Clippers 101 - Milwaukee 93 - Victory Courtesy of ESPN
by Steve Perrin on Mar 17, 2010 11:05 PM PDT
in Game Recaps
Email
PrintYou can thank ESPN and Kevin Arnovitz for the win tonight. As we mentioned in the comments of the preview, this game was on the worldwide leader tonight because the Bucks are the hottest team in basketball. And for that same reason, ESPN.com sent their crack NBA editor Arnovitz to cover the game - from the Bucks' perspective. The lede of the story was of course going to be "Bucks Use Stingy D to Win 13th Game in Last 14." Unfortunately, the Clippers shot 53% against the hottest team in basketball and stomped all over the story. So thank you Daily Dime.
It was an entertaining game to be sure. I have to give the Clippers and Kim Hughes credit - although they looked completely cooked during the road trip, they have given excellent effort in two straight games, which is not what we were expecting moving into the final four weeks of the season.
After a deadlocked first quarter, the game went in surges. The Clippers were +9 in the second, the Bucks +11 in the third, the Clippers +10 in the fourth. In both the second and fourth, the Clipper advantage was keyed by the second unit. Interestingly, none of them finished with spectacular numbers - 26 bench points, 8 for 17 shooting. But make no mistake, those guys keyed the win.
The Clippers worked on a zone defense in practice yesterday and broke it out for the fourth quarter. Honestly, I was unimpressed at first. The Bucks missed a couple of wide open corner threes which is a shot that every coach in the NBA wants. But something else was definitely going on with that zone. The Clippers were just incredibly active - much more active than we're used to. When the Bucks ran a nice ball reversal to free Bogut up underneath, it looked like an easy dunk - but Travis Outlaw came out of nowhere to smother it. The Clippers finished with five steals and four blocked shots in the fourth quarter alone, which is just amazing (they had eight and eight for the game). And I have no idea how many more deflections they had. Zone or man-to-man - if you're active on defense and you get your hands on the ball, good things happen. Steve Blake played all 12 minutes of the fourth - and was terrific. He had three assists, two steals - and three rebounds! Outlaw looked much more under control than he has lately.
As you may have read in my in game notes on the open thread, I was dubious when Hughes brought Kaman and Baron back into the game with 7:04 left. The unit on the floor had opened on a 12-2 run - I didn't see why he would mess with that. But Kaman scored six of the Clippers final 15 points, including a massive bucket inside of three minutes, making Hughes look very good indeed.
Kaman bounced back nicely from his seven game slump to score 20 points, adding to his own 20wo30 NBA record. He shot 8 for 13 in the game after going 3 for 15 on Monday night. Eric Gordon also bounced back, at least from deep - he made 2 of 4 threes after missing all 7 threes on Monday.
Baron had a terrific start, but did not end up with his best game of late. He scored 10 first quarter points - and finished with 14. He also had 5 turnovers to offset his 7 assists. But he was clearly into the game and hustling - he just wasn't his sharpest. He also took a couple of pretty nasty whacks in the game. Through it all, he finished shooting better than 50% (6 for 11) for the fourth straight game - the first time he's done that as a Clipper. I spoke to Neil Olshey for awhile in the fourth quarter, and he went out of his way to praise Baron for the way he's been playing lately. It certainly does go against the type casting - isn't he the guy who doesn't care this much?
The Clippers continue to be a decent home team, improving to 19-15. The first step in becoming a good team is becoming a decent home team. With seven home games left on the schedule starting Sunday against the Kings, we may have a few reasons to cheer yet this season.
31 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Nice bounce back game
fun game to watch from beginning to end. I hope Baron’s injury isn’t too bad but thankfully for him, we don’t play tell Sunday.
LeBron or Bust !!!!
screw tanking,,,,, we can finish the year strong and we can find a nice wing in the draft if we dont sign the marquee FAs
there are a couple of kids playing in West Virginia that would fit in nicely with our squad.
Devin Ebanks or Rasual’s brother Da’sean!
I don't believe in tanking...
and no one can ever convince me that it’s a good thing either. First off, the lottery and draft is a crapshoot, and there are no guarantees. Knowing the Clips’ own draft history, that’s especially true. If you do the proper scouting, you can find those hidden gems in the middle to late first round, and the entire second round. The Spurs and Jazz have shown how it can be done, and the Clips need to take some of that approach too. We gotta develop our young guys better, and bring in the right veterans and coaches.
by Shawn H on Mar 18, 2010 10:08 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
On tanking
No one, I don’t think, “believes” in tanking. At best it’s a question of a couple of games at the very end of the season that might make a significant difference. Talking about tanking is really just a psychological strategy for following a hopeless team at the end of the season and talking about the future. It gives a meaning to losses, but it’s always more fun to win.
by citizen zhiv on Mar 18, 2010 10:49 AM PDT up reply actions
I definitely believe in tanking this year
The Clippers would be foolish not to tank right now given this is a lost season anyways. We can slip as low as the 4th or 3rd spot as long as we stop winning games. It’s all about building the long term future — Gordon, Turner, Griffin sounds good, but Wall, Gordon, Griffin sounds even better. A top 3 spot is within reach as long as the Clippers do their part.
As proof that tanking works, talk to the Spurs.
by bballanalyst on Mar 18, 2010 5:50 PM PDT up reply actions
How did they tank?
The admiral got hurt, no?
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
I can understand what you’re saying, but the difference is that even before the Spurs got Duncan (and I still believe to this day they tanked the season Robinson was out), they were always a fairly-successful franchise, just never had enough to get to a title. There’s been too much rebuilding when it comes to the Clips, and outside of a few years here and there, there isn’t been much of a payoff. I’m just saying there has to be a better committment, and that includes everybody…the players, coaches, and front office. If we’re paying good money to see our guys play, we deserve maximum effort, and for the last four years, I haven’t seen it, injuries or not.
by Shawn H on Mar 19, 2010 4:12 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Loved the win, was a solid game. If we don’t beat the kings by 15+ there’s something wrong. Baron looked very slow after that shooting foul in the 4th, hope all is well there
by Sam50 on Mar 18, 2010 5:19 AM PDT via mobile reply actions
Even with all of our flaws
We’d be a playoff team in the east, it makes me sick.
by The Blake Griffin Era on Mar 18, 2010 7:27 AM PDT via mobile reply actions
Probably not a playoff team in the East
The Clips are now 26-43, 12 and 30 in the West and 14 and 13 against the East. Let’s assume the 8th place finisher in the East ends up with a .500 record at 41-41. If the Clips were in the East, they would play 52 games against the East and 30 against the West. If you extrapolate the numbers, they would be 27 and 25 against the East and 9 and 21 against the West, giving them a record of 36 and 46, which would not be good enough to make the playoffs in either conference. Now, you might argue that they would have kept Camby and gotten another 4-5 wins. And, it might be an altogether different story with BG next season. But, it’s more likely that the Clips would have finished out of the playoffs in the East.
Right
If we really want to know why we are so far out of the playoffs all you have to do is look at our road record. 7-28, you need to get close to .500 if you want to make the playoffs.
FA in 2010.
by ClipperChuck on Mar 18, 2010 1:43 PM PDT up reply actions
Nice win
The Clippers own mediocre teams from the East at home. Milwaukee, Miami, Charlotte and Chicago— also home wins against crappy East teams in NJN and PHI, and one against Boston.
Not a great year overall, but it is nice to have solid showings on your home floor.
Just my opinion, but...
I think this would be a playoff team in San Antonio, Denver, or Utah, not just the East.
Ha. Same here. I gave up. I think he means that if Milwaukee were located in Texas (therefore making them in the Western Conference) they would be a playoff team.
Tough position to take considering their current record wouldn’t be good enough to be in the top 8 in the West, and as madglove pointed out yesterday, their record against the West is garbage.
by Michael White on Mar 18, 2010 11:59 AM PDT up reply actions
I meant the Clippers...
I was responding to The Blake Griffin Era’s post saying the Clips would be a playoff contender in the East.
I honestly believe if you put this same Clip roster on, say, San Antonio, or Denver… one of the better organizations… they would win around 45 games.
Chaos, tanking, losing-is-ok, bad ownership… Injuries and excuses… I think the organization is more of a problem than the players. Case in point – Lebron gets to pick his own coach / GM? Is that how successful organizations go about the business of winning? Do you think the Celtics would ever allow that?
by TheCasualFan on Mar 18, 2010 8:27 PM PDT up reply actions
Well...
Magic Johnson got Paul Westhead fired. I guess most people think of coaches as the boss of the players but that’s not necessarily true, as star players are worth far more (contractually, box office appeal) than all coaches. Has any team blatantly allowed a player to pick their own coach? None that I can think of BUT then again how many Lebron type players in their prime in free agency have their been? That answer has to be be close to none.
FA in 2010.
by ClipperChuck on Mar 18, 2010 9:32 PM PDT up reply actions
Hey look at that
Bucks really limited the Clippers’ offensive rebounds, thus limiting their FGA, but unfortunately for the Bucks they can’t keep their hands to themselves and handed over 20 extra FTA.
So weird.
Coaches don't matter. - Bill Simmons, The Book of Basketball
Pretty good game
I thought that the Kaman-Bogut matchup would be fun to watch, but I didn’t expect to get as much entertainment as we did from BDavis vs. BJennings.
Watching the Bucks last night makes you wonder, how did that team just win all of those games? We know the Clippers are very beatable, so it was nice to see that they were still capable of competing. And the funny thing is that they were primed for they typical 3rd quarter/second half collapse after Jennings got hot. He looked great when he was on his run.
The Clippers looked downright formidable. EGordon didn’t have a great game, but he hit a couple of 3s and he did a great job on Jennings at the outset, and you can see that he makes a big difference to the team and the rotation. Obviously, the Gordon/Kaman vs. the Bucks was completely different from the way that tandem played against the Hornets.
The loser for the evening was Deandre Jordan—and who cares? At this point it’s becoming clear that it’s going to be tough to get Kaman going and get DJordan beefy minutes. Even tougher when Gooden and CSmith are playing well. I was wondering if DJordan should be starting alongside Kaman, but Gooden hit some shots and played well enough that he changed my mind.
Also amusing that Milph went all the way back to the Phoenix game, early in the long losing streak and after the Clips had a brief string of home wins, when I think it was Steve Kerr was saying that the Clips would have been really good if they had this team all year. Meaning Gooden-Blake-Outlaw instead of Camby-Thornton-Telfair. I don’t know about that, and it was strange to say it after the Clips have been playing so poorly for so long. It seems like having Eric Gordon healthy is much more important.
The Clippers are just a very strange team.
It takes time to jell
Keep in mind the Gooden-Blake-Outlaw project was only a month old, and I am not sure Coach Hughes qualified as “new” interim head coach, but it takes time to develop chemistry and learn the system. Steve Kerr has the special vision perhaps seeing the big picture.
Clippers off season to do list:
1) Hire Mark Warkentien (denver’s FA gm).
2) Let him choose the coach.
3) Trade Baron and our ‘10 pick for Andre Iguodala and Jrue holliday..
4) Re-sign Blake, Rhino and Butler.
‘10-’11 clippers line up
PG- Jrue Holliday / Steve Blake
SG- Eric Gordon / Butler
SF- Iguodala / Butler
PF- Blake Griffin / Craig Smith
C- Kaman / D.J.
Hmm
I actually prefer Baron to Iggy as odd as that might sound. It’s hard to find a good PG in the league. Holliday has had a decent run recently as the starter for Philly but not sold on him being a starting PG yet.
FA in 2010.
by ClipperChuck on Mar 18, 2010 5:50 PM PDT up reply actions
I agree...
Baron Davis is really good. He’s really big and strong for a pg, he’s incredibly deft with a basketball, he can hit a big shot, and he’s a seriously skilled defender. He’s really perfect next to Eric Gordon, an undersized two-guard. He’s way better (right now) than Jrue Holliday, though Holliday certainly has upside.
The problem with Baron is threefold: his ego, his salary, and our own expectations. Forget the salary, he’s overpaid, but it’s not really that bad, his ego can probably be controlled and diminished by good coaching and the confidence that will come with having one or two better teammates, and our expectations are repaired by a better record.
The Clippers challenge is simple: find one or two better players (Griffin is probably one) and pick a really good coach.
The result is a better Baron.
good points..
I just think that Eric Gordon needs to be featured more in the offense. I think EJ gets too passive with Baron on the floor, deffering to Baron too much. I dont kow about you but I’d rather have EJ shoot that Baron. I actually think he plays better with Blake, because Blake deffers to Eric. A Holliday (19yrs) and EJ (21yrs) combo would be a very tough defensive backcourt. Holliday(6’4) is actually taller than Baron(6’3) and from UCLA (he knows how to paly D). As for Iguodala, he actually has good numbers for a SF( 17ppg 6.7 rpg 5.8 apg) as aposed to Baron (15.2 ppg 3.4 rpg 8 apg ). 2pts and 3rebs’s more while only 1.2 ast more.
Holliday and UCLA
Holliday doesn’t have the same UCLA defensive credentials as Collison, Affalo, LRMAM and Restbwook. Apparently part of the reason he didn’t return as a sophomore, even though he knew he would have become a top pick, was that he didn’t want to go through another year playing for Howland and his defense-heavy approach.
Still, he’s very athletic and talented and young, but you don’t want too many young players.
by citizen zhiv on Mar 19, 2010 3:34 PM PDT up reply actions
Um, Collison has no defensive credentials
And there’s no bigger UCLA homer than me. He’s too small to guard anyone. See Derrick Rose.
I also don’t think Holiday left because he would have had to play defense. He’s a great defender. Unlike Collison. The problem was I think that he didn’t like Howland’s pedestrian-style offense. It isn’t very helpful to players trying to get better. So he didn’t need to improve his defense and he wasn’t going to learn offense from Howland.
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
Um yea that UCLA turns out a bunch of bums
Jordan Farmar, Aaron Affalo, Trevor Ariza, Kevin Love, Darren Collison and Russell Westbrook. Yea all those guys are terrible.
Pretty sure you didn’t do any research on your statement Jax, Collison was a good defender in college, he got destroyed by Derrick Rose but Derrick Rose is one of the best college PGs in awhile and was much bigger than Collison (not to mention that was one game). He even led the Pac-10 in steals once and was named to a number of all-defensive teams.
Holliday left because he didn’t like Howland’s system (both offense and defense) and because he went into UCLA as a blue chip prospect (many considered him the next Derrick Rose) and UCLA had a awful year and he was concerned it would hurt his draft prospects if he stayed another year and the team struggled again. He also did terrible in pre-draft workouts and was on most lists as a potential bust.
FA in 2010.
by ClipperChuck on Mar 20, 2010 8:24 PM PDT up reply actions
No need to argue about UCLA my man
You misread my posts. I love Collison and UCLA.. I just disagree with you about his defense. What I’m talking about is really based on his lack of size and physicality, not his quickness. We don’t disagree about why he left. Not sure what you mean by potential bust. Most draft picks are potential busts. He went 19th.
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
Holliday was the 17th pick
and he was even being considered in the top ten (which why he was on most people’s bust list). He ended up falling a bit (I think he was the last one in the Green Room).
You can ignore the fact and say he wasn’t good at defense, of course your are arguing against a pool of voters who picked him on their all-defensive teams in addition to his steal numbers.
FA in 2010.
by ClipperChuck on Mar 21, 2010 4:35 PM PDT up reply actions
Agreed
It’s pretty complex, and the Baron factor as part of the Clippers equation has only become more nuanced over the course of his second season. I think you’ve got the gist of it down exactly right.
First off, I give BD tons of credit for working hard and getting his game back to the necessary high level. He didn’t take any shortcuts. It’s a bit sad that he’s going to have to work just as hard and even harder in the upcoming offseason, but he’s got a routine and he gets paid a lot of money. It should be interesting to see if the level of summer commitment changes with Dunleavy gone. it shouldn’t, because it’s absolutely necessary.
You’re right, BD and Gordon make for a strong backcourt, and they complement each other pretty well. Gordon can defend the quicker, smaller guards and BD can handle the SGs for the most part. They’re still at a disadvantage against the longer SGs, but Gordon seems to do okay. While they complement each other, it does seem at times as if BD can do a better job of finding Gordon and getting him shots, and he seems to be more focused on feeding Kaman. But it’s not a glaring problem.
The downside to BD is that he is only a complementary player, and he doesn’t take over games and win them on his own. When there is good team play and momentum, when he has a lot of help, he gets excited and generally rises to the occasion, and he becomes a good lightning rod and leader in those situations. But the Clippers were only firing on all cylinders for brief stretches this season, and they were always short BGriffin, and BD’s play wasn’t strong enough to generate victories and build momentum on its own.
Looking back at the success of GSW, it makes you appreciate Stephen Jackson and Jason Richardson. BD is good at managing weapons and becomes a weapon himself, but it doesn’t happen unless he’s part of strong team. Perhaps he’s getting more out of Eric Gordon than we notice and realize, because the Clippers are so much better when Gordon is in the lineup. And the Clippers have no player equivalent to Stephen Jackson. It seems like Kaman 3.0-Camby should have been enough, along with Butler, Thornton, and Craig Smith, but it just wasn’t.
As sg notes, with one or two more players (I would say that Griffin is definitely one), BD will have the options that he needs, and that will in turn make him a better player. A good coach would be an important factor, but we know now that simply getting rid of Dunleavy didn’t solve everything.
by citizen zhiv on Mar 19, 2010 3:29 PM PDT up reply actions
It used to happen
He’s just getting older. So every year he becomes more and more of a complimentary player and less and less the go to guy. The problem there is that he’s getting paid to be the man and will be paid to be the man for THREE MORE YEARS.
We always knew that getting rid of MDSr didn’t solve everything (whoever said it was – seems like a strawman).
However, it’s a start. It’s a start from a GM perspective because hopefully they will land someone who actually can sign good players who compliment each other.
It’’s a start from a coaching perspective because you need a good coach to have a chance to win.
Yes Stephen Jackson is a good underrated player.
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
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
- Days of NBA Lives: Wherein Roy Hibbert tap-dances to Maine
- Grizzlies Valentine’s Day cards are the key to love
- Kevin Love would like the NBA to take the MLB’s approach on All-Star games
- Kobe Bryant fires a few hilarious salvos at Jeremy Lin
- Brandon Jennings states the obvious regarding his 2014 free agency, everyone goes nuts
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.
