I think he would be a great fit if we were able to sign him.
http://www.sportingnews.com/nba/stor...ard-earl-clark
Printable View
I think he would be a great fit if we were able to sign him.
http://www.sportingnews.com/nba/stor...ard-earl-clark
:bang daye and ayres
Would be a perfect fit for the needs we have. Combo forward with size, speed, strenght with good shooting, although questionable BB IQ.
Should have just signed him over James last year. It would have been a much better fit.
Makes more sense than Ray Allen tbh.
Better than Ayres or Daye tbh.
He has 2 first names.
Smells of a small trade brewing. Too many recognizable names for the 16th slot.
boomQuote:
Originally Posted by Chinook
Many of us were saying just that. I was really legitimately stunned that nothing came from that last year. He's young, athletic and plays a position of need and has shown the skillset that does well in this system (even if it has not been consistent).Quote:
Originally Posted by Chinook
Yeah, I wanted the Spurs to pick him up last year too. He must have been having a really bad season though to get cut by Cleveland and being cut by New York later over Shannon Brown.
This smells like an agent trying to spark interest for his client. I think the Ayon and Josh Davis stuff sounds more legit.
His one season with Lakers was pretty good.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_5swXVzKwAY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLB9HBw_psc
He's one of the endless rank of mid round SFs I dearly wished the spurs could draft in the post-Bowen years. But then Kawhi happened.
Ayon/Clark as opposed to Ayres/Daye, not bad trade-offs imo
exstatic and that coyote kid would like a word with you..Quote:
Originally Posted by elemento
Being cut by garbage teams like CLE and the Knicks give me pause tbh. But I wanted him last season and still brings a much needed skillset to the roster.
The biggest question with Earl Clark is can he shot well enough (from the perimeter) to have a chance at the last roster spot? He'd be ideal as a combo forward that can back up Kawhi and play along side either Timmy or Tiago. I just wish we had more than one roster spot available with so many intriguing candidates out there.
I was hoping he'd be scooped out last year as the 15th man but they settled on Damion James for goodness knows what reason. He has an absolutely terrible career field goal percentage (40%) and isn't young enough to be considered a prospect (26 yrs. old) anymore, but his size, versatility and athleticism aren't things that can be taught.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robz4000
Agree. Even before the trade deadline, Clark was one of ST favorites.Quote:
Originally Posted by DPG21920
Not saying much coming from two of the worst franchises in the league. Teams like that don't have any idea what they are doing anyway. Organizations like that don't want to spend time on putting some type of system in place for their players. To me, especially the Knicks, I feel they don't want to coach they're players. They'd rather have head cases like jr smith :lol and prima Donna Carmelo anthony. I mean just look at Tyson chandler. He's had really bad seasons with them. The guy is better than what's he's done in NYC. The Knicks are just looking for flashy players to go along with smith and melo to... Wooo the crowd. That's why they're all up on that other jr kid. And the cavs..they didn't even know which way was up before this offseason. So my point is, Clark has all the attributes of a player the spurs need to backup Kawhi. Given the right team, the guy could thrive. Who better than the spurs to do so.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mugen
What were the Cavs thinking giving him $4m? Classic case of getting overpaid because he played in a big market.
Anyways, I don't really see what he gives us that we don't get from Bonner. We're already at the 15 man limit with Baynes, sure we could cut Daye or Ayres for him but I don't see much point of paying their salary just to bring in someone else who won't play.
The Cavs paid that much to get that second, non-guaranteed season. They did a similar thing with Scott Hopson late in the year.Quote:
Originally Posted by Richie
Clark's not like Bonner at all. He's pretty much a more-athletic but worse-shooting Daye.
Not realy,but hey, gotta be with the cool kids.Quote:
Originally Posted by elemento
He's a stretch 4 and not a very good shooting one at that, which is probably why he is out of the NBA.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chinook
That's pretty much what I said. He's like Austin Daye. But Daye is a good shooter who isn't really athletic whereas Clark is a good athlete but can't shoot. Both are struggling to hold onto roster spots because they lack what the other has.Quote:
Originally Posted by Richie
The LA season was pretty good. He might just be one of those guys floating around, available, who might just be a good buy if put in the right town. I liked his LA stint and I'd keep an open mind.
