Al Thornton and the Rookie Game

by ClipperSteve on Jan 21, 2008 7:32 PM PST in News

If you're looking forward to seeing Al Thornton in the Rookie-Sophomore game on All-Star weekend my advice is not to hold your breath, despite what Damon Andrews might say during KTLA telecasts. He's certainly not a 'shoo-in'.

Ralph and Mike and the Clipper organization are trying to make the case by pointing to the fact that Al is 8th among rookies in scoring. But they only pick 9 for the game, and among the rookies who score less than him, Luis Scola and Sean Williams are 9 and 10 in scoring and they both start on playoff contenders. Meanwhile, Glen 'Big Baby' Davis is going to get some consideration for contributing for the Celtics. And Mike Conley may get in enough games between now and the vote to grab a spot.

As always, Al's candidacy is going to be negatively impacted by the Clippers' struggles. Of course this matters much less in the Rookie game than in the big show, since rookies are so much more likely to be on bad teams. But Scola and Williams and Moon are locks for playing well on decent teams, and Big Baby will get noticed for playing at all on a great team.

It's totally a mistake to focus on points per game. Both Scola and Williams really are shoo-ins, leaving Al to battle with Daequan Cook and Davis and maybe Conley for the final spot. Cook scores more than Al (although Al may catch him soon), so scoring is not the argument to use.

The best argument is to point to his steady improvement. He's averaging 12 points per game on better than 50% shooting in January. Cook, on the other hand, had a great November, but has shot less than 40% since then. If Al has a few more games like he did against New Jersey between now and when the assistant coaches vote, then I think he'll squeeze in. But as of now, he may be the odd man out. I think it comes down to Al or Big Baby.

0 recs | Comment 33 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

good...

better that he get the rest. Same with Kaman.

by mp on Jan 21, 2008 8:55 PM PST 0 recs

DTS is starting to get it

Clippers owner Donald Sterling said in an interview with the LA Times that if coach Mike Dunleavy doesn't get results soon, he'll have to consider replacing him.

"I want to make L.A. fans proud of this team, but if [Elgin Baylor and Mike Dunleavy] can't make it happen, then I have no choice but to make changes," Sterling said. He also addressed the possibility of Elton Brand or Corey Maggette moving to a new team, saying, "I would expect Brand and Maggette to be with us their entire careers."

by Jax on Jan 22, 2008 9:02 AM PST 0 recs

good news all around

glad to see that the Donald is aware that he owns an NBA team called the Clippers.

Glad to see that MDSr. and Elgin are not untouchable.

Glad to hear that EB and Maggette are wanted.

by mp on Jan 22, 2008 10:31 AM PST up 0 recs

Yeah

I just did a quick diary on this, looking for more comments. Fascinating article. How do you read it, Jax, especially the comments on Dunleavy vs. the comments on Maggette? It sounds like he was saying, I'd just as soon see how another coach does with Kaman, EB, Maggette, etc., rather than I'm going to back MD all the way and see how he does once Maggette is gone.

by zhivclip on Jan 22, 2008 10:38 AM PST up 0 recs

My read?

DTS has jumped the shark. He's a smart, thrifty (to put it mildly) businessman, and has now decided to commit to a winning team, including demanding accountability from those who work for him. I suspect that if he chooses to dump MDSr and Baylor that he will litigate the buyouts if necessary. Having said that, I haven't seen their contracts, so it's difficult to speculate on that issue.

MDSr's response, not surprisingly, is to try to blame Elgin and DTS. One of the trades he's talking about that they didn't approve is the trade he wanted to do for his son. Even if his son would otherwise be a good fit here, the nepotism issue is an obvious problem. And of course he doesn't mention x's and o's (why is he playing someone who hasn't scored a point in 5 games?), his involvement in poor draft picks and signings, his inability to motivate the team, etc. He also doesn't mention the Maggette debacle last year, Korolev, or anything else.

