Suns Unsuccessfully Shopping Childress
The Suns have been unsuccessful in their attempts to trade forward Josh Childress, according to executives.
Phoenix signed Childress to a five-year, $33.5 million contract this past summer. He is averaging just 17 minutes per game.
Unbelievable - Childress could lead any team to the promised land.
over 1 year ago
Jax
498 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
i am betting a couple from CC or John R
don’t remember which was the one high on childress, should be fun watch another of those discussions.
Tons of people wanted Childress
including SP. Here’s a post about Childress (http://www.clipsnation.com/2010/7/12/1565811/josh-childress-for-less-than-the)
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 12:18 PM PST up reply actions
Again, not at that price
And the FO was right not to sign the guy at that price.
"[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.
LOL
changing up your story again eh? You weren’t concerned about the price back then, you said the team had no chance because of Babby. Lies lies lies.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 12:20 PM PST up reply actions
Everyone's concerned about price - except you
In any event, the guy sucks as you can see. You’ve been crying for months that the Clips suck because they did not sign this guy.
Not so much as it turns out. Sorry, but you were wrong.
"[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.
Right...
because Gomes was the right signing. Idiot.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 12:23 PM PST up reply actions
Your attempt at deflection won't work
You know not what you’re talking about. Childress is Exh. A
"[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.
Heh
Flattering I’m only on Exhibit A. You’ve already gone through the alphabet a few dozen times, this is just exhibit XYZ for you.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 12:26 PM PST up reply actions
Your attempt to attack the messenger won't work
You know not what you are talking about.
"[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.
Heh
Trust me, 90% of the board thinks you are clueless. I’ve been to CN events.. now that’s embarrassing for you.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 12:39 PM PST up reply actions
whatever dude
"[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 like you Jax
I don’t think you are clueless…I think we are all entitled to our own opinion.
I think Eric Gordon has been a top 5 SG this season and the MVP of the Clippers, I also thought he deserved to be an All Star over Blake Griffin, but I am sure many would disagree.
I'll throw you a life-vest
I like Eric Gordon more than Blake Griffin. EJ is my favorite Clipper right now and I root for him to be successful.
I made the argument once that EJ should have been an all-star over Griffin, but with EJ missing time it’s a tough pill to swallow.
by Michael White on Feb 16, 2011 3:28 PM PST up reply actions
Michael, Michael, Michael
EJ is not doing anything remarkable compared to what Griffin is doing.
Eric can be your favorite player if you want, but Blake is the CLEAR MVP of this team.
Do not worry. (Matthew 6:27)
My argument was based on positional premiums.
At the time I did it, EJ had the higher PER compared to his SG peers than Griffin had compared to his PF peers.
by Michael White on Feb 16, 2011 3:37 PM PST up reply actions
Right now
each is #5 at their respective position, with Blake’s being slightly higher.
I get that argument. I think playing with Blake has done wonders for Eric’s game.
Do not worry. (Matthew 6:27)
I think the complement each other well
and because of how limited much of the roster is they really need one another or they face ridiculous schemes to slow them down. Griffin has much more upside than EJ, you watch him and play and he has so many things he can improve on but he’s already a stud. EJ can still improve but he already had to take a big leap this year to get to Blake’s level.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 3:43 PM PST up reply actions
Sans EJ
Blake has been very productive.
Had there been more to the roster they wouldn’t be in such a drought.
BG is still producing in Eric’s absence.
Do not worry. (Matthew 6:27)
It’s gone down a bit though. I posted some numbers from February for BG in yesterday’s game recap.
by Michael White on Feb 16, 2011 3:48 PM PST up reply actions
Its mainly his shooting percentages right?
He’s been awful on the road (so home sick and EJ). I think his home/away numbers were already significantly different before EJ went down.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 3:52 PM PST up reply actions
Pretty much
What I wrote yesterday:
SP correcly notes that Baron is playing great basketball. I quickly calculated Baron’s TS% (feel free to test my math since I did it pretty haphazardly) for February and noticed a TS% of 55.8%, which is VERY good for Baron. The best he’s ever accomplished over a season was his second to last year in GSW where he posted a TS% of 53.0%. In February, Baron’s TS% is bolstered by hitting 40% of his 3PA and 93.1% from the free throw line. This is on top of averaging 8.3 APG, which is the best Baron has averaged in any month this year. No doubt, Baron is playing his best ball as a Clipper and he is LAC’s best offensive weapon at the moment.
Blake has indeed been struggling a little bit with his efficiency. His TS% in Februrary is down 49.5% (compared to a TS% of 54.6% for the year) while his usage has stayed about the same. It’s really tough to blame BG for the usage though. He’s not calling the plays and (without charting it) it seems like they are calling a lot more ISOs to BG to try and get a basket which isn’t really his game yet. That’s probably VDN trying to ride Blake with EG out, but Baron should be filling the EJ role as long as he stays hot. And other than Baron everybody else sucks so it’s not like there are good options to pass to. Passing out of a double team for a Cook 3PA is probably the only other decent option.
by Michael White on Feb 16, 2011 3:58 PM PST up reply actions
Oh no doubt
his biggest asset is his hustle and athleticism. He’ll get rebounds whether EJ is there or not. Its effecting his offense as he gets more double and triple teams and the other guys aren’t keeping the defenses honest.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 3:53 PM PST up reply actions
Nonsense
Blake is the MVP of this team.
EJ could be replaced MUCH faster than Blake. There are a handful of EJ’s in the NBA.
There are NO other Blakes.
Do not worry. (Matthew 6:27)
Is this like a “wow” factor thing with Blake, because from a basketball standpoint he is obviously replaceable for one season. His contract and age make him pretty much impossible to replace going forward, but I assume we were discussing just this year.
by Michael White on Feb 16, 2011 3:39 PM PST up reply actions
How is he obviously replaceable?
He is a very complete basketball player with great instincts, a great motor, great hustle, 2nd among PFs in assists…and he is the first rookie since who knows when to put up 22/12.
Oh, yeah, and there is also the WOW factor.
Do not worry. (Matthew 6:27)
Right, but as you point out above there are 4 other Blakes when ranked by PER. Not zero.
Sorry, guess I’m in a hair splitting mood today.
by Michael White on Feb 16, 2011 3:47 PM PST up reply actions
Love, Amare, Pau, Dirk
have higher PER. None have a higher upside.
Only Amare scores more than Blake, and only Love rebounds more. And Blake racks up more assists than both.
For ONE year, anybody except LeBron can be replaced.
Do not worry. (Matthew 6:27)
i know more than a couple wanted childress
hell i wanted him at a resonable price i just think you,John R and Jax are the only ones still willing to fight so hard for something that was decided in the offseason when you consider he had to agree to play with us.
Its not about Childress
Its about if Olshey knows what he is doing or not.
Exhibit A: Foye.
Not what this post is about,- nice deflection
"[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.
LOL
desperate for any help eh? Again someone doesn’t think he’s overpaid but that Childress didn’t want to sign here. Sorry no points for Olshey again.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 2:48 PM PST up reply actions
Methinks doth protest too much!!!
"[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 don't know what your point ever is
So I wouldn’t speak to it. But Childress is just one example of many of how Olshey failed.
Right - except for that nasty little fact that no other NBA teams are interested
either at that price. Doh
"[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.
LOL
Except as you conceded downthread, you don’t have any evidence of this fact.
Hey, so would you do Gomes for Childress straight up?
Just say no so we can all laugh at you some more.
can I point?
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 3:26 PM PST up reply actions
I will
And when I’m done laughing, I will have to ask…WHY?
Do not worry. (Matthew 6:27)
I can see a few reasons
Maybe he’s more interested in the strategy of surrounding Blake with shooters? It’s worked relatively well for D.Howard. Maybe he doesn’t think this is a down-year for Childress is a fluke? Maybe he likes Gomes’ attitude? Because I know I do. Cap flexibility after the 3rd year?
I’d still trade Gomes for Childress for my own reasons, but there are arguments on both sides of this that are certainly valid. It’s only 60-40 for me.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
Heh
you already admitted you don’t know this. No deal doesn’t mean he’s not tradeable. He is in fact very very tradeable. Shit, Gilbert Arenas and Rashard Lewis got traded. There are guys like Matt Carroll and Ryan Gomes getting paid similar money.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 3:12 PM PST up reply actions
I think that the lack of interest around the league says it all
"[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.
Sorry, I'll work on that
Problem is that the outcome has already been decided for us. No one wants the guy.
"[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.
Yah some people are eating alot of crow right about now
"[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.
Including you
you actually wanted J Chill too. Stick to your original excuse, that the Clippers couldn’t get him because of the Agent/GM thing.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 12:16 PM PST up reply actions
Not at that price, my man, not at that price
And you thought he’d be the savior of the franchise. You was wrong, and the FO was right. Embarrassing.
"[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.
Actually
he’s good value for the price. If you actually play him.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 12:19 PM PST up reply actions
Right, he's such a good value no NBA team wants him
"[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.
Actually that's not what that means
it means no teams want him without trading something acceptable back to the Suns.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 12:21 PM PST up reply actions
Ok, whatever you say
Youv’e been shouting from the rooftops how good he is. What happened?
"[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.
He's good
Clips would have a few more wins with him for sure.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 12:24 PM PST up reply actions
Yes, he's really good. So good we should pay him $33M
Thank God you’re not running the franchise.
"[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.
Yea
because we might not be paying Ryan Gomes and Randy Foye 8.25 million this year. We might actually have Childress, Sessions and you know a bench.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 12:27 PM PST up reply actions
Keep digging
"[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.
While I don't think we can say either Clips + Sessions or + Childress = playoffs (not that you implied this)
There’s a good debate in deciding whether Sessions + Childress for $10.5M at 30.6 combined PER > Gomes + Foye for $8.25M at 19 combined PER.
