How do you replace Eric Gordon?
Nuggets 8-2 since they traded the great and maximum contract Carmelo Anthony.
about 1 year ago
John R
125 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
the Nuggs got value for Melo
it’s not like we got anything in return for Gordon being out. Plus I would like to see how far the nuggets will go.
Nuggets haven't missed a beat
I’m not surprised the Nuggets are a better team post Anthony, but I am impressed how seamlessly the ex-Knicks have fit in with the remaining Nugs. They look like a scary deep team headed into the playoffs and probably a better team than any of the Carmelo led Denver teams.
The only problem I see for Denver is how they will keep all that depth together, but even that task is more manageable than it would have been had Anthony accepted a max contract extension.
I’m not ready to make the jump that Anthony = EJ. As others have noted, losing EJ hurts the Clippers’ defense just about as much as it hurts the offense. But if the Clippers could trade him and Mo for a package similar to what Denver got for Anthony and Billups so that they were at least 2 deep at every position, then they likely would come out a stronger team, too.
Even more impressive
Gallinari has been hurt and Mosgov is not playing. So essentially the Nuggets traded Chandler and Felton for Anthony and Billups. And they’re just as good if not better. Looking forward to seeing how the “deep roster” team plays in the playoffs. Will they actually fail without a “go-to scorer” as so many people think they will?
Ok, I'll bite - what is the connection between this article and replacing EJ?
I honestly don’t understand the linkage.
"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted" – Albert Einstein
by Another son of Mike Smith on Mar 15, 2011 9:51 AM PDT reply actions
Well the article is just a link to the Nuggets latest win.
If how easily Carmelo was replaced, by a team essentially forced to make a trade with only one team, inspires people to think about the value of scoring and scorers in the NBA, that would be a good thing.
Thanks for the reply, John.
I appreciate your attempt to try to address my query, but nowhere in your answer to me do you mention Gordon. Yet you made a deliberate decision to include him in the title of this post, which suggests to me that there is some connection that you are trying to make between Gordon and Melo. I’m trying to understand what you believe that linkage is.
Is it because they are both high scorers (although I believe much of the data suggests their efficiency and how they get their points are not similar)?
Is it because you believe Gordon will demand a trade (even though he is years behind Melo in his approach to free agency)?
Is it because you believe the Clips will eventually be forced to trade Gordon Like Denver did (even though my personal feeling is that the Clips would never do that – instead, I think they would follow either the Cleveland-LeBron model (i.e., milk him as long as possible, let him walk and recoup picks) or the Utah-Deron model (i.e., sell early)?
Is it because you believe they are both overrated (I know you feel that way about Gordon, but I don’t know how you feel about Melo (FYI I feel Melo is overrated but Gordon is not overrated)?
I’m not trying to trap you, John, as I know others try to do to you for sport and I know you try to do to others for the same. I’m simply not seeing why this article (as you have explained yourself in your first reply to my post) has anything to do with Gordon. Please help me understand.
"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted" – Albert Einstein
by Another son of Mike Smith on Mar 15, 2011 12:48 PM PDT up reply actions
The article itself has nothing to do with Gordon
I stated that.
It is vague on purpose to make people think and generate discussion. If the result of said thinking is everyone wants to talk about me so be it. Instead I find it interesting to look at what it means when you are forced, for whatever reason, to trade a player who was using over 32% of a team’s possessions and was their primary scorer on the wing and what success looks like in that regard.
Further, I have been challenged to defend my position that it would be easy to replace Gordon. Here we see that a more extreme, I see some below say better, player and case has been traded for what I think the average NBA fan would see as spare parts at best and the team has remained successful. This goes to the fact that the question of how could you replace Gordon is absurd in how trivial it is. It goes to the value of creating shots, which seems massively overrated to me since Carmelo was using many more possessions and now we have evidence this wasn’t necessary and it may have hurt the team. Unlike when we talk about Derrick Rose and say maybe he should dish out 3 of his shots to Boozer, Noah and/or Deng, with Carmelo the Nuggets had to instantly and without any benefit, real or imagined, from having Carmelo on the floor as a threat, replace 20 shots per game.
What does the Nuggets success without Carmelo have to do with how we evaluate primary scorers, where EJ happens to be ours? Absolutely nothing I guess. Its just me being a big meany.
