| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
P.K.
Retired Number
Joined: 10 Jul 2003
Posts: 29726
|
 Posted: Tue Jan 24, 2017 12:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kikanga wrote: | | P.K. wrote: | Some of you keep going on about making the playoffs
Let's talk about how improbable that is
Nugz (#8):17-24, .415 win rate, 41 games remaining
Blazers (#9): 19-27, .413 win rate, 36 games remaining
Lakers: 16-31, .340 win rate, 35 games remaining
IF the Nugz finish out at the same .415 rate, they'd finish with 34 wins. For the Lakers to beat that, they'd need 35 wins - meaning they'd have to finish their remaining 35 games with a 19-16 record (.543). They're suddenly going to start playing about 60% better then their current record? Let's put it another way, they've won 16 out of 47 games - is it really reasonable to expect them to win 19 out of the remaining 35?
IF the Blazers finish out at their current .413 rate, they'll finish with 34 (33.86) wins to. The math for the Lakers to catch the Blazers is almost exactly the same.
with 35 games left on the Lakers schedule, even improving to 45% for their remaining games (a 33% improvement over what they've done to-date, BTW) win rate would leave LAL with a record of only 32-50. Still short
EVEN IF, as one poster has stated, 1 of either the NUGZ or Blazers implodes or has all their players traded, the other team is still there. And, the probability math indicates the playoffs are out of reach now.
When you pass the halfway point of the season, the # of games that are left where you can dramatically change the standings becomes smaller and smaller. The Lakers would have to win over 55% of their remaining games to make this a possible scenario - not very likely when they're only winning 34% today.
Add to that the fact that the Blazers beat us pretty easily 119-128 on Jan 5th, and again on Jan 10th 108-87.
And the Nugs beat us on Jan 17th.
There is still a statistical chance LAL could do this - but it's highly unrealistic.
It's time to face up to that, start playing Ingram with the starters and start giving Zu major minutes. Build for next year, because the playoffs are not realistic.
Emplay is right. |
Great post P.K. |
Thanks....
For those of you who might be interested, I wrote that post before the Mavs game.
Since then, the Lakers lost 1 game (16-32, .333) and the Nugz won 1 & lost 1 (18-25, .419). I won't bother re-running all the math, since it's kind of pointless, but just glancing at the #'s I'd estimate that 2 game swing PLUS the reduction in games remaining (for both teams) probably would mean the Lakers would have to win approximately 60% of their remaining games to get the 8th seed now using the scenario outlined above.
_________________
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 |
|
 |
LakerMindLA
Star Player
Joined: 26 Dec 2008
Posts: 5344
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 24, 2017 1:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ribeye wrote: | | tox wrote: | | LakerMindLA wrote: | | Inspector Gadget wrote: | I agree, just look how long it took the Celtics and Clippers after years of being bad, the Celtics didn't become contenders by tanking for a top pick they did by trading for Garnett and Allen and even when you look at the Clippers they didn't become WC contenders until they acquired Paul.
This team isn't gonna get back on top by aiming for a top pick and no they aren't gonna trade it for a superstar cause no one is gonna help the Lakers. |
It took the Celtics so long because they never went into full tank mode and had to wait through so many drafts in the end the accumulate enough assets to trade for players and still have enough to be competitive. In the end, it was their tanking that helped them get Garnett and Allen. Allen was traded directly for a draft pick and Garnett came for players the Celtics drafted in the mid-first round.
The Lakers are really 1 asset short still. Tanking this year is extremely important for developing a championship contender.
I'd also challenge you to name a championship team that in which there best or 2nd best player didn't come through the draft. |
The 2013 Heat. But even then, LeBron & Bosh came because of Wade is it's a tenuous argument. |
How about the Los Angeles Lakers? Shaq was a free agent and Kobe came via a trade. Then Gasol came via a trade. Back in Magic's day, though the Lakers did draft him, the rights came via a trade (Goodrich) (or via forced compensation as it really was) as did Kareem. |
While Kobe technically came in a trade, the Lakers really drafted him.
They traded a proven player for the rights to a drafted player who had never played an NBA game.
It really doesn't change the argument. Championship teams are developed through drafting stars. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laker4life
Star Player
Joined: 26 Nov 2001
Posts: 7320
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 24, 2017 2:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| P.K. wrote: | Some of you keep going on about making the playoffs
Let's talk about how improbable that is
Nugz (#8):17-24, .415 win rate, 41 games remaining
Blazers (#9): 19-27, .413 win rate, 36 games remaining
Lakers: 16-31, .340 win rate, 35 games remaining
IF the Nugz finish out at the same .415 rate, they'd finish with 34 wins. For the Lakers to beat that, they'd need 35 wins - meaning they'd have to finish their remaining 35 games with a 19-16 record (.543). They're suddenly going to start playing about 60% better then their current record? Let's put it another way, they've won 16 out of 47 games - is it really reasonable to expect them to win 19 out of the remaining 35?
IF the Blazers finish out at their current .413 rate, they'll finish with 34 (33.86) wins to. The math for the Lakers to catch the Blazers is almost exactly the same.
with 35 games left on the Lakers schedule, even improving to 45% for their remaining games (a 33% improvement over what they've done to-date, BTW) win rate would leave LAL with a record of only 32-50. Still short
EVEN IF, as one poster has stated, 1 of either the NUGZ or Blazers implodes or has all their players traded, the other team is still there. And, the probability math indicates the playoffs are out of reach now.
When you pass the halfway point of the season, the # of games that are left where you can dramatically change the standings becomes smaller and smaller. The Lakers would have to win over 55% of their remaining games to make this a possible scenario - not very likely when they're only winning 34% today.
Add to that the fact that the Blazers beat us pretty easily 119-128 on Jan 5th, and again on Jan 10th 108-87.
And the Nugs beat us on Jan 17th.
There is still a statistical chance LAL could do this - but it's highly unrealistic.
It's time to face up to that, start playing Ingram with the starters and start giving Zu major minutes. Build for next year, because the playoffs are not realistic.
Emplay is right. |
It is very unlikely.
But you still must try.
We are only 4 games back.
Not too difficult if we go on a run. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wilkes52
Star Player
Joined: 02 Jun 2009
Posts: 2415
Location: Far from home
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 24, 2017 4:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
"Not too difficult if we go on a run."
That's the spirit, close your eyes and keep hoping (dreaming.)
I wish I could join you there, but I'm seeing strength in PK's argument. There exists awfully poor chances to even win 32 games, much less to win enough to make additional ground and make the playoffs. The guys aren't playing well.
The type of run required to displace either the Nuggets or the Blazers at this point IS tough. That's the point.
_________________
“These GOAT discussions are fun distractions while sitting around waiting for the pizza to be served.”
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P.K.
Retired Number
Joined: 10 Jul 2003
Posts: 29726
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 24, 2017 6:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Wilkes52 wrote: | "Not too difficult if we go on a run."
That's the spirit, close your eyes and keep hoping (dreaming.)
I wish I could join you there, but I'm seeing strength in PK's argument. There exists awfully poor chances to even win 32 games, much less to win enough to make additional ground and make the playoffs. The guys aren't playing well.
The type of run required to displace either the Nuggets or the Blazers at this point IS tough. That's the point. |
The writing was on the wall after the Blazers/Nugz beat us 3 times, handily, in the space of only 12 days - and I'd bet money every player on the team knows that.
Once that Jan 17th loss to the Nugz occurred, it was obvious we weren't getting there - and the priority should shift to grooming young guys, including starting Ingram and major minutes for Zubac/Nance.
wishing and hoping won't make it so - and, unfortunately, Reality is a very harsh mistress.
_________________
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 |
|
|
Inspector Gadget
Retired Number
Joined: 18 Apr 2016
Posts: 46681
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 24, 2017 7:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Wilkes52 wrote: | "Not too difficult if we go on a run."
That's the spirit, close your eyes and keep hoping (dreaming.)
I wish I could join you there, but I'm seeing strength in PK's argument. There exists awfully poor chances to even win 32 games, much less to win enough to make additional ground and make the playoffs. The guys aren't playing well.
The type of run required to displace either the Nuggets or the Blazers at this point IS tough. That's the point. |
I don't think people realize how it will be just as exciting if the Lakers finish with 30-35 wins if playoffs are out of reach, that's why I'm still hoping the team regains some of there early season magic and end there season on a high note cause once 30 wins is there you can start talking 50 wins in the 2017-2018 season. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Shaber
Star Player
Joined: 12 Mar 2006
Posts: 3732
Location: The other side
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 24, 2017 10:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Tanking is just an excuse for being incapable to win.
.
_________________
.
Lakers depth chart
PG Johnson / Goodrich
SG Bryant / West / Scott
SF Baylor / Worthy / Cooper
PF Mikkelsen / Hairston / McAdoo / Gasol
C Chamberlain / Abdul-Jabbar / O'Neal / Mikan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nash
Star Player
Joined: 23 Oct 2001
Posts: 8194
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2017 4:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| s_habe wrote: | Tanking is just an excuse for being incapable to win.
. |
This
And tanking again is a consequence of not capitalizing after tanking. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Shaber
Star Player
Joined: 12 Mar 2006
Posts: 3732
Location: The other side
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2017 6:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| nash wrote: | | s_habe wrote: | | Tanking is just an excuse for being incapable to win. |
This
And tanking again is a consequence of not capitalizing after tanking. |
And this has a tendency to become a tradition.
Hence, always say no to tanking.
_________________
.
Lakers depth chart
PG Johnson / Goodrich
SG Bryant / West / Scott
SF Baylor / Worthy / Cooper
PF Mikkelsen / Hairston / McAdoo / Gasol
C Chamberlain / Abdul-Jabbar / O'Neal / Mikan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fontana3d
Star Player
Joined: 22 Mar 2013
Posts: 3794
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2017 7:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| s_habe wrote: | | nash wrote: | | s_habe wrote: | | Tanking is just an excuse for being incapable to win. |
This
And tanking again is a consequence of not capitalizing after tanking. |
And this has a tendency to become a tradition.
Hence, always say no to tanking. |
It's not an excuse when we are trying to recover assets that we lost as much as we can. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Shaber
Star Player
Joined: 12 Mar 2006
Posts: 3732
Location: The other side
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2017 10:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| fontana3d wrote: | | s_habe wrote: | | nash wrote: | | s_habe wrote: | | Tanking is just an excuse for being incapable to win. |
This
And tanking again is a consequence of not capitalizing after tanking. |
And this has a tendency to become a tradition.
Hence, always say no to tanking. |
It's not an excuse when we are trying to recover assets that we lost as much as we can. |
We should be working on recovering a winning tradition, not assets traded long ago.
_________________
.
Lakers depth chart
PG Johnson / Goodrich
SG Bryant / West / Scott
SF Baylor / Worthy / Cooper
PF Mikkelsen / Hairston / McAdoo / Gasol
C Chamberlain / Abdul-Jabbar / O'Neal / Mikan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
davidse
Franchise Player
Joined: 03 Jul 2005
Posts: 14302
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2017 12:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Heyvoon24 wrote: | | emplay wrote: | | If the Lakers were a viable bubble playoff team, I might have a different opinion, they're not |
Agreed. Trading away one of our main scorers (Nick or Lou) to a playoff team for an asset would solidify our chances. |
No half measures.
Trade both.
Pick is too important for this team's chances of competing for an nba title in the next decade.
Lose those two and the tank is looking much MUCH better, not to mention you're not just giving them away, but actually getting back assets that will be more helpful to the team than those two players - when it actually means something - several years from now.
Just think about Swaggy catching fire and helping us win a couple of games we wouldn't otherwise win, and then.................he's gone next summer and we lose our pick.
Can you actually live with that ?
Can the Lakers ?
They're idiots if they can.
And Lou is straight up cashing out on a big time asset.
His play this season and his contract make him a great asset to move, and once again - if he's not moved and ends up helping us win the one or two games that make a difference ?
Well, then we deserve to lose our pick.
No.
Half.
Measures.
Everything but actively trying to lose on the court should be fair game.
Last edited by davidse on Wed Jan 25, 2017 7:52 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
davidse
Franchise Player
Joined: 03 Jul 2005
Posts: 14302
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2017 12:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| s_habe wrote: | | fontana3d wrote: | | s_habe wrote: | | nash wrote: | | s_habe wrote: | | Tanking is just an excuse for being incapable to win. |
This
And tanking again is a consequence of not capitalizing after tanking. |
And this has a tendency to become a tradition.
Hence, always say no to tanking. |
It's not an excuse when we are trying to recover assets that we lost as much as we can. |
We should be working on recovering a winning tradition, not assets traded long ago. |
The only tradition your'e going to recover without setting your priorities straight and your expectations to meet reality - is 1st rd exit tradition.
Right now, our trajectory is more or less where Portland sits in terms of talent.
Do you think The Sixers are looking at them with jealousy right now because of their "winning tradition" or are they extatic about their future with Embiid and Simmons ?
It's about talent.
It's always been about talent.
And it's not more than ever about talent in the draft because of the new CBA.
Adapt or become the Blazers. and they have LIllard... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wilkes52
Star Player
Joined: 02 Jun 2009
Posts: 2415
Location: Far from home
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2017 12:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
"Everything but actively trying to lose on the court should be fair game."
Well, I wonder if that even is a distinction worth drawing or pursuing, if only because its most recent series of occurrences haven't been particularly rewarding to the team in Philadelphia, in any sense. I'd offer that there's been no real consequence (no league backlash to punish, no rising from the annual crash and burn to reward) Philly for its recent history. They've conducted an outrageous series of on-court and head office cluster-foks of the highest order. Our club is not far behind.
Maybe actively trying to lose on court is overrated, but if the club isn't managed well it won't make a difference. We'll have to watch our Laker front office to see if they prove any smarter than the bozos back East.
_________________
“These GOAT discussions are fun distractions while sitting around waiting for the pizza to be served.”
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
davidse
Franchise Player
Joined: 03 Jul 2005
Posts: 14302
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2017 12:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Wilkes52 wrote: | "Everything but actively trying to lose on the court should be fair game."
