Jazzfan1971 and Floppymoose's season preview - The Lakers

Pan Jia Yuan · Post #141 » by **Pan Jia Yuan** » Mon Nov 17, 2014 7:54 am

Their schedule has been brutal tbh, how many teams in the league would've won more than 3-4 games against that competition? Not many, believe me.
The Lakers aren't supposed to beat playoff teams in the West, they'll need to beat the Nuggets, Wolves, Pistons, Celtics, Pacers, etc. If they can't win these games in the next 2-3 weeks you can bump this thread again.

RIPskaterdude · Post #142 » by **RIPskaterdude** » Mon Nov 17, 2014 8:01 am

Pan Jia Yuan wrote:Their schedule has been brutal tbh, how many teams in the league would've won more than 3-4 games against that competition? Not many, believe me.
The Lakers aren't supposed to beat playoff teams in the West, they'll need to beat the Nuggets, Wolves, Pistons, Celtics, Pacers, etc. If they can't win these games in the next 2-3 weeks you can bump this thread again.

Most of the Western teams schedules have been brutal, the Kings easiest game has been against Denver and they were .3 seconds away from being 7 and 3 right now.

Rasheeed!!! · Post #143 » by **Rasheeed!!!** » Mon Nov 17, 2014 8:06 am

hmmm, 15 wins might be overly optimistic right now lol

Pan Jia Yuan · Post #144 » by **Pan Jia Yuan** » Mon Nov 17, 2014 8:08 am

RIPskaterdude wrote:Most of the Western teams schedules have been brutal, the Kings easiest game has been against Denver and they were .3 seconds away from being 7 and 3 right now.

Well, the Kings are obviously a better team than the Lakers. Starting 1-9 against this competition isn't indicative that they will finish the season with 15 wins. As I said, the games against the Nuggets, Wolves, Pistons, etc. will be more interesting.

Post #145 » by **floppymoose** » Mon Nov 17, 2014 8:15 am

For the record, my final prediction was 22 wins, which was still worst in the west. When we started the previews, i didn't have the data model finished and it was too extreme on the best and worst teams.

But that 22 win projection was assuming Kobe would not decline further, Lin would be average (his RAPM has been all over the map during his career), and Nash would be able to provide about 15 minutes a night and be average. Nash went down after our final projections went to press.

Post #146 » by **Young_Star11** » Mon Nov 17, 2014 8:42 am

Lakers are an absolute trainwreck. 25 wins if they max out this year.

They have been in some games but maybe that is because teams aren't playing to their potential against them.

baki · Post #147 » by **baki** » Mon Nov 17, 2014 8:47 am

It's unfortunate but they seem to have a serious chemistry problem in LA and they have 70 more games to work it out.

I think they will but it starts with Kobe.

Rosque · Post #148 » by **Rosque** » Mon Nov 17, 2014 3:28 pm

Lebrizzy wrote:
Rosque wrote:
pimpim wrote:
Do you really think a 40 year old and a rookie would propel you up the standings?

RIPskaterdude wrote:
You were really counting on "always injured" Steve Nash to get this team into the playoffs?

Oh..right..forgot about Nash. Make that 3 out of 4 best players.

So you're saying Randle, Young and Nash are 3 of your top 4 players and Laker fans expected to win games?

Cool

7th pick, potential 6th man of the year and best playmakers and shooter when healthy. I'd say yes. It would give us at least not-so-embarassing record. Also those players would be best at their position and it would definitely help Kobe shoot better percentage and play less because Nick could take over as well as Nash.

Considering two of them are out for a season I'd say 15 games is good enough

Post #149 » by **zimpy27** » Mon Nov 17, 2014 3:46 pm

Ace626 wrote:LOL

Your predictions are terrible, your analyst is terrible, your entire view on basketball is just bad.
Next time you decide to include your names in a title of a topic, in the attempts of making your opinion sound credible, at least make your post somewhat knowledgeable

Ofcourse, this is all the opinion of just two regular users, but how about we put some money on this? $100 Lakers rank 12+ in the west, anything below I lose, if they do end up getting the worst seed, ill cough up $300

Lets make it happen

this one's my favourite

got 10 AND1's for it too..

Perkele · Post #150 » by **Perkele** » Mon Nov 17, 2014 3:47 pm

zimpy27 wrote:
Ace626 wrote:LOL

Your predictions are terrible, your analyst is terrible, your entire view on basketball is just bad.
Next time you decide to include your names in a title of a topic, in the attempts of making your opinion sound credible, at least make your post somewhat knowledgeable

Ofcourse, this is all the opinion of just two regular users, but how about we put some money on this? $100 Lakers rank 12+ in the west, anything below I lose, if they do end up getting the worst seed, ill cough up $300

Lets make it happen

this one's my favourite

That's actually sig-worthy.

blind prophet · Post #151 » by **blind prophet** » Mon Nov 17, 2014 3:52 pm

15 seems a bit high right now. Maybe 12-13.

NBABoom · Post #152 » by **NBABoom** » Mon Nov 17, 2014 4:16 pm

Lost Angel wrote:bad assessment of the Lakers.

they'll be better than most people think. I, however, as a Lakers fan, am hoping for a top 5 worst record finish to have a shot to keep the pick. I'd rather rebuild than tread water.

but at the end of the day, if Kobe is somewhat healthy, they aren't going to win less than 30 games.

Even if dude is healthy I see them winning less than 30 games
this season fella. Unless they make a trade by all star break
for a guy who can score and is under 35 years of age.

This team ligitimately stinks even with Bryant on the roster.

RIPskaterdude · Post #153 » by **RIPskaterdude** » Mon Nov 17, 2014 5:41 pm

Rosque wrote:
Lebrizzy wrote:
Rosque wrote:

Oh..right..forgot about Nash. Make that 3 out of 4 best players.

So you're saying Randle, Young and Nash are 3 of your top 4 players and Laker fans expected to win games?

Cool

7th pick, potential 6th man of the year and best playmakers and shooter when healthy. I'd say yes. It would give us at least not-so-embarassing record. Also those players would be best at their position and it would definitely help Kobe shoot better percentage and play less because Nick could take over as well as Nash.

Considering two of them are out for a season I'd say 15 games is good enough

When's the last time a player on a 20-25 win team has won 6th man of the year?

Rosque · Post #154 » by **Rosque** » Mon Nov 17, 2014 5:46 pm

RIPskaterdude wrote:
Rosque wrote:
Lebrizzy wrote:
So you're saying Randle, Young and Nash are 3 of your top 4 players and Laker fans expected to win games?

Cool

7th pick, potential 6th man of the year and best playmakers and shooter when healthy. I'd say yes. It would give us at least not-so-embarassing record. Also those players would be best at their position and it would definitely help Kobe shoot better percentage and play less because Nick could take over as well as Nash.

Considering two of them are out for a season I'd say 15 games is good enough

When's the last time a player on a 20-25 win team has won 6th man of the year?

NOT my point. Reading comprehension at its best. There's a reason I said POTENTIAL. Had he played for Miami last season and averaged same stats, exact same stats. He'd be in the mix(top 3) for 6MOTY.

RIPskaterdude · Post #155 » by **RIPskaterdude** » Mon Nov 17, 2014 5:49 pm

So you're saying that based on the numbers DeMarcus Cousins put up last season with the Kings, he should have been a potential MVP candidate?

Rosque · Post #156 » by **Rosque** » Mon Nov 17, 2014 5:56 pm

RIPskaterdude wrote:So you're saying that based on the numbers DeMarcus Cousins put up last season with the Kings, he should have been a potential MVP candidate?

No. Because his team sucked. Same applies for Young, and for Kobe in 2012/13 and for Unibrow this and last year... They all would be MVP/whatever award candidates had they played for top 5 teams. They were/are potential MVP/whatever award, but weren't candidates because their team sucked. You get it now?

Archerbro · Post #157 » by **Archerbro** » Mon Nov 17, 2014 6:02 pm

I had a feeling the Lakers would be at 0-10 to start the season but I didn't want to post it because I didn't know how to account for Kobe's return tho i had them at max 2 wins, and It really wouldn't have accomplished anything (I don't have a vendetta against their team or Kobe but this forum perceives most criticism as hate).

Their season is about to get easier though, I do expect them to go around 3-7 or 4-6 in their next 10 games.

Troubadour · Post #158 » by **Troubadour** » Mon Nov 17, 2014 7:13 pm

Ace626 wrote:LOL

Your predictions are terrible, your analyst is terrible, your entire view on basketball is just bad.
Next time you decide to include your names in a title of a topic, in the attempts of making your opinion sound credible, at least make your post somewhat knowledgeable

Ofcourse, this is all the opinion of just two regular users, but how about we put some money on this? $100 Lakers rank 12+ in the west, anything below I lose, if they do end up getting the worst seed, ill cough up $300

Lets make it happen

quoted for.......embarrassment?

RIPskaterdude · Post #159 » by **RIPskaterdude** » Mon Nov 17, 2014 7:28 pm

Rosque wrote:
RIPskaterdude wrote:So you're saying that based on the numbers DeMarcus Cousins put up last season with the Kings, he should have been a potential MVP candidate?

No. Because his team sucked. Same applies for Young, and for Kobe in 2012/13 and for Unibrow this and last year... They all would be MVP/whatever award candidates had they played for top 5 teams. They were/are potential MVP/whatever award, but weren't candidates because their team sucked. You get it now?

It sounds like a strawman argument about a worthless player being out who wouldn't have helped your team beat any of the higher quality opponents anyways

XtremeNite · Post #160 » by **XtremeNite** » Mon Nov 17, 2014 8:04 pm

Ace626 wrote:LOL

Your predictions are terrible, your analyst is terrible, your entire view on basketball is just bad.
Next time you decide to include your names in a title of a topic, in the attempts of making your opinion sound credible, at least make your post somewhat knowledgeable

Ofcourse, this is all the opinion of just two regular users, but how about we put some money on this? $100 Lakers rank 12+ in the west, anything below I lose, if they do end up getting the worst seed, ill cough up $300

Lets make it happen

Looks like OP is on track to get some money.