Lakers ranked #9 for the best off season by David Aldridge
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Practice
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 14 Apr 2015
Posts: 3114

PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2017 1:48 am    Post subject:

Dreamshake wrote:
OKC #3 and Hou #5? I don't see how he can rank OKC ahead. CP3 > PG13, and he appears to not be a one year rental. We also got Harden to extend this summer and Westbrook still hasn't signed.

OKC also got rid of Oladipo's contract.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Chronicle
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 21 Jul 2012
Posts: 28536
Location: Holland

PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2017 2:19 am    Post subject:

Dreamshake wrote:
OKC #3 and Hou #5? I don't see how he can rank OKC ahead. CP3 > PG13, and he appears to not be a one year rental. We also got Harden to extend this summer and Westbrook still hasn't signed.


I think you're looking at it wrong though. They're not saying okc will be better than houston this season. They're just saying they had a better offseason. OKC wasn't in a position to do anything, but somehow managed to get rid of a bloated contract in exchange for an all nba player, who not only is a good player but also may help them keep their cornerstone player. It's no guarantee, obviously, but they didn't have any real assets in the first place.

Houston pulled off a big trade for an aging star. It will likely lead to a slight improvement in number of wins (only slight because of the already high number last season), but it's not quite better than what OKC did. Though even then, it's close. #3 and #5 is not that big a difference anyway
_________________
also sprach magic johnson
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Luminous8
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 26 Apr 2017
Posts: 100

PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2017 2:46 am    Post subject:

Not really sure what the Sixers did to be rated so high up this list. They basically added JJ and Markelle.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
lewis
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 23 Oct 2013
Posts: 985

PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2017 3:36 am    Post subject:

Luminous8 wrote:
Not really sure what the Sixers did to be rated so high up this list. They basically added JJ and Markelle.


Trading up for Fultz. In theory a #1 pick is better then a #3 and a #3-5.
We will have to wait and see on this one
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
nash
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 23 Oct 2001
Posts: 8079

PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2017 3:48 am    Post subject:

SuperboyReformed wrote:
regardless of the pay, I think Clarkson is a good player to have, a lot better than other realistic options.
I am personally annoyed that we lost Nick Young since he was basically our best 3pt shooter by far. He's one of those guys like Livingston that is going to be able to really let the starters get some solid rest. I hope we make up for it somehow, but right now we don't have anywhere near as deadly a 3pt shooter or hard shot maker like Young, and the warriors, our primary target, got our best one and they already have a handful of better ones. So I was extremely annoyed at that.

Lonzo seems special enough to really distinguish ourselves from the Warriors. but there's still that bottom line that open guys will have to make their 3pt shots. This is going to be key for us, and there's also the great hope that Ingram will emerge. He showed impressive glimpses as we all know that first game in the summer, I was very impressed. Now the volume. TO me, everything else is up in the air and remains to be seen.


While I agree that we will miss Nick 3pts, all our guards from last season 4 guard rotation were abysmal defenders, bottom 10 among PG/SG. We just have Clarkson remaining from this "no defense" crop and I think it is ok keeping one player like him. Two is too much.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
lewis
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 23 Oct 2013
Posts: 985

PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2017 4:47 am    Post subject:

nash wrote:
SuperboyReformed wrote:
regardless of the pay, I think Clarkson is a good player to have, a lot better than other realistic options.
I am personally annoyed that we lost Nick Young since he was basically our best 3pt shooter by far. He's one of those guys like Livingston that is going to be able to really let the starters get some solid rest. I hope we make up for it somehow, but right now we don't have anywhere near as deadly a 3pt shooter or hard shot maker like Young, and the warriors, our primary target, got our best one and they already have a handful of better ones. So I was extremely annoyed at that.

Lonzo seems special enough to really distinguish ourselves from the Warriors. but there's still that bottom line that open guys will have to make their 3pt shots. This is going to be key for us, and there's also the great hope that Ingram will emerge. He showed impressive glimpses as we all know that first game in the summer, I was very impressed. Now the volume. TO me, everything else is up in the air and remains to be seen.


While I agree that we will miss Nick 3pts, all our guards from last season 4 guard rotation were abysmal defenders, bottom 10 among PG/SG. We just have Clarkson remaining from this "no defense" crop and I think it is ok keeping one player like him. Two is too much.


Based on summer league, Lonzo will fit in that group as well. At least in his rookie year.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
nash
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 23 Oct 2001
Posts: 8079

PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2017 5:23 am    Post subject:

lewis wrote:

Based on summer league, Lonzo will fit in that group as well. At least in his rookie year.


While his man defense is terrible, Lonzo is a good team defender, let's see how he develops.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 80289

PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2017 5:32 am    Post subject:

nash wrote:
lewis wrote:

Based on summer league, Lonzo will fit in that group as well. At least in his rookie year.


While his man defense is terrible, Lonzo is a good team defender, let's see how he develops.


I think he will improve. But long haul, probably best putting him on the team's weakest perimeter defender. His point of attack defense isn't good (most guards aren't) but you can tell he has good instincts in passing lanes and help defense.
_________________
2 Max Scenarios:

-JC out for $0/Deng stretched = 57.6m in 2018 cap space
-Same as above and Jules renounced/traded for $0 = 69.9m in 2018 cap space

2 of 4 of these players will be Lakers in 2018 (LBJ/PG13/WB/Boogie)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
epak
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 12864

PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2017 2:41 pm    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
epak wrote:
Is it about quality of team at end of off-season. Or is it improvement of quality..


It's neither. It's about the quality of the moves you made. That includes signing free agents; making trades; resigning your own players; getting players on good contracts; signing coaches or executives.

The Warriors were number #1 not because they improved or because of how good their roster was, but because they managed to resign all their own players who were free agents.


Geez. I actually clicked the link to get his criteria.

Quote:
What plays into the rankings:

This isnít science. Itís an educated guess, weighing the impact both of the Draft and free agency, but also assessing whether teams got value in their free-agent signings. Overpaying the right player is as much a sin as signing the wrong player. A good new coach can coax some more wins out of a roster. But if a teamís players donít believe in the system their team uses (Iím looking at you, Knicks), the best Xs and Os on earth donít matter.

Teams that are rebuilding obviously have different priorities than teams making a championship push. That's factored in. Itís why, even though I may think Atlanta was right to push the reset button and start over, losing Millsap and the other players whoíve departed in the last two years is a bigger deal -- and, thus, the Hawksí offseason canít be viewed as a success when determining if theyíre better now than they were in April. Theyíre not. And a team like the Warriors that shows itís willing to go deep into the luxury tax -- which most teams try to avoid -- in order to keep winning has to be commended, and its rankings reflect that commendation.

Continuity matters here as well. The most successful teams usually not only identify a core group of players, they keep them together for a while, finding that sweet spot: everyone doesnít get a max contract, but most get paid well enough to keep the train moving down the tracks. That reflects both good roster construction and good financial management -- and, again, is rewarded. The explosion in the cap means everyone has to spend; keeping your powder dry for another day doesnít have as much cache as it used to. But you still have to manage your money wisely.



bleh.
_________________
2 stooges gone, 1 to go.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
SuperboyReformed
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 07 Oct 2012
Posts: 2956

PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2017 3:17 pm    Post subject:

nash wrote:
SuperboyReformed wrote:
regardless of the pay, I think Clarkson is a good player to have, a lot better than other realistic options.
I am personally annoyed that we lost Nick Young since he was basically our best 3pt shooter by far. He's one of those guys like Livingston that is going to be able to really let the starters get some solid rest. I hope we make up for it somehow, but right now we don't have anywhere near as deadly a 3pt shooter or hard shot maker like Young, and the warriors, our primary target, got our best one and they already have a handful of better ones. So I was extremely annoyed at that.

Lonzo seems special enough to really distinguish ourselves from the Warriors. but there's still that bottom line that open guys will have to make their 3pt shots. This is going to be key for us, and there's also the great hope that Ingram will emerge. He showed impressive glimpses as we all know that first game in the summer, I was very impressed. Now the volume. TO me, everything else is up in the air and remains to be seen.


While I agree that we will miss Nick 3pts, all our guards from last season 4 guard rotation were abysmal defenders, bottom 10 among PG/SG. We just have Clarkson remaining from this "no defense" crop and I think it is ok keeping one player like him. Two is too much.

defense is a funny thing in the nba. it's like anyone at anytime can be considered a great or horrible defender. only a handful of players have a career long rep as a defensive stud. i personally laugh at it because it's all about how the team is doing...and when you factor in tanking etc. people talk about effort, i still laugh. watch, all of a sudden nick will be a an amazing defender. he already was playing good defense magically earlier in the year when the team was doing well.
lebron had a rep of being a bad defender. then he joined the heat and all of a sudden he was the most amazing defender. point is, it's easy being considered a great defensive player if your team is winning easily, and vice versa...it's easy to look bad when the team is losing. so many guys now can hit long threes while being defended well. so it's just....useless.

i think clarkson is a fine defender and will be better when the team wins more. why? not because i've seen anything spectacular on defense, but he has consistently shown that he works hard and makes adjustments as needed and he doesn't seem to slack.

my thing with nick is that we have none (ZERO) 3pt specialist on the team which is a scary thought for 2018 and onward. hopefully kuzma will be one, but highly unlikely to become that guy all of a sudden. At most, he will be consistent with knocking down the open looks, which can be developed. that's like the fisher type...not considered a specialist, but comes through. but i personally would want 2-3 specialists. there's one area i have a little hope for as far as lonzo, because perhaps the lakers with his passing can get away with not needing as many hardcore 3pt specialists to succeed. that remains to be seen. if true, that's HUGE for the lakers...if we can win without the threes screw it, i'm tired of it anyway.
_________________
U+1F49C
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 18507

PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2017 5:38 pm    Post subject:

SuperboyReformed wrote:
my thing with nick is that we have none (ZERO) 3pt specialist on the team which is a scary thought for 2018 and onward. hopefully kuzma will be one, but highly unlikely to become that guy all of a sudden. At most, he will be consistent with knocking down the open looks, which can be developed. that's like the fisher type...not considered a specialist, but comes through. but i personally would want 2-3 specialists. there's one area i have a little hope for as far as lonzo, because perhaps the lakers with his passing can get away with not needing as many hardcore 3pt specialists to succeed. that remains to be seen. if true, that's HUGE for the lakers...if we can win without the threes screw it, i'm tired of it anyway.


That's a fair point, but the NBA seems to be moving away from three point specialists. The paradigm is "3 and D" players and the like. The trend is toward teams where everyone can shoot the three, including the center. Like you, I'm not thrilled with that.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 24796

PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2017 6:01 pm    Post subject:

epak wrote:
activeverb wrote:
epak wrote:
Is it about quality of team at end of off-season. Or is it improvement of quality..


It's neither. It's about the quality of the moves you made. That includes signing free agents; making trades; resigning your own players; getting players on good contracts; signing coaches or executives.

The Warriors were number #1 not because they improved or because of how good their roster was, but because they managed to resign all their own players who were free agents.


Geez. I actually clicked the link to get his criteria.

Quote:
What plays into the rankings:

This isnít science. Itís an educated guess, weighing the impact both of the Draft and free agency, but also assessing whether teams got value in their free-agent signings. Overpaying the right player is as much a sin as signing the wrong player. A good new coach can coax some more wins out of a roster. But if a teamís players donít believe in the system their team uses (Iím looking at you, Knicks), the best Xs and Os on earth donít matter.

Teams that are rebuilding obviously have different priorities than teams making a championship push. That's factored in. Itís why, even though I may think Atlanta was right to push the reset button and start over, losing Millsap and the other players whoíve departed in the last two years is a bigger deal -- and, thus, the Hawksí offseason canít be viewed as a success when determining if theyíre better now than they were in April. Theyíre not. And a team like the Warriors that shows itís willing to go deep into the luxury tax -- which most teams try to avoid -- in order to keep winning has to be commended, and its rankings reflect that commendation.

Continuity matters here as well. The most successful teams usually not only identify a core group of players, they keep them together for a while, finding that sweet spot: everyone doesnít get a max contract, but most get paid well enough to keep the train moving down the tracks. That reflects both good roster construction and good financial management -- and, again, is rewarded. The explosion in the cap means everyone has to spend; keeping your powder dry for another day doesnít have as much cache as it used to. But you still have to manage your money wisely.



bleh.


I'm not sure what fault you have with his criteria (and yes, I read it before I responded the first time.) I find it reasonable
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 24796

PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2017 8:13 pm    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
SuperboyReformed wrote:
my thing with nick is that we have none (ZERO) 3pt specialist on the team which is a scary thought for 2018 and onward. hopefully kuzma will be one, but highly unlikely to become that guy all of a sudden. At most, he will be consistent with knocking down the open looks, which can be developed. that's like the fisher type...not considered a specialist, but comes through. but i personally would want 2-3 specialists. there's one area i have a little hope for as far as lonzo, because perhaps the lakers with his passing can get away with not needing as many hardcore 3pt specialists to succeed. that remains to be seen. if true, that's HUGE for the lakers...if we can win without the threes screw it, i'm tired of it anyway.


That's a fair point, but the NBA seems to be moving away from three point specialists. The paradigm is "3 and D" players and the like. The trend is toward teams where everyone can shoot the three, including the center. Like you, I'm not thrilled with that.


Seems like the NBA is moving away from specialists in general. Everyone's wet dream is to field a team of five 6-9 guys who can play defense, shoot 3s, and switch to any player.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Dreamshake
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 05 May 2006
Posts: 11709

PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2017 8:18 pm    Post subject:

Chronicle wrote:

I think you're looking at it wrong though. They're not saying okc will be better than houston this season. They're just saying they had a better offseason.


I'm only looking at it from the offseason perspective. CP3 is a better player than PG13, and PG13 is clearly a rental. Houston got Harden to sign a extension this summer. That's major. Westbrook hasn't, yet.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
lewis
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 23 Oct 2013
Posts: 985

PostPosted: Fri Aug 11, 2017 1:45 am    Post subject:

SuperboyReformed wrote:
nash wrote:
SuperboyReformed wrote:
regardless of the pay, I think Clarkson is a good player to have, a lot better than other realistic options.
I am personally annoyed that we lost Nick Young since he was basically our best 3pt shooter by far. He's one of those guys like Livingston that is going to be able to really let the starters get some solid rest. I hope we make up for it somehow, but right now we don't have anywhere near as deadly a 3pt shooter or hard shot maker like Young, and the warriors, our primary target, got our best one and they already have a handful of better ones. So I was extremely annoyed at that.

Lonzo seems special enough to really distinguish ourselves from the Warriors. but there's still that bottom line that open guys will have to make their 3pt shots. This is going to be key for us, and there's also the great hope that Ingram will emerge. He showed impressive glimpses as we all know that first game in the summer, I was very impressed. Now the volume. TO me, everything else is up in the air and remains to be seen.


While I agree that we will miss Nick 3pts, all our guards from last season 4 guard rotation were abysmal defenders, bottom 10 among PG/SG. We just have Clarkson remaining from this "no defense" crop and I think it is ok keeping one player like him. Two is too much.

defense is a funny thing in the nba. it's like anyone at anytime can be considered a great or horrible defender. only a handful of players have a career long rep as a defensive stud. i personally laugh at it because it's all about how the team is doing...and when you factor in tanking etc. people talk about effort, i still laugh. watch, all of a sudden nick will be a an amazing defender. he already was playing good defense magically earlier in the year when the team was doing well.
lebron had a rep of being a bad defender. then he joined the heat and all of a sudden he was the most amazing defender. point is, it's easy being considered a great defensive player if your team is winning easily, and vice versa...it's easy to look bad when the team is losing. so many guys now can hit long threes while being defended well. so it's just....useless.

i think clarkson is a fine defender and will be better when the team wins more. why? not because i've seen anything spectacular on defense, but he has consistently shown that he works hard and makes adjustments as needed and he doesn't seem to slack.

my thing with nick is that we have none (ZERO) 3pt specialist on the team which is a scary thought for 2018 and onward. hopefully kuzma will be one, but highly unlikely to become that guy all of a sudden. At most, he will be consistent with knocking down the open looks, which can be developed. that's like the fisher type...not considered a specialist, but comes through. but i personally would want 2-3 specialists. there's one area i have a little hope for as far as lonzo, because perhaps the lakers with his passing can get away with not needing as many hardcore 3pt specialists to succeed. that remains to be seen. if true, that's HUGE for the lakers...if we can win without the threes screw it, i'm tired of it anyway.


