Bill Simmons: What if the Clippers never traded Baron Davis?"
8. Where does "What if the Clippers never traded Baron Davis?" rank among the all-time NBA What Ifs?
Definitely top 50. And climbing. It was already one of the dumbest NBA trades6 of the past 10 years before the amnesty clause became part of the new labor agreement … at that point, it became one of the dumber trades in sports history. Should the Clippers be criticized for not guessing in January, with a labor stoppage looming, that the amnesty clause would potentially be in play? Yes and no — yes, they should have known, and no, they couldn't have known (because they're owned by a slum lord who has no idea what's going on).
There's more, check the link (number 8) for the full discussion.
4 months ago
ClipperChuck
83 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
even though irving is really good , i am still happy with how things turned out.
irving is a scoring point. those players in the end still dont really make the others on their team better quite like a pass first game manager type like paul.
looka t the effect rubio is having in minnesota. hell look at mike beaseley’s last 2 games.
you take rubio and swap him with irving who are 1 and 2 in the rookie rankings and thats a totally different team.
i’d much rather have our team with deandre and cp3, than one with irving and d12. because with irving guys like butler, or hell even evans on easy pick and roll baskets benefit as much.
if we get kenyon martin, i bet he feels rejuvenated with a cp3 getting him the ball at the perfect spots. not gonna happen with kyrie irving.
Only dumb if you think DTS would actually amnesty BD
Which would never happen (not sure I would throw away $30M)
Disagree with Simmons here
"[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 also doesn't seem to realize or care EJ wants a max type deal.
So w/ EJ, Dwight, and Blake just who does he think Free Agent X would be?
I’m perfectly happy with Lob City.
"Buckle your seat belts, folks. This one's going down to the wire." -The inimitable Ralph Lawler.
by Gordon for President on Feb 1, 2012 10:57 PM PST up reply actions
It could still be Caron
or AK47 or whatever. EJ’s contract wouldn’t be a problem this year and possibly not even next year since you would have the option to match.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
Why not just admit you were wrong about Olshey and enjoy the team he got 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.
by Jax on Feb 2, 2012 9:43 AM PST up reply actions
How was I wrong
his 2010 free agent signings were terrible even you must admit that much.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
Jax has freely admitted that Gomes sucks and Foye has sucked slightly less but still sucks
But he also adds that they aren’t playing to historical norms, and had they played to their historical averages, they wouldn’t be terrible at the price.
So all you would really be disagreeing on is whether historical-Gomes and historical-Foye were worth the price.
I think the reason you guys can never resolve this argument (or agree to disagree) is because Jax is focusing on whether the decision to sign them was a good idea at the time, while you are focusing on whether the results of the signings were any good in hindsight.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
And now I will take my nose out from where it doesn't belong.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
Their historical norms
were never good. Foye in particular has always been this way. Gomes as a SF was always this way. It was a bad signing at the time and the results since have just proven it over and over tenfold since.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
No, they were never good
And really I’m not talking about Randy Foye (he got worse because he started playing more SG and less PG), but just Ryan Gomes. He was never good, but he was never terrible. News flash: every championship team has a guy as productive as Gomes on the team. Expecting Gomes to be a starter was obviously never a good plan, but since they tried not to spend a ton of money, we can probably assume Gomes starting wasn’t the long-term goal.
But really? Gomes as a SF was always this way? Did you even try to research that before you said it? Allow me to do very little research to very quickly debunk that notion:
2010 in Minnesota – 12.2 PER at SF
2011 in Los Angeles – 9.0 PER at SF
2012 in Los Angeles – 3.5 PER at SF
He was never good, but he was never THIS bad. If you’re trying to kid yourself into thinking the FO should have somehow predicted his production would first drop 25%, then drop another 67%, you’re nuts. It wasn’t a good signing at the time, sure, but it wasn’t outrageously bad. It was just kind of bad. The fact that he got so much worse for no apparent reason doesn’t prove that it was a bad signing in any way.
Foye has remained consistent at playing as a crappy SG since before LAC: 2010 crap, 2011 crap, 2012 crap. I take back including Foye in the conversation since we signed SG-Foye, not PG-Foye, and SG-Foye has always been this bad.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
First off you are using PER
so this discussion is already dead before it starts. And his PER was lower on the LAC because he shot and scored less. That’s actually a plus because he was always a mediocre at best scorer.
