how did BD take a pay cut to come here? He was a free agent, no? Was anyone else offering that kind of change? If so, I wasn’t aware of it.

And in fairness he did have a few additional arguments, such as the argument that MDSr has had only one winning season and that b/c of Cassell (100% correct).

And some of us will not forget the Ewing play for two reasons (1) those are the moments of truth that define success or failure in a coach (it happened again v the Spurs, no?), and (2) you have to evaluate coaches based on the decisions they make and their success. You cannot continue year after year to give them excuses for their performance.

This year is a case in point. We have started the year 1 and 12. 1 and 12. We are all intelligent folks and we can convince ourselves that it wasn’t his fault, but I for one do not buy that. Do I think we should let the year play out? Yes. Because I could be wrong. But I doubt it.

I agree that Camby wasn’t a bad decision, but for many of us he got lucky there because EB bolted, and we would say EB bolted largely because of MDSr and his apparent belief that the situation wasn’t going to get better.

I think that Randolph may have been an acceptable decision, but again reactive. Not the best choice. It is based on the notion that the Clippers can’t land any 2010 free agents and so they have to settle for other teams’ castoffs. Given the current management and coaching situation, that is true. But that is an attitude of failure that should be unaccepbale to the fans.

I think that Simmons’ overall point (buried in the hyperbole) is that MDSr has made a number of bad mistakes and bonehead decisions in the past and because of those mistakes, and the inept offense he still runs, we can extrapolate and make an educated guess that the future is likely to be more of the same. At some point, the implication goes, one needs to take a step back and say “enough.”

I’m sure this post will generate some responses.

Is that we haven’t been bad enough in the past to land a game changing talent in the draft. In 2003, we drafted right after Lebron, Carmelo, Bosh, & Wade were selected to get Kaman. The guys we passed on in 2004 to get Livingston haven’t proved to be game changing. 2005 (see below), 2006 we actually made the playoffs the year before, and now the last two years it’s hard to argue with our drafting the last two years. Thornton at 14, you couldn’t even monday morning quarterback a better selection. This year, we had 3 picks in what was the best year to have multiple selections, and the early returns are promising. Thanks again NY for letting EJ fall to us.

Unfortunately, what sticks to Dunleavy are a few things:

The Daniel Ewing substitution may have been bad, but that team wasn’t going to win it all that year. It would have been sweet to have advanced, but not the end of the world.

Drafting Koralev: The 2005 draft outside of Chris Paul, Deron Williams, & Bynum was pretty bad. Those guys were all gone at #12, and after that it was a needle in the hay to find Granger at 17, and David Lee at 30 who were the only other productive players. So drafting Koralev was a bust, but it was a very weak draft depth-wise.

The winning season was despite Dunleavy: Sam Cassell ran the team. It’s called veteran leadership, and Dunleavy was smart enough to bring him in.

EB, BD, ZBO, etc. Elton Brand was a great Clipper and Dunleavy had his respect. That was definitely a partnership, not just EB himself. He didn’t come back, but was he worth Philadelphia money? Probably not. We pretty much would all agree that Maggette @ 50M for 5 years was a good leave as well. After looking at Beno Udrih, isn’t Baron Davis a no brainer? Especially when your star player wants it too? ZBO, the jury is still out, but he went out and got what this team needed, a #1 option on offense rather than stubbornly staying the course. I guess he’s damned either way because in trying to make the team more competitive, he screwed our cap space for 2010.

So basically, these career defining moves by Dunleavy haters didn’t really amount to much. They didn’t pull a Dallas in 06, or a Besides skill, you need a lot of luck to position a team for a title, and at least in Dunleavy’s 6 years we had an outside look at it that one year. Dunleavy took this job when we were already considered the worst franchise in sports. Due to the success of the Brand/Cassell/Maggette/Kaman team, the fan-base was expanded and has been under higher scrutiny. I guess you have to call it a success, to get this team to perform at about an average NBA level over the past 6 seasons when before it very rarely did.

Lots of good points that are hard to deny. How many final possessions have the Clippers had over the last few years where they were unable to get off a shot. More than a few. More than a few.

He also nailed it on the 500 play play book.

Sorry, Steve. I’m not over the Daniel Ewing thing. I mean, I’m over it emotionally, but I’m not over it as far as being a mark against Dunleavy. Putting in an ice-cold rookie at the end of the biggest game in franchise history was bad coaching, even if it was 2+ years ago.

I do think the guy is a good GM. I think he is a good defensive coach. But we would be lying if we said that Simmons didn’t pretty succinctly sum up the guy’s deficiencies, albeit with his usual hyperbole.

But he can be pretty nutty. And it looked like we were headed towards this when he wrote the Elgin Baylor article—which was excellent, one of his best, and I learned a few things—and took a shot at Dunleavy welching on a shooting bet.

Does he mention that? Anybody talking about it? Guess I’ve got some catching up to do.

But I have to say that the 2-12 Clippers are less than compelling, except as a train wreck of course. Pretty easy time to take a shot.

Let’s see how this new roster works. Living in the now.

Bottom line is he isn’t getting it done and the seats are empty. This season has blown up in his face and now he’s risking the team’s future for a few more wins.

Not shooting well tonight. But he will be a good player for the Clippers.

that ClipperSteve asks us as die hard fans to stop bringing up the Ewing thing. Isn’t that what this site is specifically for? To repeatedly voice our frustrations or displeasure with anything Clippers related whether perceived or real?

I like to think that I am relatively balanced in evaluating all things Clippers. I don’t rant about firing Dunleavy in every other comment or post. But I do believe the decision he made at that moment to insert a young player who hadn’t played the whole game, to play defense in that situation was a really bad call.

I don’t hold that against Dunleavy as I observe him today.

But in making a case for the Clippers possibly playing better with someone else coaching, or just Dunleavy needing to make a change in his philosophy or rationale behind his decision making, I think it is possibly the most important basis for argument or evidence, proof even that clearly shows a major flaw in his in-game decision making abilities.

After watching tonight’s game, without Dunleavy coaching, I think there was a definite sense of freedom and creativity, a dynamic energy that has been sorely lacking in the previous 14 games. It was fun to watch and competitive. There was a real sense that the Clippers had a chance to win the game until the very last second.

As a fan, realistically, that’s all I want. I know the Clips aren’t favored to win much of anything. I just want to be entertained with energetic play that gives us fans hope, no matter how small, that they have a chance to win.

Dunleavy has made some great decisions. I like all the draft picks this year. I like the Al Thornton pick from last year as well.

But tonight the team looked much happier playing for Kim Hughes – which makes me think Dunleavy as a coach may be losing or have already lost this team. It seems like Hughes was able to get a much better effort from all the guys, and I liked his rotations much better. He didn’t seem to be playing the match up game.

It felt more cerebral. Almost like he just played the best combination of players available while being patient with their mistakes. He let players play through their misses and continue taking shots. He let Baron play with three fouls. He let Thornton foul out. He tried to get Zach going and didn’t yank him right away when it was clearly apparent he was rusty, flustered and forcing the issue.

Sure, tonight’s game without Dunleavy did not result in a win. But it was extremely refreshing and I only hope Dunleavy takes to heart how much better the team played without him and humbles himself enough to incorporate what Hughes did, adjusting his coaching to better fit this new team instead of trying to force players into his 05-06 system of “success”. This is definitely not that team and HE is the one that needs to adapt now.