Lebron was second in DPOY votes in 2009 while with clevland
While I understand that players tend to not play defense on bad teams, Clarkson does not lack effort, but basics/IQ.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 118118
Location: The Gold Coast

PostPosted: Fri Aug 11, 2017 9:46 am    Post subject:

Dreamshake wrote:
Chronicle wrote:

I think you're looking at it wrong though. They're not saying okc will be better than houston this season. They're just saying they had a better offseason.


I'm only looking at it from the offseason perspective. CP3 is a better player than PG13, and PG13 is clearly a rental. Houston got Harden to sign a extension this summer. That's major. Westbrook hasn't, yet.


PG isn't clearly a rental, he should fit in well there.
_________________
#lakerclownshow
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 80289

PostPosted: Fri Aug 11, 2017 9:51 am    Post subject:

venturalakersfan wrote:
Dreamshake wrote:
Chronicle wrote:

I think you're looking at it wrong though. They're not saying okc will be better than houston this season. They're just saying they had a better offseason.


I'm only looking at it from the offseason perspective. CP3 is a better player than PG13, and PG13 is clearly a rental. Houston got Harden to sign a extension this summer. That's major. Westbrook hasn't, yet.


PG isn't clearly a rental, he should fit in well there.


And we are sure of this how?
_________________
2 Max Scenarios:

-JC out for $0/Deng stretched = 57.6m in 2018 cap space
-Same as above and Jules renounced/traded for $0 = 69.9m in 2018 cap space

2 of 4 of these players will be Lakers in 2018 (LBJ/PG13/WB/Boogie)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 118118
Location: The Gold Coast

PostPosted: Fri Aug 11, 2017 10:01 am    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
venturalakersfan wrote:
Dreamshake wrote:
Chronicle wrote:

I think you're looking at it wrong though. They're not saying okc will be better than houston this season. They're just saying they had a better offseason.


I'm only looking at it from the offseason perspective. CP3 is a better player than PG13, and PG13 is clearly a rental. Houston got Harden to sign a extension this summer. That's major. Westbrook hasn't, yet.


PG isn't clearly a rental, he should fit in well there.


And we are sure of this how?


He and Westbrook will be a good scoring duo and him replacing Olidipo will improve their defense. They should challenge as a top 2-4 team in the West.
_________________
#lakerclownshow
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 80289

PostPosted: Fri Aug 11, 2017 10:13 am    Post subject:

venturalakersfan wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
venturalakersfan wrote:
Dreamshake wrote:
Chronicle wrote:

I think you're looking at it wrong though. They're not saying okc will be better than houston this season. They're just saying they had a better offseason.


I'm only looking at it from the offseason perspective. CP3 is a better player than PG13, and PG13 is clearly a rental. Houston got Harden to sign a extension this summer. That's major. Westbrook hasn't, yet.


PG isn't clearly a rental, he should fit in well there.


And we are sure of this how?


He and Westbrook will be a good scoring duo and him replacing Olidipo will improve their defense. They should challenge as a top 2-4 team in the West.


And why does the KD/WB experience not prove illuminating here too? I know the Warriors got a cap spike, but if playing with WB was so fun and worth it, KD would have stayed.
_________________
2 Max Scenarios:

-JC out for $0/Deng stretched = 57.6m in 2018 cap space
-Same as above and Jules renounced/traded for $0 = 69.9m in 2018 cap space

2 of 4 of these players will be Lakers in 2018 (LBJ/PG13/WB/Boogie)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
epak
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 12864

PostPosted: Fri Aug 11, 2017 10:19 am    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
epak wrote:
activeverb wrote:
epak wrote:
Is it about quality of team at end of off-season. Or is it improvement of quality..


It's neither. It's about the quality of the moves you made. That includes signing free agents; making trades; resigning your own players; getting players on good contracts; signing coaches or executives.

The Warriors were number #1 not because they improved or because of how good their roster was, but because they managed to resign all their own players who were free agents.


