Lakers-Timberwolves, from a decidedly 'Sota perspective
As of Dec. 13th, 2008, I don't have the NBA package. When I called Dish Network in early November to order it, I was told the package wasn't being offered because of a dispute, which felt odd, since I was literally watching Dish commercials pimping the package (I think the nice lady on the phone was a little confused). Since then, I simply haven't gotten around to calling back. But even if my original order had gone down without a hitch, I doubt much of that investment would have been used to watch Minnesota Timberwolves action. Call me crazy, but studying the in's and out's of a 4-18 squad isn't my idea of a fun time. Thankfully, however, Nate Arch (aka "Stop-n-Pop") of SB Nation's "Canis Hoopus" blog does dig him some Wolves and was kind enough to answer some questions in anticipation of tonight's contest against Al Jefferson and Co. Check out his thoughts on Kevin's McHale, Love and Garnett, plus a few other items.
Andrew Kamenetzky: Did Randy Wittman need to get fired? Had he lost the team? Even if he hadn't, was he equipped the pieces to do much better? It's early, but have you gotten a hint of either McHale's coaching style or the system he wants to run?
Nate Arch: Yes, he deserved to be fired because he lost the
team but he still paid the price for another man's sins, if that makes
any sense at all. He wasn't equipped with the pieces to do much of
anything and it will be interesting to see just how long McHale can
keep things close before he too falls victim to the dearth of talent he
helped create. McHale doesn't really have a "system". In fact, he
doesn't even "coach". He just smiles and claps a lot and seems to
leave most of the nuts and bolts work to his assistants. Even though I
joke about this, it really isn't a bad thing.
Witt was a
Bobby Knight disciple and he constantly yelled at his players before
yanking them out of the game for some fairly silly reasons. McHale is
a "let-em-play" type of guy. I actually think he could be quite the
NBA coach. He really seems to connect with the players and they have a
great respect for his knowledge of the game. However, it is likely
that the Wolves will play well for a few weeks before falling
apart...just like they did under Witt. It's a talent thing more than
anything else. You can only pretend to have fun for so long while you
lose game after game after game.
AK: Al Jefferson is obviously the Wolves' best player and while he may
never be Kevin Garnett, he's still an outstanding player. How much has
he improved since arriving in Minnesota. Are you looking forward to
the matchup between him and Andrew Bynum? Are there any other
potential matchups you're curious about?
NA: I'm interested in the potential match up between food poisoning and
the Lakers' entire starting lineup. I view this as the Wolves' best
chance of winning. To be perfectly honest, I'm not all that interested
in seeing the Bynum/Jefferson matchup. Big Al will get his against any
big man in the league on the offensive end of the court. He's really
that good of a low post scorer. However, he's also one of the worst
low post defenders in the league and the only real intrigue between him
and any opposing big man is wondering how many points the other guy can
get. Al's a good enough scorer where he usually pulls more than his
fair share in an individual match up, but he gives up a lot in terms of
team defense. 
Go back and check out the highlights of the Wolves'
last-second victory over the Thunder. Kevin Durant scored the tying
bucket on a dunk past a "helping" Al Jefferson. This is pretty much an
every other possession happening with the big fella. He's definitely
improved as a scorer since coming to Minny (see his developing
mid-range and left hand game) but his defense seems to be getting
worse...if you can believe that. He's in a tough spot. He's a 23
year old guy who has been handed the keys to an entire franchise.
Unlike what happened with KG, there are no Sam Mitchell's around to
provide veteran guidance. One of the more troubling developments with
Al is his tendency to equate "public berating" with "leadership". He's
very quick to get on his teammates when they screw up. The big
question for the Wolves is this: is he 20/10 and nothing else, or is he
a team leader? Right now, it's hard to say but if I had to pick one
player from the squad to start all over again with it would be Kevin
Love.
AK: At 4-18, the Wolves have obviously struggled all season. What do you see as their biggest weaknesses as a team? Do they have any strengths that might surprise fans not familiar with them?
NA: The biggest weakness with this team is personnel. By nearly every statistical category you can come up with, they have more than their fair share of below-average players. Take (John) Hollinger's PER for instance. PER is updated so that the league average is 15. The Wolves have 3 players with an above-average PER and they are all at the same position: Al Jefferson, Kevin Love, and Craig Smith. At least we know that Kevin McHale has an eye for power forward talent. As far as hidden/surprising strengths, I think Laker fans may be surprised to see just how well this team can rebound on the offensive glass. It's really their only bright point so far this season and the only Four Factor where they really differentiate themselves from their opponent in a positive manner. You guys out in LA are probably more than familiar with his game, but Kevin Love can really hit the glass with the big boys. He grabbed a rebound away from Dwight Howard earlier this year that left Superman with a look of surprise.
AK: My brother and I disagreed on the Kevin Love-O.J. Mayo trade. I thought Minnesota not only gave up the better player, but a better guard than anyone they currently have. Brian thought Love would turn out to be the better player, didn't understand the idea of adding another guard to the Memphis glut and liked the Love-Jefferson concept. Thus far, Mayo has outplayed Love and the consensus is that Love's transition hasn't been easy. How do you come out on both the deal and Love as a player/prospect.
NA: I'd disagree that Minnesota gave up the better player. They
certainly gave away the better scorer 
but I think they are comparable
players in terms of overall talent and worth. Over his last 5 games
Love is averaging 11.4 ppg and 12.2 rpg in not even 30 minutes of
play. He's grabbing nearly 6 offensive rebounds per game over that
span. In the last 10, he's pretty much at 10/10 with just over 4
OReb/game. The big adjustment he needs to make now is to become more
comfortable with the high post and to take the open mid-range jumper
when it is presented to him. If Minnesota had a real point guard who
could run the pick-and-pop, he'd be even more dangerous. He's already
a superior help defender than is Al Jefferson and his supposed lack of
athleticism hasn't stopped him from being able to rebound amongst the
trees.
