Assuming that Kobe and Nash are 100% healthy for the year...
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  

How will the Lakers do if Kobe and Nash are 100% healthy and are able to play the season?
Championship
18%
 18%  [ 21 ]
Good playoff run (2nd round or Conference Finals)
25%
 25%  [ 29 ]
One and done playoffs
27%
 27%  [ 31 ]
Barely miss the playoffs
20%
 20%  [ 23 ]
Miss the playoffs by a lot
7%
 7%  [ 8 ]
Total Votes : 112

Author Message
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 6:01 am    Post subject:

[quote="Reflexx"]
ringfinger wrote:
I think the other problem with this type of question, is what does it mean to be healthy exactly?

Does that mean we have to assume Kobe/Nash won't be limited by age?

Do we have to pretend Kobe never tore his achilles? If 100% healthy, I'd still expect a significant decline for Kobe because of the achilles tear. So if I'm assuming he is healthy, I'm assuming he is as healthy as he can be for an achilles tear. Or, is that assuming he is not healthy?

I also struggle because I have no idea what post-achilles Kobe looks like. I'm not going to use the 6-game sample. I refuse to believe his falloff is that great and I chalk that up to getting back in to game shape more than representative of post-achilles Kobe.


By "if healthy" I mean just healthy. They are still as old as they are. They still are limited by whatever injuries they may have had in the past. It just means that they feel good enough to play without any pain limiting their performance.

I personally still think that both have a lot to give since they are players that are defined more by their elite skill than by athleticism. They are also not playing in a vacuum. Boozer and Lin are solid players that could make significant contributions. We also know that Lin has the skill to take over a game when he gets in the right rhythm. So it isn't exactly like these two HOFers are just surrounded by scrubs. We've got some solid role players.[/quote

Ok, that makes sense. Unfortunately, I think the post-achilles Kobe, even healthy, will be a distinctly different Kobe than we were used to seeing up until the 2012-2013 season. But that's based on the decline that every achilles tear victim suffers. Whether he breaks the trend of every single achilles tear sufferers remains to be seen. And Nash, well, he's just old and limited now.

This team still needs a solidified #2 option. We probably have the worst #2 option in the entire league and I've said in other threads that we'd probably be willing to trade whoever our #2 is for any non #1 on any other team. Remember, even when healthy, and surrounded by Pau/Howard and a Nash that played 50+ games, we had to fight (Kobe had to play 46 mins/game in April) just to get to 45 wins. That's a 10 seed based on last season's standings.

I don't disagree with you that we have some good role players. I think we do as well. What we are lacking though, is a core. There is no core. And by core, I mean, Wade/LBJ/Bosh or Durant/Westbrook/Ibaka, or Parker/Manu/Duncan. A core that you build around by complementing with role players that addresses remaining gaps and needs. A core needs at least 2 players to be competitive.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
appwrangler
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 16 Jul 2014
Posts: 103

PostPosted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 7:24 am    Post subject:

First off, great off-season topic OP. Way too long to the pre-season.

I'd say one and done. Kobe is definitely going to adjust his game and leverage his knowledge and competitiveness in a new way, but that's not going to be as good as the old way.

A healthy Nash will help us win a lot of games during the season, including a lot against top teams who won't care that much because it's not the playoffs. So that could help us pile up the 45-50 victories needed to squeak into the post season. But while he's a former AS and former MVP he's also a soon-to-be AARP so he's going to wear out over the long season, healthy or no. By late March he'll have no gas in the tank to help move us forward in the playoffs.

Best case, out in 6 in Round 1.

(Disclaimer: this is "Kobe and Nash healthy" not "Julius Randle takes over the NBA.")


Last edited by appwrangler on Wed Aug 06, 2014 7:26 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Reflexx
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 25 Jun 2005
Posts: 11163

PostPosted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 7:25 am    Post subject:

MickMgl wrote:
100% at their respective ages, and after the injuries they've suffered, is not 100% of what they were before. At 100% this season, it is still unlikely that they'd be able to be more than just above average for multiple consecutive games.

The problem is, when somebody speculates about these particular players being "100%", what's implied is that they'd be more than just "above average", but in fact, that they'd resemble the caliber of play that won them MVP trophies. That's what this team would need from them to contend for the playoffs, and I don't think either of them have that in them, even at their new standards of 100%, so I still think they miss by a wide margin.

If 100% means "MVP caliber", the team could be good, but that's just not going to happen. If 100% means "healthy enough to play all season", at least that has a chance of happening, but it won't be enough to make a difference with this team.


Since when has a team needed two players playing at an MVP level to make the playoffs and do decently?

I personally believe that while Kobe has a lot of mileage, he really isn't that old. It's not like he's some ancient guy. There are some things that mileage affects, but he's not exactly suffering that much from age yet. This is especially true since his game is skill based. The amount of athleticism his game requires isn't at a level that is beyond what he can do regularly. So why would he go from an elite level player to just above average? Will his skills go away?

As for Nash... during stretches just last year he was looking amazing. He just couldn't sustain it due to pain from his nerve issue in his back. His style of game fits with his current level of athleticism. It's not like his age makes him physically incapable of doing what he needs to do to play his game optimally. To play his game optimally he requires relatively very little athletic ability. He just needs to be free from pain.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
angrypuppy
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 32730

PostPosted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 7:28 am    Post subject:

If both Nash and Kobe are 100%, then I'm sure they'll be in trouble when they encounter the 100% Greg Oden and 100% Wade during the Finals.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 7:32 am    Post subject:

angrypuppy wrote:
If both Nash and Kobe are 100%, then I'm sure they'll be in trouble when they encounter the 100% Greg Oden and 100% Wade during the Finals.




FTW.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Reflexx
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 25 Jun 2005
Posts: 11163

PostPosted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 7:33 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
Reflexx wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
I think the other problem with this type of question, is what does it mean to be healthy exactly?

Does that mean we have to assume Kobe/Nash won't be limited by age?

Do we have to pretend Kobe never tore his achilles? If 100% healthy, I'd still expect a significant decline for Kobe because of the achilles tear. So if I'm assuming he is healthy, I'm assuming he is as healthy as he can be for an achilles tear. Or, is that assuming he is not healthy?

I also struggle because I have no idea what post-achilles Kobe looks like. I'm not going to use the 6-game sample. I refuse to believe his falloff is that great and I chalk that up to getting back in to game shape more than representative of post-achilles Kobe.


By "if healthy" I mean just healthy. They are still as old as they are. They still are limited by whatever injuries they may have had in the past. It just means that they feel good enough to play without any pain limiting their performance.

I personally still think that both have a lot to give since they are players that are defined more by their elite skill than by athleticism. They are also not playing in a vacuum. Boozer and Lin are solid players that could make significant contributions. We also know that Lin has the skill to take over a game when he gets in the right rhythm. So it isn't exactly like these two HOFers are just surrounded by scrubs. We've got some solid role players.


Ok, that makes sense. Unfortunately, I think the post-achilles Kobe, even healthy, will be a distinctly different Kobe than we were used to seeing up until the 2012-2013 season. But that's based on the decline that every achilles tear victim suffers. Whether he breaks the trend of every single achilles tear sufferers remains to be seen. And Nash, well, he's just old and limited now.

This team still needs a solidified #2 option. We probably have the worst #2 option in the entire league and I've said in other threads that we'd probably be willing to trade whoever our #2 is for any non #1 on any other team. Remember, even when healthy, and surrounded by Pau/Howard and a Nash that played 50+ games, we had to fight (Kobe had to play 46 mins/game in April) just to get to 45 wins. That's a 10 seed based on last season's standings.

I don't disagree with you that we have some good role players. I think we do as well. What we are lacking though, is a core. There is no core. And by core, I mean, Wade/LBJ/Bosh or Durant/Westbrook/Ibaka, or Parker/Manu/Duncan. A core that you build around by complementing with role players that addresses remaining gaps and needs. A core needs at least 2 players to be competitive.


I wouldn't say that we don't have a core. But we do have an aging one (that is at the same time "new" in the sense that they're not all that used to playing together) in Kobe and Nash.

A big key will likely be how Byron Scott is able to take what he has and make it work quickly as opposed to taking 2 or 3 years to develop.