I don’t believe that you’re intentionally trying to be a “big meany” (I like that term) and the idea of generating discussion is almost always a worthwhile one. But there is a balance that needs to occur between making it general enough to warrant an actual discussion (e.g., 2+2=4 is so specific and precise that such a post probably wouldn’t yield much of a discussion) but at the same time making it specific enough that the rest of us are in a position to comment on it constructively. And let’s face it, a lot of posters on this site lay down traps for others, whether it be by being overly pointed (“Gordon sucks”) or not pointed enough (perhaps this post qualifies).
To the specifics of your clarifying comments, I agree with you that the value of creating shots is “massively overrated.” And I would also tend to agree that there is probably a high correlation between primary scorers and the perception that they have to be a shot creator (although I find it ironic that Gordon seemed to receive a lot of criticism last season for not being aggressive enough in creating his own shot – does that mean he would be less replaceable?) Regardless, I can see why you might conclude that Gordon (as our primary scorer) is more replaceable than some might initially think. But I think it becomes a bit more tenuous for me when you start comparing “primary scorers” across teams and saying that they are all equally replaceable (I know you didn’t say that, but that is the logical conclusion that someone might draw from your comments). To take the leading scorers for each of the 30 teams and to draw conclusions about how one performs on a different team and then extrapolate that to the other 29 feels much too tricky for me. There are just too many other variables to consider – whatever are the specifics of the Melo trade are just that – specific to that one situation.
And lastly, I think the success or failure of every actual or proposed trade must be evaluated relative to what you give up or get back. In my humble opinion, to say that the replacement of any player is trivial feels incomplete to me, simply because I can’t answer that question without the context of knowing what I’m getting back and what other assets do I have to fit in around the new void.
Thanks for replying to my initial query.
"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted" – Albert Einstein
by Another son of Mike Smith on Mar 15, 2011 7:02 PM PDT up reply actions
Hmmm
To be clear I have never said “that they are all equally replaceable”. I am saying specifically Carmelo and EJ are equally replaceable in that they contribute very close to the same.
I agree – you did not say that. But the way you wrote it suggests exactly that to me as a logical conclusion. If your argument only extended to the two players, that is fine. But it just means that the argument that you have been making is meant to be applied to this one basis of comparison, ie. it is highly limited in its applicability. Nothing wrong with that, but it is much less than what I thought you were trying to assert… and based on my periodic reading of your posts in general, is much less than you generally try to assert. But again, nothing wrong with that. As I like to say, I’d much rather be correct in limited thinking than incorrect in broad thinking.
On what basis do Carmelo and EJ contribute very close to the same such that you believe they are equally replaceable — PPG? WoW? Some other metric? In a post below, you said it is not scoring a lot of points and I agree with that. But if not that, then what is it that you use for the EJ/Melo comparison? Without knowing, to me they’re just apples and oranges, i.e., completely different players with different strengths, skills, tendencies, etc. Very hard for me to think that one through.
"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted" – Albert Einstein
by Another son of Mike Smith on Mar 15, 2011 11:53 PM PDT up reply actions
Does it matter? Really?
If I went around fans of the NBA and asked them who is better Eric Gordon or Carmelo Anthony I would get a mix of laughs and “who is Eric Gordon?”
Am I forced to prove my thesis from all 3 mutually exclusive sides? That Carmelo’s contributions are larger than EJ’s, that EJ’s are larger than Carmelo’s AND that they are roughly the same?
Suffice to say that they play similar roles in being primary wing scorers and I find their contributions to be roughly the same. Feel free to disagree. But if I am incorrect, I am incorrect in that Carmelo should be more difficult to replace than EJ, and still that hasn’t proven to be a problem.
Therefore, the question of how could you replace EJ remains absurd.
Well put
Though I think he contributes more defensively than Carmelo (can’t prove it), EJ is definitely replaceable.
Do not worry. (Matthew 6:27)
Everyone is replaceable, but at what cost?
Michael Jordan at the peak of his career was replaceable – what does that tell you? By itself, it tells you very little, in my view.
Please don’t feel so put upon — nobody is “forcing” you to prove anything, John. For this one time, I have tried to engage you in a constructive conversation about something that I think matters. I still do not see the logic behind why Melo is more difficult to replace than EJ, but your words suggest you are sure that you are correct and I don’t wish to engage in debates that feel circular and pre-determined. I’ll leave it alone so you can go back to doing what you do with the other citizens. Thanks.
"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted" – Albert Einstein
by Another son of Mike Smith on Mar 16, 2011 12:54 PM PDT up reply actions
Well this is frustrating
I don’t think Melo’s contributions are more difficult to replace than EJ. In fact I said multiple times that I personally find their total contributions to be completely similar.
