View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
ocho Retired Number
Joined: 24 May 2005 Posts: 53714
|
Posted: Tue Mar 14, 2017 6:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
av3773 wrote: | I think it's pretty obvious.
1) We're tanking
2) The FO wants to assess the young guys, it's basically try outs
We have a lot of young pieces, but not one future cornerstone player....so they're all assets right now. |
The tanking argument doesn't hold up. You don't have to bench anyone or jerk anyone around in order to tank. Russell started all year and look where we are. You do not have to start a player on a 10 day contract in order to get him minutes or evaluate him. You can communicate and send a message to a player after a poor performance without humiliating them or holding them to an ever-changing standard that nobody else is held to. If you want to view all of our players purely as assets, this is also a poor way to go about it. Unless you think inflating David Nwaba's red hot trade value is an end that justifies the means of cratering D'Angelo Ruselll's. _________________ 14-5-3-12 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
av3773 Star Player
Joined: 11 Dec 2011 Posts: 3750
|
Posted: Tue Mar 14, 2017 6:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Pretty much disagree with everything you posted, however we're all entitled to our opinions
ocho wrote: | av3773 wrote: | I think it's pretty obvious.
1) We're tanking
2) The FO wants to assess the young guys, it's basically try outs
We have a lot of young pieces, but not one future cornerstone player....so they're all assets right now. |
The tanking argument doesn't hold up. You don't have to bench anyone or jerk anyone around in order to tank. Russell started all year and look where we are. You do not have to start a player on a 10 day contract in order to get him minutes or evaluate him. You can communicate and send a message to a player after a poor performance without humiliating them or holding them to an ever-changing standard that nobody else is held to. If you want to view all of our players purely as assets, this is also a poor way to go about it. Unless you think inflating David Nwaba's red hot trade value is an end that justifies the means of cratering D'Angelo Ruselll's. |
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
danzag Franchise Player
Joined: 28 Apr 2013 Posts: 22244 Location: Brazil
|
Posted: Tue Mar 14, 2017 6:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
So it's safe to say that the "DLO coming off the bench" experiment has failed? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013 Posts: 29418
|
Posted: Tue Mar 14, 2017 7:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
av3773 wrote: | I think it's pretty obvious.
1) We're tanking
2) The FO wants to assess the young guys, it's basically try outs
We have a lot of young pieces, but not one future cornerstone player....so they're all assets right now. |
And yet, the 76ers game was allegedly the most obvious tank job of them all according one thread here on LG.
We have won 10% of our games since the All-Star break. We can lose trying to win. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
troy Star Player
Joined: 30 Jan 2013 Posts: 4973
|
Posted: Tue Mar 14, 2017 7:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
I like Luke as our coach. But, like the players, we have to assume a wait and see policy instead of being so adamant about them, one way or the other. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Treble Clef Franchise Player
Joined: 20 Nov 2012 Posts: 23745
|
Posted: Tue Mar 14, 2017 11:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Around the 10-10 mark when everyone was anointing Luke as the coach of the year and starting to talk about playoff tiebreakers, I remember posing the question of how much of the success was due to Luke. The overwhelming response was that he established a winning culture, got everyone to buy in, plays everyone to their strengths, and so forth.
Fast forward to now, do we know what Luke's method really is? Has there been enough time to evaluate what he is trying to do? Does he just have the wrong parts? I'm having a hard time seeing any positives so far in comparison to last year other than that they might be adding a #1 overall pick to the mix. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
laker4life Star Player
Joined: 26 Nov 2001 Posts: 7317
|
Posted: Tue Mar 14, 2017 11:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
It is all about the players.
When he was with the Warriors, he coached the team to a great start. Everyone clamored that he was a great coach.
Now with the Lakers, he is a terrible coach.
We are losing because we do not have strong players. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Slappy Sixth Man
Joined: 04 Jul 2015 Posts: 74
|
Posted: Tue Mar 14, 2017 12:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ocho wrote: | av3773 wrote: | I think it's pretty obvious.
1) We're tanking
2) The FO wants to assess the young guys, it's basically try outs
We have a lot of young pieces, but not one future cornerstone player....so they're all assets right now. |
The tanking argument doesn't hold up. You don't have to bench anyone or jerk anyone around in order to tank. Russell started all year and look where we are. You do not have to start a player on a 10 day contract in order to get him minutes or evaluate him. You can communicate and send a message to a player after a poor performance without humiliating them or holding them to an ever-changing standard that nobody else is held to. If you want to view all of our players purely as assets, this is also a poor way to go about it. Unless you think inflating David Nwaba's red hot trade value is an end that justifies the means of cratering D'Angelo Ruselll's. |
They gave Nwaba the start over Russell and Ennis because he presents the least danger of taking over ball handling duties from Clarkson. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
greenfrog Retired Number
Joined: 02 Jan 2011 Posts: 36081 Location: 502 Bad Gateway
|
Posted: Tue Mar 14, 2017 12:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
IIRC, they were bottom 3 before the tank really started and then moved comfortably to bottom 2 before the Phoenix win. That win probably gave them enough of a scare that they decided to kick things up a notch.
I suspect another factor is that during the recent trade deadline negotiations they got a wake up call as to what Clarkson's true value is around the league so they're trying to boost it. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
P.K. Retired Number
Joined: 10 Jul 2003 Posts: 29641
|
Posted: Tue Mar 14, 2017 12:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Two of the expected top 3 players in the draft are Fultz & Ball - who are both guards.
They were probably assessing how DLO & JC did with the other string of players. They've already had a few games with Dlo & JC starting together.
Pretty reasonable to put our current guys in different situations to see how they do - and assess if they should spend a high draft pick on another guard _________________ LBJ + AD = More rings
Never argue with a fool - listeners can't tell you apart
Wilt's unstoppable fadeaway: www.youtube.com/watch?v=8O9MgNfcGJA
NPZ's Magic Johnson mix: www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8Qbo0WqvOI |
|
Back to top |
|
|
greenfrog Retired Number
Joined: 02 Jan 2011 Posts: 36081 Location: 502 Bad Gateway
|
Posted: Tue Mar 14, 2017 12:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
P.K. wrote: | Two of the expected top 3 players in the draft are Fultz & Ball - who are both guards.
They were probably assessing how DLO & JC did with the other string of players. They've already had a few games with Dlo & JC starting together.
Pretty reasonable to put our current guys in different situations to see how they do - and assess if they should spend a high draft pick on another guard |
Russell didn't play the point last night either, even off the bench. I think they want to get a look at him as a pure 2. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
P.K. Retired Number
Joined: 10 Jul 2003 Posts: 29641
|
Posted: Tue Mar 14, 2017 12:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
greenfrog wrote: | P.K. wrote: | Two of the expected top 3 players in the draft are Fultz & Ball - who are both guards.
They were probably assessing how DLO & JC did with the other string of players. They've already had a few games with Dlo & JC starting together.
Pretty reasonable to put our current guys in different situations to see how they do - and assess if they should spend a high draft pick on another guard |
Russell didn't play the point last night either, even off the bench. I think they want to get a look at him as a pure 2. |
Personally, I'd be interested in Ball as PG and Dlo as a ballhandling SG.
That would make a lot of sense for us down the road, especially combined with Ingram & Zu - and the fact that Nick is probably gone this summer or next.
so, yeah...I wouldn't be at all surprised if the FO & coaches aren't going to try different combo's to see what might work in a scenario of getting Ball or Fultz _________________ LBJ + AD = More rings
Never argue with a fool - listeners can't tell you apart
Wilt's unstoppable fadeaway: www.youtube.com/watch?v=8O9MgNfcGJA
NPZ's Magic Johnson mix: www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8Qbo0WqvOI |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ocho Retired Number
Joined: 24 May 2005 Posts: 53714
|
Posted: Tue Mar 14, 2017 12:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Slappy wrote: | ocho wrote: | av3773 wrote: | I think it's pretty obvious.
1) We're tanking
2) The FO wants to assess the young guys, it's basically try outs
We have a lot of young pieces, but not one future cornerstone player....so they're all assets right now. |
The tanking argument doesn't hold up. You don't have to bench anyone or jerk anyone around in order to tank. Russell started all year and look where we are. You do not have to start a player on a 10 day contract in order to get him minutes or evaluate him. You can communicate and send a message to a player after a poor performance without humiliating them or holding them to an ever-changing standard that nobody else is held to. If you want to view all of our players purely as assets, this is also a poor way to go about it. Unless you think inflating David Nwaba's red hot trade value is an end that justifies the means of cratering D'Angelo Ruselll's. |
They gave Nwaba the start over Russell and Ennis because he presents the least danger of taking over ball handling duties from Clarkson. |
C'mon dude. _________________ 14-5-3-12 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
wolfpaclaker Retired Number
Joined: 29 May 2002 Posts: 58318
|
Posted: Tue Mar 14, 2017 1:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
awntawn wrote: | no one's complaining about the loss. it's the fact that the move is counter to the development movement we should be moving toward. we want to build chemistry and the confidence of our future pieces, not jerk them around and confuse the hell out of them both on and off the court |
That's fine and I agree. The thing is what's been happening went down with Byron as coach and MDA as well. Lineup changes. Shuffling. Moreso with Luke and Byron. Don't know why they think it's a good idea to bench Russell, because I personally wouldn't. But I think it's a stretch to put this on a regime change. Jeannie and Magic weren't in charge when Byron benched him .... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
greenfrog Retired Number
Joined: 02 Jan 2011 Posts: 36081 Location: 502 Bad Gateway
|
Posted: Tue Mar 14, 2017 1:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
wolfpaclaker wrote: | awntawn wrote: | no one's complaining about the loss. it's the fact that the move is counter to the development movement we should be moving toward. we want to build chemistry and the confidence of our future pieces, not jerk them around and confuse the hell out of them both on and off the court |
That's fine and I agree. The thing is what's been happening went down with Byron as coach and MDA as well. Lineup changes. Shuffling. Moreso with Luke and Byron. Don't know why they think it's a good idea to bench Russell, because I personally wouldn't. But I think it's a stretch to put this on a regime change. Jeannie and Magic weren't in charge when Byron benched him .... |
You're being kind calling it a stretch. It's a cheap shot with a tinge of paranoia. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kikanga Retired Number
Joined: 15 Sep 2012 Posts: 29151 Location: La La Land
|
Posted: Tue Mar 14, 2017 1:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
greenfrog wrote: | wolfpaclaker wrote: | awntawn wrote: | no one's complaining about the loss. it's the fact that the move is counter to the development movement we should be moving toward. we want to build chemistry and the confidence of our future pieces, not jerk them around and confuse the hell out of them both on and off the court |
That's fine and I agree. The thing is what's been happening went down with Byron as coach and MDA as well. Lineup changes. Shuffling. Moreso with Luke and Byron. Don't know why they think it's a good idea to bench Russell, because I personally wouldn't. But I think it's a stretch to put this on a regime change. Jeannie and Magic weren't in charge when Byron benched him .... |
You're being kind calling it a stretch. It's a cheap shot with a tinge of paranoia. |
I agree. If our normal starting lineup was playing and DLO was the only 1 to get benched. Then I could believe in a, "FO hates DLO" theory. But with Lou traded away, Young sitting, and Ennis and Nwaba playing heavy minutes. The lineup change is obviously bigger than just 1 player. _________________ "Every hurt is a lesson, and every lesson makes you better” |
|
Back to top |
|
|
LakerLanny Retired Number
Joined: 24 Oct 2001 Posts: 47565
|
Posted: Tue Mar 14, 2017 5:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Luke isn't getting great defensive effort out of his young team.
Who wants to argue against that pont? And honestly, I don't mean that sarcastically.
At some point, we need a few guys who can impact games as far as winning instead of losing.
Advanced stats are great, young matadors are not unless outside of the United States. Toro! _________________ Love, Laker Lanny |
|
Back to top |
|
|
LakerLogic Franchise Player
Joined: 27 Mar 2005 Posts: 17886
|
Posted: Tue Mar 14, 2017 5:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Young teams tend to lose in the NBA. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
justsomelakerfan Franchise Player
Joined: 16 Jul 2016 Posts: 10939
|
Posted: Tue Mar 14, 2017 5:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
LakerLogic wrote: | Young teams tend to lose in the NBA. |
One big question I have is whether or not he really got everything he could out of the young guys... When I say this, I'm not saying he didn't, it's more like I'm wondering about it. I think it's fair to say that the young guys haven't really made the strides that we all wanted and were excited about this summer. There were strides! But not the leap we expected.
Did Luke really do this thing right, or is this really the players' best? Curious at our player development process. I do remember hearing to start the season, some reporter watched the Lakers prep for a game or something and noted that he's never seen a team study so much film before a game. But that's definitely not everything. _________________ Austin Reaves
Tweeter: @sarah_dotbiz |
|
Back to top |
|
|
The Logo Star Player
Joined: 25 Jul 2013 Posts: 9577 Location: Salem, OR
|
Posted: Tue Mar 14, 2017 5:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
justsomelakerfan wrote: | LakerLogic wrote: | Young teams tend to lose in the NBA. |
One big question I have is whether or not he really got everything he could out of the young guys... When I say this, I'm not saying he didn't, it's more like I'm wondering about it. I think it's fair to say that the young guys haven't really made the strides that we all wanted and were excited about this summer. There were strides! But not the leap we expected.
Did Luke really do this thing right, or is this really the players' best? Curious at our player development process. I do remember hearing to start the season, some reporter watched the Lakers prep for a game or something and noted that he's never seen a team study so much film before a game. But that's definitely not everything. |
I think it's a mixed bag with Luke. Of the three players that I've been pleased with their development are Russell, Ingram, and Zubac. Ingram and Zu both look like marginally better players than the summer league while Russell looks like an average NBA PG in year 2. JC, Julius and Nance for me is where I have some issues. I think Julius and Larry both should've been taking threes since the start of the year and I would've liked to see a lot more consistency with JC as a play maker than just a microwave scorer. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
justsomelakerfan Franchise Player
Joined: 16 Jul 2016 Posts: 10939
|
Posted: Tue Mar 14, 2017 6:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The Logo wrote: | justsomelakerfan wrote: | LakerLogic wrote: | Young teams tend to lose in the NBA. |
One big question I have is whether or not he really got everything he could out of the young guys... When I say this, I'm not saying he didn't, it's more like I'm wondering about it. I think it's fair to say that the young guys haven't really made the strides that we all wanted and were excited about this summer. There were strides! But not the leap we expected.
Did Luke really do this thing right, or is this really the players' best? Curious at our player development process. I do remember hearing to start the season, some reporter watched the Lakers prep for a game or something and noted that he's never seen a team study so much film before a game. But that's definitely not everything. |
I think it's a mixed bag with Luke. Of the three players that I've been pleased with their development are Russell, Ingram, and Zubac. Ingram and Zu both look like marginally better players than the summer league while Russell looks like an average NBA PG in year 2. JC, Julius and Nance for me is where I have some issues. I think Julius and Larry both should've been taking threes since the start of the year and I would've liked to see a lot more consistency with JC as a play maker than just a microwave scorer. |
Totally agree. I would say the same about the three guys showing the most progress. I actually think Ingram has had the most promising, consistent development. And even then, Julius still made strides in terms of his approach, not perfect, but he can be an offensive force every now and then, you know?
So perhaps on an individual basis, the guys are better. Would like a shooting coach brought on board. Did they improve as much as they could have? We might not know until next year. Julius and Larry should have been taking 3s all season.
I think they weren't because Luke was trying to win games for a loooooong time as perhaps his top priority. _________________ Austin Reaves
Tweeter: @sarah_dotbiz |
|
Back to top |
|
|
The Logo Star Player
Joined: 25 Jul 2013 Posts: 9577 Location: Salem, OR
|
Posted: Tue Mar 14, 2017 6:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
justsomelakerfan wrote: | The Logo wrote: | justsomelakerfan wrote: | LakerLogic wrote: | Young teams tend to lose in the NBA. |
One big question I have is whether or not he really got everything he could out of the young guys... When I say this, I'm not saying he didn't, it's more like I'm wondering about it. I think it's fair to say that the young guys haven't really made the strides that we all wanted and were excited about this summer. There were strides! But not the leap we expected.
Did Luke really do this thing right, or is this really the players' best? Curious at our player development process. I do remember hearing to start the season, some reporter watched the Lakers prep for a game or something and noted that he's never seen a team study so much film before a game. But that's definitely not everything. |
I think it's a mixed bag with Luke. Of the three players that I've been pleased with their development are Russell, Ingram, and Zubac. Ingram and Zu both look like marginally better players than the summer league while Russell looks like an average NBA PG in year 2. JC, Julius and Nance for me is where I have some issues. I think Julius and Larry both should've been taking threes since the start of the year and I would've liked to see a lot more consistency with JC as a play maker than just a microwave scorer. |
Totally agree. I would say the same about the three guys showing the most progress. I actually think Ingram has had the most promising, consistent development. And even then, Julius still made strides in terms of his approach, not perfect, but he can be an offensive force every now and then, you know?
So perhaps on an individual basis, the guys are better. Would like a shooting coach brought on board. Did they improve as much as they could have? We might not know until next year. Julius and Larry should have been taking 3s all season.
I think they weren't because Luke was trying to win games for a loooooong time as perhaps his top priority. |
Yup, I forgot to say that I've been pleased with Luke untapping Julius's potential as a play maker as well and instead focused on him shooting more threes. I want him shooting threes for the rest of his career, even though he's improved on his mid range from year 1 to year 2. Shooting wise has been and still is my biggest concern with all of our guys. Russell has stayed the same shooting wise from three even though his catch and shoots are significantly better than his pull ups, Clarkson has just completely regressed, Ingram's shooting was a HUGE concern until he steadily improved, and again I want to see Nance and Julius shoot more threes. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Goldenwest Star Player
Joined: 28 Nov 2009 Posts: 2801
|
Posted: Tue Mar 14, 2017 7:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The thing about tanking, whether obvious or not is that it's hard to evaluate coaching performance. It's Luke's first year so he already gets a pass for that but labeling this year a tank year, again, gives him a clean slate for next year. As long as we're tanking, its really impossible to gage how good he is. You could apply this to the young guns as well: we still don't have a good handle on how good these guys are going to be. Changing lineups, benching vets, questionable motivation on the court make evaluations difficult. The 50/50 split on how good DLO is on LG proves that.
The tank does causes all this. I hope the NBA comes up with a plan to remove this incentive to tank. It's bad for the fans and really for once great franchises like the lakers. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
bum2 Starting Rotation
Joined: 31 Aug 2005 Posts: 809
|
Posted: Tue Mar 14, 2017 10:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Goldenwest wrote: | The thing about tanking, whether obvious or not is that it's hard to evaluate coaching performance. It's Luke's first year so he already gets a pass for that but labeling this year a tank year, again, gives him a clean slate for next year. As long as we're tanking, its really impossible to gage how good he is. You could apply this to the young guns as well: we still don't have a good handle on how good these guys are going to be. Changing lineups, benching vets, questionable motivation on the court make evaluations difficult. The 50/50 split on how good DLO is on LG proves that.
The tank does causes all this. I hope the NBA comes up with a plan to remove this incentive to tank. It's bad for the fans and really for once great franchises like the lakers. |
They didn't commit to tanking until a few weeks ago. There were plenty of games to make an assessment on him up until that point. And the early reviews are not pretty.
I think how he is handling DLO is a good chance to evaluate him as a coach/leader, also. A young player, clearly fragile and viewed skeptically by his own fans. And you bench him after one bad game post ASB...bad look. And has nothing to do with the on court product because Ingrams minutes remain, even though he has been horrible this season.
Playing favourites only works in the long run, if you win.
Plus, there is an incentive to tank in every sport. Exception being baseball. Edmonton ended up with McDavid for a reason |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Goldenwest Star Player
Joined: 28 Nov 2009 Posts: 2801
|
Posted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 9:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
bum2 wrote: | Goldenwest wrote: | The thing about tanking, whether obvious or not is that it's hard to evaluate coaching performance. It's Luke's first year so he already gets a pass for that but labeling this year a tank year, again, gives him a clean slate for next year. As long as we're tanking, its really impossible to gage how good he is. You could apply this to the young guns as well: we still don't have a good handle on how good these guys are going to be. Changing lineups, benching vets, questionable motivation on the court make evaluations difficult. The 50/50 split on how good DLO is on LG proves that.
The tank does causes all this. I hope the NBA comes up with a plan to remove this incentive to tank. It's bad for the fans and really for once great franchises like the lakers. |
They didn't commit to tanking until a few weeks ago. There were plenty of games to make an assessment on him up until that point. And the early reviews are not pretty.
I think how he is handling DLO is a good chance to evaluate him as a coach/leader, also. A young player, clearly fragile and viewed skeptically by his own fans. And you bench him after one bad game post ASB...bad look. And has nothing to do with the on court product because Ingrams minutes remain, even though he has been horrible this season.
Playing favourites only works in the long run, if you win.
Plus, there is an incentive to tank in every sport. Exception being baseball. Edmonton ended up with McDavid for a reason |
When the lakers were 15 games under 500 everyone pretty much knew where this season was headed (lottery).
Even if there are incentives in other sports doesn't mean it's good for basketball. Anyway, in football for one, there really is no tank. Bottom dwellers are still playing to win mostly because players and coaches want to keep their jobs. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|