Darvin Ham... The weak link?

[Kilroy]

Now that time has passed, I'm still struggling to figure out why we did so poorly against Denver... I feel like we were their toughest matchup, and yet they made beating us look relatively easy... Miami shouldn't have been anywhere near the challenge we were...

Lebron wasn't 100%... Sure...

But Murry killed us... Even after we pretty much neutralized Curry?

It felt like starting from about game 2 of the GSW series, we started fighting ourselves... Like our gameplan just wasn't working.

And against Denver, we didn't really adjust at all... Or rather we did stupid ****... Like LW getting more minutes than Vanderbilt... Why? Why didn't Vanderbilt even sniff the floor in GM4? We played really porous D that series... Shouldn't our best defender have been on the floor? LW has one huge game and all of a sudden we throw a series to get him more minutes?

So, am I the only one who thinks a better coach/system might have been a huge difference for us?

I mean Denver is an incredible team. They deserved to win it all. But maybe we could have made it a little more interesting if we played to our strengths rather than actually negating them?

[Beethoven]

I agree. He needs some staff that can really do the strategy homework for him as he is the frontman for the team. Vogel at least was able to make those adjustments and/or had the staff to do it as well. We have Vogel, we would have beaten Denver no doubt.

[MAMBAEMD]

Denver was the better team and deserved to win that series and the chip.

That said, every game was within reach. We could have won at least one or two (and maybe more) if we had made the right moves from a coaching and strategy perspective.

Making in-game and in-between game adjustments are what the playoffs are all about.
Not adjusting defensively on Murray was a huge void.

That was a weak link in this series.

[stan francisco]

Denver was the better team and deserved to win that series and the chip.

That said, every game was within reach. We could have won at least one or two (and maybe more) if we had made the right moves from a coaching and strategy perspective.

Making in-game and in-between game adjustments are what the playoffs are all about.
Not adjusting defensively on Murray was a huge void.

That was a weak link in this series.

This. Seasoned assistant coach needed.

[dAdo dA dEvil]

I really hate it when we are playing small with 3 guards in the line up (DLo, Reaves, Dennis) because we give up too much size at the 3 position. Rui or Vandy should be in the game to play the 3. Once AD is taken out from the paint via pick and roll we only have Lebron as our primary defensive rebounder against the opponent's front court and this is where the likes of Wiggins gets offensive rebounds because we only have a guard going up against them in rebounds.

Vandy should be there to play and guard the opponents best guard. His inconsistency in hitting the open corner 3s really affect us as the opponents are literally daring him to shoot that but I think he should be more patient and try to attack the basket instead if he is not confident enough with his 3 point shooting. I still think he should have at least played in game 4 against Denver. The game plan on Murray should be the same on how Vandy played Ja and Steph.

Line up should be DLo/Reaves/Vandy/Lebron/AD or Dennis/Reaves/Rui/Lebron/AD. DLo and Vandy should paly together to compensate each other's weakness but it won't matter if DLo isn't having a good offensive game. Dennis/Reaves/Rui/Lebron/AD is a more balanced unit when it comes to offense and defense.

[topdaytrader]

Low IQ coach who doesn't know how to adjust. No one ever win with small ball other than GS, and Lakers is not build like GS.

[stan francisco]

Low IQ coach who doesn't know how to adjust. No one ever win with small ball other than GS, and Lakers is not build like GS.

I agree and disagree. Yes, he does not know how to adjust at all; but I don’t think he’s low IQ at all. He lacks playoffs experience. Next year, he won’t be talking stupid stuff about not making adjustments. That’s what the playoffs are about, how you win.

Hopefully we can sign an assistant with head coaching playoffs experiences, to tell him what’s up. Or maybe Phil can consult.

[Showtime:Part2]

Fire him. Dlo over 30mpg till game 4 was inexcusable

[stan francisco]

Fire him. Dlo over 30mpg till game 4 was inexcusable

I’d be okay with that as long as we get a better replacement. Is Nick Nurse still available?

Edit: no he isn’t. Budenholtzer? Who else is left?

[Showtime:Part2]

Fire him. Dlo over 30mpg till game 4 was inexcusable

I’d be okay with that as long as we get a better replacement. Is Nick Nurse still available?

Edit: no he isn’t. Budenholtzer? Who else is left?

