I don’t like to talk about the upcoming draft lottery. On a recent podcast (listen here!) I was asked about the potential pick and noted, without any sarcasm, that it is too stressful to worry about whether or not the Lakers keep their top-3 protected pick. If the Lakers finish with the 2nd worst record in the league, they have a 55.8% chance of keeping their pick. If they fall to the 3rd worst record, they have a 46.9% chance of keeping their pick.
These odds are okay (2nd worst) and not at all what I would want to deal with (3rd worst), but I’m not having it anyway. You should have seen me last May during the lottery special when the draft order was revealed. I was holding my then 3 year old and was a wreck. When the drawing revealed the Lakers kept their pick, I let out a wail of relief. When they jumped to #2, I yelled with joy.
But those moments leading up to when the #6 team was announced were pure torment. This year, with worse odds and higher stakes, I can’t bring myself to focus on it. My blood pressure means too much to me. And I do not want to be “rooting” for losses or worried about how a win affects the standings. I mean, on Sunday night the Lakers beat the Warriors! You think I’m not getting excited about that?
Anyways, this matters, now, because the Lakers are, sort of, trending up lately. It’s not just the win against the Warriors. The W/L column is just as littered with L’s (the team is 2-8 in their last 10), but the Lakers have flashed longer stretches, within games, of better play. They look more comfortable on offense, have shown more life defensively (even if it doesn’t always translate to stops), and, in general, look like a better team than they did before the All-Star break.
Even more encouraging is that the Lakers’ young players are leading the way. Look at their production in the chart below, pre and post-All-Star break (all stats are per-36 minutes)
| Pre-All-Star | Post All-Star | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Name | Points | Rebounds | Assists | Points | Rebounds | Assists |
| Russell | 16.2 | 4.8 | 4.4 | 21.1 | 3.4 | 5.4 |
| Clarkson | 17.1 | 4.4 | 2.8 | 20.2 | 5.1 | 3.5 |
| Randle | 14.6 | 13.1 | 2.2 | 16.8 | 13.3 | 0.9 |
Randle and Russell have also experienced major jumps in FG% while Clarkson has seen a big jump in 3-point FG% since the break as well.
This increase in productivity may yet lead to wins the Lakers were not projected to win based on their season long win/loss trends. Wins that could see the Lakers leapfrog Phoenix in the standings, even with the Suns also playing better than expected. Especially since the Lakers play the Suns two more times before the end of the season. With the difference between these two teams only 5 games in the loss column, imagine the Lakers sweeping the Suns and then catching a few more wins that seemed totally unlikely just a couple of weeks ago.
This leads to a question that I have been asking myself more and more lately: would you trade a surge in development and strong play from the young core down the stretch of the season for a better chance of the Lakers keeping their protected draft pick? Would you celebrate wins like the one on Sunday against the Warriors or against the Nets where Russell exploded for 39 points knowing it might help contribute to worse odds when the lottery is determined?
For me, that answer is yes. But, like I said above, I’ve been so reluctant to even consider the Lakers keeping their pick that I’ve rarely embraced the idea the pick was coming. Of course I’ve hoped they would keep it and have watched some of the top prospects in this year’s draft, but before the season I also thought the Lakers would be better than they are and had it set up in my mind they would lose the pick anyway.
This season has not unfolded that way, though. With the Lakers being as bad as they have been to this point, I understand those who would see this season as disastrous should the pick go to the 76ers this summer. After all, much like last year, when you’re this bad you want some type of reward for that suffering. And, for some, seeing progress late in the year by the young core isn’t enough of a reward. I get that. I really do.
For me, though, I see the odds, combine it with promising play from the young players, and then remember that if the Lakers lose their pick this year they keep next year’s for sure and the blow is softened. Not removed entirely, mind you, just carrying less an impact.
Here’s hoping that’s not how it goes. Even though that’s exactly what I am preparing for.
Mike Vick says
Do we want the pick next year? Isn’t it even more protected? And if we lose this years dont we lose a 2018 pick as well?
Anonymous says
If we lose the pick this year, we keep next year’s pick. League rules state that you can’t forfeit 1st round picks in consecutive years.
P. Ami says
I feel pretty comfortable with the gap between the Lakers and PHX. Making up 5 games in less than 20 games is highly improbable and, as you said, PHX has been winning too.
I’m concerned that this improvement in play will convince the FO to keep Byron. Looking at quotes from Russell, after the win against the Dubs, that he credited coaching from Kobe and Metta is perhaps my grasping at straws. Here is to hoping that Russell can be credited with minimizing Byron’s contribution and that the FO is ready on to move to a coach that is better at establishing a culture of winning and one that focuses on the process.
Baylor Fan says
My understanding is that the Lakers either lose their #1 pick this year and 2018 or they get to keep their #1’s for the next 3 years (and lose #2’s instead). If Russell and Clarkson are really all that, then I am fine with winning as much as possible and put an end to the losing. However, my glasses are not as rosy, they still have too many warts to their games. Huertas could be a game changer if he were to get some serious playing time. The rest of the team plays better with him on the court and I could see them stealing games with the boost he provides. At least there is reason to watch the games in addition to Kobe.
R says
Please refresh my memory, somebody. If the Lakers lose this years pick, they keep the following years pick, then what happens after that?
Not that we can do anything about whatever transpires.
mca says
It’s important to keep in mind that that the choice is not between getting the pick and not getting it. It a question of improving your odds of keeping it by about 9%.
Anonymous says
R–
This is from RealGm.com
2016 first round draft pick to Philadelphia
L.A. Lakers’ 1st round pick to Philadelphia (via Phoenix) protected for selections 1-3 in 2016 and 1-3 in 2017 and unprotected in 2018 [L.A. Lakers-Phoenix, 7/11/2012; Milwaukee-Philadelphia-Phoenix, 2/19/2015]
2018 first round draft pick to Orlando
If at least two years after the L.A. Lakers conveyed a 1st round pick to Philadelphia, then the L.A. Lakers’ 1st round pick to Orlando protected for selections 1-5 in 2018 and unprotected in 2019; if the L.A. Lakers have not conveyed a 1st round pick to Philadelphia by 2017, then the L.A. Lakers will instead convey their 2017 2nd round pick and 2018 2nd round pick to Orlando [L.A. Lakers-Orlando, 8/10/2012]
Mid-Wilshire says
P. Ami,
Good post. Like you, I am not overly concerned about the Lakers “catching,” let alone surpassing, Phoenix. The Suns are themselves starting to win (they’ve won 2 in a row now) and Alex Len and Devin Booker are developing, it appears, into a formidable inside-outside duo. I feel confident that the Lakers will finish with the 2nd worst record. Of course, we’ll still have those pesky ping pong balls to worry about.
Again, like you, I, too, am somewhat concerned about the Lakers FO having a change of heart regarding Byron. One week ago, his being fired was a foregone conclusion. Now…I’m not so sure. We’ll have to see what happens during the rest of the season.
And yet, there’s another issue to consider. Free Agency. If the Lakers retain Byron, will FAs want to come to play for him? My best guess would be — No Way. If the Lakers decide to pursue Kevin Durant (I don’t think Durant’s leaving OKC but that’s another matter), then their best move might be to hire Scotty Brooks. Or they might go for Thibodeau. Or Luke Walton. Someone who could be appealing to FAs.
The Lakers are rapidly coming to the point, as I see it, where they are about to put the final 3 pieces or so on to the team. One might come through the draft. One might come through a trade. And one, possibly, through Free Agency.
If Free Agency remains a viable part of the team building strategy (even if it hasn’t worked in the recent past), then the Head Coaching position could be a serious issue. So, I’m thinking that this summer could be a fairly momentous one for the Lakers — one high draft pick (hopefully), a key trade or 2, a key FA or 2, and a new Head Coach.
That’s a lot to pack into one summer. But I think the Lakers are actually approaching that point. This summer could be huge.
We’ll see what happens. The re-build continues.
Fern says
If we keep the pick this summer we lost next summer’s and viceversa. Like Darius i really tought this team would he better than last year. And for the longest time I didn’t even entertain that we have a shot to this year pick. The fact that we are having this conversations about it are a sign of failure to me, the FO failed us, Byron failed us. I knew the team is not a world beater but i did expected 25-30 wins. Let’s not kid ourselves yesterday’s game was a fluke.If we play the Warriors 10 more times they would blow us out of the building every time. But i loved what i saw and i saw what some people in the media are calling an “emerging” core. I agree with that but there is still a lot of “emerging to do. I don’t think we are going to end up playing 9-9 or something close to that the last 18 games. Would be nice but we’re not that good yet. I be really really surprised if we reach 20 wins. The team is improving our core it’s giving more and more indications with every passing game that they could be pretty good, but not just yet. If we keep the pick and made a couple of good signings in the FA period and i think everybody here knows who i would the Lakers to sign, then there could be some serius “emerging” next season.
