Joined: 24 Dec 2007 Posts: 36387 Location: Santa Clarita, CA (Hell) ->>>>>Ithaca, NY -≥≥≥≥≥Berkeley, CA
Posted: Wed Jun 19, 2024 9:30 am Post subject:
JUST-MING wrote:
LakersRGolden wrote:
Boston's big 2 = $64M of $183M payroll
Our big 2 = $88M of $168M payroll
Very veteran stars + not going above the aprons = lower quality in the 3 - 8 slots.
Celtics big 2 — 5x East Finals, 2x NBA Finals
Record: 55-27 (#2), 49-33 (#4), 48-24 (#3), 36-36 (#7), 51-31 (#2), 57-25 (#2), 64-18 (#1)
Lakers big 2 — 2x West Finals, 1x NBA Finals
Record: 37-45, 52-19 (#1), 42-30 (#7), 33-49, 43-39 (#7), 47-35 (#8)
Jaylen Brown (28 years old), Jayson Tatum (27 years old), in their athletic prime, which can extend into their mid 30’s.
Athletic prime can extend into mid 30s? I thought pure athletic prime is 22-26. _________________ Damian Lillard shatters Dwight Coward's championship dreams:
Joined: 20 Jul 2002 Posts: 3229 Location: Orange County, CA
Posted: Wed Jun 19, 2024 9:45 am Post subject:
There isn't a single right way to build a title team. But it helps to have the best talent and the best decision makers in the front office.
If you happen to draft the best player in the league at any particular time (Jordan, Magic, Bird, Duncan, Kobe (draft day trade), Jokic, Giannis, etc) then your chances have increased significantly to win at least one title.
But poor decision making can mess up even having the best player. In LeBron's first stint with the Cavs when he was clearly the league's best player, their front office/ownership was terrible and failed to pair him with good enough talent (Larry Hughes, Drew Gooden, Zydrunas Ilgauskas, etc.) so they did not win a title.
There are title teams that don't have the consensus best player in the league like this year's Celtics, but their front office did a great job surrounding their two stars with reliable 3 and D guys.
The teams that don't win the title have neither the best player in the league nor a good front office.
I fear the Lakers may be in this position for an undetermined amount of time.
Boston's big 2 = $64M of $183M payroll
Our big 2 = $88M of $168M payroll
Very veteran stars + not going above the aprons = lower quality in the 3 - 8 slots.
Celtics big 2 — 5x East Finals, 2x NBA Finals
Record: 55-27 (#2), 49-33 (#4), 48-24 (#3), 36-36 (#7), 51-31 (#2), 57-25 (#2), 64-18 (#1)
Lakers big 2 — 2x West Finals, 1x NBA Finals
Record: 37-45, 52-19 (#1), 42-30 (#7), 33-49, 43-39 (#7), 47-35 (#8)
Jaylen Brown (28 years old), Jayson Tatum (27 years old), in their athletic prime, which can extend into their mid 30’s.
As a Lakers fan we know the only relevant stat from the numbers above is Lakers 1, Keltics 1 and that most important stat isn’t even listed. Sure, you could make a prediction of the future by looking at the relative ages but no team should get credit for anything until they’ve earned it. I’ve seen a lot of similar posts seemingly reacting as if crediting a dynasty before it’s earned. In the aftermath, if it is accomplished then yea, populate the information with ship wins…but until then…it’s just pre-hyped noise until they earn what’s expected.
I don’t have faith in the Lakers front office and fully expect the doom and gloom being pushed to be realized but before it does I’m not acting like it has already happened. Not only has it not happened yet, there is still a possibility that it may not happen at all.
Now if you want to post that type info as a campaign to change the FO and sell the team then…yea relevant case made…I’m with ya. But if the post is just to list some type of accomplishment well…then no…it isn’t. _________________ “When it looks as if it is a realistic possibility, I want to focus on winning a ship like it’s a goal that can’t be denied. I didn’t see that this off season.”
