Game 70: Los Angeles Lakers (31-38) @ New York Knicks (13-56) - 12:00 PM ET

Pythagoras · Post #81 » by **Pythagoras** » Sun Mar 17, 2019 7:46 pm

Danny Darko wrote:

Read on Twitter

This would be such a toxic environment to bring a lotto pick into, they have to trade it I would think. That said, I have no earthly idea what they trade it for...

BEazy · Post #82 » by **BEazy** » Sun Mar 17, 2019 8:36 pm

I’m fully on the trade LeGroin train. I can’t stand this guy anymore.

Jedi32 · Post #83 » by **Jedi32** » Sun Mar 17, 2019 8:45 pm

Pythagoras wrote:
Danny Darko wrote:

Read on Twitter

This would be such a toxic environment to bring a lotto pick into, they have to trade it I would think. That said, I have no earthly idea what they trade it for...

i agree with pincus, losing would be better. at this point you lick your wombs get huys healthy, get that pick and see what you can do next year. we all know that pick is going to get traded.

Post #84 » by **zimpy27** » Sun Mar 17, 2019 9:29 pm

Bron had the best +/- of all players on both teams at +9, Kuzma has -17 and no one bats an eyelid it seems.

TKainZero · Post #85 » by **TKainZero** » Sun Mar 17, 2019 9:50 pm

TyCobb wrote:
Ballerhogger wrote:
Danny Darko wrote:

Read on Twitter

So let’s get the tank out full force and .
Rondo
Hart
Kumza
Wagner
Williamson starting 5

If we're trying to lose, then LeBron needs to start.

This
Lebron is the worst defender I have ever seen.

A 5’6 350lb guy off the street would give more effort on defense

I can only hope that enough people shame lebron that he actually tries next season. (Or is traded)

Post #86 » by **TyCobb** » Sun Mar 17, 2019 9:57 pm

zimpy27 wrote:Bron had the best +/- of all players on both teams at +9, Kuzma has -17 and no one bats an eyelid it seems.

Because we watched the game.

Post #87 » by **zimpy27** » Sun Mar 17, 2019 10:04 pm

TyCobb wrote:
zimpy27 wrote:Bron had the best +/- of all players on both teams at +9, Kuzma has -17 and no one bats an eyelid it seems.

Because we watched the game.

You watched the teams best player play 35 minutes and have the team winning by 9, then watched the teams second best player play 33 minutes and have the team losing by 17.

If the numbers weren't a -26 discrepancy between the best player and second best player for the game then I wouldn't be saying anything.

You may have watched the game with your eyes but the logical processing of that information appears to be overtaken by emotion.

Post #88 » by **TyCobb** » Sun Mar 17, 2019 10:17 pm

Yeah, Kuz played the entire first with Rondo and got a -11 real quick. Rondo was god awful on defense and didn't play much the rest of the way. Lebron's numbers got saved by the defensive stops brought to you by Cousin Caruso.

LeBron also missed more shots than our second best player took, but let's ignore that so we can point to the useless stat that favors him.

Post #89 » by **Danny Darko** » Mon Mar 18, 2019 12:14 am

TyCobb wrote:
Ballerhogger wrote:
Danny Darko wrote:

Read on Twitter

So let’s get the tank out full force and .
Rondo
Hart
Kumza
Wagner
Williamson starting 5

If we're trying to lose, then LeBron needs to start.

and muscala!

Post #90 » by **Kilroy** » Mon Mar 18, 2019 2:13 am

LeBron to Lakers quickly achieving Howard to Lakers levels of frustration... Any chance those 2 had a chat before LeBron came...

Landsberger · Post #91 » by **Landsberger** » Mon Mar 18, 2019 2:25 am

zimpy27 wrote:Bron had the best +/- of all players on both teams at +9, Kuzma has -17 and no one bats an eyelid it seems.

Kuzma came back in the game at the 4 minute mark during Caruso's FT attempts. He touched the ball offensively just twice in those 4 minutes while we played iso ball with Bron. That was a -11 right there that he had absolutely nothing to do with. This is why ± is a poor individual indicator IMHO. Our change in offensive approach from moving the ball to isolation to let Bron close the game out was the difference in the game and a lot of ±'s on the floor. Luke should get that -11 too.

Landsberger · Post #92 » by **Landsberger** » Mon Mar 18, 2019 2:28 am

Kilroy wrote:LeBron to Lakers quickly achieving Howard to Lakers levels of frustration... Any chance those 2 had a chat before LeBron came...

While the outcome is similar the 2 are in no way the same to me. Howard was an underachieving idiot prior to being a Laker. Bron is one of the best to suit up. Bron, on the court hasn't been the issue as much as off the court. I think he and the FO were expecting PG to sign and the team to make more moves than it has to get veteran talent. I'm sure that was the discussion that got him to come here. What is evident is that we need to either get rid of him or go and get that vet talent. Another season with this core will not go well....

Post #93 » by **zimpy27** » Mon Mar 18, 2019 4:01 am

Landsberger wrote:
zimpy27 wrote:Bron had the best +/- of all players on both teams at +9, Kuzma has -17 and no one bats an eyelid it seems.

Kuzma came back in the game at the 4 minute mark during Caruso's FT attempts. He touched the ball offensively just twice in those 4 minutes while we played iso ball with Bron. That was a -11 right there that he had absolutely nothing to do with. This is why ± is a poor individual indicator IMHO. Our change in offensive approach from moving the ball to isolation to let Bron close the game out was the difference in the game and a lot of ±'s on the floor. Luke should get that -11 too.

Bron was on the court too, so he was +20 before that?

PharmD · Post #94 » by **PharmD** » Mon Mar 18, 2019 8:50 am

Landsberger wrote:
Kilroy wrote:LeBron to Lakers quickly achieving Howard to Lakers levels of frustration... Any chance those 2 had a chat before LeBron came...

While the outcome is similar the 2 are in no way the same to me. Howard was an underachieving idiot prior to being a Laker. Bron is one of the best to suit up. Bron, on the court hasn't been the issue as much as off the court. I think he and the FO were expecting PG to sign and the team to make more moves than it has to get veteran talent. I'm sure that was the discussion that got him to come here. What is evident is that we need to either get rid of him or go and get that vet talent. Another season with this core will not go well....

3x NBA DPOY, top 5 in MVP voting 4x. Led a team whose 2nd best player was Hedo Turkyglue to the conference finals. He's been an underachieving idiot ever since he was traded to the Lakers, not before.

Post #95 » by **Slava** » Mon Mar 18, 2019 9:16 am

Its like no one expected Rondo to be an absolute plague to any team that signs him. I've seen chemistry killers but Rondo's awfulness is in a league of his own.

JazzUte88 · Post #96 » by **JazzUte88** » Mon Mar 18, 2019 11:37 am

Yeah, Rondo is pretty awful TBH.

Maybe a guy like Darren Collison (probably thinks he can get paid) or Patrick Beverley?

Post #97 » by **Slava** » Mon Mar 18, 2019 12:41 pm

I'd love Beverley, I'd infact take Caruso as the back up if I didn't think Lonzo is a walking injury risk and I don't trust the clown's ensemble of medical team we have in place to keep anyone healthy.

kobe808lak · Post #98 » by **kobe808lak** » Mon Mar 18, 2019 12:50 pm

Joke team, joke Franchise at this point.

Landsberger · Post #99 » by **Landsberger** » Thu Mar 21, 2019 3:12 am

PharmD wrote:
Landsberger wrote:
Kilroy wrote:LeBron to Lakers quickly achieving Howard to Lakers levels of frustration... Any chance those 2 had a chat before LeBron came...

While the outcome is similar the 2 are in no way the same to me. Howard was an underachieving idiot prior to being a Laker. Bron is one of the best to suit up. Bron, on the court hasn't been the issue as much as off the court. I think he and the FO were expecting PG to sign and the team to make more moves than it has to get veteran talent. I'm sure that was the discussion that got him to come here. What is evident is that we need to either get rid of him or go and get that vet talent. Another season with this core will not go well....

3x NBA DPOY, top 5 in MVP voting 4x. Led a team whose 2nd best player was Hedo Turkyglue to the conference finals. He's been an underachieving idiot ever since he was traded to the Lakers, not before.

The Lakers don't measure success.... or achievement by individual statistic based BS participation awards. He "led" teams nowhere (look at the Easter Conference strength that year) and when he was exposed without 3 3 point snipers around him his true value showed. He was the biggest mistake the Lakers have made in my fandom which started in 1972. No heart at all and no.... there isn't a post season award for that.

Landsberger · Post #100 » by **Landsberger** » Thu Mar 21, 2019 3:26 am

zimpy27 wrote:
Landsberger wrote:
zimpy27 wrote:Bron had the best +/- of all players on both teams at +9, Kuzma has -17 and no one bats an eyelid it seems.

Kuzma came back in the game at the 4 minute mark during Caruso's FT attempts. He touched the ball offensively just twice in those 4 minutes while we played iso ball with Bron. That was a -11 right there that he had absolutely nothing to do with. This is why ± is a poor individual indicator IMHO. Our change in offensive approach from moving the ball to isolation to let Bron close the game out was the difference in the game and a lot of ±'s on the floor. Luke should get that -11 too.

Bron was on the court too, so he was +20 before that?

Well... basic math would say yes. When you get outscored 12-1 in the final 4:30 seconds and end with a +9 then you must have had 9+11 at the 4:30 mark. ± in a vacuum or judging individual players by it is not a good indicator of player value.

Think of it this way. We are 23rd in bench scoring so it's safe to say on most nights we will have a - for our bench players so are they all to blame? Conversely on many nights we will have a + for the starters because we are 10th in starter scoring.

Also, a losing team will have more - than + overall because they are getting outscored more than they outscore someone else.

Now there are mixes of players that can make a difference and some players can effect the scoring/defense for sure but a group of 5 guys got outscored by 11 points in 4:30 seconds and the one you focused on touched the ball twice offensively in that time frame. He committed a shooting foul and didn't blow any defensive assignments that I saw. The ± difference at the end of the game was clearly on the offense as one bucket in that time frame wins the game. The offensive flow stagnated (by design) and one guy took the majority of the shots with KCP getting a bail out shot as well. In a vacuum the ± says LeBron played the best and Kuzma didn't but anyone who watched the game (especially the second and third quarters) could see that Kuzma was having a good all around game (well.... except rebounds).