| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
emplay
Site Staff
Joined: 15 Apr 2001
Posts: 25549
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Tanlentueux
Star Player
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
Posts: 7169
|
 Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2017 4:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Thank you... Let's see. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
razor
Starting Rotation
Joined: 01 Oct 2014
Posts: 121
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2017 11:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
What I really want to know;
1. Why were they in such a hurry to get rid of Lou? I know he's 30, his contract etc, but if they didn't receive a viable pick, why do it? I read that this will allow the younger players to develope, and force a tank thus protecting the top 3 pick......is this the reality of it?
2. Giving time for players to develope. Call me stupid, but for all the years I've been watching the NBA(since jwest and uncle wiltie), great players are great when they hit the floor, they are not average and suddenly become great, you either got it or you don't. Boston has more number one picks than god, yet they are building a vet team, why is that? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
emplay
Site Staff
Joined: 15 Apr 2001
Posts: 25549
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2017 11:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Nance was a 27 pick, Butler 30,zubac 2nd round - what you call non-viable is your projection
_________________
Salary Cap Strategist and Columnist at Bleacher Report and on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/EricPincus |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
razor
Starting Rotation
Joined: 01 Oct 2014
Posts: 121
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2017 1:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| emplay wrote: | | Nance was a 27 pick, Butler 30,zubac 2nd round - what you call non-viable is your projection |
Well I guess that"s fair, you could also use Curry and Thompson as examples too. Guess I'll just wait and see how they do things. I was thinking about how important JCraw is to the Clips, and saw Lou as the same thing, but I guess it's not in a rebuild... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
emplay
Site Staff
Joined: 15 Apr 2001
Posts: 25549
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2017 2:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Clippers are desperate to unload Crawford in trade
_________________
Salary Cap Strategist and Columnist at Bleacher Report and on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/EricPincus |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
razor
Starting Rotation
Joined: 01 Oct 2014
Posts: 121
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2017 2:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| emplay wrote: | | Clippers are desperate to unload Crawford in trade |
Maybe now that they've built a decent bench...but through the years, even with that starting lineup, they still needed JCraw to win.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
emplay
Site Staff
Joined: 15 Apr 2001
Posts: 25549
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2017 2:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Actually they shopped Crawford heavily each of the past few seasons - they re-signed him because they couldn't replace that asset in FA, so they inked him to a deal they believed they could easily trade. Now they're having trouble trading him.
Also Crawford has been a washout for the Clippers in the playoffs - I think he has a single game of impact.
_________________
Salary Cap Strategist and Columnist at Bleacher Report and on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/EricPincus |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
razor
Starting Rotation
Joined: 01 Oct 2014
Posts: 121
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2017 2:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| emplay wrote: | Actually they shopped Crawford heavily each of the past few seasons - they re-signed him because they couldn't replace that asset in FA, so they inked him to a deal they believed they could easily trade. Now they're having trouble trading him.
Also Crawford has been a washout for the Clippers in the playoffs - I think he has a single game of impact. |
Well I could say the entire starting clip lineup is a washout. Teams play defense in the playoffs, and they push the perimeter, leaving the clips with nothing but an unskilled dunkathon in the middle....they lose the same way every year, unless CP blows a hammy.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tox
Franchise Player
Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 17876
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2017 10:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| emplay wrote: | Actually they shopped Crawford heavily each of the past few seasons - they re-signed him because they couldn't replace that asset in FA, so they inked him to a deal they believed they could easily trade. Now they're having trouble trading him.
Also Crawford has been a washout for the Clippers in the playoffs - I think he has a single game of impact. |
 Doc, cmon man |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laker50
Star Player
Joined: 07 Mar 2014
Posts: 2140
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 8:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
This was almost a no choice decision. Kupchak and Jim had messed up the Lakers so much that it would be hard to come back.
Nash for 2 first rounders never played.
Howard for 2 first rounders and never wanted to play for the Lakers.
All the coaching mistakes. Coaching carousal.
And the big blooper. Two 80M 4 year contracts to players over their prime
and now bench players. Wow, stupid.
Looks like Kupchak and Jim were looking at press clippings and reviews of the past in making their decisions. Yes, true.
Did they ever scout their players? Even a monkey with a coin would have made better decisions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
