Game 58: Los Angeles Lakers (19-38) @ Phoenix Suns (17-39) - 9:00 PM ET

[SashaTheMachine]

this game makes me not want to play 2k.

[SlimShady83]

If you don't want to play for LA get the hell out of LA... I'll play for LA buy me a house by the beach in LA and I'll play my heart and soul for you and actually play Defense. FFS play defense La

[Princeinrevolt]

Yes our players were bad today, but its all the front offices fault... These young guys have had very poor teammates... If we surrounded our young guys with defensive minded players, intead of ballhogs... maybe they would look different... But Jim Buss & Mitch obviously don't care about defense or this team... I cant believe they actually signed mozgov and deng for 4 years... These guys are trash... No one on our team is an above average defender... That is crazy!!!! Its insane, i dont understand it... There is a reason why they dont have heart, because they have bad leadership...


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[stan francisco]

Everyone knows the deadline is up, that a few teammates (friends) will be lost in transactions. Didn't see the game but wouldn't be so strange to figure that the team, especially after Magic's recent ramblings, figures out that there will be trades. They're teens and in their early twenties.

Or maybe they were just hungover. Tank? Nah, Luke doesn't tank. We just suck.

[danfantastk32]

Prob the most worrisome thing (for me) is I'm just seeing the guys go out and do the same thing night after night after night.

We started this season with a bang.....and then it just crumbled. And I've seen NOTHING since. Ingram is running in circles. Randle, Clarkson, Russell.......you plop the same guys from last year in, and you got the same game. This team has gone NOWHERE this year.

Is this it? Is this our "talent"?
Is our coach completely over his head?

This 'funk' (if you wanna call it that) started almost 40 games ago....and I don't think we've taken one single step to improve it. I see zero growth. Lou's gettin' his....and that's about it. You can just see he's more talented than anyone else on this team...and it rises to the top. The coach has done absolutely zero to remedy this. Nothing has changed offensively. The rotations are a little different, but each guy goes out and tries his futile best.

When we hit the gate running, I was sure Luke had something. Guys looked like they were getting it, and I thought we had the makings of a pretty good team. I don't know about any of that now. Luke looks clueless.....and we look like a team that's got 9-29 talent on it (our record since our 10-10 start).

Just nothin'. I don't see anything to take away from this year.

[Kilroy]

I've questioned Luke's coaching all year... That said, if you're not already, you need to entertain the idea that his coaching is by design. It would seem like we're showcasing our trade prospects and embracing the tank at this point.
I honestly don't think Luke is as bad a coach as some of his decisions lately would indicate... So if not, you sort of have to wonder if there's a larger goal in mind here.

[Landsberger]

Truth is that we're a very bad team. We have a rookie coach who's really never been part of a losing situation in his adult life. We have an inexperienced team with no on the floor leader and none in sight. The outlier was the first 20 games not this part of the season.

The biggest obstacle is overcoming the losing culture. What I'm seeing right now is that the team is going through the motions. No one wants to go to work when you know it's going to be a really bad day.

All of that said, the fan base has expected each of the young guys to progress at a 45° angle to the right. That jades what is truly happening IMHO. I actually see about what I expected with some surprises. Zubac is a nice surprise on the upside. Ingram has been a little less than what I expected overall. To get where the fan base expects this franchise to be will take a whole lot more than maturity and time for the current core of young players. We will need some big changes, lots of luck and a culture change.

Bad teams that struggle always seem to get to changing the players last. It's always starts in the FO.... then to the coaching staff and finally to the players. Recent events show we are entering phase I.

[danfantastk32]

I've questioned Luke's coaching all year... That said, if you're not already, you need to entertain the idea that his coaching is by design. It would seem like we're showcasing our trade prospects and embracing the tank at this point.
I honestly don't think Luke is as bad a coach as some of his decisions lately would indicate... So if not, you sort of have to wonder if there's a larger goal in mind here.

Yeah...I certainly hope your right. It does seem odd that we just abandoned what we had been doing, and never went back to it. Is Luke afraid to be the jerk-coach who sits guys for shooting too much? (BTW..it's not the shooting. It's the ISO plays. Move the ball! If your open, take as many shots as you want!)

I'd really like to see Luke make it. I wanted Mark Jackson.....I think he was better suited for the job,as he's been in this exact situation before. But I also think Luke will be a good coach. I'm also pretty sick of the revolving door. I really don't think the coach is the problem. I never did. D'antoni was far from perfect....but he's doing alright over in Houston. We just keep rotating these coaches, and it gets us nowhere.

[danfantastk32]

The biggest obstacle is overcoming the losing culture. What I'm seeing right now is that the team is going through the motions. No one wants to go to work when you know it's going to be a really bad day.

You wouldn't expect that from such a young core, right? Youthful vigor.....and all that??


quote="Landsberger"]All of that said, the fan base has expected each of the young guys to progress at a 45° angle to the right. [/quote]

How about a 5-degree angle? I'd take that. As you pointed out...the 10-10 start was the anomaly. That's going to mask the fact that this team is actually a 16-20 win team. Hell....it might not even do that!

The #2 pick....all our youth growing a season....$38ish mil in free agents.....and new coach (replacing the worst coach in history, apparently) and your giving us zero to three-or-four additional wins?? Yikes! I mean....include the 10-10 start...and we're still looking at about 6 extra wins. That's junk!

[Landsberger]

How about a 5-degree angle? I'd take that. As you pointed out...the 10-10 start was the anomaly. That's going to mask the fact that this team is actually a 16-20 win team. Hell....it might not even do that!

The #2 pick....all our youth growing a season....$38ish mil in free agents.....and new coach (replacing the worst coach in history, apparently) and your giving us zero to three-or-four additional wins?? Yikes! I mean....include the 10-10 start...and we're still looking at about 6 extra wins. That's junk!

Young players these days (1 and done guys) have been the best guys on their team and typically in their entire competitive world for all of their lives. To suddenly be put in a situation where that's no longer the case is a wall a lot of them don't get over mentally. Think of it this way. You were the best player in AAU... the best on your HS team by a long ways.... recruited by 10 or more top colleges... you played deep in the NCAA tournament..... you were drafted in the top 5... then you're the 20th best player at your position at best to begin. You are also in a spotlight like never before. The support team is there as long as the revenue flow is positive. It goes from a game where you're the king to a business world where you are the product in a flash.

This is why I'm a huge proponent of at least 3 years after HS for the draft.

This kind of pressure creates a losing culture quickly when the losses pile up. This is also why the "superstar" rate of the top 5 picks since the Kobe/Garnett breakthrough for HS kids is so low. They need to be in a situation where expectations are low. My comments about Russell are indicative of this. I think he's not a mental leader. That doesn't mean I think he's a bad player however. I think the expectations in LA for him to be a Harden/Westbrook/Curry mixture of a player soon will be too much for him and his lack of progress toward that end will sour the fan base eventually. This is why I think his emergence will most likely be on another team. Add in the circus that is our front office, Magic and the history of this franchise and following Kobe to that mixture. While Russell is the focus now because he's been given the "keys" this will move to whomever is perceived as the best player or has the most potential.

My thoughts are that we need to acquire the next Superstar or even a mid level Allstar quickly and if it costs us some youth so be it. The ones left will be in a shadow so to speak for a while and their development will be perceived less important to the immediate goals of the team.

If next year yields another 25 to 30 win season we will be a team with a losing culture. All the players we have now will not have had much if any success at this level regardless of their draft position.

[danfantastk32]

This is why I'm a huge proponent of at least 3 years after HS for the draft.

I have always thought at least 2 years....but I think we're essentially on the same page. Hey.....God bless the 'straight from high-school' guys. You take a guy like Lebron...and he clearly didn't need college. But for every Lebron....there's two dozen failures.

IMO....the NBA "Minds" listen way way way too much to the media, and the ESPN's of the world. All the GM's have to do is start valuing that 2nd year immensely more....and the young players will follow. But ESPN spashes that shiny toy in front of everyone, and the GM's start drooling all over it. The GM's need to collectively start valuing that 2nd year above everything else, and you will see players respond. The NBA is the buyer here......put emphasis on that 2nd year, and you'll see less and less players opting for the draft that first season.

Same exact logic if you wanna make it 3 years.

[Landsberger]

This is why I'm a huge proponent of at least 3 years after HS for the draft.

I have always thought at least 2 years....but I think we're essentially on the same page. Hey.....God bless the 'straight from high-school' guys. You take a guy like Lebron...and he clearly didn't need college. But for every Lebron....there's two dozen failures.

IMO....the NBA "Minds" listen way way way too much to the media, and the ESPN's of the world. All the GM's have to do is start valuing that 2nd year immensely more....and the young players will follow. But ESPN spashes that shiny toy in front of everyone, and the GM's start drooling all over it. The GM's need to collectively start valuing that 2nd year above everything else, and you will see players respond. The NBA is the buyer here......put emphasis on that 2nd year, and you'll see less and less players opting for the draft that first season.

Same exact logic if you wanna make it 3 years.

2 years or 3 years..... most professions require a 4 year degree right?

On a serious note, the ones that flame out or get the $$ too soon all tend to end up in dire straights later in life. I think the NBA in particular does a disservice to the "human" side of this equation with the 1 and done stuff. To be fair, it's the union that is the roadblock in this not the owners from what I've read.

You are spot on about LeBron. He's by far the best HS to the NBA success. Kobe needed a year as did Moses and Garnett to show that they were special. Between those 3 there are a lot of lackluster careers, some all stars and some top players but in overall percentages it's not a straight line from HS star to NBA Superstar by any means.

[danfantastk32]

On a serious note, the ones that flame out or get the $$ too soon all tend to end up in dire straights later in life. I think the NBA in particular does a disservice to the "human" side of this equation with the 1 and done stuff. To be fair, it's the union that is the roadblock in this not the owners from what I've read.

Yeah, I think the league wants to add a year. Make 20 the minimum. I'm not sure why this is this "travesty of human rights" ...that's something I never understood. Plenty of jobs require college. Plenty of jobs require either no-pay or little pay 'apprenticeships'. Look at Doctors and what that takes.....how's 2 years of college (which you don't technically have to go to college) this breach of rights? Never got that....but whatever. There's a million things in this world that make no sense to me.

It makes sense that the league wants that. They get a second year to get VASTLY more information about a guy. You get to see growth, you get to see other teams now plan for a player, and see how he adapts. There's another years meat on the bones....all sorts of stuff. I'd say college acts exponentially for scouts. 2-years is prob 4 times better than 1. 3-years is 4 times better than 2...etc. Much less risk for teams in the draft, I'd say.

On the leagues side...I'm not really sure whats up. You only have so many spots in the NBA....they are all filled each and every year...so how the union loses money, I'm not sure? For each year that 50 new players come in the front door.....50 get pushed out the back. There's a salary cap...and a salary floor. So I don't really know the players union argument.

As far as dire straights later in life....I'm not one to care. IMO, that's not the league's problem. Your a big-boy....you figure it out. I just looked at Zubac's contract (2nd-rounder) and he's got a 3-year deal worth about $3,300,000.00. The vast majority of Americans are gonna go work 40 years (25-65) and not reach that amount. Granted....he'll have a crazy high tax-rate....yada yada. But at the end of the day.....I shed no tears for pro athletes who lose it all.

[Landsberger]

On a serious note, the ones that flame out or get the $$ too soon all tend to end up in dire straights later in life. I think the NBA in particular does a disservice to the "human" side of this equation with the 1 and done stuff. To be fair, it's the union that is the roadblock in this not the owners from what I've read.

Yeah, I think the league wants to add a year. Make 20 the minimum. I'm not sure why this is this "travesty of human rights" ...that's something I never understood. Plenty of jobs require college. Plenty of jobs require either no-pay or little pay 'apprenticeships'. Look at Doctors and what that takes.....how's 2 years of college (which you don't technically have to go to college) this breach of rights? Never got that....but whatever. There's a million things in this world that make no sense to me.

It makes sense that the league wants that. They get a second year to get VASTLY more information about a guy. You get to see growth, you get to see other teams now plan for a player, and see how he adapts. There's another years meat on the bones....all sorts of stuff. I'd say college acts exponentially for scouts. 2-years is prob 4 times better than 1. 3-years is 4 times better than 2...etc. Much less risk for teams in the draft, I'd say.

On the leagues side...I'm not really sure whats up. You only have so many spots in the NBA....they are all filled each and every year...so how the union loses money, I'm not sure? For each year that 50 new players come in the front door.....50 get pushed out the back. There's a salary cap...and a salary floor. So I don't really know the players union argument.

As far as dire straights later in life....I'm not one to care. IMO, that's not the league's problem. Your a big-boy....you figure it out. I just looked at Zubac's contract (2nd-rounder) and he's got a 3-year deal worth about $3,300,000.00. The vast majority of Americans are gonna go work 40 years (25-65) and not reach that amount. Granted....he'll have a crazy high tax-rate....yada yada. But at the end of the day.....I shed no tears for pro athletes who lose it all.

What I do for a living is statistical analysis and building of data sets. Several years ago we did one on Lottery winners (it gets a lot of press every time a big one is won) that go broke in less than 5 years. Rich people that got that way over 20 years are much different than ones who get that way overnight. Interesting part is that Lottery winners in their 50's and up kept the majority of their winnings. Under 40? Poof! Age, life experience and maturity all have something to do with people who get a lot of money all at once going broke.

Does a couple years in college avoid this? Most likely not. It does however give them a little background other than basketball to fall back on

[danfantastk32]

What I do for a living is statistical analysis and building of data sets. Several years ago we did one on Lottery winners (it gets a lot of press every time a big one is won) that go broke in less than 5 years. Rich people that got that way over 20 years are much different than ones who get that way overnight. Interesting part is that Lottery winners in their 50's and up kept the majority of their winnings. Under 40? Poof! Age, life experience and maturity all have something to do with people who get a lot of money all at once going broke.

Does a couple years in college avoid this? Most likely not. It does however give them a little background other than basketball to fall back on

Hey......give me the money, if its such a heartbreak. Just saying. It's not the leagues problem...and it's certainly not mine. Pro athletes losing their money is probably about number 5000 on my "fix it" list. You make more money in 1 year than your average American makes in their life....you sort it out. If not....nobody's crying for ya. That's my personal opinion.

[danfantastk32]

Same goes for lottery winners BTW. Sorry life didn't come with a manual. But you just won the lottery. Sort it out....or lose your money to people who deserve it. That's where I stand on that. Won't lose a seconds sleep for those lotto winners who lost it all, either. Life should be so cruel...eh?

[Landsberger]

What I do for a living is statistical analysis and building of data sets. Several years ago we did one on Lottery winners (it gets a lot of press every time a big one is won) that go broke in less than 5 years. Rich people that got that way over 20 years are much different than ones who get that way overnight. Interesting part is that Lottery winners in their 50's and up kept the majority of their winnings. Under 40? Poof! Age, life experience and maturity all have something to do with people who get a lot of money all at once going broke.

Does a couple years in college avoid this? Most likely not. It does however give them a little background other than basketball to fall back on

Hey......give me the money, if its such a heartbreak. Just saying. It's not the leagues problem...and it's certainly not mine. Pro athletes losing their money is probably about number 5000 on my "fix it" list. You make more money in 1 year than your average American makes in their life....you sort it out. If not....nobody's crying for ya. That's my personal opinion.

"Problems" are different than outcomes. I didn't say it was the NBA's "problem".... I said it's a likely outcome. I'd hope any business assists their employees in understanding their business. Is it their obligation? No but there is no reason to just fire and forget either.

Anyway.... The younger you are the more likely you will have issues with coming into a large sum of money. The more money you have the bigger target on your back.