POLL How far will these misfit Lakers go?

[lakersrule]

We get it... Lakers fans are excited. Leave it to a Celtics fan to provide some balance.

The Lakers were a bad basketball team last season. Let me say that again another way: all these guy you speak of combined to form the nucleus of a bad team just one season ago.

Don't get me wrong... some of them put up some stats last season, especially in flashes. But let's not forget that the Lakers under Walton play in a friendly offense that runs at a brisk pace...

... the scoring didn't equal success, though.

Of course things will get better in the upcoming with the addition of the best player in the game. But c'mon... reading the OP one might think the Lakers have one of the very best teams in basketball.

They don't. It's gonna be a process.

A bad but improved team from the prior season. Certainly LeBron makes a significant difference. With the additions of Butler and Teague, Minnesota won 16 more games last season than the year before. I think the Lakers win about that many more and will be a tough out in the playoffs simply because of LeBron.

 

[Gman]

Brandon Ingram and Kyle Kuzma are special young talents in the same breath as Jalyen Brown and Jayson Tatum is. Should I not glow about those guys?

^ This is a homer take.

Brown and Tatum led their team to the conference finals.

Ingram and Kuzma led their team to a party at Outback Steakhouse at the end of the regular season.

Is Josh Hart not a promising young role player? Does Lonzo Ball not have talent and potential?

I'm gonna return to the point of my previous post: the Lakers were a bad team last season. Yet your take on many of their individual pieces is positively glowing. Something is not adding together here.

If you say they were/are young and have potential to grow into... fair enough. But potential is the easy part, of course... and a lot of young guys have it.

 

[DJ]

With this group of misfits it's either going to work really great or it's going to be an absolute disaster. And if the latter is the case, then it's easy to place the blame on the volatile personalities and cut ties with them next off season and cycle in new players.

Ramona Shelburne said it best. They don't need all of them to click...just 2-3 of them....the FA's.

 

[Gman]

Certainly LeBron makes a significant difference.

No doubt... and I conceded as much.

 

[DJ]

^ This is a homer take.

Brown and Tatum led their team to the conference finals.

Ingram and Kuzma led their team to a party at Outback Steakhouse at the end of the regular season.

I'm gonna return to the point of my previous post: the Lakers were a bad team last season. Yet your take on many of their individual pieces is positively glowing. Something is not adding together here.

If you say they were/are young and have potential to grow into... fair enough. But potential is the easy part, of course... and a lot of young guys have it.

The Celtics had a better supporting cast around their young duo.....and IT'S THE EC.

 

[DJ]

Defensively the Lakers match up well with the Warriors.

Lebron, Ingram, Hart, and KCP are all 6'5 to 6'9 and can guard multiple positions on the perimeter. Kuzma isn't a black hole on defense like Kevin Love was. Rondo is a tenacious defender when he chooses to be. I think they want to use Michael Beasley like Boston used Marcus Morris. Lonzo is 6'5 and has all the potential in the world to become Jason Kidd like on the defensive end.

I think it won't be pretty for a lot of stretches but if they can turn it on defensively they can compete with anyone

Great comment on the Beas.

Right @TurnUpTheHeat ?

 

[Gman]

The Celtics had a better supporting cast around their young duo.....and IT'S THE EC.

The Celtics were hamstrung without their two best players... aside from Horford, we're not talking worlds of difference here... if Ingram and Kuzma are really equal to Brown and Tatum.

They're not, though.

 

[DJ]

We get it... Lakers fans are excited. Leave it to a Celtics fan to provide some balance.

The Lakers were a bad basketball team last season. Let me say that again another way: all these guy you speak of combined to form the nucleus of a bad team just one season ago.

Don't get me wrong... some of them put up some stats last season, especially in flashes. But let's not forget that the Lakers under Walton play in a friendly offense that runs at a brisk pace...

... the scoring didn't equal success, though.

Of course things will get better in the upcoming with the addition of the best player in the game. But c'mon... reading the OP one might think the Lakers have one of the very best teams in basketball.

They don't. It's gonna be a process.

Ingram and Ball missed 80-plus games combined.

If they played more....they would have won 40-43 games. Winning 35 was a big improvement from the previous season.

 

[Logicallylethal]

^ This is a homer take.

Brown and Tatum led their team to the conference finals.

Ingram and Kuzma led their team to a party at Outback Steakhouse at the end of the regular season.

I'm gonna return to the point of my previous post: the Lakers were a bad team last season. Yet your take on many of their individual pieces is positively glowing. Something is not adding together here.

If you say they were/are young and have potential to grow into... fair enough. But potential is the easy part, of course... and a lot of young guys have it.

Brown and Tatum did lead Boston deep in the playoffs. But they also did it on a great team. To say that Ingram and Kuzma are not equivalent talent wise simply based on the fact that they didn't lead their team to the playoffs shows your bias.

Karl Anthony Towns did not lead his team to the playoffs. Is he not a great young talent?
Nikola Jokic did not lead his team to the playoffs. Is he not a great young talent?
When Anthony Davis missed the playoffs last year was he also not a great young talent?

I stand by my original post. I'm praising young talent and talking up their potential. Nowhere in that post did I guarantee these guys would be this or that.

Brown and Tatum are actually very similar to Ingram and Kuzma. If you take off your Celtic green shades for a second you will see it.

