Why waiving Mike Taylor wasn't a good move

by 9ineballer on Aug 6, 2009 10:33 PM PDT

o.k so i understand there are better options out there than mike taylor. i understand and would prefer fred jones

/ novak over taylor if it came down to that . But , what were the clip missing supposedly last year ; aside from the

ridiculous injury downtimes. it is chemistry!! chemistry is what a good portion of the excuses were laid upon , or a combination of a new roster having to learn to play together and this so called chemistry. i would say strongly

that the injuries were not the biggest problem and in fact , weather your a m.d.sr fan or not, putting a 85% new roster together and expect them to be able to compete with teams that have all been playing together for years is nuts.

So fast forward til now. another major change to the team . i'd say these guys probably wont even feel confident with

m.d.sr's swollen telephone book of plays til the allstar break. and y'know what ? i found that the games when

all the big names were hurt , were by far the most exciting to watch. and they actually got some wins with the young lineup.

mike taylor was certainly out of control 75% of the time , but he's young, inexperianced and still learning.

the skill level is there ,but he also possessed an honest exhuberant posative vibe like d.j does. like there

wasnt a negative bone in that kids body . thats what the clips could benefit from seeing more of .

instead of sulking whining pros . if i could choose taylor vs . telfair for a roster spot(purely hypothetical)

i choose taylor . and everyone watch as this kid takes some dark days and turns them into sunny ones as he starts to protect the ball better . someone going that fast that can be in control and dunk ; well that's as good as it gets.

anyway , another group of players having to learn that bloated playbook from the early nineties.

another bunch guys who have to form this chemistry. if i was a gambling man , id say another ruff year ahead with little sparkles of hope occasionaly . hell i say bring cassell back as assitant coach. . he was the only one that was shouting at everyone and getting them going . clips aint had no swagger since.

Tweet Comment 10 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Chemistry and major changes

I don’t think that Taylor leaving is going to hurt chemistry (maybe might make DJ a bit sad but he has been hanging around more with BG any ways). I would also disagree that Telfair isn’t better then Taylor. One big advantage is that Telfair is out of control 0% of the time meaning he can actually be trusted with the ball. Yes Taylor was fun to watch but really he had no place on the team, especially if it turns out that we end up getting Sessions in which case he would have been the 4th Pg off the bench. If you really want whats best for Taylor then you would want him to go to somewhere in need of a project point guard that can bring energy maybe the Knicks (Taylor would probably score lots of points in Dantoni system).

In Gordon we trust

by bestclipfan on Aug 6, 2009 11:26 PM PDT reply actions

Professional Basketball is a business

All of these guys knows this, and they will find out if they don’t already know (the youngsters). A third of the team is hanging out in Vegas right now trying to prepare for the upcoming season. DJ, BG & Rhino were all training together a week ago. The only ones that I haven’t heard of spending much time with their teammates (not including Madsen) were Kaman, Collins & Novak. Collins may have very well have been practicing at the training facility this summer, if he has healed. Chemistry should be better this season. The guys have a season under their belts and don’t want a repeat of last year. They’ve taken steps to try to prevent a repeat of that.

I was rooting for Taylor to improve and make it in this league. The problem is that he wasn’t a point guard when we traded for him, and still isn’t. He can be called a scoring point, but he’s really an undersized 2 guard. He has a lot of qualities that I do like (athleticism, speed, effort on defense), but he needs to have a better feel for the game if he’s going to play point. His passing, court vision, ability to set the tempo, read the defense, set up his teammates (not just alley oops), control the ball, and shoot could all stand to be improved. He was developing a nice little teardrop, and did show promise at times, but he lacked stability. The thing that sucks the most is that we gave up on him while giving up a high 2nd round pick that could have been useful going forward.

Since waiving him was a salary move, there’s still a chance that we could pick him up with a partial or non-guaranteed contract later on. It happened with Paul Davis. I would be fine if he did come back, but I’m not upset if he doesn’t. Regardless of where he plays, I’m rooting for him to elevate his game and to have a productive career.

by Lawler 4ever on Aug 7, 2009 12:20 AM PDT reply actions

I haven't had time to read the respones - apologies (I will later when I have the time),

but I’m with 9ineballer on this. I think we should have kept MT.

by eastie Rich on Aug 7, 2009 9:28 AM PDT reply actions

Should we never have drafted him?

We would have had a high 2nd rounder this year, and there turned out to be quite a few solid players left on the board.

by ghost_ride on Aug 7, 2009 11:17 AM PDT reply actions

It's hard to say

I did like the move when we did it, and he looked like he was a project that could be a valuable role player in the future. He was our backup, but he could have eventually developed into a consistent and reliable backup. Aside from speed, it wasn’t certain what he was going to bring night-in and night-out.

It looks like we wasted a pick since we just waived him. From that standpoint I would have rather us to have kept him. I was rooting for him. I don’t think it’s a big loss that he’s not here, but with all things considered, I wish we would have kept him.

by Lawler 4ever on Aug 7, 2009 11:59 AM PDT up reply actions

Good point...

This year, we could’ve had Sam Young, Chase Budinger, or Marcus Thornton.. All who could’ve been the wing help that we now desperately need.

'Cause how you play, is how you'll be remembered. PLAY LOUD!

by CLiPPz WeRD 12 on Aug 7, 2009 2:03 PM PDT up reply actions

it was because of money

i think we are going to resign him to a 1 year deal

everyone and their mom’s knows he’s a project pg not a backup pg. since we are trying to be players in FA next year we need to save as much $ as we can.

if the clippers really thought he was done then why wait til the very last minute (day before his contract is guaranteed)? why not just cut him right after SL? why waste time?

if anything his poor SL play lost his chance at guaranteeing his contract, but did not loose his spot on the team.

since he was never a backup pg (he just ended up playing backup pg bcuz our original backup pg sucked…see Jason Hart)…then Bassy/Sessions (whatever happens) isn’t his replacement. either of the two will play backup pg and allow MT to return to his natural position: spark-plug-project-combo-guard off the bench

by KidJustin on Aug 8, 2009 1:39 AM PDT reply actions

It wasn't because of money...

It was the roster spot. Clips traded 3 for 1 in Minny deal, now have 12 SIGNED players. Dunleavy likes to carry 14. They are thin at small forward, point guard, and could use a wing defender. It seems they’d still like to sign Steve Novak. There’s no room for Taylor who can’t back up at the point and is really too small for the off guard and can’t shoot from distance. Cutting him was obvious.

by John Raffo on Aug 8, 2009 10:07 AM PDT up reply actions