Point Guard Roulette

by Steve Perrin on Jul 3, 2007 12:42 PM PDT in News Comment 16 comments

I can't really decide what analogy works best for the Free Agent point guards on the market this summer. Are we talking about Dominoes? (Chauncey has to fall first, and then all the others will fall in order.) Really, it's more like a shell game. A bunch of mediocre point guards will get moved around, and the only way to win the game is not to play. I mean, c'mon: Steve Blake or Jason Hart? Does it really matter? After Billups and MAYBE Mo Williams, aren't you just re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic? Or is it Russian Roulette? Isn't ending up with Smush Parker as your starter a little like a bullet to the temple?

Just look at Chris Sheridan's free agent rankings (the table on the right). According to Sheridan, Blake is the third best free agent point guard (and ninth best free agent overall, yikes!) But does half a season of starting in Denver really prove anything? And let's face facts, 8 points on 43% shooting and 6.6 assists in 33 minutes a game for half a season is not exactly lighting it up. Compare that to Jason Hart's 04-05 numbers when he was a starter in Charlotte (9.5 points, 45% shooting, 5 assists in 25 minutes per). Compare it to Dan friggin' Dickau in New Orleans in 04-05 (13 points and 5 assists). Dickau is not a free agent, by the way, but a great example of a point guard who put up some numbers the one and only time he got a chance to play. Also, don't be surprised if he is waived by the Knicks - once the Portland trade goes through, New York will be carrying 15 guaranteed contracts, and that's not including first round pick Wilson Chandler. With a crowded backcourt, Dickau could well be the odd man out, unless Isiah figures out a way to dump Malik Rose and his $15M.

My point is, it's bleak out there. The Lakers are supposedly very interested in Blake, but is he a significant upgrade over Smush? (OK bad example.) The simple fact is, point guard by committee doesn't actually work. The Lakers seem to think that Javaris Crittendon's size plus Jordan Farmar's quickness plus Steve Blake's passing plus Sasha Vujacic's (OK, Sasha brings nothing) can add up to one complete point guard. But of course it just means they'd have four roster spots tied up in guys who aren't NBA starter caliber.

According to Art Thompson in the OC Register, Hart is getting interest from Indy, Miami, Denver and the Lakers. (Time for another analogy - musical chairs! Denver loses Blake to LAL, LAC loses Hart to Denver, Parker lands somewhere, round and round we go.)

From the Clippers perspective, they're not waiting on a Billups signing but rather on a declaration from the league office making the Zach Randolph trade official. Until that happens, the Blazers can't release Steve Francis, the Clippers number one target. Of course the risk is that Hart will become impatient and / or insulted and sign somewhere else in the meantime. But other than familiarity, I'm not sure that Hart brings anything more to the team than any number of other free agents could. Francis, while risky, is clearly more talented than any of the point guards on the market after Billups, and yes, I'm including Mo Williams. Isn't Mo Williams just this year's version of Mike James?

Here is the (crowded) list of free agent point guards after Billups, Williams and Francis. Tell me one of these guys is significantly better than the rest:

Brevin Knight, Steve Blake, Earl Boykins, Keith McLeod, Jason Hart, Smush Parker, Chucky Atkins, Gary Payton, Jacque Vaughan, Junior Harrington, Shammond Williams, Jannero Pargo, Mike Wilks.

There are also a handful of restricted free agents like Travis Diener, Ronnie Price and Dee Brown.

0 recs | Comment 16 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Blake

I think its Blake, less so for last season but for his campaign in Portland one season prior. Besides his per 40 numbers being 13/7/3, he absolutely owned Kobe both games in Portland. Owned him.

He can bring the ball up, has a 2.5/1 A/TO ratio, and he hits the 3 at a .370 clip. Even his counter-part PER is decent at the point.

I can't say that he is definitively the guy you want in any system, but he can get the ball up, break down a defense a little bit and hit the open jumper. That's pretty much what the Clippers should be looking for if they can't get the home run.

Is he full mid-level better vs veteran's minimum for the other guys? That's the much tougher call.

by John R on Jul 3, 2007 1:14 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Russian Roulette ON the Titanic maybe

I also like Blake better than the rest of that 2nd tier list.

