Free Agency Primer: The Case Against Mason Plumlee
Why the Clippers shouldn't bring the veteran center back.
After delving into the cases for and against Russell Westbrook returning to the LA Clippers this offseason in free agency, it’s time to look at those same cases as they pertain to center Mason Plumlee.
Plumlee arrived from the Charlotte Hornets at the trade deadline in exchange for veteran guard Reggie Jackson and a 2028 second-round pick. That pick will be coming directly from the Clippers and features no protections. The Clippers also sent $1 million in cash to the Hornets.
The reason the Clippers needed to trade for Plumlee in the first place was that they had decided to not bring in a legitimate backup center during last offseason, opting instead to roll with their “long lineup,” as Clippers’ president of basketball operations Lawrence Frank refers to them.
Unfortunately, the Clippers ran into issues almost immediately.
Those “long lineup” groups weren’t as productive as they had hoped early on, mainly due to Kawhi Leonard having to miss about three weeks of action after initially beginning the season by coming off the bench, and then another two weeks after rolling his ankle just three games into his mid-November return.
But when Leonard was able to be on the floor alongside Paul George, it did yield positive results in lineups that did not feature a center.
This isn’t being used as a way to highlight a negative for Plumlee, but rather to illustrate just how inconsequential the backup center position can prove to be for the Clippers considering their highest highs came from them embracing these “long lineups” with Leonard and George flanked by spacing and multi-faceted players.
Plumlee has his positives, which we will discuss in Thursday’s article, but there are some drawbacks to his return.
As things stand, the Clippers are charged with a $16.2 million cap hold because of Plumlee’s status as an unrestricted free agent. This doesn’t mean that’s the minimum or maximum that the Clippers can spend to retain him. The Clippers hold Plumlee’s ‘Bird Rights,’ and those allow the Clippers to re-sign Plumlee to any contract despite the Clippers being an over-the-cap team.
But all of this comes down to how much the Clippers are (a) willing to pay Plumlee in order to retain him and (b) what Plumlee’s exact role would be. Paying a backup center in excess of $10 million per season doesn’t sound too bad on the surface, but starter Ivica Zubac is slated to make $22.7 million over the next two seasons, starting this season at $10.9 million.
Is it really prudent to pay a backup center equal to or more than your starter? Especially when factoring in how good your team plays without a center on the floor, so long as your two stars are healthy?
The sample size with Plumlee alongside Leonard and George was small. They only logged 73 minutes together, and the Clippers were outscored by 17 points during that time.
After Plumlee arrived, Zubac went down to 26.0 minutes per game. Part of that was in an attempt to keep the big man healthy for the postseason. In the postseason, Zubac averaged 29.6 minutes over the first two games of the series before dropping to 23.5 over the final three. Those final three contests saw the team without the services of Leonard.
Beyond potentially taking minutes away from Zubac, as well as the Clippers’ proclivity to play without a center, Plumlee doesn’t grade out as a great rim deterrent, according to Basketball Index.
While he does contest a lot of shots around the rim, which should be pointed out is a huge positive in and of itself, Plumlee isn’t an adequate rim protector when it comes to blocked shots. This past season, Plumlee averaged just 0.8 blocks per 36 minutes, the lowest mark of his entire career.
This can be viewed as nitpicky, and it probably is since all the other interior defense grades are fantastic, but having a backup center that doesn’t fit the mold of a floor-spacer or a true rim protector is a bit of a tough pill to swallow. Add in the contract he could command, and it does make you wonder if Plumlee should return.
To be clear: this does not mean that Plumlee is a bad player or a bad fit. More so that the Clippers have always been productive playing a certain way, and Plumlee, despite the positives he can bring, might impede that should he have to get consistent rotation minutes.
Should the Clippers opt to let Plumlee walk, they would find themselves $25.1 million over the second-apron and $37.2 million over the hard cap. They could do a slew of other moves — waiving Eric Gordon, who has a June 28th guarantee date, and offloading Marcus Morris Sr. — to get just under the hard cap and both aprons.
But that scenario would leave the Clippers with 11 players under contract, not including Russell Westbrook’s impending free agency. In other words: if the Clippers were to let Plumlee walk then it’d be for the pure purpose to save money on luxury tax, and while we might scoff at that notion, I promise you that front offices and ownership groups across the league don’t scoff at saving money.
The Clippers opting to “run it back” by not rolling with a backup center out of camp could be a play. It’s not one I’d bet on, but we have seen them do it before. It was made worse last offseason when they opted to not re-sign Isaiah Hartenstein to the taxpayer mid-level exception and instead threw it at guard John Wall which opened the door for Hartenstein to walk to the New York Knicks. Maybe the Clippers will learn from that mistake.
Truth be told, the case against Plumlee returning isn’t a strong one. It’s there within the margins, though.
We’ve seen the Clippers be great without a center, and why pay a backup big man substantial money that impacts your luxury tax payment heavily when you could conceivably pick one up yet again near the trade deadline if you feel so inclined?
The lack of spacing, lack of true rim protection, money likely required, and the tendency for the Clippers to play without a true center are the things working against Plumlee coming back.
Is that enough to stop a return? We shall see.
(Part 4 of this four-part series will be out on Thursday, outlining the case for the Clippers to bring Plumlee back.)