Good News for Heat fans: Lakers prefer Rondo over Goran

[wildturkey]

Yes, because after all, guys like Phil Jackson, Pat Riley, Greg Popovich, etc. have all taken average/below average team to championships.

I'll bet Spoelstra still would have taken the Heat to 4 straight finals and won 2 if he didn't have Lebron, Wade and Bosh on the team.

It's amazing how good coaches look with guys like Magic, Kareem, Worthy, MJ, Pippen, Duncan, Robinson, Parker, Lebron and Wade isn't it?

I'll wait while you compile the list of coaches who have won titles without great players.

That's always been your only fall back and one that skirts the issue of actual coaching acumen. You can't look beyond a championship to see how a coach affects the game or you don't understand enough about the details of the game actually see the difference when its in front of you. Does he make his players better? How are his in game adjustments? Is what he's doing schematically make any sense overall or in the situation given time/score/etc? All are factors that are determine a coach's value and ability. But you just throw it all out. Championship or bust.

I don't care how bad this team is, they play hard every night. My co- worker and I joke all the time how a Lakers game will turn out. They will play hard and keep it close, but can't finish at the end.

Doesn't matter if you're playing hard if you're doing the wrong things. I can bust my ass all day with a baseball bat to chop down a tree but that doesn't mean that sumbitch is coming down. Carlos Boozer or Ed Davis using some extra hustle while chasing picks beyond 3 point line isn't going to win more games because its stupid to hedge that hard that far out from the start. Using a dummy action pick and roll that wastes 10 seconds of the clock to get into an Iso 18 footer for Jordan Hill doesn't start working with more effort.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

That's always been your only fall back and one that skirts the issue of actual coaching acumen. You can't look beyond a championship to see how a coach affects the game or you don't understand enough about the details of the game actually see the difference when its in front of you. Does he make his players better? How are his in game adjustments? Is what he's doing schematically make any sense overall or in the situation given time/score/etc? All are factors that are determine a coach's value and ability. But you just throw it all out. Championship or bust.



Doesn't matter if you're playing hard if you're doing the wrong things. I can bust my ass all day with a baseball bat to chop down a tree but that doesn't mean that sumbitch is coming down. Carlos Boozer or Ed Davis using some extra hustle while chasing picks beyond 3 point line isn't going to win more games because its stupid to hedge that hard that far out from the start. Using a dummy action pick and roll that wastes 10 seconds of the clock to get into an Iso 18 footer for Jordan Hill doesn't start working with more effort.

Just curious, but what's your point?

 

[wildturkey]

Just curious, but what's your point?

Given you responded almost immediately, I take it you didn't even both to read. But its a round about way of saying Scott is average at best and his 1st season as the Lakers coach he's accomplished very little in actually building a productive basketball team, which isn't a surprise given his entire career.

 

[WiggyRuss]

Winning 40% of their games against the West doesn't mean much because they only play each team twice. If they played in the West, that would mean they play each team 4-5 times. Their winning percentage wouldn't stay the same, it would go down because that means 2-3 more games against each of the better teams.

Dude- cmon now though- the Celtics have played 30 games in the West- and have 4 more wins than the Lakers that have played 46 games in the West. That shows you something. Even if the Celtics played 15 more games against the West and lost every single one of them- they would still have 4 more wins in the same amount of games

that is not insignificant.

The Celtics are 23-24 in the East- while the Lakers are 12-18....47 games vs. 30 games.....

you think if you gave the Lakers an additional 17 games- and lets say they dont even have to play the Cavs/Bulls/Hawks/Raptors even one game.....not one game do they have to play a top 4 team in the East in those 17 games-

do you think they win 11 out of the 17 games? There is no way on earth.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

In 2000, Scott took over a struggling New Jersey Nets team. His team performed poorly in his first year, but that changed in the 2001-02 season with the arrival of Jason Kidd as the Nets raced to a franchise record of 52 wins. In the process, they won their first Atlantic division crown and appeared in their first NBA Finals against the Los Angeles Lakers. Despite losing the championship series to LA, Scott came back to coach the team through another successful season during the 2002-03 campaign, once again taking the team to the NBA Finals, but losing once again—this time to the San Antonio Spurs. New Jersey was up by double figures in game six, but the Spurs tightened up their defense, which won the game and the championship.

Scott became the head coach of the New Orleans Hornets in 2004. In the 2005–06 and 2006–07 seasons, he guided the team to a pair of sub .500 seasons. One obstacle was that the team played most of its home games in Oklahoma City due to Hurricane Katrina's devastation of New Orleans.

In the 2007–08 season, Scott had his first winning season as the Hornets head coach. They had a winning percentage of .683 with a record of 56–26. They became Southwest Division champions and finished 2nd overall in the Western Conference. The Hornets clinched the Southwest Division title in their win over the Los Angeles Clippers. Byron Scott was named the head coach of the 2008 Western Conference All-Star team, and a few months after, he was awarded the 2007–2008 NBA coach of the year award. Due to his success the Hornets awarded Scott with a two-year extension.

The Hornets had a 30–11 home record and a 26–15 road record and clinched the second seed in the Western Conference Playoffs. The Hornets won their first round series against the Dallas Mavericks, posting a 4–1 record for the series. They would go on to face the defending champion San Antonio Spurs in the conference semifinals. An unusual trend of home court blow outs would mark the series until the deciding game 7 when the veteran Spurs would pull out a 91–82 win on the Hornets rowdy home court. The win marked the 100th playoff victory for Spurs coach Greg Popovich.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

Given you responded almost immediately, I take it you didn't even both to read. But its a round about way of saying Scott is average at best and his 1st season as the Lakers coach he's accomplished very little in actually building a productive basketball team, which isn't a surprise given his entire career.

What did you think he was going to accomplish with the crap he had as a team?

 

[trojanfan12]

That's always been your only fall back and one that skirts the issue of actual coaching acumen. You can't look beyond a championship to see how a coach affects the game or you don't understand enough about the details of the game actually see the difference when its in front of you. Does he make his players better? How are his in game adjustments? Is what he's doing schematically make any sense overall or in the situation given time/score/etc? All are factors that are determine a coach's value and ability. But you just throw it all out. Championship or bust.

I guarantee you that I have plenty of understanding of "the details of the game." You don't seem to understand that no coach wins without talent. He has, in fact, made players better. I'm not going to rehash what players like CP3 and Kyrie have said about him developing them.

Coaching the Lakers this year, I have seen exactly what I wanted to see from him. The younger guys have been developing and learning and the team plays hard every night. We're not going to see how far he take the Lakers until he actually has players who can get somewhere. In the meantime, he's developing them and the effort is there.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

There is a 17% chance by the way that the Lakers don't get that top five pick and lose it to a team below them.

 

[trojanfan12]

What did you think he was going to accomplish with the crap he had as a team?

I'll save you the trouble. wildturkey doesn't think talented players are necessary for a coach to win. He is certain that if Scott was a good coach, the Lakers would be right in the thick of the playoff race even though they have one of the least talented rosters in the league. All he needs to do is make the right "adjustments."

 

[WiggyRuss]

lol,i do have to say - i do have some bias against Scott for this : Cleveland Cavaliers see a lot of Dwyane Wade in Syracuse's Dion Waiters | syracuse.com

Byron Scott saw the similarities the first time he watched Dion Waiters play for Syracuse.

The fearlessness. The explosiveness. The solid build. The killer instinct.

"The first thing that came to my mind was Dwyane Wade," Scott said.

But the Cavaliers coach wanted to make sure his eyes weren't deceiving him, that there were no tricks in the tape. So he viewed another 15 or so games, dissecting every aspect of Waiters' game. It was only then that he felt content with his conclusion.

"I kept coming back to the same thought," Scott said. "The kid is good."

With Scott's blessing and insistence, the Cavaliers selected Waiters with the No. 4 pick in Thursday night's NBA draft, giving them a backcourt partner for reigning rookie of the year Kyrie Irving and another player capable of making big plays in crunch time.


They drafted Waiters- and Scott failed to develop him- in fact- neither him or Kyrie even tried on defense- and a feud developed between the two, lol....i mean, talk about worst case scenario. You cannot make this stuff up.

 

[WiggyRuss]

I'll save you the trouble. wildturkey doesn't think talented players are necessary for a coach to win. He is certain that if Scott was a good coach, the Lakers would be right in the thick of the playoff race even though they have one of the least talented rosters in the league. All he needs to do is make the right "adjustments."

just a question....

so you think that Scott has gotten the most out of the roster he could- and the team is 20-56....

just saying as well- the last 3 games they played at home against the Clips, Hornets and Blazers- and lost by 25, 30, and 28....

like i said- you know better than i do since oyu watch the games- but on its face its just hard for me to believe.

 

[trojanfan12]

Dude- cmon now though- the Celtics have played 30 games in the West- and have 4 more wins than the Lakers that have played 46 games in the West. That shows you something. Even if the Celtics played 15 more games against the West and lost every single one of them- they would still have 4 more wins in the same amount of games

that is not insignificant.

The Celtics are 23-24 in the East- while the Lakers are 12-18....47 games vs. 30 games.....

you think if you gave the Lakers an additional 17 games- and lets say they dont even have to play the Cavs/Bulls/Hawks/Raptors even one game.....not one game do they have to play a top 4 team in the East in those 17 games-

do you think they win 11 out of the 17 games? There is no way on earth.

It is absolutely insignificant. It's 2 games per team. Additionally, the East has more crap teams than the West. The Lakers may not get more wins against the better Eastern teams, but they would get more wins against the crap teams and the East has more crap teams.

Do you really think that the Celtics are going to continue to win at a 40% against not only the top 8 teams in the West, but also against the likes of the Pelicans, Suns and Jazz who would all be playoff teams in the East?

Not sure why this is so difficult for you. But feel free to keep embarrassing yourself.

 

[WiggyRuss]

good lord - i was just looking at team stats- and Minnesota is just historically bad defensively-

the 3 worst teams in basketball field goal percentage wise are the 28 Lakers, 29 orlando and 30Minne---- now Orlando and the Lakers are close to the other poor teams at .464,.466...i mean Toronto is a good team and are at 27 and .462......new yokr and detoit at 26 and 25 at .460 and .456....

Minnesota is at .486!!!! that laps the field in how bad it is....

if you play minnesota you shoot .486%!!!!!! that is unreal to me...

 

[True Lakers Fan]

I'll save you the trouble. wildturkey doesn't think talented players are necessary for a coach to win. He is certain that if Scott was a good coach, the Lakers would be right in the thick of the playoff race even though they have one of the least talented rosters in the league. All he needs to do is make the right "adjustments."

Silly me, I was hoping that when he saw that question, he would realize how stupid he sounds. I must have had to much of his crack pipe.

Seriously though - let's for the sake of argument agree with him -That Scott is just an average coach. Personally I think he did okay in Sacramento, but if I understand the history - was partly responsible for developing both Jason Kidd and Chris Paul among other players. He took the troubled Nets into the playoffs as well as New Orleans in the year they had to play in Oklahoma, so in short he had some huge obstacles to overcome including the Cavaliers int he post Lebron decision. That being said - the Lakers are crap - they don't need the best coach in the NBA right now. In about two or three years when the Lakers are playoff material and Scotts contract is up to be renewed - That's the time to talk about a change or no change. Right now Scott is more than enough for the quality of the Lakers if you believe that Scott is Wiggy's version or the turkey's vision

 

[TurnUpTheHeat]

good lord - i was just looking at team stats- and Minnesota is just historically bad defensively-

the 3 worst teams in basketball field goal percentage wise are the 28 Lakers, 29 orlando and 30Minne---- now Orlando and the Lakers are close to the other poor teams at .464,.466...i mean Toronto is a good team and are at 27 and .462......new yokr and detoit at 26 and 25 at .460 and .456....

Minnesota is at .486!!!! that laps the field in how bad it is....

if you play minnesota you shoot .486%!!!!!! that is unreal to me...

Pretty hard to overcome losing Love's defensive presence.

 

[WiggyRuss]

It is absolutely insignificant. It's 2 games per team. Additionally, the East has more crap teams than the West. The Lakers may not get more wins against the better Eastern teams, but they would get more wins against the crap teams and the East has more crap teams.

Do you really think that the Celtics are going to continue to win at a 40% against not only the top 8 teams in the West, but also against the likes of the Pelicans, Suns and Jazz who would all be playoff teams in the East?

Not sure why this is so difficult for you. But feel free to keep embarrassing yourself.

you think i am embarrassing myself by saying that Scott is a lousy coach?- I am sorry- there are a lot of people that would agree with me. Like i said- you can slam me all you want- i know what i saw with Scott when he was with the Cavs- and the Cavs underacheived and he failed to raise up even one guy above their expectations- and in fact most of the guys under achieved.
I hope he does better in LA becuase i have a lot of respect for the guy as a professional and as a person- but i cannot tell you how glad i was when he got fired for a 3rd time as an NBA coach.-

 

[True Lakers Fan]

I might be crazy, but I though Byron Scott was a huge upgrade over D'antoni who was the anti-defensive coach. A defensive minded approach to the game takes time to develop and it will take a few years to gradually collect players who will buy into that system. Obviously Jeremy Lin and Carlos Boozer are not among them and Swaggy needs to be traded

 

[trojanfan12]

just a question....

so you think that Scott has gotten the most out of the roster he could- and the team is 20-56....

just saying as well- the last 3 games they played at home against the Clips, Hornets and Blazers- and lost by 25, 30, and 28....

like i said- you know better than i do since oyu watch the games- but on its face its just hard for me to believe.

It was Pelicans, Blazers and Clips. All 3 of those teams are fighting for playoff spots. The Lakers played hard, but they don't have the talent and got their asses kicked. Even happens to the good teams. If memory serves, they were missing guys in each of those games as well. For example, Ellington went out for the season, just before that. They were down to 9 healthy players before adding Brown and Buycks from the D-league.

Not really sure what any coach is supposed to do. At this point, it's about giving guys playing time and evaluating them for the future.

 

[trojanfan12]

you think i am embarrassing myself by saying that Scott is a lousy coach?- I am sorry- there are a lot of people that would agree with me. Like i said- you can slam me all you want- i know what i saw with Scott when he was with the Cavs- and the Cavs underacheived and he failed to raise up even one guy above their expectations- and in fact most of the guys under achieved.
I hope he does better in LA becuase i have a lot of respect for the guy as a professional and as a person- but i cannot tell you how glad i was when he got fired for a 3rd time as an NBA coach.-

You are embarrassing yourself because you have no clue what you are talking about, have admitted as much by posting that you've only seen the Lakers play vs. the Cavs and yet continue to post about it.

Also, wildturky and bks don't exactly qualify as "a lot of people."

 

[WiggyRuss]

Pretty hard to overcome losing Love's defensive presence.

lol.....maybe it was not all love....i mean, holy crap dude, ! almost 49% field goal percentage for the opposing team? ----that has to be historically bad.....of course- they DO have Ricky Rubio- which artifically deflates all other teams defensive metrics so they do have that going against them....lol