Happy Monday, everybody and happy birthday, Martin Luther King Jr. Here are a few of the best Lakers-centric reads and notes from around the web:
- MORE TO COME: The LA Times’ Eric Pincus recently profiled Jordan Clarkson and one of the key takeaways was that both Clarkson and the team believe he has yet to stop improving. The piece also includes some interesting notes about Tarik Black’s motivation to find staying power in the league.
- BLACK AND BROWN: For more on Black, Janis Carr of the OC Register details his effort to not only remain in the NBA, but to prove to Byron that he deserves significant minutes. On another note, Carr also took to Twitter to suggest that Black is unlikely to stick with he team beyond the trade deadline.
- RUMORS GALORE: Elsewhere in the rumor mill, Steve Kyler of Basketball Insiders suggested that the team has been testing the trade market for Roy Hibbert.
- TRADE MACHINE: Our friend David Murphy recently explored three “under-the-radar” trade scenarios LA could make before the NBA’s deadline.
- “I’VE HAD MY MOMENT”: In case you missed it, Kobe ruled himself out of consideration for the 2016 Olympics late last week, all but confirming his final game will be in a Lakers jersey against Utah.
- …IF HE MAKES IT THERE: Kyle Hartwick of Lakers Outsiders recently penned a letter to Kobe and Byron, asking what we’ve all been pleading for: Please don’t break Kobe. Someone make sure this sees Byron’s desk.
- MAGIC MAMBA: In other Kobe news, he also passed Jerry West for second place on the franchise’s career assist list during last night’s loss to the Rockets. You can take a guess at who’s first.
- THE GAME IS CHANGING: In a non-Lakers related piece, Jesse Blanchard recently wrote about the evolution of the power forward in the modern NBA and how the position has quickly become the most crucial one in the league. Considering that LA has two talented fours of their own (and perhaps another one eventually incoming) they could find themselves in ideal position to develop them alongside one another.
- RUH-ROH: Speaking of those power forwards, reports suggest that Julius Randle may have broken his nose in last night’s loss. This will be something worth monitoring in the coming days.
Lakers Schedule This Week:
- The team is off until Wednesday, January 20th when they face the Kings in Staples (7:30 p.m. PT, TWCSN). The Lakers then stay home to kick off a back-to-back set against the Spurs on Friday, January 22nd (7:30 p.m. PT, TWCSN) before heading north to take on Portland on Saturday, January 23rd (7:30 p.m. PT, TWCSN).
Darius Soriano says
Since there is a lot of trade speculation in the links, feel free to comment/speculate yourselves in the comments of this post as well.
Clay Bertrand says
YEAAAHHHHHHH Darius!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Open Season!!!!!! : ) maybe…….
ANY Talent that can be a Net addition to this team during the season would require some shrewd moves and very fortunate circumstances it would appear.
Clearly the Lakers need more talent and need to look at every option for adding it. That said, we are the SECOND WORST team in the league and cannot trade our developing core.
SOOO, Who would give up anything of value for our available players????
Brandon Bass–gone (from wherever he is) next year on opt out.
Lou Williams–2 more years/$7mil per (not a bad deal under the rising Cap), our ONLY trade Asset IMO.
Hibbert—FUTURE UFA/FUTURE CAP ROOM/FUTURE NON LAKER.
Black–Undrafted/Undersized/UNPLAYED/UNSEEN.
Kelly—Looks like White Taliban/Limited Role Player/Some Value but NO TRADE value,
Young—1 Dimensional Chucker w/ 3 year deal at $5mil per,
METTA–END OF CAREER/END OF BENCH,
Sacre–Yeah he’s just Sacre, nuff said,
Now of this group, under the perfect circumstances, MAYBE, Lou Williams is worth what could forecast to be a future LATE 1st Rounder. The other players are not worth more than MAYBE a second rounder here or there and even that would be a generous proposition for a few of these guys.
To go along with these JEWELS, we have no CAP ROOM to act as merely a facilitator like last year. We would need to move actual bodies to participate in these deals. I.E. — No more just taking Jeremy Lin on so we can get a 1st round pick. Further, we have a full roster so we cannot sign any 10 day contracts so NO D-League call ups.
Its “NO DUCK WALK” but let’s see if Mitch can Jedi Mind Trick someone into giving us Rudy Gobert for Nick Young and some goats from Ryan Kelly’s village in Afghanistan!!
Anonymous says
Hibbert and Black for Rose, Portis and McDermott.
1. Bulls need help in the pits with Noah out.
2. Lakers are not going to do anything in free agency this summer so cap space is not needed. So one more year of Rose’s contract is not a killer. We don’t need Rose but Chicago needs cap space so we’ll eat his deal to get Portis and McDermott. We flip Rose over the summer or eat his dea (not a fan of his post injury riddled game).
3. Portis is big enough to play center and he can hit the three which our bigs can’t
4. McDermott starts at SF or becomes a reliable three point shooter off the bench.
Robert says
We never should have signed any of these guys, and I said so at the time. Hibbert: This was a flat out salary dump by Bird and he fleeced us out of a pick as well. Nick: There was absolutely no reason to sign this guy for that long, especially right before we were about to hire Byron. Lou: We could actually get something for him, but he is a complete mismatch for our team. I can’t believe that some blame his playing time on Byron. The whole reason he came here was to “the man” if Kobe went down. That is what he is doing. Not good for the youngsters, but it is what it is. All of them should go. We will be lucky to even get any takers at all for Roy and Nick. In Lou’s case – we may get lucky if a contender thinks they need him. The length of his contract is not a plus however. This last off season was a disaster in the FA department.
Clay Bertrand says
Anonymous, Puff Puff Give man!!!!!
No offense, but that deal is just TOOoooo SWEET bro!!!!!
So let me get this straight:
WE trade Useless Hibbert and Very Limited Tarik Black and the Bulls GIVE US former MVP (admittedly oft injured) Derek Rose, Polished Prized Rookie Bobby Portis, and young 3 point shooter McDermott?!?!?!?! Can’t they throw in Jimmy Butler for Sacre while we have them DRUNK and at GUNPOINT!!!!!??
Not trying to be mean bro but CMON!!!!!!! Let’s get REAL here!!!!!
Anonymous says
Sorry Hibbert + Williams + Black or nance For Rose + Portis + McDermott.
Key for Bulls is they get under cap for the summer. Rose has worn out his welcome in Chicago.
Clay Bertrand says
Got you Anon.
Better but still a NO GO from Chicago’s end IMO. They seem to actually be leaning toward shedding their older bigs IN FAVOR of Portis and McDermott still possesses a coveted modern NBA skill with the shooting. I DO see the marriage breaking up between Rose and the Bulls though……
Robert, I agree that the players we signed have never made much sense. However, I would disagree that Bird “fleeced” us out of a 2nd round pick that forecasts to be a very low pick. I think it was a very worthy gamble that Hibbert COULD add some D if he reinvented his game enough and had some new surroundings. He still could MAYBE net us something so as not to be a complete loss but largely worth the limited gamble IMO.
Hale says
2 drafts ago the Lakers paid the former Bullets (I don’t like the name “the Wizards”) 2 million dollars for a second round pick that became Jordan Clarkson. Indiana getting a 2nd rounder isn’t the end of the world. Maybe not the best deal but fairly defendable. The Lakers have 2+ million in the petty cash drawer unless things are worse than we all know. If they do trade someone, there’s a chance that a 2nd rounder will be part of the bargain.
I’m not seeing any of D. Murphy’s trade machine adventures palatable. Sac supposedly turned down a better package for Gay. Whereas I might have mentioned a few thousand times I would like to not see Kelly in Lakers gear, Solomon Hill can’t shoot. Jennings will be a UFA.
Only reason I wouldn’t mind Hibbert gone is so a roster spot for experimentation can open up (d-league dude). The less old dudes on the team, the less Mr Scott can lean on them for arguably meaningless wins.
Clay Bertrand says
As much as I would contend that on paper, Lou Williams is our most tradable asset if we are looking for a return, I still have trouble even believing that we could sign him as a FA when anyone else could have signed him as well, and then FLIP him a few months later for a 1st Round Pick that are considered GOLD these days by modern GMs.
Todd says
I think between Noah ‘s injury and Rose’s issues that the Bulls are more likely to blow this up and start anew around Butler, Mirotic, Portis and McDermott. Not a bad core to build on.
I do like Portis and was hoping he would fall to the Lakers at the end of the first round. ESPN has said the Bull’s FO loves him — so I don’t see him going anywhere.
