# Who should the clippers take if available?



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

Pick your top two choices for the clippers to pick, should they be available.


----------



## matador1238 (May 3, 2006)

I picked Young and Stuckey. I was going to pick Julian Wright instead of Stuckey but I had a chance to watch Stuckey played at Northridge. Jerry West, Mitch Kupchak, GM from Utah Jazz and Seattle were there. That guy was amazing. He made shots after shot with defense in his face. He scored 32 points that night. He can defend and play the point too. The only problem is that he plays in the Big Sky, not Pac 10.


----------



## PAIDNFULL23 (Jul 9, 2005)

I picked Nick Young and Julian Wright, but I'm 90% sure that Young is going to get picked by the Hornets at 13. So if Wright, Law, Crittenton and Thad Young are on the board at 14th I'll pick Wright because he will be the best player avaiable and to get a player who was projected as a top 5 pick at 14 is too much to past up.


----------



## MR. VADA (Jun 29, 2006)

nick young and corey brewer. but since brewer is unlikely unless we trade up, i would say law, if not him stuckey.


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

agree with pandifull


----------



## PAIDNFULL23 (Jul 9, 2005)

The more I read about Nick Young and what he has gone through, the more I want him as a Clipper. 

For the guy who said that Young has a bad attitude, this video sure doesn't show him as someone who would have a bad attitude, he actually comes off as a very humble person who has gone through alot. 

Watch this trailer for Second Chance Season, a documentary on Nick Young. 

http://youtube.com/watch?v=NPdapGCx71w

And this is an article about him and his struggles

http://www.charlotte.com/370/story/173649.html


----------



## nauticazn25 (Aug 27, 2006)

at first i was thinking we should pick critteon but now i think we should get law...just because it will probably take critteon 2 or 3 years to develop whereas law is ready to play...i hope we end up keeping #14 and some how get a higher pick as well...im thinking that since wallace will most likely leave Charlotte that they are interested in maggette, then if brewer or green is there at #8 we should get one of them


----------



## Showtime87 (Jun 27, 2005)

Law or Wright. Law is an NBA-ready talent who will help a lot more than Nick Young would. Wright is also somebody who could step in right away and provide depth and production off the bench. I just hope we don't end up with somebody like Spencer Hawes....UGH.


----------



## matador1238 (May 3, 2006)

Just pick Julian Wright or Stuckey.


----------



## Starbury03 (Aug 12, 2003)

The clippers should trade for nick Young by using there second round pcik and rights to Diaz and Sofo, this is the guy they need. Anything else wont really help this team that much.


----------



## clips_r_teh_wieners (Nov 4, 2005)

i have to say i am just completely baffled by some of the choices on here. 

first of all, wat's the deal with julian wright? hasnt this guy been a top 10 prospect since the beginning of the year? its realistic for the clips to just assume he's off the board by the 14th pick. i seriously dont see why so many of u guys think julian wright will fall to the clips. we might as well shoot for greg oden

and second of all, did i miss the news that the clips have somehow resolved the huge problem that is the PG situation? why would we not target point guards then? it seems to me the only prospect that can be selected over a PG is nick young, only because he would be the ideal fit in dunleavy's system. but it appears he'll most likely be off the board early as well. 

other than that, fulfilling our need of ANY PG should be the clips #1 priority at this point, cuz a healthy lineup of hart and ewing for the majority of the year would be disastrous. in that case, crittenton and acie law are no-brainers for me.


----------



## Quasi-Quasar (Jul 18, 2002)

clips_r_teh_wieners said:


> first of all, wat's the deal with julian wright? hasnt this guy been a top 10 prospect since the beginning of the year? its realistic for the clips to just assume he's off the board by the 14th pick. i seriously dont see why so many of u guys think julian wright will fall to the clips. we might as well shoot for greg oden


