Brooklyn_Wolves wrote:Are you guys talking about Cliff Alexander?
Yeah, sorry BW. I'm guessing Monster and I were confusing Alexander with another underperforming KU PF who's been linked to the Wolves...Thomas Robinson
I hope someone else got a kick out of my blunder. Know I was thinking Cliff Alexander but somehow Cliff Robinson came out when I typed. Maybe my iPhone autocorrected to that. In all fairness Cliff Robinson makes sense to type as a Blazer named Cliff he was a terrific player. It's funny LST thought maybe I was mixing up Thomas Robinson's name. Maybe I was anyway...
Cliff-Thomas Robinson-Alexander does seem to be a mystery. I'd be interested in hearing some more what people think about him. A quick Google search brings me nothing written about him since last year. I suppose there isnt much to say.
monsterpile wrote:LST I'm curious how much higher you have Cole rated above Ezeli. How much more money per year would you pay for Cole compared to Ezeli?
Difficult to say, monster. They're both backups who can start in a pinch, but Cole had the far superior year. And Ezeli didn't impress me in the finals. I guess I think "fair" value in this crazy market might be Ezeli at $6-7 million and Cole at $10-12 million.
monsterpile wrote:LST I'm curious how much higher you have Cole rated above Ezeli. How much more money per year would you pay for Cole compared to Ezeli?
Difficult to say, monster. They're both backups who can start in a pinch, but Cole had the far superior year. And Ezeli didn't impress me in the finals. I guess I think "fair" value in this crazy market might be Ezeli at $6-7 million and Cole at $10-12 million.
My guess is that Cole would have impressed you even less in the Finals had he been put in the same context.
It's tough for me to differentiate these two guys much given their paucity of minutes over the years and the fact they were both backups on extremely good teams. Cole's numbers worry me a bit too since we seem to be taking last year as the gospel moving forward. Let's remember that the year before he shot only 48% playing more minutes and it's not like he was a rookie.
I'm happy with the deal for Aldrich, don't get me wrong, but I'm tempering my enthusiasm. If he is truly limited to a 10-15 minute per night backup role, I think we'll be OK. Where I get worried is if we get a few injuries and suddenly he's being asked to play 25+ MPG. I'm not sure his game or his conditioning for that matter is built for that kind of role.
monsterpile wrote:LST I'm curious how much higher you have Cole rated above Ezeli. How much more money per year would you pay for Cole compared to Ezeli?
Difficult to say, monster. They're both backups who can start in a pinch, but Cole had the far superior year. And Ezeli didn't impress me in the finals. I guess I think "fair" value in this crazy market might be Ezeli at $6-7 million and Cole at $10-12 million.
My guess is that Cole would have impressed you even less in the Finals had he been put in the same context.
It's tough for me to differentiate these two guys much given their paucity of minutes over the years and the fact they were both backups on extremely good teams. Cole's numbers worry me a bit too since we seem to be taking last year as the gospel moving forward. Let's remember that the year before he shot only 48% playing more minutes and it's not like he was a rookie.
I'm happy with the deal for Aldrich, don't get me wrong, but I'm tempering my enthusiasm. If he is truly limited to a 10-15 minute per night backup role, I think we'll be OK. Where I get worried is if we get a few injuries and suddenly he's being asked to play 25+ MPG. I'm not sure his game or his conditioning for that matter is built for that kind of role.
Totally agree Q. He's made for a limited role and asking anything more than that would be dangerous. He would be just fine getting spot minutes and under Thibs I can't see him being asked for more.
monsterpile wrote:LST I'm curious how much higher you have Cole rated above Ezeli. How much more money per year would you pay for Cole compared to Ezeli?
Difficult to say, monster. They're both backups who can start in a pinch, but Cole had the far superior year. And Ezeli didn't impress me in the finals. I guess I think "fair" value in this crazy market might be Ezeli at $6-7 million and Cole at $10-12 million.
My guess is that Cole would have impressed you even less in the Finals had he been put in the same context.
