CelticsStrong
Celtics Basketball => Celtics Talk => Topic started by: Alleyoopster on July 14, 2017, 09:07:39 AM
-
After watching the last LA Summer League game I think we can safely say LA will not be a bottom 6 team next season.
I hadn't watched the previous game where Ball went off for 36 points. But, from what I saw last night, he's the real deal. Both offensively and defensively, he's a game changer. He's definitely a transcendent player on the passing end of things. I think both Brown and Tatum can learn a thing or two from him. He has an amazing way of thinking 'pass' all the time. He's lightening quick in his thinking. Often, even if he doesn't get the assist, his initial pass leads to a secondary player being wide open.
Forget the LA pick. It ain't happening. Ingram scored 26 before he was shut down. Add KCP and possibly 50 games from Lopez, a healthy Randle(?), Clarkson is legit..i don't know the rest of roster that well...I'm sure I'm missing someone good.
In time, the Celtics might wish they hadn't passed on Ball, not Fultz. (I know he didn't want to play here, his father, yada, yada, ....)
-
Summer league guarantees NBA success:
(https://www.pattisonave.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Screen-Shot-2017-07-06-at-12.25.53-PM.png)
-
Ball / Clarkson
KCP / ?
Ingram / Deng
Randle / Nance Jr.
Lopez / Zubac
That team is atrocious, and is likely the worst defensive team in the entire NBA.
-
If we don't get the pick it won't be because of Ball and Ingram looking like superstars. It will be because of the other guys they brought in boosting the team out of the bottom 5 of the league.
-
I think that is the case too, but there are some chances still.
http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=92638.0
I wrote why I believe it could be beneficial for us.
-
They got rid of their most consistent scorer from last season (Russell) who was looking at having a breakout year this upcoming season. They've replaced him with Lopez, who will certainly get his on the offensive end but he's done that forever on a losing team without making an impact before. I don't see how replacement level players like Randle, KCP, and Clarkson bring them any closer to success even with marginal improvements.
Ball looked great the other night and I think his game is perfectly suited for the pace of the modern NBA. In one of the other countless "Tatum is better than (insert player)" threads, there was a lot of criticism about how Ball's assists come from throwing lead passes after inbounds/made baskets, which is exactly what makes him so special. He's able to play like a quarterback and get his teammates going if they're willing to run. When his shot is falling, he's hard to stop.
With all of that said though, Ball and Ingram are not far enough in their development to be a scary team especially in the West. Nothing about their roster suggests consistent winning in the near future. I wouldn't worry about it.
-
Teams worse than LA - BKN, ATL, CHI, SAC, PHX, ORL
Teams that look alright but could be worse - IND, NYK, PHI, UTA.
Going to be close but I would start getting used to the idea of getting SAC's pick in 2019 and hoping they're still atrocious.
-
I watched some of that game. I was impressed with his ability to set up his teammates. But then again, I was similarly impressed with some of the shots Tatum made.
The proof is in the pudding, and we wouldn't know until we see how they adjust to real competition.
-
Too premature to safely say this.
1 - Summer League doesn't mean much.
2 - Lakers defense should be bottom five.
3 - It's lottery based...even if their record is not 2-5...the pick could fall into our sweet spot!
"May the odds be ever in our favor." ;D ;D ;D
-
I think that is the case too, but there are some chances still.
http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=92638.0
I wrote why I believe it could be beneficial for us.
TP good analysis in your previous CB post...
Slamtheking mentioned in one the responses to your post..." I can't see anyone other than possibly Phx being that bad in the West."
I tend to disagree with his assessment based on what I remember of the first Boston-Phoenix game last year. They were a tough defensive team. They really bottled up the Celtics in that game. Bender is a great perimeter defender (if he's healthy). And, obviously Josh Jackson will be even better. They have the Chriss swatting balls underneath. They also have great shooting guards and Len is decent too.
-
Ball has always been a highly skilled, high output player. The question is what happens to him when he's playing against guys that are nearly as skilled, and a better athlete than he is. So far, the evidence is that he struggles.
In summer league, he rarely faces that level of player.
-
As mentioned, the Lakers' defense is going to be a huge roadblock to that team's success. On that entire roster, the only good defender is (this surprised me) Larry Nance Jr. Aside from him, all of their real rotation players grade poorly even when adjusted for the poor play of their surrounding players.
Ball has adjusted well to summer league. I'm still going to need to see him make an impact in NBA games, where opposing teams will have a much greater ability to control tempo and gameplan for his strengths and weaknesses. I'm not sure the Lakers shoot well enough to pick him up in halfcourt sets. Lots of mediocre-at-best shooting on that roster. But he'll be a problem for teams that don't want to play defense in transition - those look-ahead passes on the break are gorgeous.
Honestly I'm looking forward to watching him. His brand of basketball would be fun to watch if we didn't stand to directly benefit from his failure, lol.
-
Worst team in the West imo
-
Ball / Clarkson
KCP / ?
Ingram / Deng
Randle / Nance Jr.
Lopez / Zubac
That team is atrocious, and is likely the worst defensive team in the entire NBA.
A~T~R~O~C~I~O~U~S
Really..... Come on. This Lakers team is way better than last years team. a 41 win team last year went to the playoffs from the West. ITs not that crazy to think this roster can win 15 more games than last year. I hate the Lakers as much as the next guy, but the reality is they might just be better than A~T~R~O~C~I~O~U~S
-
Ball / Clarkson
KCP / ?
Ingram / Deng
Randle / Nance Jr.
Lopez / Zubac
That team is atrocious, and is likely the worst defensive team in the entire NBA.
A~T~R~O~C~I~O~U~S
Really..... Come on. This Lakers team is way better than last years team. a 41 win team last year went to the playoffs from the West. ITs not that crazy to think this roster can win 15 more games than last year. I hate the Lakers as much as the next guy, but the reality is they might just be better than A~T~R~O~C~I~O~U~S
It's crazy to think that team can win 2 more games than they did last season, let alone 15. They have barely any passable NBA level defenders on their entire roster, and they're relying upon young guys almost exclusively (except for Lopez).
In addition to that, they have one of the worst benches in the league. Atrocious is definitely the word I'd use.
-
They are in an absolutely brutal conference this year, only Sac and Phoenix can be considered objectively worse. I fully expect them to be in the bottom 6 at the end of the year, it'll likely be lady luck that decides the fate of the pick.
-
When did KCP become a superstar? He's a slightly souped up version of Marcus Smart.
-
If we miss on LAL, we got a great chance for a high pick in 2019. And that draft is just as stacked at the top as the 2018 draft is.
There's always the chance we miss out on both, but we could be in line to land another cornerstone player. I'll focus on BRK 18 pick and worry about the LAL/Sac bridge when we come to it.
-
If we miss on LAL, we got a great chance for a high pick in 2019. And that draft is just as stacked at the top as the 2018 draft is.
There's always the chance we miss out on both, but we could be in line to land another cornerstone player. I'll focus on BRK 18 pick and worry about the LAL/Sac bridge when we come to it.
That's a fair point. Quite a few nice cornerstones in the 2019 draft
-
we get the worse of sac/phil pick in 2019?
-
Ball / Clarkson
KCP / ?
Ingram / Deng
Randle / Nance Jr.
Lopez / Zubac
That team is atrocious, and is likely the worst defensive team in the entire NBA.
A~T~R~O~C~I~O~U~S
Really..... Come on. This Lakers team is way better than last years team. a 41 win team last year went to the playoffs from the West. ITs not that crazy to think this roster can win 15 more games than last year. I hate the Lakers as much as the next guy, but the reality is they might just be better than A~T~R~O~C~I~O~U~S
Someone has been writing about IT so much that muscle memory kicked in. :D
1 thing to note. Lakers don't have the incentive to lose this year. "Au contraire!" They lose the FA appeal when they do, as we have seen. They will play hard, just not well enough. Kings and Phoenix own thier pick rights.
-
I still think they're gonna suck enough where we'll get the pick conveyed to us next spring.
-
we get the worse of sac/phil pick in 2019?
Only if it's #1 overall. Otherwise we get the better of the two.
-
I watched some of that game. I was impressed with his ability to set up his teammates. But then again, I was similarly impressed with some of the shots Tatum made.
The proof is in the pudding, and we wouldn't know until we see how they adjust to real competition.
co-sign
-
Ball / Clarkson
KCP / ?
Ingram / Deng
Randle / Nance Jr.
Lopez / Zubac
That team is atrocious, and is likely the worst defensive team in the entire NBA.
A~T~R~O~C~I~O~U~S
Really..... Come on. This Lakers team is way better than last years team. a 41 win team last year went to the playoffs from the West. ITs not that crazy to think this roster can win 15 more games than last year. I hate the Lakers as much as the next guy, but the reality is they might just be better than A~T~R~O~C~I~O~U~S
Someone has been writing about IT so much that muscle memory kicked in. :D
1 thing to note. Lakers don't have the incentive to lose this year. "Au contraire!" They lose the FA appeal when they do, as we have seen. They will play hard, just not well enough. Kings and Phoenix own thier pick rights.
I must have missed this...could someone explain this to me. And/or send me a link. Thanks....
-
I think it's way too early to "safely say" we won't get the pick in 2018.
Yes, the Lakers have made some improvements to their roster. But so have almost every single team in the West. The Lakers still look to be no _better_ than the 2nd worst team in the West. And it's not really clear to me that the Lakers are better than PHO if Chandler, Bledsoe & Dudley are all healthy and play real minutes alongside their own talented youth. Those three plus Booker, Chriss, Bender, et al., is on paper just as good if not better of a lineup than the Lakers'.
Every other Western Conference team looks clearly superior. Even SAC, though probably still a lottery team, looks a clear step up above the Lakers.
Where are the Lakers going to get the "wins"?
I grant they may be 'better' than a handful of teams in the East. But that doesn't mean they will have a better record than those crappy teams in the East.
The Lakers have to play 52 games in the West. How many of those are they going to win?
Most of the Western conference teams will probably sweep their series against the Lakers. I can't imagine the Lakers sweeping any of the others. So they are going to get maybe just 1 or 2 wins from each of the 4 or 5 worst teams in the West. So maybe ~10 wins against western teams?
So they'll have to get a bunch of wins against the 'crappy' eastern conference teams. But their problem is that they just won't be playing that many games against those teams.
-
(http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f347/Clinton_Walker_Wilkerson/Mobile%20Uploads/Screenshot_20170706-104237_zpsgslmvgxd.png) (http://s50.photobucket.com/user/Clinton_Walker_Wilkerson/media/Mobile%20Uploads/Screenshot_20170706-104237_zpsgslmvgxd.png.html)
(http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f347/Clinton_Walker_Wilkerson/Mobile%20Uploads/Screenshot_20170714-102743_zps9bwmf4a8.png) (http://s50.photobucket.com/user/Clinton_Walker_Wilkerson/media/Mobile%20Uploads/Screenshot_20170714-102743_zps9bwmf4a8.png.html)
-
I think they still might be the worst team in the West. Phoenix has more young talent and still has some cagey vets like Chandler and Bledsoe. I really like what Sacto has done. They have a lot of young talent, but then added George Hill, Vince Carter, and Zach Randolph (and they still have vets like Barnes, Afflalo and Koufos). I mean I wouldn't be surprised at all to see the Lakers finish with a better record then both of those teams, but I also wouldn't be surprised to see the Lakers with a worse record.
As for Ball, he was 6 of 20 from the field and 2 of 10 from three. It is never good when you have more shots than points. Obviously scoring isn't Ball's game, but you will cost your team games if you can't hit a broad side of the barn either.
-
My analysis stems from acknowledging that Lopez had a really good year for the Nets last season and even with that, they managed to be the worst team in the league. The Lakers probably have more talent around Lopez than the Nets did but none of it is proven talent. Ingram and Randall have not done anything (they may improve), KCP may add something and Ball is rookie, very few rookies move the needle in their first season.
My conclusion is that the Lakers are not much better than last seasons Nets and they will play in a tougher conference. Lopez will probably not play two consecutive seasons injury free.
I am not that worried about getting the Lakers pick. Worst case, we get a lottery pick the next season from either Sac or Philly. It would be nice to get a top 5 pick and I think there is a good shot at this but not the end of the world if we don't.
-
My analysis stems from acknowledging that Lopez had a really good year for the Nets last season and even with that, they managed to be the worst team in the league. The Lakers probably have more talent around Lopez than the Nets did but none of it is proven talent. Ingram and Randall have not done anything (they may improve), KCP may add something and Ball is rookie, very few rookies move the needle in their first season.
My conclusion is that the Lakers are not much better than last seasons Nets and they will play in a tougher conference. Lopez will probably not play two consecutive seasons injury free.
I am not that worried about getting the Lakers pick. Worst case, we get a lottery pick the next season from either Sac or Philly. It would be nice to get a top 5 pick and I think there is a good shot at this but not the end of the world if we don't.
I disagree that they won't be better. To me, Ball seems to make everyone around him better.
I do agree that they may not have a much better record because of the tough conference they play in. Plus, Lopez is injury prone.
-
After watching the last [...] Summer League game I think we can safely say
This is where I'm gonna stop you. There is absolutely nothing that we can "safely say" based on a summer league game (well, unless you want to say things like "After watching the last Summer League game I think we can safely say Ball is a good summer league player", which is true but useless). Playing well in summer league does not mean that your game will translate to the NBA (and vice versa for playing poorly). It's a good sign, but it is not even close to enough to "safely say" anything about how people will play in the NBA.
Need an example of a great summer league player that struggles in the real NBA? Look no further than the Spurs' Kyle Anderson (23.7/8.3/4.3 in Utah last year, 3.4/2.9/1.3 in the NBA) or our very own Terry Rozier.
-
Come on y'all. There's a lottery.
The only way you can "safely say" we won't get the Lakers pick is to guarantee that they're a playoff team.
I'll take that bet.
-
After watching the last [...] Summer League game I think we can safely say
This is where I'm gonna stop you. There is absolutely nothing that we can "safely say" based on a summer league game (well, unless you want to say things like "After watching the last Summer League game I think we can safely say Ball is a good summer league player", which is true but useless). Playing well in summer league does not mean that your game will translate to the NBA (and vice versa for playing poorly). It's a good sign, but it is not even close to enough to "safely say" anything about how people will play in the NBA.
Need an example of a great summer league player that struggles in the real NBA? Look no further than the Spurs' Kyle Anderson (23.7/8.3/4.3 in Utah last year, 3.4/2.9/1.3 in the NBA) or our very own Terry Rozier.
TP Excellent thinking....Can't really 'safely say' any about what the future might hold.
-
Teams worse than LA - BKN, ATL, CHI, SAC, PHX, ORL
Teams that look alright but could be worse - IND, NYK, PHI, UTA.
