I am calling it now re Clippers

[Ogaju]

Doc will be exposed.

I have already noticed his no flow offense stifling the Clippers.

Clipper nation get ready for the Griffin ISO except Griffin does not have a J. LOL

[indeedproceed]

Seems legit. Lord knows there aren't any bigger indicators that a team will be terrible than a first preseason game.

[CelticG1]

I don't think Doc will be exposed but the clippers should be.

They aren't a good team period

[D.o.s.]

Seems legit. Lord knows there aren't any bigger indicators that a team will be terrible than a first preseason game.

 

And DeAndre has a 16/8/1/2/4. So maybe Doc was right after all.

[Fafnir]

I don't think Doc will be exposed but the clippers should be.

They aren't a good team period

They've been a good team the past two years, I don't see why they won't be a good team again this year.

[MBunge]

I don't think Doc will be exposed but the clippers should be.

They aren't a good team period

They've been a good team the past two years, I don't see why they won't be a good team again this year.

They didn't bring Doc in to be a "good" team, though.

Doc won't be "exposed" because he is a pretty good coach but people will have to adjust to the reality that this Clippers team isn't anywhere near as good as Doc's Boston team that won the title.  It's hard to compare benches because chemistry and how the starters play factor in so much, but just look at the likely starting lineup.

Chris Paul 2013 > Rajon Rondo 2007.  Not much to argue about here except that Rondo '07 wasn't expected or needed to contribute as much as Paul '13.

Blake Griffin 2013 < Kevin Garnett 2007.  Again, Griffin '13 probably has more athletic ability than KG '07 but there's really no argument that's he's as good a player in any meaningful way.

DeAndre Jordan 2013 < Kendrick Perkins 2007.  This is close to a push but I think you give a slight edge to Perk '07i n that he had a defined role and played it very well.  Jordan makes more spectacular plays but he's nowhere near the defender that Perk was.

JJ Redick/Willie Green 2013 < Ray Allen 2007.  This is probably the 2nd closest matchup only because of the role these guys were/are expected to play as designated shooters.  Even so, Ray '07 undoubtedly gets the nod.

Matt Barnes/Jared Dudley 2013 < Paul Pierce 2007.   HAHAHAHAHA!

The Clips are still going to be good, unless Paul blows out another knee, but I don't think there's any way you can put them alongside the '07 Celts.

Mike

[CelticG1]

I don't think Doc will be exposed but the clippers should be.

They aren't a good team period

They've been a good team the past two years, I don't see why they won't be a good team again this year.

By good I mean contender.

They've been trotted as a contender the past 2 years until they fizzle out come playoffs and he excuses whether injuries, coaching or personell start flowing in.

Are they a contender this year? Again I say no. First or second round goner I'd say.

[D.o.s.]

I don't think Doc will be exposed but the clippers should be.

They aren't a good team period

They've been a good team the past two years, I don't see why they won't be a good team again this year.

By good I mean contender.

They've been trotted as a contender the past 2 years until they fizzle out come playoffs and he excuses whether injuries, coaching or personell start flowing in.

Are they a contender this year? Again I say no. First or second round goner I'd say.

I'd say that the line for "contending" is around 52+ regular season wins.

So they were a contender who ran into a brutal matchup last year, and a team that overachieved by beating the Grizzlies in 2011.

[Fafnir]

They were also beaten both times in the past two years when one or both of their best players were hobbled.

CP3 and Blake were both very banged up against the Spurs, and Blake wasn't right after game 2 (I think) of the Grizzlies first round series.

If one of your top 2 players is ineffective due to injury then all bets are off, no matter how good your team is. See for example the 2008-2009 Celtics, pushed to 7 games by the Bulls.

[CelticG1]

They were also beaten both times in the past two years when one or both of their best players were hobbled.

CP3 and Blake were both very banged up against the Spurs, and Blake wasn't right after game 2 (I think) of the Grizzlies first round series.

If one of your top 2 players is ineffective due to injury then all bets are off, no matter how good your team is. See for example the 2008-2009 Celtics, pushed to 7 games by the Bulls.

Yeah I mean you can use the injury excuse every year for a lot of teams. We lost KG entirely one year, Rondo playing with one arm literally one year, Pierce and Ray banged up year after year and weren't "right" among others.

The Clips are going on their 3rd year. If we are still using Paul and Blake being banged up as an excuse it will be getting a little old and a little soft.

[D.o.s.]

They were also beaten both times in the past two years when one or both of their best players were hobbled.

CP3 and Blake were both very banged up against the Spurs, and Blake wasn't right after game 2 (I think) of the Grizzlies first round series.

If one of your top 2 players is ineffective due to injury then all bets are off, no matter how good your team is. See for example the 2008-2009 Celtics, pushed to 7 games by the Bulls.

Yeah I mean you can use the injury excuse every year for a lot of teams. We lost KG entirely one year, Rondo playing with one arm literally one year, Pierce and Ray banged up year after year and weren't "right" among others.

The Clips are going on their 3rd year. If we are still using Paul and Blake being banged up as an excuse it will be getting a little old and a little soft.

Just because it's a widely applicable thing doesn't mean that it isn't accurate--and, frankly, I don't understand why it would count against them in any way.

The T-Mac & Yao Ming Rockets were consistently underachieving due to injury--I don't think you can use that to cast shade on either player's talent and ability.

[Celtics18]

They were also beaten both times in the past two years when one or both of their best players were hobbled.

CP3 and Blake were both very banged up against the Spurs, and Blake wasn't right after game 2 (I think) of the Grizzlies first round series.

If one of your top 2 players is ineffective due to injury then all bets are off, no matter how good your team is. See for example the 2008-2009 Celtics, pushed to 7 games by the Bulls.

Yeah I mean you can use the injury excuse every year for a lot of teams. We lost KG entirely one year, Rondo playing with one arm literally one year, Pierce and Ray banged up year after year and weren't "right" among others.

The Clips are going on their 3rd year. If we are still using Paul and Blake being banged up as an excuse it will be getting a little old and a little soft.

Just because it's a widely applicable thing doesn't mean that it isn't accurate--and, frankly, I don't understand why it would count against them in any way.

The T-Mac & Yao Ming Rockets were consistently underachieving due to injury--I don't think you can use that to cast shade on either player's talent and ability.

Of course you can.  The reality is that to achieve greatness in the sports world, you have to be able to remain relatively injury free.  Otherwise, there's just way too many "woulda, shoulda, couldas."

So, yes, getting injured, and not being able to produce at your best, counts against you as an athlete. 

[D.o.s.]

They were also beaten both times in the past two years when one or both of their best players were hobbled.

CP3 and Blake were both very banged up against the Spurs, and Blake wasn't right after game 2 (I think) of the Grizzlies first round series.

If one of your top 2 players is ineffective due to injury then all bets are off, no matter how good your team is. See for example the 2008-2009 Celtics, pushed to 7 games by the Bulls.

Yeah I mean you can use the injury excuse every year for a lot of teams. We lost KG entirely one year, Rondo playing with one arm literally one year, Pierce and Ray banged up year after year and weren't "right" among others.

The Clips are going on their 3rd year. If we are still using Paul and Blake being banged up as an excuse it will be getting a little old and a little soft.

Just because it's a widely applicable thing doesn't mean that it isn't accurate--and, frankly, I don't understand why it would count against them in any way.

The T-Mac & Yao Ming Rockets were consistently underachieving due to injury--I don't think you can use that to cast shade on either player's talent and ability.

Of course you can.  The reality is that to achieve greatness in the sports world, you have to be able to remain relatively injury free.  Otherwise, there's just way too many "woulda, shoulda, couldas."

So, yes, getting injured, and not being able to produce at your best, counts against you as an athlete.

...coming from the poster who refuses to look at Rondo's ACL recovery in anything other than a glass-totally-full light.
 

[Fafnir]

They were also beaten both times in the past two years when one or both of their best players were hobbled.

CP3 and Blake were both very banged up against the Spurs, and Blake wasn't right after game 2 (I think) of the Grizzlies first round series.

If one of your top 2 players is ineffective due to injury then all bets are off, no matter how good your team is. See for example the 2008-2009 Celtics, pushed to 7 games by the Bulls.

Yeah I mean you can use the injury excuse every year for a lot of teams. We lost KG entirely one year, Rondo playing with one arm literally one year, Pierce and Ray banged up year after year and weren't "right" among others.

The Clips are going on their 3rd year. If we are still using Paul and Blake being banged up as an excuse it will be getting a little old and a little soft.

Just because it's a widely applicable thing doesn't mean that it isn't accurate--and, frankly, I don't understand why it would count against them in any way.

The T-Mac & Yao Ming Rockets were consistently underachieving due to injury--I don't think you can use that to cast shade on either player's talent and ability.

Of course you can.  The reality is that to achieve greatness in the sports world, you have to be able to remain relatively injury free.  Otherwise, there's just way too many "woulda, shoulda, couldas."

So, yes, getting injured, and not being able to produce at your best, counts against you as an athlete.

I'm glad that you think less of KG for having a serious knee issue after 14 years of near injury free professional basketball and less of Rondo for being pulled to the floor and dislocating his elbow.

Injuries happen, and staying healthy is something that matters for player value. But if you're going to say "scoreboard" and ignore the context of what happened, what's the point? Every team sucks then, except the Heat I guess.

Blake Griffin had a severe ankle sprain during the playoffs. Does that mean in future years we should discount the Clippers as potential contenders?

[masteremile123]

I'm still convinced that jamal crawford will average 5 ppg this year