It's tough for me to differentiate these two guys much given their paucity of minutes over the years and the fact they were both backups on extremely good teams. Cole's numbers worry me a bit too since we seem to be taking last year as the gospel moving forward. Let's remember that the year before he shot only 48% playing more minutes and it's not like he was a rookie.
I'm happy with the deal for Aldrich, don't get me wrong, but I'm tempering my enthusiasm. If he is truly limited to a 10-15 minute per night backup role, I think we'll be OK. Where I get worried is if we get a few injuries and suddenly he's being asked to play 25+ MPG. I'm not sure his game or his conditioning for that matter is built for that kind of role.
Like Q I'm not sure how there is the type of gap between these 2 guys you are suggesting and Q already made some good points. But I'll add more what I was thinking when I said I would be thrilled to get Ezeli for that contract.
For that price I dont have to choose which one I want I could have both! It's like walking into a store and they have something you want on clearance for a terrific price. You pick up one of the item. Cool. You can't walk away the price is so good you consider getting another of the item. You don't need it but it could possible come in handy... :)
I see Ezeli despite his disappointing performances in the playoffs as a guy that could still be a starting C in this league. He was injured (again which maybe really hurts his value) and played a reduced role this season so it's possible that's partly why he struggled when given the opportunity. I think his upside to be a higher level rotation player is higher than Cole. Remember you are getting this guy for what is basically mid level money. That's very good for a legit C and that contract even in the pre cap jump days would have been pretty good.
Aldrich has a different value. I do think he has some sort of possible upside as a Robin Lopez type starting center. I don't think he is that good but I think it shouldn't be completely dismissed either. I think his ability to play as a role player doing whatever the team needs and being happy with it is very valuable. It's not that Ezeli may not do this it just seems like he may have some higher aspirations and probably should. Cole probably would be thrilled just to continue to be in a regular rotation not sitting on the bench or even in a suit behind it. Those great dude, lunch bucket type guys are really valuable and you need them on any type of team. The fact that we committed to him for 3 years is big because he can be a real part of the roster going forward and having his bird rights means we can have a great shot at keeping him beyond this contract of they choose to do that. I think it's quite possible Cole becomes a really valuable rotation player for this team for quite a while and again for mid-level money locked up for 3 years! Yes!!!!!
monsterpile wrote:LST I'm curious how much higher you have Cole rated above Ezeli. How much more money per year would you pay for Cole compared to Ezeli?
Difficult to say, monster. They're both backups who can start in a pinch, but Cole had the far superior year. And Ezeli didn't impress me in the finals. I guess I think "fair" value in this crazy market might be Ezeli at $6-7 million and Cole at $10-12 million.
My guess is that Cole would have impressed you even less in the Finals had he been put in the same context.
It's tough for me to differentiate these two guys much given their paucity of minutes over the years and the fact they were both backups on extremely good teams. Cole's numbers worry me a bit too since we seem to be taking last year as the gospel moving forward. Let's remember that the year before he shot only 48% playing more minutes and it's not like he was a rookie.
I'm happy with the deal for Aldrich, don't get me wrong, but I'm tempering my enthusiasm. If he is truly limited to a 10-15 minute per night backup role, I think we'll be OK. Where I get worried is if we get a few injuries and suddenly he's being asked to play 25+ MPG. I'm not sure his game or his conditioning for that matter is built for that kind of role.
Totally agree Q. He's made for a limited role and asking anything more than that would be dangerous. He would be just fine getting spot minutes and under Thibs I can't see him being asked for more.
Well he did step into a bigger role for that Blake dude and the Clippers played better during that stretch. It's a small sample but it's there.
Monster, Aldrich started 5 games for the Clips and played 800 minutes. I don't think he did much to fill the Blake Griffin void. That was more Mbah Moute.
Alan Crabbe went to Brooklyn for 4 years at $73M. I'm happy that finally someone went from West to East, but jeebus, that's an overpay. Once again, that 3X10 deal for Dudley looks like an absolute bargain.