All in all, I appreciate DTS' statements as a Clipper fan. I look forward to seeing more of it. Why shouldn't MDSr be required to defend his decisions? He's being paid millions per year.

by Jax on Jan 22, 2008 10:58 AM PST up 0 recs

Speaking as a manager

It is an admission of failure for the owner to suddenly wake up and blame an employee or employees. When my employees tell me what they need to succeed, I get it for them. I don't tell them they can't have it, and then blame them for the results. My budget, my responsibility.

Speaking as an NBA fan

I would be embarrassed to find myself in total agreement with Sterling, given his history.

by John R on Jan 22, 2008 11:04 AM PST up 0 recs

I'd be embarrassed if I ignored all the facts, too

Several years ago, DTS ponied up to resign EB and Maggette. Then he paid millions to MDSr. Then he signed several free agents to long term deals based on MDSr's advice.

Translated, DTS didn't suddenly wake up. He woke up several years ago and put trust in his management team. The team isn't performing as it should. He's demanding accountability. Which is uncomfortable for those who haven't been performing, like MDSr and Elgin, and for those who enable them, like John R.

Unfortunately for those MDSr lovers like John R, but fortunately for the rest of us, it's DTS' team, not MDSr's team.

by Jax on Jan 22, 2008 11:09 AM PST up 0 recs

Its not just me, simple one

Sactown Royalty's and Fanhouse's own TZ agrees. I'd suspect most folks with vision beyond the end of their nose do too. I suppose if I had more respect for your silly opinions, I would elaborate as he did. But I don't.

But if you weren't so tragically myopic (former Lakers fan, yes?), you could see what's really going on here.

Sterling doesn't want to WIN. He wants to QUIT. This is the beginning of an exit strategy to return to not paying. Firing MDSr isn't the beginning of anything. It is the end of everything. Always has been.

by John R on Jan 22, 2008 12:33 PM PST up 0 recs

That's your funniest post ever, and

there have been some great ones. Let's see:

All Euro refs will run to the US
Sky is falling over Donaghy (and the conspiracy)
All players are replaceable

Just to name a few. I haven't read your links and really don't need to link to support my points.

Exit strategy? Keeping EB is a return to not paying? Firing MDSr? With all due respect, I can't stop laughing.

Your post is insightful John R, but not for the reasons you state. Rather, it's insightful because it is so enlightening about who you really are. God forbid the boss might actually demand competency from his employees. I would imagine that you're in a similar pickle in your own job.

by Jax on Jan 22, 2008 12:45 PM PST up 0 recs

Roflcopter

I wouldn't expect you to read the links.

Gaining or showing insight has never been your strong suit.

by John R on Jan 22, 2008 1:04 PM PST up 0 recs

Always

Some things always ring true - the truly ignorant always loudly proclaim their intelligence

by Jax on Jan 22, 2008 1:15 PM PST up 0 recs

Hmmm

Aside from you and Jax getting into one of your arguments, I'm trying to understand the point here.

I doubt that DTS believes the Clips can make the playoffs, but he's not going to write off the season in an article in the LA Times. He's trying to give people some hope and a reason to come to the games. I don't think that he's "suddenly" blaming Dunleavy--it seems to me that there's some residual blaming of Dunleavy for the team's failure to make the playoffs last year. At any rate, he's clearly less enamored with Dunleavy than he was 18 months ago or whenever it was he gave him the new contract. He wants results from him. That seems reasonable enough, and it helps Sterling's credibility that he admits to being a moronic, cheapskate owner for a really long time.

I read the article as a big show of support for Elton Brand, with some respect for Maggette thrown in, and a call for Dunleavy to produce some wins and a decent product for the fans even with the injuries. Knowing DTS, however, maybe he's clueless enough to believe that the Clips can still make the playoffs.

by zhivclip on Jan 22, 2008 12:54 PM PST up 0 recs

Agree and disagree

DTS is not clueless. He's just gone from someone who was using the NBA franchise solely to make money to someone who is actually trying to compete. The fact that he has now publicly called out MDSr should be seen as a sign that MDSr could very well be gone after this year.

