Joined: 24 Sep 2001 Posts: 8188 Location: Eagle Rock
Posted: Thu Oct 20, 2016 1:53 pm Post subject:
MJST wrote:
Deng's a far worse defender at the 4, and is at his best defensively at the 3.
So if you are trying to replace him at the 4 for defense you're slamming yourself in the foot.
Deng at the 3 is best for this team for what we need from them unless there's an injury.
Deng is a better defender at the 4 than Randle at this time. I am all for starting Deng at the 4 and moving JR to the bench until his game improves. Not sure that we should start BI yet at the 3 though. Might still be better to start Swaggy (I can't believe I am typing that) at the 3. BI looked really good as a guard. I would rather have him start at the 2 than JC. _________________ R.I.P. Doc Buss
Deng's a far worse defender at the 4, and is at his best defensively at the 3.
So if you are trying to replace him at the 4 for defense you're slamming yourself in the foot.
Deng at the 3 is best for this team for what we need from them unless there's an injury.
Deng is a better defender at the 4 than Randle at this time. I am all for starting Deng at the 4 and moving JR to the bench until his game improves. Not sure that we should start BI yet at the 3 though. Might still be better to start Swaggy (I can't believe I am typing that) at the 3. BI looked really good as a guard. I would rather have him start at the 2 than JC.
Deng is a net negative defensively at the 4 and what he gives offensively isn't worth it.
Julius is a better choice for bodying up against other 4s in all honesty as well as rebounding and being able to deal with the mass coming his way.
The ONLY benefit to sticking Deng at the 4 is that he will shoot 3s. But he'll be giving up enough defense at the 4 for it not to matter much.
Julius is just fine at the starting 4 and Deng as the starting 3.
It's tickling how you want Julius to 'earn' the starting 4 position despite him outplaying every other power forward on this team thus far, while you want Ingram to be handed the starting 3 from Deng when he's yet to earn it himself. So which way is it?
Cause if you wanna play it that way consistently you'd put Julius on the bench along with Ingram and have Nick Young start at the 3 and Deng at the 4
Do you really want that if we're staying with the consistency of that theory? Cause if Julius hasn't 'earned' that starting 4 spot given his play, Ingram sure as heck hasn't earned the starting wing spot from Deng, Lou, OR Nick Young for that matter. So yeah.. if we go by that logic our starting lineup should be
D'Angelo Russell
Lou Williams
Nick Young
Luol Deng
Timofey Mozgov
Could Luke Walton Get Experimental With Brandon Ingram At Center?
Quote:
If you think this lineup would struggle you might be right. But at the risk of sounding overly negative, keep in mind that the most conservative lineup the Lakers could put out there wouldn’t fare much better, because, well, they don’t have many good players. Exploring Ingram’s versatility is a worthwhile investment. He has the skillset for the Lakers to even try a big lineup of Russell, Ingram, Deng, Larry Nance Jr. and Julius Randle, even if that may seem to be the opposite direction than the one the league is heading in.
Could Luke Walton Get Experimental With Brandon Ingram At Center?
Quote:
If you think this lineup would struggle you might be right. But at the risk of sounding overly negative, keep in mind that the most conservative lineup the Lakers could put out there wouldn’t fare much better, because, well, they don’t have many good players. Exploring Ingram’s versatility is a worthwhile investment. He has the skillset for the Lakers to even try a big lineup of Russell, Ingram, Deng, Larry Nance Jr. and Julius Randle, even if that may seem to be the opposite direction than the one the league is heading in.
Joined: 12 Jul 2014 Posts: 2154 Location: Inglewood, CA
Posted: Thu Oct 20, 2016 2:34 pm Post subject:
MJST wrote:
Dr. Funkbot wrote:
MJST wrote:
Deng's a far worse defender at the 4, and is at his best defensively at the 3.
So if you are trying to replace him at the 4 for defense you're slamming yourself in the foot.
Deng at the 3 is best for this team for what we need from them unless there's an injury.
Deng is a better defender at the 4 than Randle at this time. I am all for starting Deng at the 4 and moving JR to the bench until his game improves. Not sure that we should start BI yet at the 3 though. Might still be better to start Swaggy (I can't believe I am typing that) at the 3. BI looked really good as a guard. I would rather have him start at the 2 than JC.
Deng is a net negative defensively at the 4 and what he gives offensively isn't worth it.
Julius is a better choice for bodying up against other 4s in all honesty as well as rebounding and being able to deal with the mass coming his way.
The ONLY benefit to sticking Deng at the 4 is that he will shoot 3s. But he'll be giving up enough defense at the 4 for it not to matter much.
Julius is just fine at the starting 4 and Deng as the starting 3.
It's tickling how you want Julius to 'earn' the starting 4 position despite him outplaying every other power forward on this team thus far, while you want Ingram to be handed the starting 3 from Deng when he's yet to earn it himself. So which way is it?
Cause if you wanna play it that way consistently you'd put Julius on the bench along with Ingram and have Nick Young start at the 3 and Deng at the 4
Do you really want that if we're staying with the consistency of that theory? Cause if Julius hasn't 'earned' that starting 4 spot given his play, Ingram sure as heck hasn't earned the starting wing spot from Deng, Lou, OR Nick Young for that matter. So yeah.. if we go by that logic our starting lineup should be
D'Angelo Russell
Lou Williams
Nick Young
Luol Deng
Timofey Mozgov
Deng's a far worse defender at the 4, and is at his best defensively at the 3.
So if you are trying to replace him at the 4 for defense you're slamming yourself in the foot.
Deng at the 3 is best for this team for what we need from them unless there's an injury.
Deng is a better defender at the 4 than Randle at this time. I am all for starting Deng at the 4 and moving JR to the bench until his game improves. Not sure that we should start BI yet at the 3 though. Might still be better to start Swaggy (I can't believe I am typing that) at the 3. BI looked really good as a guard. I would rather have him start at the 2 than JC.
Deng is a net negative defensively at the 4 and what he gives offensively isn't worth it.
Julius is a better choice for bodying up against other 4s in all honesty as well as rebounding and being able to deal with the mass coming his way.
The ONLY benefit to sticking Deng at the 4 is that he will shoot 3s. But he'll be giving up enough defense at the 4 for it not to matter much.
Julius is just fine at the starting 4 and Deng as the starting 3.
It's tickling how you want Julius to 'earn' the starting 4 position despite him outplaying every other power forward on this team thus far, while you want Ingram to be handed the starting 3 from Deng when he's yet to earn it himself. So which way is it?
Cause if you wanna play it that way consistently you'd put Julius on the bench along with Ingram and have Nick Young start at the 3 and Deng at the 4
Do you really want that if we're staying with the consistency of that theory? Cause if Julius hasn't 'earned' that starting 4 spot given his play, Ingram sure as heck hasn't earned the starting wing spot from Deng, Lou, OR Nick Young for that matter. So yeah.. if we go by that logic our starting lineup should be
D'Angelo Russell
Lou Williams
Nick Young
Luol Deng
Timofey Mozgov
Would you want that?
Julius is also a net negative defender.
He's also better suited to play the power forward and is better at the power forward than Deng is.
The only reason you're playing Deng at the 4 is to take advantage of a matchup/lineup with which you stagger minutes and you only ever start Deng at the 4 if all your other options are injured.
It would take both Randle and Nance to be hurt for Deng to see a single second of starting time at the 4. I don't think anyone wants that.
Deng's increased 3 point percentage at the 4 wasn't worth the points he gave up on the other end and as I said, we're not going with an "offense first" mentality.
Julius is also stronger, a better rebounder and playmaker and fast break option than Deng is at the 4 which is why Walton has him in there. Deng's 3 point shooting and lack of defense doesn't off-set everything else Julius gives us at the 4 ESPECIALLY for what Luke wants to do.
So if you wanna stagger lineups with Deng at the 4 from time to time that's fine, however STARTING him there.. we have no legitimate reason for if we're looking at what he'd give us there vs what he doesn't.
I love ingrams demeanor and way he handles himself. He has an older kobes off court persona. keeps to himself and just works hard not which is hard for a 19 yr old millionaire franchise player of Lakers
Look at how Ingram operates this P/R from their scrimmage today. Exquisitely guard-like. The inside-out cross going away from the screen - then the inside out dribble while being patient and taking up more space that the D is giving him - then finally making the pass to the bigman. That patience and manipulation of the defense off the dribble's great. Rare as hell for a 19 year old SF. You can absolutely tell he played PG in highschool.
highlights from the Dubs game. Love the first drive on Draymond Green, keeping the dribble alive and doing that little hesitation, all with the left - And then the smooth reverse layup long extension. advanced stuff for his age. And then the pass to Swaggy on the break in the 1st half, that was a greattt read that he didn't even stare down
Interesting what he said regarding catch and shooting and shooting off the drible. He seems pretty adamant on creating his own shot which isn't a bad thing by any means. But Clarkson and Randle are two players who are only effective offensively with the ball in their hands (Clarkson isn't consistent enough of a shooter to be a lethal off ball threat.) This just solidifies my idea of bringing Clarkson and Randle off the bench. Ingram's development is more important than those two.
Interesting what he said regarding catch and shooting and shooting off the drible. He seems pretty adamant on creating his own shot which isn't a bad thing by any means. But Clarkson and Randle are two players who are only effective offensively with the ball in their hands (Clarkson isn't consistent enough of a shooter to be a lethal off ball threat.) This just solidifies my idea of bringing Clarkson and Randle off the bench. Ingram's development is more important than those two.
Clarkson was much more efficient without the ball last season, so he should probably get used to working off of screens.
Ingram was frozen out a lot tonight in a sloppy, sloppy game, but on some of his possessions he was clearly affected by Bender's length at PF. I actually would have liked to see BI more at SF than PF this game, but the team was admittedly short-handed.
Last edited by Baron Von Humongous on Fri Oct 21, 2016 9:23 pm; edited 1 time in total
Joined: 14 Apr 2001 Posts: 144475 Location: The Gold Coast
Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2016 9:18 pm Post subject:
Dr. Funkbot wrote:
MJST wrote:
Deng's a far worse defender at the 4, and is at his best defensively at the 3.
So if you are trying to replace him at the 4 for defense you're slamming yourself in the foot.
Deng at the 3 is best for this team for what we need from them unless there's an injury.
Deng is a better defender at the 4 than Randle at this time. I am all for starting Deng at the 4 and moving JR to the bench until his game improves. Not sure that we should start BI yet at the 3 though. Might still be better to start Swaggy (I can't believe I am typing that) at the 3. BI looked really good as a guard. I would rather have him start at the 2 than JC.
We are trying to develop Randle, not Deng.
Ingram didn't seem there tonight and didn't get many minutes, I wonder if he might be nursing something. _________________ RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023.
Ingrams awareness and Insticts on D is truly special, even if he ends up only scoring 8-10Pts if he brings that elite D, we will win more games because of it.
So far on offense I think he's been best at pg. I'd like to see experiment with a lineup of
Ingram
Russell
Clarkson
Deng
Nance
That's the lineup most of us want to see with Nance or Mozgov at C but for some reason Luke is too attached to Randle. I think that will be our most successful lineup and we'll win a lot of games.
I don't like Huertas out there. He's too ball dominant. And I thought we looked great as a team when the ball was in Ingram's hands with the second unit.
Ingram is very passive. Let's hope it's a function of age.
Yeah, when the ball is not in his hands he becomes very passive. I think he should be the 2nd unit PG. He just offers much more of a threat than any of the other guys. And he has pretty good court vision.
I don't like Huertas out there. He's too ball dominant. And I thought we looked great as a team when the ball was in Ingram's hands with the second unit.
This goes right to Luke. He's giving these vets too much control of the offense.
I know... I know... but it's how I felt after tonight's game. The offense felt like a carbon copy of Byron-ball, with Lou and Young leading the charge and shot-jacking with zero regard. It was pandemonium and Luke's rotations were complete @ss. It's unwatchable basketball and Luke probably knows it too.
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
