I see that Doc Rivers is quoted on ESPN saying that the Clips got the right pieces in Hawes & Farmar for their needs, which somewhat curiously match what the Blazers needed & got in Blake & Kaman. So, all of you stats gurus, which pair of acquisitions is better?
To Leonard or not to Leonard, that is the question. Olshey's "first" choice was to get Hawes for 4 years, negating the need for Leonard. Olshey's "second" choice was to get Kaman for a year or so and then plug in Leonard. So, basically the Clips got the better because Hawes channeled his inner 12 year old, which frankly was a weird way to make a decision.
Well seeing as Hawes is the best player of the 4 i'll take hawes/Farmer. To bad Hawes turned us down.
Id much rather have Hawes/farmar. I'm happy with plan B but our #1 target this off-season is vastly superior
Not sure if I buy any of that. The team may have completely given up on Meyers and grabbed the best short term solution they could find. Summer league and if the team declines his option before October will tell us for sure
Signing Kaman to his deal doesn't mean were giving up on Meyers but anyone would be crazy to think he is ready for consistent minutes.
'Cause I've got friends in low places Where the whiskey drowns And the beer chases my blues away Cause I can't sign a good FA I'm not big in NBA players graces Think I'll slip on down and sign Kaman and Blakeses Oh, I've got friends in low places
While it is Hawes/Farmar I wouldn't take Farmar alone over Blake and Blake isn't even who I wanted at PG so that is saying a bit.
Health and games played for Kaman/Blake will largely determine whether it is a push or not. What I really like is the short term deals given to our guys.
I don't give a shit about Farmar. Clearly Olshey thought Hawes was a better choice, so Olshey would pick Hawes/Farmar if presented with this choice. But just like us, Olshey didn't get to pick. Hawes picked. So I don't give a shit if Hawes/Farmar is better. It's moot. (Not to be confused with Mote.)
I don't think there is any question that the new Lakers got the better of the two deals. Doc is in control and he will be a force to be reckoned with. I may have to start rooting for Donald Sterling to win the lawsuit to keep the team. Yes the Clippers are now a desirable FA team.
Kaman/Blake, because I don't think they'll be significantly worse than Hawes/Farmar this coming season and Kaman is just a short-term commitment, whereas Hawes is a four-year commitment and he's not a good enough player to want to have locked up for four years.
This is my thinking, too. I don't get why everyone was/is so hyped on Hawes. I definitely prefer NOT having him for 4 years. I also think Kaman is a better fit for our team - as long as he can stay on the court. And I'll pick Blake over Farmer 11 times out of 10, but will readily admit it's because I loathe Farmar and never want to see him on the Blazers. Perhaps Farmar is better (I don't know - I don't pay any attention to him), but if he is it's not nearly enough to make me pick him over Blake.
Sorry, I should have led out with a better description of what I was after in starting this thread. The fact that the Clippers are now a desirable team for FAs to sign with certainly wasn't the point of the question. I'd hoped that maybe this topic would trigger some discussion of the comparative strengths and weaknesses of the four players. And, more particularly, what those strengths and weaknesses may mean in how the two teams' second units play. I've never been much of Jordan Farmar fan, but there's no doubt that he's better at penetrating, while Blake is the better 3 pt shooter and, IMO, is more sound at running an offense. Hawes had a terrific year last season at shooting the 3 point shot, but he's not much in the paint. Kaman is a traditional center, good in the paint and capable of hitting a mid-range jumper consistently. Hawes/Farmar are younger, but don't have as much experience as Kaman & Blake. Overall, I think that the total difference isn't as great as some of you are saying but I do think that the style of play will be different in the two teams' second units as Rivers and Stotts adjust their offenses to take advantage of the respective strengths and weaknesses of their new additions.
And even this stands out as a massive outlier. If this is the sole reason Hawes has gone from general non-entity to prized free agent, I think it's overreacting greatly. Yes, stretch big men are great, but Hawes has only flashed such elite range once--last year. It's possible that he's simply stepped up to a higher performance level that he will now hold onto for the rest of his prime, but I wouldn't gamble a four-year MLE deal on it.
This is along the lines of my first reaction (before my other snarky post. ) It's situational. Olshey struck out on Plan A. Then went with Plan B, which I believe is a decent fit with the Blazers for where the Blazers are today, and where they want to be tomorrow.
Sorry didn't mean to make it sound like I was slamming you for asking it. (I edited that part when I re-read my post) But yeah I think the Clipps did a little better in terms of talent. But others have made good points in terms of long term cap space. I just think Hawes would have fit in well with this team. And Farmar is under rated IMO. But he is an LA boy and I think he was destined to play for one of the two home town teams. I wanted Hawes though for the MLE
