed. They really need Bradley’s defense and Gallinari’s offense. It also doesn’t help when their opponent can’t seem to miss a shot

Well wrote, bro. You posted this while I was doing the long version.

Are you ready to admit that I was right about Ty Wallace yet?

Dunno what you mean. Ty was starting over Sindarius so yes, I wish he'd have been playing. Do I think they should have guaranteed him a contract for next year? Not necessarily. Sindarius is under contract, Pat Bev will be back and maybe one or both of Austin and Avery Bradley, making Ty redundant. He can't shoot, and I like shooing guards who can shoot.

Am I looking forward to Ty coming back for the last 10 games? Yep.

[MartinToVaught]

Shooting can be taught, as we saw with Blake over the years. Wallace is a team-first player who can defend, so that alone makes him more valuable than Austin. I knew deep down that we weren't making the playoffs when we didn't sign Wallace to a real contract, and it looks like I'm right.

[esqtvd]

Shooting can be taught, as we saw with Blake over the years. Wallace is a team-first player who can defend, so that alone makes him more valuable than Austin. I knew deep down that we weren't making the playoffs when we didn't sign Wallace to a real contract, and it looks like I'm right.

If Ty were better than Austin he wouldn't have started the year without even a G-League 2-way contract. It's a non-discussion. Ty can't shoot, period. He's 30% on the 3-ball and a laughable 24% in G-League. If teaching and learning shooting were so easy, everyone would do it. If Ty [or Sindarius or Jawun] ever learns to shoot the 3 like Austin can, he'll never want for an NBA job again. JJ just got $23M to do nothing else.

That said, I agree with you that the FO not converting Ty's 2-way is a mystery I can't find a satisfying explanation for. If they want to miss the playoffs, it's stupid to short-change us fans for a couple of draft slots. If OG [iirc] is correct, they're keeping Ty on ice to keep his market value down for next year. I think that's stupid too--if I'm Ty, I'm outta here if ANY other team shows interest. The Clips made an unacceptable non-guaranteed long-term offer, and jerked me around by not even converting my 2-way so I could pick up a little extra coin. Ty's a RFA, but if anyone makes me an offer the Clips are tempted to match, I'll make it damn clear I don't want to be here.

I can usually find a reasonable explanation for almost any FO move [like Doc's over the years] but this one has me stumped. Whatever they're up to, it's too clever by half.

[MartinToVaught]

If Ty were better than Austin he wouldn't have started the year without even a G-League 2-way contract.

If Austin's last name wasn't Rivers, he'd be playing in Europe or China right now.

Somtimes talent is overlooked due to agendas or just plain incompetence.

It's a non-discussion. Ty can't shoot, period.

Neither could Austin when he signed his current contract, but I never see you complaining about that. Austin also got paid a lot of money and contributes nothing outside of volume chucking.

[esqtvd]

I'm not debating Austin with you. This is a game thread. I agree we could have used Ty last night.

[Roscoe Sheed]

If Ty were better than Austin he wouldn't have started the year without even a G-League 2-way contract.

If Austin's last name wasn't Rivers, he'd be playing in Europe or China right now.

Somtimes talent is overlooked due to agendas or just plain incompetence.

It's a non-discussion. Ty can't shoot, period.

Neither could Austin when he signed his current contract, but I never see you complaining about that. Austin also got paid a lot of money and contributes nothing outside of volume chucking.

I don’t think it is debatable that Austin belongs in the nba. He probably shouldn’t be starting on a really good team, but he definitely belongs in the nba

[og15]

Just one correction, Austin had figured out the shooting by the time we signed him. He shot 39% 3PT over his last 45 games in 2015-2016, he just started off the season slow with his shooting. Still got more than I would have given him though.

I agree that Ty Wallace would help, but he's no superstar, and he's not the difference between whether this team would make the playoffs or not. Ty Wallace doesn't make the Blazers incapable of doing what they did last night. We all know that's not the way it works where if you plug in a good defender, then every opposing teams player who goes off now doesn't. Better defenders sometimes do worse against certain matchups than worse ones, and good defenders get torched all the time. Clippers defense as a whole has holes.

[esqtvd]

Just one correction, Austin had figured out the shooting by the time we signed him. He shot 39% 3PT over his last 45 games in 2015-2016, he just started off the season slow with his shooting. Still got more than I would have given him though.

Yes and no, G. You are quite correct that in the 2nd half of the season Austin started sticking the 3-ball at near 40%.

If Austin seemed overpaid on the new contract, it was an overheated market in the summer of 2016--Olshey gave Alan Crabbe $19M a year and the Heat matched Brooklyn's offer to Tyler Johnson for 4yr/$50M. Austin's 3 yr/$35M was market value, and we also were over the sal cap, so could only re-sign our own Bird Rights players. It was Austin [and Jamal] or nothing. Even if he was overpaid, we had no choice.

Another thread hijacked for Rivers hate, regardless of the facts.

[og15]

I didn't say he got more than that market suggested, but more than I would have given.