Chris J says
Clay — your Hibbert “could” argument was how I felt when he came to L.A. over the summer. New team, change of scenery, desire to reestablish his value on last year of his deal — and most importantly, a roster that needs rim protecting and D from the 5. It looked like a perfect fit. Alas…
I wish Hibbert well and hope the Lakers can move him for something of value. But I really don’t envision him making a turn for the better elsewhere if he couldn’t do much given the near-perfect situation he found as a Laker.
Clay Bertrand says
Chris J, Agree with your assessment completely.
Its as if time as passed Hibbert by right before our eyes in terms of his basketball value. He’s an Oil Rich country in a world of Teslas!!!
Gary says
At his trade discussion is highlighting what a lot of us have been saying. Our role playing vets have little value.
Combine this with the likelihood we aren’t attractive to free agents this summer and the odds we lose our pick and you are left with the following conclusion: we may not be able to add any real talent this off season.
That my fellow Lakers fans is a big problem.
Robert says
Gary: All very true. And all of this has been true since we mortgaged the team and then let DH walk out the door for nothing and Jim muttered “Houston – we have a problem”. For all the DH hatred out there – just ask yourself. Should we start Sacre or Howard? Hibbert or Howard (Hibbert makes just as much by the way)? And this is year 3 since that occurrence, so Howard’s new contract would already be 3 years in for those who are going to say we would have been saddled forever. Lou and Nick are under contract for the same/longer than DH would have been had he stayed. My friend rr called it an “unmitigated disaster”. He was being nice.
KO says
Need to find teams with bad GM who are sucking this year. Suns should be first in line. Couple of guys worth looking at to unload Roy, Jelly and Young. There is a twin with talent who wants out that might be worth looking at and a aging center.
Thoughts?
Anonymous says
The Cavs look like they can use some scoring help. Let’s dump Williams and Young on them for future picks — due after Lebron retires and they suck again.
Anonymous says
Wow! GS looking good so far.
What if Lebron’s remaining peak years coincide with a Warriors team the Cavs can’t beat? It’s possible Lebron falls way short in the ‘chip race.
Craig W. says
I simply can’t fathom Byron’s comment about Black. WTF Byron! What, exactly do you expect from one of your three most active and aggressive players – Nance Jr. & Randle being the others?
If Mitch is listening to this ‘crap’ I suspect you are shortening your own rope.
Mid-Wilshire says
Craig W.,
I concur. Byron’s criticism of Tarik Black is nothing short of baffling. It’s not that Black doesn’t have his shortcomings. He does. (All players do.) But Byron’s claims that Black is lacking in energy and aggressiveness flies in the face of all evidence.
If anyone plays with energy and aggressiveness on the team, it is Tarick Black.
None of this makes sense.
For that reason, I suspect that there could be some sort of personal animus that Byron feels toward Black. Perhaps they’ve crossed swords. I can think of nothing else.
Lamont787 says
I saw this video on twitter today. Metta World Peace talks to sportscaster Drea Avent about Kobe’s farewell tour, and Byron Scott critics. Wanted to share it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCEFcIBliaE
BigCitySid says
– Amazing timing for this article. A portion which focuses on my greatest fear for one of the world’s greatest franchises in all of sports. The ability of the current ownership group to do anything correct.
– Two former Lakers and future Hall of Famers posted stats on playoff contenders that you would love to see someone, anyone, in a Laker uniform put up this season:
* Pau Gasol: 13-18 fg’s 4-5 ft’s for 31 points with 12 rebs & 3 block in 36 mins
* Dwight Howard: 11-16 fg’s 14-18 ft’s for 36 points w/ 26 rebs & 4 assist in 45 mins
and what did our crackerjack front office get for these guys who chose to leave money on the table and get out of L.A.? Nothing, zilch, nada, zero.
Fern says
That 2nd round pick for Hibbert is like in 2019, so where is the “fleece”? , that salary dump is going to pay off in the near future, and if the Lakers are a playoff team by 2019, (hopefully) who would care about that pick?
bleedpurplegold says
Does BS even watch the games from the sidelines?!? Tarik averages 14rbs(4 offensive) per 36min and is always active on D, which cant be said of everyone on our roster….really sad scott doesnt see this
Craig W. says
Mid,
If there is personal animus that Byron has about Black and it impacts the chemistry of the team – a player needing and earning minutes that are not given does affect chemistry – then that criticism falls squarely on the shoulders of the coach.
This year could poison Black’s attitude toward the Lakers and he may get another – even inferior offer – and choose to leave. If we need him as a backup or developmental player to be used in ‘small-quick’ player sets, then his loss does impact a club trying to build depth and talent. That too would be on this coaching staff.
Mitch can’t help but see this sort of thing and Byron’s connection with ownership not withstanding, his turn as a Laker coach very well could be sealed with this type of action/feeling.
Anonymous says
and what did our crackerjack front office get for these guys who chose to leave money on the table and get out of L.A.? Nothing, zilch, nada, zero.
__
FO supporters always like to point out that these couldn’t have been traded because we would have had to take salary back. An argument that makes no sense. Also note that one week after Howard walked Boston fleeced the Nets in the Garnett/Pierce deal — yes Boston had to take salary back but they also got some sweet 1st round picks out of the deal.
This is the biggest case of Jim’s hubris and few call him on it. Jim thought it would be easy to sign multiple max free-agents and replace the lost talent. Why take on salaries to get picks when all you need is cap flexibility to sign elites — plus who needs 1st round picks?
The response from FO supporters is always this is a natural downturn what else could have been done? I hold that Jim’s mis-management has hastened, deepened and prolonged the Lakers downturn.
A poster above said the Lakers hopefully will be a playoff team in the 2019/202 season — you realize that would be a SEVEN year rebuild (213/14 to 2019/20).
Keith says
Byron is coaching as if the job is his next year. He doesn’t understand that chasing wins with his old school hard ass style is not going to work. His best chance at getting a coaching gig beyond the Lakers would have been to do a great job developing the kids. Getting recognition and kudos for bringing the kids forward might have made him attractive to another team that needs a teacher/developer for a very young team.
He could have carved out a niche for himself — a mature coach who has a steadying hand and makes young players better. Instead, BS has missed an opportunity to prolong his career. He is now lumped in with all the retread ‘win now’ coaches and unfortunately he just isn’t that good.
marques says
We have two sixth men starting, Clarkson and Williams, we know Williams can accept being a sixth man, what about Clarkson?
If you believe Russell is a future star, why keep Clarkson? He wants to dominate the ball, I thought that is what Russell is for.
I say, trade Clarkson while his stock is up, get any young, long, wing that is available. Keep Williams, he is proven and will provide whatever Clarkson would provide for the next 3 to 5 years.
KevTheBold says
I believe they imagine a future splash bro setup.
Darius Soriano says
I’m sorry, but “FO supporters” seems to be a silly statement. Few people here are ardent “FO Supporters”. And it seems folks who want to rip on the FO all of the time (which, honestly, doesn’t even really bother me as much as unless the posts lack context), like to prop up these “supporters” to make themselves seem smart. Guess what, no one cares. Especially not me. And I run this damn site.
I will add, though, that arguing the Lakers should have traded Pau and/or Dwight, requires a ton of context that often is ignored. Dwight only played for the Lakers for one season. Trading him meant either dealing him before the deadline in February or trying to do a S&T in the off-season. The latter requires the player and the team receiving him to want to make a deal, something that is no longer beneficial to anyone. Back when LeBron/Bosh did S&T’s to go to the Heat, the CBA was different and allowed for the team with Bird Rights (in their cases, the Cavs and the Raptors) to offer longer contracts with larger annual raises. Thus, it was in the player’s benefit to seek a S&T rather than just sign with the new team outright. This gave the incumbent team some leverage in making a deal (and why the Cavs and Raptors got some draft pick compensation for those guys). With the new CBA, there is no benefit with a S&T. The player cannot get a better contract by doing one, which removes leverage from the incumbent team and makes it so the receiving team has no incentive to make a deal. If your argument is the Lakers should have engaged the Warriors in a S&T for Dwight (which was being reported at the time), that too is irrelevant since he chose the Rockets.
As for trading Pau, I have learned that there were really not many (any, really) legitimate offers on the table for the Lakers. There was one deal reported for a 2nd round pick with the Lakers taking salary back, but the FO was not interested in that. I don’t blame them, but if others want to that’s their right.
In any event, what I continue to believe in is that this FO is far from perfect. They have certainly made mistakes with their coaching hires and the optics of their decision making have become an issue. The other side, of course, is that their drafting looks to be a positive and they have made some positive trades (though they have skewed towards gambling) historically. It remains to be seen how they manage FA, especially after they start to build a better team. If they are still unable to close on FA’s when their roster looks better and closer to being competitive, that will be a problem.
KevTheBold says
Amen ! Spilt milk posts are so tiring!
Vasheed says
From various sources and my own thoughts:
Get D. Favors from Utah. Utah has been rumored to want to get rid of him wanting more spacing under the basket with Gobert. There have been rumors centering on J. Clarkson for Favors. It would look something like:
Favors plus 2 min guys for J. Clarkson, B. Bass, L. Williams or Hibbert.
Notably I would prefer to send Williams to use Hibbert elsewhere in trades.
Get Rudy Gay from Sacremento. Rumor has the Kings want to shed Gay’s salary. So this starts off being mostly about Gay for Hibbert. I would tweak this by adding Randle and WCS into the mix.
DeRozan has been in the rumor mill as free agent target for the Lakers in the offseason. So in my ideal world the Lakers would have a starting lineup after the trades this year of
Favors
Gay
WC Stein
Russell
Bryant
And DeRozan replaces Bryant next year.
Other Notable trade possibilities:
J. Clarkson for Okafor and lifted Lakers pick protection. I’m not huge fan of Okafor. But he fits Scott’s Princeton and this reduces salary next year while removing the uncertainty of the pick this year.
J. Noah for Hibbert. Gives the Bulls a healthy player. The Lakers would need to get a pick as compensation.
Kelly to Philly for 2nd round pick. Kelly had success under MDA so this might be a good fit.
Hibbert to Boston for Lee and a pick. Boston could use a center and they don’t use Lee. For one of their stock piled picks the Lakers can fill this need.
I’m very keen to the idea of the Lakers trying to get at least one trade for a guy like Favors or Gay as these are the types of players the Lakers need to add to really start having a “core”. I don’t see the probability of filling every need through free agency as all that viable.
Anonymous says
I say, trade Clarkson while his stock is up, get any young, long, wing that is available. Keep Williams, he is proven and will provide whatever Clarkson would provide for the next 3 to 5 years.
__
Clarkson’s impending free agency (restricted) make him an unlikely trade piece this year.
Anonymous says
Gary and Robert – I think you are looking at things through heavily pessimistic glasses. Not sure if you know, but there is a mandatory minimum salary and roster number the lakers had to fill out this year. Like it or not, we, like most teams in a rebuilding phase, were going to end up with some real duds on the roster for cap filling purposes. Of the duds, only Young has a guaranteed contract and Brandon Bass have a player option. My understanding is that for all other duds you refer to, the Lakers can opt to make a qualifying offer or not. So we may not be able to get a bunch of picks at the trade deadline, but lets be realistic here, the type of teams that are shopping for talent are typically playoff bound teams and their picks are not really worth much. Is it really disastrous to have obscene amounts of cap space this offseason?
Please re-read this again:
“And it seems folks who want to rip on the FO all of the time (which, honestly, doesn’t even really bother me as much as unless the posts lack context), like to prop up these “supporters” to make themselves seem smart. Guess what, no one cares. Especially not me. “
Todd says
We go over this a lot. The salary floor is meaningless.
The ‘punishment’ for missing the minimum salary threshold is merely that you get charged up to the amount of it anyway. That’s it. The excess is divided up amongst the players on the roster at a percentage determined by the NBA Player’s Association, and that’s all that happens. That’s not a punishment at all. That’s not even really a penalty. And thus, going over it for the sake of going over it would be meaningless.
matt says
I like trade scenarios, but the best thing is trade no one and keep cap room, sign free agents, clarkson, derozan, and a center ………(Jefferson, horford, whiteside, or drummond )
Here’s a trade scenario (just for fun)
Lakers trade. Hibbert, swaggy p, and bass
Suns trade. Tyson chandler, teletovic, and tucker
Bulls trade. Gibson, McDermott, and 1st rounder (pick27)
Lakers get. chandler, McDermott, teletovic, and bulls pick
Suns get. Hibbert, young, and gibson
Bulls get. Bass and tucker
Clay Bertrand says
Not a HUGE point here but for Good or for Bad, we also do not have any current roster flexibility.
The Lakers DID NOT NEED to fill out their ENTIRE ROSTER and carry 15 players this season. They could have satisfied all league requirements and carried as few as 13 players. Metta/Sacre are occupying the 14th/15th roster spots that COULD be used to look at D-League guys or potentially absorb an additional player or two in a likely minor trade. Not that I see much value in this route to adding talent to the roster, but we filled out roster with a full 15 so we won’t be adding BLUE to BLACK AND BROWN unless we cut someone…..
RELATED NOTE: FYI– Jabari Brown went from the Second Worst NBA team, to the WORST Chinese team in the Foshan Long Lions where he is leading the squad with a 30.6 pt avg.
matt says
Trading no one also allows young players minutes, and possible keeping top 3 pick, any movement could, sad to say, improve the team, and diminish players minutes
Clay Bertrand says
Matt, NO man. We would STILL have Byron to ensure we keep our pick.
We could have freaking Steph Curry on the team but you know Byron would just bench him and say, “I’ve been telling Steph he needs to be tougher. He needs to model his game after and emulate Ronnie Price, Matthew Dellavadova, and Lindsey Hunter. I think he hears me, but he just doesn’t get it. He needs to man up.”
matt says
Clay that’s funny stuff byron bench and blaming an mvp
Clay Bertrand says
Matt, We laugh to keep from Cryin!!!
Anonymous says
1) I like the Favors idea. But he has a team friendly deal (especially with the cap going up) — haven’t heard he was on the block. Plus Utah is already heavy in the backcourt with Burke, Burks and Exum. Also, Hayward and Hood often play SG. Not sure it works.
2) Not a fan of Gay (30 next season). Plus, I think you need to give Randle more time to prove himself. Trading him now feels like selling low.
3) Clarkson for Okafor makes sense. I agree that Clarkson is too ball dominate to be a long term fit with Russell. Okafor’s lack of ‘speed’ concerns me – but getting him for Clarkson would be a great deal for the Lakers in my book. But, as mentioned above does Clarkson’s impending restricted free agency make him less likely to be dealt.
4) Hibbert for Noah makes sense on one level. The Bulls need another post player. But Noah is on an expiring contract as well and they like him in Chicago. The Bulls have an internal solution with Bobby Portis, who is really talented.
I think any team interested in Hibbert signs him cheap this off season. I think Noah signs a team friendly deal to stay in Chicago — his numbers have cratered recently and would likely take less to finish out his career in a Bulls uniform.
5) DeRozan is a free agent. Does he come home for less money (in terms of guaranteed years and raises) or does he stay in Toronto and play for the better team? Media reports have said the Lakers are very interested but they also have said Demar stays put.
matt says
Clay good note on jabari brown, who got beat out by Huertas who did look good in summer, but i couldn’t understand the whole thing because, i figured those extra roster spots were for prospects not guys you thought could add an extra win, i mean it was sad one guy almost broke his arm for a lose ball trying to make the team, my point and yours all extra roster points were won at by veteran players not one prospect made it, and prospects get better veterans don’t
KevTheBold says
“Prospects get better, veterans don’t”
Well said,.. there are some perks with starting fresh with a new crew.
Yes it takes longer, yet the payoff will last longer.
Craig W. says
Todd,
The league minimum is not nothing. You just make it seem like that when looking at things in hindsight.
The Hibbert trade served three purposes – any one by itself wouldn’t have justified the trade. 1) We were going to be pretty bad defensively and Hibbert had the real possibility to help us around the rim, 2) He had a large salary, but only for 1 year and he was an unrestricted FA, which made the experiment better because there was no long-term risk, and 3) the Lakers were going to pay the minimum salary in any case and bringing possible new talent and veteran smarts to the team seemed to be a good idea. Roy was bitterly disappointed with his last year in Indy and there was every reason to think he would really apply himself here – he has, but apparently his skills have fallen off a cliff.
Looking back on it now, we might have made a different decision, as might also be the case with Byron Scott. However, nobody gets the chance to change what they previously did and it serves absolutely no purpose for the front office to admit to a mistake and alienate their team and coaches. If the Lakers can find a way to trade the players, I am sure they will. If the Lakers find a better coaching situation in the middle of the year, I am sure they will consider it. However, I really don’t expect the front office to pass any of this information along to Laker fans.
Todd says
Craig: I was addressing the question of the minimum salary floor — not the pros and cons of the Hibbert deal. The Hibbert deal was made for perceived basketball reasons and not due to the fact that there was a salary floor the Lakers were trying to exceed.
Vasheed says
@Anonymous,
1) Favors has been on the block since like 2014. Exum has been injured and in the reports specific to the Lakers I’ve read Trey Burk goes to the Lakers. I leave out a few points here and ther as I consider them minor points.
2) I personally don’t get too concerned with age until a guy has a contract that goes past 33. I will also disclose I have never been a big fan of Randle. I think he has what they call upside if he develops as one would hope but, I figure odds are pretty strong this is selling high not low. Meanwhile I really love WCS.
3) I think it would take lifting the Lakers pick protection in order to get Philly to swallow having to pay Clarkson next year.
4) Noah hates Hoiberg by all accounts. I will be shocked if he plays for the Bulls next year under Hoiberg.
5) I think your DeRozan point clarifies why I’m in favor of making some upgrades through trade now. In order to attract free agents you need to start showing you have guys who can win. I’m very skeptical of just trying to develop several rookies and then praying for ping pong balls and then also getting the draft pick right. That is not a given even if they win the lotto. I favor getting some guys with more predictable production and then trying to develop a few rookies like Russell and Stein that you can make minutes for rather than having a roster full of rookies.
matt says
I don’t see lakers landing okafor, but they could land al Jefferson who is better than okafor, and more experienced, his free agent stock is going down because of an injury and some kind of drug infraction, he’s missed almost 6 weeks, he could fly under the radar in free agency, and would be a tremendous pick up for the Lakers, at 31 years-old he should have a couple more years left, again al Jefferson is far better than okafor, and we got enough youngsters. Also if you had okafor would you trade him for clarkson
matt says
Trade. Kobe for joe Johnson
matt says
My point on the okafor thing is,
al jefferson right now is what okafor might one day become
Vasheed says
@Matt,
The Sixers have 3 big men Noel, Embiid, and Okafor. The Sixers have high hopes on Embiid returning next season and playing up to expectations. Okafor has been the clearest guy who doesn’t fit among the 3. I would question their sanity if they didn’t want to move Okafor. If it were a straight up deal they would want Russell. But by lifting the Lakers trade protection Clarkson becomes a palatable offer giving them certainty of a high pick this season.
Note: I’d rather scrap Scott and the Princeton. But Okafor would fit in Scott’s system pretty well.
Anonymous says
My point on the okafor thing is,
al jefferson right now is what okafor might one day become
__
That’s fine — Al Jefferson had a nice 5 to 7 yr run. Don’t fall in love with Okafor, fall in like with him — play him as long at it makes sense then trade him.
matt says
Vasheed i hear ya, 76ers also have 3 or 4 first round picks in next draft, and with all this stockpile they need to make some quality moves, maybe kupcheck can call them and do a jedi mind trick, okafor is a great prospect
matt says
Anonymous are you talking as if lakers already have okafor or from 76ers perspective
Anonymous says
Either.
I’m not sure the Clarkson for Okafor thing is made up or if there is smoke/fire from a real source. Bottom line for me is that if the Lakers acquired Okafor and Okafor is Al Jefferson then I’m OK with it. From 06/07 to 14/15 Jefferson’s PER was above 19 and most of those years it was in the 20s. He’s been a pretty efficient player.
rr says
The league minimum is not nothing.
—–
It is, actually, and it has been explained why it is several times now. The Hibbert deal is defensible without bringing misconceptions about the salary floor into the discussion, and it cannot be called a failure until we see how or if the Lakers FO leverages his expiring deal.
Complaining about FO complainers: If people want to complain—and when a team goes 57-150 over 2.5 years and is also down multiple draft picks, complaints are inevitable—then I think it is more logical to complain about the guys who hired the coach so many fans mock (who had coached for thirteen years prior to getting hired, and who was widely derided at the time), put together the rosters, and traded said draft picks than it is to complain about the coach every day. So singling out FO complainers for opprobrium—sorry, no sale there.
That stipulated, I agree that bagging on the FO for not getting anything for Howard is not a good argument. I think the entire organization from ownership on down, including Howard himself, mishandled Howard’s year here, but I would not have traded him. As to Pau, I saw reports at the time that PHX was offering a late-mid first rounder for him and were building the salary exchange around Emeka Okafor’s deal. It was also reported that the Lakers turned that down, and many, including the KBros, were critical of that. If those reports were inaccurate and that was not on the table, then fair enough.
Trades: I am not seeing anything here that I really like and that looks doable to me. The Clarkson/Okafor thing is creative, but I am not seeing Philly giving up Okafor for the pick protection and from the Lakers POV, I am not a huge Okafor fan.
On another note, I rarely watch college ball, but I did see both Brandon Ingram and Buddy Hield yesterday. Ingram has nice skills for a tall guy and has amazingly long arms, so people are seeing Durant in him. It may turn out that way, but he is very skinny, looks like a high school kid, is only 18, and will have a long development curve. Hield OTOH is a 22-year-old senior, who has some size and a quick shot release. I didn’t see a lot in his game other than scoring, but if you need scoring, well, he may be able to help you right away. I have seen him projected to go as high as 7th and as low as the 20s.
Anonymous says
Someone made up the Okafor for Clarkson deal, right? I can’t find any media reports just bloggers playing fantasy basketball.
My thoughts: At 23, Clarkson is what he is. Okafor just turned 20. I think its safe to say that Okafor has more upside. I don’t see the 76ers making that deal unless the Lakers removed protection on the pick.
If, I’m the Lakers and I have even a remote shot at keeping the pick I keep it. Getting Simmons would speed this rebuild up. Plus he may be this generations’ Lebron.
Clay Bertrand says
The Okafor Myth is just that……
William Wallace says
Al Jefferson is done. We don’t want him unless it’s a bargain (short) deal. Clarkson is what he is? at 23? It’s only his second year in the league and he’s still improving. Get him a real coach and let’s see what he can do.
Darius Soriano says
RR,
The proposed Pau/Emeka Okafor trade did not include any other assets per the report Marc Stein put out there: http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/10392533/phoenix-suns-explore-deal-los-angeles-lakers-pau-gasol
And, actually, that’s why the Lakers didn’t make the trade. They wanted a 1st rounder for Pau and no one bit. It is my understanding that teams were offering two types of packages: a 2nd round pick + salary back OR salary relief (like the Emeka/Bynum rumors) that brought back no other assets. Stein implies the Suns were willing to include a pick for an “impact” player, but I have heard they haggled w/ the Lakers on this.
Folks knew Pau was going to be a FA and the Lakers always wanted a 1st rounder (or other good assets) for him (remember, they traded him for Chris Paul before, they wanted return on a Pau trade). This was pretty much known. Whether they should have caved and traded him for salary relief/a 2nd rounder anyway is a different conversation, but considering the complaints above are about the Lakers “getting nothing” for Pau and “letting him walk”, I again say that just because fans think something is possible/should happen, doesn’t mean it is/can happen.
Anonymous says
Al Jefferson is done. We don’t want him unless it’s a bargain (short) deal.
__
The issue isn’t acquiring Al Jefferson. The question was if Okafor projects to be Al Jefferson would you do the deal? My response was that if Okafor = Al Jefferson, I would pull the trigger. Jefferson had a very nice run for almost a decade.
I would not want to acquire Jefferson now, because as you say he is done.
Darius Soriano says
Also, people complain about the coach because the team is not well coached. You can blame the FO for hiring a bad coach. I do that too. I also, you know, blame the coach since he’s doing a poor job. Both things can happen at the same time.
I’d add that when I complain about the coach, I provide context. I say that he’s got a difficult balancing act to manage, that the roster construction makes his job more difficult, and that young players can be mistake prone. That is some of the background for the job this coach is doing and this matters.
But to simply give this coach a pass by saying “the front office hired him and he had a track record” seems less logical — to use the word that was thrown around — than assigning blame where it lies with all parties. So, yeah, blame the FO. I did that when the coach was hired. But, also blame the coach, who continues to say things in the press that are hard to defend, as the team continues to look lost on both ends of the floor, and as the team plays barely to/mostly below their talent level on both offense and defense. He deserves blame for those things.
I’d add, if you want to credit the coach for the things he seems to do well, do that too! There’s room for all that in a wide-ranging and fair analysis of the job he’s doing. Just like should be the case for anyone else. I don’t know why it should be so hard.
Anonymous says
The Kobe Achilles injury closed the door on that Lakers team. Howard leaving slammed that door. The FO just chose not to act on it.
Pau should have been traded that summer when he likely would have garnered a mid/late first round pick in return. The plan of Kobe making a healthy comeback and the team pushing for a playoff spot in 2013/14 was pure folly.
Bottom line: The organization should have started the rebuild the summer of 2013. Kobe’s injury and Howard’s leaving gave them the cover they needed to do it but the FO lacked the will power to make the tough but right call,
Darius Soriano says
“Pau should have been traded that summer when he likely would have garnered a mid/late first round pick in return.”
You have no idea what the Lakers did or did not try to do that summer. I know for a fact Pau continued to be on the trade block that summer and that offers did not yield what you think was a “likely” return. Pau was entering his walk year where he was to be a FA the next summer. Teams don’t often like to surrender assets of good value for players who are in their walk year.
The Lakers tried to trade Pau — for Chris Paul — right at the time he could have netted something of value in return. He was still under contract for two more seasons and, while coming off a difficult post-season, was still viewed as a top 15-20 player (he was 2nd team All-NBA in the 2010-11 season was traded post lock-out in early December 2011). We all know what happened.
Again, I’m more than happy to dish dirt on the FO for mistakes they’ve made. Making up things about trades that “should have happened” while saying you know for certain what would have been acquired is silly. Tangentially, it’s why we don’t allow trade speculation on this site — fans always seem to think they know what another team would do when, in fact, they don’t.
Marques says
I can’t say I understand or know what the coach is thinking, but…….somebody has to be here through the bad years.
Maybe he is running real good practices….maybe Kobe is killing the teams spirit and Byron is waiting for next year to coach for real
These are my hopes, my alternative theory is much much worse.
Clay Bertrand says
Darius, are you saying that Brandon Bass and Nick Young to the Knicks for Porzingis and a First Round Draft pick is NOT happening?????!!!!! Who says NO??? The Knicks get a quality PF to play with Melo and a lights out shooter off the bench in Young!!! Porzingis is a project!!
Chazz the Bartender approves this message………..
(tongue in cheek)
Marques, your alternative theory that Byron IS AS BAD as he seems is true. Go with that one……..
matt says
Al Jefferson is done, ok?
matt says
Okafor might be al Jefferson, might, but his character is already questioned, all our young guys have high character, okafor doesn’t belong here, our youth will grow better without him.
Mid-Wilshire says
To return to the Tarik Black issue, today Michael Pina of Bleacher Report published an interesting article entitled, “It’s Time for Los Angeles to give Tarik Black a Shot at Center.” Here’s the link:
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2609139-its-time-for-los-angeles-lakers-to-give-tarik-black-a-shot-at-center
In the article, Pina sites some very interest statistics including the following:
“The Lakers are never better rebounding the ball, on both ends of the court, than when Black is in the game, according to NBA.com. Their offensive rebound rate falls from 28.7 percent with him to 22.7 percent without, and their overall rebound rate shoots from 47 percent with Black on the sideline to 54.3 percent when he’s mixing it up in the paint (no other Laker lifts them above 50 percent).
“Furthermore, the Lakers’ defensive rating goes from 100.3 points per 100 possessions with Black to 108.3 when he’s on the bench. That’s a noisy stat, but the range between those numbers is the same difference between the NBA’s 30th and ninth-ranked defensive units.
“On the other end, Black’s averaging 1.00 point per possession as a roll man and shooting 58.3 percent. According to Synergy, he’s more efficient in this situation than Serge Ibaka, Draymond Green, Kevin Love and Blake Griffin.
“That’s largely due to an extremely limited sample size and the fact that those guys pop out and launch jump shots, but Black’s rolling ability still adds a dimension to L.A.’s offense that it otherwise lacks.”
Then he quotes J.B. Bickerrstaff of the Houston Rockets who offers the following perspective on Tarik Black (Black was initially a rookie with Houston last year before joining the Lakers):
“Black has qualities that validate his presence on an NBA court, and he made an impression on Rockets head coach J.B. Bickerstaff while a rookie in Houston last season.
“‘We loved him. We wanted to keep him around,’ Bickerstaff said. ‘He plays with great energy. Defensively, he communicates. He’s good in the pick-and-roll. He’ll rebound the ball, doesn’t back down from anybody, accepts all the challenges, all comers. So we love him.’
“If the Lakers felt the same way, they too could unearth some useful production that’s currently sitting under their noses.”
An interesting article. Must reading.
Clay Bertrand says
Soooo Houston Didn’t tell Tarik Black that in order to stay in the league to 10-15 years, that he had to model his game after Kenneth Faried, Dennis Rodman and Ben Wallace????
Because that’s what “NBA COACH” Byron Scott says!
Mid, how does this comment play in the context of Pina’s article???
Or how does this DIRECT QUOTE from the Idiot “Coach” himself RE Black:
“He has been OK. What he gives me off the bench, I don’t know,” Scott said. “He hasn’t done anything spectacular. But he hasn’t done anything devastating where you say, lets send him down to the D-League. But when you’re bringing guys off the bench. You want them to have an impact. He doesn’t have that.”
This MORON refuses to play Black at all and then laments, “What he gives me off the bench, I don’t know.” WTF???? Of COURSE you don’t know!!!! You NEVER play the guy!!!!!
Clay Bertrand says
I just have to say, remember when Byron was the Studio Analyst during MDA’s coaching stint??? He was so damn SMUG!!! All he did was lambast MDA for his team playing NO D. He would basically almost laugh and just DIS MDA as if his Rileyesque Bloodlines of being a HARD ASS would CERTAINLY whip the Lakers into shape.
Then he’s given the job and he hasn’t implemented ANYTHING he huffed and puffed about. In fact, you could argue he has made them WORSE!! I realize the roster has gotten a lil younger but he hasn’t got ANYONE to buy in. Lucky for him, he has his former assistant and LEAD APOLOGIST Dave Miller uhhh “analyzing” HIS moves to blatantly deceive the viewing public into believing that Byron is a GOOD COACH and that his methods are working. Can’t we get MDA from Philly just to do ONE GAME while Byron coaches????? Or how about just ANY HONEST PERSON WITH A SET OF EYES just to balance out the Bogus SWEET TALK with a dose of REALITY????
Not like AC and BigGame are going to really criticize anything….
Craig W. says
We can all feel that Byron is making mistakes in managing the Lakers, but that still doesn’t justify calling him a moron. There is no context in that statement, just emotion. Like most unbridled emotion, you are not adding anything to the discussion.
rr says
Byron/FO: I don’t know why it should be so hard.
It’s not hard, but you should consider looking at what goes up on your own website and on your Twitter account. Since last off-season, there has been one main site post here focused on Jim Buss, which
a) Was posted by Myles Duve.
b) Linked to a piece defending Buss that was written by an actual criminal defense attorney.
Meanwhile, you spent most of the preseason talking about stuff like how Byron needed to leverage the various playmakers on the team, suggesting that the team could win 38 games if things broke right, etc. Yes, you said that there would be a balancing act, but you also dismissed arguments about Byron’s situation by saying that this was the job he signed up for. I have yet to hear you say something like that on the site about Jim Buss, and that is before we get to how hard you go at Byron on Twitter.
Track record: I notice that when this comes up, you never actually specifically address Byron’s track record. Byron has had some good teams when he has had a HOF PG (Paul, Kidd) and defensively elite, active bigs (Chandler, Martin). This suggests that what Byron brings as a coach is instilling toughness, maybe a little ring-bearer gravitas, focus, simplicity etc. He is not, as we hear about every day, and as we see every day through his own actions and words, either a nurturing type or a creative strategist. So, it seems pretty obvious to me that if you ran an NBA team and you were thinking about hiring Byron Scott, that you would look to see if you had the elements of past teams with which Byron has had success, or failing that, if you could add them. Although Jeremy Lin and Ed Davis are nobody’s idea of greatness, it may be that the FO thought that those guys could provide some lite versions of what Scott needed and that last year’s team could be decent. It may be that they thought the same thing when they brought in Hibbert and Williams. I don’t know. I think it is more likely that they hired him because, as Jim said in preseason, “He’s a Laker.” But suggesting that his long track record shouldn’t be a big deal and that we should just focus on what he is doing wrong now is sort of like loaning money to a guy after you found out from multiple people that he doesn’t pay off his debts, getting stiffed by him, and then walking around day after day saying, “But he should change now. He should pay me.”
I think the bottom line here is that you seem to think that Byron is really bad at his job, and that the FO guys are actually pretty good at theirs, but have just had a few unfortunate missteps, and that you like talking tactics and on-court stuff more than talking FO stuff. If that is not the case, fine, correct me, but that is what you put on-line day after day strongly suggests. That’s OK, but I also think that people who see it differently have several very solid arguments, including the fact that Byron is the coach.
Pau/trade market: I did a little Googling, and it was not hard to find pieces suggesting that PHX would be willing to part with a first-rounder. Bresnahan said that the Lakers wanted a better pick than the 17th pick, for example. I found one article saying that PHX offered Okafor and the pick. But none of that was tightly sourced, may have been agenda-based, and it may be that nothing of the sort was ever on the table. I have never gone at the FO that hard for not trading Pau per se, but keeping Pau and then offering him an extension was all part of the IMO ill-conceived try to be like Dallas/try to sign Carmelo Anthony plan.
rr says
But that still doesn’t justify calling him a moron.
—
Agreed.
LKK says
I don’t think Byron is a moron. I think he is trying to tank as per his employer’s wishes. This season has gone completely awry and a shot at retaining the pick is about all that’s left. Of course this is just my opinion and I have not one shred of proof, but I ask myself this: can a 3time NBA champ truly believe the things he says about Tarik Black? Yes, Tarik has deficiencies, but at the same time, he brings some positives to the table. I think Scott knows that, but simply does not want to play Black (and others) because that may lead to some victories and spoil the chances of retaining the pick.
R says
“‘We loved him. We wanted to keep him around” Bickerstaff said. “He plays with great energy. Defensively, he communicates. He’s good in the pick-and-roll. He’ll rebound the ball, doesn’t back down from anybody, accepts all the challenges, all comers. So we love him.”
———————–
Now, this has absolutely nothing to do with what the Lakers should do with Tarik Black, but I do wonder why, if the Rockets “loved” and “wanted to keep him around”, they waived him.
Mid-Wilshire says
R,
Good question. The Rockets last year were very much in the playoff hunt. But they had a full roster and they wanted to acquire Josh Smith from the Detroit Pistons. They felt that with Josh and Dwight together on the front line, they would have a shot at the NBA finals.
So they waived Tarik Black who, at the time, was an undrafted rookie.
I remember Kevin McHale (the Houston coach at the time) lamenting the necessity of the decision. Black had just had a game in which he grabbed 15 or so rebounds. But they wanted Smith badly.
The Rockets, as you know, did not make the finals.
That’s what happened.
Darius Soriano says
“It’s not hard, but you should consider looking at what goes up on your own website and on your Twitter account.”
Haha. I’m pretty sure no one considers what happens on my twitter or on my site than me.
“Meanwhile, you spent most of the preseason talking about stuff like how Byron needed to leverage the various playmakers on the team, suggesting that the team could win 38 games if things broke right, etc. Yes, you said that there would be a balancing act, but you also dismissed arguments about Byron’s situation by saying that this was the job he signed up for. I have yet to hear you say something like that on the site about Jim Buss, and that is before we get to how hard you go at Byron on Twitter.”
Seems you have a pretty big hangup on Jim Buss, which is fine. Seems you might be one of the few people who doesn’t acknowledge that, but that’s fine too, I suppose. As for writing about Jim Buss every day, I don’t do that because this team is built, now. I’ve written plenty about the construction of the team, the draft picks, the trades, and the free agency that led to this team being what it is. I mostly liked those moves in a vacuum, while acknowledging what I did not like about them. If you want to know what I think about Buss, you can re-read those articles since those are the moves reflective on him. Or you can read what I wrote when Byron Scott was hired to see what I thought of that move, which also reflects on Jim Buss and, of course, Mitch Kupchak.
I write about Byron Scott because he is now in charge of utilizing the players on this team. If you think Byron Scott is a good coach, we can agree to disagree. If you think he’s a bad coach, you’d have a hard time convincing me of that with how you deflect for him by ripping the guys who hired him.
“I think the bottom line here is that you seem to think that Byron is really bad at his job, and that the FO guys are actually pretty good at theirs, but have just had a few unfortunate missteps, and that you like talking tactics and on-court stuff more than talking FO stuff.”
I don’t think Byron is particularly good at his job, no. It seems you think he’s neutral, or good (though you only blame the FO, so I could be wrong). Again, we can agree to disagree here. But, I will explain further that I think Byron can work fine on a team with a lot of talent but does not get more out of his players than is expected. And, in some ways, he gets less out of them. He’s a motivator in the old school sense and I’m sure that still works for some players, media, fans, etc. But, and I’ve been clear on this, I think coaching is not just motivation, but tactics and strategy, etc. Again, if you think he’s good at these things, we can agree to disagree.
Also, I think it’s funny that you consistently say the Lakers hired this guy so his faults are, essentially, their faults. No, his faults are his faults and him being hired is the FO’s fault. As I said above, criticism doesn’t have to be an either or. You seem to want it to be the FO’s fault only that he’s performing poorly in this job as if now that he has this opportunity him not doing everything he can to succeed is somehow not his fault, but someone else’s. Sorry, but I’m for personal accountability. So the FO can be accountable for hiring him and he can be accountable for the things he controls. As I wrote when he was hired “He should get his chance to prove his critics wrong; to show that he can improve areas where he’s not been as successful while maintaining some of the things he has done well. My hope, of course, is that he is able to do just that and lead the team back to prominence. This is the nature of being a fan — rooting for the success of the team comes with the territory.”
At this point, I think we can all agree hiring Byron Scott was a mistake. I thought this at the time, but he had the chance to make it so I would be wrong. Sadly, I have not been.
Anonymous says
This MORON refuses to play Black at all and then laments, “What he gives me off the bench, I don’t know.” WTF???? Of COURSE you don’t know!!!! You NEVER play the guy!!!!!
—
Anger issues?
Bruce McNall says
seems like you have a pretty big hang up on Jim Buss… Seems like you might be one of the few that doesn’t acknowledge that . . . lol
Fern says
Please Okafor for Clarkson? yeah that’s what we need a big that is not a rim stopper at all and not that good of a rebounder, he can score, so what? Our defense would be worse than now, the Lakers passed on him on the Draft, let it go already, while we’re at it let’s trade Russell for Miudiay too since it was what some people here wanted. How easy people forget, Pau was on the trading block for more than two damn years, so there’s that, the Lakers could not find a aceptable trade, want to blame someone? blame MDA who killed his value by mishandling him the way he did. And please despite everything don’t disrespect Byron Scott, want to call coaches and players names, there are a thousand sites that cater to that kind of talk. Thank you very much…
Mr.G says
I’ve read almost all posts…
I’llsummarize in few words.
A coach who told to press that Russell don’t know the playbook, says that Julius needs to grow up, tell us that Nance Jr. worth first round pick and finally “Black is OK” but he even plays is a MORON
matt says
This is an ongoing agruement, about who’s fault it is that the lakers are bad. They wanted to make dr. Buss happy on his death bed, so they drastically constructed a team and it blew up in their face. Isn’t that what happened. And now we are paying for it.
I would like to agree about the bad coach hirings though. Mike brown, bad hire…d’antoni, bad hire….byron scott, bad hire…
The free agent signings were just patchwork, due to the mistakes of bringing, super drama Dwight howard, and broken back steve nash, oopps almost forgot overpaid kobe
matt says
Fern totally nailed it on pau
matt says
Pau under d’antoni was the most abused, misused, underutilized player I’ve ever seen. Pau had heart through it all, and even though the whole thing made him look like he was done.
But a little bit of disagreement the FO thought the team or coach was gonna pull it through and didn’t make a move before trade deadline
rr says
>Seems you have a pretty big hang up on Jim Buss, which is fine.
AFAIK, Buss is the final sign-off on all the big basketball decisions, like who coaches the Lakers, what FAs they try to sign, who they draft, and who is on the final roster, so yeah, I am in fact fine owning that I am hung up on that. I’m a Lakers fan.
> Haha. I’m pretty sure no one considers what happens on my twitter or on my site than me.
What I said about the number of posts appearing here directly about the FO (not about a move they made, but directly criticizing them, supporting them, whatever, as opposed to talking directly about Byron) was true. Also, if your position is that you liked the moves “in a vacuum” then, well, that is sort of the point. The Lakers don’t play in a vacuum, and those of us who have questioned the team’s direction the last three years have not seen that many of the moves fit together in a productive way. There is nothing wrong with signing Lou Williams for 3/21 in a vacuum—but doing it didn’t fit all that well with this team and this roster at this moment. But what a lot of people do is hammer more on Byron for playing Williams than hammering on the FO for signing him. I don’t really agree with that, for many reasons.
As to the rest, where I think we differ the most is right here:
>Sorry, but I’m for personal accountability. So the FO can be accountable for hiring him and he can be accountable for the things he controls.<
You seem to think that the FO’s accountability for what the coach does ends when he signs his contract. Leaving aside the reality that Scott’s faults, as you call them, were very clear before they hired him, I simply don’t think that is the right way to look at the issue. This is basic stuff—with great power comes great responsibility, the buck stops here, etc. Accountability flows upward. If Byron Scott is misusing Tarik Black or damaging Julius Randle’s psyche or impeding D’Angelo Russell’s chances of becoming an All-Star someday, then I don’t think saying that those things are the coach’s purview and leaving the FO out of them makes much sense, especially with the way many teams are run today with the analytics/coaching overlap. Those macro-issues ultimately fall on the people to whom Scott answers, and it is ultimately up to them to correct his faults or to make a change. You seem to be saying that the fact he was a bad hire is the FO’s fault, but the fact that he has been a bad coach has nothing to do with them. I don’t see it that way. Also, I have made it clear several times that I don’t think that Byron is an especially good coach, and I made it clear in the post above what I think he brings to a team and what he doesn’t bring, that he should be playing the kids more, and I see no good argument other than Stealth Tank stuff that he is a fit for where the Lakers are now. But I don’t expect him either to change or to resign and leave millions of dollars on the table, so that puts the spotlight back on the guys upstairs.
Finally, on a general note: I have always been a roster guy more than a coaching guy. The NBA is a talent league; Phil more or less said as much in his exit interview back in 2011. This is why I sometimes defended Brown, D’Antoni, and even Phil. We can see this clearly if we look at the arcs the last couple of years with
Miami
Indiana
Cleveland
Portland
Oklahoma City
At the same time, a system/culture that fits and grows the players’ talents can make a difference. We see that if we look at recent results in
Golden State
Atlanta
Boston
San Antonio
Detroit
So, that is one reason why I think the Lakers need a new coach. But I don’t think it is current one’s responsibility to see that.
rr says
matt,
Yes, the point about going for one more title for Dr. Buss and Kobe is always relevant, and I do not really blame Jim Buss for that.
rr says
LKK,
No way to know, but as stated, I am never on the Stealth Tank Story train. I said the other day that I think Byron just thinks that young guys need to earn it, need to be pushed, need to be kept in their places, etc, so that is how he deals with them.
R,
Indeed. I was saying weeks ago that Black should get some run, but yeah. Houston waived him presumably because they thought Montejunas, Jones, and Capela et al were better than he was.
Darius Soriano says
“Those macro-issues ultimately fall on the people to whom Scott answers, and it is ultimately up to them to correct his faults or to make a change.”
For all the talk about “this is who he is”, you seem to be ignoring a fairly big point about Mitch and Jim Buss (and Jerry before them). This front office has never really micromanaged their coaches. There were whispers that Mitch talked to Byron about playing Clarkson some last year, but I haven’t found anyone willing to report that (on or off the record). Both Mitch and Byron have said they are in constant communication, but I think they (mostly) believe in Byron’s “macro” methods of issuing tough love and not handing out playing time simply to do so. Mitch has said as much.
Seems you want Jim & Mitch to coach the team and make the final decisions. Well, they hired a guy to do just that. If you think it’s now their job to intervene, I don’t know what to tell you. It’s never really been their M.O. If it was, they probably would have told Mike Brown to not run the Princeton with Steve Nash or told Mike D’Antoni that Pau isn’t a stretch 4.
Fact is, for all the talk about what I do and don’t write about the FO — who I have consistently said have made decisions I disagree with, mostly on the coaching side but also in terms of certain personnel decisions — you seem to not speak much on Scott at all beyond to say that fans would be better off focusing their attention on the guys who hired him. Anyways, I’ve spend too much time on this already. I think folks know where I stand. If they don’t, they can’t read. Haha.
matt says
The way d’antoni handled pau is similar to how byron scott is. Signs of a bad coach. You don’t put pau out there and watch him get man handled and be like whats wrong with that guy, if your opponents stronger he’s gonna throw you around, pau was not as strong as some people he guarded.
Back to scott, russell and randle were criticised after getting whipped by okc, westbrook and ibaka are veterans, stronger guys you would expect them to get handled, coach you put them out there..you should expect something like that..they are your players
now this comes back to the tarik black rants I’m seeing on here, byron scott gives tarik a shot at playing, he plays great at first then the mismatch starts to set in, doesn’t the coach know his player, correct me if I’m wrong but he matched tarik with gobert who is bigger, probly stronger, if your gonna play tarik match him up, when it’s right, if he gets beat take notes coach, don’t act like he’s gotta prove something, the player is who he is, it’s the coaches responsibility to know who he is, and utilize that player accordingly. You can’t force a square peg in a circle hole,,
It’s bad coaching
Darius Soriano says
I should add, I’m not for calling anyone — not the coach, not the GM, not the VP of basketball operations — a moron. It’s pretty easy to coach or make fake trades from comfort of a keyboard. It’s much harder to deal with all the variables these guys do and come out the other side clean.
That said, criticism can be fair just as praise can be. We try to see both sides of the story here as best we can.
rr says
Well, they hired a guy to do just that. If you think it’s now their job to intervene, I don’t know what to tell you. It’s never really been their M.O.
—
I agree that the Lakers’ FO is probably old-school about staying out of the coach’s flower bed. But Byron is 30-95 with the Lakers, appears to have somewhat tenuous relationships with the team’s two recent lottery picks, and is widely seen as being out of touch with the modern NBA. To riff on something that you once said about Byron, perhaps it is time for the Lakers FO to “evolve and adapt.”
>you seem to not speak much on Scott at all beyond to say that fans would be better off focusing their attention on the guys who hired him.
I think I said plenty about him in the last few posts, have talked about his track record in more specific terms than anyone else here has, and I have said then that and now I never thought hiring him was a great idea. It is true that I don’t go off on his tactics, rotations, and what he says to media people day after day, mostly because
1. Plenty of other people in the Lakers blogosphere, especially some of the ones with the biggest megaphones, (there are high-profile people who are much rougher on Scott than you are) already do that.
2. As stated, I am a roster guy more than a coaching guy. The Lakers IMO just don’t have the horses to win many NBA games right now.
And, yes, absolutely: I think that if people want to complain about how the team is being run, then they should focus their concerns at the top more than on Byron and Kobe.
The real question is whether Byron should finish the year. I don’t have a good answer to that one, but it now seems pretty clear that he is going to be allowed to do so.
rr says
I should add, I’m not for calling anyone — not the coach, not the GM, not the VP of basketball operations — a moron
—
Absolutely. I definitely do not think that Mitch, Jim, or Byron is a moron and even if I did, I wouldn’t post such here.
BigCitySid says
– “Providing context” to show our current ownership is not the brightest crayon in the box…how about plain old common sense. Is it the norm to allow TWO future Hall of Famers, both still quite productive and in demand to walk away for nothing??
– Some things are too obvious to ignore.
matt says
Sid….With Dwight howard, we got him on an expiring deal if you remember, we couldn’t trade him, just hoped he’d stay, that’s why the whole thing in bringing him in was bad…
Craig W. says
Let’s see about that front office micro managing the team’s coach…can I think of an example? Oh, yes, the Sacramento Kings. Their owner seems to have somewhat learned his lesson this year – and his team is doing better. Don’t give me the George Karl is a better coach line – they went through a couple of potentially really good coaches before they got to him. Then there is the Dallas Cowboys. Both of these are excellent and extended examples of an owner interfering with the coach.
I haven’t heard anyone – even me – give the front office a complete pass on the last 5 years, and there have been plenty of threads over 50 comments that re-plowed this particular ground.
I just find it better to talk about the players we have and how they are being developed and coached. It is – after all – what the Lakers are doing today.
david h says
darius: full moon yesterday? couldn’t tell by all the drizzle and cloudy skies yesterday down here in usual southern california…. do love the back and forth here on your blog and is an inspiration that proves that we are all fanatical laker fans; especially when it comes to losing and trying to maintain a grip at the same time. gets really tricky.
speaking of losing; I hate losing. always have, always will. speaking of lakers; I love lakers, always have, always will.
keep up the warm loving discussions. most entertaining.
Go lakers
Gary says
The Lakers gave two first round picks and two second round picks to Phoenix in a deal for a 37 year old free agent Steve Nash.
Yet, it’s perfectly acceptable to many that a 27 year old in his prime center, Dwight Howard, and a 33 year old still very productive, Pau Gasol, are allowed to walk for nothing as free agents.
Why were the Lakers FO on the short end of the stick of each of those deals? FO’s are supposed to see the big picture — that’s a lot of assets walking out the door and not much coming back. Why is our FO constantly painting themselves into corners?
I think we all agree that this is a talent league so I think its fair to criticize the FO for those deals and the fact that their subsequent plans (sign multiple max free agents) at talent acquisition have failed.
Baylor Fan says
There was a brief window for the Lakers to trade Howard. Golden State was one of the teams interested. Jerry West was thought to put an end to that interest if the Lakers insisted on getting Klay Thompson as part of the package. Water under the bridge…
Anonymous says
Water under the bridge…
__
Yes and no.
We have the exact same management team in place as the one that got us into this mess. Have they changed their approach and are they better prepared going forward?
Because the flip side of that is the argument is that the folks who made the poor decisions that got us here should not be the ones to make the decisions to get us out of here.
matt says
Baylor i guessed i was wrong, the whole thing to bring him here was just dumb, a player with that much drama should’ve been avoided and any of us could foresee kobe wouldn’t be cool with it
Anonymous says
The Lakers gave two first round picks and two second round picks to Phoenix in a deal for a 37 year old free agent Steve Nash.
Yet, it’s perfectly acceptable to many that a 27 year old in his prime center, Dwight Howard, and a 33 year old still very productive, Pau Gasol, are allowed to walk for nothing as free agents.
___
FO honks can’t have it both ways. If overpaying for Nash is OK then getting nothing for Howard and Pau is pretty bad. The Lakers FO simply did not play their cards right and the last 2 + years is a direct result.
Shaun says
Personally if we could do a trade like Hibbert and maybe nance or bass for tyson chandler and markieff morris I would do that
Would add an up and coming player in markieff whose struggles really relate to him hating pheonix for screwing him over ….on a great contract …. plus some dead weight in tyson .,.. who could get better and help attract a serious FA who would now be a piece could sit next to a core of Russel,Clarkson, Randle, Markieff, and Tyson with Lou on the bench
Ideally we would target a SF started in FA like Barnes which would give us a rotation of
Russel
Clarkson
Barnes
Randle/Markieff
Tyson
Bench
Lou
Randle/Markieff
Other FAs…..
This lets pheonix reboot because they screwed their team up in the last 2 FA periods and need a redo and helps them open up capspace while we would still have 20-30Mil+ to go after FAs and having more of a rounded core would make us a more compelling landing spot in negotiations and if we swing out at least we get 1 piece in Markieff that might be a good longterm fit + a stretch 4 that could possibly be seen in rotations with randle to go small
matt says
A good trade would be..bass for a bench warmer with an expiring contract and a first round pick, trade with a contender like chicago
Free up minutes for prospects and it would piss off byron because he won’t have a choice but play them
Anonymous says
A good trade would be..bass for a bench warmer with an expiring contract and a first round pick, trade with a contender like chicago
__
Chicago on the verge of blowing it up and building around Butler, Portis, McDermott and Mirotic. They’re keeping their picks.
rr says
Craig,
Jim is an owner, but he is also VP of Basketball Operations and has stated publicly that he is ultimately responsible for the team’s performance and direction. So therefore any comps to other orgs. are weak. The Lakers’ management structure is in some ways unusual.
If the argument is basically that the Lakers are old-school and don’t interfere with the coach’s rotations, etc. and further, that it is bad idea to do so, then, OK. But that doesn’t change the fact that Byron is here because of the FO.
Also, I think we can all agree that things work better if the FO and the coach are on the same page and that the coach’s decisions about PT etc. work in concert, as much as possible, with the FO’s overarching plan for the team. And if that is not happening, then I think it is fair to say that the parties involved need to address it. Characterizing such things as “micro-managing” and “interfering” is IMO just another way to deflect focus off of the FO and put it on the coach. The Lakers are 9-34, and are arguably not giving young guys enough burn in that context. That is Byron’s fault in some direct sense, but it also an organizational issue that affects everybody.
But, of course, maybe everything Byron is doing that bothers fans is being done with the FO’s blessing and support. No way to know, really.
>I just find it better to talk about the players we have and how they are being developed and coached.<
Well, those things are directly connected to how the roster is constructed. Russell’s development is arguably being affected by the fact that Williams is on the team and that the FO has stated publicly this season is in many respects about Kobe. The presence of BB and Hibbert on the team is arguably affecting the Tarik Black situation. Byron’s well-documented views about veterans and rookies are affecting these situations as well. The issues cannot IMO be effectively separated.
Clay Bertrand says
Wow. I didn’t realize that Sticks and Stones can BREAK the Internet!!!!
I just have to point out that All any of you did was basically decry the word, “MORON” in my statement directed at Byron Scott. Other than Mr. G, Not ONE PERSON said ONE WORD regarding the man’s OWN QUOTES and his actions regarding Tarik Black. The PC POLICE just can’t see past the word…..
CraigW says, “There is no context in that statement, just emotion.”
The CONTEXT was/is in the post preceding the “MORON” comment wherein I posted a paraphrased quote and a direct quote from Byron himself both of which fly in the face of reality. In the most ridiculous, he literally says, he wants to play Tarik off the bench, but that he hasn’t because he doesn’t know what he can give them off the bench. He also says he’s looking for impact off the bench but Black hasn’t provided it.
That is the Context for calling someone a fool. When someone TALKS like a fool, he is open to being called one.
How else can you interpret what Byron says versus what he does??
Is basketball supposed to be some sort of Secret Riddle??
Is Byron Scott the next Yogi Berra just uttering nonsense??
Do you think Byron Scott an Intelligent Basketball coach??
Do his comments and actions lead you to believe he is ASTUTE at analyzing Strategy??
Do his comments and actions sound like a Leader and Teacher??
Do his comments seem ODD and FOOLISH??
Ohhhh yessss I understand….Jim Buss is ruining the team and they coulda got Anthony Davis for Pau and I did some Googling so I MUST have found all the answers because newspaper speculation by reporters is SOLID info.
Merriam Webster Definition of Moron: a very stupid or foolish person.
Byron is acting like a FOOLISH PERSON.
Bring on the backlash!!!!!!!
matt says
I agree with shaun trade, somewhat, to take on tyson chandler contract would not be terrible, 13 mil 4 years is a low price for a good defensive center, but i thought about how much trouble we’ve had scoring, and alot of it is most likely cuz hibbert doesn’t score, chandler would be a better hibbert, if you know what im sayin, it would be an ok deal if Phoenix took swaggy p contract, but ultimately i think we need a big who can defend and put up points it would help randle inside
matt says
Byron is a _________.
matt says
Trade randle on draft day, scout the players if a guy you want is still on the board, trade randle and draft him.
This could happen especially if we draft simmons.
If a good guard is there we could draft him and let clarkson go.
I don’t think this is a good idea, cuz i think we stold randle in his draft, and i think he’s going to develop and be a good player, as for clarkson he’s a good prospect too, there’s no telling what these guys will play like if we bring in good free agents.
Just throwing it out there
matt says
To clearify trade randle on draft day for first round pick, preferably pick 6-12.
Philadelphia, Boston, and denver each will have 3 first round picks. So picks most likely will be traded on draft day.
Again i don’t like this idea, just throwing it out
Mr.G says
Talking about basketball drills I just can’t see where is that famous Princeton offense in Byron scheme.
The mainly cornerstone of this oldfashioned system, which has multiple variations, is cutters and screeners(the screners in generally are the 5 and 4) but I just see it on a game by purple and gold.
Few running plays like contested 3s, some open shots when Kobe is calling the plays and a very bad high pick-and-pops with HIBBERT, yes, ROY HIBBERT
Tarik Black is the most prolific screener in this squad and so he will be vey useful for Scott’s playbook. And I have questioned myself….Why he is doing it with this dude man???
Ok. He doesn’t want Tarik. But the middle of the season arrived and the system is not working with those pieces or those pieces are not working in this scheme. However he doesn’t change neither his system nor players…
It doesn’t make any sense guys…
Dlo is jacking up threes all the way.
Let’s thing about the basketball that we are playing! This is not seems a professional team. Just it!
matt says
Someone mentioned that the chicago bulls wana rebuild, and the lakers want to have their hands in the 2017 free agents.
Bulls trade… Derek rose 2 year 20 mil per, contract ends 2017.,and pau gasol 7.5 mil with player option at the end of this year
Lakers trade …. roy hibbert expiring contract 15 mil, lou williams 3 years 7 mil per, brandon bass 3 mil with player option at the end of this year.