Au revoir, l'arreter du Kobe

by Steve Perrin on Dec 13, 2007 3:31 PM PST in News Comment 15 comments

Here are a couple other takes on the Clippers release of Ruben Patterson today. No surprise that Kevin at ClipperBlog thinks it's the right move as does Kelly Dwyer at Yahoo. I found the AP story pretty strange:

The Clippers waived forward Ruben Patterson on Thursday, hours after he helped them beat the Nets in New Jersey for the first time in nearly 10 years.

Hours after helping them beat the Nets? Well, yes, I suppose. 40 or so hours is 'hours'. But it was fewer hours after he played 6 minutes in a loss in Charlotte. Myself, I would reserve the use of the word 'hours' for a period less than 24 (which is called a 'day'), but as far as I know there's no rule that precludes its use for longer time periods. I suppose you could also say it was 'hours' after he scored 30 points in a win over Memphis (approximately 8890 hours, and he was playing for Milwaukee). The point is, if he was really that valuable of an asset to an NBA team, he would have signed for guaranteed money with one of them.

The irony of course is that the self-proclaimed 'Kobe Stopper' is waived 3 days before the first meeting of the year with the Lakers. Of course, his contract would have become guaranteed by then, so we'll just have to live without him this Sunday.

While Patterson can serve a purpose on an NBA roster, it's fairly clear that this was not the right one. With the team shooting 42%, 28th in the league, and missing multiple scorers off and on so far this season, a 6'5" tweener who can't shoot at ALL is simply not a good fit. And while he did score points in a few games, his tendency to BELIEVE he is a scorer only exacerbated the problem. As Citizen John R says, every low post touch he got was was one that didn't go to Kaman. Shooting percentage, turnover rate and future with the team all favor Kaman in that argument.

I found the comments at ClipperBlog interesting and dismaying. Are Clipper fans really so shrill that we're going to blame this one on MD^sr? What exactly have the Clippers lost in the Ruben Patterson experiment? Not Guillermo Diaz, who sits quietly in Anaheim awaiting a phone call. Not Jared Jordan, who was after all traded to make room for Dan Dickau. If the Generic Clippers had found enough offense from Kaman and Thomas and healthy versions of Maggette, Mobley and Cassell, then a Ruben Patterson to add toughness and situational defense would have been a fine addition (as indeed it looked to be in spades for a little over a week). It didn't end up working out, but MD^sr and Elgin had the foresight in August to sign a non-guaranteed contract, and now Ruben is free to go elsewhere (which he no doubt will). From a team management standpoint, this was, as I have always said, an excellent move. The one thing the team could not afford to do this summer was commit to significant long term contracts. Brevin Knight and Ruben Patterson were incredible bargains given their resumes, and Brevin is only signed until 2009, while Ruben is already gone. Meanwhile, you could not hope for a better one-year minimum signing for this team than Dan Dickau, a competent NBA point guard who can actually shoot. As for Josh Powell, well, he wasn't expensive, and although he is signed for 3 years, it's only partially guaranteed.

Are any of these four signings big time difference makers? Of course not. But how many difference makers signed this off-season? Frankly, I'd much rather have Brevin Knight for 2/$4M than Jason Kapono for 4/$24M. Tell me Toronto isn't going to be desperate to get rid of that deal in a couple of seasons.

So credit where it's due - the waiving of Ruben Patterson, far from an indication of front office incompetence, is a testament to a shrewd off-season move. It didn't work out but the Clippers are only a little poorer for it.

As for replacing him on the roster with Richie Frahm... well that's a different story. But at least his contract isn't guaranteed.

0 recs | Comment 15 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Its a litmus test

Its easy to see who comes to discourse du Clipper from a position of honesty and integrity and good vibes and intentions and those who don't.

Anyone who would pin a GOOD personnel decision on a COACH as a negative...I don't know. Ignorance is the best thing you could say about that person. I try not to chalk things up to malice, I really do. Really. But I also only have two cheeks to turn.

by John R on Dec 13, 2007 9:30 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Props for this blog.

First off... Ruben Patterson... didn't he dress up as a cop... impersonated law enforcement and drove around Utah? Why doesn't a real interviewer ask him about that??? That is some weird ish. He's a good defender... but if I hate Kobe's arrogance... I can definitely do without someone on our team who steals police uniforms and wears it.

THANKS for making this blog. Didn't know it existed! I'm a Clipper Fan for life. We'll be there one day. One sweet MFN day.

Season ticket holder last year. I'm married so I'm watching more games from home now. I've been to 3 games this year.

I watched a lot of Clipper games when I was a kid... at the sports arena... then became a huge fan during the Mark Jackson, Ken Norman, Ron Harper, Danny Manning, Gary Grant, Benoit days...

I was also a huge Laker fan because that's when my family came together... no fights.

but when they traded championship runs for individual glory... that was it. When they gave away Shaq and didn't get Wade... it made it official.

CLIPS FOR LIFE.

I don't mind suffering and going into the lottery this year. We'll get a solid PG.

2008

PG - Livingston... we'll see.
SG - Maggette
SF - Thornton - he's a hard worker, he'll be Great next year.
PF - Brand
C - Kaman

Mobley, Thomas, Ross, star rookie PG off the bench. off the bench.

If Thornton bulks up a little and really develops into a Dominique Wilkins...

We'll surprise people.

Thanks for making this blog.

If you need a wedding MC/DJ, that's what I do. prokreation.com

by prokreation on Dec 13, 2007 9:33 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

I don't

really think it matters all that much. Good decision from a financial perspective, I suppose. We'll never know the motivation for management's decisions, since they never explain such things to us lemmings.