Of course, Childress shouldn’t really be involved in this debate, since it’s Sessions’ 18.5 PER that’s making this so lopsided. Childress, Gomes, and Foye ALL suck.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
Then again
If Childress is like Sessions, and this year is his outlier-year, then maybe you have two guys with 16+ PER, and you have an above-average bench. I dunno.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
Childress
has a career PER of 16 and he’s played inconsistent minutes all year. This is his absolute worst which is still better than Foye and Gomes. Other metrics besides PER suggest he’s much better than either as well.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 2:39 PM PST up reply actions
Agree on this
I’m more or less confident that Childress will go back to his statistical norms. But because his situation was unique (went to Europe, possibly replaced by a clone, etc.) I’m not as confident as I would be about other players. Foye, for example, is much better than he has shown. Of course, even at their average PER’s, it’s two 16 PER guys in Childress & Sessions vs two 13 PER guys in Foye and Gomes. No matter which way you cut it, we got the short end of the stick.
I really think that this whole agent dealio with Childress already committing to Phoenix early on is a much better explanation for why we didn’t get Chidlress than that he somehow sucks. If we can swap Gomes for Childress, we do it, no questions asked. And if we can swap Foye for a ham sandwich, we do it, no questions asked.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
probably cost extra
what kind of cheese? American? Cheddar? Mild or Medium?
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 4:51 PM PST up reply actions
That's because
all you care about is yay points!
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 3:29 PM PST up reply actions
Not true at all...
I am a basketball coach. I coach both ends of the court and like all-around players.
These three guys are all highly skilled basketball players, but none of them are defensive stoppers.
According to anonymous "executives"
per realgm. Let’s not get carried away.
by Michael White on Feb 16, 2011 12:22 PM PST up reply actions
So you think that everyone really wants him but the Suns won't trade him?
Um, 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.
There’s a big difference from “everybody wants him” to “nobody wants him”
I’m sure there are teams that would take him in the right trade, absolutely.
by Michael White on Feb 16, 2011 12:24 PM PST up reply actions
Yep
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 12:25 PM PST up reply actions
Right, the problem is that he's not worth anywhere near what they paid him
Chuckles thinks that he is worth that. The Suns clearly screwed up on the appraisal. Some of us thought the price was too high. Now I think reality has set in.
"[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.
Gomes for Childress straight up. Do you do it? If not, why? How do you think that would negatively impact future moves?
by Michael White on Feb 16, 2011 12:28 PM PST up reply actions
Can that trade be done?
"[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.
In the trade machine? I assume so since the clippers would be under the cap before and after, but can’t confirm right this second.
by Michael White on Feb 16, 2011 12:31 PM PST up reply actions
It works
http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=4ejk9uo
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 12:34 PM PST up reply actions
If you thought PHX was stupid for signing JChill
they would be REALLY stupid if they traded him for Gomes.
Do not worry. (Matthew 6:27)
But...
its so crazy it could work! I’d trade Foye for him too. Doesn’t have to be Gomes. As much as it hurts I’d give up the treasures we found last summer.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 2:41 PM PST up reply actions
I'd REALLY love to give up Foye
And we could possibly get that done, since they have a glut of SFs right now, and Foye is fooling everyone into thinking he’s actually decent by scoring more points at the same (in)efficiency.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
Still no answer?
So Gomes or Childress?
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 2:42 PM PST up reply actions
I would certainly do that
While Childress’ deal is a bit longer than I’d like, I think we have to assume he’ll go back to his norms.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
LOL
just read this you dumbass.
http://www.clipsnation.com/2010/7/12/1565811/josh-childress-for-less-than-the
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 12:29 PM PST up reply actions
Its funny reading that thread
How desperately Jax needs to talk about Dunleavy.
Not sure what you mean but I'm always up for talking about
how Childress will take us to the playoffs and EJ sucks. Let me know.
"[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.
Its not just the amount of points
its how efficient they do it. Childress is a good player stuck behind other good SFs. He’s MUCH better than Gomes.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 12:15 PM PST up reply actions
Yes, he's so good no NBA team wants him
Look up from your statbook for a moment and see reality staring you in the face.
"[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.
Heh
you don’t know what the Suns have been asking. They probably don’t Ryan Gnomes back for him.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 12:19 PM PST up reply actions
It's not pretty watching you fall so hard and so quickly
"[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.
Sorry
not all of us are bottom feeders like you.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 12:22 PM PST up reply actions
Your entire statistical theory about the value of NBA players has been decimated
Painful to watch
"[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.
How so?
show your work.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 12:28 PM PST up reply actions
Four months later he's a mistake
"[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.
How so
the stats still show he’s a very valuable and productive player who’s not playing enough. He’s still very productive in the minutes he does get.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 12:46 PM PST up reply actions
I know it's just so surprising that no one wants him
Just can’t undestand it
"[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.
PER tends to fall with minutes, ya?
It seems like he’s just a bad fit for that Suns team, really. They’d rather let Frye chuck up 3’s…
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
It shouldn't effect it
because its taken on a per minute basis. If a guy plays too many minutes you could expect diminishing returns but a guy in his athletic prime should be able to play 30-36 minutes without a problem.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 2:46 PM PST up reply actions
I remember something oddly increased PER when it shoudln't
Maybe it was volume of shots. So with a small volume of shots, we might see a reverse effect? I’m just so confused by his statistical dropoff.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
Right, PER is per minute
But the thing I harp on as inappropriately raising PER is the low threshold for shots to count positively.
Not correct.
It is still calculated on a per minute basis.
by Michael White on Feb 16, 2011 3:16 PM PST up reply actions
Of course it does
Particularly because 17 mpg backups are typically playing against second units.
"[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.
of course...
that also means he doesn’t get to play with the other starters. He doesn’t get the Nash bounce as he usually plays with Dragic who of course is a big drop off from Nash.
http://www.82games.com/1011/10PHO7.HTM
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 3:20 PM PST up reply actions
What are they asking for?
Do not worry. (Matthew 6:27)
All this means
is Olshey should offer Gomes for him right now.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
I suppose so...
I don’t know what the Suns are demanding, but let’s suppose they’d take Gomes and a protected draft pick. Would you do that? Beyond all the bickering going on above, there is a real issue of price. I wanted Childress back in the summer, but now I’m disinclined. None of this is meant to be argumentative.
"i know huh........freakin clippers man.....its like a wild ride rooting for this team....gotta love em....(sometimes) lol" In GrIfFin We TrUsT
No pick. If they are desperate they get the cheaper Gomes and call it a day.
by Michael White on Feb 16, 2011 12:31 PM PST up reply actions
Yes
this works for me
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 12:36 PM PST up reply actions
But you would the upgrade be worth it?
Just to push the point, you’d be acquiring JChill for more $ and time.
I’m not grinding my axe here. I have sincere reservations about taking on such a contract for a guy who can’t break into another team’s rotation. I’d rather have JChill than Gomes, but at this point I believe we can do better.
"i know huh........freakin clippers man.....its like a wild ride rooting for this team....gotta love em....(sometimes) lol" In GrIfFin We TrUsT
I think that's the point
Might as well trust the league on this one.
"[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.
You think Gomes breaks into that rotation?
He’d be at the end of the bench for any .500+ team.
Childress is behind Carter, Dudley and Hill in Phoenix. He’s played fine when he has played.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 12:57 PM PST up reply actions
Kind of like JChill is on the Suns, I get it
Look you repeatedly ripped the FO for not signing the guy. Now that the Suns have admitted a mistake and paid far too much, clearly you were wrong.
Not really debatable.
"[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.
The Suns didn't need him
not with that many SFs. They didn’t overpay for him though, that’s good value for a SF.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 1:55 PM PST up reply actions
Again, if no one else will take him, it probably wasn't good value
"[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.
Arguing facts not in evidence counselor.
by Michael White on Feb 16, 2011 2:05 PM PST up reply actions
That's what the article says
If we had to submit admissible evidence to post here the board would get no hits.
"[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.
Being unable to reach a deal is not the same as saying nobody else will take him.
I’m sure there are teams who would trade a conditional second round pick for him.
by Michael White on Feb 16, 2011 2:14 PM PST up reply actions
I think he's significantly overpriced
"[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.
You might think that and you may well be right.
I was just objecting to your statement that, “no one else will take him.”
I don’t think that’s true.
by Michael White on Feb 16, 2011 2:19 PM PST up reply actions
Fair enough
No one else has to date
"[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.
Hammering down if the marginal cost is greater than the marginal benefit is a tricky question and it would take more time to analyze then I can dedicate now.
How do you think LAC can do better?
by Michael White on Feb 16, 2011 1:00 PM PST up reply actions
Of course they can
Are they desperate now to overpay for marginal talent?
"[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.
Heh
Childress is not marginal talent but Gomes sure is.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 1:05 PM PST up reply actions
You're right, the Suns are stupid for not playing their $33M guy
more than 17 mins/game
"[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.
Yea
they are. They actually clear the logjam next year when they cut Carter and maybe Grant Hill leaves/retires.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 1:18 PM PST up reply actions
The only overpaying is money and it’s not like his contract per year is going to kill your cap (that would be my initial thought.)
Otherwise you are upgrading a position without giving up a pick or Kaman or something.
by Michael White on Feb 16, 2011 1:07 PM PST up reply actions
He wouldn't be a starter on this team
He doesn’t spread the floor. Our money is better spent elsewhere. So you really are not upgrading anything by getting Chill. He’s be good off the bench on this team.
"[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.
He would absolutely be a starter on this team. Airball Aminu doesn’t spread anything.
by Michael White on Feb 16, 2011 1:18 PM PST up reply actions
Heh
Well it’s official now. Jax is clinically insane now.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 1:19 PM PST up reply actions
Sorry, what I meant was
That he is not the SF we need and not worth the money.
"[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.
My first thought is signing Prince in the offseason
He might even come cheaper than JChill, esp after the new CBA. The point is that we don’t need a player here and now (although of course I wouldn’t mind it, at the right price).
"i know huh........freakin clippers man.....its like a wild ride rooting for this team....gotta love em....(sometimes) lol" In GrIfFin We TrUsT
I agree
There’s no need for argument here. Childress’ situation is what it is.
"[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.
Laugh
which is?
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 12:35 PM PST up reply actions
We'd need to give a pick
that just means Gomes is so bad the Clips need a pick to bribe someone to take him.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 12:36 PM PST up reply actions
Well, supposedly Childress is better, more efficient
Or do you mean to say that Josh is bad and Gomes is worse?