Both Brown and Ingram scored less than 10 ppg their rookie season. Their 2nd season they both elevated their game to 14 and 16 ppg respectively. The only difference is Brown played on a playoff team and Ingram played on a rebuilding team.

Tatum and Kuzma both rookies who balled out in summer league and both their games translated to the regular season. Again only difference is Tatum played on an already established playoff team.

 

[DJ]

That was Magic and Rob's plan when filling out the roster. They figured it's better to try to stop the Warriors from scoring than try to outshoot them. They should be able to switch on everything defensively.

People are making mad jokes but this is true.

They are trying to play vastly improved defense....rather than outscoring them.

And I bet that's what they sold James on when they met with him.

Magic: "LeBron. We want you but we can't beat them at scori-"

James: "Did you watch the playoffs?"

Magic: "Yes,"

James: "Did you see JR?"

Magic laughing: Yes,"

James: "If I sign.....you won't trade for him?"

Magic laughing like a hyena: "Fuck no!!!!!"

James: "Where do I sign?"

 

[DJ]

You can't see poster's fave teams when using a cell?

Hate this shit.....

 

[lakersrule]

The Celtics were hamstrung without their two best players... aside from Horford, we're not talking worlds of difference here... if Ingram and Kuzma are really equal to Brown and Tatum.

They're not, though.

I think Ingram has the higher ceiling of those four. He showed significant improvement in his second season. He's getting stronger and understanding more how to use that ridiculous length. He was able to bump defenders and keep his balance when attacking the rim. He had a better release point on his jumpshot. There's still a lot of upside there as long as he keeps working hard in the offseason.

 

[Gman]

Brown and Tatum did lead Boston deep in the playoffs. But they also did it on a great team.

But that's the thing... the Celtics weren't a "great team" apart from Brown and Tatum. They were a heavily wounded team without their top 2 players who made up a huge chunk of their salary cap.

Brown and Tatum are actually very similar to Ingram and Kuzma.

We'll probably just have to agree to disagree on this point. I completely disagree, of course... but only time will tell.

 

[Logicallylethal]

James: "Did you see JR?"

Magic laughing: Yes,"

James: "If I sign.....you won't trade for him?"

Magic laughing like a hyena: "Fuck no!!!!!"

James: "Where do I sign?"

BREAKING NEWS

JR Smith agrees to sign with the Lakers, but Lakers did not agree.

 

[Gman]

I think Ingram has the higher ceiling of those four.

If we're talking pure potential, Tatum is right there with Ingram... I'd argue past him, personally... but the point is debatable.

 

[DJ]

Brown and Tatum did lead Boston deep in the playoffs. But they also did it on a great team. To say that Ingram and Kuzma are not equivalent talent wise simply based on the fact that they didn't lead their team to the playoffs shows your bias.

Karl Anthony Towns did not lead his team to the playoffs. Is he not a great young talent?
Nikola Jokic did not lead his team to the playoffs. Is he not a great young talent?
When Anthony Davis missed the playoffs last year was he also not a great young talent?

I stand by my original post. I'm praising young talent and talking up their potential. Nowhere in that post did I guarantee these guys would be this or that.

Brown and Tatum are actually very similar to Ingram and Kuzma. If you take off your Celtic green shades for a second you will see it.

Both Brown and Ingram scored less than 10 ppg their rookie season. Their 2nd season they both elevated their game to 14 and 16 ppg respectively. The only difference is Brown played on a playoff team and Ingram played on a rebuilding team.

Tatum and Kuzma both rookies who balled out in summer league and both their games translated to the regular season. Again only difference is Tatum played on an already established playoff team.

People under-estimate how good the Lakers youngsters are.

The Celtics had several vets with playoff experience. That helped with Hayward and IRving out.

 

[DJ]

Ingram has drawn comparisons to KD.

Must have the Tatum comparisons.

 

[Logicallylethal]

But that's the thing... the Celtics weren't a "great team" apart from Brown and Tatum. They were a heavily wounded team without their top 2 players who made up a huge chunk of their salary cap.

We'll probably just have to agree to disagree on this point. I completely disagree, of course... but only time will tell.

What are you talking about?

The Celtics were a playoff team before Tatum got there. Before Brown was even a contributor. Kyrie played 60 games. Him being their the first 2/3 of the season helped Brown and Tatum ease into their roles. Once he got hurt and was unavailable to play those guys were ready to take the torch.

Not to mention you have Al Horford, Terry Rozier, Marcus Smart, Marcus Morris. Let's not act like Tatum and Brown carried a team of nobodies. You're the only one exhibiting dangerous levels of homerism here

 

[Gman]

Must have the Tatum comparisons.

Surely a Lakers fan can appreciate this:

Video shows the eerie similarities in Jayson Tatum's and Kobe Bryant's games
Kobe Bryant wonders why the Lakers didn't draft budding Celtics star Jayson Tatum

“We actually showed Kobe it yesterday,” Hanlen told “Sidelines” podcast host Evan Daniels, via USA Today, “and he was like, ‘Why didn’t the Lakers draft him?’ which was pretty funny after seeing that.”

Hanlen suggested Bryant made the comment somewhat in jest, as if to say, “How come the Lakers didn’t draft another me?”

^ That's not just anyone comparing Tatum to Kobe... that's Kobe comparing Tatum to Kobe.

 

[handicappers]

LeBron is the GOAT so the Lakers will probably at least make the finals. The GOAT always delivers.