I’m all for tempering expectations when it comes to young players. Being successful is hard in the NBA. Being successful when you’re not yet even 21 years old is even harder. Players this young not only need to physically mature, but they need to figure out how the strengths they do possess translate to playing against grown men. The same is true of the mental adjustments and getting to the point where they can react to the game in front of them rather than having to think through possessions.
However, just because the learning curve exists doesn’t mean young players don’t show us flashes of what they can become. I remember watching Jordan Clarkson’s first summer league games last year and thinking “this kid has something” even though it seemed like every other possession was him trying to go too fast or not recognizing what the rest of the players on the floor were doing.
This year is no different when it comes to Julius Randle and D’Angelo Russell. They are only on the bottom levels of their respective development curves, but when watching them play it’s easy to see they have something to them. This “something” was on full display in Sunday’s win over Maccabi Haifa.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npvI_abdgy4&feature=youtu.be
For Randle, this is his third straight game of looking just like this. The handle, quickness, power, and finishing ability he showed above have been on full display the last three games. Whether he can keep it up are real questions, but as he strings games together where he looks this good doubts start to dissipate.
As for Russell, we’ve had much less to go on to this point. After getting injured early in the team’s second preseason game and subsequently sitting out their third, Russell simply hasn’t had the floor time to show all that much (one game samples, and all). Still, Russell, like Randle last year around this time, was showing glimpses.
On Sunday, however, he did more than that.
https://youtu.be/qUh-1vXe5qE
These types of passes aren’t anything new from Russell, but to see them strung together in a single contest without having them countered by some of the rookie mistakes he was making in summer league was good to see. People around the team have raved about Russell’s passing ability and while we got glimpses in other games, this was a clinic.
Again, I’m all for not taking highlights and turning them into normative performance. On the other hand, sometimes it’s just fun to sit back and say damn, these young guys can play a little bit.
A Horse With No Name says
One of the best things last night: R Kelley’s new and much improved shot release. The off-season work has paid off. Gone is the slow wind-up and measuring. He simply fired and buried. It’s a game changer for him as a player.
He and Randle ‘could’ play together with their inside/out strengths. Randle guards the three, attacks as a four. Kelley guards the three, plays stretch four and gives Randle the space to be a attacking/play making beast. A variant could be Kelly as the stretch five in small ball.
bmcburney says
Sorta amazing that the dysfunctional morons in Lakers’ management would nevertheless pick these guys in the draft. They must be really lucky since they obviously don’t know anything about basketball or, more importantly, statistics.
Oldtimer says
For a change, nothing to comment on our lakers. They won against a non-NBA team, nonetheless both offense and defense were great.
Hope to see Huertas before preseason ends.
Todd says
Another dose of reality that many on the board don’t want you to read:
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/13852924/losangeles-lakers-embracing-new-reality
A Horse With No Name says
another dose of reality
the reality is that this kind of story makes espn $
stats says
Darius – Thanks for highlights. The young guns are gonna be fun, although there will be some ups and downs.
Horse – Couldn’t agree more. Historically, I have not been a fan of Kelly. But he’s been more aggressive this preseason and his shot looks much better. If nothing else, he’s making the decision (to cut or not to cut) much harder.
Keith says
the reality is that this kind of story makes espn $
__
And could shed light on why we have lost 116 games these last two seasons. It’s just an article with a perspective. It’s not like we can point scoreboard — we’ve been historically awful these past two seasons.
Anonymous says
Not a fan of Kelly. Last night showed that he can bury the jumper when he’s not guarded. I’m not convinced he belongs on an NBA roster. Trade him and be thankful to get a 2nd round pick.
bmcburney says
“Last night showed that he can bury the jumper when he’s not guarded.”
If this statement really is true (and pre-season so far does not quite convince me that it is) then Kelly absolutely belongs on an NBA roster. If he can make the shots he made last night on a consistent basis, the Lakers need to keep him.
Ed says
Whether Kelly or somebody similar, Randle needs to play with another big who can hit the 3, while Randle operates closer to the paint. I just question Kelly`s overall quickness and speed on defense and still not convinced Russell should start with with Kobe at the three.
T. Rogers says
Good stuff, Darius. It will take time. But Randle and Russell are showing some promise. At this point that’s all we can ask for. Pair them with Clarkson and it could be the makings of something good. All three still have much to learn. I can take a 30 something win season with the arrow clearly pointing up.
Regarding Baxter Holmes’ latest piece: We get it. The Lakers are a terrible organization. Kobe is a terrible. Byron is a terrible. Anyone with the last name Buss is terrible. Mitch is terrible. Vitti is terrible. The parking lot attendant at the El Segundo practice facility is terrible. And on and on. No matter your position on the team, FO, Kobe, etc. redundancy is still just that. We’ve read this same story over and over from ESPN. Henry Abbott wrote it at this time last season. Trash the Lakers all you want. But at least employ SOME originality.
Keith says
Regarding Baxter Holmes’ latest piece: We get it. The Lakers are a terrible organization…
__
That’s not true. Yes, the Lakers aren’t currently at their best but with the right leadership they could be much more. Change does not have to be a bad thing. It could be as simple as opening the doors and windows to bring in a fresh and much needed new perspective.
Imagine, you are at a party and people keep coming up to you to let you know that your fly is down. Well, you could continue to ignore them and say they are being rude or obnoxious but that doesn’t make their comments any less true. At some point in the evening you take the time to see if your fly is down or not.
Articles like this are people letting the Lakers know that their fly is down.
Vasheed says
Great display of the future by Russell. The earlier he figures things out the better. If all of our rookies start off good this can be a better than expected season. But so far it is just one game.
I’ve liked Kelly’s game since he was drafted. He is no ways near quick enough to play against Small Forwards and even some of the quicker Power Forwards will take advantage of him. But he is solid enough against most Power Forwards. Forcing him to play Small Forward last year made him look much worse than he is.
It is only one game but I think the biggest difference for Kelly is having guys on the court who can cause the defense and then pass the ball to him when he is open. That is what he does. Considering all the depth at PF I thought Kelly was a likely cut. But, he has started to make a case for himself.
Todd says
I have been an advocate that the Lakers needed to find a forward with range to play with Randle. I haven’t previously been a fan of Kelly’s but I did notice that he had a very nice game last night.
I’d like to see more of the Randle/Kelly pairing in future games. While Kelly isn’t the most gifted athlete he can hit the open ‘j’ and contrary to popular belief, that is a good thing.
Robert says
Everyone should read the ESPN article as I think it perfectly summarizes how the rest of the league looks at us. A couple choice quotes:
“”It’s like [they think], ‘We’re not on the Titanic.’ Yeah, you are,” an executive said. “‘No, we’re not. It’s all right. No, we’re good.’ No, you’re not good. You’re not good. It’s sinking. People are in lifeboats. They’re jumping off. You’re not good.” (I made a Lakers Titanic post 2 1/2 years ago on this board).
One agent said if he were in charge, “I would clean house. The reality to me is that the Lakers aren’t going to be better and are going to have a difficult time rebuilding with Jim Buss running the organization, and, to be quite frank, with Mitch Kupchak being in the front office,” the agent said. ” Has Baxter Holmes been reading my posts? !!!!
I do like the way the young guys are playing, but while they are looking decent – they are also showing they are a ways away from being a major impact. We need to do everything we can to properly develop them, leading up to the big summer of 17.
Craig W. says
I think no one should read the article – I haven’t – because it only gives more ‘clicks’ to ESPN; and that is their point.
From those who read the article there is nothing new. If the rest of the league thinks of the Lakers the way the ESPN articles do, then so what! However, I think it gets more attention to talk down the Lakers than almost any other subject – including Lebron James. I doubt any of us really know what other GMs think of the Lakers – and they are really the only ones who matter, in the area of trades – so pontificating about what others think would seem to be of little value.