John R understands this, which is why he's displaying so much vitriol.

by Jax on Jan 22, 2008 12:59 PM PST up 0 recs

Based on?

He's just gone from someone who was using the NBA franchise solely to make money to someone who is actually trying to compete.

You base this on...what? Myopia mostly.

by John R on Jan 22, 2008 1:05 PM PST up 0 recs

Pretend he is a politician

Re-read everything he said. Add historical context.

No Sterling team has won more games than Dunleavy's 47. Only once before has a Sterling team won 40 games back to back, under Larry Brown. And Larry Brown isn't walking in that door. Sterling let him walk, of course. They only went to the playoffs one other time, when 36 wins was enough to get them there.

There is a lot to be frustrated about this season. If I was footing the bill I would probably be frustrated too.

But nothing now nor ever will ever change Sterling's primary focus from making money. Winning helps make money. Its true. But with no Brand and no Livingston, its rather futile, regardless of coach and/or GM.

So why start to speak? To back away. To set the stage. To prepare for 20 wins to return to the norm instead of the outlier.

I think some people want to read that Sterling has changed. Really want it to be true. Like we really want Maggette to be able to catch and pass the ball. But 30 years of history didn't change because he talked to Simers.

In fact, maybe Simers made the whole thing up.

by John R on Jan 22, 2008 1:03 PM PST up 0 recs

Just like MDSR, blame it all on the injuries

As DTS, Simers, and so many others have said, the injuries are only part of the equation.

Frankly, DTS told a friend of mine last year that he was frustrated with MDSr's decision making even back then.

If you don't think that DTS has changed over the past few years, then there's really no point arguing wtih you.

Now DTS seeks accountability. Nothing wrong with that, except those who have reason to be concerned.

by Jax on Jan 22, 2008 1:13 PM PST up 0 recs

Let's be clear...

Sometimes excuses are just excuses, and sometimes they are valid explanations. Learn to know the difference.

This team had no chance, and MDsr gets a 'Get out of Jail Free' card on this season.

I'm finally reading the Simers piece now. I have much to say on it.

by ClipperSteve on Jan 22, 2008 1:47 PM PST up 0 recs

Yes, let's be clear

Steve, I (and I believe others) believe that there are problems with the coaching this year that have little to do injuries.

by Jax on Jan 22, 2008 1:58 PM PST up 0 recs

Jax...

I understand that. I (finally) posted my take on the Simers column, so you can look at that.

There may be 20 problems that are impacting the Clippers won-loss record. 19 of them wouldn't really matter, because the injury problem is enough by itself.

So unless we know something specific (like for instance if the players quit giving effort, which certainly could happen, and yesterday didn't look too good), he gets a do over on this season. He's under contract for 3 more years, he's gotten more out of the team than any coach ever. It simply doesn't make sense to change coaches now.

Not unless Nate McMillan is available.

by ClipperSteve on Jan 22, 2008 5:21 PM PST up 0 recs

We don't know all that goes on

but we do know that DTS is the owner. It's his team. Reading between the lines of that article and the other quotes that you referenced, and still others from folks like Mobley, Sam, et al., it's pretty clear to me at least that DTS now realizes that he made a significant mistake when he agreed to give MSDr that extension. MDSr's ridiculously juvenile reaction to his boss's comments just proves the point. DTS probably isn't very happy paying that guy $5 M / yr.

It ain't easy being a Clipper fan. DTS' words are at least a glimmer of hope.

by Jax on Jan 22, 2008 5:49 PM PST up 0 recs

You'e right about that...

There's clearly tension between DTS and MDsr that we've haven't seen before. The quotes about 'Thornton just needs coaching' and 'Maggette just needs coaching' were pretty brutal.

I think it would be a mistake to fire MDsr before next season, and I don't think it will happen. For one thing, this is the same man who tried to weasel out of paying Bill Fitch the $1M he owed him. He sure ain't looking forward to paying MDsr $17M after he leaves.

There's another huge issue here: who do you hire? The Memphis situation is the most analogous to the Clippers current situation. They bailed on Fratello while Gasol was hurt. They played just as poorly under interim Barone after Gasol came back. They go out and hire the HOT assistant du jour, Marc Iavaroni.... and they're record this year is worse than the Clippers. With Gasol healthy and Gay leading them in scoring. Fratello led them to the fourth best record in the west the last time he had a healthy Gasol. A million other things have changed since then (they always do), but it's hard to argue that firing Fratello helped, and pretty easy to argue that it made things worse.

by ClipperSteve on Jan 22, 2008 6:38 PM PST up 0 recs

We may not have seen it, but

I've heard about it. DTS hasn't been shy about his views of MDSr. Last year he ripped him publicly (not to the press, but still in public). If I were the Clippers, I'd get Baylor, Roeser, and whoever else is responsible for management into a room and decide how best to go forward (assuming DTS is serious about competing). The problem with that is that current management has not done a good job and really can't be relied on to do anything right.

This is what I was concerned about at the beginning of the year - DTS decided that he wanted to win and put his trust in a bunch of incompetent fools such as MDSr who let him down and ended up getting burned. These articles confirm that he knows it now. The question is - what is he going to do now? Keeping MDSr, who really is a fool, as you can see from his latest lame comments (at $5 M a year - I just can't get over that).

I would probaby tell DTS that he's got to work out a buyout with MDSr (bite the bullet), find a good, up and coming GM (maybe not in that order), get someone in here to run the team short term, and move forward. In the long run, the team should be successful, and he can make the money back. Keeping MDSr here any longer isn't going to do anything for anyone.

by Jax on Jan 22, 2008 6:57 PM PST up 0 recs

A quick clarification...

I'll comment soon enough on Simers' piece, either in the diary or in my own post. I'm ashamed to say I haven't even read it yet. I usually avoid reading Simers as long as possible.

But let's use the term 'Jumped the Shark', one of my all time favorites, properly.

To Jump the Shark, usually used for television shows but now applied to almost anything, is to go from being valid, relevant and of generally high quality, to being irrelevant and of poor quality. The term of course comes from the episode of Happy Days when Fonzie literally jumped over a shark on waterskis.

(My favorite thing here is that the episode in question occurred LONG after Happy Days had already 'jumped the shark'. Happy Days was indeed a good show at one point - for maybe a season and a half. Fonzie jumped the shark in like season 6 or something. In fact, the show 'jumped the shark' (i.e. ceased to be a good show) when Fonzie moved into the apartment over the garage. I'll grant you that the phrase 'Wow, that show really moved into the apartment over the garage' doesn't have the same ring to it. But still, it's delicious irony that the show that inspired the idiom doesn't actually fit the idiom.)

As for DTS, I don't think you mean he has 'jumped the shark.' Quite the opposite, I think you're saying that is trying to become relevant. He has 'turned the corner'; 'seen the light'; 'found religion'; 'turned the page'; he has not 'jumped the shark.' Not in this case anyway.

Sorry for the sermon, but shark-jumping is something of a pet topic of mine. Little did you know.

'The Bob Newhart Show' and 'Happy Days' in the course of three days. Maybe I need to start a new blog. All of this Clipper stuff is getting in the way of my 70s TV trivia.

by ClipperSteve on Jan 22, 2008 11:14 AM PST up 0 recs

You're right - sorry about that

Actually, I think he decided to become relevant several years ago and this is proof

by Jax on Jan 22, 2008 11:21 AM PST up 0 recs

Good TV stuff

Funny comment. I was thinking, however, that the original comment was saying that DTS had jumped the shark because he had suddenly starting acting like a real owner. That is, DTS has established himself as a long-running, incredibly lowbrow or broad show (any good 60s/70s examples?) that suddenly brought in some great young writers and became valid, relevant, etc. Like, say, if Larry Gelbart and a young Jim Brooks went to work on Gilligan's island, and somehow it turned into a prototype of Mary Tyler Moore, Seinfeld, and the Simpsons. DTS has such a ridiculous history, that I just assumed that him jumping the shark made sense when he is calling for accountability, saying that he'll take care of key players, and admitting that he was a clueless doofus for much too long.

by zhivclip on Jan 22, 2008 11:45 AM PST up 0 recs

Hmmm...