The team now has one less NBA vet on the roster. Ruben was pretty successful last year on another depleted team. One wonders why it is he wasn't so successful this year. At least they replaced him with a shooter.

by Jax on Dec 13, 2007 11:41 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

didn't watch the Bucks much last year

but I think Rueben's success came when other guys went down. Bogut, mainly.

He probably got a lot of opportunities by rebounding and putting back Redd's and Villenueva's shots. Who knows. Can't for the life of me comprehend how he scored 15ppg.

I also hope this clears room for

by mp on Dec 14, 2007 8:17 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Conspiracy Theory

Good post--as usual, we're on the same page. The RP experiment might have worked, but it didn't. End of story.

But the thing I'm wondering about, based only on half a comment, is this "roster flexibility" issue, especially as it relates to Sam Cassell.

MD made what I thought was a good case for RP's release, saying first that it will give Thornton more minutes (great news) and second that they need a roster spot if one of their point guards goes down. That makes a lot of sense, their current pgs being Knight and Cassell, and they've both been banged up already this year. Right now the Clips just have these two guys, that's it, and if one gets hurt they really need to bring in a player as a backup.

But my concern is that the statement was made as if Cassell doesn't exist and isn't coming back in the relative near future. I can't remember exactly what was said about Cassell, it was just a short half-sentence, but it didn't sound like he was part of the calculation. Which makes me think that the Clips might be more active than we know with him on the trading block, or even working the illogical Simmons buyout somehow at Cassell's request. It's clear that Cassell doesn't want to repeat last year, and come back at half-speed (hello, Cat!) and never get right.

I doubt that any of this is actually happening, but Cassell's situation bears some close attention. I really don't care about RP, but would love to see new Kaman, EB, Maggs, healthy Mobley, Sam, Liv and Thornton all playing together this year. Did I somehow forget Tim Thomas (and QRoss and my man Paul Davis, plus our plucky pgs)in that list? Sorry--my bad.

by zhivclip on Dec 14, 2007 9:54 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

oops

typo--third paragraph says Knight and Cassell, when I meant Knight and Dickau obviously

by zhivclip on Dec 14, 2007 9:56 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

I'm not a conspiracy theorist by nature...

...but I also found MDsr's comments re: Ruben's release a little strange. Not so much the Cassell stuff (but now that you bring it up).... Here's the thing - he talks about roster flexibility and the point guard situation over and over and over. The main reason to waive Ruben is so that they can sign a point guard, or at least that's the implication. And then they sign Richie Frahm. Excuse me?

Taken at face value, it seems like they have no intention of keeping Frahm long term, which hardly seems fair to the guy.

Other possible interpretations

IF Knight or Dickau gets hurt, they can now waive Frahm (not guaranteed until Jan 10) and sign a FIFTH point guard (sheesh). If Cassell is healthy and productive before Jan 10, then Frahm might be allowed to stick.
Something is in the works with or without Cassell.

I have no idea. The 'strained calf that never heals' is certainly becoming a concern (the latest is that he won't play Sunday either). But let's face it, 38 year old bodies heal more slowly. And I sure don't want them to make the same mistake they made with Mobley. Although in Sam's case, the point is almost moot - this season is almost a lost cause already (and probably will be by Jan 1 given the upcoming schedule), and Sam won't be here next season. Which means he's likely resting up in order to be full strength somewhere else.

by Steve Perrin on Dec 14, 2007 10:36 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Seems like

Trading Sam should have been on the checklist regardless of all other factors, even before EB got hurt.

by John R on Dec 14, 2007 10:51 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

5th PG

I was thinking the same thing.

Also, AT has shown improvement lately, and more minutes will help him grow.

by mp on Dec 14, 2007 11:04 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

My interpretation

is that this is confirmation that they are giving up on the season and looking towards the lottery. If that's the case, not a bad move.

by Jax on Dec 14, 2007 11:46 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not so sure

i think he just wasn't producing. MDSr. has said that the team's woes are shooting. I doubt they are phoning it in, esp. with EB returning this spring.

I would like to see Mobley and Kaman get a little less milage, and Thornton get some more.

by mp on Dec 14, 2007 12:23 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

But they didn't

have to get rid of Ruben to get a shooter. Aaron Williams anyone?

by Jax on Dec 14, 2007 1:29 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Break out of your paranoid fantasy

Check out Occam's Razor.

The simplest reason is Patterson was playing terrible and they had the chance to terminate his contract with no downside.

If he says he wanted to increase the FG%, cutting Williams's .571 isn't the way to get there. You cut the guy who is guilty of low-percentage ball-hoggery.

Many of the MDSr. haters have elaborate fantasies built up in their heads. As with all things, the simplest answer is probably the best. He was on a non-guaranteed contract and didn't deliver.

by John R on Dec 14, 2007 2:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

More silliness

Why are you wasting our time? Who said anything about hating MSDr? Paranoia?

Shooter in the sense of adding an SG who can stretch the defense, not to find another PF.

I have a feeling that you may have gone off your meds. Please call the doctor.

by Jax on Dec 14, 2007 2:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Impersonating a Policeman? that was Olden Polynice

prokreation said "First off... Ruben Patterson... didn't he dress up as a cop... impersonated law enforcement and drove around Utah? Why doesn't a real interviewer ask him about that??? That is some weird ish. "

Actually, that was Olden Polynice in 2000. The big center was involved in an incident in which he was accused of impersonating a police officer.Polynice was involved in a minor traffic accident in which his car was struck by a speeding motorist who drove off after striking Polynice. Polynice chased after the car and ended up having a confrontation with the driver of the other car.The situation was resolved at the scene without the police being involved, but a few days later he was informed that he was being charged with impersonating a police officer. He would eventually plead guilty to the offense (a class B misdemeanor), and served a one-game suspension during the 2000-01 season.

by chill on Dec 14, 2007 11:23 AM PST reply actions 0 recs