Did the Clippers mess up?
Blake Griffin is a beast. He is a top big man now and is intent on getting better. DeAndre Jordan is a solid young big man who can block shots, rebound, and dunk. And, Chris Paul is doing a great job running the show. He is the MVP candidate who doesn't get as much attention as KD, LeBron, or even Kevin Love and Westbrook.
But, can they win a title with Blake, CP3, Jordan, and some other guys? Is that a big enough of a big three? Plus, Blake is really young, but CP3 is a veteran who might not be in his prime in a few years.
I am wondering if the Clippers messed up by getting Chris Paul. First, they traded Baron Davis and their pick (which turned out to be the number 1 pick) to the Cavs for Mo Williams. Mo Williams is solid but now he is a backup. Chris Paul is great but they gave up Eric Gordon (a promising young shooting guard) to get him along with Chris Kaman and Al Aminu. They gave up a lot and now they don't have any big men depth. I like the Clips but I am not sure if they are contenders. ... I still think they need to add pieces.
Blake's stats aren't really better this year and that is odd considering they got an upgrade at point guard. But, maybe the Clippers aren't running enough.
I am wondering if the Clippers should have kept Baron Davis and not traded for Chris Paul.
Then their starting lineup for next year might look like this:
PG: Kyrie Irving
SG: Eric Gordon
SF: Farouq Al Aminu
PF: Blake Griffin
C: DeAndre Jordan
That would be a nice young starting lineup who might offer more potential down the road. They would still also have Chris Kaman and Baron Davis as solid veterans off the bench along with Bledsoe. Or they could turn Kaman and B Diddy into other pieces.
This younger team (I bet Gordon would resign with them) features a great young four man core along with a nice do-it-all small forward. Bledsoe would be better utilized as the first or second guard off the bench. The thing about this team is that they would have one of the best young players at 4 out of 5 positions with Griffin, Gordon, Irving, and Jordan. That would be one hell of a team in a couple of years, and could have more upside than the Blake/Paul tandem.
What do you guys think?
Yes I was surprised at when they did that trade. At the time they didn't know that was the no1 pick.
I like Eric Gordon but he is injury prone
They should have
1- Drafted Paul George over Al-Farouq Aminu
2- Kept Baron Davis and Draft Kyrie Irving
Good God Damn Thats Scary
The mistake they made was not Top-3 protecting the pick, which they probably negotiated and tried to do, but lost out on.
The rationale behind the trade was to get Baron Davis's salary off the books to free up money to spend on DeAndre Jordan, a young big man who played a lot better last year than he has this year. At the time, they viewed Baron Davis as an aging guard with decreasing athleticism and not much of a work ethic, so it made sense to give up a draft pick that they're thinking will be around 5 and won't produce a player as good as DeAndre Jordan anyway.
So if they had kept that pick, they wouldn't have DeAndre Jordan, he'd be in a Golden State uniform. We all love Eric Gordon, but Chis Paul's first six seasons were historically good, and as promising as Gordon is, the chances that he turns out to be as good as Chris Paul are not high.
Giving up on Aminu was a smart decision because he's not a very good basketball player. I was hoping they'd draft Gordon Hayward with that pick. I think they should have. But either way, sending Aminu to New Orleans hasn't even really hurt them because picking up Chauncey Billups (until his injury), Nick Young (basically for free) and Kenyon Martin (basically for free) more than offset any production they would have had from Aminu.
That wouldn't have been the number 1 pick if they hadn't traded it. We all know Stern rigged that lottery.
It's always easy to look back and hindsight and say what they SHOULD have done...nobody knew Kyrie Irving would be this good out the gate. But Chris Paul is just turning 27 in May (Griffin just turned 23) and will still be in his prime for the next 5-6 years. Eric Gordon is too injury-prone to be a true franchise building block.
The Clippers were in win now mode because they didnt want to lose Blake to free agency, so this was probably the best move for them. Plus they will have a better chance of attracting big free agents to LA with 2 franchise players there in CP3 & Blake
The sad part is that the Cavs were relieved from Baron Davis's services via the amnesty clause, which didn't exist when he still played for the Clippers, it was introduced as part of the new CBA.
So in retrospect, they could've kept Baron Davis and the draft pick, amnestied Davis, and still had the money re-sign DeAndre Jordan. But they had no way of knowing that. Hindsight is always 20-20.
