GT - LAL vs CHI - Thu 01/29/15 7:30pm TNT

[dockingsched]

No, not at all. I think Scott stinks as a coach and didn't coach that well tonight either. He got lucky and I credit the players out there, Hill, Ellington, Clarkson, even Sacre, the bench in the first half. Even the announcers were saying the ball was sticky with so many Laker possessions late. It just so happened that Hill, Ellington hit big timely shots. I don't credit Scott for much in this game.

I hate that term and quite frankly I disagreed with Harlan harping on that. Everybody is so enthralled with this come down and pull jumper after jumper after jumper that they can't realize at times you have to be methodical in your offense when it lacks a creator like Kobe or one from the post.

So now when they see the shot clock at say even 10 seconds they claim the ball is sticking....that's bs in some cases.

In some cases it is a BS label but not in this one. The ball was sticking and it was mostly cause the offense came to a total stand still. There was no off the ball movement at all til the 2nd OT.

I agree with bws, Scott didn't really help the situation. There was no adjustments at all at the end of regulation and the 1st OT. They survived in part cause of the bulls missed free throws and lakers players making tough shots.

I'm not gonna blame Scott for that though. He's obviously trying to get guys like Clarkson some experience, and this game provided tons of that. The team looked lost out there with no guidance, and it took players pulling some tough shots out of their ass to pull the win off. The defense was good though, credit to players and coaches. I thought the big man help d was great.

[Kilroy]

I thought they were saying the ball was sticky because it literally looked like Hill was having a hard time dribbling it... It looked like it was sticking to his hand. He fumbled it like 4 times in a row like that.
There was no ball movement at all at the end of the 4th though, but they always seemed to say it after Hill fumbled the ball.

[Slava]

No, not at all. I think Scott stinks as a coach and didn't coach that well tonight either. He got lucky and I credit the players out there, Hill, Ellington, Clarkson, even Sacre, the bench in the first half. Even the announcers were saying the ball was sticky with so many Laker possessions late. It just so happened that Hill, Ellington hit big timely shots. I don't credit Scott for much in this game.

Well, his agenda is to get certain players the proper game time and expose them to certain situations and let them handle it. That's why he kept Clarkson in the game even when he couldn't handle the ball pressure. That's part of learning on the job and he pulled off a win while playing the guys he wanted to play and guys redeemed themselves.

At this time its pretty obvious that what suits the Lakers fans isn't the same as what suits you so your opinion on the coach is probably very far from ours.

I don't think he is a good coach and plenty of Lakers fans don't either. I thought the OT lineups weren't the best but the team got lucky. Boozer doesn't enter the game with Sacre out although Sacre really stepped up this game. Clarkson playing so many minutes so quickly, is his body ready for it? I hope so. And on and on.

But, look, the team won. I think it was because they really played hard and showed some determination and made big plays. But you can have Scott. I don't dislike him as a person, just as a coach.

Read proper my man. I never said he was playing the best line up for the win, he wasn't but he got the win with the line up that he wanted to play. Big Big difference between the two and for the Lakers fans, the latter makes more sense because our rookie and the players we want to evaluate rectified their mistakes and won the game.

I could care less what plenty of Lakers fans think. The plenty of Lakers fans didn't like anyone before Phil Jackson since Pat Riley and they've never liked anyone since then, they drove out Mike D'Antoni for no apparent reason and now even though Scott is not getting close to 10% of the criticism D'Antoni did, they will find faults with him without understanding the bare minimum truth that the team as it is, can't be much good and there are higher objectives at play. Your average Lakers fan cannot comprehend an NBA universe that doesn't revolve around them.

[bws94]

Slava, fair enough. Fans aren't logical and look for scapegoats. Every coach has strengths and weaknesses and the better coaches use their assistants to help in areas that aren't their expertise.

I do wonder if changing the playing time for Ellington and Clarkson will make them susceptible to an injury. I wonder about Byron's DNP to playing major minutes for both of them. I guess he'll work Black in when he sees fit to do so, and then will Black get major minutes?

If this season is evaluation going forward, then I guess that is what Byron is doing. But Kupchak said the directive is to win games. That is what I was questioning with Byron's late rotations last game.

I got a kick out of the game, it was more interesting than some others and it was good to see Hill and Ellington especially show a clutch quality, Clarkson show a fearless quality, Sacre show up defensively, and overall even though they imploded a bit to end regulation, stuck with it and pulled out a victory in the 2nd OT.

[Penberthy]

Even with this double OT game included, Wayne is averaging 30 mins per over the last 5 games, and 27 mins per on the month of Jan. Clarkson is at 34 over the last 5 and 24 on the month of Jan. I doubt either will average over 30 mins the rest of the way. If a player, especially their age, can't handle 30 mins per, should they even be in the nba?

[Kilroy]

A vet, probably no... But a rookie, even an old one like Clarkson, needs to be a little restricted at this point in the season.
I'd try to keep Clarkson somewhere between 25 and 30 min. Ellington should play as much as possible with both Kobe and Young out.

[Slava]

Clarkson was a 4 year college player so you can afford to be a little more liberal in playing him heavier minutes imo.

[Kilroy]

Clarkson was a 4 year college player so you can afford to be a little more liberal in playing him heavier minutes imo.

The most games he played a season was last season. 35... They get relatively long breaks between games and the competition isn't nearly as tough...

According to the stats I think he only played 3 seasons in the NCAA. 27gms, 31gms, and 35gms...

I just don't think there's much correlation between that and what he's having to adjust to in the NBA. The practice schedule and intensity alone has probably been a tough adjustment.

This is when all rookies start to hit the wall, I don't think time in college has a whole lot to do with it. It's just a big adjustment all around.

[Slava]

Yeah he hasn't seen this kind of workload before but usually college seniors tend to do well in adjusting during the rookie seasons than one and dones. Lillard is a pretty good example and he shouldered a much heavier offensive burden. I guess what I'm saying is we can keep engaging him until he surely hits the wall and then ease up. Nothing to lose.

[Kilroy]

Yes. He definitely needs the PT. He's just shaping into a nice combo guard for us and Injuries scare me.