His rebounding as a SF is atrocious, probably because he’s just too slow to get to them on the perimeter.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 3, 2012 12:46 AM PST up reply actions
PER is flawed, sure
But it’s not entirely imperfect. I provided evidence that Gomes has regressed significantly from historical norms. You have provided no evidence at all, except that you say so.
(Isn’t this what you usually accuse Jax of doing?)
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
Allow me to elaborate
He started missing 10% more freethrows inexplicably since joining LA:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/gomesry01.html
He started missing more perimeter shots that he usually makes more often (look at the FG% by shot location). Oh and every single advanced stat dropped since joining LA.
http://www.hoopdata.com/player.aspx?name=Ryan%20Gomes
Seriously, every single piece of evidence points to the fact that this player is NOT AS GOOD as the one they thought they were signing. He’s not just worse, he’s much worse. He was never good, no, but he wasn’t this bad. This is all I’ve been saying, and if you have any respect for the stats, you must see this.
I need one, just one, solid argument that Ryan Gomes of 2010-12 is the same player as Ryan Gomes of 2005-10. You can say he used to take more shots so PER made him look good, except that he only ever took 10 shots a game, and PER doesn’t really fluctuate as much for usage as you think it does. Randy Foye went from 14 down to 8 shots, and his PER stayed the same—-and it’s not because he played any better (look at his Win Shares).
AGAIN, I never said Gomes was any good, just that he was better than he is now, and no one could have predicted this drop off. If you’re going to try and argue that I’m wrong, then show me some effort. Otherwise just agree to disagree and stop trying to describe how my analysis is flawed with absolutely nothing to debunk it.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
Couple of things wrong with Simmons
1. He asumes DTS would have amnesty BD (That’s a big assumption)
2. He assumes we win the lottery even if we keep BD, another big asumption because it’s hard to believe we remain the same with Baron.
In the en he also says he likes the current team better than the other hypothetical.
I'm pretty happy with how things turned out
considering the guy we traded him for is a candidate for 6th man of the year and is now backing up a hall of famer. I thought it was the right move at the time, and did not change that opinion when the Cavs won the lottery. We put ourselves in position to make a move and it worked out.
Yah Mo Williams is certainly outplaying BD and is much cheaper
"[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 Jax on Feb 1, 2012 2:53 PM PST up reply actions
Mo is playing out of his mind
Conventional wisdom says that he’ll regress back to his statistical norms.
Except that conventional wisdom isn’t accounting for the fact that up until now, Mo was being asked to be Chris Paul with all of the defensive attention being given to him. Now he’s being asked to be Jason Terry, with the defense paying less attention to him than before, and playing off the ball more as well.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
Do you really think BD is going to play well for anyone this year?
He hasn’t played a game yet. How many games has Mo helped us win so far this year?
"[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 Jax on Feb 2, 2012 9:43 AM PST up reply actions
Did I say anything about BD?
I don’t remember saying anything about BD. I wasn’t even disagreeing with you, man. I was saying Mo is playing great, and then saying that although guys usually go back to their statistical norms, Mo might not do that because his role changed.
Your response is really confusing me.
Also see my picture below (which shows I totally agree with what you just said about BD haha).
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
cp3 trade is separate
The question is baron and irving for mo and carin. With the amnesty factor included.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Feb 1, 2012 3:20 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
True,
but Irving was by no means a lock, and after him, is there anyone win the draft the Clippers would really want? That was a really weak class and it was dumb luck that we won it. We got something for Baron instead of nothing in my opinion, and some flexibility to make some moves.
Clips had some cap space coming without the trade
and Derrick Williams or Enes Kanter would have been nice prospects (something to be used in a trade for CP3 or Howard at the very least)
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
how is that the question
You are assuming we get the same results by keeping Baron that would have led to Irving when winning or losing 2 more games would have change everything.
And of course Irving was not something that was considered because there was a 2% chance of that happening
"[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 Jax on Feb 1, 2012 3:36 PM PST up reply actions
Funny
coming from the guy so desperate to pretend to know something that he posted Irving’s 1st game stats as proof the trade was great (how’s Irving looking now?) and saying how much Irving sucked (while admitting to never having seen him play). Also so insecure you always round down and leave out the other factors (such as it being 8.4% of being top 3 or there being good players like Kawhi Leonard being available)
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
Wow - you'd rather have Kawhi Leonard than CP3
Noted
"[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 Jax on Feb 2, 2012 9:44 AM PST up reply actions
Again you are misapplying things
CP3 and the Mo/Baron trade were completely separate transactions.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
Irving has been really good, but he’s 97.2% irrelevant
Derrick Williams hasn’t done anything, and he’s 96.7% irrelevant.
