|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
LakerSanity
Moderator
Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 33474
Location: Long Beach, California
|
 Posted: Tue Jun 23, 2009 3:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sky wrote: | | Mitch is the best NOW doesn't mean he was the best or even good THEN or had a method throughout. Yet that is the argument you, Wolf and Dennis are trying to make. Doesn't hold water. |
Any person is the summation of their past history. You can't separate Mitch from his past any more than he would like to. In those periods in which you or others claim that Mitch lacked "success," I see a man who was just patient. I see a man who took the time to measure what he had because he knew, unlike many fans, that a championship couldn't be built in a day. At first, he learned on the job, and then the Shaq trade happened and he had to re-define the Lakers' front office's methodology. This "re-definition" began in a new era so needed a new approach, one which was formulated in the season following Shaq's departure (2004-2005) and executed ever since (beginning in the summer of 2005).
There have definitely been distinct differences in his approaches since Shaq left this team and following that 2004-2005 season. I think, for you, those difference began with the Ariza trade as the mark of Mitch's new era (his new "two-way" mentality, so to speak). For me, it was much sooner and actually came at the formation of the Kwame trade. The Kwame move (which you brush off as a salary swap to avoid the Butler situation) was in fact a departure from the approaches during the Shaq years - Kwame was a player who had two-way potential and came at little risk. The same can be said for the drafting Bynum in 2005, the drafting of Turiaf in 2005, the trade for Mo Evans a year later in 2006 (a player who had just come off of Detroit's defense-oriented teams), the drafting of Farmar in 2006 (a Howland product) , and the drafting of Crittenton in 2007 (although a tri-fit, someone with definite two-way potential). These were all moves well ahead of the Ariza trade and all moves for players with two-way potential outside of the "strict" triangle skill sets.
The only difference in Mitch's approaches since 2005 are the successful outcomes, not the methodologies. The only real guaranteed large impact move he's ever made was the Gasol trade. The Ariza trade was financially motivated first and talent motivated second - it could have easily been nothing more than a salary dump if Ariza hadn't developed (very similar to the Vlad for Brown/Morrison trade). Every move outside the Gasol trade since 2005, whether ultimately successful or not, were all similarly weighed and calculated risks. Even the Gasol trade was a result of Mitch being smart in how he signed players (Kwame) and how he drafted (Crittenton and Marc Gasol). As a result of Mitch's approach, we've seen a slow and steady rise in the Lakers talent level all finally coming to a head 4 years later with a 2009 Lakers' NBA championship. This was a rise that was only temporarily derailed with the injuries of 2006-2007, but set right back on track well before the Ariza or Gasol trades with a healthy Laker squad in 2007-2008.
You say Mitch had no method? I disagree. Mitch's method was to take a step back, look at what this team had and could be (i.e. the 2004-2005 season), and then patiently build it once he had made his assessment. He slowly made calculated risks in seeking the balance you talk about, not just in the last two years, but since 2005. Since then, it's been the same guy and the same approach, just with better outcomes of late. If there was no Gasol trade and those "calculated risks" hadn't panned out (as they could have easily not had), we'd be complaining about the same old Mitch instead of praising him for being the "new" one. In any case, I think Wolf is dead on in his assessment.
_________________
LakersGround's Terms of Service
Twitter: @DeleteThisPost
Last edited by LakerSanity on Tue Jun 23, 2009 4:19 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
JerryMagicKobe
Moderator
Joined: 28 Jul 2005
Posts: 15100
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 23, 2009 4:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sky wrote: | Mitch does get credit now, as he should. This was his team.
Look JMK my only objection is when folks attempt to argue that because Kupchak is successful now he was just fine before. No he wasn't. He drafted signed and traded for gunner matadors en masse and failed as a result. |
Yeah - I know sky-boy, and believe me I wish he got 'em all right. But in retrospect nobody did better from 2000 to now and I think the guy who took the most crap should have his moment in the sun without having to endure his own personal black cloud raining on the parade. Plus, for those of us who believed in him from the day he traded Shaq, it is pretty resounding vindication, and we can't help but to toot the horn a little. Regardless, the future looks so damn bright for this team that I really don't care who gets credit for what. In fact, I find that I don't have a lot to add to the board now that the team doesn't need much defending.
This thread was just what I needed.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dreamshake
Franchise Player
Joined: 05 May 2006
Posts: 13711
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 23, 2009 4:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ok, so the Wizards just gave up their pick and some throw in's for Foye and Mike Miller. I don't know how strong it makes them (if healthy), but it seems like they wanna play. SA and Washington are all-in. What will the Rockets, Blazers and Celtics do?
This is gonna be an interesting summer. Teams are basically giving away dudes for $$...... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wolfpaclaker
Retired Number
Joined: 29 May 2002
Posts: 58336
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 23, 2009 5:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sky wrote: | Mitch does get credit now, as he should. This was his team.
Look JMK my only objection is when folks attempt to argue that because Kupchak is successful now he was just fine before. No he wasn't. He drafted signed and traded for gunner matadors en masse and failed as a result. |
Sky - thats not what I'm saying, really.
Mitch was not doing a good job, but my point as you accepted was that there were some other factors.
When you talk about bad draft picks and signings, well there are always some. Sasha may be Trasha, Vlad a space cadet, etc. but there are always a few guys on all GM's resume who flat out didn't work.
Look Mitch definitely got better at drafting and you were spot on in your analysis regarding this. However, I think you've been a little unfair with him in other areas. I understand as Laker fans we are spoilt, but to re-build a champion in 7 years and potentially a brand new dynasty, thats not easy. When I said method to his madness I meant the waiting game. You've always hated Mitch's tendency for the homerun and waiting for a great deal. Well if he hadn't, if he made the moves that made more immediate sense, the Lakers would have Jermaine O'Neal on 1 leg, no championship while Bynum and Lamar in other jerseys. Oh, and no Pau either, most likely.
So my point is just that sure you are correct Mitch was not this good back then and your criticisms particularly draft wise were accurate. But his method or his philosiphy on waiting for the right deal, well I have to say you need to change your stance on that one. He's proven smarter than all of us. Some of us would have dealt Bynum and Lamar. Others Kobe. Others fired Jackson. You name the dramatic, we would have done it. It is for that reason, I applaud Mitch for taking his patient, waiting strategy. It works ... he is the actual GM and us armchair GM's for a reason. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BornAndBredLakersFan
Starting Rotation
Joined: 11 Mar 2009
Posts: 344
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 23, 2009 5:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
2 things all title teams have; 1) Luck 2) Skill. You better believe we had both these things, which is why we are the effin champs, baby!
_________________
"These young guys are playing checkers. I'm out there playing chess." -- Kobe Bryant |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sky
Star Player
Joined: 15 Apr 2001
Posts: 9830
Location: Up
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 23, 2009 5:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
JMK - Toot the horn all you want he deserves it, bask in the afterglow of a championship that Kupchak built. Just don't claim that because he's successful now he never sucked. He did. That's all I'm asking here. He sucked, he learned, he changed, he succeeded. All four are true.
| LakerSanity wrote: | | The only difference in Mitch's approaches since 2005 are the successful outcomes, not the methodologies. |
The valuation shifted Sanity. Which one doesn't belong? Kareem Rush, Brian Cook, Vlade Radmanovic, Sasha Vujacic, Trevor Ariza. Except for Ariza all one trick pony gunner matadors. Then Ariza. Defense-first, speed, athleticism and not a shooter. Sea change in valuation. Everything his past acquisitions were not. Bad shooter. Long, quick defender. Great athlete. The polar opposite of what he acquired before. Acquired by dealing two of the gunner matador collection. Tectonic shift.
Last edited by Sky on Tue Jun 23, 2009 5:32 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sky
Star Player
Joined: 15 Apr 2001
Posts: 9830
Location: Up
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 23, 2009 5:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Wolf - His patience worked, great point, agreed. His personnel philosophy did not, that HAD to change and once it did he succeeded. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wolfpaclaker
Retired Number
Joined: 29 May 2002
Posts: 58336
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 23, 2009 5:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sky wrote: | | Wolf - His patience worked, great point, agreed. His personnel philosophy did not, that HAD to change and once it did he succeeded. |
We are in agreement, sir.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jeremysnowIII
Sixth Man
Joined: 14 Dec 2007
Posts: 91
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 23, 2009 6:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hiya evryone!!!!
Ive been spending the passt fwe days readding this thraed to Gramps.
And Gramps says the part where sky and dennis is very valauble to laker fans becuase both writers are very smart.
And Gramps says that some ofn skys' ideas has sumhow gotten to Mr.Kupchack.
bye!!!! js3 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dennis_D
LG Contributor
Joined: 12 Apr 2001
Posts: 2017
Location: North Dallas
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 23, 2009 6:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jeremysnowIII wrote: | Hiya evryone!!!!
Ive been spending the passt fwe days readding this thraed to Gramps.
And Gramps says the part where sky and dennis is very valauble to laker fans becuase both writers are very smart.
And Gramps says that some ofn skys' ideas has sumhow gotten to Mr.Kupchack.
bye!!!! js3 |
Tell gramps that he is missed and we all wish him the very best. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sky
Star Player
Joined: 15 Apr 2001
Posts: 9830
Location: Up
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 23, 2009 7:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jeremy - Great to hear from your Gramps. Thanks for passing it along. I echo Dennis' thoughts on this, a rarity for us  Your gramps is definitely missed, a class act that added a lot here and is a good friend to us and to Mitch. Say hi to the original Jeremy for me. His friend Mitch eventually got it right and richly deserves all the praise he is now receiving. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LakerSanity
Moderator
Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 33474
Location: Long Beach, California
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 23, 2009 7:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
During the Shaq era, I forgive Mitch for his poor player acquisition decisions being that his hands were tied by Buss' fiscal restraints. Once the Shaq era ended, a change in player acquisition philosophy was needed. With 2004-2005 used as a transition period, IMO, beginning with 2005 Mitch proved himself to be more than up to the task.
Mitch made two objective mistakes from my perspective (i.e. moves I had a problem with at the time they were made) - 1) Aaron McKie (even if that ended up helping with Gasol later) and 2) not upgrading the PG position in the summer of 2006 (Shammon Williams, are you kidding?... and a rookie in Farmar was never going to be enough either). As for the other moves, I had no problem with the Butler-Kwame trade as I think it was a good calculated risk (he still had potential as a two-way PF and we knew we weren't going to keep Butler anyway) and we signed Kwame to a reasonable contract (as validated by his use in the Gasol trade). I also have no problem with the Vlad signing being that a) that was Vlad's market value at the time as he had come off a great playoff performance with the Clippers, b) we desperately needed a shooter at the time, and c) we ended up trading away a redundant talent in Cook later (which was really my huge complaint at the time being that Vlad was simply an upgraded and more versatile version of Cook... I think Mitch recognized that and did his best to remedy the situation). However, every other move he made was a solid, if not excellent one. The Evans trade was a steal as was the Ariza trade. The Gasol trade was a bank robbery. Finally, the Vlad for Brown/Morrison trade was some magic wandage.
As for the draft, I have few problems with Mitch as a draft guru. Kareem Rush and Pinnock were the only picks I disagreed with at the time. Everyone else (Cook and Vujacic included) I was cool with. I was especially okay with Luke (2004), Bynum (2005), Turiaf (2005), Farmar (2006), Crittenton (2007), and Gasol (2007). I didn't care much either way about Douthit, Wafer, and Crawford.
I think Mitch's mistake during the Shaq era was that he was doing his best to not make a mistake and add more tension to an already tense situation.... when, as a GM, he should have been more active and imaginative, i.e. he should have tried to take the job by the reigns from the start. Once Shaq left, like a player who has to shoot with the shot clock winding down, the pressure was off and he was free to go for it. He took 2004-2005 to really figure things out and from 2005 on he became the GM he is today.
_________________
LakersGround's Terms of Service
Twitter: @DeleteThisPost |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sky
Star Player
Joined: 15 Apr 2001
Posts: 9830
Location: Up
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 23, 2009 8:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sanity - Solid points, the championship weight of the Shaq era and his first years as GM made it difficult for Mitch to take bold steps. I think part of it also was that he was looking to build a trust with Jackson, which led to all the tri fit picks.
From the outside it appears Kupchak was drafting to try to provide what he thought Phil wanted in the near term. As a result the picks come from the question - how do we best optimize what we have? As opposed to both of them sitting down and asking what skillsets does this roster lack?
The triangle focus caused Mitch to stray away from balance since tri fit focuses on floor skills and offense, it excludes the physical - which all led to speed, athleticism and defense not being valued.
I had huge problems with the draft obviously. I was absolutely livid when they picked Cook over Barbosa. A primordial scream of agony followed by assorted colorful metaphors. I was on a chat with Mike and some others, after the pick buddy of mine watching with me typed in Sky has just gone postal he'll be in jail by sunset.
Also hated the Sasha pick, my buddy in Europe forewarned me and his scouting report was dead on. I wanted Varejao, again seeking defense and balance. Fortunately Turiaf got through the surgery and filled that role well.
Mitch showed signs he knew the roster was out of balance, but it was difficult to act on. For example, Banks is in the original Boston deal, but then Kupchak loses him and doesn't try to get that skillset back. For years. They also paid a price for buying into the triangle doesn't need a 1 talk. So you ignore the position and end up with Tierre, Chucky and Smush.
That's part of balance too. Can't just focus on four positions and ignore the fifth. From 2005 on different questions were asked in the draft and balance began to take shape. To Dennis' point the Gasol trade was transformative, to mine the Ariza trade and to a smaller extent the Radmanovic trade brought the final balance the roster lacked and needed. Then to Kupchak's final point on balance, bringing Fisher back calibrated the youth-leadership axis. Now they were ready. Final step was to have their heart broken to develop the sense of collective purpose that always drives a championship season. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DancingBarry
Editor-in-Chief
Joined: 07 Sep 2001
Posts: 40198
Location: O.C.
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 24, 2009 12:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sky wrote: | I was on a chat with Mike and some others, after the pick buddy of mine watching with me typed in Sky has just gone postal he'll be in jail by sunset.
|
Ah memories.  I recall that event very clearly. Somehow, Mitch ending up flipping that mistake into Ariza.
Last year, I borrowed a character from Michael Chabon in describing Mitch as "The Escapist". His best skill seems to be how well he can get out of a bad situation.
- Turning a useless Greg Foster into a much needed Lindsey Hunter (when we had PG health issues).
- Turning Hunter into a good draft pick.
- Blowing that pick. but turning Kareem Rush into two second round picks, great recovery to get something for Rush at that point in his career (one of those turned into Turiaf, if I recall).
- Sending a BYC Cook (and a second rounder he turned into Evans) out for Ariza. Amazing.
- Recovering from the Kwame trade (not to mention making McKie finally useful) by turning it into Gasol. The Wand with the Prestige.
- This season, getting out from Vlad's deal for $$ savings (vital with our current situation) and a much needed role player in Brown.
He's slippery, that Mitch. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big Game James
Star Player
Joined: 14 Jan 2003
Posts: 4004
Location: The official trout slapper of LG.net
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 12:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Awesome post! Although I don't completely agree with the lavish praise heaped upon Mitch, I have definitely changed my idea of him.
Let's not forget the bad contracts that were handed out by Mitch (Vlad, Kwame, Sasha, Walton). Even though I realize Mitch turned some of those into something good, the point is, he had to dig himself out of the hole he made. We currently have $15.1 million locked up in horrible contracts (Walton, Sasha & Morrison).
That $15.1 million would sure come in handy right now while we attempt to resign Lamar & Ariza...
_________________
Don't make me give you a trout slap!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bigballer8
Star Player
Joined: 05 Feb 2008
Posts: 1323
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 6:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Wow this post really put into perspective of what an amazing job Mitch Kuptchak has done. Even though our rebuilding years we saw disapointment with the talent around Kobe. Namely Kwame Brown, Brian Cook, Smush Parker, and Chuck Atkins. We really made a turn around year in 2008. It really started when we got really lucky dumping Kwame for Gasol. That was like a present from Jerry West for Laker Fans. You guys should really thank Memphis for accepting a bogus trade like we did. We robbed them of their best player for a scrub like Kwame whose now playing for Detroit pistons. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LakerLanny
Retired Number
Joined: 24 Oct 2001
Posts: 47580
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 27, 2009 9:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Big Game James wrote: | Awesome post! Although I don't completely agree with the lavish praise heaped upon Mitch, I have definitely changed my idea of him.
Let's not forget the bad contracts that were handed out by Mitch (Vlad, Kwame, Sasha, Walton). Even though I realize Mitch turned some of those into something good, the point is, he had to dig himself out of the hole he made. We currently have $15.1 million locked up in horrible contracts (Walton, Sasha & Morrison).
That $15.1 million would sure come in handy right now while we attempt to resign Lamar & Ariza... |
Good post. I hate those contracts also, but it can be said we have the benefit of hindsight.
My real problem with the Walton/Vujacic deals wasn't even so much signing them, but the amounts and years were bloated and out of the market. You don't want to hardball your franchise player, but there is nothing wrong with paying marginal talents marginal money.
Both Walton and Vujacic were overpaid probably by double per year what the market called for. Walton somehow got 2 or 3 more years than the market would have dictated also.
But all is forgiven with the Pau deal and the steal of Trevor Ariza. Nice job getting DFish back too.
No GM is perfect and I have been all over Mitch in the past, but he can truly say the 2009 title was his doing (with a little help from Jerry West for the brilliant Vlade for Kobe deal and likely some role in the Pau deal)
_________________
Love, Laker Lanny |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
angrypuppy
Retired Number
Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 32752
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 28, 2009 8:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| DancingBarry wrote: | | Sky wrote: | I was on a chat with Mike and some others, after the pick buddy of mine watching with me typed in Sky has just gone postal he'll be in jail by sunset.
|
Ah memories. I recall that event very clearly. Somehow, Mitch ending up flipping that mistake into Ariza.
Last year, I borrowed a character from Michael Chabon in describing Mitch as "The Escapist". His best skill seems to be how well he can get out of a bad situation.
- Turning a useless Greg Foster into a much needed Lindsey Hunter (when we had PG health issues).
- Turning Hunter into a good draft pick.
- Blowing that pick. but turning Kareem Rush into two second round picks, great recovery to get something for Rush at that point in his career (one of those turned into Turiaf, if I recall).
- Sending a BYC Cook (and a second rounder he turned into Evans) out for Ariza. Amazing.
- Recovering from the Kwame trade (not to mention making McKie finally useful) by turning it into Gasol. The Wand with the Prestige.
- This season, getting out from Vlad's deal for $$ savings (vital with our current situation) and a much needed role player in Brown.
He's slippery, that Mitch. |
He has seemingly performed well under the constraints imposed by the Buss family. I think all GMs have to answer to ownership, but what makes Mitch's job tough is the issue of being the incumbent during generational transition. We've already scene flashes of discord, perhaps in both the draft and the handling of Andrew Bynum. It isn't always clear what Mitch's role is, and we can only infer his philosophy. Some of the praise being heaped Mitch's way may actually be the result of Jimmy Buss, and vice versa... perhaps some of the bone headed moves were from Jimmy as well. There was a sea change Sky, but was that Mitch? Was it Jimmy suddenly raising his voice? Or was it Jimmy, Jerry or even Phil telling Mitch that they no longer wanted a non-athletic, apathetic marshmallow backing up the four spot?
I used to criticize Mitch, and praised him liberally as well. But I really don't see footprints, which is probably by Laker front office design. We really don't know Mitch's role, which I suspect is far more facilitative rather than authoritative. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dennis_D
LG Contributor
Joined: 12 Apr 2001
Posts: 2017
Location: North Dallas
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 28, 2009 12:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| angrypuppy wrote: | He has seemingly performed well under the constraints imposed by the Buss family. I think all GMs have to answer to ownership, but what makes Mitch's job tough is the issue of being the incumbent during generational transition. We've already scene flashes of discord, perhaps in both the draft and the handling of Andrew Bynum. It isn't always clear what Mitch's role is, and we can only infer his philosophy. Some of the praise being heaped Mitch's way may actually be the result of Jimmy Buss, and vice versa... perhaps some of the bone headed moves were from Jimmy as well. There was a sea change Sky, but was that Mitch? Was it Jimmy suddenly raising his voice? Or was it Jimmy, Jerry or even Phil telling Mitch that they no longer wanted a non-athletic, apathetic marshmallow backing up the four spot?
I used to criticize Mitch, and praised him liberally as well. But I really don't see footprints, which is probably by Laker front office design. We really don't know Mitch's role, which I suspect is far more facilitative rather than authoritative. |
My theory is that the Laker scouting organization didn't need to be very good under West because he had such a great eye for talent. However, when scouting got to be bigger than one person could handle (because of high school kids and internationals), the Lakers drafting went down the tubes. So the first few years after Mitch took over, he had no trust in the Lakers scouting organization and had to rebuild it. He made Ronnie Lester an assistant to the GM in 2001 and may be all the Lakers' drafting success is due to the work Lester has done. There is no way of knowing. From the occasional comments I have seen about how the Lakers make decisions, there are lots of people who have a voice. Mitch doesn't have to be the smartest one of those, he just has to be able to get the group to make the smartest decision. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
