Thomas Wood: Let's talk about the Clippers as daily fantasy plays. There's really five relevant guys: Blake Griffin, Chris Paul, DeAndre Jordan, J.J. Redick, and Jamal Crawford. Who's the best value?
Shap: While this is closer than you'd think, I'd say Chris Paul might be the answer to this question. And the answer doesn't just lie in his traditional point guard stats, but it's also buoyed by the fact that not only is he giving you terrific points, assists, and steals like he normally does, but this year he's hitting a career high in 3s per game. He's statistically pouring in as good of a year as he's ever given since his prime statistical days in New Orleans.
TW: He's been excellent. He's a premium player at the top of the price range, but he deserves it.
When I've been playing, though, I've tended to allocate my money to other positions. Point guard is stacked. You can spend $10,000 on Paul, or you can spend a few thousand less to get Lillard or Lowry or some other good player. The difference between Paul and those guys is a lot smaller than the difference between LeBron and other small forwards. But, Blake and DeAndre play stacked positions too, which is kinda why I like Redick, especially the way he's playing right now.
S: That's a great take on the fact that point guard is absolutely loaded and you could probably spend your money more wisely. While Redick is under appreciated both in fantasy and reality, he still doesn't give you enough aside from his scoring for me to be too excited for him to be on my team. Blake's versatility at the power forward spot might actually make him more desirable in FanDuel as opposed to him giving up the passing and gobbling up more rebounds, and there aren't many centers out there who do what DJ does quite as productively. While Blake might be able to be replaced, DeAndre's dominance in rebounding/blocks towers over many other centers.
TW: DeAndre has been a monster, especially the past month or so. Although, center has been deeper than years past -- certainly more so than the days of old when you had Shaq, then Ilgauskas or Camby, then a whole bunch of nothing. The weird thing about picking a Clipper as a value is that the team's weakest positions line up with the league's weakest positions. I agree that Redick is one dimensional, and to add on to that, he's inconsistent, not through any fault of his own, just because he's never more than the 3rd or 4th option.
Along the lines of consistency, would you ever trust Crawford? Or is that just gambling?
S: So hard to trust hero ball in anything. Unfortunately crossovers isn't a category. Though I do think a real gambling man might be able to find a good matchup for Crawford on a specific day and roll the dice, but I'm not sure how hard you can bet on Crawford on any given day, really.
Even with Redick's narrow contributions, his price tag wouldn't kill you, and, particularly on this ragged Clipper team that's injured on the wing, he'd chip in. His value relative to the field is undeniable even with some of his duds.
TW: He seems to be playing a bigger role in the offense now. Do you think he keeps it up for the next few weeks?
S: As long as Crawford is out, and it seems like he's still out for a while, then Redick will contribute more and be more consistent. All those minutes Clipper fans wished would go to Redick anyways in crunch time will be his by default.
TW: So you're not buying Nate Robinson stock?
S: Nope. Are you?
TW: Sadly, no, and I loved Nate. That playoff series he had with the Bulls was special. But little athletic guys lose it fast, and he might be there. Although, to be fair to him, it doesn't look like he was ever in shape this season.
S: Yup, Nate's athleticism looks sapped, and with that gone, there goes most of his value. And as far as late season bargain bin buys, there will be loads more promising than Nate with incoming shut downs/rest days giving some daylight to talented players otherwise hanging out on benches. Some of my favorite players ever came about this way, people only fantasy diehards will recognize.
TW: Agreed. Maybe the first thing we've agreed on. Let's do this again next week.