Roster Thoughts
Here are my thoughts on what the 2008 opening day roster might look like. Bear in mind that anything can happen. Chris Kaman is pretty close to untouchable and he's signed for 4 more seasons. So I'm listing him at 100% to be on the team opening day. But even so, it's possible that he could be traded. The likelihood that he would be traded isn't worth spending time on. That's why I have him at 100%. Hopefully the rest of the numbers make sense.
| Player | Status | Likelihood? |
| Chris Kaman | Signed | 100% |
| Al Thornton | Signed | 100% |
| Eric Gordon | Signed | 100% |
| Tim Thomas | Signed | 98% |
| Brevin Knight | Signed | 98% |
| Cat Mobley | Signed | 98% |
| Elton Brand | Free Agent | 95% |
| Baron Davis | Verbal | 90% |
| DeAndre Jordan | Unsigned | 80% |
| Nick Fazekas | Qual. Offer | 75% |
| Marcus Williams | Qual. Offer | 70% |
| Josh Powell | Partial? | 70% |
| Shaun Livingston | Free Agent | 50% |
| Mike Taylor | Unsigned | 25% |
That's 14 names right there. For Brand and Davis, everyone is well aware of what's happening, and clearly the Clippers will try to sign both of those players. I've got Brand at a higher likelihood of being on the team, simply because if it does come down to a question of money, the Clippers will say goodbye to Baron and keep Elton.
For Jordan, Fazekas, Williams and Powell, it's really up to the Clippers. They have the rights to all four and they are all inexpensive (a crucial factor). Powell is actually one year into a three year deal, but it's not fully guaranteed. Still, it seems more than likely that all four of them will make the team.
Now it gets tricky.
Assuming that Brand and Davis sign as free agents (i.e. the Clippers have to renounce Livingston, as opposed to some best case S&T scenario), re-signing Livingston will still remain a priority. However, it's far from certain that Livingston will take the Clippers minimum salary offer, even with multiple player option years tacked on. Nonetheless, Livingston could really be a key to next season's team. He adds depth at the one through the three where the Clippers are thinnest. Of course he may not be able to play, but he's more than worth the risk as he's a great fit for the rest of the team if he can even approach full strength.
MDsr has always preferred to enter the season with 14 players under contract, leaving a roster spot open for flexibility. If they can sign Livingston, we're already likely up to 13 players, so there may only be a single spot remaining. Backup center looks a little dicey - a 19 year knucklehead (Jordan) and a 6'8" overachiever (Powell). Paul Davis remains a possibility, despite the team's refusal to extend a qualifying offer. He's got a little more size that Powell and might be a better option - remember that he was way ahead of Powell on the depth chart when he got injured last season. But I have to assume that Powell and Davis are an either / or. So there's still a roster spot, even if you replace Powell with Davis.
Point guard is the other problem area for depth. Davis is clearly the starter, and Knight can take the backup minutes, and Livingston is a wild card. But all three of those guys are injury-prone, led by Livingston who may or may not play again. So even if Livingston signs, the Clippers may be in the market for a point guard. Second round pick Mike Taylor will get a chance to show what he can do next week in Las Vegas, but he's a long shot to make the team as the 55th player drafted. Don't be surprised if the Clippers wait until October to see who gets released by other teams and try to pick up a veteran on the cheap (a la Dan Dickau and Beno Udrih last season). The Blazers are still looking at a roster glut, though I doubt that Sergio Rodriguez would hit the waiver wire.
I wonder if MDsr won't consider breaking his 'roster spot' rule, given the injury histories of his players. I'd like to see a 4th point guard, but a veteran center would be good too. And if they can't sign Livingston, they may have to replace him with two players - one point guard and one small forward.
0 recs |
36 comments
Comments
What about
Corey Maggette? Doesn’t he warrant at least a couple of percentage points? I mean, if EB DOES command the max $$, then Baron is off the table, and Corey is back in, right? I would call that scenario #3 of 3, the first being EB and Baron sign and free agents, and #2 being John R’s S&T scenario…
by Clip Show on
Jul 7, 2008 8:21 AM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
You're right
Maggette gets some percentage of the scenarios where either Baron or Brand doesn’t sign – call Maggette a 10% chance.
The Clippers! The (second) Best NBA Team in LA!
by Steve Perrin on
Jul 7, 2008 9:17 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Jordan at 80%?
I know Jordan is supposed to have great potential but I don’t see him making the roster with that alone. I think he is more of a 65% and is more likely to be put on the clippers D-league team. I think maybe if he works his butt off and proves himself during summer league then maybe he will make the team. I would much rather take a Paul Davis or a Powell over him right now, but he could prove me wrong.
by bestclipfan on
Jul 7, 2008 10:00 AM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
I thought that sending players to the Dleague
still counted as a roster spot.
CS, what’s the verdict?
by cantthinkofagoodname on
Jul 7, 2008 12:26 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Jordan at 80%
CTOAGN is right – even if you want to leave him in the D-League all year, he takes a roster spot.
I think his potential is too great not to have him at 80%. He’s a future piece, and short of letting him sign in Europe (which is probably unlikely) there’s no real way to retain his rights without using a roster spot.
It may end up being a wasted gamble, but he’s just too enticing as a prospect. Even if they don’t think he’ll help this year, I see him signing a contract.
The Clippers! The (second) Best NBA Team in LA!
by Steve Perrin on
Jul 7, 2008 12:30 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
this is why
the NBA should really expand the roster to 17, but make it so that a team has to assign 2 players to the Dleague. I have a big thought on this point but this isn’t the proper thread to post it on and I dont want to hijack your post here.
by cantthinkofagoodname on
Jul 7, 2008 1:41 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
The kool aid
Just real quick the WP48 of these guys from a recent season. I did cherry pick for a best case scenario, but that’s what the kool aid is all about.
Nick Fazekas 0.297
Elton Brand 0.274
Chris Kaman 0.233
Baron Davis 0.209
Shaun Livingston 0.115
Brevin Knight 0.115
Josh Powell 0.036
Cat Mobley 0.029
Marcus Williams 0.013
Tim Thomas 0.001
Al Thornton -0.081
Eric Gordon
DeAndre Jordan
Mike Taylor
So the Clippers could be starting 3 guys who very recently have been twice as productive as the average player. They bring a big off the bench who is very strong. Fazekas’ number is pretty high and is probably a product of limited use, but he does the right things when he is on the court. The backup guard play is solid if not spectacular. The 2 is still a question mark, but even if Mobley ends up taking the bulk of minutes, at least he isn’t costing the team wins.
The big question marks will be Gordon and Thornton. If Al can make the leap and if Gordon can produce any better than Mobley, that squad goes from dangerously shallow to solid. Obviously not everyone is an all-star, but don’t underestimate having depth that isn’t doing damage. Having guys with positive WP48 off the bench instead of negative can go a long way.
So arbitrarily assigning minutes here…
EB 37 minutes per game * 82 games = 3034 minutes * 0.274 wins / 48 minutes = 17.3 wins
Kaman 33 * 82 = 2706 * 0.233 = 13.1 wins
BD 32 * 82 = 2624 * 0.209 = 11.4 wins
So that’s 42 wins right there from the gasp Big 3.
If the Clippers can get any positive contributions from the 2 and 3, any at all, 5 total wins from each position, its a 50+ win team.
by John R on
Jul 7, 2008 10:19 AM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Wouldn't it be nice if we could predict team wins based on individual player stats
Do any of those individual player win predictions overlap others? Meaning are the quoted stats really something that could be added up by player?
by Jax on
Jul 7, 2008 10:30 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I believe thats the idea
Wins produced sort of has this as a goal. Berri hasn’t done this stating that he doesn’t know how to predict minutes, which you would need to know in order to calculate the output over a season. For a fan of an individual team this would seem easier. I guessed at the minutes for the 3 players for next year.
This contrasts with PER which assigns a number, but has nothing whatsoever to do with actual results.
Like I said I cherry picked for best case scenarios so its definitely the high end.
Here is an example of the author doing this based on actuals.
by John R on
Jul 7, 2008 10:46 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
That is interesting
My non-scientific gut reaction to the Clipper likely wins next season presuming EB and BD, assuming Livingston can play (huge assumption I know), health all year long (another huge assumption), and Thornton and Gordon significantly contributing (also huge assumptions) is somewhere between 45 and 52 wins in the tough west. Part of the problem is that BD and EB haven’t played together before; nor has BD played for MDSr, and we simply have no idea how that will play out. It would be much easier to predict wins for a team that has played together before.
by Jax on
Jul 7, 2008 10:51 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
That seems reasonable
Gordon and Thornton represent the Tremendous Upside Potential. If they come in and become average producers, they alone get those 10 wins.
Thats not counting the production of Livvy off the bench. He is already slightly above average, but you hope he continues to get better. Fazekas gets you some wins off the bench in the front court.
Then those nights when nothing is going right, Mobley and Thomas come in and don’t hurt you.
There is a kool aid scenario here for 60 wins. But thats the delicious purple stuff talking. OHHHH YEAHHHHH
by John R on
Jul 7, 2008 10:59 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
The DPS and the Beard
Speaking of the DPS (delicious purple stuff), I remember a good line somewhere last week that said the Beard alone is worth ten wins.
Even for me, it’s a little scary when John R says 60 wins. Could be time to put back on the Club Realism hat. Not quite time yet, however. Have to stay the Optimism course for just a little while longer, at least until the Brand deal is done.
by citizen zhiv on
Jul 7, 2008 11:11 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
So many variables
Just starting with the fact that Brand was out last year makes all of this extremely complicated, but if John R wants to go there, we will follow.
So BD is completely new. Gordon is new. Not only has Brand not really played with Thornton (yes, there are I suppose some existing numbers from last season for Brand playing with Powell, Knight, etc.), he hasn’t played with Kaman 2.0 yet—that’s what we were all waiting for. Then there’s Livingston, who CS mentioned as a key potential backup at 3 positions, and we still don’t know if he can play.
The summer league stuff next week should be helpful and interesting. That will tell us something about Jordan taking a roster spot too, and we’ll get to see if Gordon can hit some shots, Fazekas in extended minutes against other young guys and scrubs, and a little bit of the sophomore show of Al Thornton. Should be fun.
by citizen zhiv on
Jul 7, 2008 11:06 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
A wonderful petrie dish
If all goes to plan in the free agency period the Clippers will be a great test of stat based analysis. They will have a new point guard. He is all-star level, but known to be volatile and coming from a different system. They have an all-time power forward returning from a season long injury. They have an enigmatic center who has had wild swings in his short career. Will they gobble up each other’s productivity? They are the only teammates in the last 38 years to have 30/20 and 20/20 games in the same night. Can that be sustained? The team is losing a 20ppg scorer and replacing him with a sophomore. How will all the pieces fit?
Many things that folks fairly question stats about will be on display. How independent are individual stats from the team they have around them? Sit back and watch the show.
by John R on
Jul 7, 2008 11:34 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
That about sums it up.
Should be very interesting.
by mikey p on
Jul 7, 2008 11:51 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Looking at the minutes
I was just glancing at the stats for the last 3 years, and it’s been a pretty amazing journey. Within this roster scenario, I’m mostly curious about the minutes played. Start breaking that down by position, and it gets really strange. If I had a moment (have to leave) it would be fun add up total minutes for all three years. What the hell—
CMo – 8514
CK – 6817
EB – 6443
CMa – 5739
SC – 5042
QR – 4727
SL – 3137
by citizen zhiv on
Jul 7, 2008 11:51 AM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Surprised to see Ross's minutes are so low
Seems like he played more.
Not surprised about Cat.
by mikey p on
Jul 7, 2008 11:54 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
So many variables
I’m not a big believer in Wins Produced, and am dubious that you can add things up. More importantly, I think everyone would agree that something we might refer to as chemistry or even synergy will play a part. How do things fit together? Baron Davis is completely new to the team and has never played with significant low post players. Brand and Kaman 2.0 have never played together.
Does 1+1+1=3? Does 1+1+1=2.5? Or does 1+1+1=4? All three equations seem possible. Look no further than the Celtics, where Pierce, Garnett and Allen all had down years in terms of raw stats, and all the team did was win a title. You want a thin team beyond the top 3? Going into last season, who thought Rondo, Perkins, Posey, Po, Big Baby, and Eddie House were anything other than third rate. Compare those six to Thornton, Mobley, Thomas, Livingston, Gordon and Fazekas (and maybe Jordan and Powell and others, while you’re at it).
Synergy. The sum of the parts is greater than the whole. If it works, good things happen. If it doesn’t, well, bad things happen.
The Clippers! The (second) Best NBA Team in LA!
by Steve Perrin on
Jul 7, 2008 12:17 PM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
the hornets
had a very weak bench from what I remember.
I think they didn’t have more than an 8 man rotation all year and they came up 2nd in the west.
by cantthinkofagoodname on
Jul 7, 2008 12:35 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Anything is possible!
Er, impossible is nothing?
Celtic: 07-08 06-07 Change
Garnett 0.370 0.330 +0.040
Allen 0.148 0.144 +0.004
Pierce 0.220 0.202 +0.018
That’s 3 dudes who came from very disparate organizations and situations coming together and…doing the same thing they always do.
I only post this because it seems like it would be good news…
by John R on
Jul 7, 2008 12:52 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
That's right. Sometimes is is just about chemistry
After Duncan, Parker and Ginobli, who do the Spurs really have? Yet, look at what they have been able to do because of chemistry.
by mikey p on
Jul 7, 2008 1:33 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Well
Posey, Rondo, Perkins and House were all thought of as pretty good players. Posey and Rondo in particular.
by Jax on
Jul 7, 2008 9:29 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
House?
I’m not letting you get away with House on that list. I like Eddie, but he’s a journeyman at the very best.
People had hopes for Rondo certainly, but he wasn’t first team all rookie, so you’d have to argue that hopes are justifiably higher for Al Thornton.
Perkins was certainly a stretch as the fifth starter on a championship team. More so than Cat Mobley, right?
Posey was a great acquisition for them, not question, and was crucial in the playoff run.
The Clippers! The (second) Best NBA Team in LA!
by Steve Perrin on
Jul 8, 2008 9:49 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Come on
Perkins – serviceable center when not asked to do too much. Particularly on a team with three hall of famers. See Chitown’s centers.
Rondo – has promise, particularly where he’s not asked to score.
Love Posey.
by Jax on
Jul 8, 2008 1:51 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Come on and what?
I compared Perkins and Rondo, the fourth and fifth starters, to Mobley and Thornton, the fourth and fifth starters. You described them as ‘serviceable’ and havnig ‘promise’. So I’m guessing you agree with me at this point.
The Clippers! The (second) Best NBA Team in LA!
by Steve Perrin on
Jul 8, 2008 3:33 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I like being optimistic
I would love to say that we could win 60 games this year but i don’t know if we can in the tough tough west we are in. I think we can win 50-55 games which is being very optimistic because we still don’t know if BD and MDsr will get along and after last seasons injuries I have given up trying to guess exactly what will happen. But I will say that we have a good core group of players with EB,BD,Kaman. But I also think that Al and Gordon will be good this year. I expect that Gordon will be starting by the end of the season and Mobley will coming off the bench along withThomas, Knight and maybe Livingston. The key to us having a good season where we barely make the playoffs or a great year where we get in at the 6th spot or higher will be our bench. If our bench does a good job will be a very good team.
by bestclipfan on
Jul 7, 2008 4:35 PM PDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Counting Wins
CS made the important point recently that it’s pretty sketchy to discuss the possibility of 60 wins for a franchise that has never won 50 before. The big Boston turnaround counters that prohibition to a certain degree, and even if Boston did tank hard last year to get to the lowest eschelon, it’s not as if they were putting up 55+ win seasons like it was routine for the last 15 years before 07. So we know that bad teams can turn around pretty quickly when they get the right personnel. The Spurs, with Robinson (Brand) injured getting Duncan are a pretty good example, and I was wondering today if the Clippers, over time, can try to aim towards what San Antonio accomplished—a franchise that was mired in futility that becomes known for being formidable, well-run, and consistently competitive at the highest level. It’s possible, but one thing you have to do is keep the horrible and catastrophic injuries (Brand and Livingston) to a minimum.
So, once the roster is more or less set, the Clips have to get through the summer, starting with summer league, and out of training camp in good health before we can make any predicitions. Then we can do what we did last year, and try to have an optimistic outlook for the all-star break—except this time, it won’t just be about getting players back and trying to stay at .500. In the end, the Clips have to win 40 games, and then 10 more (the automatic 10 games the Beard garners), to get into entry-level playoff position.
Let’s never forget that we’re Clipper fans. At every stage of the basketball year there are pitfalls that have victimized the Clips. I can’t remember any bad Clipper summer league injuries, but Brand was injured in the pre- preseason last year. Maggette was hurt in December 05. Livingston went down in February (or was it March?) 07, Cassell in November 06 and 07, Brand in November 04. The list, of course, is epic. There were injuries to Jaric, Dooling, Odom, Big Z. Oy.
by citizen zhiv on
Jul 7, 2008 5:19 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Some of us were realistic last year
And pitfalls don’t victimize the Clippers any more than any other team. I’ve said it time and time again – that is loser thinking. Every team has injuries. It is how the team plans and deals with injuries that counts. The organization needs to take responsibility for the team it puts out on the court and we as fans need to hold the organization to a higher standard. I’d be happy to set forth the list again.
by Jax on
Jul 7, 2008 9:39 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
"Every team has injuries"
Very true. Except that it’s completely false. Teams that win championships don’t have injuries. Not serious ones. Period.
The Clippers! The (second) Best NBA Team in LA!
by Steve Perrin on
Jul 8, 2008 9:50 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Not in the year that they win the championship
Didn’t Miami win it all a couple of years ago? Good teams don’t dwell at the bottom year after year after year. And they don’t allow themselves to get into a loser mindset. I want to see the culture change for this team, which is why I will always comment when I see people saying that it’s ok that the Clippers lose. It is not ok.
by Jax on
Jul 8, 2008 1:53 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Great example, Miami
Really well run, never at the bottom of the league due to injuries or problems. Riley always has a plan. Like when Wade and Shaq both got hurt this year and they had the worst record in the NBA. The year they won the championship Shaq missed 23 games in November, mostly just resting up, and they were completely healthy for the stretch run and the playoffs. So yes, Miami proves my point perfectly. Injuries matter. Sometimes the difference between the best in the NBA and the worst in the NBA.
The Clippers! The (second) Best NBA Team in LA!
by Steve Perrin on
Jul 8, 2008 3:42 PM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Injuries matter, but
Getting top flight NBA players to play for your team matter more. You’ll never be in the position to win without them.
by Jax on
Jul 9, 2008 12:45 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
CS
Hopefully Clipper Nation will take this opportunity to rethink this coach and management. I suspect that it was 06-07 that did EB in. Putting Maggette on the bench, starting Q Ross, and all that. It is time to rebuild this team from top to bottom.
by Jax on
Jul 9, 2008 12:47 AM PDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs





