Workouts! The Clippers Look at Some Wings

I think Gordon Hayward would fit in nicely on this team. 8th pick still seems a bit high for him so either moving down or acquiring another pick would be ideal, but the Clippers could definitely use more players with a winning attitude. The guy is clutch and will play all out every game which is something that can be overlooked for the “tangibles”.

I mean, this is not the NBA – the one time I can remember recently that one player carried the load for a college team and brought them a title was Melo at Syracuse.

Indiana, for instance, has a 10th and a 40th. That looks the most ideal for us. I don’t know if they’d be interested.

The Bucks have a 15th, a 47th, and a 57th. I bet at least a couple of those four wings would still be there mid first round.

The point being, with a draft deep in 2nd tier talent, we could pick up an extra player (or two) without that guaranteed money issue.

Babbitt – 50/40/90. Young. Durable. Good athlete. Rebounds well. Gets to the line a lot. Dominated conference (albeit weak). My choice.
Henry – SG. Young. Shoots well. Not a SF. Do not want.
Hayward – Thin. Nonathletic. Terrible 3 shooter. Do not want.
George – Upside. Great dunker. Young. Poor jump shooter. Good FT shooter. Sorta want. Did not dominate same weak conference that Babbitt did.

So hard to choose. There’s so many variables to consider between the draft and FAs. If we manage to pick up a SF in free agency then is all this talk about drafting a SF reasonable?

Also, we have the bird rights to Butler and Outlaw, are they no longer a consideration for being brought back to the team next season? I know we’d like to get a stronger SF, but I really like the idea of Butler being the 6th man for this team, and if worst comes to worst, then he’s familiar enough with the team to start again.

That it is all

As the SF dilemma, free agency and #8 pick loom over us for the foreseeable future (until mid-July at the earliest), I keep wanting to compare what the Clips had versus what they might get. I like to think of it as solving the Al Thornton problem. It sure seemed, a couple of years ago, as if the Clips had solved the SF issue, that Thornton could take over where Maggette left off and improve the Clips status at the position. Maggette was flawed and, as it turns out, so was Thornton. I guess I look at it as an attempt to figure out if the player in question is going to be better than Thornton at the things Thornton wasn’t good at. Thornton seemed like a really good pick for a long period of time, over a year. So with any of these options, we might ask, would you take him instead of Thornton, knowing what we know now about Thornton?

I have to say that this improves Hayward’s stock. I’m extremely wary of him. Thornton’s glaring weaknesses were court sense and ball movement, defense and rebounding. His mid-range shot was very effective. D.J. Foster has a great breakdown of Hayward over at Clipperblog. In many ways, Hayward sounds like the anti-Thornton. He’s a very good ballhandler and passer. He’s not a lock down defender by any means, but he has good focus and energy. Most importantly, he rebounds very well, and as DJF notes, rebounding seems to translate well from college to the pros. As far as shooting goes, he shot very well as a freshman, and what the Clips need is some one who can knock down open looks (as well as make good decisions moving the ball).

The comparison to RButler may be more telling. Is Hayward more of a playmaker than Butler? Throwing Babbitt and George into the mix/comparison makes it even more complicated. Just have to wait and see.

but I’m afraid he’s going to be the next Bo Kimble… a tournament darling that seems fit for the pro’s but his spotlight burnt out with his one hand left free throw shooting.

1) Wingspan?
2) Performance in a short tournament featuring wild variations in opponent talent?
3) What school the player attended?
4) Performance over many games during a medium length season looking at stats that have been proven to translate to the NBA level?
5) Age?

Only two of these aren’t dumb.

Neither of those show up in a workout, unless they were checking birth certificates.

This guy had the goods and was completely shut down by Kyle Singler, a player who NBA Scouts deem weak on defense b/c of his lateral quickness. If Hayward can’t get by Singler, he can’t get by Beasley and he never plays D.

I’m more intrigued by Aminu, Johnson, Monroe, Babbitt and George at this time

Yes it was the first time in like 10 years or more the us won. But ther’s a bunch of guys that have played on that team and did well in the nba. Theres some like deron willams were it translated into greatness but there is a bunch of guys where it hasnt. The clippers very own DeAndre Jordan was on the team so was tranjdon landon the alaskan assassin. So saying he played on the team shouldnt be seen as someting great.Terrico White played on the very same team and is not getting as much love as heyward.Just like i said before it doesnt matter if his white or green. Long as he can hoop against pro’s and has passion for the game. The only way to test that with out him being on the team. Is to put him and the other prospects up against each other in competition and some of the clippers. Hell have some d league guys go up against them see if they have what it takes. If they cant hold their own against the D league guys who are trying out it means they shouldnt be on the team. Some of the guys that have been mentioned might just be work out warriors which doesnt always correlate to being good in the nba. Oh i forgot to mention paul davis was on a us team as well.

I’m still sold on Patrick Patterson. Athletic, scores well, very efficient, intelligent and hard worker. He has talent and experience. He can contribute right away at SF or PF. Trade down a few spots and grab him. Babbitt looks pretty impressive too. I’m not sold on Hayward or Henry.

Babbit seems like a beast waiting to be unleashed.

Lights out shooter with good athleticism and height for a SF.

The SF would be the same size as our PF!

On a side note, the front line of the clips would be Kaman, BG and Babbit/Hayward. Clips would be the whitest team in the NBA (not trying to get racial, just a funny observation, please don’t get crazy).

Personally if Johnson and Aminu are gone I think the Clips should either trade down and grab another pick to take Babbitt/Hayward/Henry + grab a PG like Collins or Bledsoe to help build towards the future. If we somehow win the Lebron sweepstakes things change, but this team needs depth and shooters. The other way to go is BPA which would hopefully be Monroe otherwise I’d be disappointed =(

Props to Steve for speaking his mind, even if it puts makes him persona non grata with the Clips organization.

The Clippers basically have three options:

(1) Take the best SF available
(2) Take the Best Player available
(3) Trade the pick for a later first round + an additional second round pick

Now in the NFL, taking the BPA often makes sense, because other than QB you need multiple contributors at each position. But in the NBA you generally need only one star at each of the five position types.

Also, in the NFL, trading down often makes sense because (b) teams below you are likely to have different positional needs, and (a) you can still pick up starters in later rounds. But non-lottery picks are very unlikely to become NBA starters— also, trading down is a lot riskier in the NBA, because the teams below you are more likely to have the same positional needs as you (since there are only 5 positions).

So I think the Clippers should definitely take the best SF available. Given that our four starters are all offensive threats, I think the most important factor is making sure whoever we get is capable of guarding top tier NBA small forwards. If Hayward’s capable of that kind of defense, then I think he would be ideal.

Anyway, I think the Clippers should take whoever they feel is the best SF left— even if it might be considered a reach. After all, if we have Player X ranked that high, then there’s a good chance some other team will too, making the risk of trading down not worth the small benefit of amassing a late pick.

Also, since there are fewer positions thus making it likely that team below you will have similar needs, it’s a lot harder to trade down and still get your guy

I am against trading down for three reasons