Eric Gordon - Lest we Forget

by Steve Perrin on Sep 8, 2009 7:01 PM PDT in News Comment 40 comments

Can Eric Gordon rise above his already high standards this season?

A couple of items got me thinking about Eric Gordon the last few days, and it just sort of reminded me, as I've mentioned before, Eric Gordon is really great.

Citizen ASoMS posted a FanShot from HoopsWorld in which Luke Byrnes profiled potential 'Break Out' players in the Western Conference next season. Eric Gordon topped his list, which was gratifying considering that so many NBA pundits seem to inexplicably rank him consistently below some of his classmates from the 2008 draft like O.J. Mayo and Russell Westbrook.

Byrnes argues that an improved and hopefully healthy Clippers team will put more weapons on the floor, meaning that defenses will not be able to focus as much attention on EJ. That may be true, but it also likely implies that there will be fewer shots for him than there were January through April, when he averaged 19.9 points per game. Nonetheless, assuming a normal development and maturation process for a kid who won't be able to drink until Christmas, not to mention the brand spanking new post up game he displayed at Summer League in Las Vegas, and he figures to be somewhere between 'improved' and 'much improved', which is saying quite a bit, since he was already pretty damn good.

The other item that made me think about Gordon was Kevin Arnovitz' post in TrueHoop about Kevin Martin today. Now, I'm only a little ashamed to admit that I don't really follow baseball closely enough to know that much about sabermetrics. And frankly, I've never heard of Adam Dunn. But to me, True Shooting Percentage is not rocket science. Points per game is still the way the NBA crowns it's leading scorer, but obviously the more you shoot, the more chances you have to score, so it's equally obvious that the efficiency with which you score is a factor. But the traditional shooting percentage, which ignores three pointers and free throws, is just as obviously inadequate. True Shooting Percentage, which factors in the extra tally on made three pointers, AND also counts both the points scored from the line and the equivalent extra shots represented by those free throws, is the most complete measure of a players efficiency while scoring. There are of course myriad other factors in a player's overall efficiency on the court - turnovers take away chances to score, offensive rebounds and steals create extra opportunities, bu there's no clear way for how to measure these things. The possessions used by a player in direct attempts to score, whether inside the arc, outside the arc or from the line, factored into the total number of points the player produces may not be perfect, but it's clearly better than field goal percentage as a measure of scoring efficiency.

True Shooting Percentage is of course what truly set the rookie Eric Gordon apart from the rest of what was without question a stellar rookie class. Derrick Rose, O.J. Mayo, Russell Westbrook, Michael Beasley - these young players all carried heavy loads for their respective teams, and performed better than rookies have any right to, distinguishing the class as one of the best of all time. But most of these guys used a LOT of shots to get their points. Look at the TSP's of the rookies. Gordon led all rookies in the stat. Moreover, compared to his more publicized perimeter rivals like Mayo and Westbrook and Rose, it wasn't even close. Of the 13 rookies who averaged double digits in scoring, Gordon was of course first in TSP - Mayo was 9th, Rose 12th and Westbrook 13th.

But how does he compare to a player like Kevin Martin, on whom Arnovitz and John Krolik of SLAM Magazine heap so much praise specifically because of his gaudy TSP? What they say about Martin is of course true - high volume scorers, guys who average 20+, almost never approach 60% TSP. You have to pick your shots wisely and have a conscience to keep your efficiency high, while those traits are anathema to leading your team in scoring. But Gordon is less than one percentage points behind Kevin Martin in TSP (.601 versus .593). Among players averaging more than 15 points per game, Martin was 8th in the league, Gordon was 12th.

But it goes beyond that. Look at the names on the list again. Of the top 15 players in TSP who averaged over 15 points per game last season, 13 of them have made an all star team (only Martin and Gordon have not). And it almost goes without saying that Gordon is the only rookie, and the only 20 year old, on the list.

It's tantalizing to think about what this means for the Clippers. Eric Gordon didn't get his chance until the 14th game of last season. He wasn't a focal point of the offense until almost 2009. And all he did was average 19.9 points in his final 48 games, while maintaining a level of effiiency unimaginable for a 20 year old rookie. That's in part due to the fact that he never ever looked like a gunner last season. Even when the Clippers had $40M in salary in street clothes and EJ was the ONLY viable option on the floor, he just never took a bad shot. He can afford to take a lot more good shots (and yes, a couple of bad ones) and still be a high percentage scorer. If he does that, where does his scoring average go?

3 recs | Comment 40 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Very Very intersting

I knew Gordon was efficient but I didn’t know he was that efficient. I think this efficiency will only improve his game making him much more of a threat when ever he has the ball. It is a pretty easy to cover a high volume low percentage shooter, just stick them and make them take a worse shot. However trying to guard a deadly shooter like Gordon who knows when to shot is harder especially with other threats on the team like Griffin and hopefully Baron. This all points to Gordon having a very good season and him helping us becoming a better team.

In Gordon we trust

by bestclipfan on Sep 8, 2009 7:40 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

One thing I meant to mention in the post....

Different players skew their TSP higher in different ways. The names that are high on the lists of league leaders usually fall into a one of several categories. Bigs who simply make a very high percentage of twos like Shaq and Yao; guys who make a large percentage of threes among their field goal attempts like Ray Allen (or Steve Novak, whose career TSP is over .600); guys who get to the free throw line a lot and make a good percentage (Kevin Martin, Chris Paul and Chauncey Billups all make the list in part because of trips to the line). Gordon is something of a generalist in getting his TSP up to the top of the league. He hits a decent percentage of his shots to begin with; he makes a high percentage of threes and takes a lot of them; and he gets to the line well also. In the end, this means you can’t just focus on taking away one thing. If you’re defending Ray Allen, you chase him off screens and run him off the three point line, and if you work your ass off, maybe you can contain him. But if you chase Gordon off the three point line, he’ll just blow past you and dunk on someone – probably with an and-one for good measure. He’s going to be very tough to stop this season.

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 Sep 8, 2009 8:48 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Partially correct

Just want to add that Ray Allen might not be a very good example as he is a decent finisher. He can stop and pop the midrange or go in for the layup with either hand. There are plenty of bombers in the NBA that you routinely see blow layups when someone is on them. Allen is not in that group.

I think the difference is that Gordon doesn’t why away from contact and gets foul alot, which is good. What do you think about comparing Ben Gordon to EJ? Same body build and both are good scorers. I am glad EJ doesn’t take bad shots or turn the ball as often as BG does. EJ is also a much better defender.

http://www.clipperscurse.com/

by ClippersCurse on Sep 9, 2009 5:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ray Allen and Ben Gordon

You’re right about Ray Ray – I’m selling him short, certainly from an earlier point in his career. At this point, on that Celtics team, he’s probably a little more one-dimensional than he needs to be.

I never liked the Ben Gordon comparison because I felt like it sold EJ short – but after last season’s playoffs, I liked it a lot better, certainly on the offensive end. Ben can score the ball. If EJ ends up as Ben Gordon on offense, I’d be happy. But yes, I think EJ is a much better defender.

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 Sep 9, 2009 5:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thing is...

Gordon takes questionable/crazy shots. EJ seems to have too much ‘proper’ form and training to ever allow himself to go that route…right?

by banandy on Sep 9, 2009 5:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

so far...

yeah. EJ could take a lot more shots and it wouldn’t make me mad.

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 Sep 10, 2009 1:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Excellent point.

It’s almost as if they should award TSP bonus points for a player being well-diversified in his abilities. In some professions, being a generalist can mean being “a jack of all trades and master of none.” But in this profession, it just makes for a better player.

"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted" – Albert Einstein

by Another son of Mike Smith on Sep 8, 2009 9:03 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Always a Great Topic

Pretty awesome to see the names on that TS% list. Ray Allen & Shaq surprised me, but those are all among the top players in the league.

So much to like about EJ: He displays a mix of an inside/outside game that we haven’t really seen as Clipper fans. If Blake Griffin lives up to the hype, they have a chance to go down as one of the best rookie/sophmore duo’s seen in a long time. It’ll be interesting to see if EJ improves on some of his weaknesses: Rebounding, mid-range, closing out games, and developing a killer instinct.

by ghost_ride on Sep 8, 2009 10:03 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

two covered

Eric Gordon can already close out games and showed early that he has ice in his veins. the man put up shots at critical moments, taking big shots.

by Takebb909 on Sep 8, 2009 10:35 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

He can "shoot" well at the end of a game

But we saw him try to create his own shot to close out a game with mixed results.

by ghost_ride on Sep 9, 2009 12:14 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

quite normal

…as you may recall Kobe Bryant had the same “mixed results” in his first few seasons, taking big shots coming up short. through time and practice we now have the current precision of Kobe. At this point in there careers at same age, I would say its safe to say that Gordon was a better scorer then Kobe at the age of 20.

by Takebb909 on Sep 9, 2009 7:46 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I am not quite sure EJ is as good as Kobe at 20, but EJ is good for his age. Pretty sure EJ has been “the closer” for his teams since he started playing basketball, being a perimeter player and probably the best player on his teams. The few games he played at IU support this.

http://www.clipperscurse.com/

by ClippersCurse on Sep 9, 2009 5:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

it looks like....

somebody is already on a path for greatness. If you look at the stats of a 1 Kobe Bryant—- as a rookie to third year—- Eric’s stats are already better. If you keep that in mind, a Clippers’ fan has a lot to be happy about… at least I am.

by ChrisS.Oaks on Sep 9, 2009 12:08 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Awesome post....

by swamigusto on Sep 9, 2009 6:32 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Kobe v. Gordon at the same age in the league. This is just to show Gordon is not to bad in his proficiancies.

Year Team G GS MPG FG% 3P% FT% OFF DEF RPG APG SPG BPG TO PF PPG
97-98 LAL 79 1 26.0 0.428 0.341 0.794 1.0 2.1 3.1 2.5 0.9 0.5 1.99 2.30 15.4

08-09 LAC 78 65 34.3 0.456 0.389 0.854 0.6 2.0 2.6 2.8 1.0 0.4 2.10 2.20 16.1

by Takebb909 on Sep 9, 2009 7:52 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Let me say that I am a big kobe hater, but trying to compare EJ to kobe is unfair. EJ doesn’t quite have the upside that kobe had a the same age due to height and skillset. Kobe was pretty much unstoppable going to the rim but didn’t have a outside shot while still putting up these numbers. Sure EJ is very good driving in, but it is just not the same.

http://www.clipperscurse.com/

by ClippersCurse on Sep 9, 2009 5:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm just worried

about the sophomore slump…

…we were pretty high on AT before last year too.

by Newtybar on Sep 9, 2009 9:06 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Yes and No...

Yes we were high on Al (though I don’t think we were this high); yes, the sophomore slump is something to be concerned about (though, unlike Mayo, he showed no drop off on the second time through the league last season, didn’t hit the wall, etc.)

But what really sets him apart is the efficiency, which is the exact opposite of Thornton. Al is the classic high volume scorer – he can score in bunches, but puts up a ton of shots to do so (TSP of .504 as a rookie, .502 last season, which frankly is terrible). The big step is the one to efficiency – and some guys never take it. EJ doesn’t have to take it, so it puts him far ahead of the curve.

(I think I may be onto something with this idea of tracking TSP. Kevin Durant as a rookie – TSP of .519. Second season, .577. It may be the best indicator of players getting to the proverbial next level.)

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 Sep 9, 2009 9:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

A Few Thoughts

Great post. So nice to talk about something positive and real during the continuing dog days. The Sessions Question kept us going for a long time, most of it fumes, and obviously thinking about the intricacies of Tim Thomas’ long strange trip through the NBA isn’t fun. But Eric Gordon always seems to be good news.

The analysis of TSP is great, and the breakdown shows just how effective Gordon can be, especially when he’s playing a role on a team with a bunch of weapons. It’s interesting that we—primarily KA, of course—had to beat the drum to get people to notice just how good Gordon was last year, and it seems like sometimes we focused on his defense and his primary weakness, rebounding. But the fact is that he is just a great shooter.

The other good comparison for efficiency and TSP is our old pal Maggs. It was always fun to see those crazy Maggs lines, 23 points on 8 shots. But it’s more interesting to compare the differences: Gordon is a vastly superior shooter than Maggs, which is a huge difference. And he also doesn’t seem to be the kind of player who is going to bull to the basket expecting to get bailed out, or picking up charging fouls. Gordon seems to have similar strength to Maggette, although in a smaller package, but better body control and much better court sense. He passes the ball and has a solid handle, unlike Maggs.

But the “Maggettification,” in a good way, of Gordon was evident in summer league. It was amazing how few 3 point and perimeter shots he took—he was just going to the basket time after time, and ended up going to the line with Maggs-like frequency. He also hits virtually all of his free throws. His strength, penetration, and ability to get to the line could be the thing that separates him from a Ray Allen type—and that’s saying something.

He’s not Brandon Roy. Man, Brandon Roy is good. Just needed to mention that, to keep the analysis earthbound. But as SP notes, Gordon isn’t 21 yet, and Roy played 4 years at Washington. So Gordon has some time.

The other thing I wanted to mention here is the way that the G Force factors into the Clippers future. I was listening to Bill Simmons podcast yesterday, where he and Chad Ford spent most of their time breaking down Minnesota and Rubio, but they covered all kinds of stuff. A good ways into it they started talking about LeBron and next year and his free agency, and Simmons started making the case, with complete seriousness, that the Clippers are clearly the best option for LeBron—and Ford agreed with him. I can’t break it down adequately, but the gist of it is the LA market combined with young talent (Gordon, Griffin, etc.) and vets (BD) and a potential big time Laker-Clipper rivalry.

I would add that the genuine hard run that the Clippers made at Kobe suggests that the Clips would at least go after LeBron in earnest. It makes it that much more important that the Clips play well this season, make the playoffs, and establish credibility for the future.

I don’t know, with the variety of offseason moves, if the Clips can still clear capspace to make a run at LeBron—they’d probably have to move Kaman, right? And I’m not sure what Al Thornton does for you on a team with LeBron. Maybe somebody else can figure that out.

But it’s certainly the type of discussion that we’re not used to hearing in the Nation, and the whole thing starts with Eric Gordon.

by citizen zhiv on Sep 9, 2009 11:19 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Cap space

Good post.

I think you are right on with cap space. Clips would need to move either Kaman or BD, and one would expect AT is included in the deal as sweetener.

by Michael White on Sep 9, 2009 11:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Star FA

I’ve got to think that management agrees with your sentiment that there’s at least a shot at Lebron, and it’s worth taking. From what we could piece together with all the Sessions rumors, it sounded like they were willing to pay him $4 mil, but on a 1 year deal.

There are only 2 guys next summer worth throwing a MAX contract at – Lebron and Wade (no I don’t think Bosh is worth a MAX contract b/c he’s not a #1 guy). Wade and Gordon obviously wouldn’t fit (though if they had a crack at him, they’d probably have to take it right?) so it would have to be Lebron.

I think it’s a REAL long shot, but stranger things have happened, and it would take a ballsy move like that to really turn this franchise around.

Can you imagine Lebron’s legacy if he turned the lowly Clippers into NBA Champs? That might be the only way he could surpass Jordan. It’s nice to dream.

by madglove on Sep 9, 2009 11:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

LeBron makes sense

We have young talent (+BD) at every position except Small Forward in Gordon, Griffin, & DeAndre. Yes, DeAndre could be a stretch, but imagine a starting 5 with those 4 guys and LeBron?

What better situation could he hope for while getting max money. It’s not with the Knicks or Nets. The main problem is stigma and DTS, but hopefully the potential is enticing enough, and if he has the balls to go up against Kobe in the same city.

by ghost_ride on Sep 9, 2009 12:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

LeBron makes sense

on almost any team…

The only problem with signing the guys is we have to give up all our expiring contracts, trade away 1 or 2 players, and not sign anyone else (at least to a large contract)

That means we would have a team of 6-8 players (depending on if AT is also salary dump traded and if Novak’s contract will be more than 1 year) + LeBron
…its also possible that Bassy opts out so -1 to that range

LeBron is an all-around talent and needs to play with at least some (role) players

If LeBron has all the money…then we need to find anywhere between 3-6 additional players on minimum contracts/exceptions (assuming we keep our 1st round 2010 pick)

We will have a heck of a starting line-up…but where is the bench?

…this argument can also work for Wade or any other player you want to through MAX money at next offseason

by KidJustin on Sep 9, 2009 1:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

MAX Money

Don’t forget Max money is 20% of the cap. You can have a Max player and put talent around them, so obviously there would be some tough decisions (get rid of BD, Kaman, or both), but well worth entertaining if LeBron is interested in coming here. That’s what it’s about. Where he wants to go and who’s in a cap position to get it done financially. No one’s saying this is likely to happen, but the potential is there.

by ghost_ride on Sep 10, 2009 6:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

This year is crucial

I’ll note that it wasn’t me talking or thinking about LeBron and the Clips—it was Bill Simmons and Chad Ford.

And I’ll reiterate that it seems that this upcoming season is absolutely crucial to this scenario. The Clips have to show legitimacy and showcase the talent and stability that would make them a viable destination, and then they have to show the man the money.

But they can’t stumble and be mediocre this year. Can’t get ahead of ourselves.

The Simmons podcast is well worth listening to, for this section. They talk about OKC and Durant, building a base of young players.

by citizen zhiv on Sep 9, 2009 12:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yup...

I listened to that podcast as well, and I was struck by how much I agreed with Simmons and Ford… I don’t think many of us around here think much of their opinions. But not only were they spot on about how mutually beneficially it might be if James were to sign with the Clippers, I also totally agreed with them regarding David Kahn’s complete misplay of the draft. Definitely worth the time.

by swamigusto on Sep 9, 2009 1:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ralph Lawler

has openly dreamed of Lebron as well on his Twitter and FB pages. He’s clarified that he has no inside info, just his own speculation. But obviously it’s on everyone’s minds. And I highly doubt Lawler really came up with it all on his own and didn’t share it with anyone else on the team.

The bottom line is that it’s been a rumbling around media types for the last few months. The question is whether Lebron really has an interest in leaving Cleveland, and whether he wants to be in LA. He’s clearly a NY fan (Yankees) but who knows. He could shock the world and sign with the Clips. Talk about crazy dreaming.

I usually hate this sort of pipe dream speculation, but if ever there was a guy to dream about, Lebron is it.

I totally agree with zhiv that this year is crucial. Making a playoff run and maybe even advancing a round would go a long way towards creating hype for this team and putting them back on the national radar. If the pitch is “You can get media market AND wins here in LA” then they have to prove it on the floor.

by madglove on Sep 9, 2009 1:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Maybe this needs a whole new post...

Maggette is actually the poster child for points per shot, a different, less useful metric than TSP, in my opinion. PPS just takes the total points and divides by the field goal attempts – so free throws are all numerator in that equation. TSP on the other hand figures that free throws are used possessions, and that two free throws is usually about the same as one more field goal attempt (it actually uses .44, not .5, to account for and ones and technical free throws that actually aren’t extra possessions). So Maggette is ALWAYS among the league leaders in PPS, but his TSP is less gaudy. As a case in point, last season:

Maggette 1.5 PPS, .582 TSP (still great);
Gordon 1.39 PPS, .593 TSP

Lots of free throws still drives your TSP way up (assuming you make a good percentage), but it makes your PPS skyrocket. Interestingly, a site like basketball reference ignores PPS, even though they have a million stats, while ESPN.com lists PPS and eFG but doesn’t have TSP anywhere – just illustrates how little consensus there is on what’s important.

As for LeBron (1) by my math, they have to make another move to have enough room to sign him; (2) the big market, big rivalry, big turnaround Clippers/LeBron story is compelling, and certainly as compared to a Knicks team of Danilo Gallinari and Jordan Hill and… and… and… nothing else, the Clippers offer the most compelling combination of big market and good young talent (New Jersey has some nice pieces as well). But unless LeBron just doesn’t like the weather, I’m still not clear on why he leaves Cleveland. Isn’t he big enough to transcend geography? Does he really get significantly bigger in LA? This is LeBron James we’re talking about. He creates his own media market.

I think he stays in Cleveland.

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 Sep 9, 2009 1:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yup

Don’t mean to hijack the post with different strands. But…

Good to note the difference between PPS and TSP. Just has to be good to be a leader in either of those categories, right? And the main difference, as I mentioned above, is that Gordon is a great shooter, while Maggs isn’t.