Julian Wright got way too much hype after the Florida game, and people, including myself, thought his shooting and other deficiencies were showing improvement early on. And then he crapped the bed. He's not a SF right now, and I'm not sure that his footwork will even be clean enough to be an effective SF on an every night basis on O (he makes predictable, sloppy and wide movements, many of which should actually be called for traveling). In their season ender, Wright was statistically played to a standstill by Luc Richard Mbah a Moute, but on the floor, he was just outplayed by footwork and matching size. Luc matched his legnth, and even with bad tendinitis in his knees, his footwork plainly controlled Wright's offensive game. He rattled down two shots that ordinarily don't fall too often for him, but staying in front of him, not buying double moves, and forcing him to pick up his dribble took him out of his grove. Brandon Rush and Darnell Jackson were more interesting as far as filling an NBA role and contributing for the Clippers (Rush was clearly good, but Jackson, like Chris Richards is one of those bruiser PFs that would be a nice change-up off the bench). I'm also big on Darrell Arthur, but he didn't play up to his ability in the UCLA game.

Right now, my intentional insult of a comparison for Wright is an emaciated, more athletic, Anthony Mason (always thought he was a PG).


Al Thornton, Wilson Chandler, Josh McRoberts, Nick Fazekas and Carl Landry are more interesting to me as far as PF/SF tweeners for the Clippers' uses.


----------



## leidout (Jul 13, 2005)

clips_r_teh_wieners said:


> and second of all, did i miss the news that the clips have somehow resolved the huge problem that is the PG situation? why would we not target point guards then? it seems to me the only prospect that can be selected over a PG is nick young, only because he would be the ideal fit in dunleavy's system. but it appears he'll most likely be off the board early as well.


Because the PGs who will be available at 14 are simply not good enough to pick that high. The consensus is that in most drafts, these guys would be 25+ or 2nd round picks.

I think our best bet is to trade our pick to seattle for Ridnour, (they were trying to get the #11 from Atlanta to draft Stuckey), so i think that opens the door for the clips to trade for a better PG over the next 3 years than guys like Law/Critteon.


----------



## Showtime87 (Jun 27, 2005)

Starbury03 said:


> The clippers should trade for nick Young by using there second round pcik and rights to Diaz and Sofo, this is the guy they need. Anything else wont really help this team that much.


Why do they need another two guard? I'm not getting this logic.


----------



## Starbury03 (Aug 12, 2003)

Mobley is old and they want to trade Maggette making a huge need for a scorer and someone else who can develope into another star player next to Brand not just a solid player. IF they dont get another star the team will never have that much sucess. Livingston was suppose to be that other star and that is gone now.


----------



## leidout (Jul 13, 2005)

Starbury03 said:


> Mobley is old and they want to trade Maggette making a huge need for a scorer and someone else who can develope into another star player next to Brand not just a solid player. IF they dont get another star the team will never have that much sucess. Livingston was suppose to be that other star and that is gone now.


Agree 100%, with or without Maggette we need more scoring.


----------



## clips_r_teh_wieners (Nov 4, 2005)

leidout said:


> Because the PGs who will be available at 14 are simply not good enough to pick that high. The consensus is that in most drafts, these guys would be 25+ or 2nd round picks.
> 
> I think our best bet is to trade our pick to seattle for Ridnour, (they were trying to get the #11 from Atlanta to draft Stuckey), so i think that opens the door for the clips to trade for a better PG over the next 3 years than guys like Law/Critteon.


that doesnt make much sense considering crittenton and law were both considered to be mid-range picks anyways REGARDLESS of the position they play. maybe not law as much, but i wouldnt be surprised if crittenton is off the board before the clips can get to him.


----------



## leidout (Jul 13, 2005)

clips_r_teh_wieners said:


> that doesnt make much sense considering crittenton and law were both considered to be mid-range picks anyways REGARDLESS of the position they play. maybe not law as much, but i wouldnt be surprised if crittenton is off the board before the clips can get to him.


From what i've read, Law & Critteon both hinge on Atlanta picking one (simply because they don't want to choose Conley at 3). But I honestly don't watch much college basketball besides UCLA (woo!), so i've been basing that assumption mainly on draft sites. I do think it's safe to say that neither are top 10 talent tho in this draft.

Next year looks a lot better for PG's, that's why i think we're better off going for a semi-short term solution like Ridnour and maybe swinging a deal for a good pick next year.


----------