Perhaps we could simple spend more time commenting on the thread subject.
We are beginning to see how the team functions as a unit, or group of units. Even if the competition isn’t up to par, it is of value that these players get a feel for how to act together in an actual game. That is the biggest value from last night’s game. We definitely have more talent than we did last year and I am really looking forward to see how it all develops – never mind what any other organization thinks.
mud says
more anonymous sources….
that probably don’t really exist.
Craig W is right on the Baxter Holmes subject.
Lou1s says
All these GM’s that are quoted anonymously just want to be in the running for the job should Mitch leave. I know that Jim takes a lot of flak but he and Mitch were a basketball reasons away from putting the Lakers in a prime position to continue winning after Kobe and Pau.
These guys swem to forget that this FO turned Kwame Brown into Pau. Regardless that Marc Gasol later evolved into a stud in his own right, they parlayed that into 3 finals, 2 championships and CP3. All of that while keeping the chip they eventually used to get Dwight.
Had CP3 been in a Lakers uniform to keep Kobe and Dwight eventually in check, I think this FO would be lauded as one of the best ever.
The fact that the CBA and globalization make superstar free agents not want to leave their current team (Dwight Howard non withstanding) harder to pry away elite FAs.
Lastly, and not to keep rambling, getting Steve Nash was also seen as a coup at the time. It’s just bad team chemistry and a bad coaching selection that has us where we currently stand. We have 3 great looking kids to work with, a stopgap coach and the twilight of one of the best ever. Cycles tend to finish, but a butterfly effect has really changed the look of this team from their last ‘ship.
Snarky George says
I think no one should read the article – I haven’t – because it only gives more ‘clicks’ to ESPN; and that is their point.
__
That’s a pretty poor reason not to read the article.
I took the Buss family sunglasses off when Jerry West left the organization. The fact that the last five Lakers’ championships were won with players West acquired (Shaq and Kobe) and with the coach that West hired (PJ) is statement to the profound mistake it was allowing him to leave.
At its core, the article says its time for new leadership. I, and many others, have been touting the need for change for some time now.
I connect the dots and the challenges facing the Lakers are clear: The franchise is not experiencing a cyclical downtrend — its a bottoming out because of poor management.
Others connect the dots and still put their faith in the Buss kids. That’s their prerogative. However, the fact that we disagree doesn’t make me any less of a fan.
Robert says
butterfly effect: Just like in the movie, we have been trying to re-write that history for 4 years. Every time we try – things get worse. Time to get rid of that book – just like in the movie.
Sources: GM’s and various other executives in the league are not going to allow their names to be attached to a story trashing the Lakers. Since you did not read the article – Shaq did have a choice direct quote. Then again – what does he know – he is just one of our legends and we know that all of them are clueless – right?
bmcburney says
Winning in the NBA, like winning in poker, is not just a matter of having skillful and knowledgeable people in the front office. You also need some luck. The test of a good poker player is not whether they win every single hand because nobody wins every hand (unless they are cheating). The test is what they do with the cards they are dealt, making the best of a weak hand when they can and folding the cards when they must.
For the past three years the Lakers have had a fairly spectacular run of bad luck (injuries and the cancelled CP3 trade) but, despite that, the pieces are already in place for long term success. At a minimum, it is already obvious that the Lakers’ FO have made very, very good decisions in drafting Clarkson, Randle and Russell. Under the circumstances, I believe they have made excellent decisions in free agents and trading for Hibbard. And they will have huge cap space and/or flexibility starting next year.
If you decide you want to “clean house” you need to be able to answer the question of whether the guys you bring in are better than the guys you dump. Name a FO in the NBA that has done better than the Lakers in drafting players or trading players for an extended period. Only San Antonio is comparable to the Lakers.
LakersFanFromDR says
I stop reading ESPN almost two years ago. They show a poor journalism when they write about the Lakers, why? when you write an article, full of anonymous sources, and don´t have even the decency of make at least a contrast balancing the opinions then it is like the so called hit and run. Abbot did that to the Kobe post, Anonymous source said this, anonymous source said that, And Holmes did the same this year.
Any ranking made by ESPN make mock of the Lakers. If at least they put both the good with the bad or vice-versa, then we at least should take the article like an objective form of journalism.
I really don´t understand the fans that said, that this kind of reads are worth, because they just bash the team which we root for. And you are fan when they are wining and when they are losing too, you don´t have to be delusional, but you don´t have to burn the ships, just because they are going for bad times.
Just enjoy the process, a lot of Young promises and maybe the last ride of One of the GOAT.
That is my humble opinion.
Anonymous says
These convos about the FO are boring and take away from the discussions of the games, players and their development. If you guys want to continue to discuss your hate and dislike, maybe it can be posted on a separate FO post or something because it has been killing this blog. No one wants to read the same whine again and again hence the low participation.
LakersFanFromDR says
True Words Anonymous!!!
Why not just enjoy the process of see the kids growing up just in front of our eyes. I had the luck to see Kobe since day one, and now, I can see Julius, Jordan and D´Angelo.
That´s a luxury man.
rr says
Couple of points:
1. George–Jerry West supposedly didn’t really want Phil, and Phil was a Jerry Buss hire.
2. bcmcb- Russell has played two preseason games, one against a team that is not anywhere NBA caliber, and he didn’t look especially good in the other game. Clarkson was a very nice pick at 46, but he is not going to turn the franchise around. Randle has looked good, but let’s at least wait until 20 games are in the books. So…giving the FO credit for those picks, especially when we don’t know what Okafor et al and Vonleh will do is very premature–we are talking about guys who are 19-21 years old.
Again: the defense of the Jim Buss FO boils down to the Veto and the cost of the short-term moves designed to get Kobe and Dr. Buss one more title. The rest is simply smoke and emotion.
At the same time, though, while some people want the FO guys gone now, if they nailed the Russell and Randle picks and can score in FA in 2017, they will look a lot smarter in a hurry.
So, while people should always feel free to share opinions, for me, now is the time to watch and observe. Let’s see how the young guys look after 25-30 games.
rr says
These convos about the FO are boring and take away from the discussions of the games, players and their development.
—
So are the above-it-all complaints about them. You are free to ignore the FO talk and put up another post about how great Russell and Randle are going to be.
I have a post in mod, and I agree on a certain level in that I think FO defense diatribes and bashing, as well as Byronbashing, don’t matter that much right now. I think this is a time to watch the players. But when a team loses 116 games in two years, people are going to talk about the guys who made those decisions sometimes. FO defenders should simply consider accepting that, rather than complaining about it.
Craig W. says
” But when a team loses 116 games in two years, people are going to talk about the guys who made those decisions sometimes.”
That is a true statement. The only comment I would make about it is that the word ‘sometimes’ be replaced by ‘continuously and in every thread’. That – in a nutshell – is the problem with the bashing. We all know how you, I, and others stand on the matter of the front office. Now, how about keeping the discussion on the upcoming team and assume everything that needed to be said about the organization has been said, several times over.
Darius Soriano says
So are the above it all complaints about them.
—
The only thing is, without one, the other doesn’t exist. Every thread the same commenters make variations of the same comments about the FO. And every thread, people say they’re tired of those comments, with the only rebuttal being, essentially, “so what, just don’t read it”. This board used to be the best comment section on the Lakers’ blogoshpere. I think we still get a ton of insightful stuff on this board. We also get more of the stuff which is just repetitive dreck from the same people who get complaints levied at them not only on this board but in my email.
I guess the next comment will be some swipe at me which is fine, but also predictable.
bmcburney says
rr,
If you can’t see, right now, that Russell and Randle are special players you are blind or don’t know basketball. Of course, things can still happen, injuries or some kind of off the court nonsense could derail one or both of them, but these guys are both special talents. Clarkson too. No FO in the NBA has had better drafts the last two years than the Lakers.
Tsig says
after two excrutiating seasons, Im getting excited again. Might even sign up for a cable package. They seem to have the attitude and chemistry to be entertaining again. Only a few more ingredients needed ro build success.
A Horse With No Name says
Darius: This is your site. You do the heavy lifting. It’s been too good of a site to let 2-3 guys (and their different handles) kill it. You have every right to change the rules of engagement. The easiest thing is delete comments that kill discussions. Your readers recognize them as such, as do you. They will desist and go elsewhere or learn to talk about the game.
Anonymous says
Horse….that is right on!
213inthe415 says
Forgive me if this has already been said but……Isn’t in other FO’s interests to run down the Lakers FO and ownership with their young core, increasingly massive cap space and well… the Lakers? If I’m part of a FO that has some serious talent then I’m doing EVERYTHING to make the Lakers look unhinged and uninviting.
matt says
Agree with a above comment i don’t like a 3 guard starter system we need a guy to be a legit sf
matt says
Bench could be russell, Williams, young , kelly, bass
rr says
I guess the next comment will be some swipe at me which is fine, but also predictable.
—
Well, like Horse said, you can set up some rules if it bothers you that much, something along the lines of, “Repetitive criticism of the FO in general and of Jim Buss in particular will not be tolerated. This rule does not apply to either Byron Scott or to Kobe Bryant.” I am not being sarcastic.
Personally, I think people should post about what they want as long as it is Lakers/basketball related and civil. If you’re interested in stuff like whether Ryan Kelly or Tarik Black should get more burn and how that affects the team’s offensive game planning, or who is going to get the 15th roster spot, then go for it. If you want to post 4-5 times a day talking about how much you enjoy Russell’s dimes, that is good, too. But If you are more interested in the big picture and in what people around the net outside of the fanbase are saying about the FO, then I don’t see that that conversation should be so upsetting to some people here.
mcburney:
These guys have played only a few preseason games against NBA competition. If you want to declare them All-Stars based on that, then I am happy for you. Both of them have shown flashes, and that is a good thing. I backed picking Russell over Okafor myself. But the Lakers fanbase is starved for good news, and a lot of people are emotionally invested in Jim Buss silencing his critics, and as T Rogers pointed out, the only way that is really going to happen is if Russell and Randle show they can be not just pretty good players, but near-elite core players, guys who can be the #2 and #3 on a contender (and I think Mtitch and Kobe know this and that is part of the reason, along with obvious stuff that he does on the floor) they have comped Randel to LO. So the blindness cuts both ways.
Craig,
You are as repetitive as anyone here, and as active. If you don’t want to talk about FO, then stop bringing them up and using every thread to get in comments defending their decisions.
Darius Soriano says
I am not being sarcastic.
—
Neither was I. And like I said, most defenses of said comments are along the lines of what was posted “post what you want” with the implication others just not read it. I’d say the Scott commentary has toned down. But even when it does pop up, the conversation shifts — mostly by the same people — saying why talk about the coach when this FO hired him. So, you can see why people take the stance they do when it comes to talking about the FO.
It is a tiring stance. The Byron stuff is tiring too. The other day I read a comment about Scott and I thought it was foolish. The piling on is old in *all directions and on all topics*.
Maybe some don’t see it that way. Or maybe it’s because they’re doing the piling. As an aside, if I wanted to ban people I would. I get enough complaints about many of the same culprits that I’ve considered it. I also think people may one day tire of saying the same thing over and over again. Of course, after nearly two years of the same people not getting tired, maybe I should know better. Maybe my faith in people is too high. And I’m not being sarcastic.