Ryan P says
If we keep this pick, 2017 pick is top 3 protected and Orlando gets the 2019 pick. If we lose the 2016 pick, 2018 is a top 5 protected pick to orlando.
http://basketball.realgm.com/nba/draft/future_drafts/detailed
KevTheBold says
True, we may lose the pick, however there is a possibility that we may not need that pick if our core continues to improve and gel; plus a few manageable, realistic items.
1. A new coach.
2. Bring up Vander Blue, Recently returned Jabari Brown, and Yes, Upshaw from the D-League to fill out our roster.
3. A couple of years of stable patience for our team to grow into a mature and cohesive unit..
We accomplish this, and I believe we can get back into the hunt.
R says
Thnx anon
R says
Re: Upshaw, I think any NBA team can sign him away from the D fenders. If this is true, we must wonder why 30 teams are passing on him.
bluehill says
Some more food for thought about tanking. Long read but great points IMO. Tried to clip some of the main ones below. My take away is if you’re going to tank you better know how to draft well because you could be the Sixers vs. the Pacers that found some great players with lower picks.
http://basketball.realgm.com/article/240955/Jahlil-Okafor-Myles-Turner-And-The-Futility-Of-The-Process
“If Myles Turner and Jahlil Okafor had declared for the draft out of high school, they both would have been taken in the Top 5. The top two overall recruits in the class of 2014, they had the size, the physicality and the skill-sets to play at the next level right away. … The difference was that Okafor played for Mike Krzyzewski and Turner played for Rick Barnes…
The biggest difference between the two comes on the defensive end of the floor. Okafor wasn’t asked to do much of the heavy lifting at Duke with guys like Winslow, Jones and Cook in front of him and his inability to protect the rim and slide his feet on the perimeter weren’t exposed too much. Turner was forced into a weird hybrid role at Texas where he had to guard 25+ feet from the basket in order to create playing time for Ridley and Ibeh. When he was the primary rim protector, he had to constantly clean up penetration because Holmes and Lammert had difficulty keeping smaller offensive players in front of them.
What that meant from a draft perspective was that it was almost impossible to compare Turner and Okafor using their individual statistics.
Okafor was put in a position to succeed at the NCAA level and Turner wasn’t, which is why Okafor was in the conversation for the No. 1 pick while Turner was fighting just to stay in the lottery. When you look at things from a tools perspective, the difference became even smaller. Okafor was the better scorer and passer while Turner was the better shooter and shot-blocker. If you were picking a big man for the modern NBA, which skill-set would you prefer? Most big men played like Okafor in 1995. Most big men will play like Turner in 2025.
Nine months after the draft, does it really matter whether Okafor went at No. 3 and Turner went at No. 11? The 76ers spent all season tanking in order to get a high draft pick while the Pacers made a doomed effort to fight for the No. 8 seed. And yet somehow the Pacers were the ones who ended up with the better prospect! This is not the first time this has happened for Indiana and Philadelphia either, as the Pacers drafted Paul George at No. 9 the same year that the 76ers drafted Evan Turner at No. 2.
That’s the difference between those two franchises. Philadelphia is trying to maximize their draft position in order to increase their odds of finding a superstar. Indiana is letting the chips fall where they may and taking the best player that’s available to them. The numbers would say that you aren’t likely to find a great player in the back half of the lottery, yet the Pacers unearthed Paul George and Myles Turner in that range. Those are two guys who could be the best two players on a championship contender and Indiana didn’t have to do anything too crazy to acquire them. They just had to scout well.
All the think pieces and all the debate and all the noise surrounding The Process have really missed the whole point. The Oklahoma City model only works if you can draft as well as Oklahoma City. The 76ers were willing to buck the conventional wisdom when it comes to how to build a team but not the wisdom about who should be drafted where. And if Myles Turner is a better prospect than Jahlil Okafor, what exactly was the point of everything that has happened in Philadelphia in the last three years?”
Gary says
True, we may lose the pick, however there is a possibility that we may not need that pick if our core continues to improve and gel; plus a few manageable, realistic items.
—
I think we could still use a top three talent on the team. It would make us better next year and more importantly good coaches and free agents would look at us differently.
Look, let’s not confuse beating a hung over Warriors team with challenging for the 8 th spot next year. Absent the pick, we aren’t likely to attract any free agents of note nor do we have anything of value (except the kids) to trade. Status quo, we are a 25 win team next year.
I say we’ve invested far too much into keeping the pick to date to let it slip away for too many meaningless year end wins.
KevTheBold says
Gary, you confuse me with some green pea. I’m not giddy about one win, nor do I expect a playoff run next season.
Neither did I suggest we throw away the pick, (as if we had any control over that).
My reply was a possible avenue, most likely the one we will get regardless, in case we do lose the pick, because we are far from a free agent destination and would be foolish to trade our core.
The Laker way is however, to grow championship teams organically, and now we have the chance to do that.
All we need is patience and the ability to hold the course.
Anonymous says
Umm..meaningless year end wins cost us a better chance at Andrew Wiggings and KAT these last few drafts.
I know everyone is giddy over Randle/Clarkson/Russell but it takes more than three good players to compete. If we miss out on the pick then it will be a major setback for the long term development of the team.
There is no substitute for talent — especially young talent. And there is nothing better, in a hard cap league, than to have cost controlled young talent.
Yueh_Fei says
I think tryibg to get better and letting the chips fall where they may is the best strategy. We gained the No.2 because of Randle’s injury. Skipping next year and drafting well will allow us to have a more balanced rotation, as 3 high picks in a row will just lead to someone walking before the championship window really opens (see Clippers). The has to be balance between high picks and great mid-to-late first rounders.
Anon says
Amen to anonymous @ 8:07!
Sly Bly says
WE NEED THAT PICK!! The young guys can keep growing and still lose games. Brandon Ingram would be the perfect fit for the Lakers. If we stay at #2, we will get him or Ben Simmons. I actually like Ingram better. Adding Ingram (or Simmons) to this team would be huge and would add more value to the Lakers as looming free agents are looking at new teams. A group of Russell, Clarkson, Ingram, Randle and Nance would be the best group of young talent in the NBA. Signing Hassan Whiteside to man the middle would give us the nucleus to build an NBA champion. With only Whiteside (max deal) not being on a rookie contract, the Lakers would still have a huge amount of cap space to spend. While Durant may not choose the Lakers, someone like Batum or Derozan could still come. And with a few savvy cap moves (Nick Young and Lou Williams), the Lakers could still manage to offer a max deal next year to Russell Westbrook or someone else in the stacked 2017 class. Bottom line is the Lakers gain huge by keeping that pick. A talent like Ingram on a rookie contract would be a huge gain. We would have 4 potential future all stars and Nance, with plenty of chips to trade for a superstar, although I would rather keep all of these guys and add to them. Do everything you can to keep this pick and make the right hire for head coach (I like Walton if he runs the GSW system and not the triangle).
BigCitySid says
– The elephants in the room no want wants to focus on:
* the ability of our front office and current ownership to make good deals. It’s just unacceptable that this franchise is in this position. And it doesn’t appear this part of the equation will be changing any time in the near future.
* the Kobe factor over this season’s remaining games. Don’t ignore the obvious.
Dr Mike says
I would be thrilled if we kept the pick. But I won’t lose sleep if we lost the pick either since that means we had no chance on Simmons or Ingram.
Craig W. says
Re-read Yueh_Fei’s and bluehill’s comments. We have a tanking contingent here, but there is a real case to be made for a more traditional approach to the game, i.e. we try to win all the games we can for as long as we can.
We are trying to develop players. The win over GS makes the coaching job easier, in that the coaches now have something to point to about playing defense – regardless how you view the probability of the Lakers repeating last Sunday. It was a game historic in the entire NBA history, after all.
If our youngsters really learn how to play both sides of the ball for the rest of the year, that matters more than any other thing IMO. If we keep our pick, then the important thing is to pick a player who meshes with that emerging core, not fights it – see bluehill above. If we lose our pick, we get our core to develop one more year before we add another raw rookie – Yueh_Fei above.
All this hand-wringing about Bryon Scott and Kevin Durant are so much ‘wind in the trees’ and shouldn’t be part of our playing this year. If Byron earns the right to finish his contract, so be it. If Kevin Durant comes or stays is not material, because a well-developing core will be more attractive to those free-agents who rarely come to the Lakers, in any case.
Anonymous says
– we may not need that pick if our core continues to improve and gel –
we are the second worst team in the league and somehow still suffer from irrational exuberance
KevTheBold says
Anon: Not knowing the difference the present, and the future, is what leads to irrational posts, like yours.
If you are going to attempt to insult someone, at least try to comprehend the comment, and be man, or woman enough to post by name.
Anonymous says
We have a tanking contingent here…
__
Yes, that tanking contingent is the FO. If winning were really their goal certainly they would have put together a better roster this past summer. Their plan was to hope for a miracle and when it didn’t materialize in the first 20 games they were happy to pile on the losses.
So now that the team is 80% of the way to securing good odds of keeping the pick the FO wants to go all in and try to win games? That is crazy. They need to have the balls to stay the course. I won’t see a moral victory in winning 20 games and finishing with the 4th worst record and virtually assuring we lose the pick.
I’d rather win 13 games and keep the better odds. I want the pick because I am tired of this FO BS. I’m tired of Jim/Mitch saying ‘we have a team that can compete’ or ‘we’ve turned the corner’ when the reality we have a roster that can’t win 25 games. I want the organization to stop hedging bets and just try to win.
We may still lose a lot of games next year but I want the organization to be all in. That means a better roster 1 through 10 and a better coach. Before that though, the FO has to finish what it started this year.
Baylor Fan says
“we try to win all the games we can” – That is what the Lakers have been trying to do this season. I have complete faith in the coach that he will continue to try to win as much as possible.
LordMo says
Okay LakerLand!
1) Secure the pick we need players and this years draft has some players.
2) Give BScott another year. Get real people you don’t think the Lakers aren’t trying to get this pick? So, yes BScott has been holding them back some purposely but taking it slower has helped their development also. These kids need to learn the pro game and the “Laker Way”. BScott has been a company man here and he gets another year without Kobe. However, New York is grumbling & Phil ain’t happy either. Wouldn’t be surprised to see a Jackson / Walton combo show up next season.
3) Free Agents – We have discussed this ad nauseum! We know we need a couple big timers but let’s face it the message and the look of the Lakers ain’t what it used to be. The FO is in as Chick would say ” The Pressure Cooker”… Time to formulate and articulate a better vision when meeting with these guys.
Gonna be fun to go thru this guys and not so fun too! But Lakers Baby!!! 24/7/365!!!
Trebla88 says
Wishful Thinking:
PG: d’angelo Russell
SG: nick batum but if not then Barnes
SF: Brandon Ingram
PF: Julius Randell
C: white side
6th man: clarkson
Backup SGs: Lou will, Anthony brown
Backup SFs: nick young (not wishful thinking. We just can’t seem to find anyone that’s gonna take him for something)
Backup PF: nance, bass
Backup C: Tarik black, upshaw
Coach: Larry brown or thibs or Kevin Ollie or calipari or tom izzo or shaka smart. Pretty much anyone but Byron Scott.
Gary says
I want the organization to stop hedging bets and just try to win.
__
Amen!
Basquiatball says
The way I’m looking at it either the Lakers keep their pick and get a great young talent or they lose the pick and are guaranteed a pick in next year’s much stronger draft.
There’s a chance they play much better next year so that pick isn’t equivalent to a top 3 this year but that would mean the team has taken a large jump in quality.
All of these outcomes look positive to me.
Gary says
Trebla88 – I like your roster. Although Batum is really just so/so – so he’s a no go. If we get Ingram I’d play him at SG — he actually plays there some for Duke. Agreed, I’d pursue Barnes and Whiteside.
Side note: if Barnes is available this summer its because KD signed with the Warriors. If KD signs in GS then the Lakers are better served by developing with a younger roster (no older FAs). KD gives the Warriors a very strong 3 to 4 year window (providing they have good health).
The Lakers would be better served by letting the young core develop — natural evolution would have the Lakers ascending when the Warriors have peaked and starting the descent.
Clay Bertrand says
I favor keeping the pick this year if I could CHOOSE……..
The pick this year if retained will be a higher pick than next year both because of the Top 3 protection and because the record this year will very likely be worse than the record next year.
The Lakers are worse relative to the rest of the league this season than they are likely to be next season with even SOME development and improvement by the young players that we are already seeing signs of.
This means that it’s either drafting 1-3 THIS YEAR, or losing the pick this year and locking in next year’s pick which will likely be further down in the lottery than this year’s possible picks.
Is a Top 3 pick THIS YEAR better than a 3-8 pick NEXT YEAR????
Depth of the draft and good drafting (a la Indiana in bluehill’s post) not withstanding, I still tend to think that the Top 3 pick this year has more value than a lower pick next year.
If we lose the pick this year, I will not be at all comforted by the fact that we get to keep our pick next year. It’ll merely be silver lining………..
One more year of Byron Scott is not what we need…………He isn’t the long term answer and everyone knows it. Why keep him around ONE MORE YEAR just to prolong the inevitable change of coaches and not have to shell out his $4 Million?? We need to make the coaching change THIS OFFSEASON and start the full rebuild right with a clean start and a fresh, modern approach.
PS: Batum, while he does have some intangibles and attempts to play real D, is Fool’s Gold IMO. I don’t think he will ever reach his perceived potential. I am not in favor of breaking the bank for Nic Batum. We are more than a Nic Batum away from respectability…….
Vasheed says
Re Upshaw, any team can sign a player from the D-League but, few teams seem to keep an open slot to do that with the limit of 15 total roster slots active & inactive. From what I have heard Upshaw has been getting better.
As for the draft I’ll paraphrase Rasheed Wallace, “Ping pong balls don’t lie.”
bluehill says
I guess some of discussion depends on how far you are willing to go in order to lose games. If you just play the young guys instead of Lou, Hibbert, Bass we would probably have a better chance of losing games, but I think the point of the post is that the young guys are starting to improve to the point that they could win some games like they did Sunday.
So what do you do now? I saw the Nets “rested” Young and Lopez when they played the Wolves and lost. We could rest DLo and Clarkson when we play the Suns. Or we could just put the back of the bench in if the game is close, but that seems too obvious.
So what steps are people willing to take to ensure a loss? I’m in the let the chips fall where they will vs actively ensuring a loss. This team is an improving team but still not a good team so might be a non-issue.
Fern says
The pick is a possibility, but if we don’t get it i wont lose any sleep over it either, if this was 2 or 3 years ago when we were cap strapped and we lost that pick that would had been an unmitigated disaster. Now we have a cap way out. Im not talking about a KD level signing but i been advocating for the longest time for Whiteside, it can be a perfect fit to our core.We need to build around these kids not going for a homerun. And i agree , with Upshaw is sooo good how come nobody plucked him from the D-League?And can we get a way to eliminate anons? i mean i believe if people want to comment they should put a name not their name of course but a way to identify them, so we can have a better comments section.
P. Ami says
Getting the first pick this season, IMO, would be a huge get because of the timing of the great FA class of 2017.
A) The depth of the next draft may be great, but I’m totally sold on Ben Simmons as a superstar, franchise changing player. He is athletic, is a great passer, has a rebounding motor, plays defense, has great touch around the basket, gets to the basket at will and that without a jumper (and we see, time and again, that NBA spacing makes it easier for guys like Simmons to get to the basket). I see no reason he can’t become a serviceable shooter. He needs coaching and he will change a franchise. Do we know anyone in the next draft who has that level of talent?
B) I don’t see any 2016 FA that we aught to be chasing with any seriousness. I just worry about Whiteside. I think Durant will be signing a 1 and 1, making him available in 2017. In 2017, if we have a good coach and get lucky enough to get Simmons I think we can draw FAs again. I believe in Russell, Randle, and Clarkson. They look like real players. Two big FA to complement Russell and Simmons is a stronger play than what Cleveland pulled off in getting Love and LeBron to go with Irving. I think it would be more comparable to getting Love and LeBron to join Irving and keeping Wiggins. Durant could be happy to join a team with passers like Russell and Simmons creating off the pick and roll. Haywood will be a FA. I love Westbrook but I think he’d be too ball dominant for the team we’d be building. A developing Randle, still under team control, would be a great trade chip that may get us somebody to protect the middle. I don’t know…
There are a lot of balls in the air, ping-pong ones and other kinds. Whatever the plan was (and I never liked the Byron hire, nor did I want Melo nor LaMarcus) I like the way things are going in so far as we have players we can root for going forward. I think we have players who will attract free agents, particularly if we keep our pick this season and can show that the player we draft is a star. Al that said, we need a good coach who will develop the team, whether we keep this pick or need to hope for one in 2017.
Hale says
Nets have no pick thus no incentive to tank. The rest was probably rest.
Fern says
@P. Ami I don’t know how often you have watched Ben Simmons but he is a horrible defender and has a zero like negative zero outside shot from beyond 2 feet away. Ingram is a better player and fit for the Lakers but let’s see if we get the pick first. I be happy if we get either of them though…
KO says
Jimmy played them out of several drafts with the fool Nash disaster.
P. Ami says
@Fern
I’ve watched Simmons and disagree about his D. I think his issue is coaching. I don’t care about his shooting. The other aspects of his game are so advanced and shooting improves. Ingram is a really good player who has lots of potential but I think he’ll take years to change a franchise. Simmons changes a franchise the moment he is drafted.
Anonymous says
Trust in our Tank Commander, Byron Scott. He does not know what he is doing.