|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
K28
Franchise Player
Joined: 29 Nov 2012
Posts: 10038
|
 Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2015 1:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 24 wrote: | | kray28_ wrote: | | JerryMagicKobe wrote: | | kray28_ wrote: | | Sniper008 wrote: |
Posts like this is the reason why Steven A Smith still has a job, wow. You actually believe the BS you post wow |
Yeah, I believe it. So far you've done nothing to convince me otherwise.
Just calling it "BS" does nothing except tell me that you have an opinion. BFD. |
Be careful.
If you stick to the opinion that Jim is responsible for the decline then you will have to also credit him for the turnaround.
When it comes, and it is, no fair switching credit to Mitch.
 |
Show me the turnaround, and I will happily credit Jim.
Thus far under Jim, the change has been unidirectional decline from 2011 on. (reality)
Recognizing this, Jim promised us a trip to the WCF in about 1 year and 10 months. I am anxiously awaiting this. |
Jim actually promised contention for the Western conference, not the WCF.
And I agree the team's record has been in decline since 2011. Actually, however, the team has been in decline since around 2009. The whole reason for Howard and Nash (and CP3 before them) was the fact that the team had gotten old and stale. Howard and Nash certainly didn't help matters in the short term, but they did bottom the team out and net the a couple of really nice picks, and the team is definitely going to be moving upward now. How much and how fast remains to be seen. |
Let's look at the actual quote and see just how straightforward this read is:
"I was laying myself on the line by saying, if this doesn't work in three to four years, if we're not back on the top — and the definition of top means contending for the Western Conference, contending for a championship — then I will step down because that means I have failed," he told The Times about the meeting.
He actually said "if we're not back on top."
Further defined as:
1. Contending for the Western Conference == WCF
2. Contending for a Championship == FINALS
I don't know, if you actually tried to measure this promise based on results....how else would you do it?
I will also disagree about the decline starting in 2009. Both 2009 and 2010 yielded championships. You could argue that they were a tired team by the time they tried to three peat in 2011. Jim took over right after that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
GoldenThroat
Moderator
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 37474
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2015 1:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The team's decline has coincided with Kobe's decline. Where we are seems inevitable regardless of who was running the show. The CP3 trade was a valiant attempt to reload rather than rebuild, but it didn't work out. That why we went all in on the 2012-13 team. Kobe's window was closing, and the team's was as well as an extension of that.
I have my gripes with a few of the attempted moves along the way, but strictly going by what's actually happened, I'm pretty happy with where we are. My biggest complaint with what we've done since 2011 is the hiring of Byron Scott. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
K28
Franchise Player
Joined: 29 Nov 2012
Posts: 10038
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2015 2:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| GoldenThroat wrote: | The team's decline has coincided with Kobe's decline. Where we are seems inevitable regardless of who was running the show. The CP3 trade was a valiant attempt to reload rather than rebuild, but it didn't work out. That why we went all in on the 2012-13 team. Kobe's window was closing, and the team's was as well as an extension of that.
I have my gripes with a few of the attempted moves along the way, but strictly going by what's actually happened, I'm pretty happy with where we are. My biggest complaint with what we've done since 2011 is the hiring of Byron Scott. |
The team's decline started with Jim, and here is how:
1. The coach he hired to replace Phil, Mike Brown, was a terrible choice.
2. All the people he fired in the front office and didn't bring back (guys like Lester or McKechnie). Phil would later point out that Jim could have asked Alex McChechnie about trading for Nash. Jim didn't, of course, because Jim had decided to burn that bridge. He would have learned from McKechnie (who had been working with Nash) just how fragile Nash' health was.
3. The ill-fated CP3 trade...which led to Lamar's departure. No one wants to blame Jim for this. But given what had just transpired in the lockout, maybe Jim might have considered that the timing was not exactly ideal?
4. The slow attrition of the entire Championship core over 3 seasons 2011-2014 - (Lamar, Fish, Drew, Ron, and finally Pau).
5. The even more disastrous choice of D'Antoni over Phil. The D'Antoni hire would be the domino and the true cause behind Kobe's decline. Prior to the Achilles, Kobe was having one of the best seasons of his career.
6. Replacing the core with one year rentals with the idea of using cap space to win the free agent lottery and reload instantly. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Vancouver Fan
Franchise Player
Joined: 17 Apr 2006
Posts: 17740
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2015 2:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| GoldenThroat wrote: | The team's decline has coincided with Kobe's decline. Where we are seems inevitable regardless of who was running the show. The CP3 trade was a valiant attempt to reload rather than rebuild, but it didn't work out. That why we went all in on the 2012-13 team. Kobe's window was closing, and the team's was as well as an extension of that.
I have my gripes with a few of the attempted moves along the way, but strictly going by what's actually happened, I'm pretty happy with where we are. My biggest complaint with what we've done since 2011 is the hiring of Byron Scott. |
Agreed. The Dwight Howard & Nash trades were moves to win now. Obviously it didn't work out but at least the FO had the balls to make a move like that. In retrospect, it's easy to criticize. At the time, we were all jumping for joy.
Of course, the cp3 fiasco was bull (bleep). That would've changed the landscape tremendously imo. WIth all that being said, I still like where we are in the rebuilding stage. I believe Mitch knows what he is doing. Therefore, I trust Mitch over Phil and whatever he is planning in NYC. Let's not forget, IT'S NOT LIKE PHIL WAS ABLE TO SIGN LMA, LEBRON ETC ETC ETC EITHER. So let's not get it twisted.
_________________
Music is my medicine |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
USCandLakers
Franchise Player
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 19955
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2015 2:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| GoldenThroat wrote: | The team's decline has coincided with Kobe's decline. Where we are seems inevitable regardless of who was running the show. The CP3 trade was a valiant attempt to reload rather than rebuild, but it didn't work out. That why we went all in on the 2012-13 team. Kobe's window was closing, and the team's was as well as an extension of that.
I have my gripes with a few of the attempted moves along the way, but strictly going by what's actually happened, I'm pretty happy with where we are. My biggest complaint with what we've done since 2011 is the hiring of Byron Scott. |
Yet our window was shorter than it should have been. It didn't make sense for our window to have been the same as Boston's. We had the younger players, the younger core.
Mitch did a horrible job building that team to extend the run. The complete opposite of what San Antonio has been in the Duncan Pop era. We peaked in 2009, a year after acquiring Pau and Ariza. If Mitch had done his job(and I really have no idea what he was doing during those years), we could have contended for more years. It seemed more like he was saving money than trying to win a championship. Letting go of championship talent and youth in favor of cheaper deals. Selling draft picks. Signing players that simply weren't good fits.
When I think of how good Kobe was in 2011 until the point he tore his achilles, it becomes all the more apparent just how bad of a job Mitch had done.
Pau is his crowning achievement. But let's not act like he didn't have a head start towards a championship having Kobe freaking Bryant on the team. The rest of the moves he's made tell me he doesn't know how to build a team, and has no real direction. Our last 3 coaches couldn't be anymore different. What is he even doing?
_________________
A banana is killed every time a terrible thread or post is made.  Save the bananas. Stop creating terrible posts! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Omar Little
Moderator
Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90306
Location: Formerly Known As 24
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2015 2:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kray28_ wrote: | | 24 wrote: | | kray28_ wrote: | | JerryMagicKobe wrote: | | kray28_ wrote: | | Sniper008 wrote: |
Posts like this is the reason why Steven A Smith still has a job, wow. You actually believe the BS you post wow |
Yeah, I believe it. So far you've done nothing to convince me otherwise.
Just calling it "BS" does nothing except tell me that you have an opinion. BFD. |
Be careful.
If you stick to the opinion that Jim is responsible for the decline then you will have to also credit him for the turnaround.
When it comes, and it is, no fair switching credit to Mitch.
|
Show me the turnaround, and I will happily credit Jim.
Thus far under Jim, the change has been unidirectional decline from 2011 on. (reality)
Recognizing this, Jim promised us a trip to the WCF in about 1 year and 10 months. I am anxiously awaiting this. |
Jim actually promised contention for the Western conference, not the WCF.
And I agree the team's record has been in decline since 2011. Actually, however, the team has been in decline since around 2009. The whole reason for Howard and Nash (and CP3 before them) was the fact that the team had gotten old and stale. Howard and Nash certainly didn't help matters in the short term, but they did bottom the team out and net the a couple of really nice picks, and the team is definitely going to be moving upward now. How much and how fast remains to be seen. |
Let's look at the actual quote and see just how straightforward this read is:
"I was laying myself on the line by saying, if this doesn't work in three to four years, if we're not back on the top — and the definition of top means contending for the Western Conference, contending for a championship — then I will step down because that means I have failed," he told The Times about the meeting.
He actually said "if we're not back on top."
Further defined as:
1. Contending for the Western Conference == WCF
2. Contending for a Championship == FINALS
I don't know, if you actually tried to measure this promise based on results....how else would you do it?
I will also disagree about the decline starting in 2009. Both 2009 and 2010 yielded championships. You could argue that they were a tired team by the time they tried to three peat in 2011. Jim took over right after that. |
I don't have any problem with the subjective idea of WCF, just saying he never said that. Contending for the west or championship can technically mean anything down to and including in the playoffs.
And yes, the 2009-2010 team was not as good as the 2008-2009 team. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
K28
Franchise Player
Joined: 29 Nov 2012
Posts: 10038
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2015 5:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 24 wrote: |
And yes, the 2009-2010 team was not as good as the 2008-2009 team. |
Going by what? Regular season record? 2008-2009 won 65 games, but had serious trouble in the playoffs with Houston and Denver.
2009-2010 won less in the regular season, but had a far more impressive post-season against tougher competition. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
slavavov
Star Player
Joined: 03 Oct 2003
Posts: 8327
Location: Santa Monica
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2015 6:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mitch is the classic good soldier. He's loyal to a fault and he'll carry out instructions and orders well. His strength is putting together and finalizing trades, as well as working with the constrictions of the cap and the CBA.
That means someone above him needs to be creating a vision and gameplan for Mitch to carry out. It used to be the Logo. Then it gradually became Jimmy.
Jim Buss may not be bad when it comes to personnel decisions, but his coaching decisions and the other decision to lay off scouts and trainers just before the lockout were awful. It doesn't seem like Jim has the self-belief or the guts that his dad had to make the kind of right decisions that an executive or business owner must make.
I wouldn't mind it if Phil came back in a somewhat limited role similar to the one West has in GS. I don't think Phil is as bad a judge of talent as some make him out to be, I think the bigger issue with that is that he is committed to the triangle to a fault. Which means that he may pass up on young skilled players that he identifies as such but feels are a bad fit for his offense.
The big plus to Phil being in that role with us is in him having that undeniable cachet in attracting and recruiting free agents.
_________________
Lakers 49ers Chargers Dodgers |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wolfpaclaker
Retired Number
Joined: 29 May 2002
Posts: 58336
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2015 7:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Mitch did a horrible job building that team to extend the run. The complete opposite of what San Antonio has been in the Duncan Pop era |
Horrible wouldn't be the word, I'd use. I'd say he could have done better, had he drafted younger role players that fit around Kobe/Gasol, and had Dwight been convinced to stay, or we trade Bynum for longterm assets, as Dwight was a short term asset heading into FA.
At one point in 2011 or 2012 Mitch had Pau, Bynum as an all-star, 6th man of the year Odom to work with as trade assets. What came out of it? Zilch. Yes he tried and almost had CP3, but you don't get brownie points in the NBA for trying. We got Dwight/Nash, but Nash was a huge bust and Dwight was a short term asset. In hindsight, Lakers definitely could have done more with the talent they had in hand in 2011 (Pau, Bynum, 6th man LO)
Mitch has a proven track record. The job he did in re-building the Lakers from 2004-2008 can not be disputed in my book. Trading Shaq was not easy, and to put it all back together and have a loaded team like we had in 2008? Great stuff. It is that proven record that gives me faith he'll get the Lakers back on track.
But the last few years Mitch's been a bit off his game. I'm hoping it's just a short detour. I really hope this isn't like Dumars, where a guy just lost his mojo and ability to put forth great teams. Many FO guys lose their touch after a while at the same place. It happens more often than people realize. I hope that isn't the case with Mitch. Biggest thing that concerns me is the style of play (conflicting and constant changes) the last 3 years. Mainly due to coaching changes. First you wanted to distance yourself from Phil as far as you can, you go with Brown. Defensive mindset, slow tempo. Ok, in a year you go 180 and go with MDA whose all about speed, 3 point shooting, offense etc. Then you go to Byron, whose trying to insert things that worked 20 years ago. How do you plan on making players develop if there's constant changes? I don't really sense a vision here. But this may not even be Mitch's final decision. Word was he wanted Adelman in 2011 and Jim Buss wanted Brown. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GoldenThroat
Moderator
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 37474
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 25, 2015 8:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| USCandLakers wrote: | | GoldenThroat wrote: | The team's decline has coincided with Kobe's decline. Where we are seems inevitable regardless of who was running the show. The CP3 trade was a valiant attempt to reload rather than rebuild, but it didn't work out. That why we went all in on the 2012-13 team. Kobe's window was closing, and the team's was as well as an extension of that.
I have my gripes with a few of the attempted moves along the way, but strictly going by what's actually happened, I'm pretty happy with where we are. My biggest complaint with what we've done since 2011 is the hiring of Byron Scott. |
Yet our window was shorter than it should have been. It didn't make sense for our window to have been the same as Boston's. We had the younger players, the younger core.
Mitch did a horrible job building that team to extend the run. The complete opposite of what San Antonio has been in the Duncan Pop era. We peaked in 2009, a year after acquiring Pau and Ariza. If Mitch had done his job(and I really have no idea what he was doing during those years), we could have contended for more years. It seemed more like he was saving money than trying to win a championship. Letting go of championship talent and youth in favor of cheaper deals. Selling draft picks. Signing players that simply weren't good fits.
When I think of how good Kobe was in 2011 until the point he tore his achilles, it becomes all the more apparent just how bad of a job Mitch had done.
Pau is his crowning achievement. But let's not act like he didn't have a head start towards a championship having Kobe freaking Bryant on the team. The rest of the moves he's made tell me he doesn't know how to build a team, and has no real direction. Our last 3 coaches couldn't be anymore different. What is he even doing? |
I agree with most of this. We made almost no effort to replenish the team with prospects during the title years, even if they would have been the 11th and 12th men on the teams. And in the few times that we tried, we were unsuccessful. |
|
| 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
|
|
