2024-25 NBA Season Discussion

[tsherkin]

Double-J better be a good coach

I don't think coaching is the core issue with the Lakers. Hopefully, JJ will help, but the Lakers were fairly middle of the road at either end of the floor last year. And that was with pretty good health from Lebron and AD. They still blow on the O-boards, they don't protect the ball well, they don't generate turnovers well, they don't really have a bench, Russell still isn't a good choice as a starter, like... they have many issues which Redick probably isn't going to fix.

Hopefully, he can get them shooting more threes so they have any kind of leverage on offense. But without pretty significant changes all over, they're just going to do the same thing they did last year, more than likely.

[falcolombardi]

Double-J better be a good coach

I don't think coaching is the core issue with the Lakers. Hopefully, JJ will help, but the Lakers were fairly middle of the road at either end of the floor last year. And that was with pretty good health from Lebron and AD. They still blow on the O-boards, they don't protect the ball well, they don't generate turnovers well, they don't really have a bench, Russell still isn't a good choice as a starter, like... they have many issues which Redick probably isn't going to fix.

Hopefully, he can get them shooting more threes so they have any kind of leverage on offense. But without pretty significant changes all over, they're just going to do the same thing they did last year, more than likely.

Lakers biggest hope would be unexpected leaps from their young players and internal growth

Thinghs like vando improving his 3 pointer, reaves or hachimura taking a leap or wood improvement

Russel feels like a lost cause in the playoffs

[eminence]

The Lakers are done in terms of contention. Bron can't keep the pedal to the floor for a whole season anymore, Davis never could, and they're mediocre at best from 3 on down. Not in any better spot than last season (probably worse, given we know their stars had great health last season).

What level are fans hoping for?

[tsherkin]

Lakers biggest hope would be unexpected leaps from their young players and internal growth

Yeah, I mean, I wouldn't hold my breath.

Russel feels like a lost cause in the playoffs

He is, in general, a lost cause, yes.

[ShaqAttac]

lakers gonna cook, trust in reddickh

[MartinToVaught]

lakers gonna cook, trust in reddickh

Being a good(?) podcaster doesn't mean you'll be a good NBA head coach with no coaching experience in between. I'd have an easier time buying the optimism if the Lakers hadn't cheaped out on Hurley.

[penbeast0]

lakers gonna cook, trust in reddickh

Frankly, after his plumbers and firemen comment, my default take without having listened to his podcasts is that Redick is a Stephen Smith/Skip Bayless clickbait idiot, though I'm willing to be shown differently.

[tsherkin]

lakers gonna cook, trust in reddickh

Being a good(?) podcaster doesn't mean you'll be a good NBA head coach with no coaching experience in between. I'd have an easier time buying the optimism if the Lakers hadn't cheaped out on Hurley.

Again, though, I don't think Redick is really the issue. The Lakers have other problems and coaching influence goes only so far when the roster isn't really there. I doubt he's going to hold them back any more than did Darvin Ham, you know what I mean? Let's say Redick is average to mediocre in his out-of-bounds plays and the basic way he sets up the team. That probably won't actually influence their seasonal record by all that much. Like, maybe a game or three at the most. But as a shooter with at least a rudimentary understanding of contemporary offense, if he gets them shooting more from outside and leveraging a few of their strengths, that will be more valuable than both of the last two seasons... in which they won 43 and 47 games.

So a 50-win season isn't entirely out of the question, depending on health and such.

[Texas Chuck]

lakers gonna cook, trust in reddickh

Frankly, after his plumbers and firemen comment, my default take without having listened to his podcasts is that Redick is a Stephen Smith/Skip Bayless clickbait idiot, though I'm willing to be shown differently.

I don't know what comment you are referring to, but having heard him on his pod and on the TV broadcasts and other various interviews throughout the years, he is absolutely not just some clickbait idiot. Doesn't mean he'll be a good coach. Nash was obviousy extremely smart, but was a terrible head coach. But his problem won't be that's he's dumb.

[Peregrine01]

Did the Nuggets have to pay Murray that much money? If so, the CBA is so broken that a guy who's never made an all-star team, hasn't played more than 65 games in any of the last 5 seasons and totally crapped the bed in his most recent spate of play is about to make close to $60 million in the last year of his extension. Just mind-boggling.

[tsherkin]

Did the Nuggets have to pay Murray that much money? If so, the CBA is so broken that a guy who's never made an all-star team, hasn't played more than 65 games in any of the last 5 seasons and totally crapped the bed in his most recent spate of play is about to make close to $60 million in the last year of his extension. Just mind-boggling.

And they're desperate to add talent around Jokic, so letting what they do have leech away is a huge problem. Overpaying for such is a thing.

[Dr Positivity]

Did the Nuggets have to pay Murray that much money? If so, the CBA is so broken that a guy who's never made an all-star team, hasn't played more than 65 games in any of the last 5 seasons and totally crapped the bed in his most recent spate of play is about to make close to $60 million in the last year of his extension. Just mind-boggling.

Much like Celtics paying a guy like Jaylen big I think it's ok, Murray also looks better when realizing there aren't as many good PGs anymore as in the 2010s boom.

[Peregrine01]

Did the Nuggets have to pay Murray that much money? If so, the CBA is so broken that a guy who's never made an all-star team, hasn't played more than 65 games in any of the last 5 seasons and totally crapped the bed in his most recent spate of play is about to make close to $60 million in the last year of his extension. Just mind-boggling.

Much like Celtics paying a guy like Jaylen big I think it's ok, Murray also looks better when realizing there aren't as many good PGs anymore as in the 2010s boom.

The difference here is that Jaylen’s a better player and a lot more available and Boston is a big market that can afford to pay that.

[IlikeSHAIguys]

Can I get a rundown on Isiah Joe?

[RCM88x]

Did the Nuggets have to pay Murray that much money? If so, the CBA is so broken that a guy who's never made an all-star team, hasn't played more than 65 games in any of the last 5 seasons and totally crapped the bed in his most recent spate of play is about to make close to $60 million in the last year of his extension. Just mind-boggling.

Much like Celtics paying a guy like Jaylen big I think it's ok, Murray also looks better when realizing there aren't as many good PGs anymore as in the 2010s boom.

The difference here is that Jaylen’s a better player and a lot more available and Boston is a big market that can afford to pay that.

The difference is Nuggets best player is actually paid properly and the Celtics best player is horrifically underpaid. Nothing to do with the market or quality of player, everything to do with the luck the franchise have had with paying everyone else.

[tsherkin]

Much like Celtics paying a guy like Jaylen big I think it's ok, Murray also looks better when realizing there aren't as many good PGs anymore as in the 2010s boom.

The difference here is that Jaylen’s a better player and a lot more available and Boston is a big market that can afford to pay that.

The difference is Nuggets best player is actually paid properly and the Celtics best player is horrifically underpaid. Nothing to do with the market or quality of player, everything to do with the luck the franchise have had with paying everyone else.

Hasn't mattered a lot to Denver for talent acquisition, though. They are still dirt-poor in terms of contention-level talent past Jokic.

[Tim Lehrbach]

Did the Nuggets have to pay Murray that much money? If so, the CBA is so broken that a guy who's never made an all-star team, hasn't played more than 65 games in any of the last 5 seasons and totally crapped the bed in his most recent spate of play is about to make close to $60 million in the last year of his extension. Just mind-boggling.

As others said, they sorta did have to pay him, but it's also poor roster management that left them in the position that they are so reliant on such an unreliable second option. It would have been bold beyond reasonable expectation to let him become a free agent, but I also might have applauded such boldness.

[Tim Lehrbach]

lakers gonna cook, trust in reddickh

Being a good(?) podcaster doesn't mean you'll be a good NBA head coach with no coaching experience in between. I'd have an easier time buying the optimism if the Lakers hadn't cheaped out on Hurley.

Again, though, I don't think Redick is really the issue. The Lakers have other problems and coaching influence goes only so far when the roster isn't really there. I doubt he's going to hold them back any more than did Darvin Ham, you know what I mean? Let's say Redick is average to mediocre in his out-of-bounds plays and the basic way he sets up the team. That probably won't actually influence their seasonal record by all that much. Like, maybe a game or three at the most. But as a shooter with at least a rudimentary understanding of contemporary offense, if he gets them shooting more from outside and leveraging a few of their strengths, that will be more valuable than both of the last two seasons... in which they won 43 and 47 games.

So a 50-win season isn't entirely out of the question, depending on health and such.

I agree with you in being skeptical of the Lakers' upside, but there absolutely is potential downside to hiring an untested coach. Just because a team projects as mediocre doesn't mean that their coach turning out to be horrible and pushing the team from solid also-ran to can't sniff the play-in isn't a dreadful outcome. I'm not even passing judgment on Redick; I have no idea whether he'll succeed or not. Just disagreeing with your lack of concern over who coaches the Lakers.

[Doctor MJ]

Much like Celtics paying a guy like Jaylen big I think it's ok, Murray also looks better when realizing there aren't as many good PGs anymore as in the 2010s boom.

The difference here is that Jaylen’s a better player and a lot more available and Boston is a big market that can afford to pay that.

The difference is Nuggets best player is actually paid properly and the Celtics best player is horrifically underpaid. Nothing to do with the market or quality of player, everything to do with the luck the franchise have had with paying everyone else.

I'm so confused by the bold. Are the team names just switched or what?

[tsherkin]

Being a good(?) podcaster doesn't mean you'll be a good NBA head coach with no coaching experience in between. I'd have an easier time buying the optimism if the Lakers hadn't cheaped out on Hurley.

Again, though, I don't think Redick is really the issue. The Lakers have other problems and coaching influence goes only so far when the roster isn't really there. I doubt he's going to hold them back any more than did Darvin Ham, you know what I mean? Let's say Redick is average to mediocre in his out-of-bounds plays and the basic way he sets up the team. That probably won't actually influence their seasonal record by all that much. Like, maybe a game or three at the most. But as a shooter with at least a rudimentary understanding of contemporary offense, if he gets them shooting more from outside and leveraging a few of their strengths, that will be more valuable than both of the last two seasons... in which they won 43 and 47 games.

So a 50-win season isn't entirely out of the question, depending on health and such.

I agree with you in being skeptical of the Lakers' upside, but there absolutely is potential downside to hiring an untested coach. Just because a team projects as mediocre doesn't mean that their coach turning out to be horrible and pushing the team from solid also-ran to can't sniff the play-in isn't a dreadful outcome. I'm not even passing judgment on Redick; I have no idea whether he'll succeed or not. Just disagreeing with your lack of concern over who coaches the Lakers.

It is in-context though. Darvin Ham was a pain train through disaster town. I'd expect a can of Doctor Pepper to be at least neutral after that.