I also disagree that everyone is replaceable. The best at anything is not replaceable in the NBA due to the limited resource of minutes. The second best can only be replaced profitably by the best. Eventually you move down the line to where a player can be replaced or even improved upon by bringing in multiple players until finally you get to the players who hurt their team being on the court. (The Clippers seemed fond of this last group this offseason.)
Eric Gordon and Carmelo both reside comfortably somewhere in the middle group. Now, working against a team that acquires Carmelo is that he consumes so much of a couple other resources: cap space and possessions. So the net of resources gained and lost by the Nuggets appears to be well in their favor so far. I think it is fair to say that to much of the NBA-sphere this is unexpected given Carmelo’s stature and pay. He is paid and treated as a top tier player but doesn’t not hold the same value to his team as one. Carmelo is replaceable. Lebron James is not.
So now the question remains do I care to prove my position that EJ and Carmelo are very similar in contribution, and the answer is I still pass. Given the extreme irrationality I see surrounding his play, there is no point. But in the end, it doesn’t matter. EJ is not the problem with the Clippers, but he is yet to prove that he is the savior either in the Jordan/Pippen sense.
Just for fun
After tonight’s loss, Knicks are 1 game over .500 before Carmelo got there and 1 game over .500 in game since Carmelo arrived. I feel like taking on a max contract player should make a difference.
This stuff isn’t too tricky to me. A team is no more and no less than the sum of its parts.
I think the basic point is that EJ is expendable, provided we get a generous deal.
I would agree to this, although I don’t know why it’s an issue worth singling out. EJ is a multi-faceted player, certainly not just a scorer, and as far as I know he isn’t demanding a max contract. For anything reasonable, we should keep him… Shouldn’t we?
Now, for the record, I like what Utah did. Deron probably wasn’t staying, so they got out in front of the situation and found excellent value. I don’t think there’s much overlap here, though. If we suddenly have reason to think that EJ won’t sign, then that changes things.
"i know huh........freakin clippers man.....its like a wild ride rooting for this team....gotta love em....(sometimes) lol" In GrIfFin We TrUsT
Is it weird that you would make up a point on my behalf?
That’s not the point at all.
This was a matter of timing. Your post hadn't come through on my snail connection.
I wasn’t responding to you, and it was a legitimate interpretive question. Let’s move on.
Your point apparently is that EJ is a scorer like Melo, and hence he’s expendable. If so, then I disagree with your premise, in a variety of ways… Scorers are valuable, EJ is not only a scorer, and other skills are also expendable.
Ironically, we may be in agreement here. EJ is not untouchable, in case a generous offer comes around. But are you in favor of trading EJ? Would you push for it? How much would you be willing to extend him for?
"i know huh........freakin clippers man.....its like a wild ride rooting for this team....gotta love em....(sometimes) lol" In GrIfFin We TrUsT
Are you inviting me to mind-read now?
You mention EJ in your title, and then you bring up “the value of scoring and scorers in the NBA” above. If my nuance is off, then be a good guy and enlighten me.
"i know huh........freakin clippers man.....its like a wild ride rooting for this team....gotta love em....(sometimes) lol" In GrIfFin We TrUsT
Don't fall into the trap, brother.
"Buckle your seat belts, folks. This one's going down to the wire." -The inimitable Ralph Lawler.
by Gordon for President on Mar 15, 2011 12:39 PM PDT up reply actions
I am inviting you to not worry about what I think unless I state it explicitly
We will all get along better.
Then by all means, state it explicitly
If you make a post “vague on purpose to make people think and generate discussion,” then that’s what you’re going to get. I was commenting on what I thought the issue was. I have asked you to clarify your position on EJ. I invite you to move past whatever else it is you think I’m up to.
I see that you have offered some clarification in your 1:03 post above. The issue as stated is whether EJ is easily replaceable. I believe that’s closely related to how I framed the issue, namely, whether or not EJ is expendable. From here, it should be easy enough to get into a real conversation. I would still like to know whether you want to trade EJ, given his current value.
"i know huh........freakin clippers man.....its like a wild ride rooting for this team....gotta love em....(sometimes) lol" In GrIfFin We TrUsT
Like I said
You want to talk about me. I want to talk about the role of the scorer in the NBA.
It shouldn’t matter what I think for the discussion to go forward.
You ought to have laid down the specific topic from the get go.