Geez. I actually clicked the link to get his criteria.

Quote:
What plays into the rankings:

This isnít science. Itís an educated guess, weighing the impact both of the Draft and free agency, but also assessing whether teams got value in their free-agent signings. Overpaying the right player is as much a sin as signing the wrong player. A good new coach can coax some more wins out of a roster. But if a teamís players donít believe in the system their team uses (Iím looking at you, Knicks), the best Xs and Os on earth donít matter.

Teams that are rebuilding obviously have different priorities than teams making a championship push. That's factored in. Itís why, even though I may think Atlanta was right to push the reset button and start over, losing Millsap and the other players whoíve departed in the last two years is a bigger deal -- and, thus, the Hawksí offseason canít be viewed as a success when determining if theyíre better now than they were in April. Theyíre not. And a team like the Warriors that shows itís willing to go deep into the luxury tax -- which most teams try to avoid -- in order to keep winning has to be commended, and its rankings reflect that commendation.

Continuity matters here as well. The most successful teams usually not only identify a core group of players, they keep them together for a while, finding that sweet spot: everyone doesnít get a max contract, but most get paid well enough to keep the train moving down the tracks. That reflects both good roster construction and good financial management -- and, again, is rewarded. The explosion in the cap means everyone has to spend; keeping your powder dry for another day doesnít have as much cache as it used to. But you still have to manage your money wisely.



bleh.


I'm not sure what fault you have with his criteria (and yes, I read it before I responded the first time.) I find it reasonable



Yea, I was assuming you read it.
I just meant, "geez... now I gotta click on that link to verify it."

I dont really care about DA, but just to carry on the conversation about the logic in his criteria:
His convoluted criteria (imo):

* weigh the impact both of the Draft and free agency - so far so good
* weigh value in free-agent signings - so far so good
* overpaying the right player is as much a sin as signing the wrong player - eh? at what price point does the overpay equal the bad/wrong player?
* new coach can coax wins, but X's & O's dont matter if team doesnt buy in - is he saying he's weighing the new coach, or weighing a bad fit in player? since he mentioned "new" coach i'll assume he's talking about weighing a coaching change
* rebuild vs winning factored in - factored in how? "Hawksí offseason canít be viewed as a success when determining if theyíre better now than they were in April. Theyíre not." So is quality of team a factor then?
* weigh the value of team trying to keep winning has to be commended - is this not based on quality of team
* weigh continuity - well, i guess just to make his point he's saying continuity matter if you're able to not have to use the max on every player. Thank you, KD

He doesn't say which are factored higher. He doesn't say why one team was ranked higher than another.
He throws out "factors" and doesn't say how he's weighing them.
And he qualifies this by saying "This isnít science. Itís an educated guess."
To me, he should have spent more time on this. You can disagree and think it's reasonable. I'm just saying it's not reasonable to me.
_________________
2 stooges gone, 1 to go.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 18507

PostPosted: Fri Aug 11, 2017 10:57 am    Post subject:

epak wrote:
And he qualifies this by saying "This isnít science. Itís an educated guess."
To me, he should have spent more time on this. You can disagree and think it's reasonable. I'm just saying it's not reasonable to me.


I don't disagree with your points, but come on. This is just an off-season fluff piece. It's basically filler designed to generate clicks. There are no metrics involved here. This is just a glorified opinion piece.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
epak
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 12864

PostPosted: Fri Aug 11, 2017 11:23 am    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
epak wrote:
And he qualifies this by saying "This isnít science. Itís an educated guess."
To me, he should have spent more time on this. You can disagree and think it's reasonable. I'm just saying it's not reasonable to me.


I don't disagree with your points, but come on. This is just an off-season fluff piece. It's basically filler designed to generate clicks. There are no metrics involved here. This is just a glorified opinion piece.


Oh yea, I agree.
That's why I was resistant to clicking.
But brother above made it seem like DA had a good point.
The rabbit hole... the rabbit hole!
_________________
2 stooges gone, 1 to go.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 118118
Location: The Gold Coast

PostPosted: Fri Aug 11, 2017 12:20 pm    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
venturalakersfan wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
venturalakersfan wrote:
Dreamshake wrote:
Chronicle wrote:

I think you're looking at it wrong though. They're not saying okc will be better than houston this season. They're just saying they had a better offseason.


