Page 1 of 2
Will Lou & Young Cost Us 2 #1 Picks?
Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2017 8:09 pm
by LakersLegacy
I would never lose a game on purpose. I see this season as an opportunity to give the young players the playing time they need to learn Luke's system so we can ball next season. I view Luke and Deng as strong leaders.
When I watch the game I see Lou and Young trying to be the best player they can be. But I don not see them mentoring our young core. Last night we won because of Lou & (contract year) Young. But these guys are too old to be part of the Lakers future. I would like to see the vets get a chance to play in the play-offs.
Even if we gave these players away for 2nd round picks, wouldn't that be worth it? Our young guys could learn more. Which will accelerate the rebuild. Free agents are not coming to play with Lou & Young! As a bonus if we kept our pick we would not owe the 2019 #1 UNPROTECTED pick to the Magic.
I would like to see both these guys gone by the trade deadline (I actually wish we traded them last year). What do you guys think?
Re: Will Lou & Young Cost Us 2 #1 Picks?
Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2017 8:12 pm
by LakersLegacy
What I meant to say is that the cost of Lou and Young comes at the expense of developing our young players scoring and it hurts the team in the long run.
Re: Will Lou & Young Cost Us 2 #1 Picks?
Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2017 9:47 pm
by Slava
I have a feeling we won't be making any trades for two reasons:
1. The 8th seed is both mathematically and probabilistically possible. We are one good month away from running away with it, so are 7 other teams but we have the benefit of the easiest schedule.
2. The front office is more than likely to change this summer. Jeannie is not wasting her time posturing, change is on the cards and I suspect Mitch would let the incumbent handle the roster as it is than make any lasting moves in his final few months unless he more than sure of his position.
Re: Will Lou & Young Cost Us 2 #1 Picks?
Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2017 12:18 am
by Landsberger
I don't see us making trades either. Mitch isn't a small step guy it seems. If we don't trade at least Young it's a waste of a piece IMHO. Even if it's for a second and some cash it's better than him walking away.
Williams is a little different. Right now without him I'm not sure we have 12 wins this season. While it's a certainty that he will not be here the next time we are a true threat he is the one getting some excitement in the fan base. I don't see him moving unfortunately.
Deng and Mozgov are pipe dreams for Mitch to trade. This was HIS rebuilding FA group. To dump them after 50 games is admitting failure.
I actually think it's more likely we trade one of the young guys if the right deal comes along.... big if however.
If they are out come the summer I'm hoping that it's all of the Buss's that are out and for gods sake don't let Magic get in charge.... it will be Isiah Thomas 2.0
Re: Will Lou & Young Cost Us 2 #1 Picks?
Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2017 12:26 am
by Dr Aki
i'm not a big believer in this lou and swaggy costing us 2 picks theory
sure, they're great offensively, but man are they bad defensively, they'll let in more than they score, and if you want to see the lakers improve markedly, you'd want to trade them for guards that can play defense
Re: Will Lou & Young Cost Us 2 #1 Picks?
Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2017 3:07 am
by MrWaffles
We should've traded them two months ago. There really is no reason for them on this team. What are we trying to do, win to get swept by the Warriors. It's not helping the core develop which is clearly the main goal for the Lakers.
Mitch won't make any trades.
Re: Will Lou & Young Cost Us 2 #1 Picks?
Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2017 3:12 am
by Crooked-I
I just don't see the Lakers making a tank move. Trading our 2 best players for some picks just won't cut it in LA. It'll be too obvious of a tank move and they'll take some heat for it. That kind of stuff might fly in Philly, but in LA I just don't see it. Although it's probably be the best move.
Re: Will Lou & Young Cost Us 2 #1 Picks?
Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2017 3:13 am
by larry14r
MrWaffles wrote:We should've traded them two months ago. There really is no reason for them on this team. What are we trying to do, win to get swept by the Warriors. It's not helping the core develop which is clearly the main goal for the Lakers.
Mitch won't make any trades.
You can't blame him because we won't get full value back for those two.
Re: Will Lou & Young Cost Us 2 #1 Picks?
Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2017 3:15 am
by larry14r
Crooked-I wrote:I just don't see the Lakers making a tank move. Trading our 2 best players for some picks just won't cut it in LA. It'll be too obvious of a tank move and they'll take some heat for it. That kind of stuff might fly in Philly, but in LA I just don't see it. Although it's probably be the best move.
Plus we stealth tank here in LA.
Re: Will Lou & Young Cost Us 2 #1 Picks?
Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2017 8:28 am
by TylersLakers
Lou and Young didn't cost us two picks. The Lakers fully knew the risk associated with the Nash deal and did it. The fact that we've survived this long without losing the pick is a complete miracle.
Re: Will Lou & Young Cost Us 2 #1 Picks?
Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2017 9:35 am
by LakersLegacy
Dr Aki wrote:i'm not a big believer in this lou and swaggy costing us 2 picks theory
sure, they're great offensively, but man are they bad defensively, they'll let in more than they score, and if you want to see the lakers improve markedly, you'd want to trade them for guards that can play defense
Wouldn't u rather see more of our young core?
Re: Will Lou & Young Cost Us 2 #1 Picks?
Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2017 4:13 pm
by Landsberger
Dr Aki wrote:i'm not a big believer in this lou and swaggy costing us 2 picks theory
sure, they're great offensively, but man are they bad defensively, they'll let in more than they score, and if you want to see the lakers improve markedly, you'd want to trade them for guards that can play defense
Lou is not good on the defensive end but he's not our worst guard defender by a fair margin. That's Russell. Young, on the other hand, is our best guard defender by a fair margin.
Our defensive woes are not as player specific as they are overall scheme and effort.
Back to Young and Williams. Not trading Young would be truly stupid as he'll walk for nothing. Trading Williams is truly raising the white flag and I'm not sure we'd do that after what the FO said. So..... they traded a whole lotta picks in a desperate effort to keep the window open a few years ago and not to hang on to their grasp of the team they wouldn't see that the team is not going to make their stated goal of the playoffs and again make a desperate move by not trading valued players that may help us keep a top level pick or two. They can't get out of their own way....
Re: Will Lou & Young Cost Us 2 #1 Picks?
Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2017 4:31 pm
by Ballerhogger
It's so hard say. We're so up and down. One day we blowout the pacers . One day we get blown out by the Blazers. If we plan and competing and Luke can get consist play from Randle, we will be too good anyways to keep our pick.
Re: Will Lou & Young Cost Us 2 #1 Picks?
Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2017 10:54 pm
by BEazy
I have one foot inside the tank. I don't want the 8th seed. Warriors will kill us, bring us back to life, then kill us again in the playoffs.
Re: Will Lou & Young Cost Us 2 #1 Picks?
Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2017 11:31 pm
by Dr Aki
Landsberger wrote:Dr Aki wrote:i'm not a big believer in this lou and swaggy costing us 2 picks theory
sure, they're great offensively, but man are they bad defensively, they'll let in more than they score, and if you want to see the lakers improve markedly, you'd want to trade them for guards that can play defense
Lou is not good on the defensive end but he's not our worst guard defender by a fair margin. That's Russell. Young, on the other hand, is our best guard defender by a fair margin.
Our defensive woes are not as player specific as they are overall scheme and effort.
Back to Young and Williams. Not trading Young would be truly stupid as he'll walk for nothing. Trading Williams is truly raising the white flag and I'm not sure we'd do that after what the FO said. So..... they traded a whole lotta picks in a desperate effort to keep the window open a few years ago and not to hang on to their grasp of the team they wouldn't see that the team is not going to make their stated goal of the playoffs and again make a desperate move by not trading valued players that may help us keep a top level pick or two. They can't get out of their own way....
Re: Will Lou & Young Cost Us 2 #1 Picks?
Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2017 1:46 am
by Landsberger
Dr Aki wrote:Landsberger wrote:Dr Aki wrote:i'm not a big believer in this lou and swaggy costing us 2 picks theory
sure, they're great offensively, but man are they bad defensively, they'll let in more than they score, and if you want to see the lakers improve markedly, you'd want to trade them for guards that can play defense
Lou is not good on the defensive end but he's not our worst guard defender by a fair margin. That's Russell. Young, on the other hand, is our best guard defender by a fair margin.
Our defensive woes are not as player specific as they are overall scheme and effort.
Back to Young and Williams. Not trading Young would be truly stupid as he'll walk for nothing. Trading Williams is truly raising the white flag and I'm not sure we'd do that after what the FO said. So..... they traded a whole lotta picks in a desperate effort to keep the window open a few years ago and not to hang on to their grasp of the team they wouldn't see that the team is not going to make their stated goal of the playoffs and again make a desperate move by not trading valued players that may help us keep a top level pick or two. They can't get out of their own way....
So what? We playing games through so called advanced stats? Why watch if you believe this stuff? Just add up the individual stats before the game and you'll know who won. Go look at the variables within that stat and then look at a singular defensive possession and tell me that is a stat reflective of a team defensive possession where 5 work together as one. It's an individual stat that is missing a few dozen variables to be anything close to realistic.
The fact is that our worst defender by a good margin is Russell. He has no feel on that end. Young as been our best guard defender when you look at how he plays in the team scheme. Again, this isn't really close and none of them are really "good". Clarkson is way up or way down (down more than up) and Lou is ineffective most of the time man up but at least knows how to follow him man off the ball on that end of the floor.
Back to your initial point. Not sure Young and Williams are going to help us lose the pick if we keep getting beat by 50 by teams as bad (supposedly) as we are.....
Re: Will Lou & Young Cost Us 2 #1 Picks?
Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2017 3:38 am
by danfantastk32
Landsberger wrote: Back to your initial point. Not sure Young and Williams are going to help us lose the pick if we keep getting beat by 50 by teams as bad (supposedly) as we are.....
Yeah....it's hard to argue with that after a game like tonight. I suppose standing pat is exactly what the doctor ordered. Just let this squad "go to work"....and our draft pick is assured. Sheesh
Re: Will Lou & Young Cost Us 2 #1 Picks?
Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2017 5:30 am
by Dr Aki
I mean, it's not rocket science, advanced stats that aggregate various other stats might only show a snapshot of what is happening, but to simply discount it altogether and rely on "the eye test" is simply taking the extreme the other way
Re: Will Lou & Young Cost Us 2 #1 Picks?
Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2017 8:45 am
by yanuary
Landsberger wrote:Dr Aki wrote:Landsberger wrote:
Lou is not good on the defensive end but he's not our worst guard defender by a fair margin. That's Russell. Young, on the other hand, is our best guard defender by a fair margin.
Our defensive woes are not as player specific as they are overall scheme and effort.
Back to Young and Williams. Not trading Young would be truly stupid as he'll walk for nothing. Trading Williams is truly raising the white flag and I'm not sure we'd do that after what the FO said. So..... they traded a whole lotta picks in a desperate effort to keep the window open a few years ago and not to hang on to their grasp of the team they wouldn't see that the team is not going to make their stated goal of the playoffs and again make a desperate move by not trading valued players that may help us keep a top level pick or two. They can't get out of their own way....
So what? We playing games through so called advanced stats? Why watch if you believe this stuff? Just add up the individual stats before the game and you'll know who won. Go look at the variables within that stat and then look at a singular defensive possession and tell me that is a stat reflective of a team defensive possession where 5 work together as one. It's an individual stat that is missing a few dozen variables to be anything close to realistic.
The fact is that our worst defender by a good margin is Russell. He has no feel on that end. Young as been our best guard defender when you look at how he plays in the team scheme. Again, this isn't really close and none of them are really "good". Clarkson is way up or way down (down more than up) and Lou is ineffective most of the time man up but at least knows how to follow him man off the ball on that end of the floor.
Back to your initial point. Not sure Young and Williams are going to help us lose the pick if we keep getting beat by 50 by teams as bad (supposedly) as we are.....
jeez. In any advanced statistic Russell is our best def. guard. I know you dont like him, but stop write lies (Williams over Russell in D) because its just make you stupid.
And yes i watched every single LAL game in last two years and in my eye-test Lou is far far worse defender than Russell.
Re: Will Lou & Young Cost Us 2 #1 Picks?
Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2017 8:28 pm
by Landsberger
yanuary wrote:
jeez. In any advanced statistic Russell is our best def. guard. I know you dont like him, but stop write lies (Williams over Russell in D) because its just make you stupid.
And yes i watched every single LAL game in last two years and in my eye-test Lou is far far worse defender than Russell.
Like has nothing to do with it. I don't know Russell and to like or dislike someone you need to know them. I don't project emotion or wish things about him either that isn't backed up with historical fact. I've stated that I believe his approach and dedication are lacking. That's different than emotion. It's cute to call people "haters" and all.... I get that.
Russell is horrible defensively. Not sure how anyone could say otherwise. Comparing him to our best guard who is just really bad is what I'm doing. Russell fails to understand the basics of off the ball defense. He goes under every screen, doesn't understand switching (either follows the wrong player or leaves his man), fails to fight through back screens and turns his back to the ball constantly. Lou fails for different reasons. However he does keep the ball and his man in his vision plane as well as he does know when to switch.
That graphic is truly proof that the underlying statistics are flawed. Showing Randle that close to Nance is silly. If the "math" showed that then the underlying calculation is wrong or needs significantly more work.
What's even more absurd is the idea that you can quantify defense individually in a team sport. Stats are cool to argue over and continued interest is their real intent in this context. Defense is a team of 5 guys playing together. Effort and intensity is 70-80% of it. The balance is less about individual talent and more about understanding a team scheme (handoffs, transition, switching, rotations and isolations). A great individual defender inspires others more than covers for them. Ron Artest was a great individual defender by reputation however he rarely slowed down guys like Kobe, Melo etc. What he did do was instill an aura of defense and it importance. There is no stat available, nor data compiled, to quantify all the aspects of real defense in the NBA. The data set, the variables involved and the back testing needed to do that would be a massive undertaking.