Earl Clark Discussion: Second Wind?

KB24 · by **KB24** on Thu Feb 21, 2013 4:58 am

therealdeal wrote:Again...

8 million dollar expiring contract. Even if he was absolutely useless, that much money off the books will be valuable to someone. He's still an elite level defender, so he's not even useless.

We don't need to amnesty someone that we could get value for.

yes, it will...mostly to the Lakers. And thats not even a "feeling", the numbers say no team is gonna benefit more (financially) than the Lakers from getting rid of his contract.

trodgers · by **trodgers** on Thu Feb 21, 2013 7:40 am

In his starts, he's now at 11.3 points, 8.8 boards, and he now has NINE double doubles, as many as Kobe, tied for 51st most in the NBA.

puffyusaf#2 · by **puffyusaf#2** on Thu Feb 21, 2013 7:43 am

Love this kid....that is all.

Aonex · by **Aonex** on Thu Feb 21, 2013 8:04 am

KB24 wrote:
therealdeal wrote:Again...

8 million dollar expiring contract. Even if he was absolutely useless, that much money off the books will be valuable to someone. He's still an elite level defender, so he's not even useless.

We don't need to amnesty someone that we could get value for.

yes, it will...mostly to the Lakers. And thats not even a "feeling", the numbers say no team is gonna benefit more (financially) than the Lakers from getting rid of his contract.

Since we're so far above the salary cap the only trade I think we should consider is to a team with cap space that's willing to give us draft picks and no additional contracts.

Pig Miller · by **Pig Miller** on Thu Feb 21, 2013 8:13 am

didn't realize he had 16 boards. thought it was closer to 10 or 11 when i was watching. hope he keeps this up

therealdeal · by **therealdeal** on Thu Feb 21, 2013 8:28 am

Aonex wrote:
KB24 wrote:
therealdeal wrote:Again...

8 million dollar expiring contract. Even if he was absolutely useless, that much money off the books will be valuable to someone. He's still an elite level defender, so he's not even useless.

We don't need to amnesty someone that we could get value for.

yes, it will...mostly to the Lakers. And thats not even a "feeling", the numbers say no team is gonna benefit more (financially) than the Lakers from getting rid of his contract.

Since we're so far above the salary cap the only trade I think we should consider is to a team with cap space that's willing to give us draft picks and no additional contracts.

My ideal trade would be to send him away for a young 1st round pick SF on a rookie contract. Those contracts are longer, but are at somewhere near half the cost. Some young guy who might look like a bust, but hasn't really had a shot yet (aka Clark or Hill). Someone like Moe Harkless or something.

KB24 · by **KB24** on Thu Feb 21, 2013 9:08 am

^that would be perfect. If we could dump his K for a pick or a young cheap player then the Lakers will pull the trigger immidiately, I'm sure. They would be insane not to.

My only concern is that such offer is not available. Artest is too old and excentric for rebuilding teams and probably too expensive for contending teams. I don't see which type of team needs a player like Artest AND can afford it.

People forget, its ONLY the Lakers and maybe the Knicks providing unlimited cash supply if they feel they are going after "it". Teams like Memphis are even trading their star to save cash. The Thunder decided to trade Harden because he was too expensive for them to keep. Even Cuban who used to pay endless money has been tightening things up.

dj vitus · by **dj vitus** on Thu Feb 21, 2013 11:03 am

^^ It looks like Cuban wants to make a splash in the 2014 market, and Metta's contract expires by then, so it could work in theory.

Though in reality I'm not sure who we'd get in return. They were rumored to have Shawn Marion on the block at one point. Nash/Marion reunion? :man1:

Chillbongo · by **Chillbongo** on Thu Feb 21, 2013 11:40 am

EARL M'FKIN CLARK

Spoiler:

khmrP · by **khmrP** on Thu Feb 21, 2013 11:42 am

really is a shame Pau went down, maybe with Clark emergence something like Clark/Metta/filler might have peaked Indy interest for Granger?