[esqtvd]

I didn't say he got more than that market suggested, but more than I would have given.

thanks for stipulating that Austin was signed at market value


so the choice was meeting the market value or losing him
and since we were over the sal cap and couldn't sign any other FAs except our own, what was the alternative?

the CP/BG window was closing fast

[MartinToVaught]

Just one correction, Austin had figured out the shooting by the time we signed him. He shot 39% 3PT over his last 45 games in 2015-2016, he just started off the season slow with his shooting. Still got more than I would have given him though.

Instead of cherrypicking an arbitrary small sample size to cast Austin in the best possible light, let's just look at his career three-point shooting percentages leading up to that contract: 32%, 36%, 29%, 33%.

We overpaid for a shooting guard who couldn't shoot. It is what it is. Esqtvd doesn't like shooting guards who can't shoot - unless their last name is Rivers, apparently, then it's okay. And then it's also okay that they can't defend, rebound, make free throws, create for others, or score within the flow of the team offense, either. At least Wallace can find other ways to contribute to winning without making threes.

[og15]

We're supposed to round up when it's 0.5 and over, not down, and it makes a difference in perception. So it should be 33%, 36%, 31%, 34%. Total, 33%, actually not that bad in terms of just 3PT shooting for a poor shooter.

Career numbers don't really indicate current ability for young players. The whole point is that young players are improving. There are sample sizes that we consider good and representative ones for evaluation, and a 45 game sample size is very good and shows an improvement trajectory. Hindsight also tells us that it was accurate since he shot 37% 3PT the next season and this season, 38%.

Come on, I know you hate Austin, but you have to sometimes be able to get away from your hate and look objectively. I can't imagine that you truly believe that we judge young players current ability and projected future performance on career numbers, it would be ridiculous.

Imagine after the 14-15 season when Jimmy Butler averaged 20/6/3 arguing that Jimmy Butler is a career 12/4/2 player and should be paid as such. Don't move the goalpost on me now saying "oh, well he was a star and did me, etc", it's a regimens comparison and the question is what are we judging a players current ability on. Bledsoe who in a different thread you said had good trade value, well according to this logic he didn't because who cares about his small sample size in 12-13 and the improvement in all areas when his career numbers paint him as a 7/3/3 player who is turnover prone, inconsistent and a 31% 3PT shooter.

I also agree that esqtvd is overly protective of Austin and biased in the other direction, but the market when Austin signed was abnormal because teams expected a continued rising cap. Any other season he doesn't get that contract, but for the market, it wasn't ridiculous. I didn't even mind his contract because it was tradeable and he was improving, but they re-signed Jamal also, that was annoying, but that was also partly the fault of all the teammates, so it is what it is.

[esqtvd]

We're supposed to round up when it's 0.5 and over, not down, and it makes a difference in perception. So it should be 33%, 36%, 31%, 34%. Total, 33%, actually not the bad in terms of just 3PT shooting for a poor shooter.

Career numbers don't really indicate current ability for young players. The whole point is that young players are improving. There are sample sizes that we consider good and representative ones for evaluation, and a 45 game sample size is very good and shows an improvement trajectory. Hindsight also tells us that it was accurate since he shot 37% 3PT the next season and this season, 38%.

Come on, I know you hate Austin, but you have to sometimes be able to get away from your hate and look objectively. I can't imagine that you truly believe that we judge young players current ability and projected future performance on career numbers, it would be ridiculous.

Imagine after the 14-15 season when Jimmy Butler averaged 20/6/3 arguing that Jimmy Butler is a career 12/4/2 player and should be paid as such. Don't move the goalpost on me now saying "oh, well he was a star and did me, etc", it's a regimens comparison and the question is what are we judging a players current ability on. Bledsoe who in a different thread you said had good trade value, well according to this logic he didn't because who cares about his small sample size in 12-13 and the improvement in all areas when his career numbers paint him as a 7/3/3 player who is turnover prone, inconsistent and a 31% 3PT shooter.

I also agree that esqtvd is overly protective of Austin and biased in the other direction, but the market when Austin signed was abnormal because teams expected a continued rising cap. Any other season he doesn't get that contract, but for the market, it wasn't ridiculous, I didn't even mind his contract because it was tradeable and he was going and improving, but then re-signed Jamal also, that was annoying, but that was also partly the fault of all the teammates, so it is what it is.

I say Austin is an OK player, that's all. If I seem "overprotective" it just seems that way in this environment.

Playing next to Pat Bev for 11 games he was shooting 44% from 3. Since then, he's started mostly next to rookies and G-Leaguers, often having to play the point or even SF. I was looking forward to seeing Austin play alongside Chris and I'm sure he was too. He won a shot at JJ's job fair and square.

38.4% is still a major accomplishment given our injuries and who he has to play with. Anybody who can shoot 38.4% with volume [not just wide-open catch-and-shoots] has a place in an NBA rotation. Maybe he's a starter, maybe he isn't, but until he's flanked by real NBA starters [and Sindarius and (sorry to say) Milos aren't], it's not a fair test.

No, he's not a Top 10 starting SG, but he might fit into the middle of the pack somewheres, just about where he's paid.