Clippers vs. New York - Game Preview
by Steve Perrin on Feb 11, 2009 5:00 AM PST
in Game Previews
Email
Print| 2008/2009 NBA Regular Season | ||
|---|---|---|
 |
vs. |  |
| 12-40 | 21-30 |
|
| Staples Center |
||
| February 11th, 2009, 7:30 PM | ||
| FSN Prime Ticket, 710 AM |
||
| Probable starters: | ||
| Baron Davis |
PG | Chris Duhon |
| Eric Gordon |
SG | Quentin Richardson |
| Al Thornton |
SF | Danilo Gallinari |
| Zach Randolph |
PF | Al Harrington |
| Marcus Camby |
C | David Lee |
The Back Story:
- First meeting of the season.
The Big Picture:
Depending on which games you've watched in the last week, you might think the Clippers are one of the worst teams in NBA history, or poised to make a deep playoff run. If you've watched them all (as most of us have), you're ready for therapy. The team either shoots under 40%, or over 55%. It either wins by 20, or loses by 20. If either takes terrific care of the basketball (6 turnovers versus Atlanta) or is remarkably careless (24 turnovers versus Washington). One thing is certain though - if you're team is on a five game losing streak (like the Bobcats and the Wizards), you want to see the Clippers next. Guess what? The Knicks are on a five game losing streak. I wish I knew what the magic switch was for the Clippers - obviously they have to make shots. But it has gone way beyond that these last few schizophrenic games. The energy level in Orlando and Charlotte was about a 2. In Memphis and in Atlanta, it was definitely at 11. Home in Staples Center for the first time in a couple weeks, one would think that they would not need a lot of extra motivation. By the same token, with the All Star break looming, they might be looking to check out of work early and get started on their vacations (not that many of them haven't had most of the season off already). Despite the loss in Charlotte, the lineup that's expected to start for the Clippers tonight still has a winning record at 8-7.
The Antagonist:
Expectations are an interesting thing. The Isiah Thomas Knicks were so bad and so dysfunctional, that 21-30 has everyone in New York thrilled at the progress. Indeed it is progress - the Knicks didn't win their 21st game until April last year. Of course, the performance on the court this year and next is subordinate to another goal - cap space in 2010. With a potential bonanza of super-mega star free agents on the market in 17 months, the main thing in New York is to be in position to sign one or more of them. So 21 wins before the All Star break is really just gravy. Mike D'Antoni, in his first season in New York, is on a pretty short list of 'coaches who make a difference' in my humble opinion. It remains to be seen if his style of play can win a championship, and certainly he doesn't have the talent in New York yet to do so, but he can win regular season games. As was the case for D'Antoni in Phoenix, he has the Knicks playing at a very high pace - second in the league behind only Golden State. Unfortunately for the Knicks, they're not nearly as effective at that pace as D'Antoni's Suns teams, ranking 16th in efficiency. Defensively, they're 24th in the league. Amazingly, the team has gotten much better results while either shipping out (Zach Randolph and Jamal Crawford) or simply mothballing (Stephon Marbury and Eddy Curry) well over $50M in salaries. Of course that's more an indictment of the disastrous tenure of Isiah than an endorsement of D'Antoni and new GM Donny Walsh. Al Harrington (acquired from the Warriors for Crawford) leads the team in scoring, while David Lee leads them in rebounding and is arguably their best player.
The Subplots
- Former Clippers. Former Clippers Quentin Richardson and Tim Thomas are key Knicks this season, both averaging in double figures for the team. Q ended up in New York via Phoenix, the big contract the Suns gave him fitting in nicely in New York. Thomas began the season with the Clippers, but went to New York in the deal that brought Zach Randolph to LA. It looks like both teams will get what they want out of the deal - LA gets a bona fide low post scorer, New York gets 2010 cap space. Cat Mobley was also part of that trade, but retired before ever playing for the Knicks after it was discovered that he suffered from a potentially serious heart condition.
- What Isiah Did Well. Isiah Thomas was a bad coach and a horrendous GM in terms of managing the salary cap. But the guy was a shrewd judge of young talent. Trevor Ariza (2004, 43rd pick), Nate Robinson (2005, 21st), David Lee (2005, 30th), Mardy Collins (2006, 29th), and Wilson Chandler (2007, 23rd) are all low picks who are performing better than their draft position. And they were all picked or acquired on draft day by Isiah. Of course, the reason he was picking so low despite constant losing records in New York is because he kept making bad trades where he sent great draft picks out the door.
- Big two guards from DePaul. Lately, both Richardson (6'6") and Chandler (6'8") have been getting some minutes at the two guard for the Knicks. so that could present some problems for Eric Gordon (6'3"). Q used to play in the post quite a bit when he was in LA, but he seems to have been pigeonholed as a three point specialist in his post Clipper career, so we'll see if they can take advantage (I must admit, I know nothing about Chandler other than that he is playing for the Sophomores in the Rookie Challenge next week). At the same time, Chris Duhon (6'1") and Robinson (5'9", the smallest current player in the NBA) both play a lot of minutes, and will certainly be on the floor together at times, in which case the Clipper guards will have a big size advantage. Of course it didn't help much against D.J. Augustin and Raymon Felton Monday.
- Trivia Time - Why are the Knicks on the road currently? What has been happening in Madison Square Garden?
- A High Scoring Game? The Clippers have scored over 120 in each of their recent wins. The Knicks allow over 107 points per game, second highest in the league. They gave up 144 to Golden State last night in a loss. Meanwhile, according to Baron Davis, the Clippers 'don't pride themselves on their defense.' So apparently we're in for a good old-fashioned ABA style shoot out.
- Eerie Parallels. Way back in December, the Clippers went on a long road trip during which the team began to show some signs of life. They concluded with an abysmal performance in the last game of the trip, and the excuse was that they were tired. They returned to LA for a single home game before a long lay off. That time, they laid an egg against Toronto, lost Zach Randolph during the game, and started a downward spiral of futility. We'll see what happens this time. If Malik Rose enters late in the third quarter and starts shoving people, watch out.
- Gallinari or Gordon? Despite having identical records last season the Knicks got the sixth pick in the 2008 draft, while the Clippers picked seventh by virtue of a coin flip. The Knicks picked Italian teenager Danilo Gallinari, leaving Eric Gordon on the board for the Clippers. Gallinari has spent most of his rookie season injured, while Gordon was the Western Conference Rookie of the Month for January. Still, a career is a long time, and Gallinari is starting to play now - he recently was inserted into the starting lineup. It appears he can shoot, as he's 14 for 30 from beyond the arc so far. With Harrington and Gallinari both on the floor, and Tim Thomas coming off the bench, D'Antoni has three players in the 6'9"-6'10" range capable of shooting the three ball, which is how he likes it.
- Baron's Struggles. It's hard to fathom what has happened to Baron Davis this season. We're so close to it, it's hard to keep it in perspective. During his injury absence, I pointed out that he was shooting 36%, worse than any other qualified point guard, while only Rafer Alston was worse among starters. Since Baron has returned, he's been worse, which is pretty hard to do. He's actually lowered his percentage to 35.3%, and he airballed not one but two three pointers against Charlotte on Monday. Alston has now passed him, and we're left with Sebastian Telfair as the only point guard with more than 150 field goal attempts shooting worse than Baron - who has taken 600 shots. Looking back over the Clippers season, Baron actually led the team in scoring in 7 of the first 21 games. It's hard to imagine that ever happening again the way he is playing now, and none of us want him getting anywhere near the number of shot attempts for it to happen. Something is very, very wrong with the guy, either with his mind, or his body, or his heart. If only we knew which it was.
- Superstar for one game. Let's go with Gallinari. He's playing in his 14th game, his career high is 11 - sounds like a guy who could go for 30 against the Clippers.
- Get the Knicks perspective from Posting and Toasting.
21 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
If Tim Thomas playing
He will drop 40 pts.
Stephen Jackson dropped 12-22 from 3pts, we need that kind of effort to beat the knicks b/c we don’t play D
You did indeed...
I’m not sure he qualified for the honor in the Anthony Morrow sense of the award. But yes, you called it. That was a monster game – 33/15/9/5 – that’s crazy. Career high in assists…. probably a career high in rebounds.
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 Feb 12, 2009 10:31 AM PST up reply actions
Maybe credit should only be given when the Clippers lose . . .
And you’re right – he was playing at a fairly high level before (14/4/4).
BD ball.
If there was ever a time we really needed to run this would probably be it. Our defense is below average at best so right now it’s either run or blowout.
If you feel a defense is below average why would you run?
Running would increase the number of possessons for both teams. This would give the other team MORE chances to score against your below average defense. Giving each team more possessions would make it worse on the team already at a disadvantage.
I wonder if Camby, Gordon, Skinner, Collins and any others took offense to “we don’t pride ourselves on defense.”
BD should probably stick to speaking for himself on that one. Perhaps he was using The Dude’s royal we, man.
Get me BD and 75 and I'm in
The Dude abides, man
The Dude abides.
I took offense.
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 Feb 11, 2009 2:09 PM PST up reply actions
Of course
We also have a poor defense, as KillaClip points out. In such a scenario, it may be better to try to outscore your opponent.
Maybe BD was referring to MDSr’s lack of abiliity to instill good defensive habits in this team.
Illogical
But if your defense is poor, how do you plan to outscore them by giving them MORE chances? It doesn’t make sense on a fundamental level. If you feel your team is worse than the opponent, you should slow the game down as far as possible, thus increasing the importance of luck. Pick a better fight than this Jax.
Several Clippers clearly play good defense. The notable exception being Baron “The All-Star Maker” Davis.
And not in the good way that PG’s are supposed to make all-stars. In the bad way.
Get me BD and 75 and I'm in
I agree with your first point here John R
but don’t see the several clippers that play good defense. Camby, EJ, Ricky (sometimes), Kaman (sometimes) and then I’m struggling.
I certainly don’t see Baron, Zach, Thornton, Fred Jones, Novak as good defenders.
Unsure about DJ and Mike Taylor at this point.
Bingo! Oh me oh my!
Um, No
Teams that half bad half court defense will lose if they try to slow the game down. They might be able to win if they try to outscore the opponent and get lucky in transition defense.
I find your posts on such subjects – which drip with negative energy – reflective of a basic lack of understanding of the game of basketball. I suspect you realize that.
This isn’t a fight. I’m simply trying to teach you something.
That was a cheap shot
I respect both of your opinions, but that was a cheap shot. I agree with you though, bad offensive teams have to rely on scoring and athletic ability to win. There has been several posts on why QRoss, Bowen, etc are not valuable on bad teams. Bad teams need to score. Bad teams are usually bad because they lack the ability to consistently score. Let’s face it, bball is an offensive game…there’s no goalie or goal tending…each basket is worth 2—3 pts, and there is a 24 sec shot clock. Good teams can score…even the Spurs.
This is going to be my team, and we're going to rise together.
-Clipper Darrell
Really, oasisman?
Look, John R started his post off by calling my argument “illogical.” That statement was totally unnecessary, and was really quite silly because he doesn’t really know what he’s talking about here. If someone who is ignorant calls you illogical or suggests that you’re “picking a fight” when you obviously are not, I suspect you’d react in the same manner that I reacted. The cheap shot here was John R’s post. Instead of trying to prove how smart he is, why not engage in a reasonable dialogue? Mine was simply reactive.
As I indicated, and you concurred, bad defensive teams need to change the pace of the game, by playing up tempo, to have a shot at winning. Obviously, you cannot evaluate the prospects of winning a game solely by looking at statistics – at how many shots are being thrown up. Basketball is not baseball. Go ahead and quote me to Dave Berri.
Reasonable dialogue
I found John R’s post much more reasonable. I suspect others do as well. So by all means, let’s all be reasonable.
In a discussion of alternative views, isn’t it implicit that one side finds the other side to be illogical? If they found it to be logical, they would not be taking the opposing viewpoint. So I think your being hurt at the use of the word illogical seems more than a little thin-skinned. Let’s face it – John R has said significantly meaner things to you (and to me for that matter).
He didn’t call the position ‘stupid’. He certainly didn’t say, as you did, that the position indicated a total lack of knowledge of basketball.
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 Feb 12, 2009 10:43 AM PST up reply actions
I wasn't hurt, and no
I don’t think we need to call out opposing reasonable views for being illogical. Reasonable, respectful debating doesn’t involve such assertions.
Yes, that will go well...
And not dripping with negative energy at all!
You’re both wrong incidentally. Manipulating the pace of the game has more to do with the offense than the defense. If you’re offense is suspect, you would want to play at a faster pace in an attempt to get more easy baskets.
I think John R’s point was that the weaker team would want to play at a slower pace. From a probability standpoint, the more possessions there are, the more likely the stronger team will win. The standard deviation gets smaller as the sample size gets bigger (i.e. more possessions). But that’s referring to both sides of the ball – the team expected to lose has an incentive to slow the game down, but it doesn’t necessarily mean that they are particularly weak on defense. It might, it might now.
Jax’s point is… I’m not sure. Sounds like his strategy would apply to a team that was solid on offense but weak on defense. That hardly seems to apply to the Clippers.
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 Feb 12, 2009 10:37 AM PST up reply actions
We disagree there
There is absolutely no way that a weaker team would want to play slower against a strong half court defensive team. Teams play faster tempo when playing against zones, for example. David Stern actually commented on that very issue during a radio interview this morning.
That point about the more possessions there are the more likely the stronger team will win doesn’t really say much. Why is the stronger team stronger? Half court defense, offense? What? For example, you can be strong in the half court offense but weak in transition uptempo offense (slower team with strong post up players).
Good coaches find a way to maximize their chances to win based on the personnel they have. D’Antoni had a small team in Phx that would have been killed in half court offense against good defensive teams but found a way to turn their size and skills to their advantage (and should have beat the Spurs a couple of years ago, but I digress).
I’ll say it again – you cannot use things like standard deviations to determine these kinds of issues. You just can’t.
Finally, you think the Clippers are strong on defense? With all their shooters, Thornton, and BD, they are potentially a good offensive team in transition.
Clippers are last in the league in most offensive stats
So, it’s hard for them not to be stronger on defense, right? I realize that the season stats have been compiled with many injuries to good offensive players, so it’s arguably skewed. You can certainly make an argument that they COULD be a good offensive team. but they aren’t – not yet anyway, a handful of 120+ night’s lately notwithstanding.
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 Feb 12, 2009 12:47 PM PST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Chris Paul is recruiting J.R. Smith to the Clippers
- Video: ‘Where in the World is Nikola Pekovic?’
- Jeremy Lin’s teammate snaps a picture of his famous couch
- Dwight Howard picks a strange time to ask for more fourth-quarter shots
- Spike Lee texts to thank the coach that cut Jeremy Lin before seeing him play
Certain photos copyright © 2012 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.
