Here is an excerpt from an LA Times article where fans ask questions about the Clips. Here is one of the questions and answers: <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Q: Why don't the Clippers immediately make the trade for Mike Dunleavy Jr.? He handles the ball well, has the outside shot, and has a high basketball IQ. Don Nelson erred early in the season by publicly humiliating him, thereby throwing fuel on the fire with the home crowd up there. His overall stats per minute have been excellent. Jim Babbitz A: Well, it's not that simple. There are salary-cap issues because Mike Jr. has a higher salary than Corey Maggette, who the Clippers need to trade because of Maggette's poor relationship with Mike Sr. The younger Dunleavy's contract could put the Clippers into the luxury-tax threshold, and owner Donald T. Sterling would rather not pay the tax. Also, some in the organization think it would be a bad idea for Mike Jr. to play for his father. Other players could be uncomfortable talking freely about the coach if his son was on the team. And Mike Jr. could be in a bad position if his teammates do not trust him because of his relationship with the coach. That could lead to chemistry problems, which wouldn't be a good thing for the Clippers. And if Mike Jr. played poorly, Mike Sr. could take a lot of heat for bringing in his son.</div> Source For fans, the grass is always greener on the other side, I suppose. But realistically I have to agree with the answer that it might be awkward for an NBA player to play for his dad. My brother played for my dad and even though he was probably the 2nd best player, as well as best shooter and best defender, people always had issues with it because my brother started and played heavy minutes. It would have been the same regardless of the coach (my dad even went out of his way to show there was no favortism) but the father-son thing is always tricky. That team went on to vie for the state championship twice, though, so it still worked out well. But in the NBA -- a league of egos and prima donnas and media hype -- it would definately be a topic of scrutiny. And boy, if MDJ got there and laid an egg, and teh Clips went deeper in the tank, man LA would go nuts down there, lol. Has there ever been a father-son tandem in the NBA?
Dunleavy/McLeod for Maggette works But this three team rumor is interesting as well, especially since all three teams are in the same division.
I can't believe MDJ has a higher salary than Maggette... That's a little embarassing right up there with Foyle. Nothing wrong with MDJ and our hopes of wanting him to be this fantastic starter that makes everyone better. But those hopes are kind of gone right now. He was extremely overrated, but he's a helpful team player.
I think Dun's role is perfect and Magette is coming off the bench anyways so it would be a perfect fit as far as chemistry with the coach. I think players could get over Dun being dad's boy if he is playing well off the bench...
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">I can't believe MDJ has a higher salary than Maggette... That's a little embarassing right up there with Foyle.</div> I say Foyle's is less embarrassing because if we didn't give it to him that year someone would've, JR wasn't even due yet.
I agree. I remember way back when Wtwalker77 said I lied about Jrich and Murphy being signed late and Dunleavy being signed early. Well actually, I probably jacked up in my writing and I meant that Mullin intended to sign Jrich and Murphy the following offseason rather than the current. This was evident with Mullin waiting to the very last minute and gave in from the pressure from both their sports agent, Dan Fegan. We later found out that Jrich's contract was quite reasonable for the amount of numbers he was going to put up and that Murphy's was somewhat arguable if played anything near the level of other double double big men in the league (two stat figures can't justify this if he doesn't play much like your classic power forward). But with Dunleavy's case, Mullin intended to sign him early and not the offseason next. Dunleavy was re-signed with no sweat, plenty of time left, no complaints, and despite not proving as much as Jrich and Murphy in the numbers column. It was all this mythical intangibles and potential that we all try to justify that deal. It was a sucker deal and Mullin wasn't even dealing with a high pressure, high salary sports agent like Dan Fegan either. He also had Fisher and Foyle locked up as starters with that kind of Dunleavy money. What was he thinking? We either thought Mullin was generous or just plenty confident that he had a winning team in his hands. I wonder if Mullin thought that Dunleavy was Joe Johnson? We must have thought Foyle was going to be putting up Ben Wallace numbers if Mullin was that confident in him. But now we know not to give the inexperienced GM the benefit of the doubt, no matter how famous he was as a player. Now I admit everyone was overpaid, but it's better to overpay if the talent is going to be competitive type of talent. Michael Redd, Carlos Boozer, Joe Johnson is overpaid too, but damn at least they're good enough at times to justify the money they make. They are star players, overpaying them is okay as long as they don't pull a Baron or an AI on us, but I hate it when teams overpay scrubs or role players. This stuff is important if we want any kind of value back for our role players and so we can make the most of any window of opportunity to make the playoffs. We can't do that if Baron Davis goes down, because we're out of stars and lucrative contracts that people would want for a star player. Without Baron, everyone else will be transformed back into their roleplaying, benchplaying selves. Who knows if we could have gotten an all-star or near star talent if some GM wanted more cheap role players in return. That's my gripe about the situation regarding players like Dunleavy.
Yeah, you overpay for superstars, not for mediocrity, inconsistency, or an incomplete game, several of which usually describe Dun at any given time.
Everyone's analysis looks good in hindsight. What about JKidd getting $18M/yr right now? Francis $18M? Marbury $18M? Those contracts are deadweight, but at the time, the majority did not cry foul. Let's concentrate on the playing and not the $$$
<div class="quote_poster">philsmith75 Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Everyone's analysis looks good in hindsight. What about JKidd getting $18M/yr right now? Francis $18M? Marbury $18M? Those contracts are deadweight, but at the time, the majority did not cry foul. Let's concentrate on the playing and not the $$$</div> Francis and Marbury just stink though. Jason Kidd is one of the best point guards in the NBA the dude is almost averaging a triple double at his age.