Tragic · by **Tragic** on Thu Feb 21, 2013 11:45 am

We have definitely found a talent in Earl Clark. Thank God. Hope he can keep up the rebounding and defending he brings for us and hitting the open shots he'll be getting as teams continue to double Kobe down the stretch of games.

Aonex · by **Aonex** on Thu Feb 21, 2013 11:46 am

How much do we think Clark will want in the off-season? Same as Jordan's $3.5M a year?

khmrP · by **khmrP** on Thu Feb 21, 2013 11:49 am

Aonex wrote:How much do we think Clark will want in the off-season? Same as Jordan's $3.5M a year?

some deperate team out there will offer him something ridiculous that we cant or wont match, it'll just be up to him if he wants to sacrifice money for fit like Hill did.

therealdeal · by **therealdeal** on Thu Feb 21, 2013 12:33 pm

KB24 wrote:^that would be perfect. If we could dump his K for a pick or a young cheap player then the Lakers will pull the trigger immidiately, I'm sure. They would be insane not to.

My only concern is that such offer is not available. Artest is too old and excentric for rebuilding teams and probably too expensive for contending teams. I don't see which type of team needs a player like Artest AND can afford it.

People forget, its ONLY the Lakers and maybe the Knicks providing unlimited cash supply if they feel they are going after "it". Teams like Memphis are even trading their star to save cash. The Thunder decided to trade Harden because he was too expensive for them to keep. Even Cuban who used to pay endless money has been tightening things up.

I know what you're saying. But there's also idiotic teams that are content to have a high draft pick every season and somehow want to save money every year as well. Teams like Sacremento, Charlotte, and today's version of the Pistons come to mind. Say we find a partner for an Ebanks for a 2nd round pick.

Artest/2nd rounder would be worth a 1st rounder a team like that doesn't really like.

John3:16 · by **John3:16** on Thu Feb 21, 2013 12:35 pm

puffyusaf#2 wrote:Love this kid....that is all.

therealdeal · by **therealdeal** on Thu Feb 21, 2013 12:55 pm

khmrP wrote:
Aonex wrote:How much do we think Clark will want in the off-season? Same as Jordan's $3.5M a year?

some deperate team out there will offer him something ridiculous that we cant or wont match, it'll just be up to him if he wants to sacrifice money for fit like Hill did.

The way he's playing... We might get lucky if he's willing to stay here for 3-4 million. Some team will give him one of Houston's infamous "poison-pill" contracts worth 6-7 million and it'll be up to him to hopefully not accept that.

I hope he gives us a discount for giving him a shot.

karacha · by **karacha** on Thu Feb 21, 2013 1:03 pm

I'd offer him $4M per. Hopefully he will accept that, because on this team he will have a significant role and he fits really well next to Dwight.

gcclaker · by **gcclaker** on Thu Feb 21, 2013 1:56 pm

Not having TWC and relegated to the ABC/ESPN feeds...anyone think Clark can play the 3 spot? I'm grateful for the Artest/World Peace contributions [though sporadic the last two seasons] but that has been a sore spot and needs to be addressed.

Chillbongo · by **Chillbongo** on Thu Feb 21, 2013 2:02 pm

Aonex wrote:How much do we think Clark will want in the off-season? Same as Jordan's $3.5M a year?

No way he takes that IMO.

Look, Clark can do what Hill can do AND more. If Hill got $3.5 as a bench player who hustles, plays D, and gets put backs, why would that be enough for Clark? He can do that plus more.

He plays great man D (at the 1,2,3 & 4), he can put the ball on the floor and take it to the rim. He's aggressive on the boards and I mean AGGRESSIVE. Put backs, takes away O-rebs for the other team, has a jump shot and can even hit the 3. And he's playing as a starter.

Not sure what the going rate for a player of the diversity is, but if Hill is $3.5, dude has to at least be getting $4.5M a year.

therealdeal · by **therealdeal** on Thu Feb 21, 2013 2:11 pm

gcclaker wrote:Not having TWC and relegated to the ABC/ESPN feeds...anyone think Clark can play the 3 spot? I'm grateful for the Artest/World Peace contributions [though sporadic the last two seasons] but that has been a sore spot and needs to be addressed.

