http://realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/478...uben_patterson/</p> <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>The Los Angeles Clippers today signed free agent forward <u>Ruben Patterson</u>. Per team policy, terms of the deal were not released. </p> “I am really excited by our signing of <u>Ruben Patterson</u>,” Clippers head coach <u>Mike Dunleavy</u> said. “He is a great competitor. I have always admired the intensity he brings from game to game. His versatility will help improve our team.”</div></p>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Petey)</div><div class='quotemain'> Good signing for the Clippers.</p> -Petey </p></div> <font color="#000080">Depends on what attitude he bings here. He can play but at the same time he can cause problems for the Clippers. It is a definite surprise to me and I am sure to other Clipper fans.</font> </p>
I don't really think he fits with this team. You have Corey Maggette, Cuttino Mobley, Quinton Ross, and they just drafted Al Thornton. Yes, Maggette may be traded, but we've heard that for the past 3 years, and Thornton may have to play a little extra at the 4 with Brand out, but I don't think this was a great fit.
I was not expecting this at all. How does this signing impact the Clippers offense? Cassell, Knight, Mobley, Maggette, Thornton, Ross, Thomas. Looks to me like we might ge getting out an running more and hope that Kaman can hold down the block. Honestly I think Kaman is better off with a version of the 4 out 1 in, which seems to be what we are going to. Thomas is obviously going to play PF, so hopefully we get out and run a bit more.</p> Patterson, Knight, and Ross give us three good perimeter defenders as well. I just hope Patterson doesnt blow up and that he and Maggette can co-exist without one of them complaining about playing time.</p>
http://www.82games.com/0607/0607MIL2.HTM</p> Patterson did get heavy minutes at the 4 last year.</p> -Petey</p>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Petey)</div><div class='quotemain'> http://www.82games.com/0607/0607MIL2.HTM</p> Patterson did get heavy minutes at the 4 last year.</p> -Petey </p> </div></p> Good call I thought he did as well. Too bad Livingston is out, because this could have been his breakout year, considering the style we seem to be setting up.</p> </p> </p>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TucsonClip)</div><div class='quotemain'> I was not expecting this at all. How does this signing impact the Clippers offense? Cassell, Knight, Mobley, Maggette, Thornton, Ross, Thomas. Looks to me like we might ge getting out an running more and hope that Kaman can hold down the block. Honestly I think Kaman is better off with a version of the 4 out 1 in, which seems to be what we are going to. Thomas is obviously going to play PF, so hopefully we get out and run a bit more.</p> Patterson, Knight, and Ross give us three good perimeter defenders as well. I just hope Patterson doesnt blow up and that he and Maggette can co-exist without one of them complaining about playing time.</p></div> <font color="#000080">I forgot where I read it but Dunleavy said something this off-season of possibly moving the offense to a more up tempo style.</font> </p>
Petey, yes, Patterson logged some time at the 4 last year, but there are good reasons why. First of all, Milwaukee was absolutely shafted with injuries last year, including Charlie Villanueva and Andrew Bogut, so Milwaukee was forced to play small. Secondly, that team was going nowhere. Third of all, it was the Eastern Conference. Patterson can't legitimately play at the 4, especially in the West, where he'll face guys like Duncan, Boozer, Nowitzki, Gasol, Nene, Jefferson, etc. on most nights. Can he get away with playing heavy minutes at the 4 when they play Phoenix and Golden State? Sure, but Patterson and his 6'5'' frame is not a valid option in the West.</p> Not to mention, he doesn't have much of a shot on him, so you can't say "well it goes both ways, the bigs have to guard him too." Most of his offense is bulling his way to the basket. So not only will he be unable to defend (perimeter defense, by the way, is his biggest strength, so you'd be taking that away from him also), he won't even really stretch opposing defenses and give himself an advantage offensively.</p> If they swing a Maggette-for-Haslem type of deal like rumors have suggested over the past few years, then this would be a decent fit. If not, I don't see it.</p>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CelticBalla32)</div><div class='quotemain'> Petey, yes, Patterson logged some time at the 4 last year, but there are good reasons why. First of all, Milwaukee was absolutely shafted with injuries last year, including Charlie Villanueva and Andrew Bogut, so Milwaukee was forced to play small. Secondly, that team was going nowhere. Third of all, it was the Eastern Conference. Patterson can't legitimately play at the 4, especially in the West, where he'll face guys like Duncan, Boozer, Nowitzki, Gasol, Nene, Jefferson, etc. on most nights. Can he get away with playing heavy minutes at the 4 when they play Phoenix and Golden State? Sure, but Patterson and his 6'5'' frame is not a valid option in the West.</p> Not to mention, he doesn't have much of a shot on him, so you can't say "well it goes both ways, the bigs have to guard him too." Most of his offense is bulling his way to the basket. So not only will he be unable to defend (perimeter defense, by the way, is his biggest strength, so you'd be taking that away from him also), he won't even really stretch opposing defenses and give himself an advantage offensively.</p> If they swing a Maggette-for-Haslem type of deal like rumors have suggested over the past few years, then this would be a decent fit. If not, I don't see it. </p></div> A coach has to use what he has. I understand your point on the better quality of PF in the West, but there are very few teams with 2 good post options. And the Clippers do have Kaman, whom they can play on defense verus that role. </p> While Patterson is short, I think he's rather stocky. I think he'll be servicable if used correctly. </p> The Clippers without Brand and Livingston might be in a similar position to the Bucks last year anyway...</p> -Petey</p>