Well, I wonder if that even is a distinction worth drawing or pursuing, if only because its most recent series of occurrences haven't been particularly rewarding to the team in Philadelphia, in any sense. I'd offer that there's been no real consequence (no league backlash to punish, no rising from the annual crash and burn to reward) Philly for its recent history. They've conducted an outrageous series of on-court and head office cluster-foks of the highest order. Our club is not far behind.
Maybe actively trying to lose on court is overrated, but if the club isn't managed well it won't make a difference. We'll have to watch our Laker front office to see if they prove any smarter than the bozos back East. |
I disagree.
Sixers always played extremely hard, even when they were terrible.
Their tanking stopped right at the bottom red line of acceptability as far as I'm concerned - shutting down players.
But they always played hard and played to win, and I hope we do too.
There is a line I won't cross and that is the line. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fontana3d
Star Player
Joined: 22 Mar 2013
Posts: 3794
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2017 1:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| s_habe wrote: | | fontana3d wrote: | | s_habe wrote: | | nash wrote: | | s_habe wrote: | | Tanking is just an excuse for being incapable to win. |
This
And tanking again is a consequence of not capitalizing after tanking. |
And this has a tendency to become a tradition.
Hence, always say no to tanking. |
It's not an excuse when we are trying to recover assets that we lost as much as we can. |
We should be working on recovering a winning tradition, not assets traded long ago. |
Well still owe draft picks to Philly and Orlando we have been delaying paying up to the Sixers and Orlando for the last two years, and we are to face the music soon because we will lose a draft this season regardless just to who though? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
scoobs
Star Player
Joined: 19 Aug 2005
Posts: 4746
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2017 7:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
How about a trade for Jimmy Butler?
Lakers get: Butler
Bulls get: Ingram, Randle and Clarkson
Why for Bulls?
They were rumored to be shopping Butler, Ingram is a potential future star. Randle and Clarkson are pretty good and young.
Why for Lakers?
Butler is an NBA all star starter. We obviously win in this trade. It takes great players to win, i would be more then happy to part with 3 good players for one great player. We still suck enough to keep our pick, this is more about setting things up for next year. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
emplay
Site Staff
Joined: 15 Apr 2001
Posts: 25549
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2017 7:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Lakers won't give up those 3 for Butler
_________________
Salary Cap Strategist and Columnist at Bleacher Report and on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/EricPincus |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
scoobs
Star Player
Joined: 19 Aug 2005
Posts: 4746
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2017 7:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| emplay wrote: | | Lakers won't give up those 3 for Butler |
Why not? You would think that they would want some star power, right? Butler is arguably a top 10 player right now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
emplay
Site Staff
Joined: 15 Apr 2001
Posts: 25549
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2017 8:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Because that's more than the Lakers are willing to give up for Butler
_________________
Salary Cap Strategist and Columnist at Bleacher Report and on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/EricPincus |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
emplay
Site Staff
Joined: 15 Apr 2001
Posts: 25549
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2017 8:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Because that's more than the Lakers are willing to give up for Butler
_________________
Salary Cap Strategist and Columnist at Bleacher Report and on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/EricPincus |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2017 8:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| scoobs wrote: | | emplay wrote: | | Lakers won't give up those 3 for Butler |
Why not? You would think that they would want some star power, right? Butler is arguably a top 10 player right now. |
His current bulls team would be better than what's left over on the Lakers and they're not even that great.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
samwowmar5
Sixth Man
Joined: 25 Jan 2017
Posts: 33
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2017 8:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| If we end up getting a top 3 pick....who do you want? Ball/Fultz/Monk/other? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
scoobs
Star Player
Joined: 19 Aug 2005
Posts: 4746
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2017 8:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| yinoma2001 wrote: | | scoobs wrote: | | emplay wrote: | | Lakers won't give up those 3 for Butler |
Why not? You would think that they would want some star power, right? Butler is arguably a top 10 player right now. |
His current bulls team would be better than what's left over on the Lakers and they're not even that great. |
Not really. Who would be their star? You got to have stars to win in this league and Butler is the only star included in my trade scenario. This trade greatly favors the Lakers. Sure, Ingram has star potential, but Randle and Clarkson are good players at best. Besides, we are in tank mode anyway, so getting Butler now is more about setting us up for the future than anything. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
scoobs
Star Player
Joined: 19 Aug 2005
Posts: 4746
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2017 8:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| samwowmar5 wrote: | | If we end up getting a top 3 pick....who do you want? Ball/Fultz/Monk/other? |
Im torn between Ball and Fultz. Ball reminds me of one of my favorite all time players, Jason Kidd. He looks like Kevin Martin out there with his shot though, which i cant stand. Is he Jason Kidd or Kendall Marshall? Fultz reminds me of Dwayne Wade, but is he Dwayne Wade or Jordan Clarkson? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