Going to be close but I would start getting used to the idea of getting SAC's pick in 2019 and hoping they're still atrocious.
Phoenix (see Josh Jackson and Bender's improvement and look at their starting KY guard tandem) and Sacremento (see their FA pick ups and PLEASE watch Fox!!!) simply will be BETTER than the Lakers with NO QUESTION!!
Orlando and LA will be neck and neck.
I will concede the others.
Smitty77
-
When did KCP become a superstar? He's a slightly souped up version of Marcus Smart.
Since he became a Laker, or on Megahype Ball's team. ESPN's coverage of Laker SL games is hilarious. Brick, brick, TO, OMG look at the transcendent talent on that pass!!!!
Ball will be a fun rookie to watch, but he's not going to improve that team a lick, at least this year. Looks like he will shoot low 20% on the 3, overall in the 30's. He really is a terrible shooter, and NBA defenses will simply cheat off him and let him fire away.
Many of his assists are on cheap leak-out cherry picks that won't be assists in the NBA. But he will average about 8 dimes a game.
The Lakers will again be terrible. I think they are a 25-win team tops..
-
After watching the last LA Summer League game I think we can safely say LA will not be a bottom 6 team next season.
I hadn't watched the previous game where Ball went off for 36 points. But, from what I saw last night, he's the real deal. Both offensively and defensively, he's a game changer. He's definitely a transcendent player on the passing end of things. I think both Brown and Tatum can learn a thing or two from him. He has an amazing way of thinking 'pass' all the time. He's lightening quick in his thinking. Often, even if he doesn't get the assist, his initial pass leads to a secondary player being wide open.
Forget the LA pick. It ain't happening. Ingram scored 26 before he was shut down. Add KCP and possibly 50 games from Lopez, a healthy Randle(?), Clarkson is legit..i don't know the rest of roster that well...I'm sure I'm missing someone good.
In time, the Celtics might wish they hadn't passed on Ball, not Fultz. (I know he didn't want to play here, his father, yada, yada, ....)
Ball also had 7 TOs. 1.7 to 1 Assist to TO ratio ****
-
After watching the last LA Summer League game I think we can safely say LA will not be a bottom 6 team next season.
I hadn't watched the previous game where Ball went off for 36 points. But, from what I saw last night, he's the real deal. Both offensively and defensively, he's a game changer. He's definitely a transcendent player on the passing end of things. I think both Brown and Tatum can learn a thing or two from him. He has an amazing way of thinking 'pass' all the time. He's lightening quick in his thinking. Often, even if he doesn't get the assist, his initial pass leads to a secondary player being wide open.
Forget the LA pick. It ain't happening. Ingram scored 26 before he was shut down. Add KCP and possibly 50 games from Lopez, a healthy Randle(?), Clarkson is legit..i don't know the rest of roster that well...I'm sure I'm missing someone good.
In time, the Celtics might wish they hadn't passed on Ball, not Fultz. (I know he didn't want to play here, his father, yada, yada, ....)
they're D is atrocious. their offense inexperienced, at best, outside of Lopez. They're rebounding is suspect. they have a lot of youth which rarely makes for a winning team. most importantly, they're playing in a stacked Western conference that's going to beat them like a drum. This is the team the rest of the conference will be looking at for easy wins while they're all fighting for a playoff spot.
Looking at LA as a bottom 4 team record-wise right now.
-
They have a mediocre and untested offense and one of the worst defenses in the League
-
Safely say?
They are still going to be bad and get thumped by the Western conference teams. Question is how bad will the East be. They might not be top 2 but they still have top 5 potential.
-
(http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f347/Clinton_Walker_Wilkerson/Mobile%20Uploads/Screenshot_20170706-104237_zpsgslmvgxd.png) (http://s50.photobucket.com/user/Clinton_Walker_Wilkerson/media/Mobile%20Uploads/Screenshot_20170706-104237_zpsgslmvgxd.png.html)
(http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f347/Clinton_Walker_Wilkerson/Mobile%20Uploads/Screenshot_20170714-102743_zps9bwmf4a8.png) (http://s50.photobucket.com/user/Clinton_Walker_Wilkerson/media/Mobile%20Uploads/Screenshot_20170714-102743_zps9bwmf4a8.png.html)
It would really surprise me if the Magic were this bad.
Also, I think this is underestimating how much more difficult schedules the team's in the west will have compared to those in the east.
Rookies rarely make huge contributions immediately, but even if Lonzo is great right away, they are still one of the 3 worst team in the west. The fact that their schedule will be west heavy and they are one of the worst teams in the west will hurt them.
-
oh no not another Summer League overreaction !!!
Lakers will be garbage.. of course they are a good summer league team most of their lineup is playing ..
As for Lopez they are going to trade him at the deadline to get value back for having no pick in the draft... think about it!!
-
Looks like Bagley could skip his senior year and come out next year :o :o
https://www.sbnation.com/college-basketball/2017/7/14/15972042/marvin-bagley-iii-recruiting-duke-usc-reclassify-nba-draft
Imagine landing 2 of Doncic, Bagley, and Porter next year..
-
Looks like Bagley could skip his senior year and come out next year :o :o
https://www.sbnation.com/college-basketball/2017/7/14/15972042/marvin-bagley-iii-recruiting-duke-usc-reclassify-nba-draft
Imagine landing 2 of Doncic, Bagley, and Porter next year..
If nothing else, it significantly increases our chances of landing one of them.
-
Worst team in the West imo
Right, which means they will play more tougher teams. I still think the pick will convey.
-
After watching the last LA Summer League game I think we can safely say LA will not be a bottom 6 team next season.
I hadn't watched the previous game where Ball went off for 36 points. But, from what I saw last night, he's the real deal. Both offensively and defensively, he's a game changer. He's definitely a transcendent player on the passing end of things. I think both Brown and Tatum can learn a thing or two from him. He has an amazing way of thinking 'pass' all the time. He's lightening quick in his thinking. Often, even if he doesn't get the assist, his initial pass leads to a secondary player being wide open.
Forget the LA pick. It ain't happening. Ingram scored 26 before he was shut down. Add KCP and possibly 50 games from Lopez, a healthy Randle(?), Clarkson is legit..i don't know the rest of roster that well...I'm sure I'm missing someone good.
In time, the Celtics might wish they hadn't passed on Ball, not Fultz. (I know he didn't want to play here, his father, yada, yada, ....)
Doesn't LA play in the West? And didn't they get ALOT stronger over the last few weeks? They are a very young team still and one thing that they don't have going for them season is BAll. Reason is, his dad made a lot of statements that rubbed players the wrong way, and has put a target on his back. Guys are going to go at him hard for at least the first half of the season. Remember, Ball is playing against the same age as him, wait until he's going against established players.
The East got weaker, but there are a bunch of teams going to be fighting for the tank job, and it's going to end up being 50/50 when they play each other. They might end up with more wins because they are playing against teams just as bad as them. Where the Lakers are going against at least 10 teams that will crush them.
-
Looks like Bagley could skip his senior year and come out next year :o :o
https://www.sbnation.com/college-basketball/2017/7/14/15972042/marvin-bagley-iii-recruiting-duke-usc-reclassify-nba-draft
Imagine landing 2 of Doncic, Bagley, and Porter next year..
If nothing else, it significantly increases our chances of landing one of them.
Yeah. Assuming the Nets are the 1st or 2nd worst team (a pretty safe bet), it guarantees us one of Bagley, Porter, Doncic, Ayton, Bamba. Quite possibly 2 of them..
-
Bagley, Ayton, Doncic, Porter, Bamba. I don't think there will have been a more highly regarded group of players at the top since the year Lebron, Wade and Carmello came out.
Very good chance we get one of them. Hard to believe the Nets won't be one of the worst teams, even if the LAL slips outside the top 5.
We have a great chance to have one of if not the league's most stacked roster in a couple years. Great time to be a Celtic fan.
Thank you, Brooklyn.
-
RE: Bagley....wow! Just ....WOW! I was only kidding a couple of weeks ago about him being eligible for the 2018 draft but if this actually happens DA will pay teams off to beat the Nets this year. And getting the 1 & a top 5 pick would give DA a lifetime contract and part ownership. Talk about options. Even the Pelicans would come calling if the AD and DMC duo doesn't work out.
-
Bagley and Ayton would be a dream come true.
C. Deandre Ayton 7'0"
Pf. Marvin Bagley 6'11"
Sf. Jayson Tatum 6'9"
Sg. Jaylen Brown 6'7"
Woah. What a core for the future while also competing! All that line-up needs is a PG of the future. Maybe T-Ro or Smart
-
I dont get the Bagley hype ...
I think Williamson is far a better prospect ... dude is Lebron 2.0
-
You have no idea how the Lakers will be next year, injuries and so forth. Guys need to relax they are a lottery team!
-
They are in an absolutely brutal conference this year, only Sac and Phoenix can be considered objectively worse. I fully expect them to be in the bottom 6 at the end of the year, it'll likely be lady luck that decides the fate of the pick.
Yup, I'll say it again in a different way. They have to A LOT of very good teams and some much improved, very often, out West...GSW, HOU, SAS, LAC, OKC, MIN, DEN, SAC. They will be a lottery team, "I can safely say"...
-
Another overreaction thread in Summer League.
I love them. Especially when little by little time passes and they are shamely silenced.
-
Another overreaction thread in Summer League.
I love them. Especially when little by little time passes and they are shamely silenced.
I remember Orien Greene having a great summer league
-
I don't think that's a safe assumption at all. It's hard to win with several young guys on your roster, and three of their starters are still on rookie-level contracts. They'll also essentially have zero defense whatsoever in a brutal Western conference.
-
After watching the last LA Summer League game I think we can safely say LA will not be a bottom 6 team next season.
I hadn't watched the previous game where Ball went off for 36 points. But, from what I saw last night, he's the real deal. Both offensively and defensively, he's a game changer. He's definitely a transcendent player on the passing end of things. I think both Brown and Tatum can learn a thing or two from him. He has an amazing way of thinking 'pass' all the time. He's lightening quick in his thinking. Often, even if he doesn't get the assist, his initial pass leads to a secondary player being wide open.
Forget the LA pick. It ain't happening. Ingram scored 26 before he was shut down. Add KCP and possibly 50 games from Lopez, a healthy Randle(?), Clarkson is legit..i don't know the rest of roster that well...I'm sure I'm missing someone good.
In time, the Celtics might wish they hadn't passed on Ball, not Fultz. (I know he didn't want to play here, his father, yada, yada, ....)
Underrated aspect of this post.
-
This is like saying that if we suited up a team with Jackson, Brown, Ojeleye, Tatum and Zizic that we'd be a playoff team. Not going to happen. As soon as a legitimate defensive guard gets up on Ball he will be a flawed rookie once again. Let's also not forget he shot 6-20. Guy can't shoot and this will create major problems for him once he's up against an NBA level player. Most of this will be determined by the teams around them and how bad they try and tank more than the Lakers skill.
-
Here's the thing - Lakers have incentive to be as good as possible because they are trying to convince two superstars to join them, and they don't own their pick. They have no reason to tank, and actually have incentive to be good.
Bulls, Pacers, Suns, Hawks, Magic - all own their picks and figure to tank.
Given those facts I don't think the Lakers have a shot and being bottom-5, which is what we need them to be. That's the way the arrows are pointing anyway. And there is always the chance their ping-pong ball comes up and Celtics get their 2/3 pick.
-
Here's the thing - Lakers have incentive to be as good as possible because they are trying to convince two superstars to join them, and they don't own their pick. They have no reason to tank, and actually have incentive to be good.
Bulls, Pacers, Suns, Hawks, Magic - all own their picks and figure to tank.
Given those facts I don't think the Lakers have a shot and being bottom-5, which is what we need them to be. That's the way the arrows are pointing anyway. And there is always the chance their ping-pong ball comes up and Celtics get their 2/3 pick.
The Nets had no reason to tank for the past two seasons. That didn't stop them from finishing with the #3 and #1 lottery odds, though. Having "no incentive to tank" doesn't magically make the team better.
-
Did any CBers get to watch it?
Was the press conference as weak as it was tweeted about?
https://twitter.com/Scott_Souza/status/885922519471050752
@Scott_Souza
Technically, it was a hallway next to a locked conference room & a fire exit.
@alexdsilvia93
am i the only 1 majorly disappointed in what I just saw? Get the big fish all the hype & get ainge for 10mins in corner of gym
11:02 AM - 14 Jul 2017
-
Did any CBers get to watch it?
Was the press conference as weak as it was tweeted about?
https://twitter.com/Scott_Souza/status/885922519471050752
@Scott_Souza
Technically, it was a hallway next to a locked conference room & a fire exit.
@alexdsilvia93
am i the only 1 majorly disappointed in what I just saw? Get the big fish all the hype & get ainge for 10mins in corner of gym
11:02 AM - 14 Jul 2017
Please delete...wrong thread.
-
Did any CBers get to watch it?
Was the press conference as weak as it was tweeted about?
https://twitter.com/Scott_Souza/status/885922519471050752
@Scott_Souza
Technically, it was a hallway next to a locked conference room & a fire exit.
@alexdsilvia93
am i the only 1 majorly disappointed in what I just saw? Get the big fish all the hype & get ainge for 10mins in corner of gym
11:02 AM - 14 Jul 2017
excuse me, but i have no idea what you are referring to in your post. please provide some context. thanks.
-
Bagley and Ayton would be a dream come true.
C. Deandre Ayton 7'0"
Pf. Marvin Bagley 6'11"
Sf. Jayson Tatum 6'9"
Sg. Jaylen Brown 6'7"
Woah. What a core for the future while also competing! All that line-up needs is a PG of the future. Maybe T-Ro or Smart
Yeah just trade IT and Hayward to pholly for Simmons. 😂
C. Deandre Ayton 7'0"
Pf. Marvin Bagley 6'11"
Sf. Jayson Tatum 6'9"
Sg. Jaylen Brown 6'7"
Pg. Ben Simmons 6'10"
-
Here's the thing - Lakers have incentive to be as good as possible because they are trying to convince two superstars to join them, and they don't own their pick. They have no reason to tank, and actually have incentive to be good.
Bulls, Pacers, Suns, Hawks, Magic - all own their picks and figure to tank.
Given those facts I don't think the Lakers have a shot and being bottom-5, which is what we need them to be. That's the way the arrows are pointing anyway. And there is always the chance their ping-pong ball comes up and Celtics get their 2/3 pick.
The Nets had no reason to tank for the past two seasons. That didn't stop them from finishing with the #3 and #1 lottery odds, though. Having "no incentive to tank" doesn't magically make the team better.
