Los Angeles Lakers vs Memphis GrizzliesFri Mar 6, 8:00 PM EST – TWSN, SPSO Line: MEM -11.5, O/U: 196.0 FedExForum – Memphis, TN Recent Matchups |
|
Ranks
|
Latest Results |
Leaders
|
|
|
Ranks
|
Latest Results |
Leaders
|
|
The Lakers are playing their third game in four nights (all of them on the road) and face a team whose record basically the exact inverse of their own. The Lakers have only won 16 games all season while the Grizzlies have only lost 17. If you were looking to boil this game down to its most simplistic form, these things would be all you need to know. Based off these facts alone, the Lakers are very likely to lose.
The other factors at play — matchups, overall talent, playing at home vs. on the road — those things matter too, of course. But, those things also tilt in the Grizzlies favor and make this thing even more lopsided. So, in reality, there’s not much the Lakers can look to lean on tonight other than, well, hope.
They can hope that Jeremy Lin continues his good play. They can hope that Ed Davis has a “revenge game” in him versus his former team, they can hope that Wayne Ellington gets hot from behind the arc, etc, etc. None of things are even that far fetched. The thing is, even if all those things happen, the Lakers would still be major underdogs.
Where does that leave us? Probably in a place most fans are pretty comfortable in right now — watching the standings and understanding of the fact that losing, while not especially fun in the moment, isn’t the worst thing in the world when it comes to the team’s long term prospects. We say this a lot, of course. And typing the words again is not only repetitive, but it’s tiring and, in someways, overkill as part of the discussion when there are only 20 some-odd games left in the year.
The thing is, it’s still true. Just like it’s true the Lakers are very likely to continue that streak I mentioned at the top.
Where you can watch: 5pm start time on TWC Sportsnet. Also listen on ESPN Radio 710AM Los Angeles.
Aaron says
Robert,
Ha. As you know I’m only talking about after we got Nash and Howard since you know I was against both additions. At the time I said I hope we don’t trade Bynum for Dwight (since he just had back surgery) I think we can get Westbrook for Bynum.
Since the “big” four failed I have agreed with every thing aside from the length of Young’s deal.
LKK says
One positive for the FO has been the acquisition of young Mr. Clarkson. He’s had an outstanding first half tonight going against a top-flight point in Mike Conley.
lil pau says
Clarkson going crazy against the Grizz.
Jor-danity! Clark-sanity!
Tim says
What a good half for Jordan Clarkson 8-12 from the filed and 17 points leading the Lakers to a half-time lead over the Grizzlies. .
pat oslon says
The Dynamic Duo of Sacre & Kelly are stinking up the building AGAIN! (0-8 fg / 0 points in 3rd Qt)
LKK says
Memphis is an easy team to dislike. Tony Allen and Zach Randolph are world class butchers.
LKK says
Memphis can talk all they want about a lack of focus and playing down to the Lakers’ level. The Lakers are kicking the snot out of them tonight.tge Griz may win but they’ll know they were in a fight.
rr says
Big night for tanking fans–Orlando won and the Lakers blew a 4th-quarter lead.
bleedpurplegold says
The way clarkson is developing, could you imagine what could’ve been if we played him from the beginning?!?
Sacre and kelly are two of the ten worst players in the league and the two worst in laker history 🙁 sad days for all of us…But at least we brought a great fight to memphis and they gave it their all….no reason to be mad at the team tonight
Craig W. says
Isn’t it about time to say Jordan Clarkson should be our starting PG next year and stop thinking about trading/signing a PG, other than a backup?
R says
Craig W – why not Lin as the backup?
Ko says
Sure am glad they keep starting that Kelly the bumbling, fumbling fool. They actually might win games if he was in the Z-league. Another game of more turnovers then points.
Todd says
Craig W.: Believe it or not I agree with you on Clarkson. That’s why I am so opposed to signing Rondo or Dragic – why waste cap space on a position of strength.
Let’s keep our pick and draft Towns (fingers crossed). With Randle and a young FA or two (see rr and Darius’s comments on the previous thread) we’ll be on the right path.
Fern says
i totally agree to giving Clarkson a shot at starting pg next year,save that money!!!!!!!
J C says
If Clarkson is our starting PG we aren’t contending unless we are excellent at the other positions.
C – Towns or Okafor – but we’re likely to finish 4th worst so that’s a bit of a long shot.
PF – Hill or Monroe or Randle.
SF – we need help here. This is the spot we may not be able to draft for. How about Wilson Chandler? Will he be a FA?
SG – Kobe. If he’s healthy.
PG – Clarkson?
Ellington, Davis and Lin off the bench.
Ryan Kelly remains as towel boy.
Please!! don’t re-sign Sacre or Wes J.
I don’t know if this is a contending team but if we draft well and get at least one good FA we could be a competitive team.
Tra says
In total agreement in regards to Clarkson being our starting PG going forward. While it’s understood that there’s still a learning curve that he’ll have to navigate in regards to the position, considering that we more then likely won’t be in contention for a few years, we need to exercise patience and grow with him. From all accounts he’s a hard worker, who’s willing to learn and he has a chip on his shoulder – which can’t be underestimated. Dragic will be too expensive and Rondo .. ? I think it’s best that I just leave that alone.
Never, in all of my years of being a Lakers fan, could I have imagined myself rooting against them during games, but, unfortunately, that’s what it’s come to. However, my guilt is alleviated by the fact that, for a team that’s in our position, securing young talent, under rookie scaled contracts, is the best, easiest and most cost efficient way to make it back to the top. Also, even though it’s a lottery, we need to put ourselves in the best possible position to maintain our top 5 pick. If so, like most within our FB&G Community, I’m hoping that we can luck into either Towns or Okafor. Possible franchise altering youngins.
Ko says
JC in order to be a towel boy you must be able to hold on to towel. Good dropped or tripped on his own feet 4-times. As for top 2-centers in draft, they are going 1 and 2 with Laker chances of moving from 4 less then 20%. Go back and look at last 2 years drafts.
I see 3 guys worth keeping Clarkson(biggest upside) Davis(his option to leave?) Randle(no clue on talent but 2 leg injuries by age of 19 is not a positive).
Only chance to improve is to get a quality FA to drink the cool aid your drinking and take less money to come here. Last 2 guys in NBA to take less were named GASOL and HOWARD who took LESS to get the heck away from Jimmy boy and LA.
So now that I just gave you a reality check have I made your day do you hate me? Sorry but this ain’t Dr. Buss and Jerry West’s Lakers it’s baseball hat (failed in every business) son and look at my Twitter Playboy
page playmate daughter running and ruining the Lakers. I ask you James, would you put all your money and trust in those two to run your company? 58% rating decrease is not a mirage. Maybe you can buy Jacks floor seats and trade them for Ram Tickets next year?
Happy Saturday!
Asked and answered!
J C says
Haha Ko glad to see you’re alive and well.
Greetings from Bangkok btw!
I’m off to see the Wizard right now and forget about my Lakers for a few days.
Ko says
Don’t return with any lasting diseases and if you hear “love you long time” run faster then a Ryan Kelly air-ball!
Robert says
I am very curious about Ko’s statement: “Last 2 guys in NBA to take less were named GASOL and HOWARD” Certainly this is not literally true, because LBJ for example took less. That said he was a very special circumstance in that he left money on the table all over the place hoping to get a new deal with the new CBA. So, in the past 3 years, are there other significant players who have left money on the table to go to a new team in the manner that Gasol and DH did.
the other Stephen says
@bleedpurpleandgold,
I guess one byproduct of not playing Clarkson earlier on is that it kept him from hitting the rookie wall? =\
R says
Jc — more details on Bangkok please — far more interesting than state of the Lakers I’d say.
dxmanners says
Sad news in the LA Times today, Nick Young still has three years left on his contract. I’ve tried to think of a Laker I’ve ever liked less, going back to 1969. Can’t think of anybody.
Still think of Clarkson as more of a 2 guard, him learning how to play the point certainly leaves their options open.
Elias Harris is the man they should be focused on in free agency. Sign him big, and dare Orlando to match. He’s solid as they come. Clarkson-Harris-Randle-draft pick could be the start of something.
Darius Soriano says
DX,
I think you mean Tobias Harris. Elias Harris is a tweener forward who the Lakers had on their roster a couple years ago. I believe he plays in Europe now.
Todd says
Darius: in a previous thread you and rr talked about Tobias Harris and Khris Middleton being RFAs thus summer. Is it possible for the Lakers to get both? Harris would slot is as our SF and Middleton would be the heir apparent to Kobe as the SG. I like the idea of getting two 22/23 yr olds that would be joining Clarkson, Randle and our top 5 pick (fingers crossed on Towns).
I had been thinking of targeting Monroe but if Randle is healthy that may not be money well spent. We have had a hole at SF for years running and Kobe is not a sure bet to stay healthy so we need a competent replacement before he retires. We could fill both needs for possibly less than just getting Monroe.
J C says
R
Bangkok amazing so far.
Just arrived yesterday.
Details spared here, but suffice to say there is no shortage of beauties – each seems to top the last.
I’ll be sure to announce anything of import 🙂
Go Lakers!
BigCitySid says
@ Craig W., Todd, Fern, Tra “Isn’t it about time to say Jordan Clarkson should be our starting PG next year and stop thinking about trading/signing a PG, other than a backup?”. Just for clarification purposes, are you guys saying if Towns & Okafor are off the board when the Lakers are up, they should by-pass 6’5 pg’s Russell & Mudiay for a big like Porzingis or Cauley-Stein? Or are you guys saying you see Mudiay or Russell as a back up to Clarkson?
Todd says
No, I would not pass on either Russell or Mudiay. The Lakers have to draft the best talent. I would however pass on signing a PG via free agency, such as Rondo or Dragic. That was the point I am making.
I think Clarkson could work with either Russell or Mudiay. The Lakers will need to replace Kobe at SG and while neither of these young men are offensive assasins they have the size to guard the position.
So for me the bottom line is acquire young talent over old, be patient with the rebuild, fans will support the progress if it’s done properly and look to acquire assets that enable the FO to use all means outlined in the CBA (trades, drafting and FA signing) to improve the team.
I can be very optimistic about the Lakers future. I just do not have any confidence in Jim Buss. These last few years have been incredibly painful. That pain will be worth it if we continue to build focusing on young talent. We will just kick the ‘rebuild can’ down the road if we use opportunity to simply sign 30 year old FAs (like Melo).
Craig W. says
BCS,
I think Clarkson will be a good starting PG in the NBA – and this is necessary in the West – and he now has experience at the most difficult position to play. Center takes the longest to adjust to, however.
Therefore, I think – with Clarkson and Lin – the PG position may be a position of strength for the Lakers. Because of this, I think it might be wise to consider trading Clarkson or the pick to get a good big man, if the two main big-men are gone in the draft. My guess is that we would get more for the pick than we could for Clarkson, because Clarkson will be paid sooner. I am just looking at options here and don’t have a hard-and-fast opinion.
Craig W. says
Todd,
Why would we try to sign both players as free agents? We will probably have to somewhat over-pay to get either one. If we have our PG position, keep Ellington, and draft/trade for a big man we would have a reasonable starting unit, without decimating our bench. This leaves us with a gaping hole at SF and one of these players could fill that. Why overpay for two?
The Dane says
I was watching a great Stephen Curry highlight video the other day with Kanye West’s Runaway, now I cannot find it. Anybody here who knows it?
Craig W. says
Realistically, I think the Lakers finish with the 3rd worst record under a best-case scenario. This probably leaves them out of the big-man selection unless they get a break with the ping-pong balls. If we truly want to draft a big man, we have to be rooting for the ping-pong balls.
This scenario is one reason why I think rooting for losses is really silly. We lose so we get more ping-pong balls, so we can get a better chance to move up to 1 or 2? The IFs are getting so numerous and complex it is better to simply root for the team to do its best and let the results fall where they may.
Todd says
Craig W. – I am not a fan of Ellington. He’s a role player at best. The Lakers need young talent that can play 34 plus minutes agame. We need a viable Three and Two. Harris and Middleton fill those needs.
If Middleton is too expensive I also like Lance Stephenson as I think he is a top 25 talent and would focus his skills with Kobe mentoring him. Stephenson has one year guaranteed plus a team option.
I have a response to BCS stuck in mod where I elaborate.
Craig W. says
If we don’t have to overpay, I think Ellington would be fine backing up Kobe – we don’t have to make every move this summer, i.e. I am not trying to recruit all starters with this summer’s signings.
My problem with Stephenson is not his talent. He has been a disruptive force in two different locker-rooms – one a good team in the east – and I am not sure I want him in a very young locker room in Los Angeles. If he is a distraction and if the coach can’t get him to play within the team constructs, exactly what good is all his talent?
rr says
Worrying about whether Mudiay or Russell would back up Clarkson or vice versa is like a guy who needs to lose 150 pounds worrying about which side to part his hair on. Presuming that the Lakers’ FO has evaluated Mudiay and Russell the way most teams/observers have, if either of them is there, the Lakers should take him. The Lakers, more than any other team in the NBA, including the Knicks and the 76ers, should absolutely not be drafting based on perceived positional needs. They need to take whomever the FO thinks is the best player available–and that goes for the pick that they got from Houston as well.
Clarkson still looks to me like a combo guard, anyway–I think that he can play either 1 or 2 depending on match-ups, and can be used with another 1, as we have seen with Lin.