My question concerned your opinion on a particular basketball matter, one seemingly related to the post. If you think it’s standard for people to not inquire about other people’s basketball opinions, then you’re simply mistaken. As I’m sure you’ve noticed, people advance controversial opinions all the time, so it’s often fruitless, and absurd, to try to carve them out of the discussion. However, I can drop my particular questions and stick to the topic as you’ve now defined it.
Topic: The role of the scorer in the NBA. In my opinion (because what else would it be?), scoring is obviously important, although it does appear to be overrated by the marketplace. Melo looks like a case in point. $60M seems like too much for a half-hearted defender who shoots with only average efficiency. However, we probably shouldn’t read too much into the fact that Denver is doing well. Teams need scorers, and the Nuggets have still got a few. I’m a big fan of Afflalo, and their PGs have been hitting their threes. Losing a big scorer is hardly fatal if the team in question has viable replacements. Whether the new Nuggets are truly viable is still an open question; the sample size is too small. But like many others, I’m watching with interest.
EJ is a scorer too. Even if that were all he was, he’d still be important in that role. But he would be replaceable, yes, provided that others could step up once he was gone.
What I notice when EJ’s gone is how the defense suffers. I notice other things, too, but now I may be too far off topic.
"i know huh........freakin clippers man.....its like a wild ride rooting for this team....gotta love em....(sometimes) lol" In GrIfFin We TrUsT
You ought to have laid down the specific topic from the get go.
Why? Is that a rule? If you have something to add it shouldn’t require something to first react to.
Errrr... So now I require something to react to
Who’s psycho-analysing who?
"i know huh........freakin clippers man.....its like a wild ride rooting for this team....gotta love em....(sometimes) lol" In GrIfFin We TrUsT
Let's reimagine what happened as a conversation in real life
Scene: A Clipsnation meetup
John R. “Hey guys, Nuggets are 8-2 post-Carmelo, how do you think this situation relates to Eric Gordon and improving our team?”
Others: I think this and I think that.
Time passes…
ASoMS: Alright, what do you think John R?
John R: I think…
SilverClip: John R thinks that EJ is expendable, provided we get a generous deal.
John R: No that’s not what I was going to say.
SilverClip: Your point apparently is that EJ is a scorer like Melo, and hence he’s expendable.
John R: No that’s still not it and you are being very rude.
SilverClip: How dare you?
SilverClip: Expendable, provided we get a generous deal
John R: Equally replaceable
I don’t see a difference, unless you don’t think that Denver got a generous deal.
by BayAreaClipper on Mar 15, 2011 11:44 PM PDT up reply actions
I can think of few things ruder than people trying to tell me what my point was
Which was the point of the comment above.
What is your point?
This was a matter of timing. Your post hadn’t come through on my snail connection.
I wasn’t responding to you, and it was a legitimate interpretive question. Let’s move on.
Fixation issues?
"i know huh........freakin clippers man.....its like a wild ride rooting for this team....gotta love em....(sometimes) lol" In GrIfFin We TrUsT
It would appear he misunderstood what you meant by "replaceable"
You just meant that, as scorers, they are interchangeable, not expendable and to be replaced, correct?
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
by Erik O on Mar 16, 2011 11:54 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Interesting theory
I have never heard replaceable mean to be imminently marked for substitution before so it never dawned on me it could be construed this way.
I still mean their total contributions can be achieved through alternate means. In that sense expendable I suppose, but not the word I would choose either.
In my view
EJ currently doesn’t have near the perceived value that Melo has around the league. If he did, then it is quite possible that he could be traded for a bunch of players in the same way that Melo was traded. Of course, there is a reason why Melo’s perceived value is so high. Is that reason legitimate? That’s another topic I suppose.
"[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.
Forgot to mention that Chauncy Billups, another good player, was included in that trade
Assuming that EJ’s value was equal to Melo’s, we’d have to include someone else equal to Chauncy’s value, or at least with a similar salary who would be a serviceable PG since a PG was included in the trade.
"[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.
EJ is more than just a scorer.
This is a non-sequitur. I guess this means Durant is easily replaceable by a trade with the Knicks, too.
"Buckle your seat belts, folks. This one's going down to the wire." -The inimitable Ralph Lawler.
by Gordon for President on Mar 15, 2011 10:23 AM PDT reply actions
+1
John R stretching again.
Also odd that it coincides with a loss.
Proud member of Club FTR. falconPUNCH! for president!
by Newton Pham on Mar 15, 2011 10:58 AM PDT up reply actions
Its hard to avoid them all since almost any day I could come here would be after a loss
That’s not fair. I’ll try harder for you though.
I've been a silent reader for some time now, thanks to your bullying
But I can’t quite hold my tongue on this one. You must realize that in 2011, you’ve now posted 77 times on game recaps for losses, and a whopping 0 times for game recaps on wins, right? Oh, and the record was 16-19 during that time. Oh no!! Where are the wins??
And before you make some snide remark about how I must be so obsessed with you to figure this out, or that I’m Jax 2.0, that I have nothing better to do with my time, or something else you consider insulting, just know this:
A) That took me roughly 10 minutes to figure out
B) It’s downright offensive when people outwardly lie like this because they assume everyone is too dim witted to see through it, and
C) You’ve escaped the insinuation that you only come around during losses for far too long, and so it seemed necessary to get you off your high horse.
Show a bit of humility, Mr. R, and people might show you some respect. Until then, you’ll never be the leader you obviously think you are. Until then, you’re just a bully. So go right ahead on and bully me away again, that’s fine as Christmas pine.
by BayAreaClipper on Mar 15, 2011 11:36 PM PDT up reply actions
Just what does it mean
that one only comes around during a loss?
On a related note, from the post by John R below re replacing EJ, I don’t agree with the thesis. To me, the team wins when EJ is playing. See Jan.
"[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.
True - I was thinking about that
But there BD was out, BG was new, and Kaman was out. Would that make a difference? To me Jan is the better measure. Also, look what’s been happening without EJ – 3 of 5 on the road, almost a fourth win? Not bad. Agreed they need some shoring up, but they are playing pretty well with Kaman. They just need a better SF now IMO.
"[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, if you want to cherry pick the measure
Its not a very scientific way to go, but go ahead.
I'm not going to get into an argument - clearly you have a different opinion
"[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
Like I said, its a tough target to hit to comment only when they win.
They have lost 42 times now, so that means I have comments less than 2 times per loss.
I am not sure this proves what you think it does.
I think he was referring to 2011 losses
77 (79) posts in 19 losses. 4.05 posts per loss.
"[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.
OHHHHHHHHHHHH
So 4 times proves something then. Interesting.
I don't know that it proves anything - just doing the math
Apparently the opinion of the poster is that you are more comfortable posting after losses because you believe that the current FO is not doing its job and that people would be more inclined to side with you after losses than wins. Assuming that your posts were about those kinds of issues.
Not an unreasonable opinion, I suppose. Since I believe that the FO has been doing an adequate job, or am willing to give them more rope then you are, when they play well for a sustained period, like in Jan, or on this road trip, I probably start thinking about whether my opinion has been validated. This has been a rollercoaster season.
I do think it’s true that you don’t typically make positive posts about the team’s successes. However, that doesn’t necessarily mean that you don’t enjoy the successes.
"[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.
Wow
You sure seem to know exactly what he thinks. Are you BayAreaClipper or do you just not think he can speak for himself?
As I think I mentioned - I don't know what he thinks
But I think that I can make a reasonable assumption, which I’ve done above.
So – am I correct that you are more comfortable posting after losses or is it just a coincidence?
"[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.
BAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRFFFFFFFFFFFFF
LOL, you got your first one of the day.
Question, how is your question relevant to the Clippers?
Ouch
i think it’s relevant to this blog and to this thread. Apparently, you disagree. So be 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.
I asked how
Please explain. It may cause me to rescind your barf.
I thought I did
My answer is that the question is relevant to this blog and this thread. The blog has posters with personalities whom we have all come to know because we interact with them as Clipper fans. It’s a community.
"[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.
So is the "barf" rescinded?
"[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, nope, not even close
You would need to draw the connection between Carmelo Anthony, the Nuggets, Eric Gordon and my comment count. This is called being on topic and is considered good form on the internet.
Oh well
I’m not sure that’s fair – reasonable comments on the bloggers that make up the Nation are to be expected. Particularly given some of the types of opinions you tend to post or the way you express them. Please note that I’m not criticizing you here, I’m just disagreeing with you regarding what is good form on this Blog.
"[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.
Exhibit A
But you are certainly entitled to your opinion. I think we’ve exhausted this conversation.
"[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 certainly does seem you have nothing to add
No disagreement there.
I will get my comment count up on those wins though for you guys
So you can stop whining about it.
I don't think anyone was whining
They just pointed to some statistics and endeavored to interpret the statistics.
"[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
I doubt you’re that surprised by some of the reactions posters may have to some of your opinions.
"[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.
Why would I be surprised?