Kanter’s been great, but he’s only 96.1% irrelevant.
Leonard’s been nearly as great, and he’s 100% relevant. Or equally as importantly, George Hill has been very good too, and he is just as relevant as Leonard.
Getting Leonard or trading Leonard for Hill would not prevent the CP3 trade, assuming DTS would amnesty Baron, which is a difficult assumption I suppose.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
Actually I should have compounded that..
I think it should be…
Odds of missing Irving = 97.2%
Odds of missing Irving and Williams = 97.2% * 96.7% = 94.0%
Odds of missing Irving and Williams and Kanter = 97.2% * 96.7% * 96.1% = 90.3%
I could be misremembering how to do this… but that seems to show that there’s a 9.7% chance of getting a top 3 pick. CC, where’d you get 8.4% out of curiosity?
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
Hmm
actually I think I meant 8.1%. I thought the odds of the 1st overall pick from the 8th worst record was 2.7%
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
I was using wikipedia
It had 2.8% for #1, 3.3% for #2, and 3.9% for #3 individually. So in order to figure out the odds of NOT getting top 3, I multiplied the inverse percentage. It’s been a really long time since I did anything in the realm of calculating odds, so I could be misremembering how to do it. Seems right, though…
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
This is all under the assumption of ignoring the nearly impossible repeat of the lottery.
Want some toxic waste? I got a lot of it.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
The mathematical odds remained the same
8.4% chance of it being top 3. Don’t need to go radioactive on us man.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
Right - you'd go for the 8% chance for Kawhi Leonard rather than get CP3
Remind us to hire you as the new GM – since the guy you hate so much – Olshey – is doing so turrible 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.
by Jax on Feb 2, 2012 9:45 AM PST up reply actions
The pick isn't relevant to CP3, it's BD and DTS.
If DTS won’t amnesty BD, you can’t get CP3.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
How so?
The trade pieces involved for CP3 were there whether the Clips amnestied Baron or not. The difference would be Baron would be the guard off the bench.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
Oh wait...
You’re right! The trade pieces to NOH = CP3 salary.
We could swap our Gordon for Irving in the trade and hang onto EJ. Would we still have room for Butler? Or maybe you still keep Gordon in the trade, then you swap Irving + DJ for Howard.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
Right
or maybe its the 8th pick/Leonard and Bledsoe instead of #1 pick/EJ. The point has always been the Clips traded away a very valuable trade asset to dump a contract (and said contract might have been dumpable through amnesty).
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
Getting hung up on top 3 picks is really kind of silly.
8.4% is much too small to be leaning on it as a crutch of any kind. That’s still a 91.6% chance of being outside the top 3.
The better crutch by far is the argument for Leonard, or the fact that with a pick like Leonard, the Pacers got Hill who is also playing great. And neither of those have anything to do with CP3, but again, this is assuming DTS amnesties Baron—-also keeping in mind that since he was injured, no one picked him up and Cleveland has to pay his entire contract—-the amnestying is a huge assumption that’s tough to swallow.
So I’ll stick to relying on radioactive magic for this scenario to play out. 90% chance of failure just doesn’t cut it for me.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
well
this is looking after the fact.
But the trade has always been 8th pick (with the 8.4% chance of being top 3), Baron Davis for Mo Williams and $5 million in additional cap space to sign free agent small forward X (which ultimately turned out to be Caron).
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
Oh
And Caron’s productivity = Leonard’s = Hills = 8th pick.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
Ridiculous revisionist history - only exists in the minds of those with time to waste
"[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 Jax on Feb 1, 2012 3:36 PM PST up reply actions
Guys guys guys
Simmons set up this fantasy world… Chuck’s just responding based on that premise. It’s called “What if” for a reason. Remember when they did a “What if” where Superman landed in the Soviet Union? This is like that.
We’re at the point where pretty much everyone agrees that the odds of that fantasy coming together are insanely low, but that doesn’t stop us from hypothesizing just for fun. Maybe it’s a waste of time, but so is talking about Boozer’s hairline, and that didn’t stop Simmons.
(If anyone actually believes this fantasy would have probably happened had we not traded Baron, I will eat my own arm.)
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
CC prob does - right CC?
"[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 Jax on Feb 1, 2012 3:44 PM PST up reply actions
Nope, don't have the time
but I have the brains to imagine it. I even imagined the CP3 trade back in June. Also called it the second the Baron trade went down in February.