On LeBron, one of the points that Simmons makes pretty clearly is a distinction between what he might call the Cleveland model and the OKC model (although he doesn’t allow himself to say the words OKC).

The Cleveland model is bringing in new vet FAs or making trades and shuffling around a player here or there to complement LeBron. This year, it’s Shaq. I’m not sure what the history is over the last few years, but the point is that LeBron plays on a team where it’s just him and a bunch of other guys, none of whom is significant enough to pull any sort of focus away from him. The problem with this catch-as-catch-can model is that it’s not building a strong, long-lasting unit.

There are lots of obvious examples of championship teams with Star 1 and Star 1A, but fewer led by just Star 1 and “spare parts.” The main one is Jordan and Pippen. A young Shaq complemented by Kobe is a good example. Bird with McHale, along with Parish and DJ. Magic with Kareem and Worthy. KG with Pierce and Allen. Kobe with Pau and Odom.

Kareem in Milwaukee may be the best example for LeBron in Cleveland. He won a title with a complementary aging star in Oscar Robertson. But when Oscar was done, there were no new stars or titles on the horizon in Milwaukee. Kareem decided to go to the big market and return to LA. Did he (and Jerry West) know that they had a couple of ridiculously high picks coming in the next couple of years? Shaq moving from Orlando to LA may be an even better example, because he was in his early prime, while Kareem seemingly moved after he had reached his midpoint. Just like when Bill Walton went to the Clippers… oh, wait. That one didn’t work, did it.

The OKC model, by contrast, is forming a crew of young players around a star (Kevin Durant), allowing them to build something together. The question is whether Harden, Westbrook, and Green can support and emerge along with Durant. There are other versions of the same mix elsewhere, in Portland, or you can break down the Tim Duncan (first David Robinson, then Ginobili and Parker) approach.

The Clips seem to be the only team offering both big market and talented young players. Chad Ford mentioned Chicago, which Simmons hadn’t really considered: LeBron and Derrick Rose.

But as far as “creating his own weather/market,” the value of the LA market (vs. Cleveland) is another thing that will be put to the test this year. It will be interesting to see if 1) the Clips can compete and 2) how a player like Blake Griffin plays in Lakertown. Again, Baron Davis is a critical factor. BD has the hometown pedigree and street cred and he can make a winning, competitive Clips team a hot ticket and create a decent-sized bandwagon, one with momentum heading into the future. But it’s got to happen on the court first. If BD can play really well, show leadership and win games, if he can help Griffin and Gordon and others get after it, the dominos could start to fall.

by citizen zhiv on Sep 9, 2009 2:59 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

Like SP said, probably deserves its own post

But then again, I think we’ve gone over all of this before anyway.

To the best of my knowledge, Lebron’s max contract will be limited to 105% of the last year of his previous contract ($15,779,912 in 09-10). That puts him at $16,568,907. Unless I’m mistaken and the raise is 10.5% (a number which gets thrown around a lot here). Then it becomes $17,436,802 (regardless, I’m pretty sure he can’t make more than that last number).

Anyway, in 2010, the Clippers will exercise their team option on Eric Gordon, and Telfair will exercise his player option, putting the Clips at $36,278,349 (btw I’m getting all these numbers from hoopshype.com so blame them if the numbers are wrong). Now if the cap drops to the more optimistic level of 53.6 million, the Clippers would have 17.3 million to spend on Lebron, which is essentially his max. As for renouncing both Thornton and Collins, I’m sure none of us would mind swapping them for Lebron. The Clips could easily explain that they’d renounce them (and their mid-level and bi-annual exceptions) once Lebron agreed to come over (that was part of FElton’s negotiating process with Philly). Again, I’m pretty sure all of us would take Lebron + 6 minimum-salary players to fill out the roster (especially since veterans often take less money to come to championship teams – see Boston, 2007). Of course, this approach would require the Clippers to either trade their first round pick or draft someone overseas (and tell the pick to stay where they are).

If the cap falls any lower, they’d have to trade either Davis or Kaman for a smaller or expiring contract.

As for our allure, one thing that Ford pointed out was that there aren’t any good, young players on the Cavs (other than Mo Williams) who Lebron can “grow old with.” On the Clippers, there are two (and I think all of us would argue that they’re both better than Mo).

by d2s4ui1 on Sep 9, 2009 6:05 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

Well done by zhiv and d2s4ui1...

