OFFICIAL D'ANGELO RUSSELL (2yr, $37M, pg. 2749)
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 1754, 1755, 1756 ... 2854, 2855, 2856  Next
 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
ch3cky0selff00
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 29 Dec 2009
Posts: 4392

PostPosted: Sat Jan 21, 2017 8:10 pm    Post subject:

justsomelakerfan wrote:
We're gonna see some ugly ass offense the next couple games. Randle's game might dip missing another shooter in the starting lineup, he's going to be a lot easier to guard. Could get pretty ugly like it did last time he was injured...


disclaimer: no. i do not think the lakers are better without d'angelo russell.

the offense looked okay last game. d'angelo was only in the game for a few minutes and the team managed to get 27 assists.

Also, the team now is better than they were when he went out the first time. Should also be noted that Nick Young was out during the time D'Angelo was too. That's the Lakers starting back court right there..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
GoldenThroat
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 37474

PostPosted: Sat Jan 21, 2017 8:14 pm    Post subject:

justsomelakerfan wrote:
GoldenThroat wrote:
justsomelakerfan wrote:
We're gonna see some ugly ass offense the next couple games. Randle's game might dip missing another shooter in the starting lineup, he's going to be a lot easier to guard. Could get pretty ugly like it did last time he was injured...


This would be a good time to replace Deng with Ingram in the starting lineup, IMO.


So, it didn't really work to start the season, but what would your thoughts be on starting Ingram at PG again now that he's playing a lot better in January and hitting 3s? Deng can hit a 3 every once in a while, that could give us Ingram-Nick-Deng-Randle-Mozgov so the spacing isn't potentially atrocious?

I don't really like it, but I don't really like Calderon or Lou starting at PG either.


I kinda feel like part of his recent uptick has been that he's been playing the PG role less and has gotten the ball in positions to score a bit more. That doesn't mean that he hasn't been handling the ball, but he hasn't really been organizing the offense either.

I think the best move in a vacuum would be to start both Clarkson & Ingram in place of Young & Deng (along w/Calderon), as Clarkson provides some additional shot creation as well, in that he can get his own. It's pretty much him, Lou, Randle, & Russell who can get their own shot on this team, although Ingram is growing in that respect. But it would be unusual to bench Young because Russell got injured.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
TooMuchMajicBuss
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 17 Sep 2008
Posts: 21064
Location: In a white room, with black curtains near the station

PostPosted: Sat Jan 21, 2017 8:17 pm    Post subject:

Good to hear it wasn't worse!!

Not that a mild strain of the MCL and calf, plus a bone bruise, is anything to take lightly, but it could have been far worse.

Take your time DLO. Heal up good. Then come back ready to drop 40.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
GoldenThroat
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 37474

PostPosted: Sat Jan 21, 2017 8:19 pm    Post subject:

ch3cky0selff00 wrote:
justsomelakerfan wrote:
We're gonna see some ugly ass offense the next couple games. Randle's game might dip missing another shooter in the starting lineup, he's going to be a lot easier to guard. Could get pretty ugly like it did last time he was injured...


disclaimer: no. i do not think the lakers are better without d'angelo russell.

the offense looked okay last game. d'angelo was only in the game for a few minutes and the team managed to get 27 assists.

Also, the team now is better than they were when he went out the first time. Should also be noted that Nick Young was out during the time D'Angelo was too. That's the Lakers starting back court right there..


Net Rating

Russell/Young/Deng/Randle/Mozgov = +7.6 (most used lineup)
Calderon/Young/Deng/Randle/Mozgov = -27.1 (10th most used lineup)

The first lineup has a 2-to-1 assist to turnover ratio, while the 2nd lineup has a 1-to-1 A:TO. We're in deep (bleep) if we turn the ball over 20+ times like we did against Indiana on a regular basis.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
bonkers
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 25 Apr 2013
Posts: 6071

PostPosted: Sat Jan 21, 2017 8:24 pm    Post subject:

Have always thought and still think that DLO will become a superstar in this league. Taking stats out of the equation for a moment, had that feeling the first time I watched him play at OSU. Had that same feeling when I watched Joel Embiid at Kansas and when I saw obscure clips of some skinny kid playing in Greece named Giannis.

Get well soon, Russ!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ch3cky0selff00
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 29 Dec 2009
Posts: 4392

PostPosted: Sat Jan 21, 2017 8:32 pm    Post subject:

GoldenThroat wrote:
ch3cky0selff00 wrote:
justsomelakerfan wrote:
We're gonna see some ugly ass offense the next couple games. Randle's game might dip missing another shooter in the starting lineup, he's going to be a lot easier to guard. Could get pretty ugly like it did last time he was injured...


disclaimer: no. i do not think the lakers are better without d'angelo russell.

the offense looked okay last game. d'angelo was only in the game for a few minutes and the team managed to get 27 assists.

Also, the team now is better than they were when he went out the first time. Should also be noted that Nick Young was out during the time D'Angelo was too. That's the Lakers starting back court right there..


Net Rating

Russell/Young/Deng/Randle/Mozgov = +7.6 (most used lineup)
Calderon/Young/Deng/Randle/Mozgov = -27.1 (10th most used lineup)

The first lineup has a 2-to-1 assist to turnover ratio, while the 2nd lineup has a 1-to-1 A:TO. We're in deep (bleep) if we turn the ball over 20+ times like we did against Indiana on a regular basis.


And half of those belonged to two players that come off the bench anyway (Clarkson with 7 and Lou with 3) so I'm not sure what you were going for with that.

Yes. D'Angelo is gawd. The offense runs well with him. I'm just pointing out that it's not the end of the world in terms of offensive flow because D'Angelo is going to be out for 2+ weeks.

Again. I must say. No. I do not think the Lakers are better off without D'Angelo Russell.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
babyskyhook
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 15 Jul 2009
Posts: 18492
Location: The Garden Island

PostPosted: Sat Jan 21, 2017 8:42 pm    Post subject:

GoldenThroat wrote:


Net Rating

Russell/Young/Deng/Randle/Mozgov = +7.6 (most used lineup)
Calderon/Young/Deng/Randle/Mozgov = -27.1 (10th most used lineup)



Those are some eye-opening numbers.

Instinctively, it's been obvious that whenever Calderon or Huertas has gotten non-garbage time minutes, the results have been bad, but I didn't realize the numbers were as horrific as they are.


I'd like to see Clarkson starting at the 1 while DLo is out. Ingram should be starting at the 3 the rest of the year anyway. Would be great to see Zubac playing big minutes the rest of the year also.

Give all of these guys big minutes- spur development, give them experience and increase the odds of keeping the pick all at the same time.

Give all the young guys major minutes
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
oldschool32
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 24 Jun 2005
Posts: 20032

PostPosted: Sat Jan 21, 2017 8:43 pm    Post subject:

GoldenThroat wrote:
justsomelakerfan wrote:
We're gonna see some ugly ass offense the next couple games. Randle's game might dip missing another shooter in the starting lineup, he's going to be a lot easier to guard. Could get pretty ugly like it did last time he was injured...


This would be a good time to replace Deng with Ingram in the starting lineup, IMO.


Bingo, that was the first thing that crossed my mind. Gives them another ball handler, and if Calderon starts, it should give Ingram more touches with the ball.

I hope Zu gets regular minutes for the rest of the season as well.
_________________
"It's just a job. Grass grows, birds fly, waves pound the sand. I beat people up."-The Greatest
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
justsomelakerfan
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 16 Jul 2016
Posts: 10939

PostPosted: Sat Jan 21, 2017 8:49 pm    Post subject:

GoldenThroat wrote:
justsomelakerfan wrote:
GoldenThroat wrote:
justsomelakerfan wrote:
We're gonna see some ugly ass offense the next couple games. Randle's game might dip missing another shooter in the starting lineup, he's going to be a lot easier to guard. Could get pretty ugly like it did last time he was injured...


This would be a good time to replace Deng with Ingram in the starting lineup, IMO.


So, it didn't really work to start the season, but what would your thoughts be on starting Ingram at PG again now that he's playing a lot better in January and hitting 3s? Deng can hit a 3 every once in a while, that could give us Ingram-Nick-Deng-Randle-Mozgov so the spacing isn't potentially atrocious?

I don't really like it, but I don't really like Calderon or Lou starting at PG either.


I kinda feel like part of his recent uptick has been that he's been playing the PG role less and has gotten the ball in positions to score a bit more. That doesn't mean that he hasn't been handling the ball, but he hasn't really been organizing the offense either.

I think the best move in a vacuum would be to start both Clarkson & Ingram in place of Young & Deng (along w/Calderon), as Clarkson provides some additional shot creation as well, in that he can get his own. It's pretty much him, Lou, Randle, & Russell who can get their own shot on this team, although Ingram is growing in that respect. But it would be unusual to bench Young because Russell got injured.


That's probably the best case scenario, but it's really hard for me to see Luke benching Nick. Also trying to imagine the lineup if Luke decides to start Deng instead of Ingram now that he's almost back - Calderon-Nick-Deng-Randle-Mozgov?

I really hope he starts Ingram at least.
_________________
Austin Reaves
Tweeter: @sarah_dotbiz
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
GoldenThroat
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 37474

PostPosted: Sat Jan 21, 2017 8:49 pm    Post subject:

ch3cky0selff00 wrote:
And half of those belonged to two players that come off the bench anyway (Clarkson with 7 and Lou with 3) so I'm not sure what you were going for with that.

Yes. D'Angelo is gawd. The offense runs well with him. I'm just pointing out that it's not the end of the world in terms of offensive flow because D'Angelo is going to be out for 2+ weeks.

Again. I must say. No. I do not think the Lakers are better off without D'Angelo Russell.


Why the hell do so many people do this?

No, it might not be the end of the world in terms of offensive flow for the starters, but if it's not, that will be different from last time. The Young/Deng/Randle/Mozgov combo have played 62 minutes this season without Russell, and they've been outscored by 25 points per 100 possessions. With Russell, they outscore opponents by 7.6.

But of course it could be different this time. It think they'd be wiser to not trot out that combo without him again. (which they didn't do last night, btw)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
silkwilkes
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 15 Jul 2002
Posts: 6937
Location: searching for the mojo of Dr. Buss

PostPosted: Sat Jan 21, 2017 8:56 pm    Post subject:

This Deng and the Deng that was playing the last time DLO was injured are two different players however.

Personally, I'd play Ingram as the starting PG and give Young some run at SF with 2nd unit (increase his minutes). You can also increase Lou and Clarkson's mins to compensate.
_________________
"He may say it's not you, it's him.... but it's really you."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
tox
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 17835

PostPosted: Sat Jan 21, 2017 10:46 pm    Post subject:

DA1 wrote:
D'Angelo Russell Injury Update

Posted: Jan 21, 2017

LOS ANGELES - D’Angelo Russell, who was injured in the first quarter of last night’s game against the Indiana Pacers, had an MRI today. Results of the MRI confirmed a mild MCL sprain in his right knee and a right calf strain, and also showed a bone bruise. He will be out one-to-two weeks and will be re-evaluated in one week.

http://www.nba.com/lakers/releases/170121russell-injury-update
Bad news to cap off a birthday spent studying all day
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
tox
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 17835

PostPosted: Sat Jan 21, 2017 10:49 pm    Post subject:

GoldenThroat wrote:
ch3cky0selff00 wrote:
And half of those belonged to two players that come off the bench anyway (Clarkson with 7 and Lou with 3) so I'm not sure what you were going for with that.

Yes. D'Angelo is gawd. The offense runs well with him. I'm just pointing out that it's not the end of the world in terms of offensive flow because D'Angelo is going to be out for 2+ weeks.

Again. I must say. No. I do not think the Lakers are better off without D'Angelo Russell.


Why the hell do so many people do this?

No, it might not be the end of the world in terms of offensive flow for the starters, but if it's not, that will be different from last time. The Young/Deng/Randle/Mozgov combo have played 62 minutes this season without Russell, and they've been outscored by 25 points per 100 possessions. With Russell, they outscore opponents by 7.6.

But of course it could be different this time. It think they'd be wiser to not trot out that combo without him again. (which they didn't do last night, btw)
To be fair, they couldn't have given Deng wasn't playing to begin with.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
GoldenThroat
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 37474

PostPosted: Sat Jan 21, 2017 10:50 pm    Post subject:

tox wrote:
GoldenThroat wrote:
ch3cky0selff00 wrote:
And half of those belonged to two players that come off the bench anyway (Clarkson with 7 and Lou with 3) so I'm not sure what you were going for with that.

Yes. D'Angelo is gawd. The offense runs well with him. I'm just pointing out that it's not the end of the world in terms of offensive flow because D'Angelo is going to be out for 2+ weeks.

Again. I must say. No. I do not think the Lakers are better off without D'Angelo Russell.


Why the hell do so many people do this?

No, it might not be the end of the world in terms of offensive flow for the starters, but if it's not, that will be different from last time. The Young/Deng/Randle/Mozgov combo have played 62 minutes this season without Russell, and they've been outscored by 25 points per 100 possessions. With Russell, they outscore opponents by 7.6.

But of course it could be different this time. It think they'd be wiser to not trot out that combo without him again. (which they didn't do last night, btw)
To be fair, they couldn't have given Deng wasn't playing to begin with.


That's my point though. The "the ball moved fine last night" argument doesn't fly.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Lucky_Shot
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 10 Jan 2016
Posts: 5140

PostPosted: Sat Jan 21, 2017 10:52 pm    Post subject:

tox wrote:
DA1 wrote:
D'Angelo Russell Injury Update

Posted: Jan 21, 2017

LOS ANGELES - D’Angelo Russell, who was injured in the first quarter of last night’s game against the Indiana Pacers, had an MRI today. Results of the MRI confirmed a mild MCL sprain in his right knee and a right calf strain, and also showed a bone bruise. He will be out one-to-two weeks and will be re-evaluated in one week.

http://www.nba.com/lakers/releases/170121russell-injury-update
Bad news to cap off a birthday spent studying all day


Good job studying on your birthday man... thats not easy. Your future self will thank you later.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
tox
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 17835

PostPosted: Sat Jan 21, 2017 10:53 pm    Post subject:

GoldenThroat wrote:
tox wrote:
GoldenThroat wrote:
ch3cky0selff00 wrote:
And half of those belonged to two players that come off the bench anyway (Clarkson with 7 and Lou with 3) so I'm not sure what you were going for with that.

Yes. D'Angelo is gawd. The offense runs well with him. I'm just pointing out that it's not the end of the world in terms of offensive flow because D'Angelo is going to be out for 2+ weeks.

Again. I must say. No. I do not think the Lakers are better off without D'Angelo Russell.


Why the hell do so many people do this?

No, it might not be the end of the world in terms of offensive flow for the starters, but if it's not, that will be different from last time. The Young/Deng/Randle/Mozgov combo have played 62 minutes this season without Russell, and they've been outscored by 25 points per 100 possessions. With Russell, they outscore opponents by 7.6.

But of course it could be different this time. It think they'd be wiser to not trot out that combo without him again. (which they didn't do last night, btw)
To be fair, they couldn't have given Deng wasn't playing to begin with.


That's my point though. The "the ball moved fine last night" argument doesn't fly.


Ah I see. Yeah I misunderstood but I see what you're saying now.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
tox
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 17835

PostPosted: Sat Jan 21, 2017 10:54 pm    Post subject:

Lucky_Shot wrote:
tox wrote:
DA1 wrote:
D'Angelo Russell Injury Update

Posted: Jan 21, 2017

LOS ANGELES - D’Angelo Russell, who was injured in the first quarter of last night’s game against the Indiana Pacers, had an MRI today. Results of the MRI confirmed a mild MCL sprain in his right knee and a right calf strain, and also showed a bone bruise. He will be out one-to-two weeks and will be re-evaluated in one week.

http://www.nba.com/lakers/releases/170121russell-injury-update
Bad news to cap off a birthday spent studying all day


Good job studying on your birthday man... thats not easy. Your future self will thank you later.


Haha thanks, man. There's absolutely no one in my hometown so I couldn't have gone out if I wanted to... definitely makes studying a bit easier.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
nash
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 23 Oct 2001
Posts: 8194

PostPosted: Sun Jan 22, 2017 2:12 am    Post subject:

GoldenThroat wrote:
ch3cky0selff00 wrote:
And half of those belonged to two players that come off the bench anyway (Clarkson with 7 and Lou with 3) so I'm not sure what you were going for with that.

Yes. D'Angelo is gawd. The offense runs well with him. I'm just pointing out that it's not the end of the world in terms of offensive flow because D'Angelo is going to be out for 2+ weeks.

Again. I must say. No. I do not think the Lakers are better off without D'Angelo Russell.


Why the hell do so many people do this?

No, it might not be the end of the world in terms of offensive flow for the starters, but if it's not, that will be different from last time. The Young/Deng/Randle/Mozgov combo have played 62 minutes this season without Russell, and they've been outscored by 25 points per 100 possessions. With Russell, they outscore opponents by 7.6.

But of course it could be different this time. It think they'd be wiser to not trot out that combo without him again. (which they didn't do last night, btw)


This is the kind of conversation that makes me believe for the good or for the bad arguments about Dlo have some bias and I'm going to tell why.

Russell absence is going to be felt and the numbers starters post without him are an irrefutable proof. But at the same time it is not completely true that we suck without him because four out of five of our best lineups with 30+ minutes played don't have Russell. Our best lineup by a wide margin is a small ball lineup of JC, Lou, Ingram, Deng and Nance. The second best? Replace Nance with Black and keep all the other players.

We can get into the "they play against subs conversation" and the arguments may never end, but I'm just trying to show that there is a middle ground. Russell is a good player, he is going to be missed like we missed Nance, we missed Nick Young and we are going to miss most of our players because except by Lou they are most on the same pack.

If I'm going to conclude something is that the team runs better without Julius as PF, the first lineup with his name is the 5th best where he is the small ball center while number 1, 2 and 3 have Deng as PF, 4 and 5 Nance.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
tox
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 17835

PostPosted: Sun Jan 22, 2017 3:34 am    Post subject:

nash wrote:
GoldenThroat wrote:
ch3cky0selff00 wrote:
And half of those belonged to two players that come off the bench anyway (Clarkson with 7 and Lou with 3) so I'm not sure what you were going for with that.

Yes. D'Angelo is gawd. The offense runs well with him. I'm just pointing out that it's not the end of the world in terms of offensive flow because D'Angelo is going to be out for 2+ weeks.

Again. I must say. No. I do not think the Lakers are better off without D'Angelo Russell.


Why the hell do so many people do this?

No, it might not be the end of the world in terms of offensive flow for the starters, but if it's not, that will be different from last time. The Young/Deng/Randle/Mozgov combo have played 62 minutes this season without Russell, and they've been outscored by 25 points per 100 possessions. With Russell, they outscore opponents by 7.6.

But of course it could be different this time. It think they'd be wiser to not trot out that combo without him again. (which they didn't do last night, btw)


This is the kind of conversation that makes me believe for the good or for the bad arguments about Dlo have some bias and I'm going to tell why.

Russell absence is going to be felt and the numbers starters post without him are an irrefutable proof. But at the same time it is not completely true that we suck without him because four out of five of our best lineups with 30+ minutes played don't have Russell. Our best lineup by a wide margin is a small ball lineup of JC, Lou, Ingram, Deng and Nance. The second best? Replace Nance with Black and keep all the other players.

We can get into the "they play against subs conversation" and the arguments may never end, but I'm just trying to show that there is a middle ground. Russell is a good player, he is going to be missed like we missed Nance, we missed Nick Young and we are going to miss most of our players because except by Lou they are most on the same pack.

If I'm going to conclude something is that the team runs better without Julius as PF, the first lineup with his name is the 5th best where he is the small ball center while number 1, 2 and 3 have Deng as PF, 4 and 5 Nance.


How is this theory for you? D'Angelo Russell is the only reason that a front court of Julius Randle and Timofey Mozgov can function. The reason why the best lineups don't have D'Angelo Russell in them is because most of Russell's lineups are spent with Randle and especially Mozgov tanking the Lakers' performance, though Russell makes the lineup passable.

Stats: with Russell, Moz/ Randle have a net rating of +0.3 (109.3 ORTG). Without him, they have a net rating of -26.5 (90.3 ORTG).

Commentary: You need to be careful about throwing out labels of bias. GT's stat about Russell is one of the least "biased" +/- statistic. It's clear in its implications, with minimal confounding factors. Your rebuttal is actually extremely flawed due to issues with collinearity.

And this stat doesn't mean the Lakers suddenly can't function without him. They definitely can, and most of the bench units will be good regardless. It probably does mean the starters can't function without him, though. I have hopes that replacing Deng with Ingram will make the Randle/ Mozgov frontcourt playable even without Russell, though. I suspect we'll find out tomorrow.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Golden_Emperor_24K
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 23 Nov 2008
Posts: 3480

PostPosted: Sun Jan 22, 2017 4:27 am    Post subject:

http://www.lakersnation.com/kobe-bryant-offers-guidance-to-lakers-brass-im-always-a-phone-call-away/2017/01/22/
Should Dlo call kobe up for advice on how he could improve his game not just skill wise; but to improve his mental approach to the game. They can study films to find out what areas dlo could work on; scout players so he can learn their tendencies. So that way he can better prepare himself the next time he plays those guys.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
pio2u
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 26 Dec 2012
Posts: 54519

PostPosted: Sun Jan 22, 2017 5:11 am    Post subject:

* Follow-up article on D-Lo, Nance and CLW from the OC Register

Quote:
Lakers second-year guard D’Angelo Russell will be out between 1-2 weeks after an MRI taken on Saturday showed a mild MCL sprain, strained right calf and a bone bruise.

The Lakers had already ruled him out for Sunday’s road game against the Dallas Mavericks and also did not travel with the team. Though Russell underwent an MRI on Saturday morning, the results did not become available until later in the evening.

The Lakers’ initial timetable has Russell missing anywhere between the next 3-6 games, though they plan to reevaluate him in a week.


http://www.ocregister.com/articles/walton-741858-one-year.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Jakanzi
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 10 Jan 2017
Posts: 206

PostPosted: Sun Jan 22, 2017 6:07 am    Post subject:

That seems like an awfully optimistic timeline to me. But good that it isn't more serious.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
kobetimeeverytime
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 24 Jan 2012
Posts: 2471

PostPosted: Sun Jan 22, 2017 7:15 am    Post subject:

Jakanzi wrote:
That seems like an awfully optimistic timeline to me. But good that it isn't more serious.


lakers have a history of overly optimistic initial injury reports
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LakersRGolden
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 13 Jan 2002
Posts: 7910
Location: Lake Forest

PostPosted: Sun Jan 22, 2017 8:37 am    Post subject:

nash wrote:
GoldenThroat wrote:
ch3cky0selff00 wrote:
And half of those belonged to two players that come off the bench anyway (Clarkson with 7 and Lou with 3) so I'm not sure what you were going for with that.

Yes. D'Angelo is gawd. The offense runs well with him. I'm just pointing out that it's not the end of the world in terms of offensive flow because D'Angelo is going to be out for 2+ weeks.

Again. I must say. No. I do not think the Lakers are better off without D'Angelo Russell.


Why the hell do so many people do this?

No, it might not be the end of the world in terms of offensive flow for the starters, but if it's not, that will be different from last time. The Young/Deng/Randle/Mozgov combo have played 62 minutes this season without Russell, and they've been outscored by 25 points per 100 possessions. With Russell, they outscore opponents by 7.6.

But of course it could be different this time. It think they'd be wiser to not trot out that combo without him again. (which they didn't do last night, btw)


This is the kind of conversation that makes me believe for the good or for the bad arguments about Dlo have some bias and I'm going to tell why.

Russell absence is going to be felt and the numbers starters post without him are an irrefutable proof. But at the same time it is not completely true that we suck without him because four out of five of our best lineups with 30+ minutes played don't have Russell. Our best lineup by a wide margin is a small ball lineup of JC, Lou, Ingram, Deng and Nance. The second best? Replace Nance with Black and keep all the other players.

We can get into the "they play against subs conversation" and the arguments may never end, but I'm just trying to show that there is a middle ground. Russell is a good player, he is going to be missed like we missed Nance, we missed Nick Young and we are going to miss most of our players because except by Lou they are most on the same pack.

If I'm going to conclude something is that the team runs better without Julius as PF, the first lineup with his name is the 5th best where he is the small ball center while number 1, 2 and 3 have Deng as PF, 4 and 5 Nance.


You can't just use lineups to make conclusions because you never see some combinations. So it's not apples to apples. Williams is our best player, of course lineups with him will do well. Russell won't be in any of them due to Luke's love of Smallball excluding the back court.
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: Sun Jan 22, 2017 9:13 am    Post subject:

I always thought the acquisitions of Mosgov & Deng were a bit curious at the time. Deng would have to probably start and it may limit Ingram's time and then with the Zubac pick he would have to play behind Mosgov. What this also does is limit the Lakers starting unit, which I think has impacted Russell. If Ingram starts instead of Deng, you have another ball handler on the court that can setup Russell. Randle can at times, but seems to do it better in the open court. The team also didn't acquire depth at SG, instead originally starting the season with Russell, Clarkson, Lou, Huertas and Calderon, or essentially PG and undersized SGs. Nick playing well provided a solution, but remember it was expected they were dumping him coming into the season.

Russell will be fine long term, but I think he needs to play off ball sometimes to be effective. If he does, who is running the offense for the starting lineup?
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, 3 ... 1754, 1755, 1756 ... 2854, 2855, 2856  Next
Page 1755 of 2856
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