I think this idea stems from a general lack of understanding of tanking. Coaches and players try to win, always. All you need to do to confirm this is look at some of the late season wins of tanking teams. Look at the Knicks, for example, costing themselves a few slots in the draft on the very last day of the season last year. Jeff Hornacek, Ron Baker, Justin Holiday. These guys couldn't care less about having the 8th pick instead of the 6th; they're fighting for their livelihoods. There is a massive void between the interests of the front office and those of the players and coaches, and ultimately, it's the players and coaches who determine wins and losses..
-
I think the only thing we can safely say for sure is that the OP is jumping the gun on where LA is going to finish and that they won't win a top three spot in the lottery. Even if LA finishes 6-9 many teams landing in those spots have won top 3 picks. I don't think we can safely say anything about the Lakers pick until after the lottery.
-
Did any CBers get to watch it?
Was the press conference as weak as it was tweeted about?
https://twitter.com/Scott_Souza/status/885922519471050752
@Scott_Souza
Technically, it was a hallway next to a locked conference room & a fire exit.
@alexdsilvia93
am i the only 1 majorly disappointed in what I just saw? Get the big fish all the hype & get ainge for 10mins in corner of gym
11:02 AM - 14 Jul 2017
excuse me, but i have no idea what you are referring to in your post. please provide some context. thanks.
Please delete my post...
-
I feel everyone is overvaluing Lonzo at age 19. Name the last 19 YO player to lead a team into the playoffs that was a bottom 3 team the year before.
Take Minnesota for example. They had Wiggins and then drafted Karl Anthony-Towns. They went from 16 wins to 29 wins. Did not even sniff the playoffs.
The Lakers lost Nick Young and Russell this offseason. They added Lopez and KCP, but not sure they move the needle much. They had Ingram and now drafted Ball. Last year they had a 26 wins and had the 3rd worst record in the NBA. I don't see them getting past 33 wins this year. In fact I think they end up with 26 wins again. The West is a tough conference and teams will be dogging Ball with their best defender all year.
-
I see the LA media hype machine has everyone worried.
DOn't be scared, they will still be really bad. That defense will literally be one of the worst in modern NBA history.
And I'm not really seeing how they could be much better than last year, they lost two of their better vets and their best young player.
OUT: Russell, Lou Williams, Nick Young, Mozgov
IN: Ball, Lopez, KCP
-
Here's the thing - Lakers have incentive to be as good as possible because they are trying to convince two superstars to join them, and they don't own their pick. They have no reason to tank, and actually have incentive to be good.
Bulls, Pacers, Suns, Hawks, Magic - all own their picks and figure to tank.
Given those facts I don't think the Lakers have a shot and being bottom-5, which is what we need them to be. That's the way the arrows are pointing anyway. And there is always the chance their ping-pong ball comes up and Celtics get their 2/3 pick.
Pacers made the trade they did because they don't want to tank. Some of those other teams might have incentive to tank, but they won't have a plan to do that til later in the season.
Vegas has 4 teams with an over/under worse than the LAL. We might not get that pick, but teams like Phoenix are going to try to win, at least until their season is over. Phoenix thinks they have some quality young talent, they're not going to play to lose.
The LAL pick might sneak out of the top 5, but there's no way this is a 35 win team. They're probably going to struggle to win 30 if all goes well.
The Nets had all the incentive in the world to win in 2016 & 2017, and yet we got the 3rd and 1st picks, and they handily had the worst record last year. Lonzo Ball is probably going to be a great player, but history shows us even the best rookies have limited impact unless you're Larry Bird or Lebron James. Our chances might be 1 in 3 or 1 in 4 of getting that pick, but we can't "safely say" we won't.
-
I don't believe the Lakers are gonna be a bottom 5 team, but they aren't gonna be a playoff team either.
1. Golden State
2. San Antonio
3. Houston (CP3 + Harden)
4. Minny (KAT + Butler + Wiggins + Teague)
5. OKC (Westbrook + George + Adams)
6. Portland (Lillard + McCollum + the Nurkic effect)
7. LA Clips (Griffin + Jordan + Gallo)
8. New Orleans (Davis + Boogie + Holiday)
9. Denver (Jokic + Millsap)
10. Memphis (Conley + Marc Gasol)
11. Utah (Gobert + Favors + Hood + Rubio + good coach in Snyder)
(not necessarily in that order)
I cannot see the Lakers being better than any of those teams. Worst case scenario (for the C's) they 'll be the 12th best team in the West.
Hopefully, they are gonna be worse than some Eastern Conference teams as well. Problem is, there are far too many tankers/bad teams in the East.
If I had to guess, I 'd say the following teams are gonna be worse than the Lakers next season.
Phoenix
Dallas
Brooklyn
Atlanta
Chicago
NY
Orlando
In this scenario, only way for us to get the pick is if the Lakers move up to #2 (3.3%) or #3 (3.9%) in the lottery. To put it another way, we would have a 7.2% chance to get the pick.
-
Roughly speaking, to not get the LAL pick, one of these things needs to happen:
1) They win the lottery
2) They win 30+ games but not the lottery
Let's say there's maybe a 10% of #1, at most, considering even a bottom 3 pick is looking at ~20% odds.
What the odds they win 30 games? I'd say maybe 25%.
There are just too many net negatives on that team. Clarkson is one of the worst defenders in the league: big role. Ball is a rookie PG who's not physically mature, starting on Day 1. Randle is a poor defender. Ingram didn't look ready at all last year. KCP is overpaid and inefficient. They have at least 3 new starters who have never played together before. Deng looked like he aged 5 years last year.
Lots of "ifs" involved, for sure, but that looks like a team playing for 20-30 wins in the west. Any bad breaks and they are in a lot of trouble.
All told, I'd put the very rough odds at something like 60% that we get the pick which is to say, there's definitely no safe bet on either side.
-
I don't believe the Lakers are gonna be a bottom 5 team, but they aren't gonna be a playoff team either.
1. Golden State
2. San Antonio
3. Houston (CP3 + Harden)
4. Minny (KAT + Butler + Wiggins + Teague)
5. OKC (Westbrook + George + Adams)
6. Portland (Lillard + McCollum + the Nurkic effect)
7. LA Clips (Griffin + Jordan + Gallo)
8. New Orleans (Davis + Boogie + Holiday)
9. Denver (Jokic + Millsap)
10. Memphis (Conley + Marc Gasol)
11. Utah (Gobert + Favors + Hood + Rubio + good coach in Snyder)
(not necessarily in that order)
I cannot see the Lakers being better than any of those teams. Worst case scenario (for the C's) they 'll be the 12th best team in the West.
Hopefully, they are gonna be worse than some Eastern Conference teams as well. Problem is, there are far too many tankers/bad teams in the East.
If I had to guess, I 'd say the following teams are gonna be worse than the Lakers next season.
Phoenix
Dallas
Brooklyn
Atlanta
Chicago
NY
Orlando
In this scenario, only way for us to get the pick is if the Lakers move up to #2 (3.3%) or #3 (3.9%) in the lottery. To put it another way, we would have a 7.2% chance to get the pick.
I agree on all of the teams you predict to finish better than the Lakers.
I would go further and suggest Phx has a legit shot of being better than LA. Bledsoe, Chriss, Booker, Chandler, Dudley, Warren, Knight and Josh Jackson make for a better core of players than what LA has. That's not even depending on Bender or Len to provide much this year.
Dallas has Dirk, Noel, McRoberts, Wes Mathews, Harrison Barnes, Devin Harris, Dwight Powell and bright shiny new rookie in Dennis Smith. I like that core better than LA's too and we know Cuban doesn't want to tank while Dirk is still playing.
You omitted Sac who I also think has a better overall roster: Vince, Zach, George Hill, Kouros, Ty Lawson and some good looking youth Skal, WCS, Giles, Justin Jackson, Hield and Fox looks like a prize rookie. Borden Bogdanovic could work out well for them.
Lakers are very much contenders for the bottom of the West. Their D should continue to be horrid. KCP really needs to make a leap to move the needle for this team. still relying on Lopez to stay healthy. Deng is a shadow of his old self. Randle is empty stats. some youth that may turn into some decent players but they seem to just focus on scoring and not much else.
in the East, I think it's the Nets and Orlando competing with them for the worst record in the league with possibly Atlanta nosing their way in. I think there's a higher level of talent left in Indy, NY and Chicago for them to drop that low in the overall standing. The other aspect is the teams in the East will pick up wins against each other whereas LA will be the West's whipping boy this season further piling on the losses.
-
Here's the thing - Lakers have incentive to be as good as possible because they are trying to convince two superstars to join them, and they don't own their pick. They have no reason to tank, and actually have incentive to be good.
Bulls, Pacers, Suns, Hawks, Magic - all own their picks and figure to tank.
Given those facts I don't think the Lakers have a shot and being bottom-5, which is what we need them to be. That's the way the arrows are pointing anyway. And there is always the chance their ping-pong ball comes up and Celtics get their 2/3 pick.
The Nets had no reason to tank for the past two seasons. That didn't stop them from finishing with the #3 and #1 lottery odds, though. Having "no incentive to tank" doesn't magically make the team better.
You're absolutely correct, but it is part of the equation. And The Lakers have Ball who looks like a special facilitator, KCP who can lock down the point so Ball can play off-ball, an improving Ingram, and Lopez. They won't be able to guard a statue and won't make they playoffs, but given that they have zero incentive to perform otherwise, they'll be better this year.
Injuries happen and player development has roadbumps, and I think it's possible LA finishes in the bottom 4-5, but If I had to bet my mortgage payment I'd bet on the Bulls, Pacers, Nets, Suns, and Hawks being worse than LA this year.
Fingers crossed I'm wrong though!
-
Here's the thing - Lakers have incentive to be as good as possible because they are trying to convince two superstars to join them, and they don't own their pick. They have no reason to tank, and actually have incentive to be good.
Bulls, Pacers, Suns, Hawks, Magic - all own their picks and figure to tank.
Given those facts I don't think the Lakers have a shot and being bottom-5, which is what we need them to be. That's the way the arrows are pointing anyway. And there is always the chance their ping-pong ball comes up and Celtics get their 2/3 pick.
The Nets had no reason to tank for the past two seasons. That didn't stop them from finishing with the #3 and #1 lottery odds, though. Having "no incentive to tank" doesn't magically make the team better.
You're absolutely correct, but it is part of the equation. And The Celtics have Ball who looks like a special facilitator, KCP who can lock down the point so Ball can play off-ball, an improving Ingram, and Lopez. They won't be able to guard a statue and won't make they playoffs, but given that they have zero incentive to perform otherwise, they'll be better this year.
Injuries happen and player development has roadbumps, and I think it's possible LA finishes in the bottom 4-5, but If I had to bet my mortgage payment I'd bet on the Bulls, Pacers, Nets, Suns, and Hawks being worse than LA this year.
Fingers crossed I'm wrong though!
But their defense would need to make a massive leap for them to jump all those teams. The worst defensive team in the league (the Lakers the past 2 years) has won an average of 20.7 games over the last 10 years. The second worst defensive team has won an average of 24.6 games in the same span.
Who have the Lakers added that is going to drastically improve their defense to allow them to sta out of the bottom 5?
-
Here's the thing - Lakers have incentive to be as good as possible because they are trying to convince two superstars to join them, and they don't own their pick. They have no reason to tank, and actually have incentive to be good.
Bulls, Pacers, Suns, Hawks, Magic - all own their picks and figure to tank.
Given those facts I don't think the Lakers have a shot and being bottom-5, which is what we need them to be. That's the way the arrows are pointing anyway. And there is always the chance their ping-pong ball comes up and Celtics get their 2/3 pick.
The Nets had no reason to tank for the past two seasons. That didn't stop them from finishing with the #3 and #1 lottery odds, though. Having "no incentive to tank" doesn't magically make the team better.
You're absolutely correct, but it is part of the equation. And The Lakers have Ball who looks like a special facilitator, KCP who can lock down the point so Ball can play off-ball, an improving Ingram, and Lopez. They won't be able to guard a statue and won't make they playoffs, but given that they have zero incentive to perform otherwise, they'll be better this year.
Injuries happen and player development has roadbumps, and I think it's possible LA finishes in the bottom 4-5, but If I had to bet my mortgage payment I'd bet on the Bulls, Pacers, Nets, Suns, and Hawks being worse than LA this year.
Fingers crossed I'm wrong though!
Seriously, what in the world makes you think for ONE MINUTE that KCP, a VERY BELOW AVERAGE DEFENDER, can "lock down the point???????????????????" First, KCP is a shooting guard and I seriously DOUBT has spent a lot of time guarding PG's!!!!
Secondly, for SG's, he is ranked 62nd or 63rd (for some reason, he is listed twice, perhaps to emphasize for you EXACTLY how BAD of a defender is truly is) out of 97 (really should be 96, as he is listed twice) SG's!!!
http://www.espn.com/nba/statistics/rpm/_/page/2/sort/DRPM/position/2
I really don't get where you are coming from. Do you know things that the rest of us, likely including the entire NBA, do not know about KCP?:-)))))))))))
Smitty77
-
I don't believe the Lakers are gonna be a bottom 5 team, but they aren't gonna be a playoff team either.
1. Golden State
2. San Antonio
3. Houston (CP3 + Harden)
4. Minny (KAT + Butler + Wiggins + Teague)
5. OKC (Westbrook + George + Adams)
6. Portland (Lillard + McCollum + the Nurkic effect)
7. LA Clips (Griffin + Jordan + Gallo)
8. New Orleans (Davis + Boogie + Holiday)
9. Denver (Jokic + Millsap)
10. Memphis (Conley + Marc Gasol)
11. Utah (Gobert + Favors + Hood + Rubio + good coach in Snyder)
(not necessarily in that order)
I cannot see the Lakers being better than any of those teams. Worst case scenario (for the C's) they 'll be the 12th best team in the West.
Hopefully, they are gonna be worse than some Eastern Conference teams as well. Problem is, there are far too many tankers/bad teams in the East.
If I had to guess, I 'd say the following teams are gonna be worse than the Lakers next season.
Phoenix
Dallas
Brooklyn
Atlanta
Chicago
NY
Orlando
In this scenario, only way for us to get the pick is if the Lakers move up to #2 (3.3%) or #3 (3.9%) in the lottery. To put it another way, we would have a 7.2% chance to get the pick.
I agree on all of the teams you predict to finish better than the Lakers.
I would go further and suggest Phx has a legit shot of being better than LA. Bledsoe, Chriss, Booker, Chandler, Dudley, Warren, Knight and Josh Jackson make for a better core of players than what LA has. That's not even depending on Bender or Len to provide much this year.
Dallas has Dirk, Noel, McRoberts, Wes Mathews, Harrison Barnes, Devin Harris, Dwight Powell and bright shiny new rookie in Dennis Smith. I like that core better than LA's too and we know Cuban doesn't want to tank while Dirk is still playing.