I see us as better than Houston. Houston has Harden, Howard, and not much else. And I still don't believe that Harden is better than Kobe. The level of thinking is just too different. Howard is enough of a freak to still be a great 2nd option for any team. But he needs to get his head on straight and do what he does best instead of trying to be Hakeem. So I think their dysfunction combined with their lack of solid role players will hurt them. It doesn't matter that they're young.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 7:35 am    Post subject:

Reflexx wrote:
MickMgl wrote:
100% at their respective ages, and after the injuries they've suffered, is not 100% of what they were before. At 100% this season, it is still unlikely that they'd be able to be more than just above average for multiple consecutive games.

The problem is, when somebody speculates about these particular players being "100%", what's implied is that they'd be more than just "above average", but in fact, that they'd resemble the caliber of play that won them MVP trophies. That's what this team would need from them to contend for the playoffs, and I don't think either of them have that in them, even at their new standards of 100%, so I still think they miss by a wide margin.

If 100% means "MVP caliber", the team could be good, but that's just not going to happen. If 100% means "healthy enough to play all season", at least that has a chance of happening, but it won't be enough to make a difference with this team.


Since when has a team needed two players playing at an MVP level to make the playoffs and do decently?

I personally believe that while Kobe has a lot of mileage, he really isn't that old. It's not like he's some ancient guy. There are some things that mileage affects, but he's not exactly suffering that much from age yet. This is especially true since his game is skill based. The amount of athleticism his game requires isn't at a level that is beyond what he can do regularly. So why would he go from an elite level player to just above average? Will his skills go away?

As for Nash... during stretches just last year he was looking amazing. He just couldn't sustain it due to pain from his nerve issue in his back. His style of game fits with his current level of athleticism. It's not like his age makes him physically incapable of doing what he needs to do to play his game optimally. To play his game optimally he requires relatively very little athletic ability. He just needs to be free from pain.


Re: Kobe's mileage/age, don't forget he's played the equivalent of 3 full NBA seasons (220 playoff games) on top of 18 seasons in the NBA. That's a lot of wear and tear on his body. Dude has played through many injuries and that takes a toll too.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 7:45 am    Post subject:

Reflexx wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Reflexx wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
I think the other problem with this type of question, is what does it mean to be healthy exactly?

Does that mean we have to assume Kobe/Nash won't be limited by age?

Do we have to pretend Kobe never tore his achilles? If 100% healthy, I'd still expect a significant decline for Kobe because of the achilles tear. So if I'm assuming he is healthy, I'm assuming he is as healthy as he can be for an achilles tear. Or, is that assuming he is not healthy?

I also struggle because I have no idea what post-achilles Kobe looks like. I'm not going to use the 6-game sample. I refuse to believe his falloff is that great and I chalk that up to getting back in to game shape more than representative of post-achilles Kobe.


By "if healthy" I mean just healthy. They are still as old as they are. They still are limited by whatever injuries they may have had in the past. It just means that they feel good enough to play without any pain limiting their performance.

I personally still think that both have a lot to give since they are players that are defined more by their elite skill than by athleticism. They are also not playing in a vacuum. Boozer and Lin are solid players that could make significant contributions. We also know that Lin has the skill to take over a game when he gets in the right rhythm. So it isn't exactly like these two HOFers are just surrounded by scrubs. We've got some solid role players.


Ok, that makes sense. Unfortunately, I think the post-achilles Kobe, even healthy, will be a distinctly different Kobe than we were used to seeing up until the 2012-2013 season. But that's based on the decline that every achilles tear victim suffers. Whether he breaks the trend of every single achilles tear sufferers remains to be seen. And Nash, well, he's just old and limited now.

This team still needs a solidified #2 option. We probably have the worst #2 option in the entire league and I've said in other threads that we'd probably be willing to trade whoever our #2 is for any non #1 on any other team. Remember, even when healthy, and surrounded by Pau/Howard and a Nash that played 50+ games, we had to fight (Kobe had to play 46 mins/game in April) just to get to 45 wins. That's a 10 seed based on last season's standings.

I don't disagree with you that we have some good role players. I think we do as well. What we are lacking though, is a core. There is no core. And by core, I mean, Wade/LBJ/Bosh or Durant/Westbrook/Ibaka, or Parker/Manu/Duncan. A core that you build around by complementing with role players that addresses remaining gaps and needs. A core needs at least 2 players to be competitive.


I wouldn't say that we don't have a core. But we do have an aging one (that is at the same time "new" in the sense that they're not all that used to playing together) in Kobe and Nash.

A big key will likely be how Byron Scott is able to take what he has and make it work quickly as opposed to taking 2 or 3 years to develop.

I see us as better than Houston. Houston has Harden, Howard, and not much else. And I still don't believe that Harden is better than Kobe. The level of thinking is just too different. Howard is enough of a freak to still be a great 2nd option for any team. But he needs to get his head on straight and do what he does best instead of trying to be Hakeem. So I think their dysfunction combined with their lack of solid role players will hurt them. It doesn't matter that they're young.


Kobe and Nash is not a core. If you think that is a core, then we are not at all on the same page (or book or maybe even library) on the definition of a core.

Do you not understand the difference between Durant+Westbrook, Curry+Klay, Paul+Griffin and Kobe+Nash???

If the core of your team is Kobe and Nash in 2014 -- then your team sucks. Sorry, but true.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Krispy Kreme
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 30 Mar 2003
Posts: 12252

PostPosted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 8:40 am    Post subject:

Reflexx wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Reflexx wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
I think the other problem with this type of question, is what does it mean to be healthy exactly?

Does that mean we have to assume Kobe/Nash won't be limited by age?

Do we have to pretend Kobe never tore his achilles? If 100% healthy, I'd still expect a significant decline for Kobe because of the achilles tear. So if I'm assuming he is healthy, I'm assuming he is as healthy as he can be for an achilles tear. Or, is that assuming he is not healthy?

I also struggle because I have no idea what post-achilles Kobe looks like. I'm not going to use the 6-game sample. I refuse to believe his falloff is that great and I chalk that up to getting back in to game shape more than representative of post-achilles Kobe.


By "if healthy" I mean just healthy. They are still as old as they are. They still are limited by whatever injuries they may have had in the past. It just means that they feel good enough to play without any pain limiting their performance.

I personally still think that both have a lot to give since they are players that are defined more by their elite skill than by athleticism. They are also not playing in a vacuum. Boozer and Lin are solid players that could make significant contributions. We also know that Lin has the skill to take over a game when he gets in the right rhythm. So it isn't exactly like these two HOFers are just surrounded by scrubs. We've got some solid role players.


Ok, that makes sense. Unfortunately, I think the post-achilles Kobe, even healthy, will be a distinctly different Kobe than we were used to seeing up until the 2012-2013 season. But that's based on the decline that every achilles tear victim suffers. Whether he breaks the trend of every single achilles tear sufferers remains to be seen. And Nash, well, he's just old and limited now.

This team still needs a solidified #2 option. We probably have the worst #2 option in the entire league and I've said in other threads that we'd probably be willing to trade whoever our #2 is for any non #1 on any other team. Remember, even when healthy, and surrounded by Pau/Howard and a Nash that played 50+ games, we had to fight (Kobe had to play 46 mins/game in April) just to get to 45 wins. That's a 10 seed based on last season's standings.

I don't disagree with you that we have some good role players. I think we do as well. What we are lacking though, is a core. There is no core. And by core, I mean, Wade/LBJ/Bosh or Durant/Westbrook/Ibaka, or Parker/Manu/Duncan. A core that you build around by complementing with role players that addresses remaining gaps and needs. A core needs at least 2 players to be competitive.


I wouldn't say that we don't have a core. But we do have an aging one (that is at the same time "new" in the sense that they're not all that used to playing together) in Kobe and Nash.

A big key will likely be how Byron Scott is able to take what he has and make it work quickly as opposed to taking 2 or 3 years to develop.

I see us as better than Houston. Houston has Harden, Howard, and not much else. And I still don't believe that Harden is better than Kobe. The level of thinking is just too different. Howard is enough of a freak to still be a great 2nd option for any team. But he needs to get his head on straight and do what he does best instead of trying to be Hakeem. So I think their dysfunction combined with their lack of solid role players will hurt them. It doesn't matter that they're young.



Houston might not be as good as last year with the loss of parsons. But if Ariza has one of his hot seasons, they will be good. real good.


And Harden/Dwight is better than anything we have.
_________________
Dominating every day.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Reflexx
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 25 Jun 2005
Posts: 11163

PostPosted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 8:49 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
Reflexx wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Reflexx wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
I think the other problem with this type of question, is what does it mean to be healthy exactly?

Does that mean we have to assume Kobe/Nash won't be limited by age?

Do we have to pretend Kobe never tore his achilles? If 100% healthy, I'd still expect a significant decline for Kobe because of the achilles tear. So if I'm assuming he is healthy, I'm assuming he is as healthy as he can be for an achilles tear. Or, is that assuming he is not healthy?

I also struggle because I have no idea what post-achilles Kobe looks like. I'm not going to use the 6-game sample. I refuse to believe his falloff is that great and I chalk that up to getting back in to game shape more than representative of post-achilles Kobe.


By "if healthy" I mean just healthy. They are still as old as they are. They still are limited by whatever injuries they may have had in the past. It just means that they feel good enough to play without any pain limiting their performance.

I personally still think that both have a lot to give since they are players that are defined more by their elite skill than by athleticism. They are also not playing in a vacuum. Boozer and Lin are solid players that could make significant contributions. We also know that Lin has the skill to take over a game when he gets in the right rhythm. So it isn't exactly like these two HOFers are just surrounded by scrubs. We've got some solid role players.


Ok, that makes sense. Unfortunately, I think the post-achilles Kobe, even healthy, will be a distinctly different Kobe than we were used to seeing up until the 2012-2013 season. But that's based on the decline that every achilles tear victim suffers. Whether he breaks the trend of every single achilles tear sufferers remains to be seen. And Nash, well, he's just old and limited now.

This team still needs a solidified #2 option. We probably have the worst #2 option in the entire league and I've said in other threads that we'd probably be willing to trade whoever our #2 is for any non #1 on any other team. Remember, even when healthy, and surrounded by Pau/Howard and a Nash that played 50+ games, we had to fight (Kobe had to play 46 mins/game in April) just to get to 45 wins. That's a 10 seed based on last season's standings.

I don't disagree with you that we have some good role players. I think we do as well. What we are lacking though, is a core. There is no core. And by core, I mean, Wade/LBJ/Bosh or Durant/Westbrook/Ibaka, or Parker/Manu/Duncan. A core that you build around by complementing with role players that addresses remaining gaps and needs. A core needs at least 2 players to be competitive.


I wouldn't say that we don't have a core. But we do have an aging one (that is at the same time "new" in the sense that they're not all that used to playing together) in Kobe and Nash.

A big key will likely be how Byron Scott is able to take what he has and make it work quickly as opposed to taking 2 or 3 years to develop.

I see us as better than Houston. Houston has Harden, Howard, and not much else. And I still don't believe that Harden is better than Kobe. The level of thinking is just too different. Howard is enough of a freak to still be a great 2nd option for any team. But he needs to get his head on straight and do what he does best instead of trying to be Hakeem. So I think their dysfunction combined with their lack of solid role players will hurt them. It doesn't matter that they're young.


Kobe and Nash is not a core. If you think that is a core, then we are not at all on the same page (or book or maybe even library) on the definition of a core.

Do you not understand the difference between Durant+Westbrook, Curry+Klay, Paul+Griffin and Kobe+Nash???

If the core of your team is Kobe and Nash in 2014 -- then your team sucks. Sorry, but true.


Disagree.

I guess we'll see how the season plays out. I hope I'm right.

I would guess that you hope that I'm right too.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Reflexx
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 25 Jun 2005
Posts: 11163

PostPosted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 8:52 am    Post subject:

Krispy Kreme wrote:
Reflexx wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Reflexx wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
I think the other problem with this type of question, is what does it mean to be healthy exactly?

Does that mean we have to assume Kobe/Nash won't be limited by age?

Do we have to pretend Kobe never tore his achilles? If 100% healthy, I'd still expect a significant decline for Kobe because of the achilles tear. So if I'm assuming he is healthy, I'm assuming he is as healthy as he can be for an achilles tear. Or, is that assuming he is not healthy?

I also struggle because I have no idea what post-achilles Kobe looks like. I'm not going to use the 6-game sample. I refuse to believe his falloff is that great and I chalk that up to getting back in to game shape more than representative of post-achilles Kobe.


By "if healthy" I mean just healthy. They are still as old as they are. They still are limited by whatever injuries they may have had in the past. It just means that they feel good enough to play without any pain limiting their performance.

I personally still think that both have a lot to give since they are players that are defined more by their elite skill than by athleticism. They are also not playing in a vacuum. Boozer and Lin are solid players that could make significant contributions. We also know that Lin has the skill to take over a game when he gets in the right rhythm. So it isn't exactly like these two HOFers are just surrounded by scrubs. We've got some solid role players.


Ok, that makes sense. Unfortunately, I think the post-achilles Kobe, even healthy, will be a distinctly different Kobe than we were used to seeing up until the 2012-2013 season. But that's based on the decline that every achilles tear victim suffers. Whether he breaks the trend of every single achilles tear sufferers remains to be seen. And Nash, well, he's just old and limited now.

This team still needs a solidified #2 option. We probably have the worst #2 option in the entire league and I've said in other threads that we'd probably be willing to trade whoever our #2 is for any non #1 on any other team. Remember, even when healthy, and surrounded by Pau/Howard and a Nash that played 50+ games, we had to fight (Kobe had to play 46 mins/game in April) just to get to 45 wins. That's a 10 seed based on last season's standings.

I don't disagree with you that we have some good role players. I think we do as well. What we are lacking though, is a core. There is no core. And by core, I mean, Wade/LBJ/Bosh or Durant/Westbrook/Ibaka, or Parker/Manu/Duncan. A core that you build around by complementing with role players that addresses remaining gaps and needs. A core needs at least 2 players to be competitive.


I wouldn't say that we don't have a core. But we do have an aging one (that is at the same time "new" in the sense that they're not all that used to playing together) in Kobe and Nash.

A big key will likely be how Byron Scott is able to take what he has and make it work quickly as opposed to taking 2 or 3 years to develop.

I see us as better than Houston. Houston has Harden, Howard, and not much else. And I still don't believe that Harden is better than Kobe. The level of thinking is just too different. Howard is enough of a freak to still be a great 2nd option for any team. But he needs to get his head on straight and do what he does best instead of trying to be Hakeem. So I think their dysfunction combined with their lack of solid role players will hurt them. It doesn't matter that they're young.



Houston might not be as good as last year with the loss of parsons. But if Ariza has one of his hot seasons, they will be good. real good.


I think that we're just as likely to see Lin have a hot season as we are to see Ariza have one. Outside of that, I think Boozer, and even Young and Hill are better than what Houston has left.

Quote:
And Harden/Dwight is better than anything we have.


They have the skill to be... but they haven't really shown the discipline and maturity to play anywhere close to what they could as a team.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 9:26 am    Post subject:

Reflexx wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Reflexx wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Reflexx wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
I think the other problem with this type of question, is what does it mean to be healthy exactly?

Does that mean we have to assume Kobe/Nash won't be limited by age?

Do we have to pretend Kobe never tore his achilles? If 100% healthy, I'd still expect a significant decline for Kobe because of the achilles tear. So if I'm assuming he is healthy, I'm assuming he is as healthy as he can be for an achilles tear. Or, is that assuming he is not healthy?

I also struggle because I have no idea what post-achilles Kobe looks like. I'm not going to use the 6-game sample. I refuse to believe his falloff is that great and I chalk that up to getting back in to game shape more than representative of post-achilles Kobe.


By "if healthy" I mean just healthy. They are still as old as they are. They still are limited by whatever injuries they may have had in the past. It just means that they feel good enough to play without any pain limiting their performance.

I personally still think that both have a lot to give since they are players that are defined more by their elite skill than by athleticism. They are also not playing in a vacuum. Boozer and Lin are solid players that could make significant contributions. We also know that Lin has the skill to take over a game when he gets in the right rhythm. So it isn't exactly like these two HOFers are just surrounded by scrubs. We've got some solid role players.


Ok, that makes sense. Unfortunately, I think the post-achilles Kobe, even healthy, will be a distinctly different Kobe than we were used to seeing up until the 2012-2013 season. But that's based on the decline that every achilles tear victim suffers. Whether he breaks the trend of every single achilles tear sufferers remains to be seen. And Nash, well, he's just old and limited now.

This team still needs a solidified #2 option. We probably have the worst #2 option in the entire league and I've said in other threads that we'd probably be willing to trade whoever our #2 is for any non #1 on any other team. Remember, even when healthy, and surrounded by Pau/Howard and a Nash that played 50+ games, we had to fight (Kobe had to play 46 mins/game in April) just to get to 45 wins. That's a 10 seed based on last season's standings.

I don't disagree with you that we have some good role players. I think we do as well. What we are lacking though, is a core. There is no core. And by core, I mean, Wade/LBJ/Bosh or Durant/Westbrook/Ibaka, or Parker/Manu/Duncan. A core that you build around by complementing with role players that addresses remaining gaps and needs. A core needs at least 2 players to be competitive.


I wouldn't say that we don't have a core. But we do have an aging one (that is at the same time "new" in the sense that they're not all that used to playing together) in Kobe and Nash.

A big key will likely be how Byron Scott is able to take what he has and make it work quickly as opposed to taking 2 or 3 years to develop.

I see us as better than Houston. Houston has Harden, Howard, and not much else. And I still don't believe that Harden is better than Kobe. The level of thinking is just too different. Howard is enough of a freak to still be a great 2nd option for any team. But he needs to get his head on straight and do what he does best instead of trying to be Hakeem. So I think their dysfunction combined with their lack of solid role players will hurt them. It doesn't matter that they're young.


Kobe and Nash is not a core. If you think that is a core, then we are not at all on the same page (or book or maybe even library) on the definition of a core.

Do you not understand the difference between Durant+Westbrook, Curry+Klay, Paul+Griffin and Kobe+Nash???

If the core of your team is Kobe and Nash in 2014 -- then your team sucks. Sorry, but true.


Disagree.

I guess we'll see how the season plays out. I hope I'm right.

I would guess that you hope that I'm right too.


Disagree? This isn't an opinion. They're either the core of the team or they're not. How the season plays out is completely irrelevant. What makes you think HOW a season plays out determines whether or not you have a core?!!? Come on.

A core is a conscious decision, it's not a result. No one would create a Kobe/Nash core in 2014 if given the choice.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
focus
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 23 May 2012
Posts: 2526

PostPosted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 9:47 am    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
The IF HEALTHY argument can be used with almost every team:

Chicago: If Rose/Pau are healthy;
Spurs: If Manu is healthy;
Clippers: If CP3/Blake are healthy;
Indy: If Paul George...too soon.

But I'll oblige. I think about 42-44 wins if both were healthy. We have too many new pieces to incorporate, a new coach, a little undersized at the center position, defensive problems at the guard positions (both). We'd do better but both are 36 and 40 respectively. Father time is what it is.


Sadly, this. Defense. Except Im more pessimistic in the West. I say we dont win half our games. Really hope I'm wrong but that would depend on Randle, and how much the guys we had last year make leaps, possibly via Byron's coaching.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Reflexx
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 25 Jun 2005
Posts: 11163

PostPosted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 10:32 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
snip...

A core is a conscious decision, it's not a result. No one would create a Kobe/Nash core in 2014 if given the choice.


Those guys are the leaders. Therefore, I see them as the core.

They are the ones that put in the work and set the example. They are the ones that the others look to for guidance.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 10:46 am    Post subject:

Reflexx wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
snip...

A core is a conscious decision, it's not a result. No one would create a Kobe/Nash core in 2014 if given the choice.


Those guys are the leaders. Therefore, I see them as the core.

They are the ones that put in the work and set the example. They are the ones that the others look to for guidance.


How many actual games did Kobe/Nash attend? Was sad to not even see them on the sidelines for most of the year.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aussiesuede
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 10964

PostPosted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 11:09 am    Post subject:

Odin grants all residents of Valhalla 25 warrior years. Kobes still has a few before he takes his place alongside Ragner, Largertha, and Horrick. It is not wise to anger the gods by doubting their brother.

Skoal...
_________________
I'm On point, On task, On message, and Off drugs. A Streetwise Smart Bomb, Out of rehab and In denial. Over the Top, On the edge, Under the Radar, and In Control. Behind the 8 ball, Ahead of the Curve and I've got a Love Child who sends me Hate mail.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 12:55 pm    Post subject:

Reflexx wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
snip...

A core is a conscious decision, it's not a result. No one would create a Kobe/Nash core in 2014 if given the choice.


Those guys are the leaders. Therefore, I see them as the core.

They are the ones that put in the work and set the example. They are the ones that the others look to for guidance.


What is it about the word core that is so hard to understand? If core = leaders, then there would be no word "core". It would just be "leaders" then. LMAO.

The core represents your "primary options". But, what you're missing is that that isn't always the case. For instance ....

Derek Fisher was a leader, but he was never a part of the core.

Paul Pierce will be a leader with the Wizards, but he is not a part of their core either.

The core is the foundation by which you bring in complementary players to COMPLEMENT that foundation from a skill/talent level perspective. The Lakers are not bringing in players to complement Steve freaking Nash. If anything, they're bringing in players to REPLACE him.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
a2j1m
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 06 May 2013
Posts: 3734

PostPosted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 1:01 pm    Post subject:

Boozer is at best with a legit pg so that's a plus our only bad thing is no center or legit SF
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Reflexx
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 25 Jun 2005
Posts: 11163

PostPosted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 1:56 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
Reflexx wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
snip...

A core is a conscious decision, it's not a result. No one would create a Kobe/Nash core in 2014 if given the choice.


Those guys are the leaders. Therefore, I see them as the core.

They are the ones that put in the work and set the example. They are the ones that the others look to for guidance.


What is it about the word core that is so hard to understand? If core = leaders, then there would be no word "core". It would just be "leaders" then. LMAO.

The core represents your "primary options". But, what you're missing is that that isn't always the case. For instance ....

Derek Fisher was a leader, but he was never a part of the core.

Paul Pierce will be a leader with the Wizards, but he is not a part of their core either.

The core is the foundation by which you bring in complementary players to COMPLEMENT that foundation from a skill/talent level perspective. The Lakers are not bringing in players to complement Steve freaking Nash. If anything, they're bringing in players to REPLACE him.


Here you are with your own definition for "core" and then are up in arms when others don't define it the same way.

Sorry to break it to you, but there is not definitive definition of "core" in basketball. And I don't have to subscribe to yours.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 2:57 pm    Post subject:

Reflexx wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Reflexx wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
snip...

A core is a conscious decision, it's not a result. No one would create a Kobe/Nash core in 2014 if given the choice.


Those guys are the leaders. Therefore, I see them as the core.

They are the ones that put in the work and set the example. They are the ones that the others look to for guidance.


What is it about the word core that is so hard to understand? If core = leaders, then there would be no word "core". It would just be "leaders" then. LMAO.

The core represents your "primary options". But, what you're missing is that that isn't always the case. For instance ....

Derek Fisher was a leader, but he was never a part of the core.

Paul Pierce will be a leader with the Wizards, but he is not a part of their core either.

The core is the foundation by which you bring in complementary players to COMPLEMENT that foundation from a skill/talent level perspective. The Lakers are not bringing in players to complement Steve freaking Nash. If anything, they're bringing in players to REPLACE him.


Here you are with your own definition for "core" and then are up in arms when others don't define it the same way.

Sorry to break it to you, but there is not definitive definition of "core" in basketball. And I don't have to subscribe to yours.


It's not my definition. I didn't make it up. I mean, you can make the word "bucket" mean whatever you want in basketball too if you like. You can make it mean a stolen pass if you like. I'm just telling you that everyone else refers to a made basket as a bucket.

Same thing with core. You can make it mean whatever you'd like. Maybe core can be a cheerleader. Or a new way of describing the stanchion!

But just know for everyone else, that they're talking about the players you build a team around, that you work to surround with role players. The core are the players that act as the foundation of the team's strategy with everyone else being complementary.

Going by that definition, we do not have much of a core at all right now. That's the point and on that we can probably agree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
cthroatgtr
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 21 Aug 2005
Posts: 1375

PostPosted: Wed Aug 06, 2014 5:14 pm    Post subject:

Expecting Nash to do anything at this point is a pipe dream.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2
Jump to:  

 
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






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB