Earl Clark Discussion: Second Wind?

Rooscooter wrote: If he keeps being a "difference maker" you can bet your last dollar that the league will adjust to him come playoff time ....... if we make it that far.

The thing that would change is respect for his jump shot. Which means his man won't help off of Clark fearing that he will hit the corner 3.

As far as the other buckets -- dude is just crafty. He's in the right places and is pretty good at finishing around the basket off the pass.

So you are right to some extent, they will maybe respect him some more, box him out & and not leave him hanging around as an extra body.

That means single coverage for Kobe/Nash/Dwight.

And fortunately for us, I think defenses will be more keen on keeping a body on Nash/Dwight/Kobe than Clark.

So it is likely he will continue to get his looks. Either him or Artest.

gcclaker wrote:

pound4pound1 wrote:when Hill went out for the year, i was really worried about not having an energy guy that makes things happen...Clark has nicely filled that void....i really like him in the starting lineup

Imagine if BOTH were available? It could be a nice PROBLEM next season. We might be saying Adios to someone. Sigh...

that guy we say adios to comes from spain.

Rooscooter wrote::bang: I wasn't comparing Sessions to Clark......

I was comparing how the league changed how they played us because of how they changed our dynamic on the court.....

Clark's success right now is a surprise to just about everyone who's honest..... If he keeps being a "difference maker" you can bet your last dollar that the league will adjust to him come playoff time ....... if we make it that far.

Tonight I'll get to see him live..... I hope to get an even better look at what he can do.

But the point is, it's difficult to adjust to a guy who plays off the ball, especially for NBA players. Adjusting to Sessions was easy: once he stopped having the ball in his hands he was ineffective. He's not a great off-the-ball player.

Clark doesn't need the ball and that makes him dangerous. Teams didn't adjust to Ariza in 2009 and I can see Clark having the same kind of season. In 2010 they adjusted and now Ariza looks like trash but Clark can certainly finish the season playing this way.

I really hope he comes back next year.

gcclaker wrote:

pound4pound1 wrote:when Hill went out for the year, i was really worried about not having an energy guy that makes things happen...Clark has nicely filled that void....i really like him in the starting lineup

Imagine if BOTH were available? It could be a nice PROBLEM next season. We might be saying Adios to someone. Sigh...

Unfortunately, if Hill were still healthy nobody would have ever known Clark was capable of this level of play.

Rooscooter wrote:

gcclaker wrote:

pound4pound1 wrote:when Hill went out for the year, i was really worried about not having an energy guy that makes things happen...Clark has nicely filled that void....i really like him in the starting lineup

Imagine if BOTH were available? It could be a nice PROBLEM next season. We might be saying Adios to someone. Sigh...

Unfortunately, if Hill were still healthy nobody would have ever known Clark was capable of this level of play.

True... Silver linings.

therealdeal wrote:

Rooscooter wrote::bang: I wasn't comparing Sessions to Clark......

I was comparing how the league changed how they played us because of how they changed our dynamic on the court.....

Clark's success right now is a surprise to just about everyone who's honest..... If he keeps being a "difference maker" you can bet your last dollar that the league will adjust to him come playoff time ....... if we make it that far.

Tonight I'll get to see him live..... I hope to get an even better look at what he can do.

But the point is, it's difficult to adjust to a guy who plays off the ball, especially for NBA players. Adjusting to Sessions was easy: once he stopped having the ball in his hands he was ineffective. He's not a great off-the-ball player.

Clark doesn't need the ball and that makes him dangerous. Teams didn't adjust to Ariza in 2009 and I can see Clark having the same kind of season. In 2010 they adjusted and now Ariza looks like trash but Clark can certainly finish the season playing this way.

You are trying to twist my point into a negative comment about Clark. It's not in the least. It's more about seeing a larger sample if/when the other teams start paying attention to him before making a final decision on how good he is. Right now he's an afterthought as far an opponent is concerned.... a few more 20/12 games and that won't be the case.

I can agree that playing off the ball is difficult to defend but his impact has been just as large hitting wide open spot up jumpers...... especially 3 pointers.

If teams to adjust to him it will help everyone else..... it's a win-win IMHO.... but his production may not be what it was during this introductory stretch....

Anyway..... shouldn't you be telling us how much better it would be with Ebanks out there......

KB24 wrote:

gcclaker wrote:

pound4pound1 wrote:when Hill went out for the year, i was really worried about not having an energy guy that makes things happen...Clark has nicely filled that void....i really like him in the starting lineup

Imagine if BOTH were available? It could be a nice PROBLEM next season. We might be saying Adios to someone. Sigh...

that guy we say adios to comes from spain.