Those other guys have proven to be not so good PG's.

Look for Dunleavy to go with another veteren. Think Howard Eisley type. Knight, Vaughn or Payton.

by mp on Jul 3, 2007 2:16 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Blake

It's interesting to note that, comparisons to Steve Nash notwithstanding, the NBA player that most scouts compare Jared Jordan to is Steve Blake. FWIW.

I actually tend to agree with John that Blake is a bit better than the rest... but, he's still a reach at the mid-level. Also, don't forget that Brevin Knight was second in the NBA in assists a couple seasons ago, and has a higher career assist average (6.8) than supposedly pass first Blake's best half season in Denver (6.6). Knight is older (31) and smaller (5'10") and has no range, but he can defend, he can lead and he can distribute.

by Steve Perrin on Jul 3, 2007 2:51 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

PG's

Brevin Knight is a solid PG, but he is always injured. If the Clips signed him, it wouldn't upset me. I still like Mo Williams but I think the Bucks offered him already. And, no Mo Williams isn't this years Mike James. He has been improving his scoring and overall play the past few years. Mike James just had the one huge year with a bad Raptors team. (not that the Bucks were good last year)

by Googs on Jul 3, 2007 3:01 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

The other way

Since the topic is PG's at large, here's a fun one:

I'm not worried about jinxing this since its the Clippers and they are pre-jinxed, but consider the best case happens.

They hit the home run with Francis
Sam has another bounce back year and is great one more time
Jordan is everything he might be and even a little more
Livingston bounces back by the All-Star break and he delivers more of those 14/14 games.

Has there ever been a deeper PG chart than that in the history of basketball?
Have the Clippers ever had 3 one-time All-Stars on the roster at once?
Would a lineup of Jordan/Francis/Livingston/Brand/Kaman finally please Clipperblog in the passing department?

by John R on Jul 3, 2007 3:22 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

point guard

How about Derek Fisher.

A lot of play off experience, tons of heart and hustle and can still stick the J when it counts.

by 69knicks on Jul 3, 2007 4:19 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Fish

Assuming the right combo of specialized medical services exist in LA (not a stretch), surely Fish would opt for the Lakers over the Clippers. Still, it's an interesting possibility which I had not thought of before.

by Steve Perrin on Jul 3, 2007 7:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Fish

Granted, that everything would have to line up.
Although he my not want to return to these Lakers, they're significantly different than the teams he played for in LA.
I think the Clips need as many skilled heart and hustle guys that they can get. I think we got that in the draft

by 69knicks on Jul 3, 2007 11:27 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

ouch

looking at that list of free agents, Jarret Jack doesn't look so bad anymore. A lot of portland fans have been advocating bringing Blake back, and I think he is the best on that list. But Francis is better though. If he, uhh, doesn't have a hissy fit and go back to his trailer.

by JPop on Jul 4, 2007 2:07 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I'm going to weigh in for no real reason

Personally I think the Clippers are stuck here. They didn't draft a guy like Stuckey (who would have been a guy perfect for them I think) who was available there at 14. I also think they can go out and get Francis and have him be better than Stuckey this season and perhaps next. But beyond that Stuckey has a serious future in this league (and I'm the only non Pistons fan in the league on the Stuckey bandwagon for reasons I don't quite understand) and I'm not sure why the Clippers didn't take him. He's young can score and defend and play 2 backcourt positions. While he doesn't fit a need exactly he I can't see how picking a guy who turns 24 pretty soon fits a big time need either. Of all the teams, I didn't understand the Clippers draft very much given Stuckey's availability (and the likelihood that he and Thornton are near equal as players). Ok you get the point. I don't think Francis is a big risk at 3 or 4 mil per season for a couple more seasons. He can provide alot of things and may be re-energized playing alongside his butt buddy. The Clipps have little options at this point and what better than a guy re-energizing himself at this point to get there?

by pookeyguru on Jul 6, 2007 3:59 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Stuckey

I have to plead ignorance on Rodney Stuckey. I'm not sure how Spokane can manage to have one decent college basketball team, let alone two. But I never saw Stuckey play.

