Official 2013-14 Los Angeles Lakers Thread

Originally posted by LA9erFan:

Originally posted by gold49digger:
If the Lakers get Mark Jackson get ready for being a solid team on both sides of the ball but you will notice a lot of isos and killer turnovers.

Mark Jackson doesn't make a team solid on both sides of the ball. Steph Curry, Klay Thompson, David Lee, Andre Iguodala, Andrew Bogut, Draymond Green, etc. do that.

Are you kidding? The man came in and said to the effect "we're not going to be the same old Warriors"...and they weren't. Look at the stats, the Warriors were perennially at or near the very bottom of defensive rankings, and then under Jackson they became a Top-10 caliber defense in just 3 years, and in fact this year were someting like #4 in defensive efficiency, and that was with long stretches of games without guys like O'Neal, Bogut, and Iguodala. And then on offense, both Curry and Thompson expanded their games...think perhaps a coach who was one of the all-time great PG's in the league might have had a hand in their development? Jackson surely has his faults, but I just do no understand this almost total dismissal of what he accomplished with the Warriors, as if he played a marginal role at best.

Originally posted by DelCed2486:

Originally posted by LA9erFan:

Originally posted by gold49digger:
If the Lakers get Mark Jackson get ready for being a solid team on both sides of the ball but you will notice a lot of isos and killer turnovers.

Mark Jackson doesn't make a team solid on both sides of the ball. Steph Curry, Klay Thompson, David Lee, Andre Iguodala, Andrew Bogut, Draymond Green, etc. do that.

Are you kidding? The man came in and said to the effect "we're not going to be the same old Warriors"...and they weren't. Look at the stats, the Warriors were perennially at or near the very bottom of defensive rankings, and then under Jackson they became a Top-10 caliber defense in just 3 years, and in fact this year were someting like #4 in defensive efficiency, and that was with long stretches of games without guys like O'Neal, Bogut, and Iguodala. And then on offense, both Curry and Thompson expanded their games...think perhaps a coach who was one of the all-time great PG's in the league might have had a hand in their development? Jackson surely has his faults, but I just do no understand this almost total dismissal of what he accomplished with the Warriors, as if he played a marginal role at best.

The Warriors before Jackson never had strong defensive players though. Bogut and Iggy are premier defensive players in this league and would be no matter who coached them. I will grant you that he preached defense all the time but he was given some excellent players on the defensive side of the ball.

Originally posted by LA9erFan:

Originally posted by gold49digger:
If the Lakers get Mark Jackson get ready for being a solid team on both sides of the ball but you will notice a lot of isos and killer turnovers.

Mark Jackson doesn't make a team solid on both sides of the ball. Steph Curry, Klay Thompson, David Lee, Andre Iguodala, Andrew Bogut, Draymond Green, etc. do that.

LOL Jackson isn't perfect but if you don't think that he didn't help the warriors become what they are today you are on some kool aid. What he did on the defensive end was amazing considering how historically bad we are on that side of the ball. He pushed the Clippers to the limit despite being severely undersized. I don't know why people don't give him credit.

Originally posted by DelCed2486:
Are you kidding? The man came in and said to the effect "we're not going to be the same old Warriors"...and they weren't. Look at the stats, the Warriors were perennially at or near the very bottom of defensive rankings, and then under Jackson they became a Top-10 caliber defense in just 3 years, and in fact this year were someting like #4 in defensive efficiency, and that was with long stretches of games without guys like O'Neal, Bogut, and Iguodala. And then on offense, both Curry and Thompson expanded their games...think perhaps a coach who was one of the all-time great PG's in the league might have had a hand in their development? Jackson surely has his faults, but I just do no understand this almost total dismissal of what he accomplished with the Warriors, as if he played a marginal role at best.

They weren't the same old Warriors because they added talent. Curry & Klay are on the upward arc of their careers, Lee's in his prime, and then they added three defensive studs in Bogut, Iggy, & Green. The next coach shouldn't have any problems with getting this roster to 50+ wins and a 1st round exit. You Warriors fans are really easily impressed. He's not awful or anything, but he's replaceable.