Not so sure about that with how Pau is thriving (and now embracing) coming off the bench... less pressure, better position, etc.

^

I would agree, but he has a 19M expiring contract. We have to be able to get some younger players for that amount of $$.

karacha wrote:^

I would agree, but he has a 19M expiring contract. We have to be able to get some younger players for that amount of $$.

We could get half the Cavs team for that can't we?......

[quote="Rooscooter]You are trying to twist my point into a negative comment about Clark. It's not in the least. It's more about seeing a larger sample if/when the other teams start paying attention to him before making a final decision on how good he is. Right now he's an afterthought as far an opponent is concerned.... a few more 20/12 games and that won't be the case.

I can agree that playing off the ball is difficult to defend but his impact has been just as large hitting wide open spot up jumpers...... especially 3 pointers.

If teams to adjust to him it will help everyone else..... it's a win-win IMHO.... but his production may not be what it was during this introductory stretch....

Anyway..... shouldn't you be telling us how much better it would be with Ebanks out there...... [/quote]
I'm not trying to twist anything you're saying. You compared his situation to Sessions' and all I'm saying is it's different. If anything I could see how it'd be an indictment of Sessions, not Clark.

My point is that he's BEEN doing this for a while already. He had his first 20/10 game back against San Antonio on the 9th. He's been here long enough that people should know his MO. Open shots, check. Slashes, check. Good defense, check. That's really the scouting report on him and I think other teams know that, but because he's still the lowest guy on the totem, it's hard to account for him. Not everyone can be shut down, and I think most teams plan to have him take the shots instead of Nash or Kobe.

I'm sure his production will not be at 20/10 very often, but the activity he shows during that time needs to be and that's what's important. If he goes 5/5 tonight, but still works just as hard as he did last night, that's what I care about. Also if we win, that's important too.

And no I shouldn't be saying anything about Ebanks. I've been done with that kid since his DUI. All the talent that I was high on and apparently none of the heart. I stand by everything I said this summer by the way. Just because he failed to live up to his expectations, doesn't mean I was wrong in giving him that chance.

if he maintains this lvl of play, hopefully he will learn from Ariza path thus far but I wouldn't blame him for taking more money elsewhere.

^^He will be of little consequence initially during this summer. Howard will dominate our offseason planning until he signs. Every other FA decision will be based on what Howard does. The longer he takes the greater our chances of losing a guy like Clark IMO. If/when we resign Howard, Clark will most likely be lowballed and have to made a decision based on money more than location.

That's been the model it seems for anyone we actually "develop" for as long as I can remember.

Actually, if you want to look at who the league never adjusted too and was having a good season look at Jordan Hill. From that OKC game, when he made his debut, and made an impact hustling, providing energy, rebounding, he found a niche; the league never adjusted because Jordan is excelling in his role.

As others have noted, when you have other stars on your team, Earl's is going to have open opportunities. Those aren't going to stop. I like what D'Antoni said; to paraphrase, he said Earl's defense is what we like the most and why he is out there to begin with; everything else he gives us his gravy.

Yeah, for an example see: Odom vs. Ariza most recently.

Howard will be re-signed first and Clark will be offered a decent contract for probably 2 years, the 2nd being a team option. That'd be my guess. It gives us the opportunity to dump him if we need to, but to keep him as part of our plans if he turns out to be legit.

I actually think the importance factors come down to: Howard, Gasol, everyone else. We re-sign Howard then we get rid of Gasol, then there's money freed up for guys like Clark.

khmrP wrote:if he maintains this lvl of play, hopefully he will learn from Ariza path thus far but I wouldn't blame him for taking more money elsewhere.

As long as David Lee isn't his agent then we should be fine.

Rooscooter wrote:^^He will be of little consequence initially during this summer. Howard will dominate our offseason planning until he signs. Every other FA decision will be based on what Howard does. The longer he takes the greater our chances of losing a guy like Clark IMO. If/when we resign Howard, Clark will most likely be lowballed and have to made a decision based on money more than location.

That's been the model it seems for anyone we actually "develop" for as long as I can remember.

Dwight seems to really like playing with Earl.. I say that helps him out in the offseason..

therealdeal wrote:Yeah, for an example see: Odom vs. Ariza most recently.

Howard will be re-signed first and Clark will be offered a decent contract for probably 2 years, the 2nd being a team option. That'd be my guess. It gives us the opportunity to dump him if we need to, but to keep him as part of our plans if he turns out to be legit.

I actually think the importance factors come down to: Howard, Gasol, everyone else. We re-sign Howard then we get rid of Gasol, then there's money freed up for guys like Clark.

Yup..... unfortunately we are "star struck" in the front office. Guys like Clark (or at least like he's been for the last 10 games) are actually as important as the stars in balancing a team. For every Kareem there was a Rambis and for every Worthy there was a Green and for every Shaq there was a Samaki..... well that last one aside.. you see what I'm getting at... The balance between having a deep and balanced team and a bunch of All Stars is key IMO. We've experience what having too many alpha's is like.... it would be nice to take the SA approach and build some REAL depth behind 2 or 3 great players. The roles would be much easier to define.

Clark will be a situational signing as you noted. If Howard bolts or forces his way out it will be "Katie bar the Door" IMO..... Pau will be shortly behind because it will be next to impossible to rebuild without using his contract to get some value back if Howard leaves. A guy like Clark would be let go unless he shows some real promise in the next few months.

Clark's production is not surprising to me....it may be to some of you because you probably had never heard of him or seen him play. Me personally I can't lie ..I hadn't seen Earl Clark play since he got to the NBA... ..But I am big into Big East basketball(The great conference it use to be) so I knew him from his days at Louisville. He was always a very talented player and if he is honest would probably say he needed one more year in college. The one thing that worried me about him is that he has he had the skill set and body of an NBA player and I think he was drafted in the lottery but he always seemed so laid back...I thought that might hurt him in the NBA. His laid back demeanor to me was like a signal that he didn't work hard or practice...If he was a more fiesty player he probably would of went top 5 in that draft easy...

When I saw he wasn't playing in Phoenix or even in Orlando really I always thought it was because of his demenor and work eithic because it was NEVER his talent. That boy is talented..always has been...believe me there is no change there. I'm just glad he is starting to realize it ...his growth so far into the offense reminds me a little of the impact Trev Ariza had a few years back. What I guess we all hoped to get from that other kid on the bench who i thought would be a good NBA player but is showing otherwise right now...Ebanks...smh...

Psychobroker wrote:

KareemTheGreat33 wrote:

@ 1:58

KareemTheGreat33 wrote:

Texas Lakers Fan wrote::man10: @ this scrub having his own thread.

You'll rue this day you called him a scrub

Rooscooter wrote:Yup..... unfortunately we are "star struck" in the front office. Guys like Clark (or at least like he's been for the last 10 games) are actually as important as the stars in balancing a team. For every Kareem there was a Rambis and for every Worthy there was a Green and for every Shaq there was a Samaki..... well that last one aside.. you see what I'm getting at... The balance between having a deep and balanced team and a bunch of All Stars is key IMO. We've experience what having too many alpha's is like.... it would be nice to take the SA approach and build some REAL depth behind 2 or 3 great players. The roles would be much easier to define.

Clark will be a situational signing as you noted. If Howard bolts or forces his way out it will be "Katie bar the Door" IMO..... Pau will be shortly behind because it will be next to impossible to rebuild without using his contract to get some value back if Howard leaves. A guy like Clark would be let go unless he shows some real promise in the next few months.

I think bringing Clark back will end up happening, it just depends on the others how much he gets. If Dwight leaves, he gets a lot because Gasol is also out the door and with Howard gone we can afford to give him market value (probably 4-5 million). If Howard stays, he gets less than that. Probably not a ton less, probably the 3-4 range, but certainly less.

I almost think it's not beneficial for other teams to "gameplan" against Clark. With so many other problems (Kobe, Dwight, Nash), you do not want to overthink because if you try to account for everyone, you'll get hurt in other areas.
It gets more difficult to know how to play somebody when they are not the focal point, and do not have specific plays run for them. Clark can get his points spotting up, or crashing the boards for rebounds and putbacks. I think the best way to play Clark is to just let him shoot the open 3 pointers and the long mid-range jump shots. Until he completely shows you that he's hitting those shots at a consistent rate, live or die by those because it's the lesser of evils.

I want the Lakers to reign this guy and Dwight Howard.

I am having anew found respect for how the Lakers have been playing. This is when it's enjoyable to watch basketball, when it's played selflessly, and the Lakers are playing just brilliantly right now.

I am amazed by this guys easy flow to the game. He really has a lot of upside. Everytime I watch him I am reminded of what I fealt watching Ariza when he first got here. I think he is better overall and already has a pretty nice stroke. He is definately becoming one of my favorite Lakers.