In the comments of the Monday's Power Rankings Watch post Citizen Axxer posted a link to a Ric Bucher article on Bleacher Report about how the Clippers should consider trading Blake Griffin for a four with more range, but won't consider it because Donald Sterling is afraid. Or something like that. Honestly, the article was so stupid it was hard to follow Bucher's point. The term "pointless" comes to mind, in fact.
I myself commented that I was almost "tempted to do the vivisection treatment" on it:
That article is so bad I'm tempted to do the vivisection treatment on it. Is he seriously basing his criticism on the fact that the Clippers haven't actively shopped Griffin, with his source being one GM somewhere who hasn't gotten a phone call? REALLY? It's basically impossible to prove that something didn't happen - and here he is saying that something didn't happen because another thing didn't happen. Wow.
And how exactly are Griffin and Jordan "dissonant" with Paul? I accept the argument (and have made it myself) that they are not a great fit with each other. But is pick and pop (i.e. David West) inherently better than pick and roll (i.e. Griffin and/or Jordan)? Most people would argue that Griffin is a PERFECT fit with Paul, regardless of your feelings about the fit of Griffin and Jordan.
In the end I was too lazy or disinterested to write more than a comment. But happily, Tom Ziller at SB Nation felt pretty much exactly the same way, and gives Bucher's work the colonoscopy it deserves.
Saying "Donald [Sterlin] understands dunks and star power, not spacing the floor" is basically saying "I don't understand Blake Griffin." That it's a GM saying it is pretty gross, because I bet you that GM would leap at the chance to get Griffin, no matter what sort of spacing problems it might cause.
Thanks for saving me the trouble, Ziller.