So those are the official fanboys? Even exstatic? I am disappointed.Quote:
Originally Posted by jeebus
Hard decision : DJ Qualls or Mr. Ronaldinho smile ?
The love for scrubs will never end when it comes to SA fans :lol
Not after Danny Green went from scrub to starter. Now, every scrub is going to be the next Green in someone's eyes.Quote:
Originally Posted by elemento
To be fair the 3&D position is one of the few 'scrub to starter' roles that is out there, as is the 'volume scorer' role like Patty Mills if you give him a green light. It's much rarer with big men.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chinook
I think the hustle/rim-protecting big role is another pretty common rags-to-riches NBA story.Quote:
Originally Posted by Richie
I understand it, but Danny's case is so different. He had a very solid college career but he never had a proper chance in Cleveland as a mid to late 2nd round pick. He spent only 1 year in Cleveland barely playing and he was 22 y/o.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chinook
Daye was almost a lottery pick, he had 4 years to show something in Detroit and failed. He is 26 y/o now. I won't even mention Ayres because I don't see how a guy that can't catch a ball succeed in a system that heavily relies on ball-movement.
A better comparison to Danny is Khris Middleton and that's recent. 1 year in DET barely playing . Used as a filler in the Jennings trade and now he is coming off a very nice season putting 12ppg/4rpg @ 54%TS and 41% from deep.
Anyway, I feel that sometimes we(Spurs fans), discuss end of the bench players way too much. :lol
Probably, but I think teams are much less likely to give up on big men because naturally there are fewer skilled, taller players and they are often committed as big men are normally over drafted.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chinook
That happens when your team's starters have pretty much been locked in place since the Jurassic Era.Quote:
Originally Posted by elemento
The defense of Daye supporters, Green was 25 when he got his break. Daye also didn't really get enough minutes to show his stuff in SA, since no one really got injured.
However, people have no idea how awesome Green was in 2011-2012. Definitely his best statistical regular season so far. Danny straight-up beasted his way to get more minutes. They weren't handed to him.
I like Middleton. I think he's going to rot in Milwaukee, though. I hear talk they want to play him at the two. Ugh. His value looks to be too high for what he actually brings, so he'll probably end up re-signing there next summer and being traded eventually as the next Dudley. Ironic that they got the old Dudley to mentor him.
Asking for some intellectual honesty does not make you a fanboy. Exstatic's defense of Ayers, along with Project Spurs piece that had a comparison of Ayers', Baynes', and Splitter's stats have been pretty fair and level explanations of why Ayers keeps his job, thus far. Despite as bad as he looks sometimes, he still isn't as bad as his reputation, or much worse than some of these guys ST would have us replace him with.
Similarly, when Daye bounces to three teams in five years, the ST conventional wisdom is that: "He isn't even good enough to play for Toronto, no one wants him, useless..."
When a thread about Clark pops up, people defend the fact that he's been with FIVE teams in the same amount of time as Daye. Same draft class. And, immediately, it's said: "Those were shitty teams that just didn't know how to realize his talents."
He renegged on his contract to play for his Chinese team citing "family reasons". Maybe. But, also maybe a red flag. He was sent down for half a season to the D-league his rookie year. Daye was not. He was criticized for stamina one season, not being able to finish out a season with the same gusto as he started it with, and he can't shoot.
He may end up doing well here, or somewhere, but he's got at least as many red flags as a bust as anyone else, including Daye. He seems like a head case/lazy person at worst and a low BBIQ guy at best.
To be fair, Daye often seems like a 16 year old trapped in a 25 year old's body, too. I think he's a bit of a head case from a maturity standpoint.
But, point being, if you swap Clark for Daye, you'll probably be disappointed and cost us a year of player development and get very little upside for it all while costing us at least a million dollars more.
This is the sort of specious stuff that should get refuted, but then you get called a fanboy just for being a reasonable person.Quote:
Originally Posted by elemento
If you subtract 2009 from 2013, you do indeed get 4. That would be the only way in which you could claim he "had 4 years in Detroit to prove himself". He was drafted in 2009. He therefore didn't play until close to November 1, 2009. Maybe October 30th? Just to keep the numbers simple we'll say two months of 2009 as a rookie behind Prince. Then, he was traded January 30th, 2013. That's 1 month in January. So, you equate two months as a rookie in 2009 and one month in 2013 as TWO YEARS of your "He had four years in Detroit to prove himself." Pretty much the definition of specious.
Add to that, one of those "full" years was a lock-out year, and it diminishes your "4 years" even further.
Despite the fact that he did NOT play there for four years...closer to two...he actually had some flashes of brilliance, which is exactly why he wasn't sent down to the D-league like Clark. They traded him, but that team was a shambles with coaching problems and player mutinies, Daye being one of several players that refused to play one game or some such rebellion. Douche move, IMHO, but he shot lights out sometimes during that stint. He had a fan following that was sad to see him go. His failure to impress existed, but was not universal, and may have not been entirely skill, but partially, attitude-related.
I really like him.
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/show...ght=earl+clark
I like him over Daye and Ayres as most have noted
LCC, elemento means four seasons. Daye was in Detroit for 09-10, 10-11, 11-12 and a good part of 12-13. There's nothing disingenuous about that.
Plus, if you disregard 09 and 13, you still get three full years, not two.
Sign him up.
Yes I agree. I hope they sign someone with the MLE left. I want Baynes back too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Duncan2177
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chinook
I can't go by what I think he means. He said four years, and yes you're right it was three, not two, but three still isn't four. That's a huge error, a year, when you're talking about a base number of three or four. Even if you go by seasons, you agree it was not four, and one of the "full seasons" was a lockout year, so any way you slice it, it wasn't four full seasons OR years. It is in line with the continued exaggeration about his weight, as well...misquoting his weight as 200 (his rookie draft weight, I think), when I've heard 216-225 for going back many months from various sources. His weight is an issue, but there is no reason to continue reporting bullshit numbers to bolster a negative opinion of him, nor exaggerate how much opportunity he got in Detroit for same reason, nor pretend he was a complete failure in Detroit, which he wasn't, shooting .525 from 3 in Detroit before he was traded. .418, after the trade. He had one really bad year shooting of any significant sample size while in Detroit. I know you're aware of this, but people thinking Earl Clark would replace his skillset are huffing. Clark would be a better Ayers replacement, neither can shoot like Daye.
I agree that Daye's unceremonious exit from Detroit wasn't simply because he wasn't playing well. I think a lot of it had to due with Dumars' inability to accept that the Pistons needed to rebuild instead of reloading by overpaying vets. That led to him keeping Prince and signing players like Villanueva instead of giving Daye consistent minutes. It also led to him trading Daye in order to get back a win-now PG in Calderon rather than developing Knight (whom he traded for Jennings the following off-season). Especially in his first couple years with Detroit, Daye showed a lot of good things. On a different team, he may well have developed into a key rotation player instead of just being filler.Quote:
Originally Posted by littlecoyotecoin
However, I think you're barking up the wrong tree when critiquing Elemento. Daye was part of the Pistons' organization from June 25, 2009 to January 30, 2013. That's more than 43 months. I think it's perfectly fair to round that up to four years. Also, I can understand that the lockout might have affected him, but I don't think that's a legitimate excuse. Green made his mark in the lockout year (still his best statistical season). Leonard became a starter that year despite not having much of an off-season program. Splitter was also in his second season, and he became a rotation player. That was the year Lin and Pekovic broke out. Ryan Anderson won MIP. A lot of players took advantage of the short season, and Daye didn't.
I do think he can be a decent role-player so long as he is legitimately buying into the team (not just acting like it in front of the cameras). He needs to get his shot to be more consistent to do that, since he isn't really going to get many touches. I do think the Spurs believe in his potential, which is why they have kept him around. But they also re-signed Bonner (which was not a given if you remember), so I'm not sure they have complete faith in Austin being able to lock down the stretch-four role.
As far as Clark goes, I was one of the people who wanted him late last season. He has a pretty good skill-set, and he's a combo-forward in a good way, whereas Daye is a tweener. I can understand you preferring Daye, but there are perfectly good reasons to choose Clark. Not the least of those is the fact that it would allow the Spurs to package Daye with Ayres/Beli to make a run at a higher-impact player if they so choose.