That's jumping the shark in reverse. I don't think it applies here. Jumping the shark is not just passing from state A to state B - it specifically refers to going from good to bad - from relevance to irrelevance. The only argument you could make was that DTS offered solid comedy before, and now he's all serious. Like a great sitcom taking itself too seriously. Maybe the last seasons of M*A*S*H?

There have been a handful of shows that 'found their voice' after some early jitters. The West Wing got much better, though it was already a great show even in the pilot. (And then it jumped the shark with Smits and Alda.) Seinfeld was quirky and uneven in it's summer replacement debut, but got better quickly. Of course, every season it seemed Seinfeld was about to 'Jump the Shark' and then they always pulled it out somehow. These retoolings usually have to happen really quickly. Let's face it, if the show found an audience before retooling, then they're not going to change it. And if it didn't find an audience, it has to get changed quickly or it's gone.

So, sorry but no, DTS has not 'Jumped the Shark'. Invalid pop culture reference. That's two free throws and the ball out of bounds.

by ClipperSteve on Jan 22, 2008 11:57 AM PST up 0 recs

What If

we want to change the meaning of the term? Who says we can't (besides the blog owner)?

by Jax on Jan 22, 2008 12:01 PM PST up 0 recs

Absolutely...

That's the way language works. If you use it that way, and enough people start using it that way, then it will change. Happens all the time.

But it hasn't happened yet in this case. Sorry.

by ClipperSteve on Jan 22, 2008 1:31 PM PST up 0 recs

Sometimes...

You have to take the T and get kicked out in order to get your team back into the game. So I'll gladly pay the fine if we can just get your take on the Sterling article.

Yeah, okay, you can't Jump the Shark in reverse, not allowed.

by zhivclip on Jan 22, 2008 12:04 PM PST up 0 recs

Also--Simers

Also, you shouldn't hesitate to read the Simers article. It's shocking not only because Sterling is sort of making sense, but because it's a very straightahead piece of reporting from Simers.

by zhivclip on Jan 22, 2008 11:48 AM PST up 0 recs

most shows do jump the shark

sometimes it is subtle. It is just an indication that they are trying to hard. I prefer when shows end with grace. I don't think Seinfeld ever jumped the shark, although Jerry Seinfeld did.

Sometimes shows just get bad without jumping the shark, or sometimes it is both. I keep insisting to people that the Sopranos jumped the shark when Dr. Melfi was raped. But it actually died when Big Pussy got whacked (that should get the site some extra hits). Yet, the show became more popular as it became more desperate.

I think MASH jumped the shark, but not all at once. It coincided with Alan Alda becoming the creative force behind the show during the later years. The first 3 seasons with Wayne Rogers and Col. Henry Blake were much funnier. Col. Potter was an ok replacement, but Mike Farrell was kind of a bummer.

Otherwise, I don't watch TV all that much.

by mp on Jan 22, 2008 12:04 PM PST up 0 recs

I was going to go to the Newhart post

...but I'll mention here that in one of Simmons' columns last week he had some pretty interesting thoughts on the topic of classic TV shows, since we're all happy to chat about this.

I think it was links in his post pitting the 86 Celtics against the 07 Patriots in a head-to-head matchup, where you could go back to him writing about Pacino vs. DeNiro and, for our purposes here, Seinfeld vs. Cheers. There was another one that I forget.

by zhivclip on Jan 22, 2008 12:08 PM PST up 0 recs

Simmons...

Before I started blogging, when I was just emailing long-winded opinionated rants to a circle of friends, I was frequently compared to Simmons. And there were occasions where we said eerily similar things.

The thing is, I have no idea how this guy has enough time to watch every game in every sport, and watch every bad movie of all time and every episode of every reality show.

So the references to White Shadow, I'm all for. But Road Rules? You lost me there.

by ClipperSteve on Jan 22, 2008 1:30 PM PST up 0 recs