…both describing and expanding on Simmon’s Lebron theory. Who says September’s dull?

by swamigusto on Sep 9, 2009 6:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Here's the big problem....

Your numbers are pretty solid, but the common mistake (I make it a lot myself) is that it doesn’t take into consideration ‘roster charges’ for open roster spots. From the FAQ, one of the items used to calculate a team’s total salary is:

A roster charge if the team has fewer than 12 players (players under contract, free agents included in team salary, players given offer sheets, and first round draft picks). The roster charge is equal to the rookie minimum salary for each player below 12. The roster charge only applies during the offseason.

That rookie minimum in 2010 will be $473,604, and your $36M number appears to be for Davis, Kaman, Gordon, Griffin, Telfair and Jordan. That leaves the team 6 open spots below the 12, so that’s another $2.8M.

Of course, we don’t even know for certain what the salary cap is going to be, but even in the most optimistic projections (which I’ll admit seem pretty pessimistic) I can’t come up with enough money to offer a $17M contract. So someone still has to be moved.

(By the way, Telfair’s contract will look a lot worse if it ends up being the difference between a max offer and not.)

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 Sep 10, 2009 1:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

My bad

Haha you must get tired of me making cap mistakes.

Telfair shouldn’t make a difference – if Lebron agrees to come over, we can for sure bribe a team to take Telfair’s contract off our hands. Two future #1s for Lebron would be a no-brainer.

by d2s4ui1 on Sep 10, 2009 9:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Good anlysis.

One thing though, the timing of renouncing players and exceptions doesn’t quite work that way. Renouncing the rights to the exceptions and Thornton have to be done BEFORE the free agent period opens. So unless you have this “wink wink” deal with Lebron, which isn’t likely so early on in the process, that’s a huge risk. Especially giving away an asset like Thornton. The exceptions are a no brainer for cap space, and Collins is a small price, but you can’t just renounce Thornton on the hopes that you’ll get Lebron. You could very well end up with nobody and you just threw a lottery pick in the garbage.

And you’re right that his max contract is 105% of his previous contract.

by madglove on Sep 10, 2009 12:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Also

Looking at this again, it strikes me that the Clips would end up having the very high class—and very expensive—problem of paying the luxury tax to keep the core together. Landing LBJ in a max contract and putting him on a team with Eric Gordon, Blake Griffin, Baron Davis, and DJordan is just the first step. You’d have to pay Gordon a lot of money in a couple of years, and Blake Griffin even more the year after that. You would probably dump Baron along the way, as he heads towards the end of his deal, but the big expense for LBJ is only the first of the big checks.

But a team like that would be making gobs of money. It’s impossible to comprehend or imagine, really. A bizarro Clipper universe.

by citizen zhiv on Sep 10, 2009 2:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Cleveland?!

I think he wants out of the small town atmosphere, and actually there’s somewhat of a culture of losing in Cleveland. Take Ohio State, Cavs, Indians, Browns…there’s just not much of a history of champions. Plus, he doesn’t seem like much of a booster for Cleveland being scene with Yankee and Cowboy hats in public.

He’s been on the record of saying he wants to be the first billionaire athlete. A larger market would help support that goal.

If you were a college aged kid, wouldn’t you finally want to uproot yourself away from home?

He may in fact want to stay, but my money’s the other way. New Jersey (Jay-Z connection) & New York (largest American market, international appeal) are probably the front runners, though we could be players for sure.

by ghost_ride on Sep 10, 2009 6:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ohio State football has 7 national championships and 33 Big Ten Championships.

by Michael White on Sep 10, 2009 7:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Good Catch

I meant Ohio State lately, or during LeBron’s adult life.

by ghost_ride on Sep 19, 2009 11:15 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

People would think the Clippers were crazy aiming for Lebron...

…but I hope we do it.

If Lebron is even remotely, remotely available you have to take a run at him. Simple as that.

If LBJ wants to win championships and be in one of the biggest markets then the Clips are the only choice.

If the Cap is at $53M and we decline Al Thorton’s team option next year I think we’ll have almost $17m to spend… but I am not sure about cap holds and all that.

by DariusN on Sep 9, 2009 8:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs