Al Thornton: The NBA's LEAST Productive Player?
by mikey p on Jun 16, 2009 3:56 PM PDT
64 comments
Al Thornton had a promising rookie season. He was the second leading scorer among rookies behind Rookie of the Year Kevin Durant, and boasted scoring outbursts of 33 and 39 points after becoming a starter. Many nights he was the Clippers go to scorer down the stretch, and was the only Clipper with the ability to effectively create his own shot. Because he spent a lot of time playing out of position, his rebound rate was below average, and it was no secret that AT's defense needed work. But for a rookie who slipped to #14, Al played well overall.
Perhaps the sophomore jinx is real, because Al Thornton clearly regressed in his second season. On the surface, his numbers improved. He averaged almost 17ppg and shot slightly better from the field. A deeper look, however, puts Al into a whole new light.
Using the incresingly popular Wins Produced metric, Al Thornton was last season's least productive player. Here's the list of the least:
|
Rank |
Player |
Team |
Games Played |
Games Started |
Minutes Played |
Wins Produced |
WP48 |
|
1 |
Al Thornton |
LA Clippers |
71 |
67 |
2,654 |
-2.88 |
-0.052 |
|
2 |
Antoine Wright |
Dallas |
65 |
53 |
1,552 |
-2.70 |
-0.083 |
|
3 |
Bobby Brown |
Minnesota-Sacramento |
68 |
2 |
931 |
-2.48 |
-0.128 |
|
4 |
Donte Greene |
Sacramento |
55 |
4 |
725 |
-2.43 |
-0.161 |
|
5 |
Andrea Bargnani |
Toronto |
78 |
59 |
2,453 |
-2.31 |
-0.045 |
|
6 |
Jason Kapono |
Toronto |
80 |
12 |
1,831 |
-2.24 |
-0.059 |
|
7 |
Ricky Davis |
LA Clippers |
36 |
9 |
785 |
-2.09 |
-0.128 |
|
8 |
Al Harrington |
Golden State-New York |
73 |
56 |
2,546 |
-2.01 |
-0.038 |
|
9 |
Glen Davis |
Boston |
76 |
16 |
1,637 |
-1.98 |
-0.058 |
|
10 |
Nick Young |
Washington |
82 |
5 |
1,837 |
-1.94 |
-0.051 |
Other Clippers and former Clippers (Maggette) made the bottom 10%, but Al Thornton held the top, er, bottom spot. This metric is hardly and outlier. Al also managed to have the worst plus/minus of anyone in the NBA. The worst 5::
1. Al Thornton -575.
2. Kevin Durant -502.
3. Spencer Hawes -490.
4. Antawn Jamison -472.
5. Eric Gordon -462. (way to support your teammate, EJ)
Hence all the talk around here of going a different direction at the 3. (Sorry, Al). The point of this is not to pick on Thornton. He is hardly the only one to blame for the Clippers struggles last year (hello, Baron Davis). The point is to maybe convince AT to, well, just, try to be more productive out there.
For those interested in Wins Produced, here is a list of the league leaders by position. Marcus Camby was 13th overall in the NBA, while Zach Randolph was the 13th ranked Power Forward, and 110th ranked player overall. (Note: this metric does tend to skew in favor of centers and point guards. Power Forwards seem to have the most difficult time satisfying the parameters.)
Also, here is the Wins Produced by the Clippers thru 74 games last season. Baron Davis had the most signifigant drop off, but, as a unit, this roster was not poised to win many games anyhow.
Lots of work yet to be done
0 recs |
64 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Maggette fell all the way to the negative?
Jeez.
Its REALLY good news that as a rookie AND undersized for his position that EJ wasn’t in the negative.
"So what are the odds that the Clippers can compete next season given their limited flexibility? Slim and none."
by John R on Jun 16, 2009 4:21 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
How is WP48 calculated?
I’m not completely sold. You’re telling me that Troy Murphy was responsible for producing more wins than Pau Gasol and Kevin Garnett?
Zach Randolph was responsible for producing more wins than David West?
Melo’s ranked 83rd?
I understand that it may not be a perfect measure of a player’s impact on his team, but it’d be nice to see what goes into calculating it.
by Rotudo on Jun 16, 2009 4:27 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
There's a book and a blog
Check em out if you are interested. I’m a fan. Most opponents will have to admit they haven’t fully read the literature and you would find they most often posit strawmen, etc.
Anyone interested should read up. Its not really worth debating the metric here. Your preconceptions will be challenged. If that doesn’t interest you, don’t waste your time.
He DID just win the TrueHoop stat geek smackdown, and last year he was just about the only person on earth to pick the Celtics. So if predictive power is proof the stat is on to something, he’s winning.
"So what are the odds that the Clippers can compete next season given their limited flexibility? Slim and none."
by John R on Jun 16, 2009 4:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I owe an explanation for that
This is a tool that is based on a set of statistics that are dependent on how good the players are that play with the player who is being evaluated. Therefore, you really can’t take the statistic and use it in a vacumn. It works better in baseball.
I find the PER to be much more informative in the world of basketball.
by Jax on Jun 16, 2009 8:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I like PER, too
It usually nails it. Michael Jordan had the highest PER during his prime years, and LeBron James does now. Each was/is the best player of his era, so one would expect the stats to reveal that. PER does.
My only complaint is that guys like Bruce Bowen usually had low PER #s, yet their value was immeasurable.
There is no perfect measure. The best thing is to just watch the way people play the game. From this standpoint, Al Thornton is NOT the “worst” player in the league, nor is he the best.
F-Elton!
by mikey p on Jun 16, 2009 10:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually
Bruce Bowen’s low PER proves my point about the difficulty to evaluate basketball players soley based on individual statistics. Bowen is good in the specific system he’s in. He would be unusuable on most other teams because he is a liability in several categories. Thus, his value is created in large part by those players that surround him.
by Jax on Jun 17, 2009 12:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
See, I disagree a bit here
only becuase Bowen was a guy that could guard anyone, one on one, in any system. I think he would have been effective anywhere.
However, I don’t think he would have been a champion everywhere. That is where being a Spur helped.
F-Elton!
by mikey p on Jun 17, 2009 12:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You're right
But a team with Bowen, with such limited offense from a perimeter player, needs three other great scorers, which the Spurs have had. He’s a great piece to that team. But on the Clippers? Not so much.
by Jax on Jun 17, 2009 12:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right
Still, this is where I think PER misses intagibles guys. I’m sure the Spurs would have preferred to keep Bowen rather than trade him for a less effective guy with a higher PER.
F-Elton!
by mikey p on Jun 17, 2009 12:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also
kee in mind that PER tells us that ZBo is a good player (which he is) but it didn’t translate to wins.
F-Elton!
by mikey p on Jun 17, 2009 1:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You are correct sir
No stat evaluator can do everything. And we don’t need to review stats to know that Bowen is a potentailly valuable asset. Or to tell us that Zbo has baggage.
by Jax on Jun 17, 2009 1:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
"Therefore, you really can’t take the statistic and use it in a vacumn"
Who says? You keep repeating it, yet you show no evidence that it is true.
Conversely, there is ample evidence that it isn’t true.
"So what are the odds that the Clippers can compete next season given their limited flexibility? Slim and none."
by John R on Jun 17, 2009 8:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
"I find the PER to be much more informative in the world of basketball."
Yes, because you value scoring above all else.
What is the point of PER? We could rank everyone by points per minute and the result will be largely indistinguishable from PER, and won’t tell us anything meaningful either.
If PER was informative or informed, it would have predictive power. It does not.
It is merely a vanity rating, designed to meet preconceived notions. Boring.
"So what are the odds that the Clippers can compete next season given their limited flexibility? Slim and none."
by John R on Jun 17, 2009 8:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well
I tihink that the problems with WIN have been documented by Steve and others in addition to myself. I don’t think that the evaluation of basketball players can be reduced to statistics. I’ve explained one of the reasons why I believe that above.
PER isn’t just about scoring. It takes into account steals, rebounds, blocks, etc. And no, I don’t value scoring above everything else. Marcus Camby, for example, has a fairly high PER rating over his career.
So sorry that it’s boring for you. I understand that some folks like to reduce everything to stats in basketball as in baseball. I personally just don’t find WIN very helpful.
by Jax on Jun 17, 2009 12:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn't call it bunk
Sometimes there are players that are rated surprisingly high (Troy Murphy), but the people at the top are usually the right people (LeBron, Paul, Howard, Wade).
I don’t think WOW is perfect, either. I like it in conjunction with other measures. Wins + PER + plus/minus give a good picture. FYI, LeBron James is tops in all three. I don’t think many non-Kobe jockers will argue that LBJ is the best.
F-Elton!
by mikey p on Jun 16, 2009 10:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not saying that it doesn't show which players are better than others
in some circumstances. I’m just explaining that it isn’t really valuable as a predictive tool. For example, Al Thornton’s low WIN score is predicated in part by the horrible play of the team around him, the slow tempo of the offense, and a number of other factors. Put Al on another team with better players and a better coach and I suspect he’d do much better.
One issue I have always had with WIN is that theoretically you could put 5 centers with high WIN scores on the same starting five and these five players should bring in by themselves, a very high number of wins. We all know that just wouldn’t happen. Which explains the fallacy of the supposed predictive value of WIN. The WIN score of a player is relative to other players on the team, which all contribute to the WIN score of the player being reviewed.
Thus, there’s really little value to WIN imo as a predictor unless you are tryijng to figure out how valuable a player is on a particular team.
by Jax on Jun 17, 2009 12:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I personally don't rely on its predictive powers
Especially for a team like the Clippers that added so many new pieces. But I do see it as relative.
Chris Paul accounted for 29 of the Hornets wins. Put him on a team with four other PG’s and the number goes way down because they wouldn’t win much.
F-Elton!
by mikey p on Jun 17, 2009 12:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually, yes
It is measuring who produced more of his OWN team’s wins. David West had Chris Paul there winning all the games for them. Remove Chris Paul, and people start doing different things. West’s # maybe goes up or down as he becomes more or less (differetnly) involved.
It’s not apples to apples. The number could change if the player is on a different team or different situation. (Interestingly, Camby’s number was remarkably similar, which probably reflects that his role on both the Nuggets and the Clippers was similar).
So yes, Troy Murphy was responsible for producing more Pacers wins than Gasol was Lakers wins. Murphy would likely produce less of the wins were he on the Lakers. He’d have Kobe.
F-Elton!
by mikey p on Jun 16, 2009 4:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Gotcha...that makes more sense
Still, Troy Murphy accounted for more wins than Danny Granger did?
And J.R. Smith was accountable for more wins than Melo?
Interesting stat for sure though, I’m probably just nitpicking
by Rotudo on Jun 16, 2009 5:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Murphy/Granger and Melo/Smith
I’ll buy it for the purposes of win score. Neither Granger or Melo are great defenders or rebounders for SF’s, and this metric does value rebounding heavily. That’s why Murphy and Camby rate so high.
The thing I like about this metric is that it picks up on people like Murphy that typically fly under the radar because they aren’t flashy.
F-Elton!
by mikey p on Jun 16, 2009 5:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah not sold either
never really been a huge fan of complicated stats like WP48.
In Gordon we trust
by bestclipfan on Jun 16, 2009 4:32 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Personally
I prefer the more complicated stats for measuring a player’s worth as compared to the misleading ones like scoring. But stats are not the be all/end all.
F-Elton!
by mikey p on Jun 16, 2009 4:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
One more thought on WP48
Its SUPER high on Griffin as the college historicals convert to NBA. More really good news.
"So what are the odds that the Clippers can compete next season given their limited flexibility? Slim and none."
by John R on Jun 16, 2009 4:38 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
"last year he was just about the only person on earth to pick the Celtics."
Huh?
"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted" – Albert Einstein
by Another son of Mike Smith on Jun 16, 2009 4:39 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Last year, obviously
"So what are the odds that the Clippers can compete next season given their limited flexibility? Slim and none."
by John R on Jun 16, 2009 4:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's a canard we've heard before
Many picked the Celtics to win
by Jax on Jun 16, 2009 8:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thats a canard we've heard before
Who were they? Did they write it down? What method did they use?
"So what are the odds that the Clippers can compete next season given their limited flexibility? Slim and none."
by John R on Jun 17, 2009 8:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I picked Celtics
does that make me an expert, although I also picked the Cavs to win it all in 6 games so maybe not.
In Gordon we trust
by bestclipfan on Jun 17, 2009 9:41 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
John R doesn't believe you. Only the great head of WIN was smart enough to do that
Despite the fact that the team had KG, Paul Pierce and Ray Allen, among others.
No one other than Berri could possibly have thought (except bestlipfan) that the Celtics would have won that year. Gosh Berri is smart. Wow.
by Jax on Jun 17, 2009 12:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That was your canard. Do you want me to pull up your old posts where Steve and others
debunked you?
by Jax on Jun 17, 2009 12:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Mikey
Say it once, and I’ll say it again. Get off Al’s nuts. Please and thank you. Okay, that was a bit harsh. (=
Okay, well to start, I understand that Al probably forced some shots that made all of us at Clipper Nation wondering, but truth is, anybody on the Clippers might not have a great win/ loss percentage. Truth is, you can name anybody that you can name anybody that has a greater w/l percentage than Al, but at what price? Remember that Al is very underpriced for the amount of production that he is creating. Yes, he’s not becoming our go to guy, but at #14, he’s still a steal. Tell me if you would rather have Julian Wright instead of Thornton? Yes, he’s shooting 46%, but at 4.4 points a game? He may have gotten hot at the middle of the season, but when he’s cold, you better not use him.
Don’t give up on Thorton. Kid’s got game. W/L should be a team effort, but an individual statistic. This isn’t MLB.
Mike Smith on Eric Gordon: "The Clippers may have found their go to scorer."
On a second note, I want Novak back!
by JackduhSun on Jun 16, 2009 4:40 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
+/- is dubious on the Clippers, for sure
Anyone who was unlucky enough to play the bulk of the minutes is going to get scorched there.
That said, Al has a way to go to be the solution at the 3.
"So what are the odds that the Clippers can compete next season given their limited flexibility? Slim and none."
by John R on Jun 16, 2009 4:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
RIght
I mean, Lamar Odom was #2 in plus/minus in the NBA behind LeBron James. One benefits/suffers based on whom they’re teamed with.
F-Elton!
by mikey p on Jun 16, 2009 4:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I can't tell
if that was sarcasm, the internet is obviously a place that shouldnt have sarcasm in.
Anyways aside from that, what John R meant was that your w/l percentage is obvously not going to be up if your actually starting, or even playing for a team such as the Clippers. Let’s face it, we won 19 games. Really, even if you played well, contributed all you can, your w/l percentage is not going to be great.
The thing is, what your saying is like basically basing all your knowledge on stats. It’s like saying Novak was horrible because of his stats, but his contribution was obviously endless. He kept us in games when we were down 20. He made big shots and was consistent.
Or how about Eric? He played extremely well. Hell, he made a beleiver that he could have been ROY- runner up, although he didn’t really come close. Clipper fans all know that Eric Gordon’s contribution was anything but horrible.
Stat’s aren’t everything in basketball. Why point out a win loss stat when basketball is a team effort?
Mike Smith on Eric Gordon: "The Clippers may have found their go to scorer."
On a second note, I want Novak back!
by JackduhSun on Jun 16, 2009 5:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You mean plus/minus
I agree. I’m not a huge plus minus fans because there are four other guys out there with you. That was my point about Odom. He benefits greatly because he is able to share the court with Kobe and Gasol.
But…in this case, the data supported Al’s bad Wins Produced number. So I decided to include it. AT was at the bottom of the league in BOTH measures.
(BTW, I really am a big Al Thornton fan, and think he has an upside if used properly, and not asked to do things he is suited for).
F-Elton!
by mikey p on Jun 16, 2009 5:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Haha
Your bound to have a lower /- with a team who consistently gets blown out. I don’t know how the wp48 is calculated, but my guess might have to be the amount of wins/ losses blowouts possibly?
Remember that Thornton was possibly the only consistent start in terms of minutes. (played 71 games and started 67 of them.) Afterall, Randolph played for a decent NY Knick team( I say decent because their record was better than i expected!) and even then, didn’t play much games for us, Camby and Baron was hurt, and Gordon didn’t start until after the Mobley deal.
Thornton would probably get the least benefits then. I’m glad you like Thornton, but Thornton’s going to be fine where he’s at. I don’t buy into the idea of Thornton being the least productive player in the league.
Mike Smith on Eric Gordon: "The Clippers may have found their go to scorer."
On a second note, I want Novak back!
by JackduhSun on Jun 16, 2009 5:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
WP48 is an individual stat
It doesn’t know the score, only an individual’s line in the box score.
"So what are the odds that the Clippers can compete next season given their limited flexibility? Slim and none."
by John R on Jun 16, 2009 5:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Haha what?
Your team is bound to get blown out if you have a lower +/-. Chicken or the egg? Saying Al suffered because he played on a bad team is hardly a defense since he was a starter and major contributor for the bad team. Not exactly a ringing endorsement.
Thornton needs to improve. He IS productive, but he is also un-productive. The net result was negative last year.
F-Elton!
by mikey p on Jun 16, 2009 6:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
+/- isn't only a win/loss stat
It has its place. Compare Al Thornton to the other Clippers and it will reveal if he is helping the Clippers or hurting.
If he is the WORST on the Clippers, its not a good sign.
For example, EJ played twenty-three more minutes than Al, but the Clippers were 120+ points better when EJ was on the floor but Al wasn’t. Obviously a lot of their 2600+ minutes was together. We could burron down and look into why, but the evidence can’t be denied.
The conclusion is clear and matches up with WP48. Two completely different “advanced” metric.
Al Thornton was a weak link on the Clippers.
"So what are the odds that the Clippers can compete next season given their limited flexibility? Slim and none."
by John R on Jun 16, 2009 5:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lamar came off the bench...
So he likely played against the opposing team’s 2nd unit more often than not.
by Rotudo on Jun 16, 2009 5:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He started half the season
In any event, it just goes to show that plus/minus is skewed
F-Elton!
by mikey p on Jun 16, 2009 6:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
was gonna post this too...
Al and EJ look horrible in this metric because they both played so much in all those blowout losses. You’d look at a box score after every game and see that in the new +/- column, the bulk of the team would be -20 or more.
by dc5dugg on Jun 16, 2009 5:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oops
Tried to get a filler post up, to take the Laker congrats down if nothing else, but got distracted and MP beat me to it.
Maybe my crazy Eric Gordon post is more positive, even if it doesn’t make any sense.
Yeah, the stat stuff is tricky for me. I’d like Thornton to try to find some specific things to improve on, and for his game to get better. I also hope that Blake Griffin has a positive effect on everybody. Thornton could be really good as a scorer coming off the bench, but he could also be better than that if he makes a 3rd year jump, after backsliding a bit, though showing a little bit better consistency, in year two.
by citizen zhiv on Jun 16, 2009 5:18 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
LOL
I did this to get rid of the Lakers post, too. One day of that crap was plenty.
AT was out of the flow this year. And he has a lot of tough defensive assignments. Plus, he really doesn’t get the team defense concept. These things can improve.
F-Elton!
by mikey p on Jun 16, 2009 5:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I want to see AT
at his natural position. I wonder if going against other SFs would increase his rebs stats.
by Qlippers on Jun 16, 2009 6:05 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
He was back to SF this year
And no, it really didn’t help much.
F-Elton!
by mikey p on Jun 16, 2009 6:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually
he did play the PF duties when called upon. When Thornton got hurt, Novak was playing the PF.
Mike Smith on Eric Gordon: "The Clippers may have found their go to scorer."
On a second note, I want Novak back!
by JackduhSun on Jun 16, 2009 6:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually
He was more productive as a PF. 82games
Maybe they should just go small with Al at the 4 and Griffin at the 5. Really creates the need for a 3 now.
F-Elton!
by mikey p on Jun 17, 2009 1:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I strongly disagree
With this one. Al isn’t bad downlow, but thats just like using Rashard at the 4. Was it a bad idea? No, but its like watching Lewis try and guard Gasol. It was nasty.
Plus, I prefer Thornton on SF. He seems to work better away from the ball and trying to get open instead of having somebody guard him inside and forcing him to jack a fade away.
Mike Smith on Eric Gordon: "The Clippers may have found their go to scorer."
On a second note, I want Novak back!
by JackduhSun on Jun 17, 2009 4:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He already shoots way too many jump shots
64% of his shots are jumpers. He needs to drive more.
F-Elton!
by mikey p on Jun 17, 2009 5:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And putting him downlow with no driving lanes
will improve that? Aside from him driving, Thornton had a sweet strike Freshmen year. What happened sophmore year is a mystery. But Mikey, let’s both agree that we’re on the same page that Al needs to drive a bit more?
But Mikey, don’t you think with Dunleavy as coach, it’s a bit harder to drive? I’ve noticed that Dunleavy doesnt seem to favor guys who drive to the basket. IE Maggette.
Mike Smith on Eric Gordon: "The Clippers may have found their go to scorer."
On a second note, I want Novak back!
by JackduhSun on Jun 17, 2009 5:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
NOTE:
I have added a question mark to the headline to give it some balance. I’m not sure AT is the most unproductive player in the league. I’m just reporting the #’s.
F-Elton!
by mikey p on Jun 16, 2009 6:09 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
i'm not sure these numbers really help , you have to take them with a grain of salt.
if me and 3 clipsnation members started with AL, his plus minus would be really really bad.
that doesnt make him a bad player.
I mean I’m sure no one is talking about kevin durant’s bad plus minus.
by hans007 on Jun 17, 2009 2:32 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
EXACTLY
See my posts above on this. You nailed it.
Apparently John R thinks Durant sucks.
by Jax on Jun 17, 2009 12:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1 with Hans and Jax
I just don’t completely buy into this. Jax and Hans, lets go play with Thornton and ruin his plusminus :D
Mike Smith on Eric Gordon: "The Clippers may have found their go to scorer."
On a second note, I want Novak back!
by JackduhSun on Jun 17, 2009 4:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
All products is 30% of the market price of high quality in NBA jerseys
Hot NBA Laker jerseys No.24,7,17,16;LMB dodgers jerseys No.99,42,27;Soccer jerseys in Beckham,NFL jersey Ware NO.94,Allen NO.32 and No.21,52.
All products is 30% of the market price of high quality, Low prices, Warm service, Quick action!To know more details,Pls visite:
www.cheapplaza.com
by Zbx on Jun 17, 2009 10:54 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
can we please ban him from the site?
kthx. no spammers please.
Mike Smith on Eric Gordon: "The Clippers may have found their go to scorer."
On a second note, I want Novak back!
by JackduhSun on Jun 17, 2009 4:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just missing SP
I assume our fearless leader normally gets rid of any spam. Not sure how to get rid of it with my guest editor capacities, but SP will be back tonight.
by citizen zhiv on Jun 18, 2009 10:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I flagged him
Don’t know what good that will do.
F-Elton!
by mikey p on Jun 18, 2009 11:15 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thornton the least productive player in the league?
I’m not surprised at all…
I’d call this a great finding for wages of wins.
by ghost_ride on Jun 17, 2009 4:06 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
AT stats
mickey p -i can tell by that formula you don’t have a clue how to figure what a players true contrbution to his team is,you’d make a great rep for the team owner at contract time
by wopp22 on Jun 27, 2009 9:53 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Clips Nation
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.
