Know Thy Enemy: Portland, Minnesota, and Golden State
We've spent a good portion of our collective summers discussing every move the Lakers have made, along with the imaginary ones they didn't actually do. I think we all agree the team will be better next year — how much being the discussion point. The degree to which those improvements will translate into wins, playoff positioning, and (this would be a good time to say a little prayer) playoff advancement is very much dependent on how their Western Conference brethren have spent their summer vacations. Who they brought in, who they kicked out, and most importantly, if they're going to be better than the Lakers this year. It's been suggested that we discuss just that. Good idea. We'll start with the bottom feeders from '05-'06: Portland, Minnesota, and Golden State.
PORTLAND TRAIL BLAZERS (21-61 last season)
Big Gains: Re-signed Joel Pryzbilla, acquired Raef LaFrentz, Dan Dickau and Jamaal Magliore, more-or-less drafted Brandon Roy, LaMarcus Aldridge, and Sergio Rodriguez (all in a series of definitely confusing and possibly unnecessary trades), along with Joel Freeland, who is tall, British, and likely to play overseas.
Big Losses: Steve Blake, Victor Khryapa, Sebastian Telfair.
The Blazers were freakin' garbage against NBA teams not called the Lakers (something many Steve Blake fans in this city sometimes forget. As John Ireland told us during the season, "The Lakers were put on this Earth to make Steve Blake look good."). They've only got one way to go, and that's up. On the bad side, Darius "For the Love of God, Get Me Out of Here!" Miles is still in Portland, and Zach Randolph is proving he's not quite the role model Portland needs. Still, re-signing Pryzbilla was a good move. He's a good shot blocker and in the world we live in, not a terrible center. Magloire is a great short-term pickup for them as well. If he likes it there, maybe they'll sign him. If nothing else, his $8 million salary is a great deadline trade chip.
The Blazers brought in serious talent in Aldridge and Roy. Add them to the mix and the Blazers get even more athletic than they were last year. Not necessarily better, but definitely more athletic. And by definition, doesn't adding a guy nicknamed Spanish Chocolate (Rodriguez) make you instantly more intriguing? You know you're bad when LaFrentz helps you, but he's not a bad fit in Portland. A veteran guy who should be able to live with a potentially reduced role, can shoot a little, and teach the youngsters a thing or two, though Portland hopes that doesn't include how to be a soft rebounder and defender. With Blake gone, Jarrett Jack should start at the point. In the end, the composition of the team is still to be determined based on what happens to Miles, but the Blazers should actually be better. Not good, average, or even below average. Just a better grade of really bad. On nights when the rooks click and Miles (assuming Portland can't find any takers) isn't scouring Travelocity for flights out of town, they'll give teams fits. There won't be many of those, but probably more than 21.
Final Verdict: Worse than the Lakers. By a lot. On a positive note, they do have one of the cooler team websites in the NBA. (BK)
MINNESOTA TIMBERWOLVES (33-49)
Big Gains: Signed Mike James, drafted Randy Foye.
Big Losses: Marcus Banks.
Unfortunately for T-Wolves fans, most of the media coverage this offseason has been centered around K.G., and if he'll be in Minnesota when the season starts. He will (we tried to tell you), but his team won't be very good. Mike James is a quality pick up and Randy Foye will become a big time scorer at some point, perhaps sooner than later. But is that going to turn the Wolves into a playoff team in the West? K.G. is still K.G., but though that really cool Adidas commercial makes it seem like he can carry the entire world on his back. (Seriously, was that one of the coolest commercials of the last 10 years, or what?) He can't and shouldn't have to. Considering the supporting cast, he doesn't have much choice. Like I said, James will help, but when you think of guys who can elevate a team to playoff contention, you don't (or certainly shouldn't) think of Ricky Davis. Or Mark Blount. Or Marko Jaric. And so on, and so forth.
If they had a superstar with less drive and pride than K.G., they'd be a great candidate for worst team in the conference, even uglier than Portland. I doubt Garnett will let that happen, but '06-'07 could be a seriously nasty time in Minnesota. All the better to feed those fun K.G. trade rumors.
Final Verdict- They only improved around the margins. Foye is going to be great, but the team will be plenty worse than the Lakers. (BK)
GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS (34-48)
Big Gains: Drafted Patrick O'Bryant. Traded for Devin Brown.
Big Losses: Derek Fisher.
There are certain statements that remain a given until proved otherwise. Ben Affleck is incapable of carrying a movie to box office or critical success. DMX is incapable of going a year without getting arrested. The Golden State Warriors are incapable of making the playoffs. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
Oddly enough, on a player by player basis, the Warriors aren't horrible. When healthy (which is never, since he's more fragile than a Ming vase), Baron Davis can get by on natural talent alone. Jason Richardson is an athletic freak who can actually play. Troy Murphy hits outside shots and the glass. Were Mike Dunleavy the 13th pick of 2002 as opposed to the third, people would think of him as a reasonably versatile role player instead of a soft, skinny bust. Monta Ellis, Ike Diogu and Mickael Pietrus are solid young players. And while Adonal Foyle is overpaid to the point of hysterical absurdity, the guy's ridiculously smart, politically active and an accomplished public speaker. That should at least amount to a few good halftime speeches, right? Put all that together and you get a team that's reasonably competitive on paper...and shockingly devoid of any chemistry.