There was something that prevented them from being able to protect that pick, but I can't remember what it was.
I agree with everything you said though with the reasoning behind some of the Clippers' moves. I was hoping they picked Gordon Hayward too. I thought he'd have been a good fit and brought some winning intangibles to a losing organization.
I don't think VDN is the answer to lead this team. He must be a great interview to land the Bulls and Clips job with no previous coaching experience (other than the Bulls obviously) but I think they need to replace him with a Vet (Jerry Sloan anyone?).
Eric Gordon has been hurt and in this draft coming up, there are quite a few players that could possibly be close to his level. Nick Young is a solid scorer even though he is not as good as Gordon for the long term. Paul is a winner and despite knee injures, he is still young in his career.
Clippers made the right choice. I think this lockout shorten season is not allowing people to see the fullness of the moves that were made. They have a front court locked for 2 or so years with Blake most likely staying. They have a young point in Eric Bledsoe that they can move or they can move Mo Wiliams. They picked up Kenyon Martin and Reggie Evans who are both tough players. They should be able to add some depth next year and with more game spread out, it will be less wear and tear on Paul and other older players. Billups may be back. Mo Williams value is probably going to be high if he does well in the playoffs which he should plus there are not many elite point guards available in the draft.
If Clippers don't make this move, Paul is likely a Laker.
Clippers made the right move. I think people are undervaluing Paul and getting hype about a rookie who may never be better than Paul.
Aminu is a player that can be replace or they can pick him up when New Orleans drops him. Hornets have a lot of swingman and are looking for more.
I always wished my team was in that trade cuz LAC wanted Baron Davis off the books so bad that giving a lottery pick away would be more then worth taking on Baron Davis
I like this thread idea and all, but I'm tired of people saying they aren't contenders. Haven't they done enough to show that they are? They beat the Thunder by double digits, blew out the Mavs in Dallas, sure they lost the series to the Lakers 2-1 but it was competitive throughout. Right now they are even on a 5 game winning streak in the closing part of the season heading into the playoffs. They have shown they are contenders.
They made the right move, then Stern vetoed it and made them get screwed over. People talk about the Laker veto, but Stern vetoed the first Chris Paul to LAC trade as well.
They actually kept Gordon as it was Kaman/Aminu/Bledsoe/Tpups first that got vetoed.
NO... CP3 made a lottery team into a top 3 team in the Western Conference. He brought relevance to the NBA's doormat franchise. Now, thanks to CP3 top FA's vets like Billups & Kmart are choosing the Clips to sign with. For the first time in a long time the Clips made the right decision. Gordon & Irving are great pros but neither both would of made as big as impact to the Clippers orginazation as the future HOF CP3 has.
Do the Clippers still need one more guy for a Big Three or are Paul/Blake/Jordan enough to get it done?
To me they seem like a fringe contender like the Grizzlies or the Knicks. Yeah, they could make a big run, or they could lose early.
Even if the Clippers can beat the Grizzlies in the first round they will have trouble with the Spurs.
The Thunder is the best team in the West followed by SA and the Lakers. I think there is a slight drop off to the Grizzlies and Clippers.
I like what the Clips are doing but the West is really, really loaded. The Thunder have a kick ass Big Four and the Lakers can go with Kobe, Bynum, Pau, and Metta Ron Ron (or whatever his name is). The Spurs and Grizzlies have some really good players and are deeper than the Clippers.
I am thinking that the Clippers might have been better off waiting for the Lakers, Spurs, Celtics, and Heat to begin to fade and then attack the league with a Blake, Irving, Gordon, and Jordan Big Four. They would then be at the top of the class with the Thunder and Bulls.
Anytime when you have a chance to add a top 10 player and floor general like Chris Paul without giving up your best player you do it...There might be nobody in this draft that has the talent of CP3 ...
Blake's outstanding play from last season made the Clippers a team fans wanted to see becuz of him.....Adding CP3 and then getting Billups & Butler made them a serious playoff team...
Well, like I say, the fabric of time is delicate as hell, looking back, they went 11-14 with Mo after the trade, and that translates to an average of 33-42, while their actual record was 32-50, so maybe had they kept the pick, they would have gotten more ping pong balls, howeve that doesnt neccesarily mean that they'd win it. My point is that I'd say that the chance of not trading that pick and that pick still getting no.1 is very slim because everything is rearranged, so I don't think they would've gotten Irving.