Last edited by Hanging from Rafters on Wed Jun 19, 2024 2:34 pm; edited 7 times in total
Boston's big 2 = $64M of $183M payroll
Our big 2 = $88M of $168M payroll
Very veteran stars + not going above the aprons = lower quality in the 3 - 8 slots.
ad starts to make 60 per in 2 years. that's going to be the problem.
And those kids over there will still be young, talented and now with experience given they've tasted a ring... _________________ Lakers need to build a freaking team !
Joined: 14 Apr 2001 Posts: 144749 Location: The Gold Coast
Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2024 10:04 am Post subject:
The difference between the Lakers and Celtics is that Boston identified a path moving forward and never wavered from it. They didn’t let emotions get in the way. The Lakers have been all over the place, big team, all distributors, 3-point shooting, replace everyone then preach continuity. And being too emotional like saying that Reaves would only be available for a star player. Really? It’s no surprise that Boston has a multi-year title contending window while the Lakers are stuck in confusion. Management matters and one management team is clearly superior. _________________ RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023.
The difference between the Lakers and Celtics is that Boston identified a path moving forward and never wavered from it. They didn’t let emotions get in the way. The Lakers have been all over the place, big team, all distributors, 3-point shooting, replace everyone then preach continuity. And being too emotional like saying that Reaves would only be available for a star player. Really? It’s no surprise that Boston has a multi-year title contending window while the Lakers are stuck in confusion. Management matters and one management team is clearly superior.
Yes, but in my opinion it was more than vision+consistency, it was also execution, particularly on the margins - the Celtics used their hoard of assets efficiently i.e. didn't throw away assets for short-term bling, yet didn't hesitate to make big moves/sacrifices when the opportunity arose. (Jrue/Porzingis). It kinda reminded me of how a certain Laker Exec from the bygone days used to operate.
The difference between the Lakers and Celtics is that Boston identified a path moving forward and never wavered from it. They didn’t let emotions get in the way. The Lakers have been all over the place, big team, all distributors, 3-point shooting, replace everyone then preach continuity. And being too emotional like saying that Reaves would only be available for a star player. Really? It’s no surprise that Boston has a multi-year title contending window while the Lakers are stuck in confusion. Management matters and one management team is clearly superior.
Yes, but in my opinion it was more than vision+consistency, it was also execution, particularly on the margins - the Celtics used their hoard of assets efficiently i.e. didn't throw away assets for short-term bling, yet didn't hesitate to make big moves/sacrifices when the opportunity arose. (Jrue/Porzingis). It kinda reminded me of how a certain Laker Exec from the bygone days used to operate.
For me, both are correct. Today, the Lakers depend on the old or wounded to
survive. Neither of which are dependable night in and night out.
This FO makes it tough to be a Laker fan. _________________ Lakers need to build a freaking team !
To me the biggest difference between the Lakers and Boston is that Boston didn’t have to play Denver. If we had Boston’s route to the finals we would have been there too. And I believe we could have beaten them.
To me the biggest difference between the Lakers and Boston is that Boston didn’t have to play Denver. If we had Boston’s route to the finals we would have been there too. And I believe we could have beaten them.
Good take…I think the Lakers could have beaten the C’s too…especially with Wood/Vando/Cam healthy. They could have got to play them too if they only had to go through the depleted teams of Mia/Clev/Ind.
This take is why I want to upgrade around the fringes instead of making the team over. A better back up C, backcourt defense, a better coach, and better injury luck puts the Lakers in contention. _________________ “When it looks as if it is a realistic possibility, I want to focus on winning a ship like it’s a goal that can’t be denied. I didn’t see that this off season.”
As Steven A noted on a recent broadcast, the Lakers have been to the Finals more often within the past few decades than the Celtics - by far
Many NBA pundits have clearly stated that they believe this this title is the start of a dynasty that include multiple rings - was that the Nuggets or Celtics - lol!!
In the Eastern Conference - a healty Knicks or 76ers or Bucks would have a legitimate team that could defeat these Celtics.
Lakers are in the Western Conference, with far better teams from top to bottom - even with Paul George potentially going to the 76ers. With Caruso being traded to OKC, they definitely have the firepower to give the Cs a lot of pain. It would be fascinating to see SGA go against Holiday/Tatum/White. Our Lakers would have pushed the Cs, if not defeat them in Da Finals.
Someone just pointed this out on IG. The Celtics last two championships were in '08 and '24
.... And prior to that they hadn't even reached the finals in 21 years. To bring it all in perspective...
Since 1980:
Lakers: 11 championships and 17 finals appearances.
Celtics: 5 championships, 9 finals appearances.
5 titles, and 9 finals appearances... Magic Johnson matched that on his own prior to having his career cut short by HIV.
It sucks to see the Celtics regain the title advantage. But the Lakers have won more than twice as many titles, and appeared in nearly twice as many finals in the past 45 years. 5-3 in the 80s, 5-1 in the 2000s, and it's 1-1 in the 2020s.
The difference between the Lakers and Celtics is that Boston identified a path moving forward and never wavered from it. They didn’t let emotions get in the way. The Lakers have been all over the place, big team, all distributors, 3-point shooting, replace everyone then preach continuity. And being too emotional like saying that Reaves would only be available for a star player. Really? It’s no surprise that Boston has a multi-year title contending window while the Lakers are stuck in confusion. Management matters and one management team is clearly superior.
Yes, but in my opinion it was more than vision+consistency, it was also execution, particularly on the margins - the Celtics used their hoard of assets efficiently i.e. didn't throw away assets for short-term bling, yet didn't hesitate to make big moves/sacrifices when the opportunity arose. (Jrue/Porzingis). It kinda reminded me of how a certain Laker Exec from the bygone days used to operate.
What's annoying to me is we had the core that was good enough. AD/Kuzma/Bron/KCP/Caruso was a good enough core to be in the picture. They were not elite on offense, but top 10-12. Defensively, they were elite. Top 3. You add some depth to a lineup like that, you're in the picture each year. Then, you make some good trades like Boston did at the right time - such as maybe moving Kuzma, draft pick, for Myles Turner when Myles was being shopped heavily by the Pacers. This is all Boston did. They identified that Tatum, Brown, White, Horford, Pritchard were a good enough continuity set, and added around them with some changes. They didn't star chase. They didn't go for a Westbrook or some big name.
You look at Denver. They just got beat bad in a big game and series with full health. Their reaction? They'll be calm. They'll likely make some moves to improve, but keep a core in tact. Because the core has already won. What did we do? We didn't even lose with our healthy core. AD was hurt when the team was up 2-1 on the Suns. That was an injury ridden year. And yet, we made massive changes. We sent KCP, Caruso, Kuzma, Dennis, etc. all packing that summer. We've wasted away draft picks from 2020, 2021, maybe even 2023 in the process (if JHS isn't the player as many seem to suggest).
To Pelinka's credit, post-WB disaster, he has made some good recovery moves. Some were luck as well, such as with Reaves. So we've since recovered with Reaves, DLO, Vanderbilt, Rui. Our talent is back to being more evened out and ready to compete. However the core we have now while good, isn't the same level as the core we once had. We've not recovered enough. What's really worrying is they seem to think the problem is always the coach. It's not. Boston went from Stevens to Udoka to Mazulla. It's also our talent. We don't have enough 2-way players and our draft picks have been wasted away on rentals/short term players that never fit in the title core picture (Dennis, Westbrook etc). This has been a poorly managed situation.
The difference between the Lakers and Celtics is that Boston identified a path moving forward and never wavered from it. They didn’t let emotions get in the way. The Lakers have been all over the place, big team, all distributors, 3-point shooting, replace everyone then preach continuity. And being too emotional like saying that Reaves would only be available for a star player. Really? It’s no surprise that Boston has a multi-year title contending window while the Lakers are stuck in confusion. Management matters and one management team is clearly superior.
Yes, but in my opinion it was more than vision+consistency, it was also execution, particularly on the margins - the Celtics used their hoard of assets efficiently i.e. didn't throw away assets for short-term bling, yet didn't hesitate to make big moves/sacrifices when the opportunity arose. (Jrue/Porzingis). It kinda reminded me of how a certain Laker Exec from the bygone days used to operate.
What's annoying to me is we had the core that was good enough. AD/Kuzma/Bron/KCP/Caruso was a good enough core to be in the picture. They were not elite on offense, but top 10-12. Defensively, they were elite. Top 3. You add some depth to a lineup like that, you're in the picture each year. Then, you make some good trades like Boston did at the right time - such as maybe moving Kuzma, draft pick, for Myles Turner when Myles was being shopped heavily by the Pacers. This is all Boston did. They identified that Tatum, Brown, White, Horford, Pritchard were a good enough continuity set, and added around them with some changes. They didn't star chase. They didn't go for a Westbrook or some big name.
You look at Denver. They just got beat bad in a big game and series with full health. Their reaction? They'll be calm. They'll likely make some moves to improve, but keep a core in tact. Because the core has already won. What did we do? We didn't even lose with our healthy core. AD was hurt when the team was up 2-1 on the Suns. That was an injury ridden year. And yet, we made massive changes. We sent KCP, Caruso, Kuzma, Dennis, etc. all packing that summer. We've wasted away draft picks from 2020, 2021, maybe even 2023 in the process (if JHS isn't the player as many seem to suggest).
To Pelinka's credit, post-WB disaster, he has made some good recovery moves. Some were luck as well, such as with Reaves. So we've since recovered with Reaves, DLO, Vanderbilt, Rui. Our talent is back to being more evened out and ready to compete. However the core we have now while good, isn't the same level as the core we once had. We've not recovered enough. What's really worrying is they seem to think the problem is always the coach. It's not. Boston went from Stevens to Udoka to Mazulla. It's also our talent. We don't have enough 2-way players and our draft picks have been wasted away on rentals/short term players that never fit in the title core picture (Dennis, Westbrook etc). This has been a poorly managed situation.
Legitimate Points have been made.
Lakers have been, and always will, be the most scrutinized team in the NBA that Boston (yes, even Boston), Denver and others don't have a fanatical fan base and drive to get a ring
KCP was an important part of a trade
Caruso was a mistake
Kuzma blossom when he left the shadow of LBJ while becoming the #1 option on his team, that kept on losing
Dennis wanted to be a starter but his primary value is as a quality backup PG who is tenacious on defense - if opposng teams are not shooting over him.
Last year's team was always driving on three wheels with Vando and Vincent out most of the season, with CWood out at the end of the season.
Kudos to the Cs of winning their 18th ring.
Next season - teams from OKC (who will have a stellar defensive team with the addition of Caruso) to Grizzs (with Ja Morant back) to Nuggets (who will add some pieces) to Mavs (w/Kyrie and Luka getting more help) to our Lakers (if we had Vando, we might have been in The Finals) have legimiate shot of beating Boston - if they get there.
Next season - Knicks (if healthy) to Bucks (w/Dame & the Greek Greak now very hungry) to 76ers (if Embiid decides to be Great) to Bulls (assuming Giddry will unleashed their offense) and even the Pacers (who have shown growth) will give the Cs many serious challenges.
Is Boston starting a dynasty - not yet
Lakers have a good core that (if healthy) can elevate their status to being a very good core (translation: Rui improves his game, like what Aaron Porter did at Denver and CWood stays healthy/Hayes becomes a version of Mavs' Lively).
Rob had to address the salary cap issues caused by the Westbrook trade while improving the team, difficult task at best. If Christie is the 3&D wing that they have been searching for (who can compensate for LBJ on defense during the first three quarters of games and a 2-Way player), Lakers can play an effective **team** defense on most games.
These are the issues now facing J.J., in addition to filling out his coaching staff. Imagine Rajon Rondo, Chris Dudley, Phil Handy, Scott Brooks and others are on the bench with J.J.!
Someone just pointed this out on IG. The Celtics last two championships were in '08 and '24
.... And prior to that they hadn't even reached the finals in 21 years. To bring it all in perspective...
Since 1980:
Lakers: 11 championships and 17 finals appearances.
Celtics: 5 championships, 9 finals appearances.
5 titles, and 9 finals appearances... Magic Johnson matched that on his own prior to having his career cut short by HIV.
It sucks to see the Celtics regain the title advantage. But the Lakers have won more than twice as many titles, and appeared in nearly twice as many finals in the past 45 years. 5-3 in the 80s, 5-1 in the 2000s, and it's 1-1 in the 2020s.
Yeah sure now compare the current ownerships/FO's and you get 1-1.
Complacency and resting on past laurels leads to stagnation and rot.
The worst part is Boston acquired 7’3” Kristaps Porzingis to compete against San Antonio’s 7’5” Victor Wembanyama.
The only hope we had was Wemby running off the next 10 titles to gate keep, but Boston has Porky.
I think the Spurs are about 2 seasons away from being serious contenders. Like not this upcoming season, but the one after they should be. _________________ Previously LBJ23
The worst part is Boston acquired 7’3” Kristaps Porzingis to compete against San Antonio’s 7’5” Victor Wembanyama.
The only hope we had was Wemby running off the next 10 titles to gate keep, but Boston has Porky.
Steph Curry putting up god tier stats in 2016, winning a unanimous MVP, couldn't really "run the league" in this way. The Cavs had a defensive scheme and Curry put up some pretty ordinary stats in the 2016 Finals en route to a loss. LeBron is arguably the 2nd best player ever and the most he ever did was win B2B.
I think we will find out that Wemby has some kind of weakness, and teams will find some way to slow him down somewhat. He's not gonna win 10 straight titles. Think about how NBA teams quickly learned the best way to guard Jokic is to have a strong defender who can kinda make life harder for Jokic getting offensive position and having their big man weak side defender helping off of Gordon.
I don't know what it is, but I am reasonably confident Wemby will not be pulling a Jordan-esque 6 in 8 kind of run. Teams will find some kind of weakness, and the Spurs will run out of cap space and have some hole or other on their roster, etc.
Boston's big 2 = $64M of $183M payroll
Our big 2 = $88M of $168M payroll
Very veteran stars + not going above the aprons = lower quality in the 3 - 8 slots.
Celtics big 2 — 5x East Finals, 2x NBA Finals
Record: 55-27 (#2), 49-33 (#4), 48-24 (#3), 36-36 (#7), 51-31 (#2), 57-25 (#2), 64-18 (#1)
Lakers big 2 — 2x West Finals, 1x NBA Finals
Record: 37-45, 52-19 (#1), 42-30 (#7), 33-49, 43-39 (#7), 47-35 (#8)
Jaylen Brown (28 years old), Jayson Tatum (27 years old), in their athletic prime, which can extend into their mid 30’s.
Athletic prime can extend into mid 30s? I thought pure athletic prime is 22-26.
You’re correct. Your athletic peak is basically over by 29/30. Doesn’t mean you’re not athletic going forward…just not at your most athletic anymore. Lebron lost a subtle but noticeable amount of athleticism by 30.
AD as well. Lebron is well past his prime but what people aren’t putting enough emphasis on is AD is past his physical peak and on the very back end of his physical prime as well. By next playoffs, AD will be same age Kobe was when he won his last title and no one here thinks Kobe was at his physical best by that point.
Our 2 best players are past the age where most superstars lead teams to titles.
All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous1, 2, 3, 4Next
Page 3 of 4
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