You and others have made your intentions clear by demonstrating them over and over again.
I am not sure I understand what you mean
But I can tell that this topic has been exhausted.
"[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.
Which topic is that?
Because you don’t seem to be talking about the topic of the fanshot.
As usual.
Again, I think this discussion is over
Thank you for your 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.
Yeah you said that 3 times already
What is this compulsion of yours?
Your question seems inconsistent
with your stated position that we should only be talking about the topic of the fanshot.
With that said, I think it’s time to diesngage now. Thanks again for your 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.
+1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
My sentiments EXACTLY.
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
+1
This connection is just trying too hard to make something out of nothing.
"The perception here in Los Angeles has always been that the Lakers find a way to win games and the Clippers find a way to lose…I recognize it, but I'm not going to accept it," Griffin said. "I'm not going to say, 'Oh, that's fine."
by TheEricGordonShow on Mar 15, 2011 11:00 AM PDT up reply actions
do you mean besides the best 3 point shooter and defnder on the team?
by indy818 on Mar 15, 2011 12:49 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
subquestion: are you trying to ignore defensive accountability and effort when comparing EJ and Melo?
Bc one of these is not like the other, na mean?
by indy818 on Mar 15, 2011 12:51 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
3 point shooter isn't ignored, its rolled into scorer
Is he the best defender? I mean its not that I don’t care. I am just comparing the total skillsets both players bring to the table. I see other commenters arguing that Carmelo is better than EJ. Fine maybe so, maybe not. To me, overall the total they bring to the table is about equal. Do you strongly disagree with that? If you do, is it because you value Carmelo even higher than EJ?
im trying my best not to compare them directly.
I think EJ’s attitude and skill combined make him one of the best “#2’s” in the league. I think we can all agree the eventually Blake will be the major force behind this team, so would melo be as effective as a second fiddle player? I’m not so sure.
EJ, on the other hand, seems to be that pippen to blake’s jordan (don’t dig too deep into this comparison – I don’t need to be told that blake isn’t jordan). Both have a chance to be play at an all star level for many years, and are willing to do it together.
by indy818 on Mar 15, 2011 1:53 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Comparisons would seem to lose value if they aren't direct on at minimum the important points
I won’t dig too deep into your comparison, but I bet Nick Young is happy being Pippen to John Wall’s Jordan, but it doesn’t mean that team is going anywhere.
And that’s part of the core of the discussion. You look at everything they bring to the table and neither Carmelo or EJ is Jordan… or Pippen.
Now the Nuggets don’t seem to have a Jordan or a Pippen and they seem to be doing fine. This is what I am encouraging everyone to meditate on.
it'll be a cool experiment for sure.
Ill be watchin the nuggs, especially if they wind up playing okc, a team that has “their Melo.”
Its hard to make a point against NY/john wall, but I don’t think they compare to griff and EJ. Maybe that’s the Clip fan in me, and I don’t know much about NY.
I agree that they aren’t a jordan/pippen or a shaq/kobe or a Manu/duncan or whatever, but what they have on their side is time. At 22/21 years old, I find it hard to believe that they are done improving, and the dynamic is good, even though injuries prevented a good long look. I’m glad we will have another year to watch.
by indy818 on Mar 15, 2011 2:48 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
That combo definitely wasn't chosen at random.
Its something like:
Pippen/Jordan
< huge gap >
Gordon/Griffin
< huge equivalent gap >
Wall/Young
John, where does the Detroit Pistons championship team fit into this analogy? In my opinion, they had no go-to guy, yet they clearly played incredibly well as a team unit with what felt like a lot of depth.
Do you believe that Denver might be the second coming of that model? Or was Detroit a one time aberration? Or perhaps do you feel there was a Jordan and Pippen on that team?
And then to push it a bit further, are you of the opinion that the Clips should be striving for a model that ignores go to guys and focuses on balance, depth, unity, etc. a la Detroit (and perhaps Denver)?
I have no idea that is where your head is at… I’m just trying to nudge the thought process along to bring it back to how it impacts our team.
"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted" – Albert Einstein
by Another son of Mike Smith on Mar 15, 2011 7:09 PM PDT up reply actions
For me
Reflectively, I almost always think of the Pistons as an anomaly.
by Michael White on Mar 15, 2011 7:18 PM PDT up reply actions
I do as well
"[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 is an anomaly because
1) Few teams are trying to build themselves that way
2) Folks wouldn’t be able to recognize it again unless that team also won the title
I don’t think it is an anomaly in the sense that it could not be intentionally repeated.
Hence, Sessions + Childress = playoffs.
Except they made the ECF seven straight years
Going back, the 60’s Celtics didn’t have a “go-to-scorer”. Their superstar excelled on the defensive side of the ball.
The only other team in the modern era to win by committee was the Bad Boys Pistons, yet they did have a star in Isaiah.
The superstar model has definitely proven more successful. I believe the Clippers have one.
Do not worry. (Matthew 6:27)
The 60s Celtics?
I don’t have a way to even begin to evaluate that one. Not sure that’s relevant to today’s NBA.
"[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 the 1960 Celtics?
or the Celtics of the 1960s.
Because it makes a huge difference in your statement about lackinga go to scorer:
Hondo
Blake Griffin is coming, hide your MBengas
The pre-Hondo teams
that won 5 championships.
Do not worry. (Matthew 6:27)
fair enough
the team had great players, but no real “scoring champ” type player
Blake Griffin is coming, hide your MBengas
The Lakers imploded
Malone got hurt, and all the rumors about players breaking the code and informing wives on infidelity.
3/5ths of the starting lineup hated each other at that time.
Blake Griffin is coming, hide your MBengas
Kobe was the Pistons MVP
Do not worry. (Matthew 6:27)
LOL - so true
"[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 we are locked in to a model that does exist but doesn't
There is the Pareto principle that is to not be so easily denied.
The question is, what is production? Is it scoring a lot of points? No that is not enough information to call someone productive. Every single team has a player or two or three that scores a lot of points. What matters in the NBA is the tiny differences between them.
First, let’s move away from Jordan and Pippen. It was Jordan and Pippen and Grant or Jordan and Pippen and Rodman. ANY of those players on their Bulls championship team would probably be the most productive player on next year’s Clippers team. I offer this as an example of how tiny things make a big difference in the NBA.
As to the Pistons, Billups and BWallace are your Jordan and Pippen I would say. That team is a great example because they weren’t beating you 110 to 100. They were winning 90 to 80. Its not scoring as many points as possible. Its scoring more points than the other team.
I think these Nuggets might be more like an upgraded late-model Rockets. Now anyone who has been paying attention knows I am way high on the Nuggets bigs. If one can accept that all three of a team’s big three can be 4’s and 5’s then I offer you Nene, Martin and Andersen. But even still they don’t have a super high producer. What they have is a roster bursting with above average players. This compares to the Rockets because they have a roster bursting with average players. As I said before last season, take the over on those Rockets. There is a solid track record of failing to properly evaluate a team that either lacks a big 3 or whose big 3 is not their top 3 scorers.
So back to the Clippers. The team inherited this year is not set up for a big 3 model, unless we can talk about the Nuggets. Griffin, Jordan and Good Kaman can be that big 3. We have seen that this season. Gordon IS NOT a member of that big three. He is a very solid role player only. (Oh noes!) Still, the Clippers big 2.5 cannot overcome the huge amount of bad players on the roster. Because they are essentially forced to play with 48 minutes of below to far below average production at the 3 and almost all bench players are bad to terrible, it shows how a big 3 is not enough.
The team was set up as productive through the top 5. At the conclusion of the draft and free agency, that is where the team remained. Even after the trade which should have improved the talent by adding Moon, the coach seems reluctant to play him.
How do you replace Eric Gordon? You don’t need to worry about that. You need to acquire 2-3 solid position players without losing any of Griffin, Jordan or Kaman. Just like that, you are the Nuggets. $17M and now 3 first round picks should have been more than enough to get that done.
But John R, why did it take you so long to make your point?
Because you’ve taken on the role of provocateur and bait-slinger… though somehow, in your mind you see yourself as somekind of embattled hero… a cold, hard truth-teller.
Your off-season Gordon-bashing was regrettable and wrong but now you can’t let it go. Is Eric Gordon a perfect player? No. Is he replaceable? Yes, and interestingly, with dissimilarly unperfect players. Okay. Good point.
But if Eric Gordon is a replaceable role player than why can’t the Clips win when he doesn’t play? The empirical evidence tells a story counter to your theory.
There’s no valid comparison to the Nuggets. They traded Carmelo for value and replaced him with depth. The Clippers have no such depth. That they also got out of a gloomy Carmelo-funk seems equally important but that they wouldn’t have gotten anywhere without having good horses in the barn. Clips don’t have the horses.
But isn’t there a way to make this point without lighting the house on fire?
BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARFF
Also note, the comment above wasn’t my original point at all. Its the result of discussion that happens when people write about basketball instead of using my name in the title of comments.
Ok, I guess I'm not internet - savvy
I take it “BARF” is a way that posters let others know they don’t like posts? Or is this specific to you? Inquiring minds want to 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.
Ok, so it's not a generally-used phrase - thanks
"[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 agree that the Clips do not win without EJ
And that Jan hot streak with him in the mix with BD playing just seems like the best evidence to me.
Plus, they traded both Melo and Chauncy for all that depth.
"[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.
At this point I'd probably take EJ over Melo
Based on a number of things: Age, defense, scoring efficiency, and salary. Obviously EJ’s biggest weakness is his rebounding but given the other things he provides I’m OK with it. EJ is a shooting guard and the league is littered with inefficient 2 guards who don’t rebound (see Foye,Randy). EJ’s weakness can be covered by putting exceptional rebounders on the floor with him. You can’t cover high usage, inefficient scorers with other teammates.
John R does bring up an interesting point regarding Melo. Denver replaced him with other productive players. And they continue to play well, even better. But what would have happened if Melo was injured this year like EJ? Would Denver have struggled? IMO no they wouldn’t have. Because they would have used JR Smith at SF or put Lawson and Billups in the backcourt with Afflalo at SF. Quality replacements. Who replaced EJ? Foye and Aminu some at the 2… ugh.. Do we miss EJ because he’s a great player? Sure Do we miss EJ because the players out there instead of him are awful? ABSOLUTELY.
The moral is you need to have a couple of excellent players surrounded by good players. The Clippers top 5 (Griffin, EJ, Kaman, M.Williams, Jordan) is very good. The rest is horrible. ( I can give Aminu and Bledsoe a pass because they’re rookies, although if the team was any good they wouldn’t be playing much)
Yes you can replace Gordon. You can replace him without having to replace him. Makes sense to me.
Salary is the big one
But that will not last forever.
Nuggets are better without Melo
He was a ball stopper and, while he is an exceptional rebounder, hurt them on the defensive end. (EJ is the opposite – solid on the defensive end, but not a good rebounder.)
EJ is not worth a max (or near-max) contract, so if it looks like things are trending that way, the Clippers would be advised to move him.
There may come a time when Denver will suffer because of the lack of a go to scorer, especially of Anthony’s caliber (statistically he is the best last-second shot-maker in the NBA). But Afflalo has hit some big shots this year, and JR Smith can score pretty easily.
I would not want to play the Nuggets in the first round. They are the top scoring team in the league and can play any style.
Do not worry. (Matthew 6:27)
Looking like Nuggets vs. Thunder in the first round
What a great matchup!!
Just so I understand
You’re saying that because you believe that EJ is not worth near max, if that’s what he’s demanding, the Clips should move him?
What is he worth 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.
well no one has indicated that he even thinks he'll get that much.
His money hould be in the kaman/barn range imo, and I think the clips would pay up if that’s the case.
by indy818 on Mar 15, 2011 12:54 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Trade/Sign and trade Eric Gordon
to Indiana for Danny Granger
If they throw in Paul George I MIGHT be tempted.
"Buckle your seat belts, folks. This one's going down to the wire." -The inimitable Ralph Lawler.
by Gordon for President on Mar 15, 2011 12:39 PM PDT up reply actions
If The Pacers don't make the playoffs
I bet Granger will be traded. They just killed the Knicks in MSG with out him and there is internal strife on the team right now. Granger is not a number one scoring option but has assumed that role on the Pacers to the dismay of some. I would not trade EJ for him at this stage of their careers but the Pacers would LOVE to have their home town boy.
The real question is how do we replace JOHN R?
We need people on the Club O bullet train to the finals and with John R distracting us
every chance he gets he will try to get you guys to feeling down about the team.
Remember we're also replacing Billups here
Getting Ty Lawson more playing time has been a big factor in Denver’s recent play. JR Smith has also been getting more time, and putting it to good use.
I’m sure everyone’s glad to see more ball movement as well.
"The need to be right - the sign of a vulgar mind."
Not exactly a problem
But Ty Lawson is a big reason for their recent success, who was relegated to back up duty beforehand.
"The need to be right - the sign of a vulgar mind."
Sure and so is Felton
They have had 3 good PG’s this year.
This should've been a fan posts
"I'm an All-Star in my mind. You don't have to have somebody tell you that, to be an All-Star. It doesn't work that way." -Sam Cassell
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