Whether the lack of cohesion is due to (if you believe some reports) Davis never following the script, the squad's addiction to treys, or simply the wrong player mix, it's pretty obvious this unit ain't gelling anytime soon. Chris Mullin would love to swap a few, but that won't be easy, considering everyone from Dunleavy to their equipment manager has a long term, expensive contract. Unless they're willing to trade a few for either 25 cents on the dollar (i.e. Fish to Utah) or equally heavy contracts, these cats could be losing together for a while.
Final Verdict: As previously stated, until I witness otherwise with my own peepers, they're relegated to "season's over in April" status and predictable mediocrity. Worse than the Lakers. (AK)
AK/BK,
I don't think Minny will be better than the Lakers but do you really think they haven't made some good moves this summer? Living on the east coast (and being a poor college student I can't afford luxuries like NBA League Pass) I don't see a ton of T-wolves games, but I've always felt that one of the biggest problems Minny had was lack of speed and athleticism on the outside.
Mike James and Randy Foye do nothing but help that. I see them winning 40-44 games next season.
Posted by: Xodus | August 01, 2006 at 11:36 AM
dallasnews.com is reporting that Devean George has signed with the Mavs. More details to follow
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/spt/stories/080106dnsporomalede.1a55585.html
Posted by: RAZ-B | August 01, 2006 at 11:38 AM
Sometimes it makes more sense not to make any moves and let the team grow and mature as a group. Not for those teams.
OT, 2006/07 schedule is out:
http://www.nba.com/lakers/schedule/
Posted by: Hunter | August 01, 2006 at 11:42 AM
It's amazing these teams pull in enough fans to pay enough bills to even have a team. Still when the Lakers come to town, they do come out. It's possible we could go 500 against them especially if we get another back to back scheduling nightmare like last year with Minn.
Posted by: Vman | August 01, 2006 at 11:44 AM
Now that we have three teams out of the way that really shouldn't pose a threat to the Lakers, I can't wait to discuss the teams that finished below the Lakers last year but made some big moves this offseason.
As for these three teams, Portland will be the most interesting. Based on the simple fact that they have an almost completely new roster and are in such financial duress that Paul Allen complains, they are the perfect team to have if you're a rumor-junkie like me.
Not to be a bummer here, but isn't KG about due for an injury that costs him a half or more of the season? The guy plays all the time, and tremendously hard, yet his skinny frame is never on the DL. Just a thought.
There's a good chance for a Baron Davis to the Knicks for Jalen Rose's expiring contract at the trade deadline, that's about all we can expect from the Warriors.
Posted by: Andrew Z | August 01, 2006 at 11:45 AM
Thanks for the schedule Hunter!
Posted by: Xodus | August 01, 2006 at 11:46 AM
wow, you guys really do need a new thread.
Posted by: Tom1122 | August 01, 2006 at 11:46 AM
Xodus,
James and Foye will help the Wolves some, but just about every team in the West also got better to a degree, which could neutralize some of their progress. And in the the meantime, they still got some big ol' holes (McCants hurt, Hudson's iffy health, no front line) and the situation seems to be wearing on KG. I don't see them hitting the "40" threshold.
AK
Posted by: Andrew Kamenetzky | August 01, 2006 at 11:53 AM
So D George got his 4 mil, good for him, he wasn't going to get that here.
Don't get it. A couple of mil over the cap is nothing to this franchise. Given the teams we're discussing here, with their revenue stream, the cap shouldn't be issue in keeping a vet that could save Kobe's legs on D. It's a luxury tax item and the Lakers can afford luxury.
With or without vets that play some defense, we still should be able to go undefeated through November with that schedule.
Posted by: Vman | August 01, 2006 at 11:58 AM
Since we've all been talking about classic basketball lately, I thought you guys might like reading an article about The Captain and his legendary Sky Hook. http://hoopshype.com/articles/jabbar_stitt.htm
Let's hope Socks Bynum is able to start a sky hook revival.
Posted by: Xodus | August 01, 2006 at 11:59 AM
AK,
Right I forgot about McCants' injury. I do think KG is happy about the moves they've made though. He's been complaining for months about the T-Wolves getting better guys around him and they did it. You're right though, even though I do see them pushing 40 I could just as easily see them winning 35-39 games.
Posted by: Xodus | August 01, 2006 at 12:02 PM
Lakers are winning the championship in '07 baby!
Posted by: MikeyB | August 01, 2006 at 12:06 PM
xodus
Great link on the skyhook. The only other player smart enough to work it was Magic and that turned out reasonably well. Don't get these crazy kids, maybe it's hard to practice that shot with headphones on.
Kareem could still get 25 with it against anybody. Dude scored a billion and played past 40, hmm what have we learned? Saw Andrew's in summer league... needs more work.
Posted by: Vman | August 01, 2006 at 12:19 PM
Lakers can handle those three teams. If there's any threat, it will be Timberwolves KG, Ricky Davis & Troy Hudson. Troy has been the Laker problem since the 03' playoffs. The rest like Portland, they are all rookies, takes time to adjust in the NBA.
Posted by: Edwin Gueco | August 01, 2006 at 12:39 PM
MikeyB,
Yess...
Posted by: Taliq | August 01, 2006 at 12:55 PM
Portland is one of those teams that you expect to beat, and usually do. Somehow though, they frequently conquer you, mess with your psyche, and do other terrible things at the most inopportune times. They are lousy, but always take them seriously.
Warriors? You mean San Francisco still has professional basketball?
Minnesota has K.G., but not to worry. He'll be shipping out to Sacramento soon enough.
Posted by: sonnybelfast | August 01, 2006 at 12:57 PM
This year we need to establish more of a identity from a defensive perspective and make teams/players think twice about just driving the ball down our noses and somebody/anybody needs to be that guy -- that guy who will step in there and be a physical and defensive force -- somewhat imposing. No punkish ISH like Raja Bell or nothing but just hardnose physical basketball. I am not fearful of anybody out west or east for that matter as far as our team goes. And it was already documented that neither is Phil/Kobe..I think we can play 500 ball with the west and 750 with the East.
Posted by: lakersrydeordie | August 01, 2006 at 01:02 PM
I don't think any of these teams are going to make the playoffs, or even be that close. Golden State really should make a push, but as long as Baron Davis doesn't want to run the team properly, and keeps shooting that poorly, they've got no shot. Minny probably will make a push, thanks to KG and the new guards, but I don't think they've got enough up front. Portland? Next topic. I'm still not sure why the resigned Pryzbilla, then traded for Magloire, without trading Miles.
Posted by: Michael A | August 01, 2006 at 01:10 PM
Looking at the schedule, we need a big November. Lots of winnable home games, we can't afford to be giving away games to the likes of Memphis, Minnesota, etc. We can get on a good run early and we'll need it when we hit that Xmas road trip.
Posted by: Jman449 | August 01, 2006 at 02:03 PM
January 4th. Happy New Year NorCal!
Posted by: sonnybelfast | August 01, 2006 at 02:52 PM
Jman - I agree with the lighter schedule early on but it seems that Phil's Lakers usually peak around January. (even later last year) Hopefully we get off to a good solid start, gain some chemistry on court and find solid a rotation. We've got a learning curve to deal with in Radman and other new additions learning the triangle. That's one place where George will be missed, he knows his placement on the floor. That leaves Kobe and Luke as the vets of the offense... Lamar will be major next year in how we start, he's the x factor!
Posted by: Lakerfaze | August 01, 2006 at 03:01 PM
Sonny,
You should put your money where your mouth is. You know that I'll be in Vegas, and if and you.ve lived up to being anything in which my "hanlde" rapresents, you could be there too...you shoul be there too, you are a kings farn aren't you?
dan
Posted by: dan the man aka smushcalade | August 01, 2006 at 05:04 PM
...And I think thats what pisses me off most, I mean, Vesgas is going to be a sick-ass NBA venue.
Out of all of the teams that should have a shot at going there, you know the maloofs' are gonna get that one.
dan
Posted by: dan the man aka smushcalade | August 01, 2006 at 05:08 PM
AK:
Another key point I think you missed in talking about these three teams is the quality and ability of their head coaches to make their teams better, which in this case is "Not very good" and "Pretty low."
Here are the comparable team records by month:
Team Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr Total
Lakers 5-8 10-6 9-6 5-8 10-7 6-2 45-37
Warriors 11-6 6-8 3-9 4-9 6-9 4-7 34-48
Wolves 7-6 7-7 7-9 3-10 6-10 3-7 33-49
Blazers 5-9 5-10 6-8 2-11 2-13 1-10 21-61
Unlike how Phil Jackson had his team playing far better and winning more at the end of the year, none of these three teams showed any upward trend at the end of the year, which is where good coaching should have come into play and showed itself.
Nate McMillan at Portland has yet to prove that his 2004/5 record at Seattle was real as he could not get his team's crew of misfits to play well last year. He probably won't do much better since he still has Darius Miles and Zack Randolph to deal with. And he won't get any easy wins against the Lakers to pad the record this year. We were 2-2 against Portland last year. Now with Blake gone we will recover and go 4-0.
Dwane Casey at Minnesota will be hanging on by midseason and having the fans wishing they had Flop Saunders back. I would expect the KG rumors to begin again big time by mid-season. This may be another case of Kevin McHale taking over as coach again to try and save KG from leaving one last time. Can you say Isaaih and the Knicks? We will also find out if Mike James is for real and another Raja Bell -- or another Troy Hudson. We were 1-3 against these guys last year. This year is revenge time 3-1.
Mike Montgomery at Golden State cannot decide how to handle Baron Davis and Chris Mullen has been a bust as GM. I fully expect Montgomery to be fired by Midseason and Mullen to take over as coach to try and save his job. Can you say Isaaih and the Knicks again? We were 4-0 and swept these guys last year. This year we should sweep again but may slip and end up at 3-1.
Against these three teams last year we were only 7-5. This year we should go 11-1 or at least 10-2. Let's just say at worst, 10 wins down and just 45 more to go.
Tom
Posted by: LakerTom | August 01, 2006 at 05:22 PM
Great comments on Min, GS, and Por. What is also important is how Sacramento, Phoenix, and the Clippers have fared relative to the Lakers this offseason (so far). I don't see that Sac has improved - Artest makes them better - but Brad Miller is declining and replacing Bonzi Wells with John Salmons (as that appears to be the case) is a drop-off. Phoenix is still at the head of the division, especially if Stoudemire is healthy, but I still think the Lakers will match up well with them. I do not believe the Clippers will continue to advance. They are pretty good now, but I think Shawn Livingston is a concern as far as panning out, Cassell is a year older, and they lack depth more now than they did last year. I think the Lakers should surpass them too this year, by a bit. I hope that the Lakers can make one deal - 2-3 contracts (Mihm, Cook, etc.) for one solid player (forward most likely); that will additionally enable them to sign Pinnock and maybe Laron Profit, who was a good backup for Kobe early last year. Along with Maurice Evans this year, that would give the depth needed at the 2.
Posted by: Leo | August 01, 2006 at 05:25 PM
Laker Tom,
That's an interesting point, but I'm not sure how I'd hold it against those coaches, considering what they have to work with. Yes, it is a coach's job to "light a fire" and that's all well and good. But when your most talented players are knuckleheads (Portland), incompatible (Golden State) or about to drop dead from carrying the load by himself (Minny), you end up something of a slave to reality.
AK
Posted by: Andrew Kamenetzky | August 01, 2006 at 06:04 PM
AK,
I was thinking back to last year when we played the Wolves three times on the second night of a back to back. I looked at this years schedule and it appears they (NBA) corrected this problem. Although we do play Portland twice on the second night of a back to back, but so sweat.
dan
Posted by: dan the man aka smushcalade | August 01, 2006 at 06:39 PM
I want to talk about Phil Jackson and the Lakers' coaching stafff and the job they did last season. I have always believed coaching was a greatly unappreciated factor in the success of a team. While I have some criticisms of Phil Jackson and some of the moves he makes, I think his impact on how our team came together at the end of last year and in the playoffs has not been given its proper due.
Measuring the impact of the head coach and coaching staff on a team is not an easy thing to do because it really requires that you take a longer view than we are normally comfortable with. What you have to do is to look at how the team performs during the course of a season and over the course of several seasons. Then you have to drill deeper and look at how individual players perform against the same two criteria.
Basically, what you are doing is looking at the development and evolution of the team and its individual players during a season and during a few years. The great teams of the last few decade who managed to reach the top and stay there for a while all displayed a consistent pattern of improvement and progress as a team and as individual players.
Notice that I said make it to the top, actually win the championship, not just contend. These are the true sports dynasties. Joe Torre's New York Yankees of the 90's. Bill Walsh's San Francisco 49ers of the 80's. Pat Riley's Los Angeles Lakers of the 80's. Phil Jackson's Chicago Bulls of the 90's. Phil Jackson's Los Angeles Lakers of the early 2000's. And coming soon, Phil Jackson's Los Angeles Lakers of the late 2000's.
If you look at the progress the Lakers made as a team over the course of last year, you can see this same pattern emerging. The Lakers' record for the year was 45-37 but their record during the last two months of the season was 18-9. That same win-loss percentage translates to a 55-27 record over the full season, which is what the 55-Win Bandwagon is all about.
Similarly, if you look at the progress of the individual players, you see the same underlying pattern that led to the team's improved performance. Kobe became more of a team leader. Lamar took his game to a new level. Kwame posted the best numbers of his career. Luke finally started to show he could shoot.
If you look nearby at UCLA, you see that Ben Howland is doing exactly the same thing with the Bruins' basketball team. A team that improves made up of players that improve. It's what Pete Carroll has done at USC with its football team. Yes, you need to recruit and draft and trade for good players. But in the end, it is coaching that turns them into a championship team.
The Lakers have basically upgraded one-third of their team roster during the offseason while keeping their core group intact. They have added strength in Vladimir Radmanovic, Jordan Farmar, Shammond Williams, Maurice Evans, and either Danilo Pinnock or Laron Profit, while losing Devean George, Devin Green, Von Wafer, Jim Jackson, and probably Aaron McKie.
This should give Phil Jackson the additional pieces of the puzzle to take the the team to the next level and at least go very deep into the playoffs and possibly win another championship if Jordan Farmar steps up and takes over the starting point guard position. Make no mistake about it. The reason that the Lakers have made the progress they have made so far and the reason they have a chance to take the team to the next level is Phil Jackson and our coaching staff.
That's why there are 68 Laker fans on this blog that have joined the 55-Win Bandwagon.
Tom
Posted by: LakerTom | August 01, 2006 at 06:46 PM
AK:
I agree with you that a coach is limited by the quality of his players but the coach's job is to get through to those players or to play the ones that he can get through to.
Take the Warriors, for example, it is obvious that they have some talent with Baron and JRich. You say that the pieces are incompatible but I think it is more a case of the coach not putting the pieces together properly.
I live in NorCal and get inundated with Warrior news every day by osmosis. Montgomery has been very wishy washy and unable to develop a good relationship with Baron. The team had a very promising finish to the 2004/5 season that led everyone, including Mullen and Montgomery, to predict playoffs for last year.
Not only did the team fall short but they actually played worse by the end of the year. I do blame some of their situation on Mullen who made some real blunders and grossly overpaid four key players on that roster but he let Montgomery coach the team with little interference from the front office with what I consider to be disastrous results.
There is actually some very excellent talent and promising pieces on that team even if they aren't worth what they are being paid. But there is just no concrete direction that has been crafted to put those pieces together. Just imagine what Phil would or could have orchestrated with those players. Far better than 34-48 and fading, I would bet.
The problem is that none of coaches on these three teams has a vision of what kind of team he can make with the players that they have. For sure, Portland has more talent than a 21-61 team. Considering how they played against the Lakers, back to back games or not, they should have been a better team or at least showed it the second half of the season. Don't get me wrong, I actually like Nate McMillan and thought he would do better. But the record is what the record is.
And Minnesota, this was a team that just a couple of years ago were in the playoffs. Sure Flop didn't do so well his last year there and was lucky that Larry Brown pulled his biannual moving stunt, but Dwane Casey did nothing with respect to creating an identity for the team or really taking advantage of KG. I cannot believe that a great player like Kevin McHale could be such a bad and dishonest general manager. I would bet you that this is Dwane Casey's last year there, as well as McHales and very possibly KG's.
At any rate, my whole agenda in harping on the coaching, as I am sure you have figured out, is to focus the blog on the great job that Phil and his staff have done, notwithstanding the usual "philisms" that we have to put up with.
I think his big move this year will be starting Farmar in order to get him experience to be ready for the playoffs and for next year, which may be his last as a coach unless his health problems improve (which could possibly happen for $10M per year).
The question I would have you ask yourself is what kind of record do you think any of these three teams would have had if Phil and his staff had been coaching them?
I think the answer you would come up with would tell you how good Phil is and how mediochre the other guys are in comparison.
Tom
Posted by: LakerTom | August 01, 2006 at 07:50 PM
Laker Tom,
Do I think Phil could have done a better job with these teams? Probably, but even he'd hit a wall. PJ could maybe cojole the Warriors into playing their theoretical best, but there's no way in hell he'd get Portland or Minny even sniffing the playoffs. Not a prayer. Let's not forget, he had to work pretty hard to get the Lakers in. While G.S. is a reasonably skilled mess, Portland is not terribly talented. Minny's just as bad (that 2004 WCF team has long since been disbanded). There just isn't much to work with.
But on some level, Phil's hypothetical success with those teams is irrelevant in judging their current coaches, because Phil has an auotmatic respect that few coaches carry. One that transcends the NBA of today, where mid-level salaried athletes outearn many to most coaches (and know they have more job security). And that's as much due to Phil's past as his present. He has a track record. He's also been coaching the Lakers alone longer than Montgomery and Casey's NBA coaching careers combined. He has a distinct advantage that almost renders the whole comparison null and void.
I think the better question would be whether a pre-titles Phil could have done a better job than McMillan, Casey or Monty. My guess is no.
AK
Posted by: Andrew Kamenetzky | August 01, 2006 at 08:29 PM
Laker Tom,
Let me put it another way. Do you really think Phil Jackson, sans 9 rings on his fingers, could get Zach Randolph to meditate?
AK
Posted by: Andrew Kamenetzky | August 01, 2006 at 08:36 PM
PJAX and Zach could share a "cigaweed" and then meditate.
Posted by: MAGIC=GOAT | August 01, 2006 at 08:42 PM
LakerTom,
Officially, there is no word yet of Devin Green, Aaron Mckie, Von Wafer they're still with the team. While Laron Profit still not hired and we don't know how he has progressed from his injury. Mitch K. and Jerry Bush are too conservative on their acquisitions, if you compare it to a company, it is all profit-taking time rather than investing on known talents. PJ has no alternative but to play these pieces that are given to him. He has made a tremendous improvement compared to Rudy T. which affected the morale of the team. They have to start on square one last year. Well, trade deadlines are about to come, so far we don't know what Mitch K would do with 18 players.
Posted by: Edwin Gueco | August 01, 2006 at 08:43 PM
AK:
I do agree with you that the credibility that the nine rings Phil has carries a lot of weight, especially with today's breed of player. But I think you also don't give Phil enough credit for his proven ability as as a coach, his selection of assistants, or the vision and direction that he gives the franchise.
Nor am I saying that Phil could have taken all three of those teams to the playoffs, definitely not Portland, but maybe the Warriors and the Wolves, Many of things that you are saying about those three teams, the Warriors especially, are the same things that the everyone was saying about the Lakers before last year.
Kwame is a bust. Luke can't shoot or defend. Kobe is selfish. Lamar is brain dead. Smush and Sasha are worthless. Mihm is soft and can't stay out of fouls. Cook was a bad draft pick. Profit was a throw in to balance salaries and was expected to be cut immediately. Bynum hasn't even played a full year of high school ball. Etc, Etc.
Let's turn the question around if you didn't like the original one and see if your answer is any different, although I doubt you will admit it. How do you think the Lakers would have done with Montgomery, Casey, or McMillan as their coach last year? I would bet the none of those guys would have gotten the Lakers to the playoffs, just like Rudy T. couldn't have.
You can cop out all you want and say that is just because of the respect that Phil commands, but when you live day and night with guys over an entire season it takes more than rings to really get them to perform like the Lakers did.
You need to realize how lucky you are as a Laker fan to have Phil Jackson and his coaching staff. So give Phil the props he deserves. That's all I am trying to get you to say. Is it that hard?
Tom
Posted by: LakerTom | August 01, 2006 at 09:11 PM
Laker Tom,
First of all, why wouldn't I admit an answer to any particular question? Pretty presumputious on your part, if you ask me. But that's neither here nor there.
I'm totally giving Phil his props. He's a better coach than 95% or more of the league, much less Monty, Casey or McMillan. Of course he did better with the Lakers than those three would have. And save possibly McMillan (who at least has some track record while working with a good team), I doubt any of them would have gotten the Lakers to the playoffs. They're not as good of coaches and it was only a reasonably talented team. But it's important to remember some things.
1) While some "experts" predicted the Lakers wouldn't make the playoffs, there were also some (including myself) who also thought they would. And never wavered from ithat. So not everyone was saying that stuff about the team going into the season. Or at least not ALL of it about EVERY one of those players.
2) Before quitting, Rudy T. actually had the team playing reasonably well. They were 24-19 (despite missing Kobe for 14 games) when he resigned. It was only after an obviously lame duck Hamblin took over (and LO suffered a long injury) that things really fell apart. But before he quit, there was no reason to think that Rudy couldn't have taken them to the postseason. I'm not saying it was a given, but there's also no real reason to say that wouldn't have happened. I don't say that to downplay Phil's achievements, because I think he did a terrific job. I just think the sometimes accepted notion that Phil took over a train wreck of a team is a bit overstated.
Again, I'm not denying Phil's achievements. For that matter, I spent the very large majority of the season praising him. But he does have that cache and it's an advantage. And there's nothing wrong with saying he has an advantage, because he earned it (through the skill of his coaching). He'd be a fool not to use any advantage. But it also makes life undeniably easier for him than other coaches.
AK
Posted by: Andrew Kamenetzky | August 01, 2006 at 09:42 PM
AK,
What's going on with the sale of the Blazers by Mr. Allen? Did they reconsider the plan after drafting Roy and Aldridge? Who is better as a PF Jamaal Magloire or Chris Mihm? We could have gotten Steve Blake if we really pushed hard for a trade, but didn't do so. Perhaps, Mitch K. is fully satisfied with our sets of PG.
With regards to Rudy T., we never heard of him after he left the Lakers. He was supposed to be our scout or just a glorious exit cuz' I don't see anybody linked to him or recommended by him. Being an experienced coach, he knew where he was headed after losing games from their trip and putting LO in the injury list. Let's give Phil the credit for establishing order tho' triangle looks concave in the beginning because the scrubs were all dependent of Kobe. Nobody moved to get the rebounds or dare to contest for follow-ups, they are all on the perimeter standing around. There were so many shots taken at the 22nd or 23rd second before commiting the violation so hurried shots get wasted results cuz' they spent so much time passing the ball w/o any clear objective. Practically, the triangle was not really enforced as it was envisioned to be, in the lst half the players were learning where to position so they give all the shots to Kobe. In the second half, it was not really smooth transition but it was the appearance of defense that put them in the playoffs when they started to beat marquee teams. It can also said that the teams in 9th - 12th positions underachieved so Lakers and Sacto got into the playoffs. So next season would the real test of Kupchak/Jackson experiment, so far the aforementioned teams can be beaten. We want to know more on the Clippers, Suns, Spurs and Mavericks.
Posted by: Edwin Gueco | August 02, 2006 at 07:57 AM
Following on Edwin's notes ...
I thought that Rudy T. was (is) an advance scout. I recall that he scouted Miami and Pat Riley's coaching prior to one of the Laker-Heat games last year.
According to Al Harrington, the Lakers tried to make a sign-and-trade deal for him. If true, that no doubt would have included Mihm, probably Cook and maybe Devean George (or other 2nd year guards) ... before George agreed to sign with Dallas. That would have been nice, although Harrington could struggle in the Laker system. I like to imagine that something similar could be considered for Drew Gooden ... but that is perhaps doubtful. He would be a good fit. I don't necessarily think that Magloire would be better for the Lakers than Mihm ... but I certainly think someone like Gooden would be. Kwame and Bynum at center; Gooden, Odom, Radmonovic, Walton, Turiaf at forwards (pretty diverse and deep group). Steve Blake would have fit well ... but perhaps Portland would not have wanted to send him the Lakers way, in any case, even if Mitch and Phil and Buss were interested.
Leo
Posted by: Leo | August 02, 2006 at 10:58 AM
AK:
My apologies if I offended you. I sure didn't mean to be disrespectful as I value your opinion highly. I consider you to be an excellent journalist with a better grasp of the realities of the Lakers than I do as a knowledgeable, but admittedly always optimistic, Laker fan.
And you are right that that was pretty presumptious on my part to assume that you would not admit that the other guys wouldn't have taken the Lakers to the playoffs. My bad. It's just frustrating sometimes trying to get you -- or anyone on the blog -- to concede a point. At any rate, I am glad that you agreed that none of those guys could have gotten the Lakers into the playoffs last year. And I do agree with you that Nate would have been the only one with a chance.
Regarding Rudy, I don't necessarily disagree as I have always liked the guy as a player and a coach. With the benefit of hindsight, however, I don't think his free wheeling style was the right fit for the Lakers. I do think though that Phil did take over a train wreck in the sense that the team totally tanked over the last half of that season and definitely needed to start fresh.
And finally, as to Phil's "cache." I would just repeat what I posted yesterday that a coach's rep and pedigree can only take him so far during an 82-game season. After the honeymoon, there better be some substance there that sustains the initial respect and command that the "cache" got him. Wouldn't you agree?
Thanks for your patient client management.
Tom
Posted by: LakerTom | August 02, 2006 at 12:38 PM
Why is this article based on the comparison with the crappy teams with Portland Minnesota and Golden State? why compare them to the Lakers?
Posted by: LakeMan | August 02, 2006 at 12:51 PM
All I gotta say is.. Brandon Roy Vs. Kobe Bryant. I cant wait to see what the kid can do against him, and what he can do against kobe.
Posted by: Blazer bill | August 02, 2006 at 01:37 PM
I thought that the Lakers were looking at possibly signing Kareem Rush this off-season. He definitely could help spell Kobe for minutes...What Happend????
Posted by: Reggie Jones | August 02, 2006 at 02:06 PM
Laker Tom,
No worries. I appreciate the nice words. And I agree that Phil did a better job coaching this team than Rudy T. Frankly, I didn't think Rudy T. did a very good job at all. But nonethless, they were winning games. And had he have stayed with the team, judging by the record, the team might also have made the playoffs. People sometimes take the horrible '05 finish (the last 20 games or so) and remember the entire season that way, which isn't quite accurate.
It actually reminds me a lot of how people reacted to Steve Nash's arrival in Phoenix. They remember how much the '04 Suns team stuggled with Amare hurt, but forget that once he came back for the last month or so, they were a decent team. Thus, they sometimes think of Nash as taking a garbage team and making them incredible.
I'm not trying to take anything away from Nash, because what he's done his two seasons in Phoenix is fantastic. He was absolutely essential in their success. He was a worthy candidate both times he won MVP (even though I'm not sure I would have voted for him either year). But similar to how people sometimes don't always correctly remember the '04 Phoenix team, I think they don't always correctly remember the '05/pre-Rudy resignation Lakers team, either.
AK
Posted by: Andrew Kamenetzky | August 02, 2006 at 05:54 PM
Leo,
Thanks for the clarification on Rudy T. as Laker scout for Miami. But don't you think that's an expensive for a scout. Anyway, that's not our money.
LATEST ON AL HARRINGTON
With regards to Al Harrington, I don't know if you read my post on the succeeding thread. Al basically fired his present agent so his closing deal w/ Pacers is null and void or nothing to void cuz' nothing was signed yet. He is getting Arn Tellem as his new agent and the Lakers are just one of the dozen teams asking for Al.
AL has a house here in the Southland just one of the multitude of All Stars who maintain a house in the suburbs of LA. Don't you think he want to come home and play with Kobe & Co.? I could sense that he's sending a message to Mitch K to increase the offer with more players to trade for the benefit of the Hawks, I think that's a possibility, as long as Lakers are in contention we have HOPE in getting Harrington. These are the times when we expect Mitch K. to be aggressive enough similar to his predecessor and grab the opportunity now than waiting for 2010. Can you imagine your first five: Kobe, Lamar, Kwame, Al, Vlad - you complete the line up for offense and defense that's Finals in November. Haha!
Posted by: Edwin Gueco | August 02, 2006 at 06:28 PM
AK:
Thanks for your response. I agree about Steve Nash and Rudy T.
Tom
Posted by: LakerTom | August 02, 2006 at 06:59 PM
Nice stuff - Big time LakerTom you make this place worth coming back to time and again!
Monty in GS will get bumped by Mario Elie before mid season and beleive me Mullin is way to street smart to throw himself in that mess. The players up there have a lot of talent and a horrible game plan with no direction or true leadership. If Baron comes into camp in shape and meets a friend of Barry(hgh)Bonds he might be a huge difference maker but his every year injury program is getting old. Becareful though, the next Gus Williams slash Phil Smith is Monta Ellis and we should have done something to get him by now.
Minnesota is basically unchanged from end of season, lost Marcus Banks, stuck with Troy Hudson who should have been tearing up the league by now and then what Ricky Davis?!!!hahahahaha thats like hoping for Darius Miles to suddenly become an all-star and play defense too.
The Blazers - aw c'mon they are going to hell in a handbasket good luck and see in 2-3years nice rookie roster but they lost their best stuff and signed their death certificate when they let Blake go - see ya! Too many bad attitudes and a bunch of kids, McMillan is a great coach in my opinion and I hope the best for him. They could be fun to see become a good team by seasons end.
The truth is we have to catch San Antonio, Dallas, Pheonix and of course the Clippers...do we have the talent nooooo...not unless some crazy new summer camps are working hard to get the best off season of a lifetime out of each and every player on the roster. I may be stupid for still hoping for it but I sure wish Bonzi could get his act on over to LA and I know everyone thinks Harrington is an answer but Kwame and Mihm might be just as good combined. The thought that ANDREW BYNUM hasn't been killing everyone with his go to move, the skyhook, worries me! We might be smart to unload him if this guy doesn't start to really impress by midseason, to think we lost out on Danny Granger, and Joey Graham who I think will both become studs as PF/SF in this League. Could have would have should have...can't wait for the season to begin! Keep up the good writing, great blog!
Oh and Devean George- bye!
Von Wafer buck up and make the team! Guess we will see Cook, Green, JJ and McKie saying good bye soon. I kind of wish we could keep JJ he is one of those cheap old timers that probably still kills guys in one on ones all day. No sightings of Kareem Rush anywhere??? we have enough guards but I would package a few of these extras in a minute to land a Monta Ellis including CMihm.
Posted by: Pete Maguire | August 03, 2006 at 01:59 AM
SEEMS LIKE LAKERS ARE ALL SET NOW AND READY 2 START THE BRAND NEW SEASON...BUT, THEY ARE WRONG. THEY MUST HAVE FORGOTTEN THAT LAKERS DO STILL NEED A POINT GUARD!! YES, A POINT GUARD THAT CAN MAKES PLAYS FOR THE TEAM CONSISTENTLY....SMUSH CAN BE USE AS A BACKUP POINT GUARD BUT DEFINITELY NOT AS STARTER. SO MITCH, IF U'RE LOOKING FOR ANOTHER RING THIS YEAR, WELL, IT'S NOT TOO LATE YET. MAYBE U CAN STILL MAKE SOME FEW MOVES AND FIND A BEST POINT GUARD FOR THIS TEAM.
Posted by: danny | August 03, 2006 at 02:16 AM
Edwin,
Thanks for the clarification on Al Harrington. I did not read your post on his situation ... as I am new to this site ... in just the last couple of days. I'll check it out. I like the lineup possibility ... Vlad (Rad), Kwame, Al across the front; Kobe and Odom at guard ... very big ... a little soft on D ... but the bench has the better defenders ... and there would be considerable versatility otherwise. I won't get my hopes up, though. I still think he will end up in Indiana.
Regarding Rudy T., I don't know all that he might be doing for the Lakers ... just that he was doing advance game / coach scouting during the season ... one key example being the Heat. I would imagine he provides general consultation ... I would think this is going to continue only until his contract is up.
Leo
Posted by: Leo | August 03, 2006 at 07:47 AM
Pete Maguire:
Thanks for the props. Always glad to know that someone out there is reading my posts.
I think you are right about Mario Ellie taking over before next year. I live in NorCal and listen to sports talk on the local radio so I always get an overdose of Warriors.
I also think that Monta Ellis will be the real deal. If Chris Mullen were to trade him, I think Mullen would be gone by midseason. I've always liked Chris but the contracts he has handed out have made me change my opinion. The latest Warrior joke is guessing which underachiever Mullen will give the next big contract to with Michael Petrius smiling and ready to sign. The franchise has been such a disappointment, especially ever since Chris Cohan bought it. And the Warriors did have another Gus Williams. His name was Gilbert Arenas but they stupidly let him go as a free agent.
I actually think the Lakers have made great moves and will be able to match up well against anybody in the West, including the Spurs, Suns, Mavs, and Clippers. Anybody who thinks that Tim Thomas is going to replace Vladimir Radmanovich or that Sam Cassell is not going to be a year older or that Shaun Livingston is going to be big time is in for a surprise. The Lakers will definitely finish with a better record than the Clippers.
The big difference for the Lakers is Phil Jackson. I think last year may have been his best coaching job ever. The way the Lakers came together late in the season is vintage Phil Jackson. His next great move in my opinion will be inserting Jordan Farmar into the starting lineup to get him experience and seasoning before the playoffs and before next year, which may be Phil's swansong.
I also think that Andrew will be fine. He is just too young to be consistent. I think Phil will give him 10 to 15 minutes a night this year to speed up his development so he can be a real factor next year, which again may be Phil's last as a coach. He will probably then marry Jeanie and come aboard as part of management to run the team along with Jimmy Buss as Jerry steps back.
Always a pleasure to post back to another elder. Thanks, Pete.
Tom
Posted by: LakerTom | August 03, 2006 at 03:03 PM
blazer bill
I can't wait to se roy posterized!
dan
Posted by: dan the man aka smushcalade | August 05, 2006 at 02:36 AM
LakerTom,
You are more than likely right all across the board on the predictions but I see the Clippers getting better to with another year together. I hope we kill them of course but who knows until it all plays out.
Arenas was a keeper and I knew it right away, same thing with Monta, maybe Farmar has that same instinct and drive that will surprise me and get us a shot at keeping the quick guards out there honest on defense and scared of his ability to blow y them or spot up- I kind of thought he was like a Kevin Johnson kind of guy- not strong enough but the pre-draft info says tremendous upside on jumping and quickness hope his ball handling and shooting improve. He thing about the Laker offense if that if it is running well a point, is just a bonus. The playoffs however will certainly bring forth our weaknesses and I can only hope Smush or Farmar have become a lot more confident by then...wait n' see!
Bynum is still a project that scares me and I have seen the Warriors wait and wish for guys to develop over the years, 2 years in the League and we all better know what this kids about and if he can make a dent in the game. I have liked what I have seen other than him not being more aggressive and showing a glimpse of the SkyHook! His free throws were Shaq like and I hope he has worked on that, just to put his rookie quotes to rest. He can be an awesome presence on Defense and I do think his spot at center in more natural than Kwame or Mihm.
Take a look at the Warriors packages- good deals and if you are at the home opener- maybe we can share a couple laughs.
Later Tom and all the other Laker faithful have fun, Pete
Posted by: Pete Maguire | August 05, 2006 at 11:36 AM