Coaching Interviews begin

[Retroram52]

According to Wild turkey CL67, you are insane and there is no argument otherwise! WTH??? See above post. And TJF12 agrees with him. No wait, maybe not.

 

[Black Adam]

According to Wild turkey CL67, you are insane and there is no argument otherwise! WTH??? See above post. And TJF12 agrees with him. No wait, maybe not.

lol, everyone is entitled to his opinion. just saying we don't need the guy to win titles. like you said in your earlier post, how 'bout developing our own? 'sides, LeBron will be in decline fairly soon. i say go young and develope...

 

[Kold]

I don't really believe that report because I also remember a report from sometime ago that they had pretty much given up on getting Lebron. In the beginning I thought we had a GREAT chance at getting him, because we had the money to pair him with Melo...but now that that's not really possible, I don't think we have a chance. As for B Scott getting a second look, I'd say that he pulled ahead in the race

 

[Retroram52]

I totally agree Kold and CL67. People get their jimmies in a wad about getting this guy and we saw tonight what the outcome of one on five basketball gets a team. It is a much better long-term solution to devlop your own TEAM rather than going after high priced so-called stars and giving up the farm to get them. Haven't we learned anything from the Howard/Nash trades?

 

[Retroram52]

Oh and TJF12. I think we have already lost K.Love to a team that has more to offer Minnesota so I am pretty much bailing on him too.

 

[Kold]

I totally agree Kold and CL67. People get their jimmies in a wad about getting this guy and we saw tonight what the outcome of one on five basketball gets a team. It is a much better long-term solution to devlop your own TEAM rather than going after high priced so-called stars and giving up the farm to get them.

Spurs model indeed. We just need to get a high calibur Point guard and try to fill in the rest of the pieces

 

[trojanfan12]

I totally agree Kold and CL67. People get their jimmies in a wad about getting this guy and we saw tonight what the outcome of one on five basketball gets a team. It is a much better long-term solution to devlop your own TEAM rather than going after high priced so-called stars and giving up the farm to get them. Haven't we learned anything from the Howard/Nash trades?

Adding Lebron to Kobe and likely Pau (if Lebron comes) plus some of the guys that we had last year such as Swaggy P, Farmar, Bazemore, Meeks, etc. hardly constitutes playing one on five. The Lakers could put together a very formidable lineup.

If you want to build a TEAM, who better to build it around than the best team player in the game. As I've said, I'm no Lebron fan, but you can't deny the skillset. He is like Magic, only faster and more athletic. Who wouldn't want that on their team (besides CL).


I don't think Lebron goes anywhere. I think he trusts Riley's ability to re-build the roster too much to leave. Having said that, the Lakers need to put their best offer on the table to show they're serious. It may not land Lebron, but it will be a positive signal to other FA's.

 

[trojanfan12]

Oh and TJF12. I think we have already lost K.Love to a team that has more to offer Minnesota so I am pretty much bailing on him too.

I agree. When I have spoken about K. Love in previous posts, I use him as an example because of his stated desire to be a Laker. However, the real point has always been about the cap space the Lakers will have to sign someone like him.

 

[trojanfan12]

According to Wild turkey CL67, you are insane and there is no argument otherwise! WTH??? See above post. And TJF12 agrees with him. No wait, maybe not.

I don't know about insane, but if you have a chance to sign the best player in the game, not trying doesn't seem very smart.

 

[Black Adam]

I don't know about insane, but if you have a chance to sign the best player in the game, not trying doesn't seem very smart.

sorry, but i'm not so quick to call him "the best player in the game". my stance is is that it says more about the state of the league than it does about his "greatness"...

just my opinion, though...

 

[trojanfan12]

sorry, but i'm not so quick to call him "the best player in the game". my stance is is that it says more about the state of the league than it does about his "greatness"...

just my opinion, though...

Whether you're the current best player in the league because your THAT good or because of the state of league, you're still the current best player in the league.

Besides, just think how pissed turnup and some of the other Heat fans would be.

That's gotta be worth something!!

 

[tomodach10]

Spurs model indeed. We just need to get a high calibur Point guard and try to fill in the rest of the pieces

That is what I have been saying. You need a high quality point guard!! Most champions have one.

 

[LALakersboy24.7]

Well we will see the resolution of this conundrum fairly soon as the draft approaches in two weeks.

I can't wait. I'm really interested in seeing who we get at the 7th pick.

 

[wildturkey]

That is what I have been saying. You need a high quality point guard!! Most champions have one.

I'm just gonna keep saying this until people actually learn it. No, you don't. Go look back at the champions for the last 2 decades. Most don't have star PGs. All you need is serviceable play. Star PGs are nice to have, but they are more luxury than necessity.

 

[Retroram52]

Congrats on reaching the 10,000 post mark, TJF12.

 

[tomodach10]

I'm just gonna keep saying this until people actually learn it. No, you don't. Go look back at the champions for the last 2 decades. Most don't have star PGs. All you need is serviceable play. Star PGs are nice to have, but they are more luxury than necessity.

I sorry, but that is your opinion just like I have mine. People don't need learn anything about this. Most of the time!!!! You need a quality point guard to win!!! Tony parker, Derrick Fisher, Rondo, Chuncy Billips, Jason kidd, etc... Quality point guards.

 

[LALakersboy24.7]

I'm just gonna keep saying this until people actually learn it. No, you don't. Go look back at the champions for the last 2 decades. Most don't have star PGs. All you need is serviceable play. Star PGs are nice to have, but they are more luxury than necessity.

At the moment our PG roster, if it's like this Nash,Marshall & hopefully resign Farmar wich I see him coming back, outside of Nash Being injury prone. They can all dribble run the pick & roll & shoot, So our PG situation is not the problem & in case of Injuries, let's not forget though Marshall is not a quick or terrific shooter his very durable & can play a lot of minutes. What we need is a big men, down in that post, especially if Gasol goes somewhere else or if he stays. Julius Randle,Noah Vonleh & even Aaron Gordon could be great. The only PG I would get is Exum over everybody else, but I doubt he will drop all the way to the 7th pick. We shall wait & see.

 

[wildturkey]

I sorry, but that is your opinion just like I have mine. People don't need learn anything about this. Most of the time!!!! You need a quality point guard to win!!! Tony parker, Derrick Fisher, Rondo, Chuncy Billips, Jason kidd, etc... Quality point guards.

And of all the ones you mentioned, Parker and Billups only ones that played at an all star level when his respective team won a championship. And on top of that, neither one was the primary focus of the offense. The others you mentioned? Fisher, at his best, was just a serviceable NBA starter that likely would have been a bench player in a non-triangle offense. Rondo, when the Celtics won, was young and often a liability, but they got enough out of him to win. Jason Kidd, with Dallas, was a mile past his prime and spent more time at SG as spot up 3 pointer shooter (JJ Barea and Jason Terry actually handled a lot of the PG duties that year). So that's 2 out of 5 you mentioned, hardly "most". You must have a very loose definition of "high quality". So yeah, you do need to learn because what you said isn't true. Most champions of the last 2 decades haven't had one. PG driven teams rarely win it all. You build either with a dominant wing or interior player and fill in around that. Seriously, research it. You're not the only one that buys into the "its a PG league" myth. People just think you need a great PG because the league has a glut of young, skilled point guards that fill up a highlight reel. But if you step back and look, they aren't winning much.

 

[tomodach10]

And of all the ones you mentioned, Parker and Billups only ones that played at an all star level when his respective team won a championship. And on top of that, neither one was the primary focus of the offense. The others you mentioned? Fisher, at his best, was just a serviceable NBA starter that likely would have been a bench player in a non-triangle offense. Rondo, when the Celtics won, was young and often a liability, but they got enough out of him to win. Jason Kidd, with Dallas, was a mile past his prime and spent more time at SG as spot up 3 pointer shooter (JJ Barea and Jason Terry actually handled a lot of the PG duties that year). So that's 2 out of 5 you mentioned, hardly "most". You must have a very loose definition of "high quality". So yeah, you do need to learn because what you said isn't true. Most champions of the last 2 decades haven't had one. PG driven teams rarely win it all. You build either with a dominant wing or interior player and fill in around that. Seriously, research it. You're not the only one that buys into the "its a PG league" myth. People just think you need a great PG because the league has a glut of young, skilled point guards that fill up a highlight reel. But if you step back and look, they aren't winning much.

It is not a loss definition of a quality point guard. Do you really believe that you can have a non quality point guard and win consistantly in this league? We disagree. I want my point guard to be a stud.

 

[wildturkey]

It is not a loss definition of a quality point guard. Do you really believe that you can have a non quality point guard and win consistantly in this league? We disagree. I want my point guard to be a stud.

This is what you don't understand. I don't have to "believe" it. I've seen it happen. It's a matter of fact, not opinion. We're all Lakers fans here. Did you not watch any of the 5 championships in the 00s? Who was their "stud"? They didn't have one. They had Fisher. He's an average NBA player. If you don't see that, then the only other explanation is you have a very generous grade on PG skills.