Chinook w the goods
Good stuff. Again, you may think it's splitting hairs, but it's their argument, not mine. If they're going to use that as a a primary source of criticism, it should be accurate. And, five months is still a significant error, especially when those five months encompass 4 months of an actual season...meaning 3 1/3 seasons...one of those 3 1/3...even if OTHERS may have experienced success in OTHER situations...was a lockout season...many months were lost to the lockout, and because someone else was successful in that timeframe doesn't give Daye back that uninterrupted time in Detroit. Good on the other guys, but he was still in Russia, I think, not Detroit. Simply saying four years over and over again don't make it right.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chinook
I do appreciate the additional details about Detroit. I am more familiar with articles I've read about the coaching issues.
I remeber Clark playing well for LA, other than that I don't have much of an opinion about him. He appears to bring some athleticism which would be welcome, but we already have several bigs that can't shoot, assuming Baynes returns. Ayres, Baynes, Splitter, and Duncan are all lacking in that area, if Daye is replaced, I think the Frye speculation was more appropriate, even though we weren't going to land him, probably.
Can you provide a link? I searched there but couldn't find it. Either they realized how off-based they were and deleted it or it's buried there somewhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by littlecoyotecoin
They probably realized how off-base they were.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpurPadre
http://projectspurs.com/2014-article...-an-ayres.htmlQuote:
Originally Posted by SpurPadre
Interesting read, but it seems like the sample size for Ayers is too small to support their contention IMHO.Quote:
Originally Posted by littlecoyotecoin
Thanks for the link. Still doesn't win me over seeing as how I believe the use of per 36 to be very flawed for end of bench players.Quote:
Originally Posted by littlecoyotecoin
No problem. I am not trying to sell Ayers. I'm not a fan, so I understand your doubts. But, I thought it was interesting in showing he didn't compare as negatively as those that don't care for him, myself included, might have guessed he would.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpurPadre
73 games was the sample size for Ayers while Baynes (53 games) and Bonner (61 game).Quote:
Originally Posted by xmas1997
He actually had the highest sample size.
As for the actual article It shows he has improved over Indiana and compares favorable with Bonner & Baynes.
He his advanced metrics were actually better, in some cases, much better than Baynes was (win share per 48 minutes, TS% and Net Rtg).
This guy sucks and his play is really deceiving. If you don't really pay attention to him, it seems like he's good; he can shoot, he's tall, he can defend. However, none of that is true. He can't actually defend at all either, never knows where he's supposed to be on offense or defense. I don't think he'd succeed in the Spurs' offense at all.
i think that anything Clark could do at Louisville he could do again, but better, with the spurs. just off the searchable youtube highlights, i'd say he can shoot and penetrate. maybe play some d.
i don't give a damn what he's done for any shitty team he's played for in his nba career.Quote:
Originally Posted by DrunkTXLabrat
This. Played well on his contract year and vanished all season long for the Cavs the following season. Had games where he started and had to be subbed out immediately. Neither did he do anything special in a Cavs team weak on the wings. If you want a shooting wing you already have Daye, who's almost a full year into the system.Quote:
Originally Posted by SanDiegoSpursFan
He was in a zone that night for sure.
rian Wojnarowski @WojYahooNBA
Free agent forward Earl Clark has agreed to a training camp deal with Memphis, league sources tell Yahoo Sports.
If we don't land him,someone eles would.... Maybe he can come off the bench behind kiwi
hmm, the Spurs brought in James Johnson for a workout last off-season and he ended up getting picked up by the Grizzles at the start of the season or during the season, can't remember when he was picked up by them exactly. He may have had a D-league stint first then got picked up? Anyway, bit of a coincidence that they don't mind taking the backup SFs the Spurs take a look at.
I recall during one of the games against the Spurs where he played well, posters were asking why the Spurs didn't sign him or take a look at him, but a lot of them didn't know/recall the Spurs had him in for workouts last off-season and passed for whatever reason. Looks like they've done the same with Clark.
James Johnson pretty much got away from the Spurs last year. He was exactly what the team needed in a 13th man.
Why do you think they passed on him? I liked what I saw on him in the games against the Spurs. It really can't be down to shooting only, can it? What are they looking for in a backup SF? What qualities and attributes are they looking for?Quote:
Originally Posted by Chinook
He wasn't in shape when they worked him out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chinook
Was he out of shape?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice009
Forgot all about that.
Seemed to round into shape pretty well.
That's what he told Spurs staff. Round is a shape.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
JJ supposedly has a stupid attitude. That'll keep you off the Spurs roster.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice009