An early summer 2024 thread

[NickP]

i think it's good to acknowledge, but i suppose the question is whether lue agrees with that vision and commits to it as well (assuming he stays).

I think it depends on what the overall goals of the franchise and FO are, and what they communicate to Lue on this. The last couple of years, I am pretty certain they have prioritized winning first and foremost to try to maximize the 213 window. If they tell him that is still the goal, he is going to coach towards that.

OTOH, if Lue is going forward that winning now is not the 100% goal and we absolutely need to consider player development, we might see different things out of Lue. I'm not sure, but given our roster situation the last couple of years I'd be surprised if they told Lue to develop kids over winning as many games as possible now.

I know first & foremost Kawhi needs to be on the court and PG & Harden need to be consistent for a change for us to have any shot at post season success. But I just don't get "win now mode" with so many players that get played off the court like Russ, PJ, Plumlee, Coffey and even Mann at times. Could've had player development going since 213 first touched down in LA.

I wasn't even shocked or pissed at the outcome of this season. Once PJ Tucker arrived with Harden and demanded minutes while Kobe & Bones got kicked to the curb, the writing was on the wall as to how the season would go. It was status quo and textbook Clippers all the way through until the latest playoff disappointment. They'll sweet talk us on getting younger and more athletic, but I'll believe it when I see it.

Sorry bro but even PG, Kawhi and Harden are not gonna cut it. The league has gotten too damn younger and faster. Teams actually play team ball and not ISO ball we play. PG has to be signed and traded and we can only hope that there’s a team out there gullible enough to fall for it. If they run it back with the pieces we have we’re screwed. I don’t know what the solution is because the FO seems to love Lue and that means running everything back including coaching. Not looking good at all.

[esqtvd]

Not to mention the REAL problem with the plan was counting on your HOF-types to win on smarts and skill, and instead they simply stunk up the joint.

[madmaxmedia]

So I think here's my conclusions on the state of the Clippers.

We are increasingly less and less a playoff contender, which means that sacrificing future value for current value no longer makes sense (you could argue that ship sailed well before, but hey we'll always have 26-5.) We all know our roster and draft pick situation, which means that losing doesn't help our draft picks (but it doesn't hurt either.) Obviously tanking makes no sense, but going out of our way to avoid giving OKC better picks makes no sense either. Our future value is all that matters, even if most of the pathways are closed to us.

So all that's left is the boring middle ground- trying to maximize future roster value without tanking for picks. To me that means-

1. Try to re-sign PG and Kawhi to reasonable deals (IMO that means 3/$150M for PG and some sort of smaller 2 or 3 year deal for James). Losing them for nothing doesn't help our current or future value, but signing them to too-long deals will hurt our future roster value. Signing them to reasonable deals turns them into tradable assets when they become trade-eligible. If other teams offer 4 years, let them walk.

2. Surround whatever iteration of 213 is left with young guys on the floor, +/- be damned. It may very well be that none of Bones, Kobe, BBJ, Kai, etc. become decent NBA players. But I assume there's still a chance if they're still on the roster, so we either cut them or play them. Maybe one or two become the next Amir Coffey or Terrance Mann, great. If they stink up the joint, that's the cost of finding out and we should pay it.

3. No more old vet acquisitions no matter who it is and how cheap they are (with sole exception of if Nico wants back, he can come back anytime.) Only young acquisitions, this means probably more reclamation projects because we don't have the means to acquire anyone else with potential. Whoever we do take flyers on, play them.

4. I think at this point the ideal trade scenarios for PG, Kawhi, and James would be for bad, shorter contracts plus picks/lesser younger players with potential. All 3 guys can still play and can still help the right team, a midseason trade could definitely provide a boost to the right team without costing them too much in return. It's possible we actually end up with cap space sooner than later if we end up trading 2 or 3 or them this way.

5. Tell Ty this is the plan, period. If he doesn't want to coach that, trade him to the Lakers.

That's about the best of it IMO. We won't be great, we won't be horrible either. I can still enjoy watching this team if we go forward with this kind of 'make the best of it' plan. We're a treadmill team without the incentive to tear it down, so just generally try to do smarter things in recognition of this. That's it.

[Dynamix]

Here are two things I hope won't happen:

- Kawhi plays in Paris, gets hurt, is out for another year

- Kawhi gets traded, somehow stays healthy, wins another ring somewhere else

[esqtvd]

So I think here's my conclusions on the state of the Clippers.

We are increasingly less and less a playoff contender, which means that sacrificing future value for current value no longer makes sense (you could argue that ship sailed well before, but hey we'll always have 26-5.) We all know our roster and draft pick situation, which means that losing doesn't help our draft picks (but it doesn't hurt either.) Obviously tanking makes no sense, but going out of our way to avoid giving OKC better picks makes no sense either. Our future value is all that matters, even if most of the pathways are closed to us.

So all that's left is the boring middle ground- trying to maximize future roster value without tanking for picks. To me that means-

1. Try to re-sign PG and Kawhi to reasonable deals (IMO that means 3/$150M for PG and some sort of smaller 2 or 3 year deal for James). Losing them for nothing doesn't help our current or future value, but signing them to too-long deals will hurt our future roster value. Signing them to reasonable deals turns them into tradable assets when they become trade-eligible. If other teams offer 4 years, let them walk.

2. Surround whatever iteration of 213 is left with young guys on the floor, +/- be damned. It may very well be that none of Bones, Kobe, BBJ, Kai, etc. become decent NBA players. But I assume there's still a chance if they're still on the roster, so we either cut them or play them. Maybe one or two become the next Amir Coffey or Terrance Mann, great. If they stink up the joint, that's the cost of finding out and we should pay it.

3. No more old vet acquisitions no matter who it is and how cheap they are (with sole exception of if Nico wants back, he can come back anytime.) Only young acquisitions, this means probably more reclamation projects because we don't have the means to acquire anyone else with potential. Whoever we do take flyers on, play them.

4. I think at this point the ideal trade scenarios for PG, Kawhi, and James would be for bad, shorter contracts plus picks/lesser younger players with potential. All 3 guys can still play and can still help the right team, a midseason trade could definitely provide a boost to the right team without costing them too much in return. It's possible we actually end up with cap space sooner than later if we end up trading 2 or 3 or them this way.

5. Tell Ty this is the plan, period. If he doesn't want to coach that, trade him to the Lakers.

That's about the best of it IMO. We won't be great, we won't be horrible either. I can still enjoy watching this team if we go forward with this kind of 'make the best of it' plan. We're a treadmill team without the incentive to tear it down, so just generally try to do smarter things in recognition of this. That's it.

Hard to say what level of product Ballmer will accept. There's nothing worse than a bad, old team. At least this year's model won over 50 games.

As for the kids, it's not just plus/minus, although the minus part has a lot to do with inexperience on defense. But on the whole, they also shot poorly. Nobody could hit the 3.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/LAC/2024.html

Only Jordan Miller shot at an acceptable rate in very limited minutes [28], but NB--both Miller and Kobe Brown turn 25 next January! By NBA standards they're not even kids anymore.

[Clemenza]

So I think here's my conclusions on the state of the Clippers.

We are increasingly less and less a playoff contender, which means that sacrificing future value for current value no longer makes sense (you could argue that ship sailed well before, but hey we'll always have 26-5.) We all know our roster and draft pick situation, which means that losing doesn't help our draft picks (but it doesn't hurt either.) Obviously tanking makes no sense, but going out of our way to avoid giving OKC better picks makes no sense either. Our future value is all that matters, even if most of the pathways are closed to us.

So all that's left is the boring middle ground- trying to maximize future roster value without tanking for picks. To me that means-

1. Try to re-sign PG and Kawhi to reasonable deals (IMO that means 3/$150M for PG and some sort of smaller 2 or 3 year deal for James). Losing them for nothing doesn't help our current or future value, but signing them to too-long deals will hurt our future roster value. Signing them to reasonable deals turns them into tradable assets when they become trade-eligible. If other teams offer 4 years, let them walk.

2. Surround whatever iteration of 213 is left with young guys on the floor, +/- be damned. It may very well be that none of Bones, Kobe, BBJ, Kai, etc. become decent NBA players. But I assume there's still a chance if they're still on the roster, so we either cut them or play them. Maybe one or two become the next Amir Coffey or Terrance Mann, great. If they stink up the joint, that's the cost of finding out and we should pay it.

3. No more old vet acquisitions no matter who it is and how cheap they are (with sole exception of if Nico wants back, he can come back anytime.) Only young acquisitions, this means probably more reclamation projects because we don't have the means to acquire anyone else with potential. Whoever we do take flyers on, play them.

4. I think at this point the ideal trade scenarios for PG, Kawhi, and James would be for bad, shorter contracts plus picks/lesser younger players with potential. All 3 guys can still play and can still help the right team, a midseason trade could definitely provide a boost to the right team without costing them too much in return. It's possible we actually end up with cap space sooner than later if we end up trading 2 or 3 or them this way.

5. Tell Ty this is the plan, period. If he doesn't want to coach that, trade him to the Lakers.

That's about the best of it IMO. We won't be great, we won't be horrible either. I can still enjoy watching this team if we go forward with this kind of 'make the best of it' plan. We're a treadmill team without the incentive to tear it down, so just generally try to do smarter things in recognition of this. That's it.

Good post!

The last couple of seasons went way off the hinges for a team contending for a ring. It wasn't "Give No Quarter" it was more like "Throw Sh*t Against The Wall And See What Sticks." Ballmer's great and we do everything amazingly well off the court. Clippers even fixed up all the public basketball courts in the city of LA. Handed out thousands of free backpacks for the kids in the city. The Starship Enterprise opening up next season, etc. A lot of detail and focus to the small things to make for a great franchise but no detail and focus for the roster and product on the court. Its just tryouts and "oh you did this in the past, well come on over and lets see if you can do it again even though you're almost out of the league." This even goes back to Ballmer having Doc GM the team bringing in the corpses of Paul Pierce, Hedo Turkalou, Grant Hill, Danny Granger, and so forth. We're still doing this exact same thing to this very day.

You need an unexpected X-Factor emerge at least every so often. You can try to buy a ring all you want but there has to be something organic within your organization at some point in time. Mann going for 39 points in a closeout playoff game was a moment we hadn't seen since Blake Griffin's rookie year. You have open up a lane for something or someone to emerge and help the team at least every other season. You can't have a PJ Tucker at this stage of his career, come in, demand minutes, and actually get them! That's nuts! Acquire Harden now who goes to the bench.. and that ended up turning into a sh*t show.

Play the kids. They can't afford any notable free agents if there are any out there anyways. See what we got. Bones, Kai, and Kobe should be solidified. If Boston is brought back, which I think he will be, he has to get his jumper back or that might be it. Jordan Miller should get a look. And Moussa is at a show and prove or its over phase as well. They'll be more youth to grab as teams like OKC pretty much has their roster set but still have a million picks left to go. They'll just need another big and a wing then I take it some of those picks will be moved. A lot of teams will be in this boat as rosters are pretty much full in the NBA. There will be a lot of youth out there to nab and see if they can play, but the Clipps have to be dedicated to adding youth and developing them. L. Frank will say all the right things but will turn around and add the other Morris twin in a heartbeat if the situation presented itself.

[MartinToVaught]

Not to mention the REAL problem with the plan was counting on your HOF-types to win on smarts and skill, and instead they simply stunk up the joint.

The players on the other team have smarts and skill too. Even so-called "HOF types" still need coaching. It's not 1992 anymore like Lue wishes it was, can't just iso your way to championships.

Of course, even with better coaching, PG and Harden are still two of the biggest chokers ever in any sport. Another forseeable problem that our front office blithely ignored as they traded our future away.

[Roscoe Sheed]

As upset as many of us are about the current state of the Clippers and the plans going forward, I kind of get what Frank is saying- Kawhi looked so good for a 30 game stretch that you can't help but think "what if he stayed healthy and played like that in the playoffs?". He is under contract for three more seasons and as low of a chance as there is of that happening, it is still a chance- tearing it down and rebuilding in the next 3 years leaves zero chance of contending during that time frame and you can still re-start the process after that by having the contracts align or at least come close to aligning

[Bobbymcgee]

Considering how lopsided the PG trade is now looking with SGA coming in second in MVP votes, the trade would look even worse if PG walks away from the team with the Clippers getting nothing in return. I don't think they have a choice but to give PG whatever it takes to keep him.

[madmaxmedia]

So I think here's my conclusions on the state of the Clippers.

We are increasingly less and less a playoff contender, which means that sacrificing future value for current value no longer makes sense (you could argue that ship sailed well before, but hey we'll always have 26-5.) We all know our roster and draft pick situation, which means that losing doesn't help our draft picks (but it doesn't hurt either.) Obviously tanking makes no sense, but going out of our way to avoid giving OKC better picks makes no sense either. Our future value is all that matters, even if most of the pathways are closed to us.

So all that's left is the boring middle ground- trying to maximize future roster value without tanking for picks. To me that means-

1. Try to re-sign PG and Kawhi to reasonable deals (IMO that means 3/$150M for PG and some sort of smaller 2 or 3 year deal for James). Losing them for nothing doesn't help our current or future value, but signing them to too-long deals will hurt our future roster value. Signing them to reasonable deals turns them into tradable assets when they become trade-eligible. If other teams offer 4 years, let them walk.

2. Surround whatever iteration of 213 is left with young guys on the floor, +/- be damned. It may very well be that none of Bones, Kobe, BBJ, Kai, etc. become decent NBA players. But I assume there's still a chance if they're still on the roster, so we either cut them or play them. Maybe one or two become the next Amir Coffey or Terrance Mann, great. If they stink up the joint, that's the cost of finding out and we should pay it.

3. No more old vet acquisitions no matter who it is and how cheap they are (with sole exception of if Nico wants back, he can come back anytime.) Only young acquisitions, this means probably more reclamation projects because we don't have the means to acquire anyone else with potential. Whoever we do take flyers on, play them.

4. I think at this point the ideal trade scenarios for PG, Kawhi, and James would be for bad, shorter contracts plus picks/lesser younger players with potential. All 3 guys can still play and can still help the right team, a midseason trade could definitely provide a boost to the right team without costing them too much in return. It's possible we actually end up with cap space sooner than later if we end up trading 2 or 3 or them this way.

5. Tell Ty this is the plan, period. If he doesn't want to coach that, trade him to the Lakers.

That's about the best of it IMO. We won't be great, we won't be horrible either. I can still enjoy watching this team if we go forward with this kind of 'make the best of it' plan. We're a treadmill team without the incentive to tear it down, so just generally try to do smarter things in recognition of this. That's it.

Hard to say what level of product Ballmer will accept. There's nothing worse than a bad, old team. At least this year's model won over 50 games.

As for the kids, it's not just plus/minus, although the minus part has a lot to do with inexperience on defense. But on the whole, they also shot poorly. Nobody could hit the 3.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/LAC/2024.html

Only Jordan Miller shot at an acceptable rate in very limited minutes [28], but NB--both Miller and Kobe Brown turn 25 next January! By NBA standards they're not even kids anymore.

They generally didn’t play enough big league minutes, for now we have to go by G-League and college to determine if they at least have potential to adjust to NBA defenses. Bones has a NBA 3-pointer for sure, Kobe could, BBj could as well. Miller did well in G-League. They’re also the youngest we got, and are children compared to our collection of 35 year olds.

If Ballmer wants to throw good money after bad that is his prerogative. But where it goes sour for me is if he prioritizes win now moves at the expense of our future. We’re definitely at the point of diminishing returns here, don’t make our outlook in 2028, 2029, 2030 worse than they have to be.

[madmaxmedia]

Considering how lopsided the PG trade is now looking with SGA coming in second in MVP votes, the trade would look even worse if PG walks away from the team with the Clippers getting nothing in return. I don't think they have a choice but to give PG whatever it takes to keep him.

Signing him to 4 years is only going to be compounding the problem now. At the time the basis for the trade was generally acceptable. But giving him a max now now guarantees likely 2 really bad years at the end, and significantly decreases his trade value IMO.

I think a 3 year deal is still value positive, a 4 year/$220 max is value negative no matter what we traded to get him originally.

[madmaxmedia]

As upset as many of us are about the current state of the Clippers and the plans going forward, I kind of get what Frank is saying- Kawhi looked so good for a 30 game stretch that you can't help but think "what if he stayed healthy and played like that in the playoffs?". He is under contract for three more seasons and as low of a chance as there is of that happening, it is still a chance- tearing it down and rebuilding in the next 3 years leaves zero chance of contending during that time frame and you can still re-start the process after that by having the contracts align or at least come close to aligning

I guess the thing is I think we have zero chance for a title going forward even if we keep everybody. I don’t want to blow it up to blow it up, but if good trade opportunities come we should take them.

[esqtvd]

So I think here's my conclusions on the state of the Clippers.

We are increasingly less and less a playoff contender, which means that sacrificing future value for current value no longer makes sense (you could argue that ship sailed well before, but hey we'll always have 26-5.) We all know our roster and draft pick situation, which means that losing doesn't help our draft picks (but it doesn't hurt either.) Obviously tanking makes no sense, but going out of our way to avoid giving OKC better picks makes no sense either. Our future value is all that matters, even if most of the pathways are closed to us.

So all that's left is the boring middle ground- trying to maximize future roster value without tanking for picks. To me that means-

1. Try to re-sign PG and Kawhi to reasonable deals (IMO that means 3/$150M for PG and some sort of smaller 2 or 3 year deal for James). Losing them for nothing doesn't help our current or future value, but signing them to too-long deals will hurt our future roster value. Signing them to reasonable deals turns them into tradable assets when they become trade-eligible. If other teams offer 4 years, let them walk.

2. Surround whatever iteration of 213 is left with young guys on the floor, +/- be damned. It may very well be that none of Bones, Kobe, BBJ, Kai, etc. become decent NBA players. But I assume there's still a chance if they're still on the roster, so we either cut them or play them. Maybe one or two become the next Amir Coffey or Terrance Mann, great. If they stink up the joint, that's the cost of finding out and we should pay it.

3. No more old vet acquisitions no matter who it is and how cheap they are (with sole exception of if Nico wants back, he can come back anytime.) Only young acquisitions, this means probably more reclamation projects because we don't have the means to acquire anyone else with potential. Whoever we do take flyers on, play them.

4. I think at this point the ideal trade scenarios for PG, Kawhi, and James would be for bad, shorter contracts plus picks/lesser younger players with potential. All 3 guys can still play and can still help the right team, a midseason trade could definitely provide a boost to the right team without costing them too much in return. It's possible we actually end up with cap space sooner than later if we end up trading 2 or 3 or them this way.

5. Tell Ty this is the plan, period. If he doesn't want to coach that, trade him to the Lakers.

That's about the best of it IMO. We won't be great, we won't be horrible either. I can still enjoy watching this team if we go forward with this kind of 'make the best of it' plan. We're a treadmill team without the incentive to tear it down, so just generally try to do smarter things in recognition of this. That's it.

Hard to say what level of product Ballmer will accept. There's nothing worse than a bad, old team. At least this year's model won over 50 games.

As for the kids, it's not just plus/minus, although the minus part has a lot to do with inexperience on defense. But on the whole, they also shot poorly. Nobody could hit the 3.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/LAC/2024.html

Only Jordan Miller shot at an acceptable rate in very limited minutes [28], but NB--both Miller and Kobe Brown turn 25 next January! By NBA standards they're not even kids anymore.

They generally didn’t play enough big league minutes, for now we have to go by G-League and college to determine if they at least have potential to adjust to NBA defenses. Bones has a NBA 3-pointer for sure, Kobe could, BBj could as well. Miller did well in G-League. They’re also the youngest we got, and are children compared to our collection of 35 year olds.

If Ballmer wants to throw good money after bad that is his prerogative. But where it goes sour for me is if he prioritizes win now moves at the expense of our future. We’re definitely at the point of diminishing returns here, don’t make our outlook in 2028, 2029, 2030 worse than they have to be.

Good money after bad? Ballmer has more money than he can ever count, let alone spend. The real question is whether Ballmer wants to win 45 or 50 games a year or take it up the butt in the loss column playing "kids" who are closer to being the next Sindarius Thornwell than the next Jalen Brunson.

3-pt%:
Bones 32.6%
Kobe 29.2%
BBJ 26.9%

Ugh. Kobe [33%] and Miller [31%] didn't shoot the 3 that well in G-League either. And they turn 25 next year.

It's worth looking at the G-League leaders, especially the ones who outperformed ours. Hardly any are ever going to make a dent in the NBA, even with more NBA minutes--they already would be getting them somewhere.

https://stats.gleague.nba.com/leaders/

At least Bones and BBJ are only 24 and 23 respectively next year. But they were redundant--Mann and Powell got those minutes. Surely nobody believes those "kids" could have done better with those minutes. Both shot under 30% from 3 with the big club; Powell shot 43% and after his horrendous start, so did Mann [after the ASB].

Ballmer is 68. It's one thing to pay some dues to develop your "kids" but it's another to suffer for nothing. And he couldn't do "The Process" if he wanted--the draft picks are gone and/or pick-swapped until like 2030. No Wembys in Ballmer's future. And EVERYBODY'S looking for the same thing--"young and athletic" 6'8" three-and-Ds.

We all smelled this coming--he's boxed in, and his fellow owners boxed him in double [along with Joe Lacob of the Dubs] with this new CBA. 50-win seasons are starting to sound like a ceiling, not a floor. Even a goal.

[Roscoe Sheed]

I am concerned about Bones' attitude, but I think he is a better shooter than his percentages showed this season. I wonder how he would do as a full time back up point guard with Westbrook out of the picture- I know he got a chance with Westbrook injured, but he knew that Westbrook was coming back.

[madmaxmedia]

Hard to say what level of product Ballmer will accept. There's nothing worse than a bad, old team. At least this year's model won over 50 games.

As for the kids, it's not just plus/minus, although the minus part has a lot to do with inexperience on defense. But on the whole, they also shot poorly. Nobody could hit the 3.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/LAC/2024.html

Only Jordan Miller shot at an acceptable rate in very limited minutes [28], but NB--both Miller and Kobe Brown turn 25 next January! By NBA standards they're not even kids anymore.

They generally didn’t play enough big league minutes, for now we have to go by G-League and college to determine if they at least have potential to adjust to NBA defenses. Bones has a NBA 3-pointer for sure, Kobe could, BBj could as well. Miller did well in G-League. They’re also the youngest we got, and are children compared to our collection of 35 year olds.

If Ballmer wants to throw good money after bad that is his prerogative. But where it goes sour for me is if he prioritizes win now moves at the expense of our future. We’re definitely at the point of diminishing returns here, don’t make our outlook in 2028, 2029, 2030 worse than they have to be.

Good money after bad? Ballmer has more money than he can ever count, let alone spend. The real question is whether Ballmer wants to win 45 or 50 games a year or take it up the butt in the loss column playing "kids" who are closer to being the next Sindarius Thornwell than the next Jalen Brunson.

3-pt%:
Bones 32.6%
Kobe 29.2%
BBJ 26.9%

Ugh. Kobe [33%] and Miller [31%] didn't shoot the 3 that well in G-League either. And they turn 25 next year.

It's worth looking at the G-League leaders, especially the ones who outperformed ours. Hardly any are ever going to make a dent in the NBA, even with more NBA minutes--they already would be getting them somewhere.

https://stats.gleague.nba.com/leaders/

At least Bones and BBJ are only 24 and 23 respectively next year. But they were redundant--Mann and Powell got those minutes. Surely nobody believes those "kids" could have done better with those minutes. Both shot under 30% from 3 with the big club; Powell shot 43% and after his horrendous start, so did Mann [after the ASB].

Ballmer is 68. It's one thing to pay some dues to develop your "kids" but it's another to suffer for nothing. And he couldn't do "The Process" if he wanted--the draft picks are gone and/or pick-swapped until like 2030. No Wembys in Ballmer's future. And EVERYBODY'S looking for the same thing--"young and athletic" 6'8" three-and-Ds.

We all smelled this coming--he's boxed in, and his fellow owners boxed him in double [along with Joe Lacob of the Dubs] with this new CBA. 50-win seasons are starting to sound like a ceiling, not a floor. Even a goal.

I meant good money after bad figuratively. For example giving PG 4 year max would be throwing good money after bad. Every year going forward he’s gonna have to spend more for less wins- like you said, probably a 50 win ceiling next year. But I actually don’t even care about that, it’s making moves that cost us in the future to get those 50 wins is the big problem now.

But forget about Ballmer- what would you actually do?

[madmaxmedia]

I am concerned about Bones' attitude, but I think he is a better shooter than his percentages showed this season. I wonder how he would do as a full time back up point guard with Westbrook out of the picture- I know he got a chance with Westbrook injured, but he knew that Westbrook was coming back.

He is a shooter for sure, that’s his one bonafide NBA skill. If he only took wide open 3’s like Kennard did his % would be higher, but there’s a balance to that as Luke’s hesitation hurt him and the team.

[Captain Ballmer]

Considering how lopsided the PG trade is now looking with SGA coming in second in MVP votes, the trade would look even worse if PG walks away from the team with the Clippers getting nothing in return. I don't think they have a choice but to give PG whatever it takes to keep him.

You gotta make peace with that trade.

Go back to 2019 July, When we trade Shai was 6th on ROTY race behind Collin freakın Sexton. PG13 was 3rd in MVP ballot.

This year 6th on ROTY was Dereck Lively, 3rd in MVP is Luka Doncic. You trade Lively type prospect with 5 future 1st rd picks & 2 swaps for Luka. Every freakın time.

It just sucks that our Stars got injured for every single playoffs in the last 4 years. This is the main reason where we are.

[MartinToVaught]

You trade Lively type prospect with 5 future 1st rd picks & 2 swaps for Luka. Every freakın time.

How many more of these kinds of trades have to fail and backfire before everyone stops believing this?

No player is worth trading your entire future away for. No matter how great he is individually, he still needs an actual team around him to succeed, and trading all your assets away for him already makes that nearly impossible.

[Bobbymcgee]

Considering how lopsided the PG trade is now looking with SGA coming in second in MVP votes, the trade would look even worse if PG walks away from the team with the Clippers getting nothing in return. I don't think they have a choice but to give PG whatever it takes to keep him.

Signing him to 4 years is only going to be compounding the problem now. At the time the basis for the trade was generally acceptable. But giving him a max now now guarantees likely 2 really bad years at the end, and significantly decreases his trade value IMO.

I think a 3 year deal is still value positive, a 4 year/$220 max is value negative no matter what we traded to get him originally.

I don't disagree with you. I would love to see the Clippers move on from the 213 era which has failed much like the lob city era has. But, the Clippers decided to extend the 213 era by signing Leonard to a new three year deal. The problem has already been compounded. How do you salvage next season, the next three years, by letting PG13 walk away with nothing in return?

[nickhx2]

Considering how lopsided the PG trade is now looking with SGA coming in second in MVP votes, the trade would look even worse if PG walks away from the team with the Clippers getting nothing in return. I don't think they have a choice but to give PG whatever it takes to keep him.

Signing him to 4 years is only going to be compounding the problem now. At the time the basis for the trade was generally acceptable. But giving him a max now now guarantees likely 2 really bad years at the end, and significantly decreases his trade value IMO.

I think a 3 year deal is still value positive, a 4 year/$220 max is value negative no matter what we traded to get him originally.

I don't disagree with you. I would love to see the Clippers move on from the 213 era which has failed much like the lob city era has. But, the Clippers decided to extend the 213 era by signing Leonard to a new three year deal. The problem has already been compounded. How do you salvage next season, the next three years, by letting PG13 walk away with nothing in return?

it seems like the FO has pretty clearly tapped into this line of thinking, which i suppose is why PG hasn't been handed a 4 year max thus far, and i would imagine they think exactly what we think: try to get him for 3 because he's playable and tradeable at 3, but at 4 we're better off gritting our teeth and letting him go, in spite of everything we gave up to acquire him in the first place.

i imagine also they're kinda banking on other teams having no interest in giving him the 4 year max possible, either.

whatever the case, while i understand the sentiment of wanting to move on as fans, especially after the emotions of the series and season ending the way it did, i'm glad to see that we have people (mostly) thinking about how to extract maximum value for what we have. like i get it if people wanna move on, but yo, cmon, let's think like we're a divorce lawyer so we can try to get whatever we possibly can for the client lol. some assets are always better than none, and given how asset-starved we are to begin with, each one has much greater relative value to us.