You omitted Sac who I also think has a better overall roster: Vince, Zach, George Hill, Kouros, Ty Lawson and some good looking youth Skal, WCS, Giles, Justin Jackson, Hield and Fox looks like a prize rookie. Borden Bogdanovic could work out well for them.
Lakers are very much contenders for the bottom of the West. Their D should continue to be horrid. KCP really needs to make a leap to move the needle for this team. still relying on Lopez to stay healthy. Deng is a shadow of his old self. Randle is empty stats. some youth that may turn into some decent players but they seem to just focus on scoring and not much else.
in the East, I think it's the Nets and Orlando competing with them for the worst record in the league with possibly Atlanta nosing their way in. I think there's a higher level of talent left in Indy, NY and Chicago for them to drop that low in the overall standing. The other aspect is the teams in the East will pick up wins against each other whereas LA will be the West's whipping boy this season further piling on the losses.
The Magic just got a little better inking Jonathan Simmons to a reasonable 3-year deal1!!!
Go Magic:-)))) Please win MORE than the Fakers!!!!
Smitty77
-
After watching the last LA Summer League game I think we can safely say LA will not be a bottom 6 team next season.
I hadn't watched the previous game where Ball went off for 36 points. But, from what I saw last night, he's the real deal. Both offensively and defensively, he's a game changer. He's definitely a transcendent player on the passing end of things. I think both Brown and Tatum can learn a thing or two from him. He has an amazing way of thinking 'pass' all the time. He's lightening quick in his thinking. Often, even if he doesn't get the assist, his initial pass leads to a secondary player being wide open.
Forget the LA pick. It ain't happening. Ingram scored 26 before he was shut down. Add KCP and possibly 50 games from Lopez, a healthy Randle(?), Clarkson is legit..i don't know the rest of roster that well...I'm sure I'm missing someone good.
In time, the Celtics might wish they hadn't passed on Ball, not Fultz. (I know he didn't want to play here, his father, yada, yada, ....)
This feels like an extreme overreaction to summer league. Let's see what happens when the Lakers NBA players match up against other actual NBA players.
-
You know, I hate the Lakers and everything, but it doesn't mean I can't recognize talent when I see it. And Ball has loads of talent. I think the Lakers will actually be pretty decent this season just due to him.
Also, I like his dad as well. Seems like the old-school, jib-jab kinda dude. If you actually listen to him talk, he's not arrogant, he's mostly just joking around and talking trash.
-
Kind of ridiculous to conclude they will make the playoffs cuz ball outplays a bunch of undrafted guys. Lets see him do it against the bradleys and Westbrooks of the world first
-
One of the benefits of trading AB to Detroit...now LA and Brooklyn will have to play him and Marcus twice as much.
-
I don't believe the Lakers are gonna be a bottom 5 team, but they aren't gonna be a playoff team either.
1. Golden State
2. San Antonio
3. Houston (CP3 + Harden)
4. Minny (KAT + Butler + Wiggins + Teague)
5. OKC (Westbrook + George + Adams)
6. Portland (Lillard + McCollum + the Nurkic effect)
7. LA Clips (Griffin + Jordan + Gallo)
8. New Orleans (Davis + Boogie + Holiday)
9. Denver (Jokic + Millsap)
10. Memphis (Conley + Marc Gasol)
11. Utah (Gobert + Favors + Hood + Rubio + good coach in Snyder)
(not necessarily in that order)
I cannot see the Lakers being better than any of those teams. Worst case scenario (for the C's) they 'll be the 12th best team in the West.
Hopefully, they are gonna be worse than some Eastern Conference teams as well. Problem is, there are far too many tankers/bad teams in the East.
If I had to guess, I 'd say the following teams are gonna be worse than the Lakers next season.
Phoenix
Dallas
Brooklyn
Atlanta
Chicago
NY
Orlando
In this scenario, only way for us to get the pick is if the Lakers move up to #2 (3.3%) or #3 (3.9%) in the lottery. To put it another way, we would have a 7.2% chance to get the pick.
Not sure why you consider Dallas worse? They have Barnes who is better than anyone on the Lakers roster. Smith Jr will have as good a rookie year as Ball and I think Dirk is coming back right?
In the East there are many bad teams but they all have to play each other. They have to win some games and I think that'll take a few of them ahead of LA.
So I have them 4th or 5th worst record. So lady luck will decide whether we keep the pick or not.
-
I don't believe the Lakers are gonna be a bottom 5 team, but they aren't gonna be a playoff team either.
1. Golden State
2. San Antonio
3. Houston (CP3 + Harden)
4. Minny (KAT + Butler + Wiggins + Teague)
5. OKC (Westbrook + George + Adams)
6. Portland (Lillard + McCollum + the Nurkic effect)
7. LA Clips (Griffin + Jordan + Gallo)
8. New Orleans (Davis + Boogie + Holiday)
9. Denver (Jokic + Millsap)
10. Memphis (Conley + Marc Gasol)
11. Utah (Gobert + Favors + Hood + Rubio + good coach in Snyder)
(not necessarily in that order)
I cannot see the Lakers being better than any of those teams. Worst case scenario (for the C's) they 'll be the 12th best team in the West.
Hopefully, they are gonna be worse than some Eastern Conference teams as well. Problem is, there are far too many tankers/bad teams in the East.
If I had to guess, I 'd say the following teams are gonna be worse than the Lakers next season.
Phoenix
Dallas
Brooklyn
Atlanta
Chicago
NY
Orlando
In this scenario, only way for us to get the pick is if the Lakers move up to #2 (3.3%) or #3 (3.9%) in the lottery. To put it another way, we would have a 7.2% chance to get the pick.
Not sure why you consider Dallas worse? They have Barnes who is better than anyone on the Lakers roster. Smith Jr will have as good a rookie year as Ball and I think Dirk is coming back right?
In the East there are many bad teams but they all have to play each other. They have to win some games and I think that'll take a few of them ahead of LA.
So I have them 4th or 5th worst record. So lady luck will decide whether we keep the pick or not.
Yup. TP. Playing against the west vs 4 games against each east opponent is the difference between top 5 and top 10.
It's a lottery coming after a season where it's anyone's guess, but I like our chances.
-
I don't believe the Lakers are gonna be a bottom 5 team, but they aren't gonna be a playoff team either.
1. Golden State
2. San Antonio
3. Houston (CP3 + Harden)
4. Minny (KAT + Butler + Wiggins + Teague)
5. OKC (Westbrook + George + Adams)
6. Portland (Lillard + McCollum + the Nurkic effect)
7. LA Clips (Griffin + Jordan + Gallo)
8. New Orleans (Davis + Boogie + Holiday)
9. Denver (Jokic + Millsap)
10. Memphis (Conley + Marc Gasol)
11. Utah (Gobert + Favors + Hood + Rubio + good coach in Snyder)
(not necessarily in that order)
I cannot see the Lakers being better than any of those teams. Worst case scenario (for the C's) they 'll be the 12th best team in the West.
Hopefully, they are gonna be worse than some Eastern Conference teams as well. Problem is, there are far too many tankers/bad teams in the East.
If I had to guess, I 'd say the following teams are gonna be worse than the Lakers next season.
Phoenix
Dallas
Brooklyn
Atlanta
Chicago
NY
Orlando
In this scenario, only way for us to get the pick is if the Lakers move up to #2 (3.3%) or #3 (3.9%) in the lottery. To put it another way, we would have a 7.2% chance to get the pick.
Not sure why you consider Dallas worse? They have Barnes who is better than anyone on the Lakers roster. Smith Jr will have as good a rookie year as Ball and I think Dirk is coming back right?
In the East there are many bad teams but they all have to play each other. They have to win some games and I think that'll take a few of them ahead of LA.
So I have them 4th or 5th worst record. So lady luck will decide whether we keep the pick or not.
Problem is, the Lakers will have zero incentive to lose games whereas other teams might decide to tank the season. For instance, last year the Lakers started 10-10 and from then on their record was 16-46.
-
You know, I hate the Lakers and everything, but it doesn't mean I can't recognize talent when I see it. And Ball has loads of talent. I think the Lakers will actually be pretty decent this season just due to him.
Also, I like his dad as well. Seems like the old-school, jib-jab kinda dude. If you actually listen to him talk, he's not arrogant, he's mostly just joking around and talking trash.
They aren't going very far with him shooting 30 percent and him being abused on defense.
-
I don't believe the Lakers are gonna be a bottom 5 team, but they aren't gonna be a playoff team either.
1. Golden State
2. San Antonio
3. Houston (CP3 + Harden)
4. Minny (KAT + Butler + Wiggins + Teague)
5. OKC (Westbrook + George + Adams)
6. Portland (Lillard + McCollum + the Nurkic effect)
7. LA Clips (Griffin + Jordan + Gallo)
8. New Orleans (Davis + Boogie + Holiday)
9. Denver (Jokic + Millsap)
10. Memphis (Conley + Marc Gasol)
11. Utah (Gobert + Favors + Hood + Rubio + good coach in Snyder)
(not necessarily in that order)
I cannot see the Lakers being better than any of those teams. Worst case scenario (for the C's) they 'll be the 12th best team in the West.
Hopefully, they are gonna be worse than some Eastern Conference teams as well. Problem is, there are far too many tankers/bad teams in the East.
If I had to guess, I 'd say the following teams are gonna be worse than the Lakers next season.
Phoenix
Dallas
Brooklyn
Atlanta
Chicago
NY
Orlando
In this scenario, only way for us to get the pick is if the Lakers move up to #2 (3.3%) or #3 (3.9%) in the lottery. To put it another way, we would have a 7.2% chance to get the pick.
Not sure why you consider Dallas worse? They have Barnes who is better than anyone on the Lakers roster. Smith Jr will have as good a rookie year as Ball and I think Dirk is coming back right?
In the East there are many bad teams but they all have to play each other. They have to win some games and I think that'll take a few of them ahead of LA.
So I have them 4th or 5th worst record. So lady luck will decide whether we keep the pick or not.
Problem is, the Lakers will have zero incentive to lose games whereas other teams might decide to tank the season. For instance, last year the Lakers started 10-10 and from then on their record was 16-46.
Could not the same thing be said about the nets the last two seasons- they have no reason to tank. Yet, they sucked eggs. More than this argument is needed to convince me about the lakers.
I still want to see ball play defense on some real NBA guards before I believe in him. His not playing against fox, who ate him up twice in college ball, makes me wonder.
-
Problem is, the Lakers will have zero incentive to lose games whereas other teams might decide to tank the season. For instance, last year the Lakers started 10-10 and from then on their record was 16-46.
Yeah, because that really helped Brooklyn the last two years. And they started off 4-5 last year. So that 10-10 start was just them overachieving. Can you point to a particular decision made after game 20 that caused them to lose more games?
Do people really not get this? Tanking is far rarer than people think. For instance, the Lakers had EVERY incentive to tank last year because they would have lost their draft pick if it fell outside the top 3. Yet they won 5 straight right at the end of the season. Orlando could have tanked but their winning percentage didn't fall (5 out of their last 13 is actually better than their winning percentage last year). Phoenix won 2 of their last 3 (6-16 their last 22 is just about what they did all year). The same holds true for every other team and prior seasons bear out the same result - tanking is actually really rare. I could go into the numerous reasons why this is (fanbase, locker room ramifications, sponsors) but there are many reasons against tanking.
It's rare that teams tank an entire year. The 76ers did it a couple of years. Teams tend to do it when there's a superstar coming up in the draft (aka Lebron, Tim Duncan). But that's not what we're talking about here. The tanking we're discussing is the type of lobbying for a better draft pick.
Here's the thing - it doesn't make a tremendous difference even if they did it. Post-All Star break there's generally 26 or 27 games left. Even if there's evidence of tanking, that doesn't typically happen until around the ASB. At that point it's really too late. The teams tempted to tank are only winning at a 1/3rd clip. So they would be expected to win only about 8 or 9 games. Teams that start to tank typically still win games just at a reduced rate. The net effect would be about 3 or 4 fewer wins at best. It's enough to move a couple of draft slots at best.
In a nutshell:
(1) Bad teams are bad and will lose anyway
(2) Tanking is really rare
(3) Most tanking results in very minor differences in W/L totals
So can we PLEASE put to bed this myth of "no incentive to tank" making bad teams somehow better? It's simply not true.
-
There is some overrating of how good the Lakers can be next season. They are extremely young and young teams don't win (see OKC with 2nd year Durant/rookie Westbrook). They will be terrible defensively with Randle/Lopez as their front court and Ball struggling to keep his man in front of him. And they have very little 3 point shooting. Unless they make other moves, i think they'll be in the bottom 2 in the west with the Kings.
-
@ hwangjini_1, Granath
The Nets had no incentive to lose games but they were hands down the worst team in the league. Their roster was full of scrubs. Only good player they had was Lopez. Their second best player was Jeremy Lin! The Lakers have Lopez + KCP + Ball + Clarkson + Ingram + Randle + Nance Jr + Zubac + veteran presence in Deng. They are a far better team than the Nets were last season.
-
Lakers are going to be bottom 3 in western conference
-
There is some overrating of how good the Lakers can be next season. They are extremely young and young teams don't win (see OKC with 2nd year Durant/rookie Westbrook). They will be terrible defensively with Randle/Lopez as their front court and Ball struggling to keep his man in front of him. And they have very little 3 point shooting. Unless they make other moves, i think they'll be in the bottom 2 in the west with the Kings.
This is it. And the title of the thread is awful.
People say Boston fans overrate their own players the most in the league. They don't read Celticsblog forums, where Rozier was trash and Portis was the next KG, Zizic was rubbish and Labissiere the next Duncan, and our picks will never turn into good ones because the Nets and the Lakers have improved and may be playoff teams.
:angel:
-
@ hwangjini_1, Granath
The Nets had no incentive to lose games but they were hands down the worst team in the league. Their roster was full of scrubs. Only good player they had was Lopez. Their second best player was Jeremy Lin! The Lakers have Lopez + KCP + Ball + Clarkson + Ingram + Randle + Nance Jr + Zubac + veteran presence in Deng. They are a far better team than the Nets were last season.
Which absolutely addresses none of my other point about tanking being extremely rare anyway.
-
@ hwangjini_1, Granath
The Nets had no incentive to lose games but they were hands down the worst team in the league. Their roster was full of scrubs. Only good player they had was Lopez. Their second best player was Jeremy Lin! The Lakers have Lopez + KCP + Ball + Clarkson + Ingram + Randle + Nance Jr + Zubac + veteran presence in Deng. They are a far better team than the Nets were last season.