You don’t know jack about basketball dude, just shut up and watch the game.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
No it's not
Or at least, it wasn’t separate for the purposes of the What If pondered by Simmons in the very story you posted. He makes the same assumption that all the rest of us do, the one you keep resisting over and over: If we hadn’t made the trade, we’d have drafted Irving as our PG of the future, and thus wouldn’t have pursued Paul.
Sorry, you can’t have it both ways.
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
Now living the good life in Lob City, CA.
we draft Irving
or have the 1st overall pick can still trade for CP3. Nothing precludes us from pursuing CP3 (having Mo and Billups never stopped the Clippers either) with or without Irving we just have more trade assets.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
Yah but we'd have BD who would not be amnestied
No trade for Mo, no CP3. Period.
"[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 Jax on Feb 2, 2012 9:46 AM PST up reply actions
Before I was thinking it was a leap to just assume DTS won't amnesty Baron
But when Gilbert tried and no one took any of the Baron-burden off of his hands (because Baron was injured) it’s hard to think that DTS would eat that entire contract.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
If they traded for CP3
and had a chance to win like they do now?
And its not $30 million as Jax likes to deceptively throw out there. It’s not even $27 million (the guaranteed amount). It’s less because this year’s salary would be pro-rated due to the lockout so its more like $23 million.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
As you helped me realize above
Baron amnesty doesn’t factor in anyway, except to the extent that his salary was more than Mo’s, and so maybe we miss out on Caron. Not the end of the world if you can somehow get Dwight + CP3 + Blake on one team.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
HmmmmmmmmmMMMMMMM.
Statistically, I still can’t get over the assumption of re-rolling the die and coming up with that first pick again.
However, I recently fell in some toxic waste, and aside from a 3rd nipple, I gained the ability to make myself get over any statistical improbability AT WILL.
Observe:
Irving + Gordon + Griffin + Howard vs CP3 + Griffin + DJ + Mo
We would still get Billups because that chain of events was independent of the Baron/Mo swap. Mo apparently solicited Butler, but we have to assume (because of my superpower) that once Butler saw Howard paired with Griffin, he’d come here anyway. So we probably end up starting Billups, bringing Irving off the bench. Does Irving still flourish without starter’s minutes? Yes, he does (again, the superpowers). Reggie still joins the team, of course. And we have room for these free agents because we will have amnestied amnesthetized Baron (what a cool superpower).
Your new Los Angeles Clippers:
Billups
Gordon
Butler
Griffin
Howard
Irving
Foye
Gomes
Evans
Kaman? <— Simmons didn’t mention Kaman. That’d be a nice bonus.
Thompkins
Leslie
Cookie
Let’s just hope these powers are permanent.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
another thing i disagree with Simmons
We don’t get Howard without giving Kirving or Gordon.
+1
Your capslock is stuck, please buy a new keyboard
"But can't the refs blow the whistle and stop play in certain situations?" Boltsfan21
by BelgianClipper on Feb 1, 2012 3:11 PM PST up reply actions
Hey, I want a 3rd nipple
"i know huh........freakin clippers man.....its like a wild ride rooting for this team....gotta love em....(sometimes) lol" In GrIfFin We TrUsT
Roll with me SC.
Roll with me.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
Simmons is an idiot
If we didn’t trade Baron for Mo Williams last season then our record would have been different at the end and we wouldn’t have ended up with the #1 pick
by ap3604 on Feb 1, 2012 3:37 PM PST reply actions
You guys are being harsh
Simmons is just having fun here… silly, ridiculous fun, which is what he does.
But you’re missing the main point. He actually says “Would you rather have a Griffin/Howard/Gordon/Irving/Free Agent X nucleus, or Chris Paul’s Lob City squad that just thrashed Oklahoma City last night in the single most entertaining game of the year? It’s a great question. (I can’t believe I’m saying this … but I think I’d rather have Lob City.)” So even with all his revisionist talk, he says the Clippers came out ahead.
If you go back to before the trade, I always said that the Clippers should target Paul over Howard. Paul as a point guard fits better with Griffin than Howard. Who builds a team around two dominant, poor FT shooting bigs when they could have a great point guard and one dominant big? Paul is the complementary player, which is part of why the Clippers are coming together faster than say the super friends Heat.
So the what if isn’t “the Clippers would have gotten Howard” — it’s “the Clippers would have Kyrie Irving and some cap space instead of Mo Williams.” OK, fine. Mo’s been pretty damn good this year. I’m cool. I never liked the trade, but I’m over it, and I sure don’t see much room for complaining given what’s happening so far.
