On Second Guessing
I love CDR. I was hoping that he'd fall to 35, but I thought it would be highly unlikely. He's a classic case of scouts and GMs getting hung up on the wrong stuff, and missing the fact that a guy can PLAY. (As such, he's a fascinating contrast to DeAndre Jordan, who didn't even start consistently for his college team.) Look at it this way - on the same team as Derrick Rose, it was CDR who was first team all-american. I'm not saying he's better than Rose, but I am saying that what happens on the court counts too. Compare it to Marvin Williams of UNC a few years back - he gets drafted 3 despite the fact that he didn't even start for the Tar Heels. Sean May, the best player on that UNC team, drops to 13 - which one is the better pro? (Injuries aside.) CDR is going to be a very good pro. I would have loved that pick, and I would be just as happy today as I am with the Jordan pick. I'm going to just be thankful that the rest of the NBA let two such intriguing picks drop to 35 while Sacto was drafting the likes of Jason Thompson at 12. I'm not going to get hung up on 'CDR would have been better.' I think Jordan is a very good pick here. I don't care which one would have been better (a question that we certainly can't answer today, and may never be able to answer).
FWIW, I'd like to try to bring the Stuckey/Thornton thing down to a simmer as well. Stuckey played great for Detroit. Thornton played great for the Clippers. I'm happy the Clippers got Thornton at 14. To get a guy capable of producing so much his rookie season, who appears to be a legitimate scoring NBA threat who can create his own shot, at the end of the lottery, is a good thing. Even if you want to question whether the Clippers properly addressed their 'needs' in that draft, I think we have to assume that there was a strong possibility in June 2007 that Maggette was on his way out the door for Jason Terry. But regardless, after one season, I'm very happy with Thornton, and it's not even close to clear that Stuckey would have been 'better' though he would certainly have been good too.
Think of it this way: last summer when Chris Kaman was coming off a dismal season and Kirk Hinrich was coming off his best season as a pro, we were all pretty certain that Hinrich would have been the better pick - the obvious pick - the 'why or why didn't they take Hinrich' pick - in the 2003 draft. But we don't think that today. As my yoga instructor would say, let's live in the now. (And as it happens, 'now' Hinrich is available.)
It doesn't mean you have to be a Pollyanna and blindly accept everything the team does. The Korolev pick was bad. And what made it especially bad was that it was so obviously bad. They then compounded the problem by bringing him to the NBA right away (the guy hadn't even played for the 'A' team in Russia yet - what was he doing drawing an NBA salary?) And then they let him rot on the bench. It was bad, bad, bad... all the way around.
At the time of the Korolev pick, the players on the board that appeared to be more logical were Danny Granger and Gerald Green. Granger is now starting for the Pacers and led the team in scoring last season, averaging 19.6 point per game. Yeah, that would have been a good pick. Green, on the other hand, was just as out of the league as Korolev at the end of last season. (Arguably more out of the league, when you consider that Houston cut the guy despite the fact that he had a guaranteed contract - at least the Clippers had the good sense to stop paying Korolev.) Korolev was a bad pick in 2005, and he was a bad pick in retrospect. Granger would have been a good pick in 2005, and a good pick in retrospect. Green, although a bad pick in retrospect, would have been a good pick at the time. Don't forget that the team that drafted Green actually included him in a trade that won an NBA title for them. That's the interesting thing about drafting guys with potential - even if they suck, other NBA teams ALSO see the potential. The Wizards used Kwame Brown to acquire Caron Butler. (The Pau trade was a different thing.) DeAndre Jordan would have to be a complete train wreck not to at least have trade value down the line.
My point is, you need to swing for the fences every once in a while. Gerald Green has great size for a 2 guard, he's got a beautiful shooting stroke, and he's got athleticism that's jaw-dropping - enough to win a dunk contest and almost win a second. But so far he's not had the motivation or the savvy to turn those gifts into a successful basketball career. DeAndre Jordan may turn out to be Gerald Green. I'm cool with that. Because he may also turn out to be Dwight Howard. And, oh yeah, they drafted him at 35.
We could certainly second guess the Jordan pick on the basis of team needs. The Clippers two best, highest paid players are Elton Brand and Chris Kaman. Plus, they have what seem to be serviceable alternatives at the big positions like Tim Thomas, Josh Powell, Nick Fazekas and Paul Davis. Plus, they still have the rights to MBFGC in Greece. So why take a flyer on another big? CDR could be in the shooting guard rotation NOW, and if it's not him then we don't even know who it will be.
With all due respect to Thomas and Powell and Fazekas and Davis, none of them even scratches the surface of DeAndre Jordan's potential. Josh Powell? He's 6'8". Fazekas? I love him, but he's as athletic as I am. As for Tim Thomas, he's always had plenty of potential, but by this point, after 11 seasons in the NBA, I think we can safely assume it will remain untapped. The high end on those guys is NBA backup, and for a few of them that's a stretch. As for MBFGC, I think the Clippers have given up on him, but maybe not. (He did get invited to the Greek team's training camp in advance of the final Olympic qualifier, so we may yet get to see him this summer. The pre-Olympic tournament starts July 14, and the final cuts will occur in the next couple of days.)
I run a blog. A big part of my day would be empty without a certain amount of second guessing. But no one can convince me that DeAndre Jordan is not a good second round pick in this draft. I'm not saying the best possible pick. I'm saying a very good pick. If Jordan gets cut in training camp, or perhaps worse still, takes up space on the roster for a couple seasons but never does anything a la Korolev, then it retrospect, it will have been a bad pick. But even then, I'll maintain that it was a good pick at the time.
0 recs |
10 comments
Comments
Living in the now
Of course, a very good argument could be made that taking time out to comment on the evolving Clipper roster before the big opt-out day and the start of free agent signings, early in the morning when I could be writing stuff that prompts supportive comments like this: http://revro.typepad.com/revro/2008/06/easter-parade-z.html (which was pretty satisfying) or after lunch on a sunny Saturday, isn’t exactly living in the now.
CS and I are generally in lockstep, going through Clipper vinyasas side-by-side, but every now and then there are small points of disagreement. We agree completely on Deandre Jordan, for instance. He’s a little bit more intrigued by the potential Miami trade than I am, but I’m sure we’d both happily contribute 10,000 words about the talent, skills, and general high quality of Elton Brand and his career in the NBA at the drop of a hat. We also completely agree, it just so happens, about Al Thornton and his game and exciting future and tidy fit on the Clippers’ roster. We agree that it was one of the very best draft picks in Clipper history.
What we don’t exactly agree on at the moment is how to deal with Citizen Jax.
In the fine, thoughtful post above CS hopes to nudge his Nation locality towards the now with some good arguments about the what-might-have-beens and “bring the Stuckey-Thornton thing down to a simmer.” It’s a good try, and I feel partly responsible for it, but we all know it’s not going to work. Perhaps I should have explained my new approach before implementing it (just to use the John Yoo word of the week!), but it wouldn’t have been as much fun. At any rate, rather than fight Jax or be irritated, I figured, why not just go with it for a little while. And it won’t be long, probably two weeks at the most, until the Clippers address the glaring PG situation and render the issue moot.
So if anybody cares to join me, for the next few days or so I’m making Stuckey (I don’t even know his first name) my favorite player. All Stuckey all the time. Stuck on Stuckey. I was wondering if he might be going to the beach or yoga this morning, and what do we think Stuckey does on a Saturday afternoon in June? What’s his workout routine? Where does he live? Where did he go to college, grow up? What’s his wingspan and veritcal leap? These are all things I want to know.
And as soon as this Stuckey thing is finally over, it will be time to go to work on the greening of Kaman.
by citizen zhiv on
Jun 28, 2008 1:43 PM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Not just dealing with Jax...
I thought about it, and I just decided it was a worthy subject – the idea of second guessing, and the difference between a truly bad pick, a pick that is good but not the best possible, and a pick that is good but doesn’t work out.
By the way, Stuckey was born in Seattle, went to Eastern Washington, was Big Sky player of the year, has a 6’7” wingspan and a 35” vertical leap.
The Clippers! The (second) Best NBA Team in LA!
by Steve Perrin on
Jun 28, 2008 3:31 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Fantastic Analysis
Although, I feel a little bad you’re spending all this time analyzing our second round pick. However, isn’t that in itself a great sign? We would never spend all this time on LChalmers or Paul Davis. I also completely agree with the good/bad pick at the time v. good/bad pick now analysis. Darius Miles was a great pick at the time, and although he never quite panned out like we thought he would, we were able to get Andre Miller for him. There is still value in good pick at the time, bad pick now guys. However, there is no value in bad pick at the time, bad pick now guys. In fact, it’s hard for me to even think of a bad pick at the time, good pick now (maybe Villanueva a few years back)
I agree passing up on CDR was tough. Some guys who put up great numbers in college and fall due to athletic/height/tweener concerns end up having great careers (Josh Howard, Gilbert Arenas, Paul Millsap, David West, etc). However, realistically, finding a good player in the second round is extremely tough.
Most importantly, don’t forget that this was our 35th pick. This is a little risk, huge reward pick. Honestly, I think there’s greater than a 50% chance this guy totally flops like Chris Taft (Although Jordan is much stronger and a much better athlete). So what? We’re not going to be stuck paying him or have wasted a 1st round pick on him like McAvee or Koufas or whatever projects are taken in the first round.
CZ, stop with the Stuckey crap. Yes, in hindsight, it might have been slightly better, drafting Thornton was not a mistake. We got a guy who was for sure going to be an NBA contributor immediately as he put up big numbers at a program in a big conference. Even though I recognize that he might be 46 years old, even at the 14th pick I don’t think we had the luxury like Detroit to take a risk on a 6-2 combo guard who played at Eastern Washington. And, unlike the Korolev pick, we can all agree that Thornton was not a “bad pick then” either. The guy averaged double figures for us his rookie year even though MD cut his minutes early in the season.
by BtheKUTA on
Jun 28, 2008 1:53 PM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Just to clarify
I believe it is Citizen Jax, not Zhiv, who is really “Stuck on Stuckey”. He has a good argument, but I think most of us disagree.
by mikey p on
Jun 29, 2008 9:18 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
my bad, i meant jax
sorry, i’m new to this blog, though i’ve been a clipper fan for a long long time. Okay, i’ll jump on teh stuckey bandwagon with you
by BtheKUTA on
Jun 28, 2008 2:08 PM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Since you're new
i’ll forgive you that slight. But listen up. I don’t love Stuckey. I don’t love CDR. I don’t hate Jordan. I just think that Clipper management has no clue what it’s doing and frankly I’m tired of it. I have no idea what direction that they’re trying to take this team. Much of what they do makes absolutely no sense to me.
The Jordan pick irritates me not because it will kill the team but because I think it’s symptomatic of the management of this team. As a fan, I’m frustrated, and I think alot of fans put blinders on or find excuses for the incompetence. Seems to me that they could have taken a player that would have a chance to play in this league, at a position they need to upgrade, and they decided not to go that route. This was a deep draft. I wouldn’t automatically take the position that the second round is automatically a throw away pick.
We can all waste hundreds of posts on whether Jordan can be a good player, but frankly none of us went to the workouts or ever saw anything. My position, such that it is, is that I would have taken an SG with good upside than a project PF, given where the Clippers are right now. Very simple and not a subject that I think warrants all that much analysis.
by Jax on
Jun 28, 2008 10:19 PM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
I like the pick
CDR could turn into Daniel Ewing. A solid college player who can’t make the leap. We don’t know.
I do know that the Clips were running low on bigs last year. This is still a big mans league. You can never have to many.
by mikey p on
Jun 29, 2008 9:20 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
To add...
I don’t disagree with Jax on the competence of Clipper management. That would be a losing position. Especially with regards to the draft. The only time the Clippers draft well is when a player falls into their lap.
Thornton is an example. It was a shock that he was on the board at 14, and the only reason he was is because other teams were drafting on either need or potential. Or they were hung up on dogma – “Thornton is too old”. Al proved a lot of teams wrong last year. He only fell out of the top 14 in one mock drat that I remember last year. He was usually in the 8-12 range. Stuckey was in the top 14 only once. It was usually Nick Young or Crittendon going 14 to the Clips. Had Julian Wright or Thaddeus Young been on the board at 14, I believe they would have been the Clippers pick. Among these players, I favored Stuckey. But not over Thornton. He is the absolute steal of the draft.
I think it always wise to draft the best player available, need or not. The Clippers have done that with their picks now two years in a row. I am pleased.
by mikey p on
Jun 29, 2008 9:47 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Clippers need to get bigger.
DeAndre Jordan is a great pick up; LAC needs to be aggressive and perhaps invite MBFGC to training camp and they really should consider going after Andris Biedrins; it would hurt the Warriors and help the Clippers.
by jb_baby on
Jun 29, 2008 9:24 AM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs





