Russell in the Post

B-Scott · Post #1 » by **B-Scott** » Wed Nov 2, 2016 3:47 am

Tonight's loss hurt because Lakers were right there. I'm not sure if anyone will agree with me, but i would have liked to see Ingram back in the game to defend George and Russell in the post in crunch time. Down by 1 with a minute left id to see Russell go to the post like he did first quarter. That could result in two free throws.

When Lakers got down by three Russell shot a three. I'm talking when Lakers were only down by one.

stan francisco · Post #2 » by **stan francisco** » Wed Nov 2, 2016 4:12 am

I'm really thinking Ingram should be our starting point guard. He could become our very own Greek freak which would allow Russell to slide over to the two spot where he could be fed in the post and do what you suggest. If he makes a few of those he'll get warm and start draining threes in catch and shoot mode. That's a strength of his. Guarding quick PGs is not his strength. He's big enough to guard most SGs.

I think Ingram could hang defensively with most PGs. That wing span spread out is an intimidating sight for a PG. I always loved it when Odom was switched onto a PG because they always had trouble getting around him.

Can't believe I'm saying this but the downside would be the starters missing Young's defense.

B-Scott · Post #3 » by **B-Scott** » Wed Nov 2, 2016 4:22 am

Good point. I'm liking Ingram at the point. He can be more aggressive, but i think he's trying to stick to the offense

stan francisco · Post #4 » by **stan francisco** » Wed Nov 2, 2016 6:30 am

He's doing exactly what he should be doing right now if you ask me. Once confident within the system and comfortable with the NBA pace, watch out.

dAdo dA dEvil · Post #5 » by **dAdo dA dEvil** » Wed Nov 2, 2016 7:27 am

Once upon a time the Lakers had a 6'9" PG and he became one of the greatest to ever play the game. He is Magic Johnson.
I think it's OK that the Lakers have another 6'9" PG this time. Hello Brandon Ingram.

I think it's OK to let Ingram play PG now that it's clear that JC is the 6th man and therefore we could already slide DLo in the SG (before the argument between JC and DLo is who would play 1 and who would play 2 if they start together). I think Ingram could play any position though. Offensively, he could make the right plays and knows when and how to pass the ball and with his height advantage could easily shoot over the small PGs of the league. Defensively, his length will be of great help defending against the PGs. Meanwhile, I hope DLo could defend the SGs. He has the size and the SGs are typically slower than PGs.

For now we could roll with:

Ingram
DLo
Deng
Randle
Mozgov

In the future it could be:

Ingram
DLo
JC/Nance/Randle (Depends whether we keep JC as the 6th man)
Randle/Nance (Whoever develops an outside game plays the 3. The other 1 plays the 4)
Zubac

LALifer49 · Post #6 » by **LALifer49** » Wed Nov 2, 2016 7:48 am

What the Hell? When did it become a thing where people think Ingram is a pg just because he played pg in highschool? Ingram is not a starting pg in this league, that is not his role....

PKABOOICU · Post #7 » by **PKABOOICU** » Wed Nov 2, 2016 1:26 pm

people are really trying to embrace the free-for-all system. The Lakers aren't mature enough to produce that type of a product on the court against veterans. Sure, I dont mind experimenting Ingram at point guard but thats not his role. Defensively he can give trouble to opposing guards, but offensively he'll have trouble getting by them. The PG spot should exclusively belong to D'angelo Russell and he needs to let the game slow down for him so he could make the right passes, slash, cut, shoot, screen and all that good stuff. He really needs to study film of 3 players- Steph Curry, James Harden, and Manu Ginobili.

meetbishop · Post #8 » by **meetbishop** » Wed Nov 2, 2016 3:17 pm

All our 3 road losses hurt especially when we know that our next home game will be against GS. We were right there against Utah and Pacers. The only consolation i can take from these losses is that Luke knows what he is doing. If he is not able to turn this around when needed I will be very disappointed in him.

He lost those two games for us.

Post #9 » by **Kilroy** » Wed Nov 2, 2016 7:46 pm

LALifer49 wrote:What the Hell? When did it become a thing where people think Ingram is a pg just because he played pg in highschool? Ingram is not a starting pg in this league, that is not his role....

Nobody is suggesting he's a pure PG or could play that role in our system. What they're saying is that he can be the primary distributor in transition like Randle does to a smaller extent. He's probably not the guy you want dribbling the ball against set offenses in the half court set, but he looks good bringing the ball up and initiating the offense in transition.

He has excellent court vision and instincts with the ball. His passing is elite for his size, and he has a full arsenal of crossover moves.

I don't see it working every time down the court but I could definitely see it being a feature of our future offense. He just needs a little more strength and stamina.

LALifer49 · Post #10 » by **LALifer49** » Wed Nov 2, 2016 8:31 pm

Kilroy wrote:
LALifer49 wrote:What the Hell? When did it become a thing where people think Ingram is a pg just because he played pg in highschool? Ingram is not a starting pg in this league, that is not his role....

Nobody is suggesting he's a pure PG or could play that role in our system. What they're saying is that he can be the primary distributor in transition like Randle does to a smaller extent. He's probably not the guy you want dribbling the ball against set offenses in the half court set, but he looks good bringing the ball up and initiating the offense in transition.

He has excellent court vision and instincts with the ball. His passing is elite for his size, and he has a full arsenal of crossover moves.

I don't see it working every time down the court but I could definitely see it being a feature of our future offense. He just needs a little more strength and stamina.

Except that the posters above my post were suggesting just that, with one of them drawing parallels to Magic Johnson

Post #11 » by **Kilroy** » Wed Nov 2, 2016 8:46 pm

LALifer49 wrote:
Kilroy wrote:
LALifer49 wrote:What the Hell? When did it become a thing where people think Ingram is a pg just because he played pg in highschool? Ingram is not a starting pg in this league, that is not his role....

Nobody is suggesting he's a pure PG or could play that role in our system. What they're saying is that he can be the primary distributor in transition like Randle does to a smaller extent. He's probably not the guy you want dribbling the ball against set offenses in the half court set, but he looks good bringing the ball up and initiating the offense in transition.

He has excellent court vision and instincts with the ball. His passing is elite for his size, and he has a full arsenal of crossover moves.

I don't see it working every time down the court but I could definitely see it being a feature of our future offense. He just needs a little more strength and stamina.

Except that the posters above my post were suggesting just that, with one of them drawing parallels to Magic Johnson

Yeah, I think you're getting too hung up on the position and not seeing the reality of how it would work...
He 'drew parallels' which is exactly right... He's not saying Ingram is the next Magic... There may never be another magic, but you can surely see some similarity in skill in Ingram.
And Magic did like 95% of his distributing in transition... Which is what we're saying Ingram can do.

B-Scott · Post #12 » by **B-Scott** » Wed Nov 2, 2016 8:51 pm

Yes, and i like that he's not turnover prone. Hopefully we can see Ingram/Russell in the backcourt tonight and Russell in the post a lot more. Russell, is falling to in love with the three

LALifer49 · Post #13 » by **LALifer49** » Wed Nov 2, 2016 9:23 pm

Kilroy wrote:
LALifer49 wrote:
Kilroy wrote:
Nobody is suggesting he's a pure PG or could play that role in our system. What they're saying is that he can be the primary distributor in transition like Randle does to a smaller extent. He's probably not the guy you want dribbling the ball against set offenses in the half court set, but he looks good bringing the ball up and initiating the offense in transition.

He has excellent court vision and instincts with the ball. His passing is elite for his size, and he has a full arsenal of crossover moves.

I don't see it working every time down the court but I could definitely see it being a feature of our future offense. He just needs a little more strength and stamina.

Except that the posters above my post were suggesting just that, with one of them drawing parallels to Magic Johnson

Yeah, I think you're getting too hung up on the position and not seeing the reality of how it would work...
He 'drew parallels' which is exactly right... He's not saying Ingram is the next Magic... There may never be another magic, but you can surely see some similarity in skill in Ingram.
And Magic did like 95% of his distributing in transition... Which is what we're saying Ingram can do.

Eh I think we agree with each other Ingram is a good ball handler, passer, and it seems decision maker, and I don't mind Ingram bringing the ball down halfcourt and initiating the offense sometimes off the bench acting as a "pg". But these guys are calling for Ingram to be our starting pg and rolling out a lineup of BI Dlo Deng Randle Mozgov, and I dont see Ingram being that.

Michael Lucky · Post #14 » by **Michael Lucky** » Wed Nov 2, 2016 10:31 pm

Ingram can play some point forward, but he's in no way a full time PG. He just needs to learn how to move without the ball better and not be so complacent.

Princeinrevolt · Post #15 » by **Princeinrevolt** » Thu Nov 3, 2016 8:09 am

yeah lets make ingram point guard, he is young so he can grow into it!!!! also zubac is progressing as a shooter lets make him SG... he is too skinny to guard NBA Centers, and he is much bigger than nba shooting guards, so he can easily block every single one of their shots!!

D'angelo russell is only good at post ups because he is posting up on smaller guards, if he posted up an actual nba shooting guard, he would get blocked so hard, that you people will come back to this site, and cry about how crap he is at post ups....

Also Ingram is not a good passer... or a good dribbler... plus even if he started at point guard... does not necessarily mean he would be guarded by a point guard... Just today Andre Roberson was guarding CP3... if brandon ingram was playing point, they would put a sg or sf on him...

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

danfantastk32 · Post #16 » by **danfantastk32** » Fri Nov 4, 2016 3:07 am

meetbishop wrote:All our 3 road losses hurt especially when we know that our next home game will be against GS. We were right there against Utah and Pacers. The only consolation i can take from these losses is that Luke knows what he is doing. If he is not able to turn this around when needed I will be very disappointed in him.

He lost those two games for us.

Jeez man....cut the guy some slack. His first coaching gig...new team full of young guys. A squad that was complete crap last season, and by the way, had not won on the road since like February.

If Luke decided to play only 4 men....then OK...I agree he lost that game for us. Otherwise, people just gotta let everyone figure each other out for a few months. Learning to win on the road is a real skill in the NBA. Go look up some of the really good teams. Im talking 55-62 wins. Well most of those teams will have something like a 26-15 record on the road. And those are the dominating teams. Teams with veterans...who have played together and are making big playoff runs. Even they will be like 60-65%....road wins are hard.

The 2010 Lakers won 57 games. We had a 23-18 road record. That's 2 road wins above .500, btw. That team won a title in it's 3rd straight finals appearance.

Please everyone.....you gotta let these guys find themselves. Nobody's losing games for us. It's unreal to expect a team at our level to be winning road games, with any sort of regularity. Only contenders do that kinda stuff. That's way down the road.

Princeinrevolt · Post #17 » by **Princeinrevolt** » Fri Nov 4, 2016 6:47 am

danfantastk32 wrote:
meetbishop wrote:All our 3 road losses hurt especially when we know that our next home game will be against GS. We were right there against Utah and Pacers. The only consolation i can take from these losses is that Luke knows what he is doing. If he is not able to turn this around when needed I will be very disappointed in him.

He lost those two games for us.

Jeez man....cut the guy some slack. His first coaching gig...new team full of young guys. A squad that was complete crap last season, and by the way, had not won on the road since like February.

If Luke decided to play only 4 men....then OK...I agree he lost that game for us. Otherwise, people just gotta let everyone figure each other out for a few months. Learning to win on the road is a real skill in the NBA. Go look up some of the really good teams. Im talking 55-62 wins. Well most of those teams will have something like a 26-15 record on the road. And those are the dominating teams. Teams with veterans...who have played together and are making big playoff runs. Even they will be like 60-65%....road wins are hard.

The 2010 Lakers won 57 games. We had a 23-18 road record. That's 2 road wins above .500, btw. That team won a title in it's 3rd straight finals appearance.

Please everyone.....you gotta let these guys find themselves. Nobody's losing games for us. It's unreal to expect a team at our level to be winning road games, with any sort of regularity. Only contenders do that kinda stuff. That's way down the road.

and the team we lost to were PLAYOFF teams... i hate these fans with such unrealistic expectations... im just super happy we were close to winning those games... If Byron Scott was still the coach, we would have lost by 30... Luke Walton has only coached 5 games for the lakers, and i already know he is legit, and the right coach for us!!!

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

iamworthy · Post #18 » by **iamworthy** » Fri Nov 4, 2016 4:45 pm

Read on Twitter

It doesn’t feel like D’Angelo Russell has put together a signature outing yet this season, but the Los Angeles Lakers’ offense is humming up and down the court when he has the steering wheel. The Lakers are playing at the fourth-fastest pace in the NBA, averaging 104.38 possession per 48 minutes. The Oklahoma City Thunder, Golden State Warriors and Phoenix Suns round out the top of the league, respectively.

The Lakers have to be effective while they push the tempo, and they’re at their finest when Russell has the keys. Los Angeles averages 104.7 points per 100 possessions while D’Angelo is in the game, a bit over their team average (102.4) and well above his on-court offensive rating of 97.3 in his rookie season.

The numbers check out with the eye test, and D’Angelo is fueling the Lakers by pushing the pace and facilitating. Digging through the details there were some interesting finds, like the team shooting five percent better from three-point range while Russell was on the court, or that his usage rate is nearly identical to that of Kyrie Irving (30 to Irving’s 30.1).

I'm all for keeping DLo at the point unless we can get a true defensive minded, quick point guard.

Post #19 » by **Kilroy** » Fri Nov 4, 2016 5:00 pm

I have no argument with the intent of that article... Russell is our best all around option at PG, and the Lakers clearly play better with him on the court, but I don't necessarily follow the logic that he's driving the pace. From what I've seen, that's a team objective whether he's on the court or not, whether he has the ball in transition or not... In fact, some of the fastest possessions I've seen have been when Ingram's bringing up the ball.

I guess "Russell's the best option at PG for the Lakers" wasn't noteworthy enough for the article.

lake_show · Post #20 » by **lake_show** » Fri Nov 4, 2016 6:17 pm

Kilroy wrote:I have no argument with the intent of that article... Russell is our best all around option at PG, and the Lakers clearly play better with him on the court, but I don't necessarily follow the logic that he's driving the pace. From what I've seen, that's a team objective whether he's on the court or not, whether he has the ball in transition or not... In fact, some of the fastest possessions I've seen have been when Ingram's bringing up the ball.

I guess "Russell's the best option at PG for the Lakers" wasn't noteworthy enough for the article.

That's odd. The only times we've had Ingram bringing the ball up is when we've run horns in set plays. So if THOSE are the fastest plays you've seen then maybe you've got the player names mixed up. I don't think I've seen Ingram lead a lot of early offense, let alone anything resembling a fast break.

Plus, I don't think that article ever said D'Lo was "driving the pace". It said they were at their "finest while Russell has the keys". Which is why they state that the Lakers pace is up and the pace is "a bit over their team average" when D'Lo is in the game. Honestly, your post is pretty odd all the way around.