PDA

View Full Version : Trade Undone: How Good Would the Clippers Be if they'd Kept Bledsoe?



shep33
12-08-2015, 09:21 PM
What do ya'll think?

JasonJohnHorn
12-08-2015, 09:39 PM
I don't think Bledsoe is terribly good. He's having a great year. I'm happy for him. But with CP3 on the court, Beldsoe would get eaten up by the opposing team's SG. 6'1? Not big enough. He' be a defensive liability against guys are are 6'3-7

That means he'd be a back-up behind CP3. His talents would be wasted.

Could they have gotten more for him? C'est possible.

But Reddick is doing what he's supposed to be doing; hitting three's and spreading the floor.

ewing
12-09-2015, 12:42 AM
He's no Austin Rivers

JasonJohnHorn
12-09-2015, 12:55 AM
He's no Austin Rivers

Aargghh!!!

Granted, the kid has improved, but he's no business on that roster. If his dad wasn't the GM/coach, he'd be riding the pine n Philly... no... scratched that; he'd be the number one option in Philly so they could ensure another top-three pick.

I think that whole situation is ruining Doc in the eyes of people around the league.

Sadds The Gr8
12-09-2015, 03:12 AM
wouldn't have made the improvements IMO. Woulda been stuck getting limited mins so he wouldnt be as effective as he is now. Kinda similar to Harden on OKC, but worse.

MILLERHIGHLIFE
12-09-2015, 11:37 AM
Clippers are a good regular season team playoffs not so much. Not sure if CP3 will ever get the Clippers over the hump and into the finals. Now with them going after knuckle head players as in Smith, Stephenson. Shows they're getting desperate. NBA did Clippers a favor getting them CP3 other wise Clippers be where they always been. Then Blake would walk as well as Jordan.

Tony_Starks
12-09-2015, 03:50 PM
He's no Austin Rivers

Aargghh!!!

Granted, the kid has improved, but he's no business on that roster. If his dad wasn't the GM/coach, he'd be riding the pine n Philly... no... scratched that; he'd be the number one option in Philly so they could ensure another top-three pick.

I think that whole situation is ruining Doc in the eyes of people around the league.

You watch Clipper games? Austin Rivers is their best perimeter defender.

Easily.

Quinnsanity
12-09-2015, 04:37 PM
Can we collectively as basketball fans dispel the notion that J.J. Redick is just some one-dimensional catch and shoot guy? He's an excellent offensive player who can dribble and move, is almost a plus-defender (at the very least he's a net neutral) and, of course, he's a great shooter. He's kind of a smaller Klay Thompson. Even if Bledsoe is the better individual player (and frankly, that's far from confirmed), Redick is a much better fit for that team AND has a much more palatable salary.

Yanks All Day
12-10-2015, 03:16 PM
Can we collectively as basketball fans dispel the notion that J.J. Redick is just some one-dimensional catch and shoot guy? He's an excellent offensive player who can dribble and move, is almost a plus-defender (at the very least he's a net neutral) and, of course, he's a great shooter. He's kind of a smaller Klay Thompson. Even if Bledsoe is the better individual player (and frankly, that's far from confirmed), Redick is a much better fit for that team AND has a much more palatable salary.

Plus, JJ Redick is probably the 3rd most important Clipper now behind CP3 and Blake Griffin. The floor spacing Redick provides is something Bledsoe would never be able to. He's also one of the best in the league at moving without the ball. He's absolutely perfect for what Doc Rivers and the Clippers want to do. Extremely similar to what Ray Allen was to the Celtics.

There's this idea that JJ is only a spot-up shooter, but he's so much more than that. He's now a 10-year veteran who comfortably scores 15 ppg and shoots 40%+ from 3 while playing good defense. He's a better fit for the LA Clippers, and quite frankly, he might just flat-out be a better overall player than Eric Bledsoe. Redick is better from 2, from 3, and from the free throw line. Bledsoe scores 7 more points per game because he takes 7 more shots per game. On the Clippers, he'd either be CP3s backup or an inefficient shooting guard. He just wasn't a fit for what the Clippers had to do.

Alayla
12-10-2015, 03:40 PM
Plus, JJ Redick is probably the 3rd most important Clipper now behind CP3 and Blake Griffin. The floor spacing Redick provides is something Bledsoe would never be able to. He's also one of the best in the league at moving without the ball. He's absolutely perfect for what Doc Rivers and the Clippers want to do. Extremely similar to what Ray Allen was to the Celtics.

There's this idea that JJ is only a spot-up shooter, but he's so much more than that. He's now a 10-year veteran who comfortably scores 15 ppg and shoots 40%+ from 3 while playing good defense. He's a better fit for the LA Clippers, and quite frankly, he might just flat-out be a better overall player than Eric Bledsoe. Redick is better from 2, from 3, and from the free throw line. Bledsoe scores 7 more points per game because he takes 7 more shots per game. On the Clippers, he'd either be CP3s backup or an inefficient shooting guard. He just wasn't a fit for what the Clippers had to do.

While i buy that JJ is a better fit by a landslide this talk about his defense is getting overboard.
Lets not try and compare him to Bledsoe defensively because that certainly does nothing to help your case.
Bledsoes physical tools alone make him an excellent man defender and when he actually applys himself on that end he has arguably the best defense in the PG position as a whole and i think 8 times out of 10 he would actually win that arugement!
JJ might not be letting guys drop 50 like some people make it out to be but lets not pretend mentioning his defense as a justification to have him rather than Bledsoe is anything more than blind homerism and neglect.

As for the original post stupid thread Bledsoe would offer little to help that team.

Kyben36
12-10-2015, 04:20 PM
IRRELIVANT, CAUSE HE WOULD HAVE WALKED FOR MORE MONEY A FEW YEARS LATER, SO THEY COULD KEEP THE OTHER KEY PEICES THEY HAVE, DO PEOPLE NOT UNDERSTAND WHY HE WAS TRADED, SURE, YOU CAN KEEP HIM, BUT GIVE UP JORDAN THEN, OR GIVE UP REDDICK, CRAWFORD , SMITH AND Paul peirce, all of which would have needed to be traded, or not of been able to be signed.