Mayo scores a ton of points but he does so with jump shots and
not a lot of trips to the line. Love is a rebound machine who keeps
lots of possessions alive and who has the potential to develop into one
of the better pick-and-pop/pick-and-roll bigs in the league. He
doesn't turn it over a lot and he gets to the line at a surprising
rate. If he ends the season with close to a double/double average and
a PER between 16-18, I think the Wolves have to be very happy with the
deal.
AK: What is the general feeling among Wolves fans about this team? A promising rebuild or more of the running in place that's taken place for several years?
NA: Apathy or near apathy. It's rock bottom. Last year the Wolves had
a local TV broadcast with an estimated 1,700 viewers. Earlier this
year at a home game against the up-and-coming Portland Trailblazers you
could literally hear the hum of the building over the crowd. Fans of
this team have been through a lot with the front office since the Joe
Smith debacle. They picked Wally and Will Avery over Rip Hamilton and
Ron Artest (among others like Shawn Marion and Andre Miller) in the
1999 draft. They signed guys like Wally and Troy Hudson to ridiculous
long-term deals. They had the right idea of surrounding KG with 2
scorers when they brought in Spree and Sam but they quickly downgraded
to Ricky Davis and Mike James, who were then downgraded to Randy Foye
and....well, they still haven't figured out the point guard thing yet.
To give the front office some credit, since the KG trade they have
stockpiled a bunch of picks and cleared off a surprising amount of cap
space in 09/10 and 10/11. They even picked what many consider to be
the premier Euro player in last year's draft at the top of the 2nd
round (Pekovic). The problem is that the same folks who crashed the
car are still behind the wheel. Glen Taylor finally got Kevin McHale
out of the front office and on the end of the bench but the folks who
remain are all either questionable (Rob Babcock) or question marks (Jim
Stack and Fred Hoiberg).
AK: Laker fans went from dying to have KG in purple and gold to bitter against him as "the enemy." What's the general feeling towards him in 'Sota right now?
NA: Well, at this stage of the game, we Wolves fans wish KG was in
purple and gold too, as that would more than likely mean Andrew Bynum
would be lining up next to Kevin Love for Sunday's game. KG is like a
great relationship gone bad. It's probably best that both sides say as
little as possible about what has happened since the breakup.
AK: There are a lot of Laker fans down on Lamar Odom (nothing new,
really) and looking at trade possibilities. Mike Miller's name has
always been on the Laker rumor radar and he'd be a theoretically
terrific fit. Do you rumors about him being moved, since he's not
really a natural for a rebuilding team? And LO's contract expires this
offseason to the tune of 14 mil.
NA: Since McHale was moved out of the front office nobody really knows
what to expect with Mike Miller. I don't think there is any question
that he's the team's most movable asset. He's also a fan favorite and
a yokel from South Dakota. He grew up watching the T-Wolves and by all
accounts he likes playing in Minny. The Wolves don't get too many
players like this and they may hold on to him even against their own
immediate (and long term) self interest. That being said, a Miller +
Cardinal for Odom deal would probably work from the Wolves'
perspective. Better yet, a Miller + Cardinal + McCants for Odom and
Ariza deal would have a little icing on top for Wolves fans (although
it would probably be unworkable from the Lakers perspective).
My guess
is that if the Wolves did move Miller he would either have to improve
their draft position, bring on board a young up-and-coming starter, or
move Brian Cardinal's ugly contract. If the Wolves could get Miller
and Cardinal off the books they'll have a ton of cap space next year.
Tons of cap space + 4 potential 1st rounders + a highly regarded
stashed away Euro center could equal a nice off-season for the Wolves.
Photo of Al Jefferson: John Gichigi/Getty Images
Photo of Kevin McHale and Kevin Love: Richard Tsong-Taatarii, Star Tribune
"Last year the Wolves had a local TV broadcast with an estimated 1,700 viewers."
Wow.
That's just crazy.
Thank God the REAL Minnesota is in Los Angeles.
Lakers Today... Lakers Tomorrow... Lakers Forever.
GO LAKERS!
Posted by: Jon K. | December 14, 2008 at 11:53 AM
Eric M,
Don't doubt me I read that perfectly in Phil Jackson's Book "The Last Season" and having met Rick Fox 2 years ago personally I did ask him that question and he says that the team does try a little harder on defense to make up for Walton's defensive liability. Will that mean perfect defense? Of course not but consider that our offense went more smoothly and the overall defense actually did well with Luke on the floor against both the Suns and the Kings. Though Luke is certainly not the answer against Paul Pierce.
Consider this though also by 82games.com
http://tinyurl.com/5goaox
The 2nd best lineup on the floor was:
Fisher-Bryant-Walton-Odom-Bynum
This of course was before the Gasol trade and before Bynum's injury.
The line up currently is the same except Odom is replaced by Pau Gasol who is arguably better than Lamar Odom is.
Also that the best defensive team we actually had on the floor according to 82games.com (minimum of 100 minutes) was actually
Fisher-Bryant-Walton-Odom-Gasol.
Stats don't lie only can be distorted if read in an incorrect way.
I just wish though we had a Scottie Pippen to not only defend but to also run the offense.
Luke has the offensive skills of Pippen (except being the go to guy) but doesn't have the defense.
Trevor has the defensive kills of Pippen (not up to Pip's but very good) but doesn't have the offense.
-blitz
Posted by: kobeblitz | December 14, 2008 at 11:54 AM
Here is a controversial article that appeared in the LA Times sports blogging section some days ago. I think AK/BK haven't linked it yet (If you have, my apologies). But be careful reading it as it does not mince words.
The hard fact is: The LA Lakers are soft
4:00 PM, December 11, 2008
Memo to writers, reporters, critics, pundits, "Lakers Live" and Laker fans the world over:
Please spare us the endless talk and the annoying daily handwringing over the Lakers’ lack of defense or their failure to be aggressive. Don’t just read what I’m about to tell you, embrace it. Take it to heart. Accept it as an inalienable truth.
The Lakers are still softer than a Johnny Mathis love song. They're "Chances Are" in sneakers.