I'm only looking at it from the offseason perspective. CP3 is a better player than PG13, and PG13 is clearly a rental. Houston got Harden to sign a extension this summer. That's major. Westbrook hasn't, yet.


PG isn't clearly a rental, he should fit in well there.


And we are sure of this how?


He and Westbrook will be a good scoring duo and him replacing Olidipo will improve their defense. They should challenge as a top 2-4 team in the West.


And why does the KD/WB experience not prove illuminating here too? I know the Warriors got a cap spike, but if playing with WB was so fun and worth it, KD would have stayed.


OKC wasn't good enough to beat GS and Durant wants to win. Even as people make up some beef between the two. If PG has the chance to join GS I guarantee he would do it.
_________________
#lakerclownshow
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 80289

PostPosted: Fri Aug 11, 2017 12:30 pm    Post subject:

venturalakersfan wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
venturalakersfan wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
venturalakersfan wrote:
Dreamshake wrote:
Chronicle wrote:

I think you're looking at it wrong though. They're not saying okc will be better than houston this season. They're just saying they had a better offseason.


I'm only looking at it from the offseason perspective. CP3 is a better player than PG13, and PG13 is clearly a rental. Houston got Harden to sign a extension this summer. That's major. Westbrook hasn't, yet.


PG isn't clearly a rental, he should fit in well there.


And we are sure of this how?


He and Westbrook will be a good scoring duo and him replacing Olidipo will improve their defense. They should challenge as a top 2-4 team in the West.


And why does the KD/WB experience not prove illuminating here too? I know the Warriors got a cap spike, but if playing with WB was so fun and worth it, KD would have stayed.


OKC wasn't good enough to beat GS and Durant wants to win. Even as people make up some beef between the two. If PG has the chance to join GS I guarantee he would do it.


I didn't mention beef, neither did KD. He thought the style of game that WB played wasn't conducive to his game. I think PG13 may find out the same.

Plus, i have a hard time seeing PG13 re-up to stay and live in OKC for the next 4-5 years.
_________________
2 Max Scenarios:

-JC out for $0/Deng stretched = 57.6m in 2018 cap space
-Same as above and Jules renounced/traded for $0 = 69.9m in 2018 cap space

2 of 4 of these players will be Lakers in 2018 (LBJ/PG13/WB/Boogie)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Dr. Funkbot
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 24 Sep 2001
Posts: 6535
Location: Eagle Rock

PostPosted: Fri Aug 11, 2017 1:19 pm    Post subject:

lewis wrote:
nash wrote:
SuperboyReformed wrote:
regardless of the pay, I think Clarkson is a good player to have, a lot better than other realistic options.
I am personally annoyed that we lost Nick Young since he was basically our best 3pt shooter by far. He's one of those guys like Livingston that is going to be able to really let the starters get some solid rest. I hope we make up for it somehow, but right now we don't have anywhere near as deadly a 3pt shooter or hard shot maker like Young, and the warriors, our primary target, got our best one and they already have a handful of better ones. So I was extremely annoyed at that.

Lonzo seems special enough to really distinguish ourselves from the Warriors. but there's still that bottom line that open guys will have to make their 3pt shots. This is going to be key for us, and there's also the great hope that Ingram will emerge. He showed impressive glimpses as we all know that first game in the summer, I was very impressed. Now the volume. TO me, everything else is up in the air and remains to be seen.


While I agree that we will miss Nick 3pts, all our guards from last season 4 guard rotation were abysmal defenders, bottom 10 among PG/SG. We just have Clarkson remaining from this "no defense" crop and I think it is ok keeping one player like him. Two is too much.


Based on summer league, Lonzo will fit in that group as well. At least in his rookie year.


IDK I saw Lonzo getting a lot of steals and blocks.
_________________
R.I.P. Doc Buss

LeBronzo JamBall 2018

"I think we often overlook the best way for a team like these Lakers to obtain star level players is to turn their current players into stars, rather than looking for outside help."
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  Next
Page 2 of 3
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
© 1995-2010 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