I think you made the Clippers point for them. They're taking an optimistic approach to Livingston. If Francis (or some other veteran) is going to be better than Stuckey (or Crittendon) this year, then, optimistically, they're no longer drafting for need. Livingston is back, he's your starter, and they're looking for a backup when Cassell retires. If the vet you sign can play backup, you're only looking for your third point guard. (And apparently the 2008 draft is deep in point guards, btw.)

There's always a gem or two in the second half of the first round. Is it Stuckey? Is it Thornton? We'll see. The more I read about Thornton, the more I like him. And the fact that he's almost 24 is nothing but a plus for me.

by Steve Perrin on Jul 6, 2007 9:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

That's a good point

about the 2008 draft. If it is deep than the need isn't as great. I forget about that (the kings are going to be in need of a point too) sometimes. If Stuckey was a guy who didn't fill what they wanted than maybe Thornton was a guy who was better off with them.

Why is his almost 24 a plus for you? He'll be able to handle the rigors of the difficult Clipper media folk? I'm sorry but I don't get that. You'll have to explain the pluses of an older player dealing with Mike Dunleavy's inexplainable rotation. I just don't get it dude lol.

Playing basketball at the LA Arena is kind of like volunteering to be Satan's Spawn. It just shouldn't be contemplated.....

by pookeyguru on Jul 6, 2007 2:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

The rotation...

You're talking to the founder of the Play Corey petition... I wish I understood how MD^sr distributes minutes, but believe me, I don't. As for how it's a plus that he's older, I guess my question is, how is it not a plus? As opposed to an 18 year old, this guy is more mature both physically and mentally. Individual character certainly plays a part, but there still seem to be a higher percentage of teenagers getting into trouble in the NBA (like JR Smith and Sebastian Telfair), not too mention teenagers whose bodies break down (like Shawn Livingston and Robert Swift). When you draft a college senior, they come into town ready to play - you're not paying them to sit on the bench while their bodies develop. I wrote a long post on this idea the other day if you're interested.) Now almost 24 is extreme as is 18 (or 19 now). Maybe I'd be happiest with a 21 year old. But in the economics of the NBA salary cap, in the best case scenario, Thornton turns into a superstar and signs a max deal entering his 5th NBA season on the verge of his 28th birthday. If that deal goes 6 seasons, he plays until he's 33. That's 10 years on one contract extension - that's good return on investment. Sure, if you can get LeBron and have him play 20 years for the same team, until he's 38, that's the holy grail. But bear in mind that those third and fourth contracts he's signing are paying him $25M plus per, just as he's stating to slow down. I'm convinced that for the non-LeBron's, the older the player is when he signs his first contract (all other things being equal) the better for the team.

by Steve Perrin on Jul 6, 2007 3:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

The rotation

Yeah well I dont think anybody clipper or non clipper interests have figured out MD. As far as what you say about about individual's breaking down this is a great subject to tackle over the summer as there is little else to do.

I've got a separate comment for your Seniority post as it pertains a good deal of interesting, if nothing else, information about a perspective on age difference in the NBA.

As far as bodies breaking down I don't think that has much as to do with the age but as much as the individual. There have been plenty of multiple college players who came out their sophomore/junior seasons with injury histories as long as their wing span (Baron Davis?). The only thing about Thornton I'm interested in is how does his advanced age coming into the league effect him at 30 years old. Will the 6 years of miles mean more because he was older? Will it mean less? It's hard to say because we haven't traveled down the road. For now Thornton's selection is at worst a start of a brilliant philosophical debate on how teams approach developing talent in the short term and long term scale.

Playing basketball at the LA Arena is kind of like volunteering to be Satan's Spawn. It just shouldn't be contemplated.....

by pookeyguru on Jul 6, 2007 4:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I totally agree.

Thornton has played less than 150 basketball games at the college level. He has fresh legs. He enters physically mature with a man's body. He will be able to hit the ground running, and should still be productive into his thirties as the result of less mileage.

by mp on Jul 6, 2007 8:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs