Vince Carter In LA LA Land
by cliprboy on Jul 30, 2008 12:41 AM PDT
26 comments
I know everybody keeps talking about trying to get him. If we could some how trade mobley and maybe two first rounders, ours and minny's, which i highly doubt New Jersey would do, then i say we go for it...Having him at the 2, with thornton at the 3, would make this team an instant title contender!!! I say we go for it all right now!! I mean, come on, lets steal some thunder away from the Lakers. I kind of have this feeling dunleavy isnt done yet, but we shall wait and see
0 recs |
26 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Nah
I don’t think VC makes us a legitimate title contender, he’s definitely an upgrade over Mobley but our big 3 of VC, Kaman and Baron wouldn’t be as good as alot of other big 3’s. Plus for this to work we probably have to include TT meaning we won’t have the cap space to sign a max type player in 2010. Better finding a replacement for Camby in 2010 and pursue a stud franchise player as well. We could have a lineup of say Wade, Baron, Kaman, Amare and Thornton in 2010. Pretty awesome.
Oh no! We suck again - Idiot from The Waterboy
http://ohnowesuckagain.ytmnd.com/
by ClipperChuck on Jul 30, 2008 4:06 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Wade and Amare in 2010??!!
thats almost as impossible as half of the american population not being fat. haha don’t get your hopes up too high.
by highriser on Jul 30, 2008 4:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Its a move that isn't far from my mind
The thing is the big 3 is BD, Camby and Kaman. Vince Carter would actully be #4. I mean, to the world they might see it that way, but Carter would actually be the 4th best starter. And he would be good for another 10 wins. So that’s a scary team right?
Mobley and Thomas for VC straight up.
So your 8 or 9 man is Davis/Carter/Thornton/Camby/Kaman…Hart/Davis/Fazekas/Powell. At the 1 the average WP48 is like 0.150, at the 2/3 its almost 0.100, at the 4/5 its over 0.200. So that’s a 60 win team. Everyone knows their roles, there are no position logjams, etc.
The downside is your window is the Camby contract, and the cost is the 2010 plan and the end of Carter’s contract is very bad. You do that if you decide to win now.
I’m not so quick to dismiss this. To not want to do this I think you have to be pretty sure that the team you end up with in 2010 is at least as good and if not it will need to be near as good for much longer.
There is a lot to hate about it, but there is a lot to like there too.
Get me BD and 75 and I'm in
by John R on Jul 30, 2008 8:53 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Of course we would do TT and Cat for VC
And the Big 3 would be VC, BD and Kaman because such things are generally measured by offense, not defense. Title contenders generally require three legit scorers.
by Jax on Jul 30, 2008 9:15 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
LOL k
Even now the Clippers have 4 in Davis, Davis, Kaman and Thornton. So they are good to go, yes?
Get me BD and 75 and I'm in
by John R on Jul 30, 2008 9:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Keep laughing
Legitimate scores in that they would typically require a double team from the defense and average at least 17 to 18 ppg / game. At this point, only BD would seem to fit the bill. Hopefully, Kaman 3.0 and Thornton will develop along those lines. However, it would seem to me that only one of the two will. Which is why I would do what I could to sign someone like VC if I could.l
by Jax on Jul 30, 2008 10:12 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well
Ricky Davis is already there, having averaged over 19ppg twice in his career. His output merely being a question of minutes.
Kaman is already there by the double team rule. And he did average almost 16ppg last year. I would hate to quibble over 1ppg given the constant double teams.
And Thornton will be there now that Maggette is out of his way. It was just a question of touches.
Now whether Thornton getting 20ppg turns out to be a net positive remains to be written, but that’s not what we are talking about.
To me this is what makes Carter a tough call. His contract blows up the 2010 plan and goes until his 34th or 35th year on earth. So if your stated goal is getting younger, Carter isn’t your man. Its a bad contract. Its not the worst contract in the world, but its a bad contract.
But Carter is the right plan if the plan is to go all-in now. If it isn’t, he isn’t.
In terms of WP48, Camby/Kaman/Davis is an even bigger big 3 than Garnett/Pierce/Rondo. So the question should be supporting cast and if the team feels this is the year or not.
Get me BD and 75 and I'm in
by John R on Jul 30, 2008 10:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ok
Ricky Davis will be coming off the bench.
I agree Kaman drew a double team last year. Hopefully he can continue where he left off. But he needs to be a consistent offensive threat. With BD, he should be there.
Hopefully Thornton will get there too. He has a good shot. He has to get the 20 ppg efficiently, and within the offense, I agree.
I do want to get younger. How long is VC’s contract for. If you’re saying it’s for more than two or three years, I would not want to do it.
by Jax on Jul 30, 2008 10:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
3 years plus a team option
So right at that tipping point, but that third year is obviously past that 2010 window.
Get me BD and 75 and I'm in
by John R on Jul 30, 2008 10:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You're right, it's a very close call
So by getting rid of Cat and TT for VC we would be giving up on Bosh or Amare in 2010 or possibly a younger up and coming guard like Rudy Gay.
VC may be declining, but check out those stats from last year: 21 ppg, 5 assists, over a three a game, 6 boards. Stil pretty damn good.
2007-08 Statistics FG 3PT FT Rebounds Misc
G MIN FGM-A FG% 3PM-A 3P% FTM-A FT% OFF DEF TOT STL BLK TO PF AST PTSSeason 76 39.0 587-1287 .456 98-273 .359 350-429 .816 1.5 4.5 6.0 1.22 .43 2.38 3.17 5.1 21.3
Career 697 37.8 6079-13586 .447 1041-2776 .375 3393-4271 .794 1.7 3.8 5.5 1.27 .81 2.42 3.04 4.2 23.8
by Jax on Jul 30, 2008 10:56 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
For next year, its a great move
And the next after that too.
But it represents the final gambit.
In fact, that might be powerful incentive not to do it if you are the GM. If they do it and it doesn’t work, its definitively bad. If they stick to the 2010 plan, well we were always looking to the future anyway.
So if you are the GM and you are looking at job security, with the call being so close, you don’t do the deal.
Get me BD and 75 and I'm in
by John R on Jul 30, 2008 11:11 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
How nice
It makes me so proud when the kids are getting along.
The Clippers! The (second) Best NBA Team in LA!
by Steve Perrin on Jul 30, 2008 1:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The problem
It’s interesting, and NJ might even consider it because of their LeBron/2010/Brooklyn plan, but Carter had already begun to decline significantly last season. I’d be worried about that decline accelerating.
I think the Clippers can afford to be a little patient right now, and see how next season starts. The Mobley and Thomas contracts are going to get more valuable to other teams as 2010 gets closer.
The Clippers! The (second) Best NBA Team in LA!
by Steve Perrin on Jul 30, 2008 9:31 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
What is the length of VC's contract?
I understand that he’s begun to decline, but if the contract isn’t for too long, and if we can get rid of TT, what’ the harm? VC can still spread the floor, pass, shoot, drive, etc.
Plus he’d generate additional revenue. And we all know who would like that.
by Jax on Jul 30, 2008 9:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
3 years essentially
He’s got 3 years, and there’s a team option for the 4th. So if we’re worried about it being too long, figure 3 – which is exactly one year longer than we’d like it to be. At $17.3M in that final year, it’s effectively taking any max offers to the likes of Bosh or Amare off the table.
His 07-08 stats were still impressive, but he just didn’t seem like the same player when you watched him. He got everything from the perimeter, never took the ball to the hole. It’s possible that he’s successfully transformed himself into a premier perimeter player, but I wonder. Yes, he averaged 21 per game – and it was also the lowest per minute scoring average of his career.
I’m not saying don’t do it – I’m saying don’t do it now. (Bearing in mind that we don’t even know if there’s a deal out there, i.e. we don’t know what NJ would want in return.) It’s pretty clear that the Nets will want him gone before 2010 – so if a deal is going to be available, it will be available at the trade deadline or next summer as well. I’d like to see what this group can do before committing $50M over three years to a (possibly) declining player.
The Clippers! The (second) Best NBA Team in LA!
by Steve Perrin on Jul 30, 2008 2:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed!
At this point in his career, Carter is just a shot-jacking ball-hog.. Ask a Nets fan.
by CLiPPz WeRD 42 on Jul 30, 2008 3:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I still don't understand how
one can accurately predict team wins based solely on stats that are designed to determine how many wins each player brings to the team. But that’s a subject for another day.
by Jax on Jul 30, 2008 9:41 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
If you are honestly curious, read the book
Even if you don’t agree with everything, it presents a different way to think about the problem of assembling a team within the various limits of the NBA.
And this article sums it up well. Every single “expert” was wrong, WAY wrong, about what would happen to Philly once Iverson left. Except one.
How much better? Well, according to Berri, pretty much exactly as “better” as the Sixers have been this season. In a blog post following last winter’s AI trade, Berri wrote that “the 76ers can expect to win about 30 more games [in 2006-07]. This gives the team a final record of 35-47.”The Sixers’ final record last year: 35-47.
Get me BD and 75 and I'm in
by John R on Jul 30, 2008 10:18 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I will, but
How do numbers address things like team chemistry? And how can one decide that only one player is responsible for a win?
For example, under that system, if you could find five centers, each of whom get 10 wins according to the system, and start them all, then you should, under the system, produce 50 wins. But is that realistic?
by Jax on Jul 30, 2008 10:21 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Read the book
I didn’t like it a lot, but Berri tries to address all of these questions. They’re not easy to answer. His contention is that the proof is in the pudding – he has lots of cases (like the Sixers one above) where the sum of the wins of the individuals adds up to the sum of the wins for the team. Of course, he does a pretty good job of highlighting those cases – he probably doesn’t do quite as much with the others.
There’s also some amount of backward engineering going on, although it makes my head hurt when I try to figure out how much. But look at it this way – the winner of a game is also winning the statistical battle in the vast majority of cases. So the fact that the sum of some statistical formula for individuals on a team successfully adds up to the wins for that team makes sense. The next important tenet for Berri is that NBA player performance is very consistent – unlike baseball or football where players have good years followed by bad years, good NBA players produce more or less the same amount year in and year out.
And when a team ‘over achieves’ and wins more than expected? Well, those wins come from someone in the statistical breakdown, so he can simply explain it as ‘increased productivity from player X accounted for y more wins.’
You’re point about five centers is well taken, but since no coach is ever going to do that, we won’t ever find out if if would work.
The Clippers! The (second) Best NBA Team in LA!
by Steve Perrin on Jul 30, 2008 1:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i rather have Micheal redd
every been saying that they want vince to the clipps , I think that it a bad ideal since he is al ready starting to decline rapidly, i rather trade mobley and TT and a pick for micheal redd. Micheal would be an better option
by BaronforMvp on Jul 30, 2008 11:13 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Won't many teams have lots of $$ in 2010?
It seems to me that the free agents in 2010 will be plentiful but also very expensive. For most of the teams that have impending FA’s, the player is close to max already. If Stoudamire, Wade, Nowitski etc opts out, their teams will be loaded with cash. We may get a premium FA but we may also get screwed. Even if we luck out, expect tp pay top dollar for any star we acquire. With his team option, VC’s $17M will allow us to shop heavily in 2011 – when most other teams have no more cap space. It also gives us the slightest chance to be champs in the meantime. I say go for it if it does not cost any picks.
by citizen bob on Jul 30, 2008 9:31 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Intersting approach
Rather than going for pure cap space in 2010, if you acquire Carter, you now have contracts expiring in 2010 (Camby and Davis – I’m assuming Mobley and Thomas would already be gone in the theoretical Carter trade) AND in 2011, when Carter’s $17M come off. It’s one way to go.
In this world, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant. - Elwood P. Dowd
by Steve Perrin on Jul 31, 2008 10:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
