ImageImageImageImageImage

so where are we standing on Jimbo and Mitch now?

Moderators: Kilroy, Danny Darko, TyCobb

danfantastk32
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,993
And1: 1,958
Joined: Dec 20, 2015
     

Re: so where are we standing on Jimbo and Mitch now? 

Post#121 » by danfantastk32 » Fri Nov 25, 2016 5:42 am

Landsberger wrote:I'm not giving up on Deng. He's a vet and sometimes it takes them a while to get into a new season.

If he doesn't turn it around then he might be the worst contract we've given out since we re-signed Luke Walton :o


He does seem to be playing a bit better. I can't stress enough that this is a new team, new coach. All sorts of young guys, and Deng has a bit of a new role. If he's still stinking it up come Jan....I'll be worried, but it's too early to consider anything 'case closed'.

Your starting to see his shot drop a little better. He's attacking a bit more. I think everyone is starting to find their niche on the team. Deng is not elite....but he's been a pretty good player. I think he'll come around and at least be decent.
TheHartBreakKid
General Manager
Posts: 8,124
And1: 4,818
Joined: Aug 29, 2006
 

Re: so where are we standing on Jimbo and Mitch now? 

Post#122 » by TheHartBreakKid » Mon Nov 28, 2016 8:23 am

I have the same view of Mitch and Jim than I did before this recent mini success, and that hasn't changed. I think this is just more reassuring me on that view. Also, when we talk about Mitch and Jim, I like to look at them as separate entities.
I've been vocal about this before, but I think Mitch doesn't deserve any of the criticism he got for the past few years...I think these criticisms were unfair, and more a result of us as a fanbase being spoiled rather than any shortcomings from Mitch's end. A new owner, who is the son of arguably (not arguable imo) the greatest owner in sports history, combined with the decline of an all-time Laker great wasn't a good formula to begin with. To think that we almost pulled it off with Dwight/Nash is an accomplishment on it's own....of course, there was a risk with the Nash/Dwight movement, but I personally believe that risk was worth taking every step of the way, and even though it didn't pay off, I get annoyed when Mitch is criticized for taking that risk. Those picks were necessary to land Nash, considering we are a hated division rival. We weren't going to get him either way, and you might say maybe we shouldn't have gotten him then, but considering the season he had before, I would take that risk 10/10. So looking at Mitch, he didn't hand out bad contracts (Greg Monroe anyone), didn't trade away young talents for a disgruntled star, and drafted amazingly well, especially in the later rounds. That's my view on Mitch, and I'm honestly so glad that this "success" is coming earlier than later, because I worried Mitch would leave if this continued.


Now, regarding Jim Buss. I think he also was dealt a bad hand, with declining Kobe and the Dwight/Nash bad luck. That being said, he no doubt made a terrible mistake in the MDA higher. That team needed Phil. Now if Phil wanted more power than we were willing to give him, that's a deifferent story, but if Phil was down to coach that team, and Jim chose MDA over him due to some personal bs, then yeah, without a doubt that's a terrible decision. However, I'm not sure if the decision is irreversable. It's easy to blame everything on that decision with hindsight in our favor, but I'm not sure if that's fair. It was a crappy decision at the time, but it turned out to look a lot worse than what it is. I think we, as a fanbase, need to realize that Jim will never Dr.Buss, it's not fair to expect him to be. He has made some mistakes, and I'm sure he'll make more, but he has also either made some very good decisions, or didn't stop Mitch from making some very good decisions, which is exactly what a not good, but also not bad owner should do. He won't be Dr.Buss, but he's also not Dolan lol. I think the most important thing in any business, and especially a basketball team, is culture, which brings me to my next point...


We have a rare combination of Xs and Os with likable personality in our coach, Luke right now. Now, whether you give credit to Jim and Mitch for the Luke hire, or you think it's the hometown advantage we got, or whatever....We have Luke right now, and he is an asset, no matter what the reason for him signing here is. And in terms of culture, I can't think of a better coach for our team, and our situation, and I think we can all agree with how satisfied we are with this hiring.


Honestly for me it comes down to this, Mitch, Luke, our core/decisions, and especially Jim, aren't perfect by any means. However, it's hard for me to have imagined a better situation for our franchise than what we have right now, no matter who is running the team. Yeah, some luck with the lottery to land KAT would have been great, but we also could have had worst luck in terms of even keeping our pick...Yeah, smart signings like Isiah Thomas were available, and the Nash trade hurt us in retrospect...but I don't think it was unreasonable to not commit to a 5:10 point guard after a good reason, and to take on a legendary point guard after a good season, despite both being bad decisions in retrospect.



Regarding the future, I absoloutely agree with those saying the Deng signing might not have been of these good decisions. Time will tell, but imo, Mosgov has been worth the money, but obviously i have the benefit of hindsight right now. I'm not saying it won't be a bad move when it's all said and that....it really easily might, and it's a move that i considered a probable bad move right when it was made, but that's all it is....a probably bad move, but not a franchise crippling move.

Return to Los Angeles Lakers