In this world, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant. - Elwood P. Dowd
Seriously, Boozer's hair is ridiculous.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
Hardly one of the dumbest trades in NBA history.
Let’s be real now. I’ll take CP3 in an instant over Kyrie Irving.
Basically, Simmons is once again trying to trot out his usual unfunny “LOLOLOLZ STURLING LOLOL ITS DA CLIPURZ” garbage, but considering how good we are this year, it’s failing miserably.
Shouldn’t Simmons be too busy wringing his hands and whining about how “BAWSTAHN IS SO FACKIN’ CURSED”? After all, the Celtics are now mediocre, boring, and old.
Clippers // Chargers // Rays // Boise State
"The Lakers do win games. But things can change." - Blake Griffin
ouch
Bill Simmons is my favorite read, ever. He is actually a Clippers fan and a STH. He despises Sterling. Are you saying you don’t? I sure do.
He isn’t talking about the CP3 trade. He says that Mo for Baron/1st is a dumb trade. At the time, many people around here agrees with that sentiment. It put us in position to get CP3, but I doubt anyone had the foresight to make it reasonable to say that that is why Olshey dumped Baron.
Neil decided that 2% of Kyrie Irving was worth less than the flexibility gained by losing Baron. After the fact, it became a bad trade.
What if the pick had been #10, and there was no NBA amnesty clause by which we could have released Baron? This trade becomes alot better for the Clippers.
Clippers fan?
I thought he was a Celtics fan and a Clippers STH so he can watch basketball without being around Laker fans…
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
He is definitely a clipper supporter if not a fan
he has the clippers winning 50 games this season.
"It's better to be an optimist who is sometimes wrong than a pessimist who is always right"unknown
I might be remembering something I read from like... 5 years ago.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
He is a Celtics fan
and just an NBA fan in general (but hates all the Celtic rivalry teams like the Knicks and Lakers). He bought Clipper tickets originally because they are cheap and he can watch all the teams play (not just the Celtics) without being surrounded by the annoying Lakers fans.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
grew up in boston with his dad a STH
Celtics first for him. But like many others, he moved to LA, hated the Lakers, and fell in love with LAC
And by the way...
the longer fatass Baron stays out with his “back problems” in New York, the more and more vindicated we are for finally dumping him.
Clippers // Chargers // Rays // Boise State
"The Lakers do win games. But things can change." - Blake Griffin
as long as we're playing this game...
IF we didn’t trade baron
and
IF we still somehow got the first pick
and
IF we signed DJ during the season ala Nick Colisson (5 mil signing bonus with 8 mil yearly for 4 years)
THEN:
CP3 Trade:
ej, kaman, aminu, irving for CP3
THEN:
ebled, DJ, minnesota pick for Dwight Howard
THEN you have the BEST starting lineup in the whole nba with:
cp3
chauncey
caron
blake
dwight
who’s got a woody? :)
Yeah.
We would probably argue over Cook for a while, but we’ll play hardball and lose.
But if we were really talking about trying to get this done.
I think Minnesota+Kaman+Irving would be enough to get CP3.
At that point, our team would be stacked, but if we wanted to go overboard, we ship out Jordan+EJ +Bledsoe for Dwight.
i like simmons, but he sounds like an idiot in this case
not even worth a serious, thoughtful reply.
p.s. DTS would never, ever, ever, never ever pay Baron to play for someone else, and i’m pretty sure Olshey knew this when he did the deal.
by Joe Wolf's Mullet on Feb 1, 2012 6:06 PM PST reply actions
This is hilarious to even bring up
Yeah, we have the best Clipper team ever here…don’t you wish we could go back pre’trade?? Yeah, please take us back, bring back the beard!!!
Love you BD!
"The need to be right - the sign of a vulgar mind."
All I gotta say is...
I’m pretty happy with the way things turned out:
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
LMFAO
A picture is indeed worth 1,000 words.
Proudly enduring the pain since the days of Bill Walton's foot.
Now living the good life in Lob City, CA.
LOL!!!! Good trade!
"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.
by CLiPPz WeRD 12 on Feb 2, 2012 1:07 PM PST up reply actions
clearly, Baron handles the ball better
Mo turns the ball over more than twice as much as Baron…..
Ralph, "Last year so often with Blake Griffin you would see these things coming, with Paul, he's so crafty, all of a sudden boom there it is."
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
- The Indiana Pacers? Gone till November
- 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
