|| LocK Dis Up ||

How Many Games Do You Project The Lakers Will Win This Season?

  • 15-20

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • 21-25

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • 26-30

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • 31-35

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • 36-40

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • 41-45

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • 46-50

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • 51-55

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • 56-73

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • They Will Break the NBA Record with 74+ Wins

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    0
Show All
Status
Not open for further replies.
His offense is the same as Byron's

PgybesT.png


UfY28Wy.jpg
 
Anything is better than Byron if Brooks sucks so be it but let the kids grow he'll do that
 
Byron also has a "great track record" with young players. Brooks is the same guy that was giving perk and fisher minutes over Adams, Reggie, Morrow, lamb etc. Only played young players when injuries forced his hand. He's not so different from pre Cleveland Byron honestly
 
Last edited:
Essential1 said:
franc said:
get rid of dlo :nerd:
Click to expand...

:stoneface:

Also you do know that, that has almost a 0% chance of happening. Even if they got Westbrook.


They are not going to get rid of D'Angelo.... Hell why would they?



This same nonsense about young PGs, granted Russell will be far better than Ramon Sessions will ever be, and is actually better than Sessions has ever been already is how we ended up trading a bunch of picks for Steve Nash
Click to expand...

westbrook for dlo is a no brainer. literally, a no brainer.
 
leemelone said:
Brooks also has a "great track record" with young players. Same guy that was giving perk and fisher minutes over Adams, Reggie, Morrow, lamb etc. Only played young players when injuries forced his hand.
Click to expand...

Yup.

We should not have to settle for another mediocre to bad coach. This next coach has to be the right hire, we've been through 3 coaches in 5 years and will be 4 in 6 after Byron is let go whether it's this summer or next. Firing Byron just for the sake of firing him and then hiring a guy to replace him that's marginally better is hustling backwards.
 
leemelone said:
Byron also has a "great track record" with young players. Brooks is the same guy that was giving perk and fisher minutes over Adams, Reggie, Morrow, lamb etc. Only played young players when injuries forced his hand. He's not so different from pre Cleveland Byron honestly
Click to expand...


Let's take this one by one.


Reggie Jackson
-was a really bad player coming into the league. He was drafted for depth. Nothing else
-His second year, he gave him as much opportunity as he did Fisher. In order to give Reggie more time in year 2, Fisher ended up being a SG off the bench.
-And in the 3rd year he gave him 29 mpg the whole year, 24.5mpg in the first 30 games that Westbrook was playing. When Westbrook came back after trade deadline, he still gave him 28.7mpg

Have to factor in that Westbrook plays 35 minutes a game. You run into a quandary with that. Because Reggie isn't good enough to play off ball, and shoot. So you're limited by what you can do with him. He also was drafted with being a backup as a ceiling in mind.


Jeremy Lamb
- Played in the DLeague in his first year
- He was also on a team in year 1 that included Westbrook, RJax, KD, Thabo & Kevin Martin. There is so much overlap that It bled the minutes for the SG spot.
- KD played 38minutes. Thabo & Kevin Martin played 27 minutes each.
-They ended up moving KD to the 4 on average 5mpg because they didn't have enough minutes.
- He wasn't better than KMart or Thabo. So they put him in the DLeague
- When KMart was gone after the season, he got 19mpg
- He was not considered a Day 1 starter, and was seen as someone who needed time.


Steven Adams
- He was a project player, drafted at the end of the lottery in a weak draft. There was no reason to believe when he was selected that he was going to start.
-Perk & Collison were the guys who were going to the dance with the Thunder.
- But you're right when Perkins went down he put Steven Adams in the starting rotation over Collison. Because Collison wasn't able to be good enough to start
-The next season, Adams was starting over Perkins & Collison
- But I'll give you that he deserved more time in his first year.

Anthony Morrow
Played 24 minutes his first year with the Thunder.
Then dropped down to 13 minutes per game under Donovan in his second year.
So he played Morrow. Fisher was also gone before Morrow got there.




You're really confusing guys who were seen as projects versus guys who were seen as Day 1 Starters (Russell & Randle). But 3 of those 4 guys still developed well under Brooks. Lamb just isn't very good. Factor in that KD, Westbrook, Harden & Serge developed under Brooks as well. And also confusing a team vying for a title versus a team that has nothing else to do but play young guys.

