D-lo

Cam

Prince

AD

Davis

Vando has to re-earn the starting spot. AR is great as a 6-man. Rui should get lots of minutes.

It’s not just about wins and losses; it’s about how you win/lose and whether or not you’re developing championship habits.

Real contenders have traits that include a clear identity, team camaraderie, commitment to defense, a fluid offensive strategy, and so on.

If the Lakers had precisely the same record, but the “story of the season so far” were more positive, then I (for one) would be much more optimistic and satisfied.

Right now, we have a lot of bad habits and weaknesses that get exposed by every cohesive team we face-- and in embarrassing fashion.

Let me remind you of the lowlights:

– 10/24. Spanked by Denver 119-107. Became immediately obvious that the D-lo/AR pairing is a major defensive liability.

– 11/4. Crushed by Orlando 120-101.

– 11/8. Blown out by Houston 128-94.

– Then we get hot and won 6/7, feasting on bad teams.

– But Sac reminds us we can’t beat good teams with a 15-pt win on 11/15.

– Philly then adds insult to injury on 11/27, winning 138-94.

– And most recently, on 11/30, OKC crushed us 133-110.

We get absolutely manhandled and exposed by every good, cohesive team that isn’t riddled with injuries.

Small sample. Zach is waaaaaaaaaaaay better.

You have to give up something to get something.

Too many LAL fans are in love with the role players this season and just can’t get a grip on reality.

The Lakers have championship expectations. This might be Bron’s last good year.

They currently sit at 8th in the West, routinely have bad 1st quarters, have been blown out multiple times, need heroic comebacks just to get a win, and have had their stars and most key players fully healthy and ready.

Also, were dreadful at many team stats.

Imagine if Denver had Jokic, Murray, MPJ, and KCP healthy…But Gordon missed a lot of time and Braun missed some time. We’re like that.

Vando wouldn’t necessarily have a guaranteed starting spot if he were playing! Sometimes his lack of offense hurts more than his defense helps. It’s not like we’re missing the 2nd/3rd part of a “Big 3.”

Buddy Hield and Myles Turner

I don’t agree that we’re deep, but I agree with every other thing you said, word for word.

We lack a good, flowing offensive system.

Fine…upvote

Reaves is a fan favorite, had a breakout season last year, and has a huge role for the Lakers right now.

But, honestly, trading an-- albeit productive-- role player (and current 6th man) for a 28-year-old prime star is a no-brainer.

This is a clear upgrade, and a massive one at that. Gives the Lakers a Big 3 and instantly elevates them as a contender (if it works).

Not a Westbrook situation.

Westbrook was at the nadir of his career, had completely lost any shootong touch he might have had, and was just a blooper reel every night. Now, he was still good at certain things he’s always been great at, but he his weaknesses were even more pronounced. And, worst of all, no chemistry.

A fair take, but the Lakers have to make some kind of move.

Stagnation is death.

We lose (or fall behind and require a big comeback win) the same way every time. We need to fix these weaknesses.

I don’t care about LaVine specifically, but something must be done.

So, I have a philosophy about downvotes.

I tend not to use them when someone has an opinion I do not share.

Instead, I’ll save them for things like posts with ad hominem attacks or lazy threads.

Sorry, OP. This falls into the latter category. What’s tbe point of posting this if you can’t spare a few minutes to list a few coaches w/ some info concerning their respective Lakers tenures?

– Mike Brown, '11-'12, 42-29 (.591) reg, 5-7 (.417) playoffs.

Good coach. Fired because the team was off to a slow start with the Nash experiment, and it seemed like Brown wasn’t the right coach for a “win now” squad. He was good at holding the ship steady, but LA wanted more.

– Bernie Bickerstaff, 2012, 4-1 reg

Just an interim coach. Was a “Mike Brown guy,” but not an “Antoni guy” (note: the ‘D’ is missing for a reason).

– Mike Antoni, '12-'14, 67-87 (.435) reg, 0-4 playoffs

The Lakers did not have the personnel to play his system. They were also plagued with injuries. Nash was at the end of his career, Howard had dipped a bit, and Kobe and Howard did not get along. Oh yeah, Antoni sucks at defense or using different systems-- can only play one way.

– Byron Scott, '14-'16, 38-126 (.227) reg – Luke Walton, '16-'19, 97-148 (.398) reg

When a team is rebuilding, or at a low period for a few years, an organization must change the coach in order to herald a new era of winning. The psychological benefit is huge, as well as the symbolism. Furthermore, why reward a proven, losing coach?

Also, new players (i.e. for a potential contender) may require the right coach to maximize their talent.

– Frank Vogel, '19-'22, 127-97 (.564) reg season, 18-9 (.667) playoffs, 2020 championship

Started off very well. Great at defense. But after the 2020 ring, could not work well with the rest of the front office to find the right way to adjust the roster. The winning formula was abandoned: gone were the huge frontcourt with McGee/Howard, Playoff Rondo, sharpshooter Green, KCP, Caruso, Kuzma…

Eventually, he lost the confidence of his players. And most notably, he couldn’t figure out Westbrook or find ways to win with AF and Bron often injured.

– Darvin Ham, '22-present, win-loss records in progress, WCF appearance (swept 0-4 to eventual champ Nuggets)

Is loved by the players and is good at revealing the true talents of overlooked/underwstimated players. Willing to try various lineups. Still, has some clear weaknesses: inexperience, Xs and Os, timeout usage , finding the right line-up.

My rankings:

1 - Vogel (great results; experienced, knowledgeable, proven)

2 - Mike Antoni (experienced, knowledgable, proven coach; but very flawed and very stubborn)

3 - Mike Brown (experienced, knowledgable, proven coach)

3 - Darvin Ham (good results, but deeply flawed and inexperienced)

4 - Byron Scott (experienced, knowledgable, proven coach)

5 - Bernie Bickerstaff (not the head coach type, but could be good at it if he wanted to be)

6 - Luke Walton (in my opinion, proven to be not good as a head coach)

Agree 100%. Been saying this all season.

For most of our games we’ve had Bron, AD, AR, D-lo, Rui. No excuses.

Every NBA player (including Zion) has certain basketball skills that are at such an elite level, very few non-professionals can replicate them.

But what truly separates NBA players (and increasingly more top players in other professional men’s basketball leagues around the world) are unique physical advantages.

Have you ever seen a clearly overweight man that is not only great at dancing, but also tremendous at backflips? We all have. For whatever reason (metabolism, a psychological block), they can’t lose the weight, but still have the mental make-up and drive of a bouncy, athletic, gymnast.

That’s Zion in a nutshell.

He has a unique combination of strength, speed, mass, hops, balance, endurance, and agility that allows him to play an explosive brand of bully ball that makes other NBA giants feel small.

Other players with a “unique physicality” include Wilt, Jordan, Barkley, Rodman, Ben Wallace, Shaq, LeBron, Rondo, Griffin, Kawhi, and Giannis.

It’s not about being tall, or weighing a lot, but being able to throw your weight around or maximize your physical traits.

If you’ve ever played even street pick-up ball, you’ll know that some dudes have really big hands, or are very strong despite being very skinny, or are short but get every rebound.

Uhm…Honestly, there is so much parity, uncertainty, and newly formed rosters that no one is really under that much pressure.

Giannis, Jokic, Bron, Curry, Durant, and Kawhi got theirs…

Luka and SGA ain’t ready yet.

Embiid and the 6ers have exceeded expectations with no Harden…

Mm…Tatum seems like the best choice, as the Celtics have been a fringe contender ever since Tatum got there. But he’s so young that he has a big window.

I think Kawhi looks like he really failed in LA though.

I’ve never been a Pelinka fan.

Like any GM, he is capable of any of the following…

• obviously good moves

• high risk, high reward moves

• lateral moves

• inaction

• questionable moves

• bad moves

I think that most of the time he makes moves that are “lateral or questionable.”

Instead, I wish he had made moves that are “obviously good.”

For example, if there is any truth to the rumors that we could have got Hield and Turner, we should have done that a million years ago.

Turner and Hield are perfect fits who consistently bring to Indiana exactly what we would want from them.

Furthermore, after finding a winning formula in 2020 (i.e. imposing frontcourt with McGee/Howard, AD, sometimes Bron + Rondo as the clutch vet + a spark from KCP and Kuzma + a designated shooter in Green) , we GAVE UP OUR ENTIRE IDENTITY.

No big frontcourt, no lights-out shooters (as Bron put it, “no lasers”), no quality vet leadership, etc.

It’s ok to give up a winning squad for contractual/health/age reasons, but you gotta replace those players with others that fit!!!

When we play well for a stretch, I think it’s in spite of Pelinka-- and not because of him.

Yep

That’s a start.

We’re too inconsistent to tell. Bron and AD are the only constants.

Some recent wins aside…We still don’t put up enough shots, we don’t hit 3s, we get off to slow starts, and we turn the ball over.

We don’t have a good, reproducible offensive plan.

Interesting take.

I know how you feel. Against top teams that have a clear identity, I fear we’ll be run over.

Interesting take.

I know how you feel. Against top teams that have a clear identity, I fear we’ll be run over.

Although these are all sensible things for a contender to have, you haven’t shown that contenders don’t also need…

• a clear, reproducible gameplan and style of play

• a clear starting lineup and understanding of the most effective lineups in various situations

That’s what an identity is: a style/strategy you can reproduce and trust to give you the best possible outcomes (given your personnel) when executed correctly.

Teams that are still searching for what’s most effective don’t win rings.