The Lakers are still softer than the baby powder Kevin Garnett claps into the faces of the Celtics’ courtside timekeepers.
The Celtics have the eye of the tiger, the Lakers have the eye of the pussycat.
For instance: When Paul Pierce goes out at night, he gets stabbed. When Sasha goes out, he gets his tips colored. Or buys a new headband.
Do you know what happened at a Celtics game the other night? Garnett screamed and berated Glen Davis, making him actually cry.
Davis is as big as your house and the Big Ticket is so mean, he made the kid cry like, well, a Big Baby.
Lamar Odom throws a pass to no one except Sasha Vujacic standing in front of the bench, they both have a good giggle over it. The Lakers are just cute.
There’s no crying in Laker basketball, just giggling.
When the Celtics squeeze something, it’s their opponents’ skulls. When the Lakers squeeze something, it’s probably the Charmin.
Lamar goes on the radio with Vic the Brick, you know what they talk about? Skin products! I swear to Jergens!
The Celtics want to tear your head off, the Lakers are looking for a nice moistening cream. Their power forward is an expert on Aloe and cocoa butter.
That’s why they should have gotten Ron Artest when they had the chance. I’m pretty sure the only skin products Artest likes are the ones Hannibal Lecter used.
The Lakers make a personnel move, they draft Sun Yue, a sweetheart from China. Sun Yue? I would have signed Charles Oakley, and I don’t care if he’s 50 years old! No one messes with the Oak.
Garnett is from the south side of Chicago, Pierce is from Inglewood. Tough places, mean streets. The Lakers? They come from Spain and Slovenia
and Serbia. The only streets the Lakers know are Melrose and Beverly Drive for shopping.
The Lakers have 3 soft Euros, a guy (Luke Walton) who lives at the beach and a guy who can tell you which is a better product, Nivea or Neutrogena.
Is it any wonder they got Ashton Kutchered, punked, in the NBA Finals?
When a Celtic has a fit of pique, he makes a teammate cry. When a Laker has a violent impulse, he throws birthday cake. Like Kwame Brown always said, watch out for that whipped cream and frosting, they're natural born killers!
All the Lakers hear for days on end, ad nauseam, is how they have to toughen up. How do they respond? Lamar and Trevor Ariza break out new bright yellow headbands! Then they give up 200 points to the Sacramento Kings. That’ll show em!
Who is the Lakers’ conditioning coach, Richard Simmons?
One of the Suns drove Wednesday night with Bynum, 290 pounds, bigger than an apartment building, standing right there. The lane opened wide, with the driving Sun followed by the Queen Mary. Did Bynum put the guy on his butt? Did he send a message that this is my lane and my house and no one dunks on us here?
No, he just watched him. In fact, Bynum stopped just short of clasping his hands together so the guy could jump off them like a trampoline, the way you boost a child over a fence. Or holding up a "10" card to praise the dunk.
Bynum offered less resistance than Oscar de la Hoya.
Look, the point here is, the Lakers are who they are. And their team is what it is. Asking them to be mean and tough and hard and nasty and physical is like asking Oprah to be thin or George Bush to be smart. It’s not in their DNA.
They’re not McFilthy and McNasty, they’re McWimpy and McSoftee.
The Celtics and Lakers can even be defined by their color analysts. Tom Heinsohn is a hulking beast who looks like a hitman. Mychal Thompson is from the Bahamas and wears sandals and puka shells. Heinsohn is Tony Soprano, Thompson is Bob Marley.
If the Celtics had Laker Girls, they would be Janet Reno and Madeline Albright.
The Lakers are fast and fun and athletic and entertaining and pretty as can be. I love the Lakers! I say, to heck with the tacos! Headbands for everyone! Or free passes to Lamar's favorite day spa.
Let them score 120, give up 110 and we can all all go home happy, without the angst.
As Paul McCartney was just telling me, Let It Be.
Think of it like this: The Celtics are Rottweilers, the Lakers French Poodles. The Celtics bite your arm off. The Lakers win Best in Show.
If the Celtics were a video game, they'd be Grand Theft Auto. The Lakers are Tickle Me Elmo.
In movie terms, the Lakers are Paul Newman, the Celtics Charles Bronson. Newman made better movies, aesthetically he was the one you wanted to watch and paid to see.
Except of course that it was Bronson who kills everyone in the end.
-- Ted Green
Ted Green used to cover the Lakers for the L.A. Times. He is now Senior Sports Producer for KTLA Prime News.
Photo: Luke Walton. Credit: Lori Shepler / Los Angeles Times
Posted by: vaasa | December 14, 2008 at 12:41 PM
kobeblitz says: "Odom is replaced by Pau Gasol who is arguably better than Lamar Odom is."
This sentence would be 100% accurate if you replaced the word 'arguably' with 'obviously'. I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that you can't find a single Laker fan on this board that thinks Odom is even as good as, let alone better than, Gasol.
Posted by: Sean K | December 14, 2008 at 12:44 PM
Lakertom,
you wrote: Come on, hobbit. Talk about taking a words out of context. If you re-read my post you will see that I obviously implied that Ariza is a better defender and that I would even start him when the matchup called for more defense.
Actually, I didn't take your words out of context. I actually
mis-read them. I missed the preface about if Phil won't
start Ariza. sorry.
Posted by: hobbitmage | December 14, 2008 at 12:54 PM
Blitz,
"Luke has the offensive skills of Pippen (except being the go to guy) but doesn't have the defense."
Yea....I think Luke and Pippen are very similar players except Luke is slow, can't shoot, or jump, or finish. LOL Sorry dude...I'm just messing with ya.
But seriously, comparing Luke to "one of the 50 all time greatest" is quite a stretch. I don't think your stats will support that no matter how you read them.
I'll agree Luke does bring some intangibles, but we are already getting poor play at the point, and I just don't see how we beat the celts with questionable play out of two STARTING positions. We will win 65 or more games, but we all know that without the Larry O'brien hardware, it will be a cranky summer here on the blog.
