http://mobile.philly.com/blogs/?wss=/philly/blogs/sports/sixers/&id=246468971
Lets hope the clippers can pick him up. He would be a much better option than Ivan and he and Davis could play the 4 and 5 together. I really hope we can get one or both.
we got so many options right now that we have 3 open spots. Surely, we can't hit a home run with all 3 but i am expecting at least a double
I like the kid's hustle and he's young and quick, which could work well with Collison. Definitely a possibility.
Pick him up enough said !!! Wow
Why would Philly waive him & keep Mullens? Lol obvious Tankers! Anyway, I would like this pick up! I would still want Big Baby & Granger too. Heck, can we waive Ryan Hollins too? Lol so many options out there!
^ Actually, this move may make Granger a little less likely to be let go. I'm not sure of Philly's numbers, but they are required to meet the league minimum payroll. They can't just waive everybody.
Yeah he can make the 3 is a very good defender, able to defend the 3,4 and 5. Also a solid rebounder and decent passer.
They have to pay Granger whether they release him or not, so it doesn't effect that. Also even if they are below the salary floor it just means they pay everyone else on the team more until they meet it; trading for Granger's contract cost some of other guys on the team about million dollars above their current salary extra they would have been paid to meet the floor.
Interesting. I didn't know that.
I think he is a system player. He would work in our system better than Brown's.
We really need to sign Earl Clark he might be a better fit than Davis as Clark is actually a good defender.
Davis is actually a good defender. Clark is more versatile in that he can cover more positions. Davis would be more of a 4/5 while Clark more of a 3/4 for us. The former is more of a need.
Davis is also a better shot maker than Clark which might weight into the decision, but more so he's played with Doc, knows him and knows his system which will help the transition.
Davis is also a better shot maker than Clark which might weight into the decision, but more
so he's played with Doc, knows him and knows his system which will help the
transition. 
Davis is a decent defender can be very lazy at times. Clark's defense is what kept him in the league on the Magic.
He was drafted to be a multi tool player he just didn't pan out as much as people hoped (work ethic was a big problem in college). On the lakers he actually played center and guarded the opposing centers most of the time and did a great job when Dwight was injured. Plus he can make the 3pt shot when he needs to. He is kind of lie Boris Diaw type player with less passing expertise and better rebounding.
Clark's defense is part of it, but also his length and potential since he's still been in the young player we can develop mold. I petitioned to sign him in summer instead of Barnes as i thought he would be cheaper, but he ended up getting $4.3M which is not reasonable. I even brought the quotes of SVG talking about his defense, so I'm not unaware of his game, but he was a guy I was thinking of for more like $2M.
It's all about Doc's desire. If you feel you can better balance offense and defense with the other guys, then it makes more sense to go with a Davis. Clark's offense and consistency has always been his struggle. He's not an elite defender, but he's above average to good and versatile, but it in as been hard for teams to justify playing him when he plays bad on offense and so inconsistent in his production.
His 34.5% 3PT this season isn't bad at all, and the combined 34.1% on 220 attempts over the past two seasons is okay too. Obviously it would be nice if he could finish at the basket, but if you want a more useful play in the role Mullens was brought in to play, he could do that, but he's inconsistent in everything.
Davis gives the better option if you want to play him against a C, the familiarity with Doc and his system, and despite his lack of sound shot selection, the better offensive player. Davis also gives the consistency which to me might be the biggest thing. As a tea, trying to play at a high level, you really want that consistency, and Davis will just be a more consistent player than Clark who still hasn't put that part together yet.
Btw, iirc, Gasol played C and Clark PF.
His 34.5% 3PT this season isn't bad at all, and the combined 34.1% on 220 attempts over the past two seasons is okay too. Obviously it would be nice if he could finish at the basket, but if you want a more useful play in the role Mullens was brought in to play, he could do that, but he's inconsistent in everything.
Davis gives the better option if you want to play him against a C, the familiarity with Doc and his system, and despite his lack of sound shot selection, the better offensive player. Davis also gives the consistency which to me might be the biggest thing. As a tea, trying to play at a high level, you really want that consistency, and Davis will just be a more consistent player than Clark who still hasn't put that part together yet.
Btw, iirc, Gasol played C and Clark PF.
I was with you hoping they would sign him I actually was hoping they would trade for him when he was on the Magic.
Oh and as far as positionally he may have been PF on offense (makes sense since he has an outside shot) but on defense he was guarding the 5's and actually doing a good job. I have been a fan of his since freshman year at Louisville and watched almost all the lakers games he started in.
Also Clark produces better than Dudley and you said he was a good deal at $4.25mm and decent bigs are harder to find especially ones that can play on both ends of the court.
No, no, I thought Clark was a bad deal at $4.3M. He's a reasonable deal at $2M or less. He hadn't proven enough consistency or shown solid enough offensive ability to make that much and he's not a defensive anchor where you pay him on that. There are a lot more productive players who don't make as much. I thought he would be cheap, but he wasn't.
Clark produces less than Dudley actually, and this year he's matched Dudley's worst season production wise.
We'll compare per 36 since Clark only played 15.5 MPG with Cleveland.
Clark:
12.1 pts, 6.6 rebs, 0.8 ast, 0.8 stl, 1.0 blk, 37.5% FG, 34.5% 3PT, 46.7% TS, 8.8 PER
Dudley:
10.6 pts, 3.0 rebs, 2.0 ast, 0.9 stl, 0.2 blk, 44.2% FG, 35.2% 3PT, 54.2% TS, 8.8 PER
So I think if he was to be acquired a tempered expectation would be best as to not be disappointed because of placing unrealistic expectations,on him. Might be more of a matchup / situational play than becoming a staple rotation guy night in a night out who produces regularly.
^^^ you said Dudley was a good deal at $4.25mm that's what I was referring to. Outside of shooting % and assists he is better than Dudley in per 36.
Oh, Dudley, yes, but that's in reference to the version of Dudley we were supposed to get, not this years version. This years version is worth the veteran's minimum. They have different strengths and weaknesses production wise. Clark's noticable advantages are rebounding and shot blocking, Dudley's passing and of course shooting all over. Scoring is a minimal difference and on this team Clark's scoring rate would most likely be fairly lower if he's shooting so poorly, so that isn't really significant. Sadly for Clark, taking more shots and shooting fairly worse overall is actually a more negative outcome for your team on offense than shooting less. It's been a struggle for both guys this year.
How many playoff games has Earl Clark been in? There's a difference in playing well for teams that are below .500 and teams that area aiming at a Finals appearance.
About the same amount as Evan Turner and Spencer Hawes, but that doesn't seem to bother Indy.
Clark is healthier and in better shape than dudley. He is also younger, more athletic, and seems to cut a lot more and make the right plays.
Stats don't show everything but if we are looking at the PER 36 Agent posted I can live with that seeing how he can score in more ways than Dudley and is doubling Dudley's rebounding.
And who knows, clark might understand and fulfill his role much better under Doc than any other coach he's played for and really start to show his true potential. Let's not forget, he's longer and a better defender than dudley as well. I'm all for signing him and starting him at the 3 or having him come in for Barnes.
IF we can sign earl on the the cheap or a 10-day contract, let's do it!
No thanks, give me Danny Granger. I wouldn't mind seeing World Peace in a Clippers uni either. Paired with Barnes, that might be a good defensive tandem.
Would prefer Granger as a gamble, but I would not mind Clark. Sign either one and this has been a very good trade deadline.
It is not a done deal that we will go to 15 players, we might stop at 14. If we add two more players then Earl is a good option. But if we don't add two, then I think the player they add is another outside shooter, if available. Granger averaged 25ppg just a couple of years ago before he got injured. If he is available and if will come to the Clips, they will sign him. He is a 6'9" SF and we need to get taller/longer at the 3. They will look for the best shooter available.
Still would not mind a10-day contract to earl to evaluate his athleticism for our bench squad.
Agree with this the whole purpose of 10 days is to buy time for bigger moves and evaluate options. Would ten day Clark and rest Dudley's knee.
I've fully committed to referring to Dudley as "Dud-ley". But I fully expected his performance. Dude has a sub par skill set, and wasn't outstanding on a horrible defensive team. What do you expect to get from a guy like that who has a starting role on a team that has a target on its back?
I would like a 10 day based on everyone is waiting for Granger. If Granger doesn't happen those same teams might be knocking on this guys door. If we could get a headstart just in case a ten day wouldn't really do to much, and we might find a gem. Still in the same position for Granger, and Earl can play the 3 or the 4.
yeah, that would be a good defensive tandem.... in 2009..
Looks like Earls off the table, just signed with the Knicks
Knicks a;so worked out Dahntay Jones, before settling with Earl. Dahntay's a 6'8" wing defender and pretty good a defending. Also can hit the occasional three, which we could use.
Knicks a;so worked out Dahntay Jones, before settling with Earl. Dahntay's a 6'8"
wing defender and pretty good a defending. Also can hit the occasional three, which
we could use.
Sucks we didn't get him, would have been a great fit here. He will probably be pretty productive in NY.
Yea one of my other choices at the wing besides Granger and it looks like the Spurs have the inside track on him.
disregard
Clark is significantly better at PF than SF, so the Knicks are a better fit for him, given we already signed Davis and Blake plays so many minutes. I wouldn't be surprised if Clark was starting for the Knicks by the end of season, or least playing 20+ minutes off the bench because Amare can't play much. Here he would be fighting with Davis, Turkoglu, Bullock and Dudley for scraps which he may or not get.
Agree with that, he is more of a big but can play the 3. I would have liked to see us utilize a bigger lineup with him some and really take it to teams on the inside defense and the boards. I think he will be a starter for the Knicks by season end as well. Cleveland was a bad fit since they already had Tristan Thompson, drafted Bennett, picked up Bynum, had Zeller and Varejao