Originally posted by LA9erFan:

Originally posted by DelCed2486:
Are you kidding? The man came in and said to the effect "we're not going to be the same old Warriors"...and they weren't. Look at the stats, the Warriors were perennially at or near the very bottom of defensive rankings, and then under Jackson they became a Top-10 caliber defense in just 3 years, and in fact this year were someting like #4 in defensive efficiency, and that was with long stretches of games without guys like O'Neal, Bogut, and Iguodala. And then on offense, both Curry and Thompson expanded their games...think perhaps a coach who was one of the all-time great PG's in the league might have had a hand in their development? Jackson surely has his faults, but I just do no understand this almost total dismissal of what he accomplished with the Warriors, as if he played a marginal role at best.

They weren't the same old Warriors because they added talent. Curry & Klay are on the upward arc of their careers, Lee's in his prime, and then they added three defensive studs in Bogut, Iggy, & Green. The next coach shouldn't have any problems with getting this roster to 50+ wins and a 1st round exit. You Warriors fans are really easily impressed. He's not awful or anything, but he's replaceable.

Definitely replaceable...but it's the Warriors. They'll hire a worse coach lol

Anyway, what is your impression of Kerr? I didn't even know he could coach. Rumors came out that Phil wanted him in NY and now all of a sudden he is the most amazing thing since sliced bread. lol wtf just happened?

Originally posted by Ninerjohn:

Originally posted by DelCed2486:

Originally posted by LA9erFan:

Originally posted by gold49digger:
If the Lakers get Mark Jackson get ready for being a solid team on both sides of the ball but you will notice a lot of isos and killer turnovers.

Mark Jackson doesn't make a team solid on both sides of the ball. Steph Curry, Klay Thompson, David Lee, Andre Iguodala, Andrew Bogut, Draymond Green, etc. do that.

Are you kidding? The man came in and said to the effect "we're not going to be the same old Warriors"...and they weren't. Look at the stats, the Warriors were perennially at or near the very bottom of defensive rankings, and then under Jackson they became a Top-10 caliber defense in just 3 years, and in fact this year were someting like #4 in defensive efficiency, and that was with long stretches of games without guys like O'Neal, Bogut, and Iguodala. And then on offense, both Curry and Thompson expanded their games...think perhaps a coach who was one of the all-time great PG's in the league might have had a hand in their development? Jackson surely has his faults, but I just do no understand this almost total dismissal of what he accomplished with the Warriors, as if he played a marginal role at best.

The Warriors before Jackson never had strong defensive players though. Bogut and Iggy are premier defensive players in this league and would be no matter who coached them. I will grant you that he preached defense all the time but he was given some excellent players on the defensive side of the ball.

Granted, I'll never coach in the NBA, college, and probably not even high school, but I've coached a lot of youth basketball, and I can say without a doubt it takes a lot more than great INDIVIDUAL defensive players to have a good defense. It's a mindset, and it takes all players buying into the scheme and playing their role. Yes it helped having Bogut and Iguodala, but without everyone buying into the program, the Warriors wouldn't have been as successful...and lest we forget, Bogut and Iguodala both missed a lot of games.

Originally posted by LA9erFan:
They weren't the same old Warriors because they added talent. Curry & Klay are on the upward arc of their careers, Lee's in his prime, and then they added three defensive studs in Bogut, Iggy, & Green. The next coach shouldn't have any problems with getting this roster to 50+ wins and a 1st round exit. You Warriors fans are really easily impressed. He's not awful or anything, but he's replaceable.

I agree. Jackson is a solid coach and deserves some credit for what the dubs accomplished but I wasn't one of the fans that were outraged. If we can grab a more competent coach then so be it.

Originally posted by LA9erFan:

Originally posted by DelCed2486:
Are you kidding? The man came in and said to the effect "we're not going to be the same old Warriors"...and they weren't. Look at the stats, the Warriors were perennially at or near the very bottom of defensive rankings, and then under Jackson they became a Top-10 caliber defense in just 3 years, and in fact this year were someting like #4 in defensive efficiency, and that was with long stretches of games without guys like O'Neal, Bogut, and Iguodala. And then on offense, both Curry and Thompson expanded their games...think perhaps a coach who was one of the all-time great PG's in the league might have had a hand in their development? Jackson surely has his faults, but I just do no understand this almost total dismissal of what he accomplished with the Warriors, as if he played a marginal role at best.

They weren't the same old Warriors because they added talent. Curry & Klay are on the upward arc of their careers, Lee's in his prime, and then they added three defensive studs in Bogut, Iggy, & Green. The next coach shouldn't have any problems with getting this roster to 50+ wins and a 1st round exit. You Warriors fans are really easily impressed. He's not awful or anything, but he's replaceable.