It was more rhetorical, we are stuck w ham. No way Jeanie pays for two coaches at once and this enormous payroll. Id love to pretend it’s got a shot but it doesn’t. The sad thing is next year is our last year to win a ring, so we don’t have time for ham to grow into the role. We need a tier 1 guy now. It’s LBJ s last year w us, it’s championship or bust

[stan francisco]

Fire him. Dlo over 30mpg till game 4 was inexcusable

I’d be okay with that as long as we get a better replacement. Is Nick Nurse still available?

Edit: no he isn’t. Budenholtzer? Who else is left?

It was more rhetorical, we are stuck w ham. No way Jeanie pays for two coaches at once and this enormous payroll. Id love to pretend it’s got a shot but it doesn’t. The sad thing is next year is our last year to win a ring, so we don’t have time for ham to grow into the role. We need a tier 1 guy now. It’s LBJ s last year w us, it’s championship or bust

I thought we were already in win now mode and would consider him instead of Ham in order to have a chance to win rings.

[sonnyhill]

Given how this team's roster was not fully constructed until the trade deadline, and how LeBron played much of the season with an injured foot, Darvin Ham should be commended, not criticized, for the job that he did this past season.

[Showtime:Part2]

Given how this team's roster was not fully constructed until the trade deadline, and how LeBron played much of the season with an injured foot, Darvin Ham should be commended, not criticized, for the job that he did this past season.

Lol no dude. No.

[hoosierdaddy34]

Ham is fine. Vogel was fine. Mike Brown was fine. Mike D’Antoni was fine. People really over estimate the coach in terms of wins and losses. 90% of the league coaches are similar in quality. They will do well with the right build, and will struggle with the wrong build. The Front Office and team building has a much bigger influence on success. Coaching primary role is player development, and honestly Ham and his staff have been very good in that regard.

[tamaraw08]

Ham is fine. Vogel was fine. Mike Brown was fine. Mike D’Antoni was fine. People really over estimate the coach in terms of wins and losses. 90% of the league coaches are similar in quality. They will do well with the right build, and will struggle with the wrong build. The Front Office and team building has a much bigger influence on success. Coaching primary role is player development, and honestly Ham and his staff have been very good in that regard.

I disagree. Miami had no business playing in the Finals twice because of their relatively inferior roster.
MJ, Kobe failed to win any chip without Phil.
Of course average coaches have won before, but mainly because they also faced an average coach and/or their roster are far more superior than other teams.
Coaching is not just about player development, assistants now like Phil Handy are the ones training these young players to improve on their skills.
Coaching is about watching a ton of game tapes, formulating the best schemes with their assistants and communicating them to their players. Deciding which strategies to use is imperative because some ideas just don’t work with other specific players.
Its also about making vital adjustments, managing their minutes and egos etc.
While I admit that a great coach can only do so much with the quality of his players, I also can’t see a very talented team winning it all with a bad coach.
Ham had his share of limitations specifically with his offensive schemes and the ability to make timely adjustments but I don’t think he was the main reason why they lost.

[hoosierdaddy34]

Ham is fine. Vogel was fine. Mike Brown was fine. Mike D’Antoni was fine. People really over estimate the coach in terms of wins and losses. 90% of the league coaches are similar in quality. They will do well with the right build, and will struggle with the wrong build. The Front Office and team building has a much bigger influence on success. Coaching primary role is player development, and honestly Ham and his staff have been very good in that regard.

I disagree. Miami had no business playing in the Finals twice because of their relatively inferior roster.
MJ, Kobe failed to win any chip without Phil.
Of course average coaches have won before, but mainly because they also faced an average coach and/or their roster are far more superior than other teams.
Coaching is not just about player development, assistants now like Phil Handy are the ones training these young players to improve on their skills.
Coaching is about watching a ton of game tapes, formulating the best schemes with their assistants and communicating them to their players. Deciding which strategies to use is imperative because some ideas just don’t work with other specific players.
Its also about making vital adjustments, managing their minutes and egos etc.
While I admit that a great coach can only do so much with the quality of his players, I also can’t see a very talented team winning it all with a bad coach.
Ham had his share of limitations specifically with his offensive schemes and the ability to make timely adjustments but I don’t think he was the main reason why they lost.

They all do that.

Phil never won without a MJ or Kobe. Riley never won a chip without Magic or LeBron.

You really going to give Spo credit over Jimmy for the Heats success? That’s a take I guess.

We’ve watched D’Antoni go from cursed out here to nba coach of the year. We’ve watched Brown go from hated here to great in Sacramento and coach of the year. We watched Vogel win a title and then scapegoated for roster issues, now he’s the head coach in Phoenix. Now they hate Ham. The Lakers fanbase are absolutely morons about coaches, We give them way too much blame for what has gone on when it’s always been a front office problem. All of those dudes are good coaches with the right roster. So is Ty Lue and Monte Williams, and Ime Udoka and Nick Nurse, Eric Spoelstra and Greg Popovich and the list goes on and on. They will win with the right roster and won’t win with the wrong one.

All coaches watch tape and formulate schemes. And I didn’t say player development is their only job, I said it’s the one area they have the most impact in the future success of the team. Spo stands out in development of marginal players to make great nba role players. Ham has a great staff of player development guys which is why I’m bullish about his future here.

But I stand by my statement, history has shown a coach is only as good as his roster. And that the front office, and building the correct roster, is vastly more important to a teams success.

[tamaraw08]

Ham is fine. Vogel was fine. Mike Brown was fine. Mike D’Antoni was fine. People really over estimate the coach in terms of wins and losses. 90% of the league coaches are similar in quality. They will do well with the right build, and will struggle with the wrong build. The Front Office and team building has a much bigger influence on success. Coaching primary role is player development, and honestly Ham and his staff have been very good in that regard.

I disagree. Miami had no business playing in the Finals twice because of their relatively inferior roster.
MJ, Kobe failed to win any chip without Phil.
Of course average coaches have won before, but mainly because they also faced an average coach and/or their roster are far more superior than other teams.
Coaching is not just about player development, assistants now like Phil Handy are the ones training these young players to improve on their skills.
Coaching is about watching a ton of game tapes, formulating the best schemes with their assistants and communicating them to their players. Deciding which strategies to use is imperative because some ideas just don’t work with other specific players.
Its also about making vital adjustments, managing their minutes and egos etc.
While I admit that a great coach can only do so much with the quality of his players, I also can’t see a very talented team winning it all with a bad coach.
Ham had his share of limitations specifically with his offensive schemes and the ability to make timely adjustments but I don’t think he was the main reason why they lost.

They all do that.

Phil never won without a MJ or Kobe. Riley never won a chip without Magic or LeBron.

You really going to give Spo credit over Jimmy for the Heats success? That’s a take I guess.

We’ve watched D’Antoni go from cursed out here to nba coach of the year. We’ve watched Brown go from hated here to great in Sacramento and coach of the year. We watched Vogel win a title and then scapegoated for roster issues, now he’s the head coach in Phoenix. Now they hate Ham. The Lakers fanbase are absolutely morons about coaches, We give them way too much blame for what has gone on when it’s always been a front office problem. All of those dudes are good coaches with the right roster. So is Ty Lue and Monte Williams, and Ime Udoka and Nick Nurse, Eric Spoelstra and Greg Popovich and the list goes on and on. They will win with the right roster and won’t win with the wrong one.

All coaches watch tape and formulate schemes. And I didn’t say player development is their only job, I said it’s the one area they have the most impact in the future success of the team. Spo stands out in development of marginal players to make great nba role players. Ham has a great staff of player development guys which is why I’m bullish about his future here.

But I stand by my statement, history has shown a coach is only as good as his roster. And that the front office, and building the correct roster, is vastly more important to a teams success.

Phil didn’t win s chip without MJ and Kobe but he can make the Bulls win 57 games when Jordan left and was replaced by journeyman Pete Myers.
Lakers fell apart after Phil left the first time and went to the playoffs immediately with Smush and Kwame as starters… let that sink in for moment and ponder if an average coach can duplicate that feat.
I disagree with your take that fans are REALLY OVERESTIMATING coaches’ impact on wins and losses.
You mentioned Ime Udoka, I still don’t know if this guy is legitimately a very good coach with Boston not necessarily struggling in the RS unlike when great coaches depart.
I also disagreed with your take when you said a coach PRIMARILY ROLE is player development. Again assistants and trainers are tasked to fulfill these roles.
If a coach create bad ineffective schemes and fails to adjust , this will IMPACT wins and loses imo. Players get frustrated and they can smell incompetence, and this result to a tactician getting fired.
Having said that, yes Vogel and Ham do not deserve being fully blamed for the setbacks of the Lakers.

[hoosierdaddy34]

I disagree. Miami had no business playing in the Finals twice because of their relatively inferior roster.
MJ, Kobe failed to win any chip without Phil.
Of course average coaches have won before, but mainly because they also faced an average coach and/or their roster are far more superior than other teams.
Coaching is not just about player development, assistants now like Phil Handy are the ones training these young players to improve on their skills.
Coaching is about watching a ton of game tapes, formulating the best schemes with their assistants and communicating them to their players. Deciding which strategies to use is imperative because some ideas just don’t work with other specific players.
Its also about making vital adjustments, managing their minutes and egos etc.
While I admit that a great coach can only do so much with the quality of his players, I also can’t see a very talented team winning it all with a bad coach.
Ham had his share of limitations specifically with his offensive schemes and the ability to make timely adjustments but I don’t think he was the main reason why they lost.

They all do that.

Phil never won without a MJ or Kobe. Riley never won a chip without Magic or LeBron.

You really going to give Spo credit over Jimmy for the Heats success? That’s a take I guess.

We’ve watched D’Antoni go from cursed out here to nba coach of the year. We’ve watched Brown go from hated here to great in Sacramento and coach of the year. We watched Vogel win a title and then scapegoated for roster issues, now he’s the head coach in Phoenix. Now they hate Ham. The Lakers fanbase are absolutely morons about coaches, We give them way too much blame for what has gone on when it’s always been a front office problem. All of those dudes are good coaches with the right roster. So is Ty Lue and Monte Williams, and Ime Udoka and Nick Nurse, Eric Spoelstra and Greg Popovich and the list goes on and on. They will win with the right roster and won’t win with the wrong one.

All coaches watch tape and formulate schemes. And I didn’t say player development is their only job, I said it’s the one area they have the most impact in the future success of the team. Spo stands out in development of marginal players to make great nba role players. Ham has a great staff of player development guys which is why I’m bullish about his future here.

But I stand by my statement, history has shown a coach is only as good as his roster. And that the front office, and building the correct roster, is vastly more important to a teams success.

Phil didn’t win s chip without MJ and Kobe but he can make the Bulls win 57 games when Jordan left and was replaced by journeyman Pete Myers.
Lakers fell apart after Phil left the first time and went to the playoffs immediately with Smush and Kwame as starters… let that sink in for moment and ponder if an average coach can duplicate that feat.
I disagree with your take that fans are REALLY OVERESTIMATING coaches’ impact on wins and losses.
You mentioned Ime Udoka, I still don’t know if this guy is legitimately a very good coach with Boston not necessarily struggling in the RS unlike when great coaches depart.
I also disagreed with your take when you said a coach PRIMARILY ROLE is player development. Again assistants and trainers are tasked to fulfill these roles.
If a coach create bad ineffective schemes and fails to adjust , this will IMPACT wins and loses imo. Players get frustrated and they can smell incompetence, and this result to a tactician getting fired.
Having said that, yes Vogel and Ham do not deserve being fully blamed for the setbacks of the Lakers.

Frank Vogel won 56 games with the Pacers.

What happened when the Lakers fell apart? It was Phil or was it FREAKING SHAQ being traded? My goodness you are burying the lede.

[Showtime:Part2]

Ham is fine. Vogel was fine. Mike Brown was fine. Mike D’Antoni was fine. People really over estimate the coach in terms of wins and losses. 90% of the league coaches are similar in quality. They will do well with the right build, and will struggle with the wrong build. The Front Office and team building has a much bigger influence on success. Coaching primary role is player development, and honestly Ham and his staff have been very good in that regard.

I disagree. Miami had no business playing in the Finals twice because of their relatively inferior roster.
MJ, Kobe failed to win any chip without Phil.
Of course average coaches have won before, but mainly because they also faced an average coach and/or their roster are far more superior than other teams.
Coaching is not just about player development, assistants now like Phil Handy are the ones training these young players to improve on their skills.
Coaching is about watching a ton of game tapes, formulating the best schemes with their assistants and communicating them to their players. Deciding which strategies to use is imperative because some ideas just don’t work with other specific players.
Its also about making vital adjustments, managing their minutes and egos etc.
While I admit that a great coach can only do so much with the quality of his players, I also can’t see a very talented team winning it all with a bad coach.
Ham had his share of limitations specifically with his offensive schemes and the ability to make timely adjustments but I don’t think he was the main reason why they lost.

They all do that.

Phil never won without a MJ or Kobe. Riley never won a chip without Magic or LeBron.

You really going to give Spo credit over Jimmy for the Heats success? That’s a take I guess.

We’ve watched D’Antoni go from cursed out here to nba coach of the year. We’ve watched Brown go from hated here to great in Sacramento and coach of the year. We watched Vogel win a title and then scapegoated for roster issues, now he’s the head coach in Phoenix. Now they hate Ham. The Lakers fanbase are absolutely morons about coaches, We give them way too much blame for what has gone on when it’s always been a front office problem. All of those dudes are good coaches with the right roster. So is Ty Lue and Monte Williams, and Ime Udoka and Nick Nurse, Eric Spoelstra and Greg Popovich and the list goes on and on. They will win with the right roster and won’t win with the wrong one.

All coaches watch tape and formulate schemes. And I didn’t say player development is their only job, I said it’s the one area they have the most impact in the future success of the team. Spo stands out in development of marginal players to make great nba role players. Ham has a great staff of player development guys which is why I’m bullish about his future here.

But I stand by my statement, history has shown a coach is only as good as his roster. And that the front office, and building the correct roster, is vastly more important to a teams success.

1) yes it’s definitely as much spo as it’s jimmy you’re nuts. That roster is devoid of talent.

2) so according to you there’s no such thing as a bad coach. Why don’t they just hire me for 1 mill a year, I’ll get the job done ya? Ur nuts man, ham doesn’t even know when to call a time out

[hoosierdaddy34]

I disagree. Miami had no business playing in the Finals twice because of their relatively inferior roster.
MJ, Kobe failed to win any chip without Phil.
Of course average coaches have won before, but mainly because they also faced an average coach and/or their roster are far more superior than other teams.
Coaching is not just about player development, assistants now like Phil Handy are the ones training these young players to improve on their skills.
Coaching is about watching a ton of game tapes, formulating the best schemes with their assistants and communicating them to their players. Deciding which strategies to use is imperative because some ideas just don’t work with other specific players.
Its also about making vital adjustments, managing their minutes and egos etc.
While I admit that a great coach can only do so much with the quality of his players, I also can’t see a very talented team winning it all with a bad coach.
Ham had his share of limitations specifically with his offensive schemes and the ability to make timely adjustments but I don’t think he was the main reason why they lost.

They all do that.

Phil never won without a MJ or Kobe. Riley never won a chip without Magic or LeBron.

You really going to give Spo credit over Jimmy for the Heats success? That’s a take I guess.

We’ve watched D’Antoni go from cursed out here to nba coach of the year. We’ve watched Brown go from hated here to great in Sacramento and coach of the year. We watched Vogel win a title and then scapegoated for roster issues, now he’s the head coach in Phoenix. Now they hate Ham. The Lakers fanbase are absolutely morons about coaches, We give them way too much blame for what has gone on when it’s always been a front office problem. All of those dudes are good coaches with the right roster. So is Ty Lue and Monte Williams, and Ime Udoka and Nick Nurse, Eric Spoelstra and Greg Popovich and the list goes on and on. They will win with the right roster and won’t win with the wrong one.

All coaches watch tape and formulate schemes. And I didn’t say player development is their only job, I said it’s the one area they have the most impact in the future success of the team. Spo stands out in development of marginal players to make great nba role players. Ham has a great staff of player development guys which is why I’m bullish about his future here.

But I stand by my statement, history has shown a coach is only as good as his roster. And that the front office, and building the correct roster, is vastly more important to a teams success.

1) yes it’s definitely as much spo as it’s jimmy you’re nuts. That roster is devoid of talent.

2) so according to you there’s no such thing as a bad coach. Why don’t they just hire me for 1 mill a year, I’ll get the job done ya? Ur nuts man, ham doesn’t even know when to call a time out

I’m here to break it to you, the Heat fall a lot farther if Butler leaves next year than if Spo does. The Lakers far better if they added Jaren Jackson than they would if they added Phil Jackson. Stop putting coaches on the same level as great players. They aren’t remotely.

Sure you have to reach a certain level of competence. But at the nba level, a large number of the coaches are of the same skill level. Ham included. Again our fan base is nuts with its over criticism of the coaches.