Posted by: Eric M. | December 14, 2008 at 01:05 PM
that line about being interested in the entire lakers starting lineup matchup with food poisoning reminds me of the guy who writes for the kings website previewing last tuesday nights game as a "cover your eyes" type of game. both teams are horrible underdogs and had 8 game losing streaks coming into the matchup.
lets see if drew can show some pride and accept the challenge of making a 20/10 guy have a really bad night.
Posted by: lakers_sth | December 14, 2008 at 01:13 PM
Ted GREEN likes the Celtics?
fine, Mr. GREEN. like your buttheads. why? because they're GREEN.
the Lakers shouldn't be trying to play superior BASKETBALL, a GAME with RULES. they should be cracking skulls. we neeed more bloodsport.
Posted by: the ranter | December 14, 2008 at 01:17 PM
82games.com
According to 82games, the Lakers' best 5 man unit, by far, is the starting unit that was starting at the end of last season. The worst units, by far, are the two units that have started games so far this season. Gasol and Bynum doesn't really seem to work well. The Lakers' transition defense has been very poor this year, just as Jerry West predicted.
Posted by: giantsquid | December 14, 2008 at 01:24 PM
AK,
Good job bringing in Nate Arch to discuss the Timberwolves. It was sweet to hear about their misgivings about not having Andrew Bynum, too. How Kevin McHale can continue to have a job is beyond me. He has clearly demonstrated that he is dishonest, disloyal, and disastrous as a general manager. Most assuredly, his demotion to head coach will be the first step on riding this fool out of the NBA. He epitomizes everything I hate about Boston.
I am looking forward to seeing Minnesota play, however, as I am big Kevin Love and Mike Miller fans. I am not a big trade proposal maker but the comments about Miller and Love and the Timberwolves having too many power forwards and looking to free up more cap space, made me fantasize about Minnesota accepting Lamar Odom’s $11.4M and Chris Mihm’s $2.5M expiring contracts for Mike Miller’s $9M and Kevin Love’s $3.2M contracts.
While Minnesota probably would not want to part with Love, the deal would bring two of my favorite players to the Lakers and free up cash for free agents for the Timberwolves. I think both Love and Miller would provide the Lakers two players who would add toughness and versatility to the second unit. Love would give us a real banger inside and would probably be a better matchup for us against the Celtics. Similarly, Miller would give us a shooting guard/small forward who would give us one player who could do much of what Luke and Vlade provide us now in a single package with a much tougher demeanor.
Anyway, that’s today’s pipedream. As always, JMNSHBO!
Tom
Posted by: LakerTom | December 14, 2008 at 01:32 PM
AK/BK...
I understand Phil's philosophy on the Vlade/Luke rotation...just don't happen to agree with it...IMHO, what the Lakers have shown over the last 13 or so games, is a lack of defense...that's why I would start Trevor from now on, bringing Vlade/Luke off the bench...IF we get to the Finals, the Vlade/Luke combo won't hamper Pierce in any way...I think Trevor can, as well as hamper a potential Lebron Final...just my two cents...
As to Minny's problems...when I was a bodyguard back in the eighties, I was at a lot of Laker games...sometimes in the locker room, sometimes at after parties...back then, McHale's AKA was "The Black Hole", because once the ball went in to him...it never came out...and it was his own team mates that gave him the AKA...his management style seems to have been similar, ie I make the decisions and no one else's input is required...much to his teams downfall, I think...
Lastly, if the K-Bros will allow me a shameless plug...to pslakerfan and anyone else interested...I have two screenplays under consideration down there in LA right now, one with a very well known A-list director...that one is called "TWO DOGS", an undercover narcotics cop story...I've decided to post the treatment in serial format on my blog...http://thedumbassspeaking.blogspot.com/
It's unusual for a treatment, in that it's told in a first person narrative...if any of you get bored, go give part 1 a read and see what you think...
Let's hope our Lakers come out with fire tonight and put Minny away early...
Posted by: christopher blake | December 14, 2008 at 01:38 PM
Umm, Cardinal, Mccants, and Miller for Odom and Ariza? Cmon, Mitch isn't Kevin McHale.
On paper, we should beat this team by close to a million points. With our struggles of late it will be interesting to see if and when we build our monster lead and if we can retain it for the remainder of the game.
11 days until redemption...
GO LAKERS
Posted by: mrbarneydangles | December 14, 2008 at 01:42 PM
hobbitmage,
>>>>>Actually, I didn't take your words out of context. I actually
>>>>>mis-read them. I missed the preface about if Phil won't
>>>>>start Ariza. sorry.
No problem. I was sure that was what happened. One of the issue that is always glossed over by everybody is that deep teams can sometimes have problems due to there not being enough playing time to keep everybody happy or roles for everybody to have a part.
Furthermore, deep rosters sometimes end up losing some of their effectiveness because better players have to sacrifice playing time for players who are not as good. The situation with Vlade and Luke is a perfect example. I don’t see how you can banish a 45% 3-point shooter or a guy with a 14-1 assists-to-turnover ratio to DNP-CD on a regular basis.
Anyway, maybe a Vulcan mind-meld could transform the two into one. Next mind-meld with Ariza and Lamar and we could end up with the “perfect” Lakers starting small forward, who shoots like Vlade, passes like Luke, handles the ball like Lamar, and defends like Trevor. And our 4-way player would save us bundles of salary and luxury cap. All we need is Kirk to instruct Spock to “make it so.”
As always, JMNSHBO!
Tom
Posted by: LakerTom | December 14, 2008 at 01:47 PM
Christopher Blake,
We don't mind you bringing notice to your sports blog (although you need to put the links in tiny URL form, tinyurl.com), but stuff about the scripts and such is too much. Lakers Blog isn't an advertising space for our reader's unrelated material.
Thanks
AK
Posted by: kambrothers | December 14, 2008 at 01:47 PM
I haven't kept up with the posts at all but I would assume others are thinking the same thing.
Radmanovic goes from playing to not playing at all. Luke Walton goes from not playing at all to starting.
"Somebody" would seem to be on the trading block, either Walton being showcased or Radmanovic not playing for fear of him being injured before the trade goes down.
I would guess Radmanovic. He could have value as an outside shooter for a number of teams. Walton is more of a system guy, really OUR system... not sure what other teams would want him... so...
Wonder if we're finally going to get a decent guard who can stay in front of his man on defense. Luther Head? I dunno... but everybody is trying to lay the blame on Bynum when clearly our guards can't stay in front of anybody. How long has the pick and roll been a problem? How many years? Maybe... it's time to fix that? Maybe?
Posted by: Kwaminus I don't even play anymore Brownicalarious | December 14, 2008 at 01:48 PM
My apologies...
Posted by: christopher blake | December 14, 2008 at 02:02 PM
Please, oh please, let the Sunday whites work their magic.
Go Lake Show!
Posted by: The Outlaw | December 14, 2008 at 02:14 PM
Kwaminus,
"Somebody" would seem to be on the trading block, either Walton being showcased or Radmanovic not playing for fear of him being injured before the trade goes down."
I think that is a good guess. It's really the only thing that makes sense. Your team is 17-3 and Vladi is shooting 45% from the 3-point-line and one day you wake up and say "I've got an idea, Let's start Luke". Makes ZERO sense. Gotta be a trade coming.
"I would guess Radmanovic."
Another good guess. Although I was thinking maybe Luke was include with someone else and needed to get showcased cause he hadn't played all year. We can HOPE can't we. lol
For a quality PG and/or SF, I would trade Vladi, Luke, Farmar, LO, Mihm, or any combination therein.
I would HATE to loose Sasha. Although for the right players anyone is expendable.
Posted by: Eric M. | December 14, 2008 at 02:21 PM
The Lakers have always been rich, spoiled, nancy-boys and the Celtics have always been tough, salt of the earth, roughnecks. I've been hearing that crap for almost 30 years. Let it go.
We're in a funk. We're not playing championship ball. It's Dec. and we're still winning. If it's still like this after the all-star break, I'll worry.
Obviously, it would be nice to clear up our line-up a little bit with some trades, but frankly, I'm pretty sure Mitch won't do anything unless he can get a favorable deal, because he doesn't actually have to.
Our talent is Phil's cross to bear AtM and we're winning games(!) We know that a deal of that type is very hard to make in the NBA, but he lucked out last year, so we'll just have to wait and see.
Let's just not slip-up against the T-Wolves and we can move on from there.
GO LAKERS!
Posted by: Cameron | December 14, 2008 at 02:30 PM
Al Jefferson is a lot better than Andrew Bynum.
Lakers shld trade for AJ instead of sticking with AB.
Lakers can not win with AB.
AB is too soft still
Posted by: ogurat | December 14, 2008 at 02:48 PM
Eric, I just saw the Sasha rumor. NY? Not sure what to make of that unless it's a 3 team deal. Clearly, Ariza can take Sasha's minutes, I think Walton or Radmanovic at SF is a wash, Walton might even be better because we've got 3 starters who could easily put up 20+ points so the SF has to be more of a facilitator.
I don't think the Gasol/Bynum thing is working very well but... that would be a whopper to trade either so... that leaves tinkering in other areas. We need a guard about 6'3" who can stay in front of his man who isn't a moron so... that rules out Marcus Banks... Ha! Ha! Ok... nobody got that...
Hmmm... so if we moved Sasha and Radmanovic... ... oh boy, too many "issues", a new guard takes playing time away from Farmar and we KNOW Fisher isn't getting traded because of the reason he signed here in the first place... so if Farmar got moved with Sasha and Radmanovic... we would be trading for our PG of the future, you would think? then again... maybe nothing happens...
Posted by: Kwaminus I don't even play anymore Brownicalarious | December 14, 2008 at 02:58 PM
You know the Laker season has started when trading deals start.
Gotta love Lakerville.
As for the game tonight...we're looking at a scary game. Wolves beat the Celts...one of their 2 losses. So you know they're capable of a beatdown.
I'll be looking for how Bynum deals with the physicality of Al Jefferson.
GO Lakers!
Posted by: Faith | December 14, 2008 at 03:01 PM
How can you honestly say Love is just as good a player as Mayo? Seriously. Kobe and Wade have said that he's going to be a big-time SG after playing him.
Posted by: Justin | December 14, 2008 at 03:10 PM
Vassa,
You cannot possibly think the streets in either Inglewood or Chicago as tough as those in Serbia. You know how quickly the tough guys in our streets would run from a real war zone? Well no one does. We do know that they think they're tough when they do a drive by on a front lawn barbeque party.
Ghetto tough is wimpy and shows a total inability to understand what tough really means. Run out of a W W I trench before you tell me what tough is! Fight D-Day and then tell me you're tough. A drive by??? Tough?? Really?????
The problem is that our schools and penal system have failed to teach or impress the true nature of toughness. That is why big babies can have swagger.
Sorry, I taught high school. AND . . .
Other than that, I hope you're very funny posting is wrong.
GOOOooOOOO LAKERS!!!
Posted by: culturist | December 14, 2008 at 03:14 PM
Faith,
The Wolves lost to Boston. I think you mean their win over Detroit.
AK
Posted by: kambrothers | December 14, 2008 at 03:16 PM
Culturist,
As much as I woul like to take credit for such an eloquent and funny writing, it wasn't me who wrote that piece (as I also said in my post) but an LA journalist Ted Green who used to cover La Lakers for LA Times (as Kam brothers or Heisler/Turner etc. do right now). This should give some merit to his thoughts.
Posted by: vaasa | December 14, 2008 at 03:30 PM
Ak great interview...good questions and that guy described stuff well and was really pretty funny
good stuff
Posted by: Kiwi | December 14, 2008 at 03:49 PM
good read KobeBlitz...it's obvious to me that the team makes that much more of an effort to cover their man, and help out when Luke's on the floor. And while that might be good in the sense that at least they're trying, it's not good in the fatigue/long season sense.
To me this whole Luke starting comes down to one thing...can you honestly imagine a Championship winning team with Luke starting on it? That's not haterade talking, but sad fact.
Posted by: Faith | December 14, 2008 at 03:52 PM
AK, good looking out. I mistakenly meant Celts.
But the point stands...we have to come to play. If this team is capable of beating Detroit (something we can't say thus far, coz we didn't...regardless of the grays)...then we must take them seriously.
Posted by: Faith | December 14, 2008 at 03:56 PM
Faith,
"can you honestly imagine a Championship winning team with Luke starting on it?"
THANK YOU!
That is the point I have been trying to make.
Posted by: Eric M. | December 14, 2008 at 03:59 PM
I will be attending the game tonight I hope everyone that goes gives McHale a nice big BOOO among other choice words. I kind of feel sorry for the players on the team. There is some talent like Al Jefferson and hard workers like Ryan Gomes, but they are just sad to watch.
But since the Lakers have the habbit of making things close I guess I will have to focused the whole time. I went to their game against Toronto where they basically had control early. But this seems to be a different team. Lets hope they pick it up.
In terms of the rotation, AK/BK im not sure if you read these posts anymore, but in terms of like Josh Powell and so forth, dont you get the idea that Powell is only here to play against the Celtics in the NBA Finals? Powell has talen but hes here to be an enforcer a tough guy to wrestle rebounds maybe give a flagrant and get ejected. the Lakers havent had that game yet this season.
I wouldnt be surprised to see somebody like Vlad start most of the season and then have Luke Walton start a series or two in the playoffs with Josh Powell coming in too for Luke Walton (moving lamar to sf). Its clear that Phil is trying to figure out the roles for this team. I think hes just playing Luke now to keep him interested and not destroy his "high bball IQ" and then stuff him back on the bench.
For Christmas day, think of these as matchups
PG Fisher/Farmar v Rondo
SG Kobe v Pierce
SF Ariza Length v Allen jump shot
PF Gasol v Garnett
C Bynum v Perkins (rebound v scoring and fouls)
Tony Allen v Sasha (who makes bigger shots)
Odom v Leon Powe (who keeps the second unit from faltering)
Powell v Big Baby (who doesnt get pushed around)
Posted by: The Lake Show | December 14, 2008 at 04:00 PM
Faith,
"To me this whole Luke starting comes down to one thing...can you honestly imagine a Championship winning team with Luke starting on it? That's not haterade talking, but sad fact."
I imagine similar questions were asked about the Spurs and Fabrico Oberto in 2007. Or Jason Williams and the perpetually underrated Udonis Haslem with Miami in '06. Or Nazr Mohammed with the Spurs in '05. And I seem to recall a boatload of wasted time speculating if the Celtics could win "despite" the presence of Rajon Rondo.
Is Walton "the answer?" No. But he's not nearly a problem that four quality starters around him and a good bench can't equal a title. And if those guys aren't up to snuff, Walton won't make a bit of difference in the bigger picture. I mean, can you honestly say that a team with Vlad Radmanovic at the 3 in and of itself screams "Start sizing rings," either?
As is often the case, the question of "who starts" is being considerably overblown.
AK
Posted by: kambrothers | December 14, 2008 at 04:04 PM
you have very valid points AK...but also think of it this way.
what does the team need? In the case of Haslem...what they needed was a dirty body to get the boards, and Haslem did that. Williams? Hit the open shot.
What do we need? What has been the kryptonite for us? Defense. And we play Luke? Therein lies the problem.
As for starting being overrated...honestly that's the one thing we'll never agree with (so we'll just agree to disagree lol). I say (tomayto)...starting means something because they often also start the 3rd (game changing 3rd a lot of the time), and in the case of last game, finish it. You say (tomahto) doesn't matter lol.
Posted by: Faith | December 14, 2008 at 04:22 PM
If Luke plays within the defensive system, and hits a reasonable amount of his outside shots, then yes, I absolutely can imagine the Lakers winning a title with him starting. Keep in mind that this would be for 20-25 minutes per game, not 40 mpg. Over the years, when he is healthy, the Lakers have consistently played better with him on the court than without him.
Posted by: exhelodrvr | December 14, 2008 at 04:25 PM
19-3..and hey lets trade to satify our fans. Clearly since were armchair GM's and coaches..we can do soo much better with a different line and new personnel..oh and since the 19-3 is very misleading..lets trade so we can spend the next 40gms or so teaching the triangle to our new players while forfieting 25 out of the next 40 and chalk it up as a learning curve. Oooppss scrath that..some are to finicky and imagine how this place will be after loosing 2 or 3 in a row cuz of bad spacing and offensive brainfarts cuz of these new guys. Haha then when our season goes down he crapper THESE ARMCHAIN GM'S COACHES..errr...I mean fans would just as well blame mitch or Phil for not being able to incorporate a new group of ballers and win games. Ooppsss again...aren't these the same ARMCHAIR GM'S/COACHES..errr I mean fans..no! really I meant to say fans...can't provide enough slack for our higher ups to correct a defensive problem..but I guess teaching a new offense and defense will be much easier than that. Its all to common at most sports blogs and message boards. I have literally seen fans scream..howl..yelll..and cry about trading for this or that person then when it happens and I doesn work out there even more irate and I've never heard a fan say "Well this is what I asked for so lets grit our teeth and ride this thang out.
Haha how bout we go to the ole trade machine and after hours of deals I came up with this..
Lets trade Player A and Player B and Player C for Player D and E. That way our line up can look like this:
PG Player F
SG Player D
SF Player M
PF Player Y
C Player U
Oh wait...Player U is so soft (hes soft cuz I heard BSPN repeat it so therefore it must be true..so excuse me if I use the word "Soft" in a repetitive manner) Lets trade Player U cuz he's so soft..and since he's so soft we need some who isn't as soft as our soft Center..so lets get Player T..hes Toughl! (Im only saying
tough cuz BSPN has deemed that person tough cuz they been in the league 10yrs and the finall won 1 ring so therefore there tough..so excuse me if I use the word tough repetitivly) So adding Player T's toughness and subtracting Player U softness..us being soft will no longer said cuz now we'll be tough.
Haha yall need to stop..gezzzz
Posted by: lakeraholic | December 14, 2008 at 04:27 PM
CAN PHIL JUST PUT LAMAR IN THE STARTING LINE-UP ONCE?
NOTE TO PHIL- K.I.S.S.
LO is a better player than Ariza, Walton, and Vlade. Period.
I just don't understand PJ sometimes. It's as obvouis as his comb-over.
Side-note
If Lo is traded or leaves at the end of the year, mark my words, he will flourish once he gets away from the Triangle offense and Phil's head games. Then what will everyone have to say?
Imagine a different coach who simply tells Lamar "go out there and play ball"
START LAMAR BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE
Posted by: You Ever Notice | December 14, 2008 at 04:32 PM
Faith,
"what does the team need? In the case of Haslem...what they needed was a dirty body to get the boards, and Haslem did that. Williams? Hit the open shot. What do we need? What has been the kryptonite for us? Defense. And we play Luke? Therein lies the problem."
Yes, the team has been lacking in D, but you're taking, in my opinion, much too generalized a view of the situation. WHY the D has been struggling? One reason is that everyone, Vlad in particular, has reverted to a lot of gambling. That was going on before Luke ever entered the picture. And also, they had been coughing up a boatload of points off an increased amount of turnovers and bad shots creating transition situations, both factors which have decreased since Luke started. Again, I'm not trying to present Luke as the secret to a lockdown D, because he's clearly not. But to imply that a player impacts a defense purely because of his man D abilities isn't really looking at the issue in earnest. For that matter, neither is implying that pulling Vlad somehow equals compromising D.
"As for starting being overrated...honestly that's the one thing we'll never agree with (so we'll just agree to disagree lol). I say (tomayto)...starting means something because they often also start the 3rd (game changing 3rd a lot of the time), and in the case of last game, finish it. You say (tomahto) doesn't matter lol."
You're right, we just don't agree. The fourth quarter PT and overall minutes will always mean more to me.
AK
Posted by: kambrothers | December 14, 2008 at 04:34 PM
YES!!! luke walton is a definate problem ion the starting lineup with a BAD defensive team especially when you have lamar odom,trevor ariza, and yes a way better shootin vladimir radmanovich the lakers are the only team besides the indiana pacers ( because of larry bird) that luke walton would even be on a roster and with that said its time to start asking phil exactly whats going on here were trying to win a ring and if you dont thing lama,trevor,and vlad arent mad about this recent lineup change your crazy
Posted by: sugarhill | December 14, 2008 at 04:38 PM
AK
'As is often the case, the question of "who starts" is being considerably overblown'
I agree with your point and examples and even the idea that the issue of who starts is overblown generally but i'm not sure this can be trreated that way given that...
1) said promoted starter was out of the rotation
2) the promotion has lead to a former starter not playing at all
3) the starting gig brings with it quite a few meaningful minutes.
Not to be confused with starting perse the decision to play walton considerable minutes at a crammed position at the expense of Radmanovic even getting in the game is quite different from a player starting and playing 30 minutes or coming off the bench and playing 25...the conversation could equally be about the decision to give walton serious minutes on this team.
just saying...
Posted by: Kiwi | December 14, 2008 at 04:44 PM
Faith: "What do we need? What has been the kryptonite for us? Defense. And we play Luke? Therein lies the problem."
PJ was quoted the other night in response to one of the endless questions about how to improve the defense with something that I heard him say in the 2006 playoff series against PHX - "We need to be better on offense". I screamed at my TV back then when I first heard it but there are a couple things I understand a little better now.
Recently, both the halfcourt D and the transition D has been poor. Earlier in the season, when the Lakers were playing better, they had the highest turnover differential in the league. They were 2nd only to Miami in creating turnovers and they took care of the ball. That was when everyone thought the D was really good. PJ is trying to address what's changed (with Luke). His solution on how to improve the transition D is to keep the opposition out of transition. I guess he basically thought Luke and Vlad were about even in their halfcourt D but Luke would help the guys turn the ball over less and keep the opposition out of transition.
I don't necessarily agree with PJ about the degree which he think's its a problem and how much he's willing to address it, but I understand what he's doing.
Is the half-court D still poor? Yes, at least in terms of contesting shots and stopping dribble penetration. The contesting shots part hasn't been a consistent part of their defensive scheme all year. I hope and pray they put some effort towards that b/c that's all they'd need to address it...effort. Strangely, I don't know if they've identified it as a problem yet. Probably b/c they're so focused on stopping dribble penetration which seems to be the conundrum for the coaches. Let's hope they figure that out soon as well.
Posted by: lakers_sth | December 14, 2008 at 04:54 PM
ex,faith,AK
Ex says that the lakers have played better with walton on the court in recent years but that was on those teams...theres also the possibility that the team is considerably better now so it might not necessarily be the case.Luke might be the best option - then fine... play him ,start him ...whatever but I think of it as opportunity cost - can the lakers really not field a stronger lineup? all this gambling etc comes down to discipline and focus - how about the guys who are actually better defenders just play better...in the short term ,yeah it stops alot of the crap - in the long term are the lakers reaching their defensive potential?I get what faith is saying - to win a title we have to play fantastic D ...as Ive said I would look to create a rotation around the best defensive players.with Kobe,Lamar,Odom and Bynum playing big minutes our offense will always be good enough.
Posted by: Kiwi | December 14, 2008 at 04:58 PM
AK - to further butt into this D conversation you're having with Faith, I wonder if the coaches have really identified and are trying to fix all the short-comings that would fall under the general category of poor D.
We've talked about transition D. The coaches essentially opting for smarter O to address it.
We've talked about dribble penetration. Either the coaches are baffled or the players aren't executing but we know they're aware of the problem.
Conceding/contesting shots. This includes what we saw with Sheed, Drew Gooden, Rasho as well as the various other times we've seen the Lakers play off of the opposition essentially daring them to shoot *cough* Kobe *cough*. Has this been posed at all by the media to the coaches? Or can we just assume that they're just going to say that those are the shots they want the opposition to take b/c they're "low percentage". What I wonder is, even if those are the shots they'd prefer the opposition takes, why give any easy shots at all?
I watch a lot of non-Lakers games and I don't see any other team utlizing that philosophy (other than Sac playing off of Luke the other night).
Posted by: lakers_sth | December 14, 2008 at 05:12 PM
I often wonder how much the size of a player's contract determines the amount of playing time that they receive. Do players like Luke and Rad get more time than a Josh Powell simply because they get paid more and management is looking for a return on their investment? Do Sasha and JFarm remain on the team instead of Joe Crawford and Coby Karl because their money is guaranteed? Or are they really better players?
If, as so many claim, starting is not as important as playing time and/or who finishes the game, why not start Lamar? I've always thought that Lamar has the versatility to play either forward position. While the range on his outside shot is not the greatest, he certainly does not fall into the category of "ignorable" were he to be on the court with Pau and Andrew.
1st unit: Kobe, Fish, Drew, Pau & Lamar.
2nd unit: Farm, Sasha, Mihm , Powell & Ariza.
Odd men out: Luke and Vlad. Not that I think either player is that bad, but somebody has to sit. That's just my 2 cents.
It is almost impossible to second guess Coach Jackson. His track record and accomplishments are second to none. This incarnation of the Lakers is very good as attested to by their fast start and 19-3 record. But in the process, some weaknesses have been exposed. In order to raise the O'Brien, some fine tuning will be needed. I will trust in Phil and the coaching staff to bring out the best in this squad and to have them playing their best ball at playoff time.
Posted by: bronxlakerfan | December 14, 2008 at 05:20 PM
bronxlakerfan,
>>>>>It is almost impossible to second guess Coach Jackson. His track record and
>>>>>accomplishments are second to none. This incarnation of the Lakers is very
>>>>>good as attested to by their fast start and 19-3 record. But in the process,
>>>>>some weaknesses have been exposed. In order to raise the O'Brien,
>>>>>some fine tuning will be needed. I will trust in Phil and the coaching staff to bring
>>>>>out the best in this squad and to have them playing their best ball at playoff time.
Bravo. That is as good a summary of the situation in one paragraph that I have read. I will second your motion. Great post.
And how about adding CC and AJ to the pitching staff and Tex and Manny to the daily lineup and still saving salary over last year. What a way to launch the new Yankee Stadium!
Lakers and Yankees both win championships in 2009.
Tom
Posted by: LakerTom | December 14, 2008 at 05:43 PM
Kiwi,
"1) said promoted starter was out of the rotation 2) the promotion has lead to a former starter not playing at all
3) the starting gig brings with it quite a few meaningful minutes. Not to be confused with starting perse the decision to play walton considerable minutes at a crammed position at the expense of Radmanovic even getting in the game is quite different from a player starting and playing 30 minutes or coming off the bench and playing 25...the conversation could equally be about the decision to give walton serious minutes on this team."
I hear what you're saying, but again, it goes back to the issue I talked about in the previous post. With Ariza a mainstay, there's really only room for one other regular at SF. It's either going to be Vlad or it's either going to be Luke, at least in this rotation's current incarnation. It's strictly a number's game.
I totally understand why the situation feels weird or extreme, but along the lines of using a nine man rotation (which PJ seems to think is the best compromise between utilizing depth and giving guys enough PT to establish a flow), it makes sense. Whether or not you agree with his choice of the nine men is kind of a separate issue.
AK
Posted by: kambrothers | December 14, 2008 at 05:50 PM
I think what most fail to understand is that Luke in the Laker line up period creates player growth disruption! Take into consideration Trevor Ariza a young man who put hard work in over the summer as well as Vlad both improved and showed great improvement overall mean while PJ makes this unforseen line up change that causes players like Vlad and Ariza to scratch their heads and say WTF does a man have to do to get SFR around here! This is were Phil Jackson sick Red Holzman days come into play.
He really believes Luke is him reincarnated in the flesh. I now know for a fact that Phil Jackson is a sick man!
Posted by: chuck23 | December 14, 2008 at 05:51 PM
Kiwi,
"at the expense of Radmanovic even getting in the game "
That was also the case with Walton when he didn't start. - 8 games with no time at all, 8 games where he played but had 4 minutes or less.
It is not realistic to give three players meaningful time at one position in one game. Jackson has flexibility at SF, because none of the players are a clear-cut starter. They all have notable weaknesses. Ariza's defense, though, keeps him in the lineup. That means that it is either Vald or Luke, but you can't have both. (This assumes that Odom should not be considered at SF.)
The other positions aren't nearly as vague. There is a clear drop off between the players who play, and those who don't.
Posted by: exhelodrvr | December 14, 2008 at 05:52 PM
I understand Pil's reasoning in the Vlade/Luke rotation...still think that Trevor should start to help set the defensive tone, with Vlade/Luke coming off the bench...I don't believe that the Vlade/Luke combo is capable of defending any of the starting threes in the league, and "D" is what should be emphasized at the start of games...
I was at a lot of Lakers post games and after parties when I was a bodyguard back in the eighties...heard a lot of inside talk...McHale's AKA was the "Black Hole", given to him by his own team mates because once the ball went in to him, it never came out...seems to be his management style as well...
Let's hope for some fire tonight...
Posted by: christopher blake | December 14, 2008 at 05:52 PM
Helo,
"if he hits a reasonable amount of his outside shots"
That's a big IF we haven't seen in quite a while.
"Over the years, when he is healthy, the Lakers have consistently played better with him on the court than without him."
That was when we had Kwame, Cook, and Smush. He WAS one of our better players on that team...This is not that team.
Posted by: Eric M. | December 14, 2008 at 05:55 PM
If Ariza had a consistent outside shot, he would probably be starting. If Vlad would not lose focus on defense and rebounding he would probably be starting. Both of them have it in their control.
Posted by: exhelodrvr | December 14, 2008 at 06:08 PM