Never said he's irreplacable...just willing to give him the credit he's due, and pointing out the lunacy of people unwilling to give him any at all.

Originally posted by DelCed2486:
Granted, I'll never coach in the NBA, college, and probably not even high school, but I've coached a lot of youth basketball, and I can say without a doubt it takes a lot more than great INDIVIDUAL defensive players to have a good defense. It's a mindset, and it takes all players buying into the scheme and playing their role. Yes it helped having Bogut and Iguodala, but without everyone buying into the program, the Warriors wouldn't have been as successful...and lest we forget, Bogut and Iguodala both missed a lot of games.

I don't disagree with that, but the rah rah stuff isn't going to get you past the 2nd round. There needs to be more meat there.

Originally posted by LA9erFan:

Originally posted by DelCed2486:
Granted, I'll never coach in the NBA, college, and probably not even high school, but I've coached a lot of youth basketball, and I can say without a doubt it takes a lot more than great INDIVIDUAL defensive players to have a good defense. It's a mindset, and it takes all players buying into the scheme and playing their role. Yes it helped having Bogut and Iguodala, but without everyone buying into the program, the Warriors wouldn't have been as successful...and lest we forget, Bogut and Iguodala both missed a lot of games.

I don't disagree with that, but the rah rah stuff isn't going to get you past the 2nd round. There needs to be more meat there.

Sorry, but that's just empty rhetoric to dismiss him with comments like that. He just finished up only his THIRD year as a coach at any level, let alone a head coach in the NBA...was he just supposed to waltz into the league and instantly be better than the likes of Popovich and Doc Rivers? I kinda think going from 21 to 47 to 51 wins and having strong showings in the playoffs, to include taking the Rivers-led Clips with 2 of the Top 10 players in the world to 7 games--WITHOUT your starting center the entire series and final 2 games without your 35-yr old backup center--is indicative of someone with some coaching chops and brings a little more than just "rah rah" to the table.

Originally posted by 4ML:

Originally posted by LA9erFan:

Originally posted by DelCed2486:
Are you kidding? The man came in and said to the effect "we're not going to be the same old Warriors"...and they weren't. Look at the stats, the Warriors were perennially at or near the very bottom of defensive rankings, and then under Jackson they became a Top-10 caliber defense in just 3 years, and in fact this year were someting like #4 in defensive efficiency, and that was with long stretches of games without guys like O'Neal, Bogut, and Iguodala. And then on offense, both Curry and Thompson expanded their games...think perhaps a coach who was one of the all-time great PG's in the league might have had a hand in their development? Jackson surely has his faults, but I just do no understand this almost total dismissal of what he accomplished with the Warriors, as if he played a marginal role at best.

They weren't the same old Warriors because they added talent. Curry & Klay are on the upward arc of their careers, Lee's in his prime, and then they added three defensive studs in Bogut, Iggy, & Green. The next coach shouldn't have any problems with getting this roster to 50+ wins and a 1st round exit. You Warriors fans are really easily impressed. He's not awful or anything, but he's replaceable.

Definitely replaceable...but it's the Warriors. They'll hire a worse coach lol

Anyway, what is your impression of Kerr? I didn't even know he could coach. Rumors came out that Phil wanted him in NY and now all of a sudden he is the most amazing thing since sliced bread. lol wtf just happened?

No one knows if he will be a good coach just like it was an unknown with Jackson. What we do know is that he knows how a front office works after his years as GM with Phoenix and would probably be able to work better with management than Jackson.

Originally posted by DelCed2486:
Sorry, but that's just empty rhetoric to dismiss him with comments like that. He just finished up only his THIRD year as a coach at any level, let alone a head coach in the NBA...was he just supposed to waltz into the league and instantly be better than the likes of Popovich and Doc Rivers? I kinda think going from 21 to 47 to 51 wins and having strong showings in the playoffs, to include taking the Rivers-led Clips with 2 of the Top 10 players in the world to 7 games--WITHOUT your starting center the entire series and final 2 games without your 35-yr old backup center--is indicative of someone with some coaching chops and brings a little more than just "rah rah" to the table.

I think the Warriors improvement is commensurate with the talent that they had on the team. Of course they improved. They added guys and their existing talent got better. They won 36 games under Keith Smart in 2010-11. Steph got hurt in '12 and Jackson was a bit over his head, so they underachieved during that lockout season, but in a broader scope, they're right on track with where you'd expect them to be, considering their age and how much more talented/mature the roster is now compared to 2011.

There's plenty of skepticism about Jackson's X's & O's, even within the Warriors FO. Iguodala was criminally underused. His offensive contribution is as a PG, which gives you the opportunity to run perhaps the best shooting backcourt in NBA history off of screens. Instead, the ball was in Curry's hands way too much, minimizing Iggy's contribution and the overall offensive potential of the team. And the insistence on posting up against mismatches was puzzling, as it was very inefficient. The defensive improvement is great, but there's way too much offensive talent on the team to be the 11th most efficient offense in the league.

Originally posted by 4ML:
Definitely replaceable...but it's the Warriors. They'll hire a worse coach lol

Anyway, what is your impression of Kerr? I didn't even know he could coach. Rumors came out that Phil wanted him in NY and now all of a sudden he is the most amazing thing since sliced bread. lol wtf just happened?

I don't have any basis for an opinion of Kerr as a coach, honestly. I've always enjoyed him as a commentator and I have the impression of him as a highly intelligent guy, but I don't know if he can lead a team. I think Phil's attraction to him is his familiarity with and presumed willingness to institute the Triangle.

Originally posted by Ninerjohn:

Originally posted by 4ML:

Originally posted by LA9erFan:

Originally posted by DelCed2486:
Are you kidding? The man came in and said to the effect "we're not going to be the same old Warriors"...and they weren't. Look at the stats, the Warriors were perennially at or near the very bottom of defensive rankings, and then under Jackson they became a Top-10 caliber defense in just 3 years, and in fact this year were someting like #4 in defensive efficiency, and that was with long stretches of games without guys like O'Neal, Bogut, and Iguodala. And then on offense, both Curry and Thompson expanded their games...think perhaps a coach who was one of the all-time great PG's in the league might have had a hand in their development? Jackson surely has his faults, but I just do no understand this almost total dismissal of what he accomplished with the Warriors, as if he played a marginal role at best.

They weren't the same old Warriors because they added talent. Curry & Klay are on the upward arc of their careers, Lee's in his prime, and then they added three defensive studs in Bogut, Iggy, & Green. The next coach shouldn't have any problems with getting this roster to 50+ wins and a 1st round exit. You Warriors fans are really easily impressed. He's not awful or anything, but he's replaceable.

Definitely replaceable...but it's the Warriors. They'll hire a worse coach lol

Anyway, what is your impression of Kerr? I didn't even know he could coach. Rumors came out that Phil wanted him in NY and now all of a sudden he is the most amazing thing since sliced bread. lol wtf just happened?

No one knows if he will be a good coach just like it was an unknown with Jackson. What we do know is that he knows how a front office works after his years as GM with Phoenix and would probably be able to work better with management than Jackson.

Spols and Pat Riley clash all the time. Pat Riley said in an interview (I'm paraphrasing) - I bounce ideas off him and it gets pretty heated often during the playoffs - so we take time off from each other to cool down. He's the coach and he has the final say on those matters and I'm there to support him if he needs it.

If management is forcing their will on a coach as far as coaching is concerned - then IMO that management is in the wrong not the coach. You hired a coach to coach - you let him. Don't be an Al Davis or a Jerry Jones. A coach shouldn't have to deal with the management - he has enough on his plate. As far as Warriors are concerned - whoever extended Bogut should have been the first one to get fired.

IIRC - Steve Kerr was a lousy GM...below average at best.

Originally posted by LA9erFan:

Originally posted by 4ML:
Definitely replaceable...but it's the Warriors. They'll hire a worse coach lol

Anyway, what is your impression of Kerr? I didn't even know he could coach. Rumors came out that Phil wanted him in NY and now all of a sudden he is the most amazing thing since sliced bread. lol wtf just happened?

I don't have any basis for an opinion of Kerr as a coach, honestly. I've always enjoyed him as a commentator and I have the impression of him as a highly intelligent guy, but I don't know if he can lead a team. I think Phil's attraction to him is his familiarity with and presumed willingness to institute the Triangle.

Yea, he was a pretty good commentator. It sort of makes sense for Phil Jackson (puppet master) to be interested in him but I don't understand how he's the hottest commodity in the market.