Perhaps, but that's the wrong comparison. You have to compare how the Lakers have improved as compared to other WC teams. This is a more correct comparison because they will play most of their games against WC teams. "I think we can safely say" that many other teams in the West have improved more than the Lakers.
-
I'd bet my left arm that LAL will get off to a good start in 2017-18. They'll ride hype for a while (headline ESPN every day) and then come back to earth. Whether they coast down to earth or come crashing down is the question.
-
What are some of you guys smoking? PLAYOFFS?
Lakers better than the knicks? With melo and porzingis? In a weak conference? Or are you already expecting him to be traded for peanuts?
The lakers will finish somewhere in this group
Hawks
Magic
Bulls
Nets
Suns
Kings
Lakers
They're all pretty much equally bad. That means they have a pretty decent shot at being top 5 worst
Wait till you see them play in a regular season game. Lopez is good, KCP is absurdly bad, and the rest are all young players. This team isn't going anywhere...
Interdivisional: 8 losses vs clips and warriors. Let's say they win all vs suns and kings (doubtful)
Intradivisional: vs stacked teams... I'd give them about 30 losses here out of the 36 total
Vs east: I'd say they will lose half of these easily so 15 losses.
That's a 53 loss team. Playoffs? We talking about PLAYOFFS?
-
@ hwangjini_1, Granath
The Nets had no incentive to lose games but they were hands down the worst team in the league. Their roster was full of scrubs. Only good player they had was Lopez. Their second best player was Jeremy Lin! The Lakers have Lopez + KCP + Ball + Clarkson + Ingram + Randle + Nance Jr + Zubac + veteran presence in Deng. They are a far better team than the Nets were last season.
Perhaps, but that's the wrong comparison. You have to compare how the Lakers have improved as compared to other WC teams. This is a more correct comparison because they will play most of their games against WC teams. "I think we can safely say" that many other teams in the West have improved more than the Lakers.
I'm not sure the Lakers have improved that much at all. The scoring lost by Nick Young and Lou Williams is basically a wash for Lopez and KCP. Yes, look at their averages last year. Randle and Ingrim should improve but they are so young, and Ball is only a rookie.
-
@ hwangjini_1, Granath
The Nets had no incentive to lose games but they were hands down the worst team in the league. Their roster was full of scrubs. Only good player they had was Lopez. Their second best player was Jeremy Lin! The Lakers have Lopez + KCP + Ball + Clarkson + Ingram + Randle + Nance Jr + Zubac + veteran presence in Deng. They are a far better team than the Nets were last season.
Perhaps, but that's the wrong comparison. You have to compare how the Lakers have improved as compared to other WC teams. This is a more correct comparison because they will play most of their games against WC teams. "I think we can safely say" that many other teams in the West have improved more than the Lakers.
I'm not sure the Lakers have improved that much at all. The scoring lost by Nick Young and Lou Williams is basically a wash for Lopez and KCP. Yes, look at their averages last year. Randle and Ingrim should improve but they are so young, and Ball is only a rookie.
improvement by Randle would be suspect. just look how many people on this site consider Smart a finished product.
-
@ hwangjini_1, Granath
The Nets had no incentive to lose games but they were hands down the worst team in the league. Their roster was full of scrubs. Only good player they had was Lopez. Their second best player was Jeremy Lin! The Lakers have Lopez + KCP + Ball + Clarkson + Ingram + Randle + Nance Jr + Zubac + veteran presence in Deng. They are a far better team than the Nets were last season.
Which absolutely addresses none of my other point about tanking being extremely rare anyway.
You said it yourself : ''it's rare that teams tank an entire year''. Agreed. Never said the Lakers tanked the entire year anyway. They started 10-10 and from then on they won 16 out of their remaining 62 games.
Having said that, it's very common for teams to have a rough(/worse than expected) start and tank the rest of the season. There are plenty of teams that might go down that route half way through the 2017-18 season (perhaps even earlier than that).
Phoenix
Dallas
Sacramento
Atlanta
Chicago
NY
Orlando
Indy
(to name some of them)
Tanking happens every single season. Obviously, it's a bigger problem when teams believe there's a superstar coming up in the draft (for instance during the 2013-14 season, although Wiggins hasn't lived up to the hype). Feel free to believe tanking is rare. Imo it's the league's number 1 problem going forward (especially since the Warriors seem to be unbeatable for the foreseeable future).
-
@ hwangjini_1, Granath
The Nets had no incentive to lose games but they were hands down the worst team in the league. Their roster was full of scrubs. Only good player they had was Lopez. Their second best player was Jeremy Lin! The Lakers have Lopez + KCP + Ball + Clarkson + Ingram + Randle + Nance Jr + Zubac + veteran presence in Deng. They are a far better team than the Nets were last season.
Perhaps, but that's the wrong comparison. You have to compare how the Lakers have improved as compared to other WC teams. This is a more correct comparison because they will play most of their games against WC teams. "I think we can safely say" that many other teams in the West have improved more than the Lakers.
I'm not sure the Lakers have improved that much at all. The scoring lost by Nick Young and Lou Williams is basically a wash for Lopez and KCP. Yes, look at their averages last year. Randle and Ingrim should improve but they are so young, and Ball is only a rookie.
I was being generous by saying they would improve at all. If they do, it's only because of Lopez. When he goes down for his annual injury, they will be terrible.
-
I m going to agree . They won't make playoffs , but I rate them 6-10 th worst team.
At the endmof the season all,the good teams sit their players and teams like lAker and nets still fighting hard to improve their records.
Same situation as last year and funny it ALL hinges onthe same player ...SMH ....again Lopez health is the key .
Lopez will be pouring buckets in from Balls crafty passing.
question is when will,he trip , sprain an ankle .
Our,pick will mostly be edetrrmimed by Brooke Lopez once again. LOL
-
@ hwangjini_1, Granath
The Nets had no incentive to lose games but they were hands down the worst team in the league. Their roster was full of scrubs. Only good player they had was Lopez. Their second best player was Jeremy Lin! The Lakers have Lopez + KCP + Ball + Clarkson + Ingram + Randle + Nance Jr + Zubac + veteran presence in Deng. They are a far better team than the Nets were last season.
Perhaps, but that's the wrong comparison. You have to compare how the Lakers have improved as compared to other WC teams. This is a more correct comparison because they will play most of their games against WC teams. "I think we can safely say" that many other teams in the West have improved more than the Lakers.
I'm not sure the Lakers have improved that much at all. The scoring lost by Nick Young and Lou Williams is basically a wash for Lopez and KCP. Yes, look at their averages last year. Randle and Ingrim should improve but they are so young, and Ball is only a rookie.
I was being generous by saying they would improve at all. If they do, it's only because of Lopez. When he goes down for his annual injury, they will be terrible.
One thing the Nets did well last year was manage Lopez's wear and tear. He played 75 games with planned days off. I'm pretty sure he made it through the entire season without any significant injury as a result. His productivity was better per minute (largely due to his newly discovered joy for 3's). Of course, all of this careful planning still led to the worst record in the league, so who knows what effect he'll have on a young Lakers team? (Hopefully similar with just a little less luck in the lottery).
-
@ hwangjini_1, Granath
The Nets had no incentive to lose games but they were hands down the worst team in the league. Their roster was full of scrubs. Only good player they had was Lopez. Their second best player was Jeremy Lin! The Lakers have Lopez + KCP + Ball + Clarkson + Ingram + Randle + Nance Jr + Zubac + veteran presence in Deng. They are a far better team than the Nets were last season.
Which absolutely addresses none of my other point about tanking being extremely rare anyway.
You said it yourself : ''it's rare that teams tank an entire year''. Agreed. Never said the Lakers tanked the entire year anyway. They started 10-10 and from then on they won 16 out of their remaining 62 games.
Having said that, it's very common for teams to have a rough(/worse than expected) start and tank the rest of the season. There are plenty of teams that might go down that route half way through the 2017-18 season (perhaps even earlier than that).
Phoenix
Dallas
Sacramento
Atlanta
Chicago
NY
Orlando
Indy
(to name some of them)
Tanking happens every single season. Obviously, it's a bigger problem when teams believe there's a superstar coming up in the draft (for instance during the 2013-14 season, although Wiggins hasn't lived up to the hype). Feel free to believe tanking is rare. Imo it's the league's number 1 problem going forward (especially since the Warriors seem to be unbeatable for the foreseeable future).
Your entire post is speculation without any proof. You keep bringing up the Lakers as proof of tanking yet this is a team that won FIVE STRAIGHT right at the end of the year when it had literally everything to lose by doing so. That entirely negates your point. The evidence is irrefutable that when tanking would have counted most they simply didn't do so.
You claim it happens "every season" and that it's "very common" and still failed to provide any proof of this. So who tanked last season? I've already shown how the Suns, Lakers, Orlando and other teams didn't do it and that's evidenced by their records throughout the season. The funny thing is that the greatest (non-76er) statistical evidence of tanking over the last two seasons is probably the Brooklyn Nets in 2016 who lost 17 of their last 20 and their last 10....except we had their draft pick!
Now you've doubled down by saying there are at least 8 teams who might do so. Yet again, with no evidence that it's widespread it's simply unfounded speculation bordering on paranoia that somehow all of these teams will collude to rob us of a top 5 draft pick.
-
Yes, that Laker 5 game win streak was majorly impressive, led by such stalwarts at Metta World Peace, David Nwaba, Jordan Clarkson, D'Angelo Russell etc, over teams such as SA resting their starters, Davis-less and Cousins-less Pelicans, Gasol-less Grizzlies, and the mighty Kings.
-
I m going to agree . They won't make playoffs , but I rate them 6-10 th worst team.
At the endmof the season all,the good teams sit their players and teams like lAker and nets still fighting hard to improve their records.
Same situation as last year and funny it ALL hinges onthe same player ...SMH ....again Lopez health is the key .
Lopez will be pouring buckets in from Balls crafty passing.
question is when will,he trip , sprain an ankle .
Our,pick will mostly be edetrrmimed by Brooke Lopez once again. LOL
BROOK Lopez was healthy all last season and we ended up with the first pick.
-
Here's the thing - Lakers have incentive to be as good as possible because they are trying to convince two superstars to join them, and they don't own their pick. They have no reason to tank, and actually have incentive to be good.
Bulls, Pacers, Suns, Hawks, Magic - all own their picks and figure to tank.
Given those facts I don't think the Lakers have a shot and being bottom-5, which is what we need them to be. That's the way the arrows are pointing anyway. And there is always the chance their ping-pong ball comes up and Celtics get their 2/3 pick.
The Nets had no reason to tank for the past two seasons. That didn't stop them from finishing with the #3 and #1 lottery odds, though. Having "no incentive to tank" doesn't magically make the team better.
LOL probably the easiest TP you ever scored. Way to hit the ball out of the park.
-
@ hwangjini_1, Granath
The Nets had no incentive to lose games but they were hands down the worst team in the league. Their roster was full of scrubs. Only good player they had was Lopez. Their second best player was Jeremy Lin! The Lakers have Lopez + KCP + Ball + Clarkson + Ingram + Randle + Nance Jr + Zubac + veteran presence in Deng. They are a far better team than the Nets were last season.
Which absolutely addresses none of my other point about tanking being extremely rare anyway.
You said it yourself : ''it's rare that teams tank an entire year''. Agreed. Never said the Lakers tanked the entire year anyway. They started 10-10 and from then on they won 16 out of their remaining 62 games.
Having said that, it's very common for teams to have a rough(/worse than expected) start and tank the rest of the season. There are plenty of teams that might go down that route half way through the 2017-18 season (perhaps even earlier than that).
Phoenix
Dallas
Sacramento
Atlanta
Chicago
NY
Orlando
Indy
(to name some of them)
Tanking happens every single season. Obviously, it's a bigger problem when teams believe there's a superstar coming up in the draft (for instance during the 2013-14 season, although Wiggins hasn't lived up to the hype). Feel free to believe tanking is rare. Imo it's the league's number 1 problem going forward (especially since the Warriors seem to be unbeatable for the foreseeable future).
Your entire post is speculation without any proof. You keep bringing up the Lakers as proof of tanking yet this is a team that won FIVE STRAIGHT right at the end of the year when it had literally everything to lose by doing so. That entirely negates your point. The evidence is irrefutable that when tanking would have counted most they simply didn't do so.
You claim it happens "every season" and that it's "very common" and still failed to provide any proof of this. So who tanked last season? I've already shown how the Suns, Lakers, Orlando and other teams didn't do it and that's evidenced by their records throughout the season. The funny thing is that the greatest (non-76er) statistical evidence of tanking over the last two seasons is probably the Brooklyn Nets in 2016 who lost 17 of their last 20 and their last 10....except we had their draft pick!
Now you've doubled down by saying there are at least 8 teams who might do so. Yet again, with no evidence that it's widespread it's simply unfounded speculation bordering on paranoia that somehow all of these teams will collude to rob us of a top 5 draft pick.
Huh??
Of course I have no evidence. How could I possibly have any evidence to begin with? No one has. All we know is there are plenty of teams that have zero incentive to win their games. Regarding the Lakers, they decided to trade Lou Williams for a first rounder + salary filler (Brewer). The way I see it, that's clear indication they couldn't care less about the remainder of the season.
Besides that, players will never lose games on purpose. That's not how tanking works. The GMs are the ones who make the strategic decisions (in some cases I guess head coaches may embrase the tank as well). Players are playing for their next contract. They have no incentive whatsoever to participate in all this. The fact that the Lakers players won 5 games in a row, doesn't necessarily mean that the Lakers front office wanted the team to win in those games. Not to mention, 4 out of the 5 teams that they beat were lottery teams as well.
-
I'm not going to be living/dying with every Laker win this year. Both 18 and 19 are supposed to be good drafts at the top. I don't see any reason why SAC will be make the playoffs in two years, and don't see the Lakers making the playoffs next year. I think Danny made a decent gamble on this trade, considering he was going to pick Tatum over Fultz. Even if we end up with Phillys 18 pick, this trade is still a win. We got something for nothing in my eyes. I believe Danny when he said that he didn't have a better offer.
I remember when people were more upset when Danny traded Pierce and KG for a bunch of draft picks. That trade ended up ok, right?
-
Well if Bagley is going to be eligible for next year's draft now we better hope the Lakers suck something awful.
-
Well if Bagley is going to be eligible for next year's draft now we better hope the Lakers suck something awful.
No. It wouldn't matter. Bagley would be the first pick, which is protected.
-
Well if Bagley is going to be eligible for next year's draft now we better hope the Lakers suck something awful.
No. It wouldn't matter. Bagley would be the first pick, which is protected.
Yep. If you want Bagley, #NetsPick is where you should focus your energy.
-
Well if Bagley is going to be eligible for next year's draft now we better hope the Lakers suck something awful.
No. It wouldn't matter. Bagley would be the first pick, which is protected.
We have the Nets pick.
-
@Alleyoopster
Far far too early to reach that conclusion.
The competition in the Western conference will be fierce.
Reaching conclusions based on the summer league is far from safe.
And also, even if LAL finishes 6th 7th or below we still have a % their pick will be in the 2-5 range.
Not saying we will get the pick, but it is not certain we will not get it either.
-
Well if Bagley is going to be eligible for next year's draft now we better hope the Lakers suck something awful.
No. It wouldn't matter. Bagley would be the first pick, which is protected.
Yep. If you want Bagley, #NetsPick is where you should focus your energy.
I was talking more about the depth of the draft. Having 2 top 5 picks. Not necessarily that the Lakers pick to be Bagley, who will obviously go first.
-
Well if Bagley is going to be eligible for next year's draft now we better hope the Lakers suck something awful.
No. It wouldn't matter. Bagley would be the first pick, which is protected.
We have the Nets pick.
Of course. But the Lakers' pick deals nothing with Bagley, as you have suggested.
-
You do realize even if they are like the 8th worst team they still have a 10% chance at top 3.
Itll be worth watching for sure
-
You do realize even if they are like the 8th worst team they still have a 10% chance at top 3.
Itll be worth watching for sure
Yes, though for our purposes the number to care about is less than that, 7.2% to be precise, since we don't get the pick if it's #1.
-
Well if Bagley is going to be eligible for next year's draft now we better hope the Lakers suck something awful.
No. It wouldn't matter. Bagley would be the first pick, which is protected.
We have the Nets pick.
Of course. But the Lakers' pick deals nothing with Bagley, as you have suggested.
Again, I was referring to the depth of the draft. That Bagley entering knocks Porter Bamba Ayton and Doncic down a pick, meaning the Lakers pick will net us one of them, hopefully in addition to Bagley with the Nets pick.
Obviously I know the Lakers pick is protected, as I assume everyone else on this board does.
-
Huh??
Of course I have no evidence. How could I possibly have any evidence to begin with? No one has. All we know is there are plenty of teams that have zero incentive to win their games. Regarding the Lakers, they decided to trade Lou Williams for a first rounder + salary filler (Brewer). The way I see it, that's clear indication they couldn't care less about the remainder of the season.
Besides that, players will never lose games on purpose. That's not how tanking works. The GMs are the ones who make the strategic decisions (in some cases I guess head coaches may embrase the tank as well). Players are playing for their next contract. They have no incentive whatsoever to participate in all this. The fact that the Lakers players won 5 games in a row, doesn't necessarily mean that the Lakers front office wanted the team to win in those games. Not to mention, 4 out of the 5 teams that they beat were lottery teams as well.
So let's just recap your post here:
1. You have no evidence of tanking being prevalent.
2. Any transaction that does not immediately help a team is somehow evidence of "tanking". I guess the Cs are tanking because we didn't trade the #3 pick for Paul George.
3. Tanking doesn't work well anyway because the players won't go along with it.
Alrighty then. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Tanking has been the Boogyman of the Nets picks. I guess that will now apply to the LAL/PHI/SAC pick as well.
-
Huh??
Of course I have no evidence. How could I possibly have any evidence to begin with? No one has. All we know is there are plenty of teams that have zero incentive to win their games. Regarding the Lakers, they decided to trade Lou Williams for a first rounder + salary filler (Brewer). The way I see it, that's clear indication they couldn't care less about the remainder of the season.
Besides that, players will never lose games on purpose. That's not how tanking works. The GMs are the ones who make the strategic decisions (in some cases I guess head coaches may embrase the tank as well). Players are playing for their next contract. They have no incentive whatsoever to participate in all this. The fact that the Lakers players won 5 games in a row, doesn't necessarily mean that the Lakers front office wanted the team to win in those games. Not to mention, 4 out of the 5 teams that they beat were lottery teams as well.
So let's just recap your post here:
1. You have no evidence of tanking being prevalent.
2. Any transaction that does not immediately help a team is somehow evidence of "tanking". I guess the Cs are tanking because we didn't trade the #3 pick for Paul George.
3. Tanking doesn't work well anyway because the players won't go along with it.
Alrighty then. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Tanking has been the Boogyman of the Nets picks. I guess that will now apply to the LAL/PHI/SAC pick as well.
Yeah that's exactly what I wrote. There is absolutely no way to prove that a team is tanking games, unless a member of the team admits to it.
A couple of months ago, Mark Cuban admitted that the Mavs had done anything possible to lose games last season.
http://www.sportingnews.com/nba/news/mark-cuban-dallas-mavericks-news-tank-dan-patrick-show/94tzr8zysewk1nzfbw0q57nst
Ryan Gomes has admitted that the C's were tanking in 2007.
"I probably (would have played), but since we were in the hunt for a high draft pick, of course things are different. I understand that. Hopefully things get better. Now that we clinched at least having the second-most balls in the lottery, the last three games we'll see what happens. We'll see if we can go out and finish some games."
Are those examples good enough for you?
Going by your logic, tanking is rare cause no one can prove that it's not rare. Yeah, sure. Feel free to believe whatever you want mate.
-
Brooke Lopez is injury prone and if he goes down or only plays part of the season then watch out!
-
Huh??
Of course I have no evidence. How could I possibly have any evidence to begin with? No one has. All we know is there are plenty of teams that have zero incentive to win their games. Regarding the Lakers, they decided to trade Lou Williams for a first rounder + salary filler (Brewer). The way I see it, that's clear indication they couldn't care less about the remainder of the season.
Besides that, players will never lose games on purpose. That's not how tanking works. The GMs are the ones who make the strategic decisions (in some cases I guess head coaches may embrase the tank as well). Players are playing for their next contract. They have no incentive whatsoever to participate in all this. The fact that the Lakers players won 5 games in a row, doesn't necessarily mean that the Lakers front office wanted the team to win in those games. Not to mention, 4 out of the 5 teams that they beat were lottery teams as well.
So let's just recap your post here:
1. You have no evidence of tanking being prevalent.
2. Any transaction that does not immediately help a team is somehow evidence of "tanking". I guess the Cs are tanking because we didn't trade the #3 pick for Paul George.
3. Tanking doesn't work well anyway because the players won't go along with it.
Alrighty then. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Tanking has been the Boogyman of the Nets picks. I guess that will now apply to the LAL/PHI/SAC pick as well.
Yeah that's exactly what I wrote. There is absolutely no way to prove that a team is tanking games, unless a member of the team admits to it.
A couple of months ago, Mark Cuban admitted that the Mavs had done anything possible to lose games last season.
http://www.sportingnews.com/nba/news/mark-cuban-dallas-mavericks-news-tank-dan-patrick-show/94tzr8zysewk1nzfbw0q57nst
Ryan Gomes has admitted that the C's were tanking in 2007.
"I probably (would have played), but since we were in the hunt for a high draft pick, of course things are different. I understand that. Hopefully things get better. Now that we clinched at least having the second-most balls in the lottery, the last three games we'll see what happens. We'll see if we can go out and finish some games."
Are those examples good enough for you?
Going by your logic, tanking is rare cause no one can prove that it's not rare. Yeah, sure. Feel free to believe whatever you want mate.
It is an accurate summary of your post. And no, those examples aren't good enough. They're 10 years apart. That's neither common nor widespread.
Your insinuation is that roughly 1/3rd of the league will have great incentive to lose games somewhere around the All-Star break. Then that will cause the LAL pick to become considerably devalued. That is an accurate assessment of your point and it's refuted quite simply (and now repeatedly).
The first is unfounded speculation with more realism in a video game than it has in the real world. Players and coaches aren't paid to lose. They lose money when they do. People get fired. The locker room ramifications of accepting losing can be severe. Loss of ticket sales, goodwill with the community and business disputes with those who are buying the luxury boxes are all major consequences of tanking. It's not a simple decision and that's why it's so very uncommon. That's what made the 76er "process" so remarkably stunning - teams just don't do that kind of damage to their brand.
Then, as I've brought up repeatedly *and you've entirely failed to address) there's the limited usefulness to it. Let's use your glorious smoking gun Dallas example. Their winning percentage actually improved throughout most of the year.
End of December: .294
End of January: .375
End of February: .406
End of Season: .402
So if they "tanked" they certainly didn't do a good job, did they? :laugh:
Even in cases where tanking would be far more overt and the losses piling up (and again, these cases are hard to find), mid-to-late year tanking would likely only result in somewhere around 3 more losses than normally would be expected. This isn't enough to generally cause massive changes in draft positions.
-
Well if Bagley is going to be eligible for next year's draft now we better hope the Lakers suck something awful.
No. It wouldn't matter. Bagley would be the first pick, which is protected.
We have the Nets pick.
Of course. But the Lakers' pick deals nothing with Bagley, as you have suggested.
Again, I was referring to the depth of the draft. That Bagley entering knocks Porter Bamba Ayton and Doncic down a pick, meaning the Lakers pick will net us one of them, hopefully in addition to Bagley with the Nets pick.
Obviously I know the Lakers pick is protected, as I assume everyone else on this board does.
Right. I think if you can come out with Bagley or Porter with the Nets pick, and Doncic, the team is set for the next 10-15 years
-
Huh??
Of course I have no evidence. How could I possibly have any evidence to begin with? No one has. All we know is there are plenty of teams that have zero incentive to win their games. Regarding the Lakers, they decided to trade Lou Williams for a first rounder + salary filler (Brewer). The way I see it, that's clear indication they couldn't care less about the remainder of the season.
Besides that, players will never lose games on purpose. That's not how tanking works. The GMs are the ones who make the strategic decisions (in some cases I guess head coaches may embrase the tank as well). Players are playing for their next contract. They have no incentive whatsoever to participate in all this. The fact that the Lakers players won 5 games in a row, doesn't necessarily mean that the Lakers front office wanted the team to win in those games. Not to mention, 4 out of the 5 teams that they beat were lottery teams as well.
So let's just recap your post here:
1. You have no evidence of tanking being prevalent.
2. Any transaction that does not immediately help a team is somehow evidence of "tanking". I guess the Cs are tanking because we didn't trade the #3 pick for Paul George.
3. Tanking doesn't work well anyway because the players won't go along with it.
Alrighty then. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Tanking has been the Boogyman of the Nets picks. I guess that will now apply to the LAL/PHI/SAC pick as well.
Yeah that's exactly what I wrote. There is absolutely no way to prove that a team is tanking games, unless a member of the team admits to it.
A couple of months ago, Mark Cuban admitted that the Mavs had done anything possible to lose games last season.
http://www.sportingnews.com/nba/news/mark-cuban-dallas-mavericks-news-tank-dan-patrick-show/94tzr8zysewk1nzfbw0q57nst
Ryan Gomes has admitted that the C's were tanking in 2007.
"I probably (would have played), but since we were in the hunt for a high draft pick, of course things are different. I understand that. Hopefully things get better. Now that we clinched at least having the second-most balls in the lottery, the last three games we'll see what happens. We'll see if we can go out and finish some games."
Are those examples good enough for you?
Going by your logic, tanking is rare cause no one can prove that it's not rare. Yeah, sure. Feel free to believe whatever you want mate.
It is an accurate summary of your post. And no, those examples aren't good enough. They're 10 years apart. That's neither common nor widespread.
Your insinuation is that roughly 1/3rd of the league will have great incentive to lose games somewhere around the All-Star break. Then that will cause the LAL pick to become considerably devalued. That is an accurate assessment of your point and it's refuted quite simply (and now repeatedly).
The first is unfounded speculation with more realism in a video game than it has in the real world. Players and coaches aren't paid to lose. They lose money when they do. People get fired. The locker room ramifications of accepting losing can be severe. Loss of ticket sales, goodwill with the community and business disputes with those who are buying the luxury boxes are all major consequences of tanking. It's not a simple decision and that's why it's so very uncommon. That's what made the 76er "process" so remarkably stunning - teams just don't do that kind of damage to their brand.
Then, as I've brought up repeatedly *and you've entirely failed to address) there's the limited usefulness to it. Let's use your glorious smoking gun Dallas example. Their winning percentage actually improved throughout most of the year.
End of December: .294
End of January: .375
End of February: .406
End of Season: .402
So if they "tanked" they certainly didn't do a good job, did they? :laugh:
Even in cases where tanking would be far more overt and the losses piling up (and again, these cases are hard to find), mid-to-late year tanking would likely only result in somewhere around 3 more losses than normally would be expected. This isn't enough to generally cause massive changes in draft positions.
Really don't care anymore mate. It feels like I'm trying to persuade you that I'm not an alien or something. The way I see it, tanking the rest of the season is common practise among non-playoff teams. Obviously, you have a different point of view. I respect that. Let's just agree to disagree. Feel free to believe whatever you want.
-
Yeah this is weird, teams tank all the time after the all star break. It is pretty common knowledge.
The Lakers are just a bad team. No better than 3rd worst in the west and likely only better than a couple of teams in the East. They just aren't a good team.
-
Rondo to pelicans over lakers and Jonathan Simmons to magic helps a bit. Good news.
-
Last year LA traded Jrue Holiday and from that point forward were the worst team in the NBA. That's unlikely to happen this year.
Especially when you consider that they need to appear as competent as possible to purse George next year.
-
Last year LA traded Jrue Holiday and from that point forward were the worst team in the NBA. That's unlikely to happen this year.
Especially when you consider that they need to appear as competent as possible to purse George next year.
Don't you mean Lou Williams?
-
Rondo to pelicans over lakers and Jonathan Simmons to magic helps a bit. Good news.
Lakers will lose 5-10 more games according to Hollinger's mother. (she is a Rondo fan)
-
Well if Bagley is going to be eligible for next year's draft now we better hope the Lakers suck something awful.
No. It wouldn't matter. Bagley would be the first pick, which is protected.
We have the Nets pick.
Of course. But the Lakers' pick deals nothing with Bagley, as you have suggested.
Again, I was referring to the depth of the draft. That Bagley entering knocks Porter Bamba Ayton and Doncic down a pick, meaning the Lakers pick will net us one of them, hopefully in addition to Bagley with the Nets pick.
Obviously I know the Lakers pick is protected, as I assume everyone else on this board does.
Right. I think if you can come out with Bagley or Porter with the Nets pick, and Doncic, the team is set for the next 10-15 years
A combo of Bagley and any of the other 4 would be a dream. The Celtics could be in potential dynasty territory with a young core of Brown-Tatum-Bagley-Ayton.
-
Really don't care anymore mate. It feels like I'm trying to persuade you that I'm not an alien or something. The way I see it, tanking the rest of the season is common practise among non-playoff teams. Obviously, you have a different point of view. I respect that. Let's just agree to disagree. Feel free to believe whatever you want.
You haven't even begun to persuade. You've just said the same thing repeatedly without producing hardly any evidence that supports your viewpoint. What little you've produced (LAL, DAL) was quickly debunked by the actual result of the games. So if you want to believe in conspiracy theories and widespread tanking of games, feel free but it's one of those NBA2K fantasy GM assumptions that doesn't hold true in the real world.
-
Really don't care anymore mate. It feels like I'm trying to persuade you that I'm not an alien or something. The way I see it, tanking the rest of the season is common practise among non-playoff teams. Obviously, you have a different point of view. I respect that. Let's just agree to disagree. Feel free to believe whatever you want.
You haven't even begun to persuade. You've just said the same thing repeatedly without producing hardly any evidence that supports your viewpoint. What little you've produced (LAL, DAL) was quickly debunked by the actual result of the games. So if you want to believe in conspiracy theories and widespread tanking of games, feel free but it's one of those NBA2K fantasy GM assumptions that doesn't hold true in the real world.
Wasnt the lottery itself, and other approaches before it, put in place because it's pretty common kowldge that teams were tanking?
-
Really don't care anymore mate. It feels like I'm trying to persuade you that I'm not an alien or something. The way I see it, tanking the rest of the season is common practise among non-playoff teams. Obviously, you have a different point of view. I respect that. Let's just agree to disagree. Feel free to believe whatever you want.
You haven't even begun to persuade. You've just said the same thing repeatedly without producing hardly any evidence that supports your viewpoint. What little you've produced (LAL, DAL) was quickly debunked by the actual result of the games. So if you want to believe in conspiracy theories and widespread tanking of games, feel free but it's one of those NBA2K fantasy GM assumptions that doesn't hold true in the real world.
Wasnt the lottery itself, and other approaches before it, put in place because it's pretty common kowldge that teams were tanking?
The current lottery system was put in place 27 years ago. How does something that happened 3 decades ago support a current assumption? That same year the Bad Boys were crowned NBA Champions. Should Danny build a team to defeat that kind of roster and approach on the court?
I find tanking to be an egregious affront to the players, fans and the game. But the lottery has largely curbed the major abuses of it. That's not to say it never happens (which I have never claimed it does not). That's why there was such consternation when Hinkie adopted his multi-year "stank and tank" approach and that's why you heard a very large rumbling from NBA front offices that they were considering other approaches if it continued. When the prize is large enough - a Duncan, an Oden/Durant, a Lebron - teams will still do it because there's an overwhelming incentive that overcomes the reasons not to do it. But the current system does act as a major deterrent because of the risk versus the (generally) minimal rewards for obviously throwing in the towel the last 1/4th of the season.
-
Really don't care anymore mate. It feels like I'm trying to persuade you that I'm not an alien or something. The way I see it, tanking the rest of the season is common practise among non-playoff teams. Obviously, you have a different point of view. I respect that. Let's just agree to disagree. Feel free to believe whatever you want.
You haven't even begun to persuade. You've just said the same thing repeatedly without producing hardly any evidence that supports your viewpoint. What little you've produced (LAL, DAL) was quickly debunked by the actual result of the games. So if you want to believe in conspiracy theories and widespread tanking of games, feel free but it's one of those NBA2K fantasy GM assumptions that doesn't hold true in the real world.
Wasnt the lottery itself, and other approaches before it, put in place because it's pretty common kowldge that teams were tanking?
The current lottery system was put in place 27 years ago. How does something that happened 3 decades ago support a current assumption? That same year the Bad Boys were crowned NBA Champions. Should Danny build a team to defeat that kind of roster and approach on the court?
I find tanking to be an egregious affront to the players, fans and the game. But the lottery has largely curbed the major abuses of it. That's not to say it never happens (which I have never claimed it does not). That's why there was such consternation when Hinkie adopted his multi-year "stank and tank" approach and that's why you heard a very large rumbling from NBA front offices that they were considering other approaches if it continued. When the prize is large enough - a Duncan, an Oden/Durant, a Lebron - teams will still do it because there's an overwhelming incentive that overcomes the reasons not to do it. But the current system does act as a major deterrent because of the risk versus the (generally) minimal rewards for obviously throwing in the towel the last 1/4th of the season.
Is your stance that tanking doesn't actually happen?
-
I remember years ago when MLB Commissioner Bowie Kuhn negated Charley Finley's wholesale
sell-off of his best A's players.
What Hinkie did was similar--he gave away the Sixers' best players for nothing. Which prompted his coach at the time to resign. He tried to lose by getting rid of his best players in lop-sided deals.
It used to be in sports that GMs couldn't get away with that kind of nonsense. But nowadays, anything goes.
I don't think Philly is out of the woods yet. Two of their high picks, Embiid and Simmons, have foot problems which could be chronic. There is no guarantee that Embiid won't break down if he plays "normal" NBA minutes. He was kept under wraps last year.
As to the subject of this thread, Aren't they pretty much guaranteed a high pick, as long as it isn't the overall final #1? If it isn't LA, it's the Kings, and they figure to be in the lottery.
As an aside, #1 overall is expensive. About $7M this year--which is one reason why Ainge traded it. More $ next year. That's a lot for a 19yo gamble.
-
I remember years ago when MLB Commissioner Bowie Kuhn negated Charley Finley's wholesale
sell-off of his best A's players.
What Hinkie did was similar--he gave away the Sixers' best players for nothing. Which prompted his coach at the time to resign. He tried to lose by getting rid of his best players in lop-sided deals.
It used to be in sports that GMs couldn't get away with that kind of nonsense. But nowadays, anything goes.
I don't think Philly is out of the woods yet. Two of their high picks, Embiid and Simmons, have foot problems which could be chronic. There is no guarantee that Embiid won't break down if he plays "normal" NBA minutes. He was kept under wraps last year.
As to the subject of this thread, Aren't they pretty much guaranteed a high pick, as long as it isn't the overall final #1? If it isn't LA, it's the Kings, and they figure to be in the lottery.
As an aside, #1 overall is expensive. About $7M this year--which is one reason why Ainge traded it. More $ next year. That's a lot for a 19yo gamble.
(https://i.redd.it/v66vlk4flw9z.png)
If saving money was the issue he should have traded down to 27 and drafted Kyle Kuzma... He just signed with the Lakers for 4 years 8.65 million total. He's been outperforming Tatum all summer league.
-
I remember years ago when MLB Commissioner Bowie Kuhn negated Charley Finley's wholesale
sell-off of his best A's players.
What Hinkie did was similar--he gave away the Sixers' best players for nothing. Which prompted his coach at the time to resign. He tried to lose by getting rid of his best players in lop-sided deals.
It used to be in sports that GMs couldn't get away with that kind of nonsense. But nowadays, anything goes.
I don't think Philly is out of the woods yet. Two of their high picks, Embiid and Simmons, have foot problems which could be chronic. There is no guarantee that Embiid won't break down if he plays "normal" NBA minutes. He was kept under wraps last year.
As to the subject of this thread, Aren't they pretty much guaranteed a high pick, as long as it isn't the overall final #1? If it isn't LA, it's the Kings, and they figure to be in the lottery.
As an aside, #1 overall is expensive. About $7M this year--which is one reason why Ainge traded it. More $ next year. That's a lot for a 19yo gamble.
(https://i.redd.it/v66vlk4flw9z.png)
If saving money was the issue he should have traded down to 27 and drafted Kyle Kuzma... He just signed with the Lakers for 4 years 8.65 million total. He's been outperforming Tatum all summer league.
Yeah, Kuzna has been good but he's also a graduating senior being compared to 19 year olds here.
-
Really don't care anymore mate. It feels like I'm trying to persuade you that I'm not an alien or something. The way I see it, tanking the rest of the season is common practise among non-playoff teams. Obviously, you have a different point of view. I respect that. Let's just agree to disagree. Feel free to believe whatever you want.
You haven't even begun to persuade. You've just said the same thing repeatedly without producing hardly any evidence that supports your viewpoint. What little you've produced (LAL, DAL) was quickly debunked by the actual result of the games. So if you want to believe in conspiracy theories and widespread tanking of games, feel free but it's one of those NBA2K fantasy GM assumptions that doesn't hold true in the real world.
Wasnt the lottery itself, and other approaches before it, put in place because it's pretty common kowldge that teams were tanking?
The current lottery system was put in place 27 years ago. How does something that happened 3 decades ago support a current assumption? That same year the Bad Boys were crowned NBA Champions. Should Danny build a team to defeat that kind of roster and approach on the court?
I find tanking to be an egregious affront to the players, fans and the game. But the lottery has largely curbed the major abuses of it. That's not to say it never happens (which I have never claimed it does not). That's why there was such consternation when Hinkie adopted his multi-year "stank and tank" approach and that's why you heard a very large rumbling from NBA front offices that they were considering other approaches if it continued. When the prize is large enough - a Duncan, an Oden/Durant, a Lebron - teams will still do it because there's an overwhelming incentive that overcomes the reasons not to do it. But the current system does act as a major deterrent because of the risk versus the (generally) minimal rewards for obviously throwing in the towel the last 1/4th of the season.
But . . . "Everybody knows that all the bad teams tank. Nobody needs logic here, 'everybody knows' is evidence enough."
-
Ball leaves the summer league with calf injury.
-
Ball leaves the summer league with calf injury.
"injury"
-
After watching the last LA Summer League game I think we can safely say LA will not be a bottom 6 team next season.
I hadn't watched the previous game where Ball went off for 36 points. But, from what I saw last night, he's the real deal. Both offensively and defensively, he's a game changer. He's definitely a transcendent player on the passing end of things. I think both Brown and Tatum can learn a thing or two from him. He has an amazing way of thinking 'pass' all the time. He's lightening quick in his thinking. Often, even if he doesn't get the assist, his initial pass leads to a secondary player being wide open.
Forget the LA pick. It ain't happening. Ingram scored 26 before he was shut down. Add KCP and possibly 50 games from Lopez, a healthy Randle(?), Clarkson is legit..i don't know the rest of roster that well...I'm sure I'm missing someone good.
In time, the Celtics might wish they hadn't passed on Ball, not Fultz. (I know he didn't want to play here, his father, yada, yada, ....)
Ball isn't putting up 36 points against NBA players. The guy has no offensive game beyond spot up threes and the occasional drive to the basket (which he lacks the quickenss/strength to finish against NBA competition).
He'll be a good player, but I'll be surprised if he ends up much (if any) better than Tatum - who has all the tools to be an elite NBA scorer and a very capable defender.
-
^ agreed, and he never drives to the left. Very predictable
.
This is ball on defense: https://instagram.com/p/BWoSSqFFil1/ imagine IT splitting him. It is like 2 feet shorter than him and will make him look so bad lol
-
Ball is a rookie. He's not that special.
KCP is a journeyman. There's a reason Detroit decided to rescind their offer after acquiring Bradley from us.
-
^ agreed, and he never drives to the left. Very predictable
.
This is ball on defense: https://instagram.com/p/BWoSSqFFil1/ imagine IT splitting him. It is like 2 feet shorter than him and will make him look so bad lol
That's only one clip of Ball's matador defense going back to UCLA. Do we even need to talk about what Fox did to him?
Ball could actually make LAL's league-worst defense even worse..
-
Ball is a rookie. He's not that special.
KCP is a journeyman. There's a reason Detroit decided to rescind their offer after acquiring Bradley from us.
KCP played for 1 team so far. Detroit parted ways because of money and cause they have similar skill sets. KCP is an elite perimiter defender that shows promise in hitting threes. He is also longer and better off the dribble than AB. While Avery is more well rounded vet. KCP truly is a great partner to Ball as he can take on tougher of the guards and be a threat off the ball.
-
Ball is a rookie. He's not that special.
KCP is a journeyman. There's a reason Detroit decided to rescind their offer after acquiring Bradley from us.
KCP played for 1 team so far. Detroit parted ways because of money and cause they have similar skill sets. KCP is an elite perimiter defender that shows promise in hitting threes. He is also longer and better off the dribble than AB. While Avery is more well rounded vet. KCP truly is a great partner to Ball as he can take a tougher of the guards and be a threat off the ball.
KCP is not an elite perimeter defender. Where is the evidence that he is even an average defender?
-
Ball is a rookie. He's not that special.
KCP is a journeyman. There's a reason Detroit decided to rescind their offer after acquiring Bradley from us.
KCP played for 1 team so far. Detroit parted ways because of money and cause they have similar skill sets. KCP is an elite perimiter defender that shows promise in hitting threes. He is also longer and better off the dribble than AB. While Avery is more well rounded vet. KCP truly is a great partner to Ball as he can take a tougher of the guards and be a threat off the ball.
KCP is not an elite perimeter defender. Where is the evidence that he is even an average defender?
there's none. He's garbage
-
Ball is a rookie. He's not that special.
KCP is a journeyman. There's a reason Detroit decided to rescind their offer after acquiring Bradley from us.
KCP played for 1 team so far. Detroit parted ways because of money and cause they have similar skill sets. KCP is an elite perimiter defender that shows promise in hitting threes. He is also longer and better off the dribble than AB. While Avery is more well rounded vet. KCP truly is a great partner to Ball as he can take a tougher of the guards and be a threat off the ball.
KCP is not an elite perimeter defender. Where is the evidence that he is even an average defender?
there's none. He's garbage
where's the evidence he is garbage? I'm not a fan of KCP, but 'garbage' feels too strong.
I looked up the bball ref comp of his and Bradley's numbers, they are close in several cats.
http://bkref.com/tiny/18CTc
-
Ball is a rookie. He's not that special.
KCP is a journeyman. There's a reason Detroit decided to rescind their offer after acquiring Bradley from us.
KCP played for 1 team so far. Detroit parted ways because of money and cause they have similar skill sets. KCP is an elite perimiter defender that shows promise in hitting threes. He is also longer and better off the dribble than AB. While Avery is more well rounded vet. KCP truly is a great partner to Ball as he can take a tougher of the guards and be a threat off the ball.
KCP is not an elite perimeter defender. Where is the evidence that he is even an average defender?
there's none. He's garbage
where's the evidence he is garbage? I'm not a fan of KCP, but 'garbage' feels too strong.
I looked up the bball ref comp of his and Bradley's numbers, they are close in several cats.
http://bkref.com/tiny/18CTc
Yeah they do seem somewhat similar. For the record, I've never been that high on Bradley, but I know some think he's a really valuable player.
KCP looks a lot like Avery actually. I just had never even heard of KCP, now it seems like he's a perennial DPOY candidate or something. The Lakers definitely need the help on D..
-
Brook Lopez is the best player on that team right now and if he goes down or only plays for half the season (or less) then the LAL are so screwed.
-
Really don't care anymore mate. It feels like I'm trying to persuade you that I'm not an alien or something. The way I see it, tanking the rest of the season is common practise among non-playoff teams. Obviously, you have a different point of view. I respect that. Let's just agree to disagree. Feel free to believe whatever you want.
You haven't even begun to persuade. You've just said the same thing repeatedly without producing hardly any evidence that supports your viewpoint. What little you've produced (LAL, DAL) was quickly debunked by the actual result of the games. So if you want to believe in conspiracy theories and widespread tanking of games, feel free but it's one of those NBA2K fantasy GM assumptions that doesn't hold true in the real world.
Wasnt the lottery itself, and other approaches before it, put in place because it's pretty common kowldge that teams were tanking?
Yes. And the lottery pretty much neutralizes the determinism that _used_ to drive tanking. Tanking was a strategy before the lottery. Now it is a gamble, with the odds stacked against you.
Every year since the weighted lottery was put in place, there are about 7 teams in the NBA with less than 30 wins (or equivalent w-l percentage in the shortened years). The variance is not much. I think the most teams in any one year with records that bad was 9 and the fewest was 4.
A telling aspect of this is that the number of teams with crappy, sub-30-win records doesn't seem to really correlate with whether a draft is projected as 'strong' or 'weak'. In recent years we've had fewer bad teams in the 'strong' drafts than in the weak ones.
This lack of correlation doesn't support the idea that teams are tanking for particular drafts.
I think that mostly that these are just bad teams.
-
As an aside, #1 overall is expensive. About $7M this year--which is one reason why Ainge traded it. More $ next year. That's a lot for a 19yo gamble.
Ball would've looked good as a Celtic - could've put IT at the 2 like the Rockets did with Calvin Murphy back in the day, had him guard quick PGs and score at will from Ball's passes.
In any event, Celtics fortunes continue to rise - good picks in the bank even without the Lakers' pick.
-
Worst case a late lotto pick for 2019 draft
Danny has a good track record around this range
-
The only thing we can safely say is that some folks are grossly overreacting to Summer League. Everything else is a complete unknown. It will be fun to watch the season unfold.
-
I just don't understand how people can think the Lakers will make noise. Even the worst west teams have a bunch of stars. The clippers for example look to be a 8th seed and they are loaded.
-
The only thing we can safely say is that some folks are grossly overreacting to Summer League. Everything else is a complete unknown. It will be fun to watch the season unfold.
Exactly....
-
I just don't understand how people can think the Lakers will make noise. Even the worst west teams have a bunch of stars. The clippers for example look to be a 8th seed and they are loaded.
Yeah. I've got Golden State, San Antonion, Houston, OKC, the Clippers, Denver, Portland, Memphis, New Orleans, and Minnesota comfortably ahead of the Lakers and Utah and Dallas ahead of them as well. At best, the Lakers might be 13th worst team in the West. If the stars aligned and everything possible broke the Lakers' way, maybe they could be the 11th worst.
But there is no danger of them making the playoffs. They will have a good-to-decent chance at getting a top 3 pick no matter what. How good that chance is will likely be determined by just how bad the bottom teams in the East are.
-
The only thing we can safely say is that some folks are grossly overreacting to Summer League. Everything else is a complete unknown. It will be fun to watch the season unfold.
Disagree. I need to see a real argument that somehow places LAL outside of the bottom 5 in the Western Conference, which means they will easily be a bottom 10 team overall. My guess is they are bottom 8, which gives the Cs a good shot at getting #5.
-
Yeah I don't see it. The West has some brutal teams, but those brutal teams get to play each other a lot more often.
The Lakers play the West 52 times. Of those 52, how many of the 14 teams do you feel comfortable about them consistently beating? I think the Kings and Suns are probably at their level. The rest of the West is tough.
I can see them being a bottom-5 team, for sure. Is Ball + Lopez - Russell thatttt big of an improvement?
As long as the Nets are the worst team, I'm not too concerned with LA. Would be nice, but if not, that Kings pick should be good.
-
Brook Lopez is the best player on that team right now and if he goes down or only plays for half the season (or less) then the LAL are so screwed.
Honestly, losing Lopez would tremendously improve their defense, most likely, lol.
-
Brook Lopez is the best player on that team right now and if he goes down or only plays for half the season (or less) then the LAL are so screwed.
Honestly, losing Lopez would tremendously improve their defense, most likely, lol.
They seem to be trying to create a potent offense to offset their horrid defense.
-
As an aside, #1 overall is expensive. About $7M this year--which is one reason why Ainge traded it. More $ next year. That's a lot for a 19yo gamble.
Ball would've looked good as a Celtic - could've put IT at the 2 like the Rockets did with Calvin Murphy back in the day, had him guard quick PGs and score at will from Ball's passes.
In any event, Celtics fortunes continue to rise - good picks in the bank even without the Lakers' pick.
Can you imagine Ball guarding someone like Beal or DeRozan?!
-
The Lakers play 30 of their 82 games against the East. Let's say they are better than Brooklyn. Atlanta, Chicago, New York and Indiana and win them all, that's 10 wins. Add in 2 surprise wins against the rest for 12 total.
Of the 52 against the West they are possibly better than Phoenix and Sacramento. Let's also add in New Orleans exploding mid season and the Lakers sweep them. That's another 11 wins. Add in a couple of wins against the Denvers and Grizzlies of the worlds for 18 wins in the West.
That's 30 total, I've had them sweep every team below them which will never happen but that should offset them being swept by others... That's good for 6th worst record last year.
Does anyone think they are doing better than that? Who else are they taking wins off?
In reality they are probably going to lose road games to the bad East teams, particularly a team like Brooklyn who play hard. Ball, who won't be producing at summer league levels in the NBA, will hit the rookie wall just like every other rookie in history. They are likely to try and ship off some of their longer term contracts like Deng and Clarkson to max cap space this summer which will inevitably cause some instability on the roster.
There may even come a point where it benefits them to lose the pick this year because of cap space. I haven't looked at this but if the lack of a pick gives them the space to bring in James and George then it's a no brainer.
-
The Lakers play 30 of their 82 games against the East. Let's say they are better than Brooklyn. Atlanta, Chicago, New York and Indiana and win them all, that's 10 wins. Add in 2 surprise wins against the rest for 12 total.
Of the 52 against the West they are possibly better than Phoenix and Sacramento. Let's also add in New Orleans exploding mid season and the Lakers sweep them. That's another 11 wins. Add in a couple of wins against the Denvers and Grizzlies of the worlds for 18 wins in the West.
That's 30 total, I've had them sweep every team below them which will never happen but that should offset them being swept by others... That's good for 6th worst record last year.
Does anyone think they are doing better than that? Who else are they taking wins off?
In reality they are probably going to lose road games to the bad East teams, particularly a team like Brooklyn who play hard. Ball, who won't be producing at summer league levels in the NBA, will hit the rookie wall just like every other rookie in history. They are likely to try and ship off some of their longer term contracts like Deng and Clarkson to max cap space this summer which will inevitably cause some instability on the roster.
There may even come a point where it benefits them to lose the pick this year because of cap space. I haven't looked at this but if the lack of a pick gives them the space to bring in James and George then it's a no brainer.
They lose the pick regardless. It is unprotected this year and goes to Philly unless it's 2-5.
-
The only thing we can safely say is that some folks are grossly overreacting to Summer League. Everything else is a complete unknown. It will be fun to watch the season unfold.
Disagree. I need to see a real argument that somehow places LAL outside of the bottom 5 in the Western Conference, which means they will easily be a bottom 10 team overall. My guess is they are bottom 8, which gives the Cs a good shot at getting #5.
Assuming the Lakers are a bottom 8 team, how would we have a good shot at getting #5? In this scenario, only way for us to get the pick would be if the Lakers move up to #2 (3.3%) or #3 (3.9%) in the lottery. To put it another way, we would have a 7.2% chance to get either the 2nd or the 3rd pick.
-
https://www.sportsinsights.com/blog/2017-18-nba-win-totals/
For what it's worth, here are some over/under win totals. The Lakers are tied for sixth with the Knicks at 32.5
-
I thought it was some kind of NBA rule that The Lakers always get the number two pick...
-
The Lakers play 30 of their 82 games against the East. Let's say they are better than Brooklyn. Atlanta, Chicago, New York and Indiana and win them all, that's 10 wins. Add in 2 surprise wins against the rest for 12 total.
Of the 52 against the West they are possibly better than Phoenix and Sacramento. Let's also add in New Orleans exploding mid season and the Lakers sweep them. That's another 11 wins. Add in a couple of wins against the Denvers and Grizzlies of the worlds for 18 wins in the West.
That's 30 total, I've had them sweep every team below them which will never happen but that should offset them being swept by others... That's good for 6th worst record last year.
Does anyone think they are doing better than that? Who else are they taking wins off?
In reality they are probably going to lose road games to the bad East teams, particularly a team like Brooklyn who play hard. Ball, who won't be producing at summer league levels in the NBA, will hit the rookie wall just like every other rookie in history. They are likely to try and ship off some of their longer term contracts like Deng and Clarkson to max cap space this summer which will inevitably cause some instability on the roster.
There may even come a point where it benefits them to lose the pick this year because of cap space. I haven't looked at this but if the lack of a pick gives them the space to bring in James and George then it's a no brainer.
They lose the pick regardless. It is unprotected this year and goes to Philly unless it's 2-5.
Its 2-5 protected, which means we can only aquire it if its falls to #'s 3 or 4 so anything out of them two picks we dont get it
-
The Lakers play 30 of their 82 games against the East. Let's say they are better than Brooklyn. Atlanta, Chicago, New York and Indiana and win them all, that's 10 wins. Add in 2 surprise wins against the rest for 12 total.
Of the 52 against the West they are possibly better than Phoenix and Sacramento. Let's also add in New Orleans exploding mid season and the Lakers sweep them. That's another 11 wins. Add in a couple of wins against the Denvers and Grizzlies of the worlds for 18 wins in the West.
That's 30 total, I've had them sweep every team below them which will never happen but that should offset them being swept by others... That's good for 6th worst record last year.
Does anyone think they are doing better than that? Who else are they taking wins off?
In reality they are probably going to lose road games to the bad East teams, particularly a team like Brooklyn who play hard. Ball, who won't be producing at summer league levels in the NBA, will hit the rookie wall just like every other rookie in history. They are likely to try and ship off some of their longer term contracts like Deng and Clarkson to max cap space this summer which will inevitably cause some instability on the roster.
There may even come a point where it benefits them to lose the pick this year because of cap space. I haven't looked at this but if the lack of a pick gives them the space to bring in James and George then it's a no brainer.
They lose the pick regardless. It is unprotected this year and goes to Philly unless it's 2-5.
Its 2-5 protected, which means we can only aquire it if its falls to #'s 3 or 4 so anything out of them two picks we dont get it
That's not what the protection means. It means it can fall to #2, 3, 4 or 5 and the Celtics will get it. Not just 3 or 4.
Anyway, I'm somewhat optimistic about the Lakers pick because I think they'll rack up a good amount of losses in the West. But it will take some tricky luck to fall exactly in the 2-5 range.
-
The Lakers play 30 of their 82 games against the East. Let's say they are better than Brooklyn. Atlanta, Chicago, New York and Indiana and win them all, that's 10 wins. Add in 2 surprise wins against the rest for 12 total.
Of the 52 against the West they are possibly better than Phoenix and Sacramento. Let's also add in New Orleans exploding mid season and the Lakers sweep them. That's another 11 wins. Add in a couple of wins against the Denvers and Grizzlies of the worlds for 18 wins in the West.
That's 30 total, I've had them sweep every team below them which will never happen but that should offset them being swept by others... That's good for 6th worst record last year.
Does anyone think they are doing better than that? Who else are they taking wins off?
In reality they are probably going to lose road games to the bad East teams, particularly a team like Brooklyn who play hard. Ball, who won't be producing at summer league levels in the NBA, will hit the rookie wall just like every other rookie in history. They are likely to try and ship off some of their longer term contracts like Deng and Clarkson to max cap space this summer which will inevitably cause some instability on the roster.
There may even come a point where it benefits them to lose the pick this year because of cap space. I haven't looked at this but if the lack of a pick gives them the space to bring in James and George then it's a no brainer.
They lose the pick regardless. It is unprotected this year and goes to Philly unless it's 2-5.
Its 2-5 protected, which means we can only aquire it if its falls to #'s 3 or 4 so anything out of them two picks we dont get it
No, Boston gets the pick if it is 2, 3, 4, or 5, but LA loses the pick no matter what. If it is 1 or 6-30 then Philadelphia gets the pick and Boston then gets the rights to Sacramento's or Philadelphia's 2019 pick whichever one is better (and Philly keeps the worse of those two picks).
-
The Lakers play 30 of their 82 games against the East. Let's say they are better than Brooklyn. Atlanta, Chicago, New York and Indiana and win them all, that's 10 wins. Add in 2 surprise wins against the rest for 12 total.
Of the 52 against the West they are possibly better than Phoenix and Sacramento. Let's also add in New Orleans exploding mid season and the Lakers sweep them. That's another 11 wins. Add in a couple of wins against the Denvers and Grizzlies of the worlds for 18 wins in the West.
That's 30 total, I've had them sweep every team below them which will never happen but that should offset them being swept by others... That's good for 6th worst record last year.
Does anyone think they are doing better than that? Who else are they taking wins off?
In reality they are probably going to lose road games to the bad East teams, particularly a team like Brooklyn who play hard. Ball, who won't be producing at summer league levels in the NBA, will hit the rookie wall just like every other rookie in history. They are likely to try and ship off some of their longer term contracts like Deng and Clarkson to max cap space this summer which will inevitably cause some instability on the roster.
There may even come a point where it benefits them to lose the pick this year because of cap space. I haven't looked at this but if the lack of a pick gives them the space to bring in James and George then it's a no brainer.
They lose the pick regardless. It is unprotected this year and goes to Philly unless it's 2-5.
Its 2-5 protected, which means we can only aquire it if its falls to #'s 3 or 4 so anything out of them two picks we dont get it
No, Boston gets the pick if it is 2, 3, 4, or 5, but LA loses the pick no matter what. If it is 1 or 6-30 then Philadelphia gets the pick and Boston then gets the rights to Sacramento's or Philadelphia's 2019 pick whichever one is better (and Philly keeps the worse of those two picks).
Sadly, we get the worse of the 2019 picks if it is #1. 2018 is our year!
Mike
-
No, Boston gets the pick if it is 2, 3, 4, or 5, but LA loses the pick no matter what. If it is 1 or 6-30 then Philadelphia gets the pick and Boston then gets the rights to Sacramento's or Philadelphia's 2019 pick whichever one is better (and Philly keeps the worse of those two picks).
... unless the Philly or Sacto pick is #1, in which case we get the worse of the two. LOL. Need to dig up that flowchart.