The reason I threw in the pick was to guestimate what the Suns might be demanding, not to suggest much of anything else.
"i know huh........freakin clippers man.....its like a wild ride rooting for this team....gotta love em....(sometimes) lol" In GrIfFin We TrUsT
No reason to give up a pick
actually makes it worse. The Clips end up giving up a pick for a guy they could have signed outright 6 months ago (and to get rid of a guy they shouldn’t have signed 6 months ago). But if the Suns are really having problems moving Childress than at least Gomes gives them short-term monetary relief.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 12:59 PM PST up reply actions
Why you would waste $33M on that guy is beyond me
Maybe you should start your own NBA team and trade for him. You should be able to do it since no one else wants him.
"[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.
Gomes for Childress.
Sign me up! I haven’t watched Childress that closely, really since ATL, but I have to assume a lot his problems stem from being the odd man out with 17 mins a game. Maybe it’s because the Phoenix Small Forwards are overloaded at the 3.
Gomes for Childress. Do it.
"Buckle your seat belts, folks. This one's going down to the wire." -The inimitable Ralph Lawler.
by Gordon for President on Feb 16, 2011 2:09 PM PST up reply actions
Maybe it's because PHX plays 3's as 4's and 4's as 5's
Do not worry. (Matthew 6:27)
They were actually playing Childress
out of position a bit at the 2 at times.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 2:31 PM PST up reply actions
I like Childress for the backup 2
That’s why he is a better fit than another forward tweener like Gallinari.
He didn’t get off the bench during the game I went to last weekend against the Kings. The Suns lost that one.
COINCIDENCE?!!!
He's better than what the Clips currently have at the 2
just saying his optimal position is SF and the bulk of his minutes should go there.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 2:45 PM PST up reply actions
$33M - he should be better
"[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.
Sure
8.25 million, 17 million. Gomes, Foye and Olshey should be better.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 3:02 PM PST up reply actions
Silly Chuck
Jax reserves expectations and consequences for people he hates personally.
Ah, the personal attack card
You got nothing. Except egg on face.
Ciao dudes. Enjoy.
"[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.
Wait don't go
You didn’t answer if you would do Gomes for Childress straight up.
I feel bad
this was probably the highlight of Jax’s day when he saw this snippet of news and we ruined it for him.
Oh wait I’m confusing feeling bad with feeling great!
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 3:14 PM PST up reply actions
JChill the backup 2?
Odd. Aminu starts in this scenario (Gomes <→ Childress). You think we get more wins w/ Aminu as the starting 3 and JChill backing up EJ?
I guess that’s your way of pushing Foye out as well?
What's there to fight over?
Its well documented that NBA GM’s don’t know what they are doing. /Points to history of ridiculous max contracts.
Personally, I would feel weird if I had been bouty bout a guy until Olshey couldn’t land him and then did an instant 180 for no reason. But that’s just me. Some people might see such a thing as dishonest and/or weird, but those people are logical and I know not all of us are.
John R v. NBA execs
That’s a tough one.
"[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.
John R wins
29 out of 30 GMs are wrong every year.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 12:37 PM PST up reply actions
Not a surprising answer given how wrong you and your buddy were about Childress
"[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.
Its called the right answer
29 teams are losers every year right?
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 12:41 PM PST up reply actions
What are you going to do if they actually trade for him?
That would be awkward.
He might burst into flame
and then the curse of the cherokee indians will be lifted.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 12:45 PM PST up reply actions
I would trust the FO
I don’t see the value at $33M but if they do then so be it.
I just feel sorry for you guys that you staked your “reputations” on a guy no one wants. Sad.
"[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.
You might want to read the other comments
I know you secretly love me but if you bothered to read the other comments you’ll find most prefer J Chill over Gnomes.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 1:00 PM PST up reply actions
Not at that price, my man, not at that price.
"[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.
You say no one wants
but the people have spoken. They wants!!!
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 1:02 PM PST up reply actions
The people that count have spoken
"[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.
Right
cause you are plugged into every front office. Silly Jax, Trix are for kids.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 1:04 PM PST up reply actions
Not going to lie...I wanted Childress...actually I still do.
he will be solid next year.
Proud member of Club FTR.
Yes
buy low candidate right here. Good price for a competent starting SF.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 12:40 PM PST up reply actions
Swap Gomes for Childress and I am a happy man.
Suns get a “comparable” SF on a shorter contract and we get Childress, who I feel is a very competent SF.
Proud member of Club FTR.
by Newton Pham on Feb 16, 2011 12:51 PM PST up reply actions
This is Sessions 2.0
DO IT OLSHEY.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
hopefully, not a flame mini-question
Question: (putting $$$ and CBA thoughts aside for a moment) who is the best player for the Clippers – Childress, Battier or Prince? Please answer purely on bball reasons only…
Prince
if its this year. Childress anything after 2 years.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 1:01 PM PST up reply actions
Funny, I was going to quickly answer Childress because of the age difference.
by Michael White on Feb 16, 2011 1:01 PM PST up reply actions
yea
me too
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 1:02 PM PST up reply actions
that's a fair reason
To be clear: Battier is 32, Prince is 30 and JChill is 27.
I do like the defensive talents from Battier/Prince…I don’t believe JChill has that reputation (or skillset).
I have an irrational hatred of Battier because of the nonstop stroking he gets by the media.
by Michael White on Feb 16, 2011 1:18 PM PST up reply actions
All this post has done is make me expect Olshey trade Gomes for Childress
Now that we know Childress is available, Olshey needs to get him.
Do not worry. (Matthew 6:27)
Yep
Going to start making posters for the Celtics game. Free Chilly!
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 1:21 PM PST up reply actions
Hmm
just came up with a promotional tie-in too. When the Clippers score 100, free chili fries at Tommy’s!
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 1:22 PM PST up reply actions
first of all, i love his game,
But I don’t know if he’s the best we can get. I think it still puts a lot of pressure on EJ to be the staple of the offese (as he should be). But all I’m suggesting is that we should place higher value on a shooter.
Baron and EJ can typically get to the rim whenever they want, and we hope that one day aminu would fit into that group. This still leaves us with a need for a shooter. Mike Miller wouldve been nice in the offseason, but that wasn’t to be. Gallo is still my number 1 for the time being, but you wouldn’t really hear me complaining with JChill, especially if it means moving gomes and/or foye.
by indy818 on Feb 16, 2011 1:33 PM PST via mobile reply actions
Gallo would be way better
"[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.
LBJ would be way better
I don’t think either are available to the Clippers
Do not worry. (Matthew 6:27)
Gallo
would require the Clips to trade their 2011 1st round pick.
Seems like most would gladly trade Gomes for Childress.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 2:01 PM PST up reply actions
gomes for jchill
What does that mean for signing DJ and EJ in the near future. Obviously jchill would eat up more cap, and Kaman would surely have to go. Maybe you know better than I do, but can we still sign our guys with jchill on board?
About the 1st rounder, I’d prob give that up for Gallo anyway, considering it won’t be a “great” pick and also bc we have minnys pick for 2012. Although they are cheaper, young players are the one thing we have plenty of.
by indy818 on Feb 16, 2011 4:56 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Doesn't effect them
Trading Gomes for Childress adds an additional 2 million to the payroll. They wouldn’t need to trade Kaman to make this trade. DJ is a restricted FA, the Clippers can go over the salary cap to resign him. EJ is eligible for a extension this summer which wouldn’t kick in until 2012-2013. The Clips can also go over the cap to resign him as well.
http://hoopshype.com/salaries/la_clippers.htm
http://hoopshype.com/salaries/phoenix.htm
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 5:10 PM PST up reply actions
fair enough
im all for jchill in that case.
I do value the 3 point shot for its floor-spreading dynamic, but in a straight up trade for gomes id do this in a heartbeat.
The Blazer GM
pretty much said the same. Everyone is waiting on Melo first.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 2:03 PM PST up reply actions
Yes, it was enjoyable
"[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.
Heh
you mean a fan shot that’s not even about the Clippers but one clearly to try to attack some of the biggest contributors of the site (including Steve)?
In this corner (Childress)
Michael White
John R
Newtybar
Mikey P
SilverClip
me
Banandy??
And in this corner (Gomes)
Jax
Judges?
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 1:59 PM PST up reply actions
Oops
forgot Indy818 as well.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 2:00 PM PST up reply actions
wait, which side am i on? lol
I’m in the “I love me some jchill, but I might like gallo more, especially for the clips” club.
Can I get that registered too? I start accepting members as soon as the paperwork is all done ha.
by indy818 on Feb 16, 2011 4:59 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Um, not attacking anyone - just pointing out that the constant harassment by you and John R
of the Clippers’ FO for not signing JChill was wrong.
"[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.
Right
because your fan shot didn’t reek of sarcasm.
Unbelievable – Childress could lead any team to the promised land.
That doesn’t sound like a summary of the article but your own commentary.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 2:04 PM PST up reply actions
Apparently it touched a nerve
"[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.
Heh
when actually all it did was ignite hope amongst many of us to get a competent SF.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 2:32 PM PST up reply actions
Actually, it confirmed that you were incorrect
"[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.
Umm ok
in your own little world Jax.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 3:02 PM PST up reply actions
That's why you're wasting your entire day trying to rehabilitate yourself
Unfortunately, it ain’t working.
"[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.
We are anxiously awaiting your answer to if you would do Gomes for Childress straight up.
And by anxiously, we know you can’t honestly answer it.
This will be the thread to point to when explaining Jax to new clipsnation members.
I'm not big on Josh Childress
I’ve said in the prior thread by John R that I still thought the contract situation didn’t make sense for the Clippers. A lot of that has to do with the fact that there are better established SF vets out there.
Why didn't the Clippers get any of them then?
This is our concern dude.
No need for concern - see all NBA teams
"[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.
Yes
I see them all ahead of the Clippers in the standings. Despite having Blake Griffin.
You've seen them there for the last 8 years, my man
"[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.
And I think they are getable too
With the right package. It’s the trade deadline, and we’ve got some cap to spare and some “assets” to unload!
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
Are there?
there are few coming up for free agency this summer. The Clips don’t have much cap space. Unless they can move Kaman for one. Swapping out Gomes for Childress solves a problem AND the Clips retain a solid C.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 2:35 PM PST up reply actions
Semi-solves the problem
Childress would be the perfect long-term solution as he could start out as the starting SF, then if we can upgrade the spot, we can slot in a great SF, Player X, and have Childress as the backup to both EJ and Player X. We could go from having a solid starting 5 to a great starting 5 and a pretty good bench.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
That was exactly what I said
during the offseason that maybe one day Aminu can take over or they acquire someone even better. But worst case you got a guy who does all the little things, is highly efficient and gets extra possessions.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 3:08 PM PST up reply actions
Damn it CC now I'm drooling all over my keyboard.
Olshey, DO THIS, or I will personally put a tack on your chair. I know where you sit, man!
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
All expiring contracts
why trade for them in a lost season when you can get them as FAs in 4 months. Have to give up Kaman for those guys.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 3:09 PM PST up reply actions
The weird thing is
Acquiring Childress would not put the Clippers out of the running for those players any more than Gomes did.
This is why I don’t understand this line of thought.
Sure it would. Unless you can aquire Childress and go over the cap, you will have less to spend since his annual salary is greater than Gomes.
The trick would be to aquire somebody, go over the cap and then have more to spend in the MLE.
by Michael White on Feb 16, 2011 3:12 PM PST up reply actions
While I know they don't have literally the exact same salary
The difference is very likely inconsequential.
I mean, the Jordan decision is likely to be the big money suck.
They can go over the cap to resign DJ
like how the Heat did for Joel Anthony. So sign FA first then sign DJ to his deal since his cap hold will be small.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 3:15 PM PST up reply actions
That’s exactly the game plan. Hope somebody doesn’t sign him to an offer sheet in the first few days of free agency (clips will only then have 10 days to decide to match).
by Michael White on Feb 16, 2011 3:18 PM PST up reply actions
It would be
about a 2 million difference. But if you want to do a in-season trade Kaman almost has to be included to match salaries. Unless some team is stupid enough to want Foye AND Gomes. May god have mercy on their souls.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 3:17 PM PST up reply actions
Well
because of the cap wizardry of Olshey the Clips will have less than the MLE next summer to begin with. So I’m thinking 4-5 million tops. The CBA, the new cap number could drastically change plus the Clippers have a cap hold on the draft pick. At that price I figure Prince, AK and/or Battier take the Celtics MLE or some other clear cut contender.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 3:23 PM PST up reply actions
I guess with that conclusion
John R was right
Acquiring Childress would not put the Clippers out of the running for those players any more than Gomes did.
With JChill or Gomes, the Clips will have less than the MLE and won’t be able to sign those guys.
by Michael White on Feb 16, 2011 3:30 PM PST up reply actions
I think Battier is possible
he’s the oldest and probably the least effective of the 3. Of the 3 he’s the likeliest to get less than the MLE.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 3:34 PM PST up reply actions
Part of me would rather try and actually use the cap we "saved up" last summer.
That shiznit is going to be useless come the new CBA, in which a $5-6m reduction in cap isn’t really that far of a stretch. All we’ll do is suddenly be at max cap, instead of under cap. But then again, I don’t want to desperately sign ANOTHER crappy player just to use that cap. Maybe we just save that cap space to give to DJ this summer.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
Yup
For all we know, the Clippers are already effectively capped out for July 2011.
If there even is a July 2011.
That's why I was always saying
If we make a move at the trade deadline, our summer was not in vain. If we don’t, Olshey should go back to acting and leave the free agent picking to the big boys.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
Oh, should've kept reading
Nevermind, I’d rather use the cap and go over with DJ. How far are we under the luxury tax line? That’s quite a ways up there, right?
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
No worry there
luxury tax is all the way up to 70 million.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 3:25 PM PST up reply actions
It boggles me how some teams have that much salary on their books
$$ wins championships more than defense, it would seem…
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
Mainly because
they can absorb a bad contract or two. The Celtics have Jermaine O’Neal, the Lakers have Luke Walton, the Magic have a few etc etc. You can’t have a good team long-term unless you get close to the luxury tax.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 3:56 PM PST up reply actions
Had Olshey merely said...
“there are no good FAs available, so we’re going to sit on the $17m and see who becomes available”, that would have been better than locking up $9m per year on Foye/Gomes/Cook.
Do not worry. (Matthew 6:27)
Yea
I would’ve preferred just signing some mercs for a year then like Barnes, T-Mac. They would sign for one year deals and give the Clippers another crack at it this summer.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 3:29 PM PST up reply actions
I'll say it now
I like the Cook signing. He’s a spot up shooter and he’s making 40% of his 3PAs. You paid him for that and he gave you that.
The fact that he’s been forced to play more thanks to injuries to Rhino and Kaman are not his fault.
by Michael White on Feb 16, 2011 3:31 PM PST up reply actions
I agree with this
I don’t like the extra year because it seemed unnecessary then (and really still is). But still he almost has Channing Frye production but cost a lot less. Olshey has been solid at signing minimum contract guys (Diogu is cool too) but of course those kind of moves don’t win many games.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 3:36 PM PST up reply actions
Cook has surprised me
but Foye and Gomes are worse than I thought
Do not worry. (Matthew 6:27)
So Foye and Gomes playing worse than their career numbers
makes them worse than you thought, but Childress playing worse than his career numbers is simply a statistical anomaly that will revert to the mean?
Not defending F&G or attacking Childress, but also think that those who purport to be making purely analytical arguments seem to have no trouble bending the facts to make their case.
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
Please elaborate
instances of such.
Gomes and Foye are not going to revert to their PER means because they have gone from 3rd options on horrible teams to 4th or 5th options on a average (if healthy). They had below average PERs because they scored a relatively decent amount but were inefficient in doing so. They don’t provide anything above average in other categories such as rebounding or assists to counter the decreased scoring.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 11:05 PM PST up reply actions
Huh?
That makes no sense. Foye and Gomes won’t revert to their means because their circumstances are different this year, but Childress will revert to his mean because … his circumstances are different this year?
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
He was always a 5th option
his value is in his highly efficient shooting and offensive rebounding. Him taking less shots does not effect his PER as drastically as it does for Foye and Gomes.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 11:12 PM PST up reply actions
Totally not the point
The point is that his performance has been WAY down this year, but that is being written off as an anomaly, but Foye and Gomes are getting no such benefit of the doubt for their down years. All the rest of this is just subterfuge in which you’re using your own unsubstantiated theories to explain the difference rather than taking the numbers at face value. Either the numbers are the numbers and you treat them all the same, or you are by definition making a subjective argument. You can’t have it both ways.
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
His numbers aren't way down
his minutes are and his free throw shooting is way down.
Fine a 80% career FT shooter is now a 56% FT shooter based off 50 FT attempts this year.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 11:58 PM PST up reply actions
PER is 25% below his career average
That’s way down in my book.
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
Its down
because of PER. Look at his 2005-2006 where his numbers are exactly the same as this year save the FT%. That’s the only difference in his PER calculation.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:07 AM PST up reply actions
Here you go
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/childjo01.html
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:09 AM PST up reply actions
Um, no
Compared to 05-06, his 3PT% is down, his AST/36 is down, his STL/36 is dow, and his TO/36 is up — significantly in all cases.
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
3pt shooting is skewed
based off 9 attempts this year. His rebounding is up this year as are his blocks. Everything is within approx a 15% range.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:15 AM PST up reply actions
Hmm
That’s not at all the same thing as
Look at his 2005-2006 where his numbers are exactly the same as this year save the FT%. That’s the only difference in his PER calculation.
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
Ok
changed exactly to close
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:43 AM PST up reply actions
Everything is within approx a 15% range.
Also not true. AST/36 down 20%. STL/36 down 29%. TO/36 up 25%.
Arguing that this season’s stats aren’t reflective of his talent is something I’ll buy. Arguing that he’s not actually having a bad year is silly.
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
Hmm - I guess I'm going to have to check
Chuckles’ statistical references from now on.
Embarrassing
"[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 said this is a down year for him
and its still not that bad.
And the categories you listed are so too small. A 3 steal game would completely throw that rate off. That’s why the numbers are so volatile.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:45 AM PST up reply actions
His numbers aren’t way down. His minutes are and his free throw shooting is way down. Fine a 80% career FT shooter is now a 56% FT shooter based off 50 FT attempts this year.
Its down because of PER. Look at his 2005-2006 where his numbers are exactly the same as this year save the FT%. That’s the only difference in his PER calculation.
Where, exactly, did you acutally say he’s having a down year?
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
Bleh
its on this thread somewhere. I may have said it to Jax earlier. I agree though, this has been his worst year statistically so far but I think its due primarily to small sample size and over more games it would be close to his career averages.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:54 AM PST up reply actions
To me, the fact that the Suns aren't playing him
Suggests that there’s a reason for the small sample size that goes beyond just less playing time. Not a stats-based argument, but I’m fine with it.
"[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.
Again, great irrefutable points
"[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.
You mean he's never been good enough to be a starter in the league
You’re right about that
"[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.
Actually
he started the majority of the games his rookie season.
He’s been a de facto 6th starter for a playoff team. He was the 6th man behind very good players. Gomes has been a starter because he’s never been on a good team.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:08 AM PST up reply actions
Boy you go back a long way to find that
This thread isn’t about Gomes anyway. No matter how hard you try to deflect. It’s about the JChill ridiculous contract.
He’s not a sixth starter. He’s a bench player. Behind Marvin Williams who is not a great 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.
Do you know why he was behind Marvin?
Because he’s not a good shooter.
"[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.
You seem infatuated with titles
you know how many minutes Childress averaged in 2005-2006? 36.8 minutes a game. His other years he averaged almost 30 mpg every year.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:13 AM PST up reply actions
You're right - this year it's 17 minutes
Which should tell you alot about his value to the team
Probably a bit less than $33M
Just admit he was overpaid – be a man for once.
"[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.
Its a good contract
and the Suns actually got him below market value.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:18 AM PST up reply actions
Go read the archives
why don’t you man up for once and just admit you said something. Jesus you know this is all archived right?
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:19 AM PST up reply actions
I have no idea what you are talking about
Look, you think the contract is good value even though no one wants him and he’s playing behind an 80 year old and Chris Dudley.
Difficlut to argue with that logic.
"[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.
LOL - right
"[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.
You still up?
isn’t it 2:30 for you?
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:24 AM PST up reply actions
You serious?
Grant Hill is the man. Might be the best 38 year old SF ever… well aside from MJ.
Jared Dudley is also a good player, dude shot 46% from the 3pt line last year. Still shooting 38% from the 3pt line this year.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:28 AM PST up reply actions
Hill's been great this year
50% fg? and he’s cheap too.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:38 AM PST up reply actions
Whatever you say Chuckles
"[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.
It doesn't matter what I say
just look at the stats.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:38 AM PST up reply actions
$33 M for 17 mpg
"[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.
Thats the Suns fault
not his. He’s well worth the money if he’s on another team playing 30mpg.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:40 AM PST up reply actions
Right, if you say so
Hey those teams are all lining up at the Suns’ facility to get him
"[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.
Dude, Hill is good for any age, and outstanding for a 38yo
It’s probably because he doesn’t have that many games under his belt. I’ve always thought that it’s the # of games, not age, that defines how long a player can play. Hence why we’re seeing Kobe and Garnett “aging” so quickly.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
No one wants him
There’s your market
"[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.
Right
because you know the workings of every front office. *whiny Jax voice" Just stop it.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:25 AM PST up reply actions
Just quoting articles like you love to do
What’s good for the goose . . .
"[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.
the quote it correctly
it doesn’t say no one wants him but that they haven’t made a deal. You already conceded that somewhere in this thread to Michael White.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:29 AM PST up reply actions
Hollinger "Toxic Contract"
This arrticle – they are having trouble
SI – bad contract
17 mpg
Sorry you don’t like my reasonable opinion. It is what it is.
"[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 think it's pretty well accepted now
that the JChill contract was an agent fleecing the Suns. They don’t play him. They can’t trade him. And yet Chuckles defends. We get why given the 10,000 posts here touting the guy.
But really, isn’t it time now to just admit you were wrong?
"[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.
Nope
would gladly trade Gomes for him. So would a lot of guys on the board.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:37 AM PST up reply actions
Hilarious - keep going
You’re like the energizer bunny.
"[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.
Its pretty easy really
your arguments are so weak. Boltsfan21 at least brings up some actual points.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:40 AM PST up reply actions
You guys are equally insufferable
Jax has no actual points. You just reflexively stick to yours no matter what contrary facts you’re presented with.
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
Sorry bolts, I have legitimate points
"[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.
Heh
So you don’t think the small sample size has anything to do with anything. That’s fine.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:47 AM PST up reply actions
Me?
I said it does, repeatedly. Quit putting words in my mouth.
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
Did you?
My bad, gotta scroll around for your response then.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:53 AM PST up reply actions
I'll save you the trouble
Duh. I’ve already granted that I think Childress’ numbers this year are anomalous. But do you really think that Gomes’ first 5 seasons were an aberration and this season’s stats are all that’s relevant?
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
Gomes numbers are more relevant
because its a larger sample size. We have a better idea of how many shots he will take. Even if you increased his shooting pct to last years numbers his PER would still be down 15% because he’s shooting and rebounding less.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 1:16 AM PST up reply actions
Rebounding Cannibalism
But instead of playing next to Brian Cardinal and Al Jefferson and 1/2 of Kevin Love, he’s playing next to Blake Griffin, rebound gobbler. If he were playing on the Wolves still, with the new Kevin Love that actually gets PT, he probably would get less rebounds too.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
Gomes rebounding is down
from his career averages because Gomes used to play PF. Since he’s moved to SF last year his rebounding rate has gone down.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 1:22 AM PST up reply actions
I see
So if you attribute Gomes’ drop in stats to his change in position, and we’re under the premise that his position is not going to be changing any time soon, then this SF Gomes is not an anomaly, but just who SF Gomes is. 9 PER. The 13 PER guy played PF, and we’re not seeing him any time soon.
THAT is a black and white situation, and I can appreciate that.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
Further
Childress is currently playing a lot of SG and not doing a good job of it (12 PER). The presumption is that if we bring in Childress, we’d put him back at SF permanently, where he belongs, and his numbers should go back to where they were when he played SF a lot (17ish PER). This too I can appreciate.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
Also right
Its somewhere in this thread but I pointed out earlier that the Suns played him a little bit out of position. He can play 2 but he’s best as a 3.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 1:27 AM PST up reply actions
Right
Gomes is actually a better PF than SF.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 1:26 AM PST up reply actions
and nice try
trying to avoid answering how Childress played starter minutes.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 1:45 AM PST up reply actions
As bad as Childress has been
he’s been better than Gomes and Foye.
Childress is having a down year. Gomes has never been very good. Foye seems to regress every year of his career.
Do not worry. (Matthew 6:27)
Not arguing that, really
But the truth is, Childress is about 25% below his career PER this year, and Gomes is about 25% below his. And Gomes hasn’t been out of the league for 2 years, unlike Childress, which actually makes Gomes’ performance more likely to be an anomaly than Childress’.
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
No
J Chill has played 562 minutes this year. Gomes has played 3 times as many minutes. Its much more likely that J Chill’s smaller sample size has skewed his numbers.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:00 AM PST up reply actions
Right - he's starting where Chill is playing no minutes
The reason he’s playing less minutes is because the team thinks he sucks. And he’s much more expensive than Gomes.
Just admit you were wrong and move on.
"[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.
Stupid comment
Gomes would be playing 0 minutes on the Suns. This might even be dumber than your Mike Miller comment.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:03 AM PST up reply actions
Right, and JChill is worth $33M
And our FO was dumb for not paying him $33M
Tell us how it is
"[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.
Actually
your original argument is the Clippers never had a chance to sign him. That was your defense the entire time. Blah blah the FO reputation prevents them from signing guys like Childress. Look at the original thread.
But yea, Childress for 33 million is good value. Playing Gomes for 30 mpg is bad value because he makes you lose games.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:17 AM PST up reply actions
Your argument was that we should have offered more than the Suns
If you seroiusly think that $33M is good value then you’re delusional.
Again, this thread ain’t about Gomes. Get off it
"[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.
Then I guess a lot of us are delusional
read the archives. He was the 11th ranked FA by numerous publications. Inferior players got paid more than him. He even made more in Greece with his net income contract.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:23 AM PST up reply actions
He made more there b/c they overpaid for him
Which is why he went there. Hello
"[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.
How big is your nose?
with the amount of lies you spew you must be able to park a car under there.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:31 AM PST up reply actions
Ditto
I’ve called you on your exaggerations with the actual numbers 3 times on this thread and you haven’t responded to any of them.
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
Working on it
Jax likes to ask a lot of questions.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:42 AM PST up reply actions
What am I lying about?
That the Greek team overpaid him?
That’s a fact, my boy
"[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.
They didn't overpay him
he led them to the Euroleague Final Four and Final in consecutive years which is the best they’ve ever done.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:42 AM PST up reply actions
They overpaid him
And admitted as much but they wanted an American with some name recognition.
"[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.
They got what they wanted
how is he overpaid? I buy a Cayenne even though the Tourieg (sic) is basically the same car because I want the Porsche label. I’m still happy because I got what I wanted.
Oh, and he still help lead the team to success.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:51 AM PST up reply actions
Actually they are different cars
The Cayenne is way better.
"[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.
Same platform
sure the Cayenne is more refined but its about double the price. The engine and frame are the same.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 1:57 PM PST up reply actions
Weren't we saying in that past thread that he got less than we thought he would?
I dunno.. bleh this thread is giving me a headache.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
Yep
Jax is changing his story. It was originally that because of MDSr poor reputation we couldn’t sign a free agent like Miller or Childress. But now he prefers to say the FO did a good job by avoiding signing them. It’s confusing because Jax keeps changing his position.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:49 AM PST up reply actions
No, he's confusing the Greek deal with the Suns deal
And no, my story hasn’t changed. My story has been that we would have had to overpay for JChill. As it turns out, the Suns overpaid.
"[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 know, right
Now all of a sudden the FO is brilliant for not signing him, when in the offseason it was because they never had a chance.
Do not worry. (Matthew 6:27)
I'm not saying that he's brilliant
I’m just pointing out that as it turned out the decision not to pay $33M or more may have turned out to be the correct one.
Bolts apparently doesn’t think that’s a “worthy” argument because it’s not stats-based but to me it’s a great argument, and I’m sticking with it.
"[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.
More likely than 2 years in Europe damaged his game?
How are you going to prove that one? Are you so set on winning your argument that you can’t even admit that Gomes’ performance is anomalous this year, just as Childress’ is?
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
Why is Gomes number a anamoly?
We’re almost 75% through the season. He’s played in every game. What more info do you need. He’s established what he is.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:04 AM PST up reply actions
No, the first 5 years of his career established who he is
This year his PER is down the same 25% as Childress’. Chances are he will revert to the mean, just like Childress. That will still make Childress the better player. My only point is that I think it’s disingenuous to argue that one is an anomaly and the other isn’t.
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
Small sample size for Childress
Is Chris Kaman this bad now? He’s played about half the minutes as Childress this season.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:11 AM PST up reply actions
Duh
I’ve already granted that I think Childress’ numbers this year are anomalous. But do you really think that Gomes’ first 5 seasons were an aberration and this season’s stats are all that’s relevant?
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
Why do you thnk Chill's are an anamoly?
Doesn’t appear that the Suns think so.
"[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.
Don't know what they think
All I know is that it’s more likely that they are an anomaly than it is that he simply forgot how to play.
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
This thread is about an article that the Suns are trying to dump him
Clearly they think he’s worth less than the contract. The contract likely reflects what they thought he could do, based loosely on PER, right?
Perhaps, just perhaps, he’s declining rapidly. Generally when you’re getting paid that much and not playing at all, that’s the case.
"[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.
If you are referring to his %
then yes it could be an anomaly. But his shot attempts are not which is why his PER is down because PER cares about scoring over all else. That’s why AI has a career PER of 21.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:21 AM PST up reply actions
That's not what I meant
They think he sucks or they would play him more. The low PER is likely a reflection of his current game.
"[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.
Heh
his low PER is still much better than Gomes.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:24 AM PST up reply actions
READ MY LIPS
This isn’t about Gomes
You’re obsessed
"[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.
Funny you no longer make fun of Cook in every post
"[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.
try to stick to a topic
and it isn’t as if Cook is good. Its that he’s not as bad as we thought. And still no reason to give him a two year deal.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:33 AM PST up reply actions
We meaning "you" harassing everyone
Understood
"[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.
Heh
right, I was the only one who disparaged the Cook signing. Right.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:36 AM PST up reply actions
Youi were the driving force
Which is why you should be embarrassed now for how wrong you were.
"[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.
You should probably stop
You didn’t like the Cook signing either. So not sure why you feel like you need to gloat about it. Its not as if the Clips found a hidden gem.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 1:00 AM PST up reply actions
I never said anything about the Cook signing
Why do you always have to make shit up? Is winning internet arguments that important to you?
"[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.
It was a low amount
no one thought he would sign for just the full MLE. Read the post. Jax is changing his entire stance 8 months later.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:35 AM PST up reply actions
Hard to take you serious
when you try to think having this season’s 2nd worst starter in the NBA is okay but having a guy who’s been at least average throughout his career is a bad thing
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:34 AM PST up reply actions
You'll say anything to win
Unfortunately I never said any of those things. But I’m saddened to learn your true character.
"[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.
heh
You are a freak.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 1:01 AM PST up reply actions
Hard not to agree with boltsfan21 on that
Gomes’ and Foye’s years are obviously anomalies. I don’t care how many minutes they’ve logged this year, it could be the system or it could be something else (like I dunno, playing with 3 sloppy U23-ers?)… this year is a tiny percentage of their careers, and history shows they will revert to their mean. Just like Childress.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
Shooting percentages yes
shot attempts no. As a result their scoring will decrease and the PER will be lower.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 1:02 AM PST up reply actions
Typical obfuscation
My point all along has simply been that Gomes isn’t as bad as he’s showing this year, as evidenced by his career numbers, just as Childress isn’t as bad as he’s showed this year. But for whatever reason that rather obvious statement is something to which you’re just unwilling to agree. That’s no more honest or rational than one of Jax’s “arguments.”
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
I never said Gomes
can’t get back to previous shooting numbers. He could. I’m saying in this case PER is flawed because it weighs scoring (even inefficiently) positive. But if Gomes or Foye shoot less (which they will surrounded by playing tertiary roles) then their PERs will remain below their career numbers. Childress doesn’t shoot much anyways so his PER won’t take as big of a hit (in fact he shoots less than Gomes).
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 1:14 AM PST up reply actions
Why do you insist that somehow Foye/Gomes' previous averages mean nothing?
It seems to go against your usual stance on these types of things. There’s no evidence to suggest that, and even 82 games of starting wouldn’t be evidence. Look at Ramon Sessions last year vs this year. Did we figure out “who he was” last year? Heck no, we just figured out that he didn’t fit in that system, or the water is bad, or he wasn’t get any lovin’, or WHATEVER. Something was wrong, and now that something is gone. Anomaly.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
His shooting pcts can stay the same
but where a players role lies in a offense effects how many shots he gets. Gomes is shooting it 25-30% times less this year than last year. As a result his PER (which is heavily determined by scoring) will be lower. Even if Gomes corrects his shooting stroke and reverts to career averages his PER will be down because he’s shooting less. Get it?
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 1:20 AM PST up reply actions
That's more of an error in PER than proof that Childress' down year is more of an anomaly than Gomes'
I like the PF vs SF argument better.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
It can be a mixture of both
But if we’re using PER as the scoring system then it needs to be understood how scoring/shot attempts will prevent Gomes and Foye from reaching previous levels.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 1:29 AM PST up reply actions
This is why I'm not that high on PER
I’d rather mix it up with PER, wins produced, #-of-involuntary-fist-pumps-caused-per-game, TS%, etc.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
Who says we're using PER as THE scoring system
We may be using it as A scoring system, but clinging to this straw man is totally missing the point. By all measures, Childress is playing worse than his career averages this year. Ditto Gomes and Foye. And it’s disingenuous to argue that Childress’ drop is an anomaly but Gomes’ and Foye’s aren’t. That is the one and only point here, and it has nothing to do with the minutiae of PER.
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
You weren't
But Eric O was when measuring the 16 PER of Childress vs the 13 PER of Gomes and Foye.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 1:35 AM PST up reply actions
You were making the same arguments with me long before that
And willfully missing the real point
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
My argument with you
was regarding sample size. That’s it. His stats are skewed due to less playing time.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 1:44 AM PST up reply actions
Not true
I never once argued that Childress’ season wasn’t anomalous. But you did argue that Gomes’ play this season “established who he is” because “he’s played in almost every game,” despite 5 years of previous track record. That was what the argument was about all along. This part merely started with “why give JChill the benefit of the doubt of his past track record but not afford the same benefit of the doubt to Gomes.” Anything else was just your spin.
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
Acrually we have to separate it
Gomes used to shoot it 12 times a game (per 36) but now he is down to 10. Are you saying that the number of shots he takes is an anomaly?
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 1:55 AM PST up reply actions
Not going to get bogged down in your irrelevant minutiae
If one of them is likely to revert to the mean it’s every bit as likely that the other will. Anything else is argumentative, speculative bullshit.
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
And their mean still sucks
Do not worry. (Matthew 6:27)
Agreed
But not at all the point. You either have to treat Childress as a 12 PER and Gomes as a 10 or Childress as a 16 and Gomes as a 13. You can’t have it both ways.
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
I don't want it both ways
I’d prefer Childress and his 12-16 over Gomes and his 9-13 PER.
I’d actually vote for neither and look to secure a better SF alternative.
But we’re stuck with Gomes.
Do not worry. (Matthew 6:27)
We agree
My vote would be for neither as well.
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
mikey you get lost in Chuckles' nonsense sometimes
Clearly the Suns think Chill sucks. You are comparing apples to oranges. He’s playing only 17 mins/game
Foye was hurt seriously for 20 games and is just coming out of it. They will move to norms. Chill? Who knows. The guy has never ever started in ths league. Stop wasting time on this.
"[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.
Great points - hadn't thought of that
Basically this whole thread was about Chuckles and how he tried to dance around the fact that he’s wrong. It’s like stomping on a bug.
"[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.
Heh
so delusional. You haven’t established anything Jax.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 12:02 AM PST up reply actions
Not on your side
So please don’t try to piggyback. I find this all infuriating because you both are so inflexible that you can’t even see/acknowledge the truth in the other’s point of view.
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
Did I say you were?
I just said that you made some good points.
"[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.
Yes
It’s like left wing vs right wing. Both sides are correct about some points, and (as you said) inflexible on other points.
It’s obvious that Childress is having a bad year. It’s obvious that he’s playing differently than he has during the rest of his career. And it’s not a stretch to think that it’s because of his time in Europe.
It’s also obvious that Gomes and Foye are having bad years. It’s not obvious that they are playing differently in terms of style, but their stats are both so significantly down (~25%ish) that there’s something not right. Maybe it’s the system, coach, weather—-who cares? It’s highly unlikely they’ve both suddenly just become 25% worse.
Using PER, Foye/Gomes’ career PERs are both slightly better than Childress’ current PER, so if they revert to their averages and Childress doesn’t, they would be better. Childress’ career PER is significantly better than either Foye/Gomes’ current OR career PERs. But Childress costs more, for longer, than either of Foye/Gomes individually. There is no black and white here, ONLY GREY AREAS. And there is no point to continue this silly debate, other than to agree to disagree.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
That may be true, but
This post was only about JChill, not Gomes.
"[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.
Doesn't matter
It will live in Jax-archive infamy when Childress is finally traded and is contributing to a team.
Do not worry. (Matthew 6:27)
Nah
Jax refuses to hold himself accountable for anything he says in the past. Its like Mark McGuire at the Congressional Hearings all over again.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 2:33 PM PST up reply actions
That's what makes it even funnier
Do not worry. (Matthew 6:27)
He should be contributing for $33M
"[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.
By the way, I doubt FO would ever trade Gomes for Childress...
GM’s hate admitting they were “wrong” and usually double-down on their initial bet (see MJ and Kwame).
Btw, it’s a shame that the Lebron sweepstakes weren’t this summer than last summer…I bet there would be a lot more media trying to match up Lebron in LAC without the “it’s the Clippers” caveat.
But here they might not have been wrong - they may have wanted JChill and he went elsewhere
Agree on the LBJ point
"[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.
One wonders wtf happened to his Per-36 stats.
I don’t understand the drops in 3p%, FT%, and points scored, and increases in TO and PF per game. It’s like he came back a different person… but we can’t just ignore the historical evidence that suggests players revert to their statistical means, right?
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
John R wrote a detailed post here
He’s only taken nine 3pt shots this year. He also had a broken finger that affected his outside shooting (he chose to play rather than sit out). The rest are fairly close to career averages.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 3:07 PM PST up reply actions
Excuses...
I would still rather have Gomes on the Clippers if I had to choose.
Two reasons:
1. Childress’s $33 million contract
2. Childress’s inability to make 3pt shot.
Gomes has made 2 or more 3pt field goals 18 times this season. Childress has made 2 or more 3pt field goals only 15 times in his career (318 games), lol.
Fat lot of good it's done Gomes
or his teams.
Only once has a Ryan Gomes team finished above .400, which apparently means something to certain members of this board.
In other words, Ryan Gomes is a sub .400 player.
Do not worry. (Matthew 6:27)
But this post isn't about Gomes - it's about JChill
And the fact is that JChill’s contract, as NBAFAN8 points out, is far too costly. I would trade Gomes, but I’d rather trade him for a player better suited to this team, particularly given the amount of money commanded by JChill.
Clearly the Suns are having difficulty finding anyone to take this huge mistake of a signing off their hands. There’s a reason for that.
"[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.
3pt shooting
is vastly overrated. Childress can put the ball on the floor and get to the basket. He can also get offensive rebounds. More possessions = more points.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 3:58 PM PST up reply actions
NBA neophytes never consider defense, either
Do not worry. (Matthew 6:27)
Do you really think Childress is a lock-down defender?
He may have been a good defender in college, but nothing tells me he is a good defender.
I am sure if he was a good defender, the Suns, who struggle to play D would play him more.
It's certainly nice
But hanging your hat on Gomes being a better 3P shooter than Childress when JChill is better at basically everything else seems misplaced.
by Michael White on Feb 16, 2011 4:00 PM PST up reply actions
What's misplaced here is the notion that JChill is worth anythong close to $33M
And I think that you may be greatly overvaluing him as a player today. He plays 17 mins on a team that could use the player he used to be.
"[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.
LOL
We’ve already proven you horribly wrong. So what’s your answer? Gomes for Childress straight up?
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 4:02 PM PST up reply actions
I will answer this...
NO! I would keep Gomes.
Btw, I have told a few people here in the Midwest about this love affair some fans have with Childress and they can’t believe it.
I am really starting to believe that you are a few other members are living in a fantasy land.
Yikes
being judged for living in fantasy land about a dude who spends a small fortune on Eric Gordon cards. :(
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 4:07 PM PST up reply actions
Just so you know that lil invest has turned out just fine :-)
$20 grand put in $60 grand came out :-)
Nice job, but you failed on that one Chuck.
Don't worry - Chuckles always attacks when he's got nothing
Which is most of the time
"[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.
You never have anything meaningful to say do you?
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 4:14 PM PST up reply actions
Just pointing out what a douche you can be to other clipsnation posters
"[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.
Heh
and who’s attacking who?
Jackass.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 4:19 PM PST up reply actions
There you go again
Just apologize to NBAFAN8 and I’ll let you go.
"[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.
Let me go?
Up yours.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 4:20 PM PST up reply actions
its only a investment
if you sell it. Baseball cards have depreciated like crazy, my Magic Johnson/Larry Bird RC have gone down in value in the last 10 years and that’s not even factoring in inflation.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 4:13 PM PST up reply actions
and in case you didn't know
I was kidding. I grew up collecting cards, its like the stock market for kids. I have a bunch of Ray Allen rookies in storage.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 4:22 PM PST up reply actions
Good job apologizing
"[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.
Not for you
I think its pretty obvious when I put a smiley in there I was kidding. But your the type of guy who doesn’t understand something unless you get walked through it one excruciating step at a time.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 4:38 PM PST up reply actions
You should look at moving those now.
If and when he retires of makes the HOF, those cards will not go up.
Ray Ray is hot right now. People are thinking about his record breaking 3pt shooting.
Btw, what RCs do you have? Skybox? Topps? Fleer? Upper Deck?
Topps finest
I have like 30 of them. I had a bunch of Kobe’s but I sold them in HS to buy a card. Yea… it was not a nice car.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 4:50 PM PST up reply actions
Yeah, those Finest are very nice! Do you have any refractors?
I hope each card still has the “PEEL AND REMOVE COATING” hahahaha…I think about 90% of the people opening Finest peeled the clear platsic coating back in the day.
Sadly, the Ray Allen does not sell for much ($3-8), but now would be the time to list.
I didn't take off the coating
I had a super rare refractor of…. Anthony Mason. I remember it was 1 off someone really good. It was 1/25 or something like that.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 6:35 PM PST up reply actions
Any serial numbered card from the late 90's is rare.
In today’s hobby, the card companies have to serial number the cards to very low numbers (ie…/25, /10, /5, 1/1).
Most of the cards that were made in the 60-90’s were made in the hundreds of thousands of each card.
Btw, was your Mason a gold embossed ref?
Yah only in your twisted mind
No one wants the guy. He plays 17 mins a game. No matter how many hundreds of inane posts you make, it just doesn’t change the facts.
"[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.
Heh
only in mine? So I guess everyone else on this thread except for NBAFAN08 is also twisted?
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 4:08 PM PST up reply actions
No, you were wrong (admittedly) about Cook, you were wrong (whatever you say now) about JChill
and your hundreds of posts trying to deflect just don’t change the facts.
I’d take JChill, again, but not at that price. Which is pretty much what the entire NBA is telling you and the Suns.
So just give it a rest.
"[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.
Yawn
Gomes or Childress. Cmon now, you can do it.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 4:14 PM PST up reply actions
I think he has said "not for the $33M"
which is foolhardy, because the yearly amount for Gomes and Chill is about the same.
If it’s Gomes for Chill straight up…Jax won’t answer. To do so would be to indict Olshey.
Do not worry. (Matthew 6:27)
He can never answer
he couldn’t answer the Baron Davis trade question either. It’s pretty pathetic that a grown man can’t take a stand on anything.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 4:20 PM PST up reply actions
And again
$2MM extra over each of Gomes’s 3 years, plus 2 after-30 years beyond that at $7.5MM per, is not “about the same.”
Is Childress a better player than Gomes? Yes. Is he so much better that he’s worth a contract of that size and duration? That’s much more debatable, and no matter how much you all sidestep that question by ridiculing Jax, it’s a perfectly valid question that isn’t quite as black-and-white as some here are making it out to be.
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
Hehheh
At least we agree on this one boltsfan21—-this is one big grey area that isn’t worth arguing over. Debating, yes, but not arguing. It seems like common sense, but I think emotions are getting the best of people.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
I agree, and really that follows from the actual point of my post
Which is that JChill seems to have been significantly overpaid by the Suns when measured by playing time and by the apparent lack of interest in a trade.
Would I take JChill on the Clippers? Not at that price given the current makeup of the key players on this team.
"[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.
And...
you still haven’t answered the most basic of questions, Ryan Gomes for Josh Childress? Yay or nay?
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 4:10 PM PST up reply actions
The Clippers are a good rebounding team already.
I don’t see how they could rebound at a higher rate than they already do.
The opposing teams don’t have 0 rebounds in a game, so LAC can always improve.
by Michael White on Feb 16, 2011 4:05 PM PST up reply actions
Gotta give to get - we need to spread the floor more than an additional rebounder
This isn’t even a debatable point really mwhite
"[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.
Rebounding wins rings
Not chucking 3’s
Do not worry. (Matthew 6:27)
I'm not going to argue the point with you any longer
Just go look up a coaching website and learn about how offenses run and what different kinds of skill sets are needed. Blogs can be so lame.
"[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.
Hmm
every blog Jax is on is lame…. wait… maybe it’s because Jax is lame.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 4:15 PM PST up reply actions
I'll just stick with what Phil Jackson and Pat Riley say
Rebounding wins rings
Do not worry. (Matthew 6:27)
+1
If you take more shots than your opponent you will have a big advantage. It’s not rocket science.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 4:17 PM PST up reply actions
Sure but he always had Kobe or MJ
So what he meant was having the best players in the game wins rings.
"[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.
Heh
yea I’m sure the 6-24 in game seven is the reason the Lakers won. Not the fact that the team that won the rebounding won every single game in the Finals.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 4:23 PM PST up reply actions
Obviously
Those teams all did quite a bit of rebounding, too
Do not worry. (Matthew 6:27)
We have good rebounders. Rebounding is not our problem.
Of course, when we are healthy, even though we are a very young team, we are a good team. We just need a little tweaking.
Which is why I love the vociferous defenses here of of the Chuckles / John R previous irrational positions.
"[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.
offensive rebounds
are ALWAYS welcome.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 4:05 PM PST up reply actions
Gomes for Childress!!
If we can’t get Granger, Wallace, Prince, or Iggy at the trade deadline, then let’s do this!
"look, you can find any coach you want, bring him in here and run the situation. But I don't think they are going to do as good a job as I do." -Mike Dunleavy Sr.
With all this strident bickering, it's easy to overlook the fact that both sides can be right
The statements “Josh Childress is a better player than Ryan Gomes” and “The Suns gave Josh Childress a bad contract” are not mutually exclusive. I, for one, happen to believe that both statements are true. And the latter isn’t just a figment of this particular realgm article — Hollinger recently referred to the guy not as “Josh Childress,” but as “Josh Childress’ toxic contract.”
Only a fool would argue that Gomes is great and Childress sucks. But that doesn’t mean it’s unreasonable to question taking on Childress’ contract and the effect that this might have on our cap space both this offseason and further down the road. The argument that “the contracts are about the same and won’t affect our ability to sign a FA in the offseason” isn’t entirely true. In addition to the cap space we still have right now, people seem to be conveniently forgetting that Sool and Rhino will be coming off the books at a total of $4.7MM, which means we could have significantly more than the MLE to offer to a free-agent SF, and taking on Childress would eat into that amount.
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
The raises EJ, Kaman, BG, Baron, Aminu and Bledsoe receive
eat essentially any savings from Sool and Rhino.
http://hoopshype.com/salaries/la_clippers.htm
Ballpark it looks like about $4 million in raises which if you add the two cap holds from the empty roster spots of Rhino and Sool makes up the difference.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 16, 2011 11:11 PM PST up reply actions
Bolts, this was my thread, and it was about Childress' bad contract
The thread had nothing whatsoever to do with Gomes.
Chuckles came in and brought up the Gomes thing to try to deflect attention away from the real issue, which is the bad contract.
Again, Gomes had nothing to do with the thread.
"[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.
Well
a) this isn’t even Clipper related unless you have something to link the Clips turning down or being interested in a trade.
b) and the Gomes comment was derived because if Childress is such a bad contract shouldn’t we trade our bad contract in Gomes for him.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 1:04 AM PST up reply actions
I understand why you wanted to inject Gomes into it
You wanted to deflect. The problem is that the post had nothing to do with Gomes. You should do your own post comparing the two if you want to, but you shouldn’t have jumped all over this post.
JChill is Clipper related because he’s been discussed ad nauseum by many including you as the tonic that would cure all Clipper ills.
"[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.
It actually has everything to do with Gomes
Gomes is as much of an albatross as Childress is for the next two years. At least with Childress there is an upside.
Gomes has no such upside. He is a sub .400 player.
Do not worry. (Matthew 6:27)
Point well taken
But actually, those 6 raises total $3.25MM, so there’s still $1.5MM of savings there — savings that would be eaten up if we took on Childress’ deal. And there’s also still the matter of the 2 extra post-30-year-old years at $7.5MM per.
Don’t really feel like getting into an argument here, because I don’t see the world purely in black and white: There are legitimate arguments on both sides, despite the fact that the level of discourse here has essentially risen no higher than “You’re stupid” and “No, you are.” And that, really, was the point of my comment.
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
Again, there are not two sides here - the thread was about Childress and his contract only
"[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.
Of course there are 2 sides
Just because he has a bad contract doesn’t mean he couldn’t improve the team. The question is whether he would improve them enough to make the bad contract worth it. And to me that’s not at all clear. What is clear is that lots of folks around here are so strident that they can’t ever acknowledge the validity of opposing points of view.
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
My only point here was that they don't want him and clearly overpaid him
Sure he could help a team. But the contract makes it difficult to add him.
"[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'm glad you're here, man.
You’re the ibuprofen to this headache. Of course, I’m willingly reading this headache…………..
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
LOL
I often wonder why I willingly subject myself to something I absolutely, positively know will lead to either an elevated heart-rate or a full-blown migraine.
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
I was actually on CN
for well over a year and used to ignore Jax. Those were simpler days.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 1:33 AM PST up reply actions
Pot, meet Kettle
It’s not all just him. You are oppressively negative, unbelievably arrogant, and ridiculously inflexible in your thinking. Lighten up, Francis.
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
Nice "it's not all just him"
I just call it like I see it, bolts. I find Chuckles to be annoying, arrogant and out only to show everyone else how smart he is.
"[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.
Frankly, you're a bit arrogant yourself
As I said above, I appreciate the point you made on my post. You thought I that I thought you were on my side, which as I pointed out was incorrect. Then you suggest that my arguments aren’t really arguments. Which is certainly your opinion, but it would be wrong.
"[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.
You're right, I am a little arrogant
And also crude, rude, and often kind of a dick. But the difference is that I don’t think I’m right all the time, I don’t stubbornly stick to my guns in the face of contrary facts/evidence, I don’t think I (or any of us) have all the answers, and I actually try to read, think about, and respond in an honest matter to what other people here are saying. The only folks I get in fights with here are those who are completely intractable, and who are more interested in proving themselves right (or in proving you wrong) than they are in an open exchange of ideas. For the most part that means John R., Chuck, KillaClip (for IQ reasons alone), sometimes Mikey P., and you.
I think you often are unfairly dismissed when you have valid points, but you also bring it on yourself by painting yourself into completely illogical corners that you can’t get out of. Mostly this has to do with rigidity. MDSr. is a pretty dreadful coach, but he wasn’t a terrible GM, and the impact he had on the culture of the Clippers in terms of willingness to spend is undeniable. The more you deny it, and the more you make it out to be a black-and-white issue, the worse you look. On the flip side, Olshey hasn’t done squat yet, anything good that has happened this year can be credited either to MDSr or the lucky bounce of a ping-pong ball, and the more you try to argue otherwise, the worse you look. The only difference between my viewpoint and that of the Negative Nellies is that I don’t he’s been horrible, I believe he’s made some good moves as well as some bad, and I think he deserves a little more time to prove himself (as in 1 more offseason) before we get out the pitchforks. That’s called a reasonable opinion, and frankly I’m gratified that the crazies on both sides attack me for it.
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
Thanks for the thoughtful response
So you fault me for being rigid re MDSr. I think he’s a worse coach than a GM, but I do have problems with some of what he did as a GM, and give him credit for other things he did. I certainly gave him credit for opening up Sterling’s pocketbook, publicly, here, many times.
Having said that, one of the major issues I had with him as GM is his willingness to engage in a charade where he would pretend that he wasn’t the GM when in fact he was. In addition, he was not respected around the league as a good coach or GM in my opinion. So this was a catch – 22. He did some good things to open up Sterling’s pocketbook, but because he was such a poor coach and was not respected, the team really had to move on. I guess I could say that the more you deny that, the worse you look, but I really don’t operate that way because I think you’re entitled to your opinion, and respect it, even though I disagree with it.
I really could care less about your opinion as to how I “look,” by the way.
I also don’t think that Olshey has done that much yet. All I’ve ever said is that they need to give him some time to dig the team out of the reputational hole it’s in. I believe that he’s set up a professional system here that was not here before, which is different than your opinions apparently. The fact that you think I look bad because I hold that opinion is not only silly but may reflect a lack of understanding on your part as to how GMs work and how teams and players interact with each other around the league and expect their counterparts to act. That’s where your arrogance comes in.
In any event, I appreciate your contributions as I appreciate the contributions of everyone here. And although I could call you “crazy” for holding an opinion different than mine, I’ll resist the temptation for now.
Jax
"[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.
Your response speaks volumes
I am willing to admit that I’m imperfect, am not always right, and don’t have all the answers. What you’re saying here, essentially, is “I’m not wrong, I haven’t ever been wrong, I never held certain positions that you (and everyone else) have seen me espouse with your own eyes, I know more than you, and I don’t care what you or anyone else thinks of me.”
Fantastic! That certainly encourages me to engage in reasonable dialogue with you …
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
These are just opinions, boltsfan
I feel that my opinions about MDSr are reasonable. I don’t think that your opinions about MDSr are wrong, I just disagree with them. Basically what we are doing is just interpreting a set of facts based on our world views.
Have I ever been wrong about a factual issue? Of course, I’m wrong all the time.
Have I ever been “wrong” about an opinion I held? Yes.
"[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 usually try to stay out of these big blowups, but...
And although I could call you "crazy" for holding an opinion different than mine, I’ll resist the temptation for now.
Really, dude? Ego much? I can’t stand John R either but you’re just as crazy as he is.
Clippers // Chargers // Rays // Gators // Boise State
"The Lakers do win games. But things can change." - Blake Griffin
Um, that was based on him calling me crazy in his post
I was responding to this:
“That’s called a reasonable opinion, and frankly I’m gratified that the crazies on both sides attack me for it.”
Obviously, he was referring to me. I just responded in kind. Do I really think he’s crazy? No, I don’t.
"[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.
How do you block in blue someone else's quote?
"[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.
You highlight wanted you wanted blockquoted
and click on the apostrophe icon.
How do you block in blue someone else’s quote?
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 3:43 PM PST up reply actions
Ok, I'll give it a go
Boltsfan’s argument is incorrect, but he’s still a good guy.
"[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.
Ok, why the two lines?
"[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.
Let me try again
Boltsfan is brilliant
"[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.
Got it now
"[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 already regret teaching you that
Do not worry. (Matthew 6:27)
It's less than 1.5 million
If you look at the hoopshype link above you’ll see the Clippers have a lower payroll by 1.7 million BUT that’s because DJ isn’t on the payroll (he would have a cap hold) and you have a cap hold of about 400k per player for empty roster spots (I think up to 13) so that’s another 800k. You can also add the Clippers 1st round pick who will make about 2 million.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 1:09 AM PST up reply actions
But then again
You might be able to move Foye as an expiring. Too much crystal balling is required to nail this down completely, but it’s irrefutable that JChill for Gomes would leave us less room, and that may or may not end up making a difference.
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
I know it will eat into the cap room
I answered it above for Indy818. But your initial assumption that the team would have more than the MLE is wrong. The team will already have at best the MLE which gives them no advantage over the Celtics, Heat and Lakers of the world.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 1:31 AM PST up reply actions
I didn't "assume" that
I said we “could have more than the MLE.” And we could. Were we to move Foye, we would. But were we to move Foye but add Childress, we might not.
You can argue as vociferously and inflexibly as you want, but it won’t change the fact that adding Childress adds money to the payroll that may or may not be worth it and may or may not hurt us down the road. You feel that it’s the right move. I respect that opinion. But I don’t respect the fact that you are unwilling to respect or acknowledge the valid points inherent in opposing opinions.
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
Fine your initial inclination
I wasn’t talking down to you, just clearing up the idea that the Clips by standing pat would have more than the MLE.
I feel like adding a valuable player for 4 years offsets having a bad player playing significant minutes for the next 2 years. I wouldn’t add Childress unless the Clippers moved either Foye or Gomes for instance. Paying 11 million for a Childress/Gomes SF platoon is bad news.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 1:42 AM PST up reply actions
Sports Illustrated seems to think the Suns made a bad move in signing Childress as well.
In the Feb 21st issue, titled “RAW DEALS”, writer Chris Mannix has Childress’s 5 years, $33 million deal as one of the top five “not all of it wisely signings…of last summer”
Article stats the Suns president Lon Babby, who was Childress’s former agent, lured Childress back to the states.
I wonder if some of that $33 million contract will end up in the pocket of Babby?
Doubt it
he should have gotten more actually. It was quite surprising he signed for less than Travis Outlaw.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 1:06 AM PST up reply actions
to save time
just read the original SP post.
http://www.clipsnation.com/2010/7/12/1565811/josh-childress-for-less-than-the
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 17, 2011 1:06 AM PST up reply actions
Wow - Steve should pay me a share of the fees for this post
"[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.
Another basketball junkie and esteemed member of the media weighs in
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/two/110217
Scroll down to the list of the 25 worst contracts. Simmons thinks JChill’s contract is worse than FElton’s, Baron’s, Luke Walton’s, Al Harrington’s, Rip’s, Diop’s, and even the monstrosity (and dodged bullet) that is the Travis Outlaw deal. #4 after Arenas, Rashard Lewis, and the possibly dried-up husk of the great talent formerly known as Brandon Roy.
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
NBA Playoffs Content Module
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Shaquille O’Neal is in a Chinese beer commercial, too (VIDEO)
- ‘Deep Thoughts’ and Cheap Thoughts: San Antonio Spurs vs. Oklahoma City Thunder
- C-a-C: This is probably as close to LeBron James working with John Waters as we’ll ever get
- Dwyane Wade’s hot pink pants: The kind of thing you can get away with when you drop 41
- Lamar Odom to New York? Dwight Howard on the move? For now, it’s all talk