This was clearly a signing to make up for Brand being out for a couple of months. Personally I feel as though they should have saved their money and used it next season when the free agent class is terrific. Patterson will be a nice addition, I don't know how many minutes he'll log once Brand gets back however.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Petey)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CelticBalla32)</div><div class='quotemain'> Petey, yes, Patterson logged some time at the 4 last year, but there are good reasons why. First of all, Milwaukee was absolutely shafted with injuries last year, including Charlie Villanueva and Andrew Bogut, so Milwaukee was forced to play small. Secondly, that team was going nowhere. Third of all, it was the Eastern Conference. Patterson can't legitimately play at the 4, especially in the West, where he'll face guys like Duncan, Boozer, Nowitzki, Gasol, Nene, Jefferson, etc. on most nights. Can he get away with playing heavy minutes at the 4 when they play Phoenix and Golden State? Sure, but Patterson and his 6'5'' frame is not a valid option in the West.</p> Not to mention, he doesn't have much of a shot on him, so you can't say "well it goes both ways, the bigs have to guard him too." Most of his offense is bulling his way to the basket. So not only will he be unable to defend (perimeter defense, by the way, is his biggest strength, so you'd be taking that away from him also), he won't even really stretch opposing defenses and give himself an advantage offensively.</p> If they swing a Maggette-for-Haslem type of deal like rumors have suggested over the past few years, then this would be a decent fit. If not, I don't see it. </p></div> A coach has to use what he has. I understand your point on the better quality of PF in the West, but there are very few teams with 2 good post options. And the Clippers do have Kaman, whom they can play on defense verus that role. </p> While Patterson is short, I think he's rather stocky. I think he'll be servicable if used correctly. </p> The Clippers without Brand and Livingston might be in a similar position to the Bucks last year anyway...</p> -Petey </p> </div></p> Yes, a coach has to use what he has, but that doesn't mean that the coache's options are necessarily good ones. Patterson is stocky, he's rugged, and he's tough, but he is not going to be able to defend bigs... especially in the West. Kaman is at a disadvantage when he tries to cover quicker bigs as well, and then what? Tim Thomas? This is a lose-lose situation for LA, no matter what they do. </p> </p>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GArenas)</div><div class='quotemain'>This was clearly a signing to make up for Brand being out for a couple of months. Personally I feel as though they should have saved their money and used it next season when the free agent class is terrific. Patterson will be a nice addition, I don't know how many minutes he'll log once Brand gets back however.</div></p> That's if brand gets back this season.</p> </p>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GArenas)</div><div class='quotemain'>This was clearly a signing to make up for Brand being out for a couple of months. Personally I feel as though they should have saved their money and used it next season when the free agent class is terrific. Patterson will be a nice addition, I don't know how many minutes he'll log once Brand gets back however.</div></p> <font color="#000080">My guess is that for Patterson this is a stop gap situation. I don't think the Clippers would give him more than 1 year. </font> </p> </p>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Weasel)</div><div class='quotemain'> <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GArenas)</div><div class='quotemain'>This was clearly a signing to make up for Brand being out for a couple of months. Personally I feel as though they should have saved their money and used it next season when the free agent class is terrific. Patterson will be a nice addition, I don't know how many minutes he'll log once Brand gets back however.</div></p> <font color="#000080">My guess is that for Patterson this is a stop gap situation. I don't think the Clippers would give him more than 2 years. </font> </p> </p> </div></p> </p> I agree, this is doing alot for Patterson's market value as he's going to be starting on another team which has been crippled by injuries. He'll get more minutes and touches with Brand out which will create more interest in him. This is a very good situation for Patterson. </p> </p>
honestly, i don't see the point in this. if the clips really needed him, i'd say it was a great move, but IMO they don't. they should have gotten a real big. that woulda been nice.
http://www.ocregister.com/sports/patterson...5252-team-ruben</p> <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Seeking to improve a defense that took a step backward last season, the Clippers have agreed to a one-year deal with veteran free-agent forward Ruben Patterson.</div></p> </p>