That's a whole hell of a lot different between Scott Brooks & Byron Scott
 
Last edited:
franc said:
westbrook for dlo is a no brainer. literally, a no brainer.
Click to expand...

Yes.

But what I'm saying is they will not trade D'Angelo Russell.

Why?


If the Lakers get KD (they won't), they will not trade for Russell Westbrook. Nor would the Thunder trade him here. Even if we had the best offer. They are not going to trade Westbrook to LA to make the Los Angeles Thunder.

They will let OKC panic trade him elsewhere, and Lakers will position themselves to sign him in Free Agency.

And magic! You now have Westbrook & Russell on the same team.
 
Last edited:
All im saying is if it comes down to Brooks is all that's left cuz Lakers wait to long I'll take him over Byron
 
leemelone said:
E this is kinda like your fascination with hibbert last year. Brooks just aint it man.
Click to expand...

Roy Hibbert still did more good than bad this year for this team. I'll happily take what he provided as a locker room guy and a mentor, for the bad play which at the very least was expected on offense.

The problem is like Phil Jackson, the NBA has passed him by. The hope was that with a new team, and a new situation, it would give him a spark. It didn't change things on court. What he ended up with was much worse.



And on the Scott Brooks point. I provided you the context of each and every single thing you said... Because you wanted to make a statement without any context. Context matters. Because within context you find what actually is or isn't.

I'd love to live in the world some of you live in. Where you live free of context. You can just prescribe your hot takes to things, and just keep it moving. When you're proven wrong, you just ignore it.
 
Last edited:
I'll concede that I was slightly off on my points. Bottom line is that Scott Brooks is cheeks tho. Someone like @DatZNasty would be better suited to come in here and expound on it.
 
Last edited:
leemelone said:
I'll concede that I was slightly off on my points. Bottom line is that Scott Brooks is cheeks tho. Someone like @DatZNasty would be better suited to come in here and expound on it.
Click to expand...

He won't be the best coach in the league. I even said that when I listed why we should go after him.

What I said is that he gets the job to get the young guys to Step 2 & 3. Which is to go from terrible to mediocre to making the playoffs.

That's what he needs to do. Develop the young guys, so they can sustain themselves. That he can do, that he has done.

After that for a few years, if he is not the guy to get us further, then you look elsewhere.



The alternative is to keep Byron. And waste another year of our Young Players. Completely give up on Free Agency.

Then have to look at a coach in 2017 after you can Byron anyway. The second you realize someone is not right for the job, and is given the chance to right the ship, and can't... He should be gone.

It's either do it now or do it next year. And waiting another year wastes the one coming up.

I'd love Thibs to be the coach. I want Thibs to be the coach. But not at the cost of giving him full power. I want no coach to have that.




Finally, not every coaching hire needs to be a homerun, guy who will be here for 15 years. You want it to be, but it rarely happens. Hiring a coach to get you to the next couple of steps and that be his ceiling is still progress and it can still be a smart move.
 
Last edited:
No to Brooks, no more stop gap coaches.

Also y'all still want DeRozan?
 
I'm saying, Byron has a good history developing guys like Chris Paul, Kyrie, dave West, and even dlo, JC and Randle have been decent if you wanna play that card. What exactly has Brooks done to develop guys like Russ and KD? If you're admittedly getting a mediocre coach, what the heck is the point?
 
If you can't get a GOOD coach I'd honestly rather have Byron one more year and then see who's available next time rather than ANOTHER mediocre coach that will keep you from getting potentially better options that open up. No point in replacing trash with trash.
 
None of this matters when our front office is a mess that's our biggest problem...they're not capable of making the right choices at anything right now
 
Stuck how? He's not getting an extension, so would I rather suffer one more year of Byron when we won't be any good anyway or start another 3-4 years of another bad or mediocre coach? I'll take the former. He'll have no choice but to play the young guys next season cause he's a lame duck. Seeing as there's better options for the top tier coaches right now elsewhere, I'm fine with them waiting for the guy they really want.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

NikeTalk was created as a way of giving back to both the sneaker enthusiast community and to the greater global community of which we are all a part.

NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom