Why Clips Shouldn't Rent Marion For One Year

by moKi on Jul 8, 2009 11:48 AM PDT

After reading some of the comments to this post I thought I should rephrase the title to better convey what I believe. I didn't change anything I wrote except adding a bold in the second paragraph. I respect the yearning of Clipper Nation to BELIEVE that the Clips have a shot a LeBron James but I hold firm in my belief that the odds of that happening are so low that they shouldn't squander an opportunity to lock in a nice vet player at reasonable price. If he wants too much money or too many years, I agree - forget it. But if you can get him on a Cuttino type deal - he may be a great deal.

Seeing the results of Steve's poll I guess I am in the minority but let me ramble on as to why it might make sense to sign Marion to a multi-year deal instead of a 1 year.

First off, to be clear, my opinion is to get him for a reasonable (~6 to 7M/year) multi-year deal or not at all. Here's why:

1. A One Year Deal with the Clips is Wasted Money

From a fan's standpoint: I don't know Marion's mindset, but it's not a hard jump for anyone to think that a one year deal with the Clippers is easy money. If Marion doesn't perform well it will be easy for many fans to think that the Clippers are just a pit stop for him on the way to somewhere else. It would be easy to think he's not giving a full 100% because he won't be here next year. Any little injury - why push it? He's gone in a year anyway! Total waste of money.

Opposite View: He has to play well - he's in a contract year. Well if he's so interested in looking good on a one year deal shouldn't he accept less money and play for a winning team, with more national airtime, where he could look better for 2010? It just seems that if he takes more money to come to the Clips for one year - his mentality is more focused on the almighty dollar than winning. Plus as a player how would you feel if a team told you, "We only want you for a year, take it or leave it?" Doesn't really make you feel all warm and fuzzy about being part of a team, does it? Would you really put 100% effort into being the "glue" for a bunch of guys you'll be leaving in 9 months anyway?

From Al Thornton's standpoint: Why are they renting this guy to play in front of me for a year? What's the plan here? Should I just cruise until the year is over and I get my starting spot back? Disappointment and confusion.

2. Forget the 2010 Cap Space - No Tier One Guys Will Sign With the Clippers

Get real Clipper Nation. Let's say you rent Marion for a year - obviously hoping he does well. Let's say everything goes according to plan. The new Clippers get to the Western Conference Finals. (Why do I throw that in there? Because. Do you think LeBron is going to want to play for a team that just barely made it into the playoffs or past the first round? NO WAY. It's either go to a contender or stay with the Cavs who will most likely be able to offer him the most money. Remember Kobe coming to the Clippers for less money? Yeah that didn't work out for the Clippers.)

Okay, so Marion does great for one year, like you hope. You throw a bid at LeBron, along with a handful of other teams. As he's taking his time deciding, Marion says "I guess I'm out" and signs somewhere else. LeBron says "No Thanks" and signs with some other team in the East (Why would he even come West, where it's so crowded?...) and the Clippers are starting over again.

Now you've lost your perfectly good glue guy and you're starting over. Again. Rebuild team chemistry - again. What happens to Al Thornton? - again. Bring in someone else? If you're thinking Al is going to be the guy by then, why even sign Marion? Shouldn't Al develop now? All those issues, one year later - same place.

Why didn't I mention Wade or Bosh? Wade plays the 1/2 (uh, Baron and Gordon???) And Bosh? (I see him maybe if both Kaman and DJ look horrible, I guess) But then you're in big trouble if you need to go after Bosh because then you'll want Marion locked in for more years after you just went to the WCF with him. Marion must have been decent to great if Kaman/DJ sucked and you still got that far.

3. Getting Marion for Multiple Years Solves Some Vital Issues

(a) Stability. Marion will know this is his immediate future. He can invest himself fully into the team, being the glue between Baron, Gordon, and Griffin who will all be here with him for the next few years. They can build on this 4 man core. He can settle in and play not having to worry about the upcoming offseason.

(b) Solves the Al Thornton issue. Al knows that he's now behind a veteran for the forseeable future. If he wants to start again he's gotta outplay Marion to get it back. That means play the right way, defend, etc. ALL VERY GOOD. Either Al will step up or the Clips let him go when his rookie contract is up AND they'll still have Marion.

(c) The Cuttino Mobley Value Factor. I loved the Clips signing of Cuttino. It wasn't splashy but it was great knowing we had him for X amount of years and he devoted himself to the Clips. I think it was a very fair contract and Cuttino certainly gave us fans our money's worth. I see signing Marion the same way. A veteran whose glory years might be behind him but is able to give a solid contribution night in and night out AT A REASONABLE price.

I think the Clippers win by giving Gordon and Griffin (along with DJ and Taylor) a vet guy who they know will be with them for a few years - and Marion wins by getting a longer contract and a big market to maybe make his last hurrah in and cash in on whatever endorsements might still be out there.

Yeah there is the possibility that LeBron would sign with the Clippers, but really what are the odds? You'd have to say not very good at this point or even a year from now. What's the odds that Shawn Marion will be a bust in a multi year deal? We know very well in Clipperland that injuries can ruin the value of contracts at any time. You have to go with the assumption that players will be healthy and perform close to their career numbers or you'd never make any moves.

Get Marion for a reasonable multi year deal and stabalize the roster now.

Tweet Comment 25 comments | 1 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

i agree with you on just about everything you've said here

SM is probably one of the best rebounding small forwards… I’d offer him 4 yr 30 million! (even though he turned down a slightly larger offer from Toronto he doesn’t have any other options right now.) This is a buyers market.

I also agree about the 2010 thing… well said.

by cantthinkofagoodname on Jul 7, 2009 6:40 PM PDT reply actions

How about no?

Stuck in limbo.

by PaperClip on Jul 7, 2009 6:53 PM PDT reply actions

Sign him for one year;

and if we play well, we can upgrade someone like LeBron over him and become a real contender.

http://lucasnbablog.blogspot.com/

by LJ Hann on Jul 7, 2009 7:13 PM PDT reply actions

I love people who think LeBron to the Clippers is out of the question. It’s really not. But, whatever. Keep believing what you want.

by FlyByKnight on Jul 7, 2009 7:26 PM PDT reply actions

Exactly.

LAC is a better team than NY, a big market, and has players already in place.

http://lucasnbablog.blogspot.com/

by LJ Hann on Jul 7, 2009 9:14 PM PDT up reply actions

That leaves the Clippers (Los Angeles). That’s the offseason when Zach Randolph’s $17,333,333 million comes off of the books and all Clipper fans rejoice at the sound of the possibility that LeBron might be heading to the second largest television market in the United States. The Clippers would have just $38.6 million locked up in guaranteed contracts for the 2011-12 season. They’d already have a nice core of Baron Davis, Eric Gordon, Al Thornton, Blake Griffin, and Chris Kaman. Enough to entice LeBron to come over. But, there is a strong possibility that Kaman is dealt sometime soon which would only free up cap space since the rumor is that he could get dealt to Chicago for Hinrich due to his somewhat lower contract. Word is the Clippers might get a draft pick in the deal but who cares. If that were to happen, it’d save the Clippers $4.2 million in 2011-12 alone which is an extra $4.2 million to use on LeBron for a max-contract. LeBron to the Clippers makes sense. But, it’s the Clippers. Nothing good, almost, ever happens for them.

That’s my post from another forum where I said why the Clippers could be players for LeBron. This post was made on June 4th so it was before the draft and before the Randolph trade.

by FlyByKnight on Jul 7, 2009 9:26 PM PDT up reply actions

Good Man

http://lucasnbablog.blogspot.com/

by LJ Hann on Jul 7, 2009 9:33 PM PDT up reply actions

I think when you think of LA basketball

Lakers come first. I dont think people really consider us the second largest television market since not that many people watch Clipper games (let’s face it, its never on TNT or SportsCenter.) I hope that changes though; Blake Griffin could be the difference.

I still dont believe Lebron will ever be a Clipper. And I dont see Lebron leaving Cleveland anytime soon.

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 Jul 7, 2009 11:58 PM PDT up reply actions

We would have a shot if

I think you know the rest

by Jax on Jul 8, 2009 9:24 AM PDT up reply actions

If anyone understands MDsr iso offense, it’s LBJ…It’s what MBrown has with the Cavs…

Roger Sterling: I bet there were people in the Bible walking around, complaining about "kids today."
Don Draper: Kids today, they have no one to look up to. Cuz they're looking up to us.

by Lawler's Law on Jul 8, 2009 11:51 AM PDT up reply actions

I need to watch more of the Cavs

Do they really set him up on isos or does he just do whatever he wants with a bunch of shooters on the perimeter

by Jax on Jul 8, 2009 12:33 PM PDT up reply actions

It’s all iso all the time. That and the fact that Brown is the most incompetent coach in the league when it comes to offensive execution. Why do you think he has his assistants diagram the plays in the huddle while he sits there acting like he knows what’s going on?

by FlyByKnight on Jul 9, 2009 2:16 AM PDT up reply actions

I think we have a good shot at Joe Johnson

And he’s essentially the guy we need. We’d have a very good starting 5 with some decent bench players (Al, DJ, Mike Taylor, Collins). Not good enough to win a championship (unless Blake and EJ become All-NBA material) but should be enough to make the playoffs for a team-record THREE straight years.

FA in 2010.

by ClipperChuck on Jul 7, 2009 7:29 PM PDT reply actions

i would hold out for a really great deal

marion for one year is a great deal.

marion for 3 years is only a good deal.

i will be stoked if they get him in either way.

but, will not be bummed if they pass because the years arent right.

Clippers Basketball.... It's Masochistic!

by Clipochistic on Jul 7, 2009 7:34 PM PDT reply actions

For the reasons you mentioned,

I’m also starting to think that Marion for 1 year is a bad idea. On the other hand, I don’t want him on a multi-year deal either. The Clippers are a young team with a lot of potential. How many teams like that dream of only making the playoffs? I want a CHAMPIONSHIP. Let’s swing for the fences next year, and if we don’t get at least a young perennial all-star, then at least we can say we tried. I don’t want any part of “let’s just get to the playoffs and see what happens”. With exceedingly few exceptions, championship teams are contenders from training camp: you know a contender when you see it.

As for Bosh, I don’t think Kaman or Jordan could do anything this year to make anyone think that Bosh wouldn’t be a huge upgrade (sorry for the triple-negative). Johnson is nice too, but I feel like he has too many miles on him (he carries Atlanta’s offense way too often).

Finally, although I’d rather the Clippers not go this route, even if we don’t sign Marion and we miss on the big free agents of 2010, there will still be some decent ones left. One that comes to mind: Marvin Williams, who, if he doesn’t sign with anyone this summer will be a 24-yr-old UFA next year and has many glue-guy attributes: he can rebound, defend, hit the corner three, and he doesn’t need the ball in his hands. Plus he’ll likely come cheap.

by d2s4ui1 on Jul 7, 2009 9:26 PM PDT reply actions

Agreed

Signing Marion to a long term deal would just doom the clippers in mediocrity. However, I’m also strongly against the 1-year plan. Everyone talks about how Marion is such a “glue guy,” but after hearing stories out of phoenix, I’m starting to think he may be the antithesis. Yes, he doesn’t need the ball to score, but he forced himself out of phoenix because he wasn’t the first option on that team. Doesn’t sound like the type of guy I want on my team, especially if it’s in a contract year.

by BtheKUTA on Jul 7, 2009 9:54 PM PDT up reply actions

not to mention, Marvin has oodles and oodles of talent.

by falconPUNCH on Jul 7, 2009 9:58 PM PDT up reply actions

I thought he wanted out because he wanted more money?

I think hes starting to realize that he’s not worth 20 million without Steve Nash. But Go Marion! I still believe he can be good!

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 Jul 8, 2009 12:00 AM PDT up reply actions

Heck his second best option outside of Nash could possibly be Chris Paul.

.. or maybe first. I can’t decide which is better…

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 Jul 8, 2009 12:00 AM PDT up reply actions

I understand both sides of the argument.

Marion can be a bad pick up for all of the stated reasons.

However, i cannot help but yearn for mass production from the 3 spot when we have the opputunity to grab it: Al and Marion, rather Marion and Al would be a great combo at the 3, providing constant possibility, opposed to empty minutes. And, i think big Al Thornton is going to be a very good basketball player, even though he was whate some fans label as a “limted set of tools.”

I’m just so tired of seeing the Doug Overtons, the Brian Skinners, the Cherokee Parks, the Jason Harts, and the Cheikh Sambs. So, grab Marion for a year, because i think it makes basketball sense. But, that’s in my opinion, of course.

by falconPUNCH on Jul 7, 2009 10:07 PM PDT reply actions

Re-sign Keith Boss Kloss!

We need someone who can get beat up by a busload of gangsters in style.

Clippers Basketball.... It's Masochistic!

by Clipochistic on Jul 7, 2009 10:22 PM PDT up reply actions

You, sir, are misdiagnosed

Not Clipschotic, but psycotic!!

http://lucasnbablog.blogspot.com/

by LJ Hann on Jul 7, 2009 10:26 PM PDT up reply actions

LJ, you fall into that category also, Battier- Obssesion.

Btw, I wouldnt count out Jason Hart. I dont know why, I just cant blame the guy. We should have all already know that Jason hart was most likely not going to contribute. BUT coming into ( I believe) it was 07-08, when b(itch)-ran-D was hurt, Jason Hart was really able to step up towards the end of the season where he was barely signed. I never thought that Hart was even that good.

Heh, as for Brian Skinner, that was somebody I was hoping to never see back in a Clipper uniform. His beard is enough to scare me 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 Jul 8, 2009 12:04 AM PDT up reply actions

wow great post

you had some very good points there and i can really see both sides with a case here. its really just a gamble: do we play it safe with a multi-year deal for marion? or do wait and pray we can reel in a whale next year. the better we play this year the better the chances. if i Had to pick i would say try to give a one year deal to marion and swing for the fences next year. if we miss out on the big names im sure we can find someone worth wile with the pile of money we’re sitting on.

by AtotheZ on Jul 8, 2009 12:21 AM PDT reply actions