Robert says
Todd: “I can be very optimistic about the Lakers future. I just do not have any confidence in Jim Buss. ” Keeping in mind that I share many of your views. How can your statement possibly be true? The top guy in charge of basketball operations is a large part of whether you are going to be successful. This is like saying I love the prospects for Facebook, but I have no confidence in Mark Zuckerberg. The two are one in the same.
Craig W. says
For all practical purposes, 4 out of the 5 starting positions were lost for the season fairly early on in the year. If this happens again next year, then the Lakers will stink next year no matter what the front office does.
Injuries to front-line players seem to be going up in the league. Addressing the schedule and how coaches approach it – Pop – would seem to be a key league need.
Next year will require our injury situation to come back to the mean – vs the last two years. Unless you want to blame all this on the front office (some posters seem to) then we all better hope the younger players stay somewhat injury-free.
bryan S. says
As perhaps the biggest Clarkson booster (or blowhard) on this board, I was aware of him as a prospect worth pursuing with a later pick well before the draft. I wanted him or Spencer Dinwiddie as high value picks if we could get a pick–we did–and it’s paid off hugely. We have a rookie who is learning the pg position on the fly and more than holding his own against top tier pgs. We don’t need to pursue a point guard in free agency, but, as rr noted, if we are picking fourth and Muldiay or Russell are there you grab them if they are the bpa and worry about fitting pieces later. Fortunately, with either of those prospects, you can run a two guard front (both handle, pass and score), which in today’s game makes an offense less predictable and very potent. ( Heck, forget about today’s game; for those old enough to remember, West and Goodrich were unstoppable.)
What I find silly is all the hand wringing here about whether or not Clarkson is a point guard. If your definition is a Chris Paul or Steve Nash, he is not. But that is yesterday’s model. Today’s top point guards are super athletic, scoring, attacking, players who are maximizing the rule change advantages given to perimeter players (can’t touch’em basically). Ideally these athletes have enough length and strength to attack and get to the line, and to defend.
Thus I give you Jordan Clarkson, our starting point guard of the present and future. Credit our scouting department, Mitch Kupchak, and by extension, *cough* Jim Buss.
Nod to DS: Khris Middleton of the Bucks had a career high 30 points and game winner last night.)
rr says
For all practical purposes, 4 out of the 5 starting positions were lost for the season fairly early on in the year.
——————-
Again: one reason Kobe’s contract was so questionable is that there was no good reason to expect him to make it through the year in one piece, and I don’t think anybody was counting on Nash actually being able to play much. If you are talking about Price, then that is simply foolish. Price is a third-stringer who happened to start some games. Randle’s injury was very unfortunate, and when he went down, many people here, one of whom is an actual doctor, told us that the broken leg had nothing to do with the screw in his foot (which has since been operated on again, I think). But, of course, even if Randle had been able to play, there is no guarantee that he would have done all that well this year, given that he just turned 20. Young has missed some time, but he has played in 42 of 61 games, and Clarkson and Lin have been better than Young and Price anyway. Henry was never going to be a regular.
So, the injury narrative is a non-starter. The Lakers just don’t have any solid, prime, reliable NBA starters, nor do they have any All-Stars or franchise anchors. How much of that is the FO’s fault is a separate question, but the Lakers are not where they are because of injuries.
Robert says
Craig W: In my case, our record next year is not going to be a huge measuring stick for current FO decisions (with or without injuries). It is reflective of past decisions. A case could be made for another tank (especially if we did not keep the pick this year, but even if we did keep it). That said, we are waiting to see what Randal looks like, and then who we pick and what they look like. If we have “Kobe and the Youngsters” and finish with a horrible record, but our young guys look good, that would not be bad. It would be better in fact than if we make some Rodoish type splash in FA, thereby making ourselves better in 16 but perhaps not better for the long run. Where the FO can impress me is if the picks turn out well, and of they ultimately make a big FA acquisition (the later not necessarily next year).
Tra says
BCS,
If that situation presents itself – where the 2 Bigs are off the board – I would hope that the FO would select the best available talent. As Double R stated, we’re not in a position where we can pick and choose based off of positions because, simply put, we’re in need of everything (even though the PG & PF Positions seems to be where we are strongest at.)
Todd says
Robert: my hope, regarding the Lakers future, is that circumstances exist that either negate or temper Jim Buss from going rogue. With a recent track record that has produced decisions which have paralyzed and crushed the franchise I am hoping (there’s that word again) that Jim is open to lean on Mitch more than he has.
My sense is that Mitch gets it. However, Jim’s ‘I got this’ attitude plus Mitch’s understandable personal life priorities have taken precedence.