Yes he can, but I think it's easier to find a SF that fits next to Howard/Kobe than it is to find a PF. And Clark just happens to be a fantastic fit next to Howard.

If we could get a star type PF back for Pau (Love) then I'd say switch Clark to the 3, but otherwise I think he's best used at the 4.

Chillbongo · by **Chillbongo** on Thu Feb 21, 2013 2:13 pm

If we got Love with Dwight, why not put Clark at the 3. He can defend the 3, he can somewhat put the ball on the floor, and he has a shot. The shot is the easiest thing to improve, so I wouldn't see it as an issue. Though he wouldn't be slashing SF.

therealdeal · by **therealdeal** on Thu Feb 21, 2013 2:16 pm

Chillbongo wrote:If we got Love with Dwight, why not put Clark at the 3. He can defend the 3, he can somewhat put the ball on the floor, and he has a shot. The shot is the easiest thing to improve, so I wouldn't see it as an issue. Though he wouldn't be slashing SF.

That was my point though. If we could get Love, then sure move Clark because Love is the absolutely glove fit next to Howard.

But if you can't, Clark is right up there among the next best things. He's active, he's got a decent set shot, and he's capable of getting to the rim at his size.

I just think it's easier to find a SF type than a PF type. So go use Gasol to get the best Forward you can and then move Clark as needed.

Chillbongo · by **Chillbongo** on Thu Feb 21, 2013 2:18 pm

Hahaha yeeee was agreeing with you.

Yup I think we should make that our priority. Get Love and move Clark to the 3. Metta can be the 6th man

therealdeal · by **therealdeal** on Thu Feb 21, 2013 2:22 pm

Nash/Blake
Bryant/Meeks
Clark/Artest
Love/Jamison?
Howard/Hill

I like the balance better as a team. The one thing I'd like to see is if we could get an athletic backup SF. Get a SF that can get out and run. Ebanks can, but he's a moron. I'd like to see a second unit that can just flat out fast break.

jlkr · by **jlkr** on Thu Feb 21, 2013 2:27 pm

I can see someone taking a gamble on Clark with MLE-level money. Yes I agree he does more than Hill. Do the Lakers retain him in that case? Perhaps they do if they amnesty Gasol. Or trade Gasol and get back an exception they don't use. Not convinced they can keep both Clark and Hill if they trade Gasol for Love. Too much lux tax down the hole.

Thank Gasol for the memories then make Clark and Hill part of the 3 man big man rotation next season. Howard, Clark as starters, Hill off the bench to spell them. I think this could work. Lots of energy up and down the floor.

Earl Clark Discussion: Second Wind?

Re: Earl Clark Discussion: "they call me Easy"

Re: Earl Clark Discussion: career high 16 rebounds

Re: Earl Clark Discussion: career high 16 rebounds

Re: Earl Clark Discussion: "they call me Easy"

Re: Earl Clark Discussion: career high 16 rebounds

Re: Earl Clark Discussion: "they call me Easy"

Re: Earl Clark Discussion: career high 16 rebounds

Re: Earl Clark Discussion: career high 16 rebounds

Re: Earl Clark Discussion: career high 16 rebounds

Re: Earl Clark Discussion: career high 16 rebounds

Re: Earl Clark Discussion: career high 16 rebounds

Re: Earl Clark Discussion: career high 16 rebounds

Re: Earl Clark Discussion: career high 16 rebounds

Re: Earl Clark Discussion: career high 16 rebounds

Re: Earl Clark Discussion: career high 16 rebounds

Re: Earl Clark Discussion: career high 16 rebounds

Re: Earl Clark Discussion: career high 16 rebounds

Re: Earl Clark Discussion: career high 16 rebounds

Re: Earl Clark Discussion: career high 16 rebounds

Re: Earl Clark Discussion: career high 16 rebounds

Re: Earl Clark Discussion: career high 16 rebounds

Re: Earl Clark Discussion: career high 16 rebounds

Re: Earl Clark Discussion: career high 16 rebounds

Re: Earl Clark Discussion: career high 16 rebounds

Re: Earl Clark Discussion: career high 16 rebounds

Who is online